Şâriin lafzın mânası üzerinde tasarrufu: Mütekellim ve Hanefî usul geleneklerinde Şer‘î hakikatler meselesi
Yükleniyor...
Tarih
2017
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Usulcülerin dil tasavvurlarının merkezinde vaz' teorisi yer alır. Vaz' terimi dilde bir kelimenin, klasik ifadesiyle lafzın, herhangi bir anlam için tayin edilmesini ifade eder. Dilde ilk tayin edildiği anlamda kullanılan lafız hakikat iken, ilk anlamla taşıdığı bir irtibat (alâka) sebebiyle başka bir anlamda kullanılan lafız mecazdır. Mecazdan farklı olarak, dilde belli anlamlara vazedilen lafızların şeriatı vazedenin tasarrufuyla farklı anlamlara yüklenip yüklenmediği ve farklı anlam kazandığı iddia edilen isimleri bir tür hakikat olarak "şer'î hakikat" şeklinde ifade etmenin mümkün olup olmadığı usûl-ı fıkıh düşüncesinde tartışmaya konu olmuştur. Mu'tezile'nin itikadî anlamlar taşıyan dinî isimlerde savunduğu gibi fıkhî anlamlar ihtiva eden şer'î isimlerde de nakil olduğu ve isimlerin yeni bir hakikat olduğu iddiası, IV. (X.) asırda Eş'arî-mütekellim usulünün temsilcisi Bâkıllânî (ö. 403/1013) tarafından sert bir şekilde eleştirilmiştir. Bâkıllânî, dinî isimlerde olduğu gibi şer'î isimlerde de nakil iddiasını bütünüyle reddetmiş ve bu tür isimlerin lugavî hakikat olduğunda ısrar etmiştir. Ancak sonrasında zaman içinde, gerek Eş'arî-mütekellim usulcüler gerekse Hanefî usulcüler -açıklama tarzları değişse de- isimlerin şâriin tasarrufu ile yeni anlamlar kazandığını kabul etmişlerdir. Çalışmanın temel hedefi, şâriin lafızların anlamları üzerindeki tasarrufuna dair görüşlerin, Bâkıllânî ve sonrasında, mütekellim ve Hanefî usul düşünce tarihinde zaman içinde nasıl değiştiğini fikrî ve tarihî gelişmelerle irtibatlı olarak ortaya koymak ve bu tasarrufa dair açıklamaların nasıl olduğunu incelemektir.
?e linguistic imaginations of Islamic legal theoreticians are centered on the theory of assignation (wad‘). ?e term wad‘ refers to assigning a meaning to a noun, or, as more classically called, an expression. ?e literal meaning of an expression in language refers to the truth (?aq?qa) whereas its usage in another meaning, in some sense connected to the original meaning, refers to the figurative/metaphorical meaning. ?eoretical jurisprudential literature has debated whether the literary meaning of an expression changes by the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ and, if so, whether jurists can use the term al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya (legal truths) as a kind of truth for the nouns that are argued to have acquired different meanings. Some Mu‘tazil? theoreticians argue that the Sh?ri‘ assigned legal and theological meanings to some nouns by divorcing them from their literal meanings and referring to the nouns transferred to legal meanings as alhaq?qa al-shar‘iyya and some of the nouns transferred to theological meanings as religious truths. ?e Mu‘tazil? theoreticians use the term transference (naql) for describing the process of assigning new meanings to certain nouns in addition to their literal meanings. By employing certain nouns whose meanings the Sh?r?‘, as they argue, transferred to new theological meanings — such as belief (?m?n), sinfulness (fisq) and unbelief (kufr) — they ground the theory of al-manzila bayn al-manzilatayn, used for great sinners (murtakib al-kab?ra), in order to identify their dubious state of being believers or unbelievers. During the fourth/tenth century, witnessing ongoing ideological debates between the Mu‘tazil? and Ash‘ar? theological schools, al-Q?di al-B?qill?n? formulates the Ash‘ar? school’s theoretical framework. Considering that the usage of al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya could pave the way for the possibility of religious nouns that include theological meanings, he tries to identify these nouns with their literal meanings. ?erefore, he insists the nouns have not been transferred and their literal meanings continue to exist. By the second half of the fi?h/eleventh century, the Mu‘tazil? school lost its dominance and new challenges to Sunni theology, such as philosophy and esotericism, began to appear. Al-B?qill?n?’s resistance to the arguments of al-haq?qa alshar‘iyya transference evolved into a lighter emphasis among Ash‘ar? theologians and theoreticians. ?erefore, some Ash‘ar? theologians and theoreticians criticized al-B?qill?n?’s rigid attitude and accepted the conduct of the Sh?ri‘. By the seventh/thirteenth century, almost all Ash‘ar? theologians and Hanafi theoreticians adopted the view of legal nouns as a kind of truth. Among them, al-Juwayn? and his student al-Ghaz?l? state that the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on expressions occurs metaphorically and this metaphorical usage gains wide-circulation. A century later, al-R?z? (d. 606/1210), like his predecessors, adopts the metaphorical conduct of the Sh?ri‘ as well as calls legal nouns among the kinds of truth and accepts the transference to legal meanings. However, unlike the Mu‘tazil? school, he underlines the necessity to have an affinity at the transference between the literal meaning and the new meaning. A half-century later, Ibn al-??jib (d. 646/1249) does not accept the metaphorical conduct of the Sh?ri‘ but adopts completely alhaq?qa al-shar‘iyya by distinguishing religious and legal truths and calls the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on expressions as assignation (wad‘). Several Ash‘ar? theologiantheoreticians such as T?j al-D?n al-Subk? (d. 771/1370), Jal?l al-D?n al-Ma?all? (d. 864/1459) and ?asan b. Mu?ammad al-‘Att?r (d. 1250/1834) follow Ibn al-??jib on accepting al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya totally. In this article, I examine the Hanafi theoretical literature in three distinct lines by following the cross-references and continuities in ideas among the legal theoreticians. ?e first is the Hanafi-jurist tradition that follows the classifications and methodology of al-Dab?s?’s Taqw?m al-adilla; the second one is the tradition that combines Hanafi theoretical perspective with theologian methodology; and the third one is Hanafi-M?tur?d? theoretical tradition that builds jurisprudential methodology on the basic premises of M?tur?d? theological school. Al-Ja???s (d. 370/981), a Hanafi jurist who is known for his close connection to the Mu‘tazil? school, openly accepts that the Sh?ri‘ assigns new meanings on nouns. Later, some Hanafi jurists such as al-Dab?s? (d. 430/1039), al-Sarakhs? (d. 483/1090) and al-Pazdaw? (d. 482/1089) describe the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on nouns only metaphorically and argue, just like in the theological tradition, that metaphorical usages of nouns have more circulation. ?adr al-Shar?‘a (d. 747/1346), a scholar of Hanafi-jurisprudential tradition, calls these nouns as kinds of truth. Maintaining two aspects of explaining the issue, al-Qar?f? (d. 684/1285), argues that when one takes into consideration the literal meanings of a noun, its literal meaning corresponds to the truth while its legal meaning becomes the metaphorical meaning; and when one takes into consideration the legal meaning of a noun, its legal meaning corresponds to the truth while its literal meaning becomes the metaphorical meaning. Some Hanafi jurists following the combined tradition (such as Ibn al-S?‘?t? and Ibn al-Hum?m) and M?tur?d?-Hanafi theoreticians accept the transference of legal meanings as a whole and call the nouns transferred to these meanings al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya. In this article, I will first examine some aspects of the concepts related to alhaq?qa al-shar‘iyya in a historical and intellectual context. ?en, by a close reading of the classical works of theologians and Hanafi legal scholars, I will try to show how the argument evolved from total denial of al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya (a?er al-B?qill?n?) into a gradual acceptance in almost all Sunni traditions (especially starting with al-Juwayn?). My objective is to outline the landmarks concerning the ideas on the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on the meanings of nouns by pointing particularly to al-B?qill?n? and, a?er him, certain theologians and Hanafi jurists. I aim to highlight the changes in ideas in their proper intellectual and historical contexts.
?e linguistic imaginations of Islamic legal theoreticians are centered on the theory of assignation (wad‘). ?e term wad‘ refers to assigning a meaning to a noun, or, as more classically called, an expression. ?e literal meaning of an expression in language refers to the truth (?aq?qa) whereas its usage in another meaning, in some sense connected to the original meaning, refers to the figurative/metaphorical meaning. ?eoretical jurisprudential literature has debated whether the literary meaning of an expression changes by the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ and, if so, whether jurists can use the term al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya (legal truths) as a kind of truth for the nouns that are argued to have acquired different meanings. Some Mu‘tazil? theoreticians argue that the Sh?ri‘ assigned legal and theological meanings to some nouns by divorcing them from their literal meanings and referring to the nouns transferred to legal meanings as alhaq?qa al-shar‘iyya and some of the nouns transferred to theological meanings as religious truths. ?e Mu‘tazil? theoreticians use the term transference (naql) for describing the process of assigning new meanings to certain nouns in addition to their literal meanings. By employing certain nouns whose meanings the Sh?r?‘, as they argue, transferred to new theological meanings — such as belief (?m?n), sinfulness (fisq) and unbelief (kufr) — they ground the theory of al-manzila bayn al-manzilatayn, used for great sinners (murtakib al-kab?ra), in order to identify their dubious state of being believers or unbelievers. During the fourth/tenth century, witnessing ongoing ideological debates between the Mu‘tazil? and Ash‘ar? theological schools, al-Q?di al-B?qill?n? formulates the Ash‘ar? school’s theoretical framework. Considering that the usage of al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya could pave the way for the possibility of religious nouns that include theological meanings, he tries to identify these nouns with their literal meanings. ?erefore, he insists the nouns have not been transferred and their literal meanings continue to exist. By the second half of the fi?h/eleventh century, the Mu‘tazil? school lost its dominance and new challenges to Sunni theology, such as philosophy and esotericism, began to appear. Al-B?qill?n?’s resistance to the arguments of al-haq?qa alshar‘iyya transference evolved into a lighter emphasis among Ash‘ar? theologians and theoreticians. ?erefore, some Ash‘ar? theologians and theoreticians criticized al-B?qill?n?’s rigid attitude and accepted the conduct of the Sh?ri‘. By the seventh/thirteenth century, almost all Ash‘ar? theologians and Hanafi theoreticians adopted the view of legal nouns as a kind of truth. Among them, al-Juwayn? and his student al-Ghaz?l? state that the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on expressions occurs metaphorically and this metaphorical usage gains wide-circulation. A century later, al-R?z? (d. 606/1210), like his predecessors, adopts the metaphorical conduct of the Sh?ri‘ as well as calls legal nouns among the kinds of truth and accepts the transference to legal meanings. However, unlike the Mu‘tazil? school, he underlines the necessity to have an affinity at the transference between the literal meaning and the new meaning. A half-century later, Ibn al-??jib (d. 646/1249) does not accept the metaphorical conduct of the Sh?ri‘ but adopts completely alhaq?qa al-shar‘iyya by distinguishing religious and legal truths and calls the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on expressions as assignation (wad‘). Several Ash‘ar? theologiantheoreticians such as T?j al-D?n al-Subk? (d. 771/1370), Jal?l al-D?n al-Ma?all? (d. 864/1459) and ?asan b. Mu?ammad al-‘Att?r (d. 1250/1834) follow Ibn al-??jib on accepting al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya totally. In this article, I examine the Hanafi theoretical literature in three distinct lines by following the cross-references and continuities in ideas among the legal theoreticians. ?e first is the Hanafi-jurist tradition that follows the classifications and methodology of al-Dab?s?’s Taqw?m al-adilla; the second one is the tradition that combines Hanafi theoretical perspective with theologian methodology; and the third one is Hanafi-M?tur?d? theoretical tradition that builds jurisprudential methodology on the basic premises of M?tur?d? theological school. Al-Ja???s (d. 370/981), a Hanafi jurist who is known for his close connection to the Mu‘tazil? school, openly accepts that the Sh?ri‘ assigns new meanings on nouns. Later, some Hanafi jurists such as al-Dab?s? (d. 430/1039), al-Sarakhs? (d. 483/1090) and al-Pazdaw? (d. 482/1089) describe the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on nouns only metaphorically and argue, just like in the theological tradition, that metaphorical usages of nouns have more circulation. ?adr al-Shar?‘a (d. 747/1346), a scholar of Hanafi-jurisprudential tradition, calls these nouns as kinds of truth. Maintaining two aspects of explaining the issue, al-Qar?f? (d. 684/1285), argues that when one takes into consideration the literal meanings of a noun, its literal meaning corresponds to the truth while its legal meaning becomes the metaphorical meaning; and when one takes into consideration the legal meaning of a noun, its legal meaning corresponds to the truth while its literal meaning becomes the metaphorical meaning. Some Hanafi jurists following the combined tradition (such as Ibn al-S?‘?t? and Ibn al-Hum?m) and M?tur?d?-Hanafi theoreticians accept the transference of legal meanings as a whole and call the nouns transferred to these meanings al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya. In this article, I will first examine some aspects of the concepts related to alhaq?qa al-shar‘iyya in a historical and intellectual context. ?en, by a close reading of the classical works of theologians and Hanafi legal scholars, I will try to show how the argument evolved from total denial of al-haq?qa al-shar‘iyya (a?er al-B?qill?n?) into a gradual acceptance in almost all Sunni traditions (especially starting with al-Juwayn?). My objective is to outline the landmarks concerning the ideas on the conduct of the Sh?ri‘ on the meanings of nouns by pointing particularly to al-B?qill?n? and, a?er him, certain theologians and Hanafi jurists. I aim to highlight the changes in ideas in their proper intellectual and historical contexts.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Bâkıllânî, Hakikat-mecaz, Nakil, Mu‘tezile, Ehl-i Sünnet, Eş‘arîmütekellim Usulü, Hanefî Fıkıh Usulü
Kaynak
İslâm Araştırmaları Dergisi
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
0
Sayı
38
