A Quest for Establishing Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh) without Personal Religious Opinion (Ra’y) and Jurisprudential School (Madhhab): The Case of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān

Ali Hakan Çavuşoğlu

Makale detayları

A Quest for Establishing Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh) without Personal Religious Opinion (Ra’y) and Jurisprudential School (Madhhab): The Case of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān

Yazarlar:

Ali Hakan Çavuşoğlu

Yayıncı:

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University

Ana Başlıklar:

İslam Hukuku

Dergi:

Rize İlahiyat Dergisi Issue 25, pp.1-16

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001301739

pISSN:

2980-0331

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 In this study, I will concentrate on the tension between the People of Opinion ahl al-ray and the People of the Ḥadīth ahl al-ḥadīth in various periods and regions of Islamic scholarship starting from the formative period of the Ahl al-Sunna. The tension in question could be based on similar or different contents and dimensions throughout history, depending especially on the People of the Ḥadīths approaches to the notions and contexts of the personal jurisprudential opinion fiqh al-ray and jurisprudential school madhhab. First, I will analyze historical peculiarities of this tension through providing some exemplary cases from the periods prior to the formation of legal schools in Islam as well as from the periods afterwards. I will attempt to elucidate the heated discussions and efforts of certain scholars from among the Ahl al-Ḥadīth to criticize and discredit the legitimacy of the fiqh al-ray by way of designing an artificial history for it. Then, I will focus on the views of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān d. 13071890, one of the leading representatives of the Community of Ahl al-Hadīth that appeared in the Indian subcontinent in the 19th century, with respect to his understanding of following personal religious opinion ray, blind imitation taqlīd and jurisprudential school madhhab. I will argue that Khān attempted to draw a similar negative historical background for the concepts and figures of the Ahl al-Ray, though he presented his critique in a much more comprehensive and decisive style. Khān seems to understand the notions of fiqh al-ray and taqlīd in the same meaning and context as the notions of religious innovation bida and even polytheism shirk, and thus from a theological perspective rather than a jurisprudential one. In Khāns views, the formation of the four Sunnite jurisprudential schools was the most critical departure from the period of the Pious Ancestors al-salaf al-ṣāliḥ. He does not, however, criticize the imams of the schools themselves, on the contrary, he considers them to be among the Pious Ancestors. Khān argues that in order to understand Islam properly and practice its instructions sincerely, a believer needs to follow the Qurān and the sound Sunna. But after this departure, the believers stopped following the statements of the Qurān and Sunna directly, and embraced blindly the religious opinions formulated by, or attributed to, the expounders of Islamic jurisprudence mujtahids instead. Furthermore, some believers even claimed that the principles of the religion of Islam could not be understood competently without such formulations, and for Khāns view, this was a grave mistake. Khān argues that the verses of the Qurān and statements of the Prophet Muḥammad preserved in the authentic ḥadīth sources provide all the necessary and sufficient information about all aspects and questions of religious life. The scholars of ḥadīth compiled sound ḥadīths diligently to satisfy the needs of the believers in this context. With the existence of all these essential materials, Khān asserts, the followers of the madhhabs disregard such reliable sources but hold on to the writings of the scholars of their madhhab. Khān regards this attitude as a kind of rejecting the attribute of law-giving shāri for God and His Messenger and states that all types of jurisprudential proofs and sources other than the actual religious texts should be disregarded. In line with such views, Khān designs a fictional history of Islamic jurisprudence fiqh as well as the notions of ijtihād and mujtahid. He emphasizes that the founders of the four madhhabs embraced diligently the instructions of the Qurān and Sunna, followed a religious methodology according to the principles therein, and warned their students and followers against accepting their opinions blindly. In this context, Khāns treatment of Abū Ḥanīfa and especially the Ḥanafī scholars differs from the imams and scholars of the other madhhabs; for his statements regarding the former are more negative in tone. According to Khān the soundest madhhab in Islam is that of the People of the Ḥadīth. Although the science of Islamic jurisprudence fiqh and jurisprudential schools fiqh madhhabs, just like in the case of other religious scholarly disciplines, appeared and developed in the natural course of history and helped the believers understand the instructions of the Qurān and Sunna, and they are products of sincere scholarly efforts to transmit religious knowledge to the following generations, Khāns understanding and evaluating of the fiqh madhhab has been negative. This study aims to provide clues about the historical and sociological motives behind this attitude of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān.

 Bu çalışmada, Ehl-i sünnetin teşekkül döneminden itibaren İslam tarihinin farklı dönemlerinde ve İslam coğrafyasının farklı bölgelerinde ehl-i rey ile ehl-i hadîs arasında farklı içerik ve boyutlarda yaşanan mücadele, özellikle ehl-i hadîsin rey fıkhı ve mezhep karşıtlığı bağlamında ele alınacaktır. İlk etapta bu mücadelenin fıkıh mezheplerinin teşekkül sürecindeki ve sonrasındaki yansımalarına dair bazı örnekler verilecek ve ehl-i hadîs eğilimine sahip bazı âlimlerin rey fıkhını mahkûm etmek amacıyla bir geçmiş inşasına giriştiklerine dair tespitler ortaya konmaya çalışılacaktır. İkinci aşamada 19. yüzyılda Hint alt kıtasında ortaya çıkan Ehl-i Hadîs Cemaatinin önemli temsilcilerinden Sıddîk Hasan Hanın ö. 13071890 rey, taklid ve mezhebe intisap hakkındaki görüşleri değerlendirilerek onun da çok daha kapsamlı bir tarih kurgusu yapmaya çalıştığı ve bunun için keskin bir üslup kullandığı gösterilmeye çalışılacaktır. Rey fıkhını ve taklidi bidʻat, hatta şirk kapsamında değerlendiren ve konuyu fıkhî olmaktan ziyade itikadî boyuta taşıyan Hasan Hana göre, selef-i sâlihîn döneminin ardından müslümanların yaşadığı en büyük kırılma fıkıh mezheplerinin ortaya çıkmasıdır. Hasan Han İslamı doğru anlayıp ihlâsla yaşayabilmek için Kurana ve sahih sünnete ittiba gerekirken, bu dönemden itibaren bir müctehid âlimin görüşlerini taklid etmenin ya da ona nispet edilen fıkıh mezhebine intisab etmenin İslamı anlamanın meşrû yolu haline getirilmesine itiraz eder. Ona göre dinî hayatın bütün veçhelerine ve meselelerine dair kuşatıcı ve yeterli bilgi Kuran ayetlerinde ve sahih hadislerde mevcut olmasına, hadis kitapları sayesinde bu bilgi herkes için ulaşılabilir hale gelmesine rağmen mezhep müntesipleri bu kaynakları görmezden gelip kendi mezheplerinin kitaplarını dini anlayıp yaşamak için yeterli saymışlardır. Bu tavrı Allaha ve resulüne muhalefet, onların şârî sıfatına ortak koşmak gibi gören Hasan Han, rey ictihadının yanı sıra icmâ ve kıyas gibi naslar dışındaki şerî delillerin hemen hepsini geçersiz kabul eder. Onun bu görüşleri merkeze alarak yaptığı fıkıh tarihi kurgusunda mezhep imamları ve her mezhebin müntesipleri arasında var olduklarına inandığı müctehid âlimler ile ictihad kapısının kapandığına inanan mukallid fakihler farklı kategorilerde değerlendirilir. Dört mezhep imamının Kuran ve sünnete dayalı ictihad yolundan ayrılmadıklarını ve kendi görüşlerinin körü körüne taklid edilmemesi hususunda uyarılarda bulunduklarını sürekli vurgulayan Hasan Hanın Ebû Hanîfe ve Hanefî mezhebine müntesip fakihler hakkındaki değerlendirmeleri diğer imamlar ve mezheplere nazaran daha olumsuzdur. Hasan Hana göre en doğru mezhep, her zaman hakkı ve İslamın doğru yorumunu temsil ettiklerini iddia ettiği ehl-i hadîsin yoludur. Diğer ilimler gibi fıkıh ilmi ve bu ilmin doğal gelişim seyrinde ortaya çıkan fıkıh mezhepleri de aslında İslam âlimlerinin Kuran ve sünnetin doğru anlaşılıp yaşanması ve sonraki nesillere aktarılması uğrundaki gayret ve çabalarının bir ürünü olduğu halde Hasan Han tarafından olumsuz bir bakış açısıyla değerlendirilmiştir. Bu çalışma Hasan Hanın bu tavrının tarihsel ve sosyolojik saiklerini tespite yönelik ipuçları sunmayı hedeflemektedir.

 In this study, I will concentrate on the tension between the People of Opinion ahl al-ray and the People of the Ḥadīth ahl al-ḥadīth in various periods and regions of Islamic scholarship starting from the formative period of the Ahl al-Sunna. The tension in question could be based on similar or different contents and dimensions throughout history, depending especially on the People of the Ḥadīths approaches to the notions and contexts of the personal jurisprudential opinion fiqh al-ray and jurisprudential school madhhab. First, I will analyze historical peculiarities of this tension through providing some exemplary cases from the periods prior to the formation of legal schools in Islam as well as from the periods afterwards. I will attempt to elucidate the heated discussions and efforts of certain scholars from among the Ahl al-Ḥadīth to criticize and discredit the legitimacy of the fiqh al-ray by way of designing an artificial history for it. Then, I will focus on the views of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān d. 13071890, one of the leading representatives of the Community of Ahl al-Hadīth that appeared in the Indian subcontinent in the 19th century, with respect to his understanding of following personal religious opinion ray, blind imitation taqlīd and jurisprudential school madhhab. I will argue that Khān attempted to draw a similar negative historical background for the concepts and figures of the Ahl al-Ray, though he presented his critique in a much more comprehensive and decisive style. Khān seems to understand the notions of fiqh al-ray and taqlīd in the same meaning and context as the notions of religious innovation bida and even polytheism shirk, and thus from a theological perspective rather than a jurisprudential one. In Khāns views, the formation of the four Sunnite jurisprudential schools was the most critical departure from the period of the Pious Ancestors al-salaf al-ṣāliḥ. He does not, however, criticize the imams of the schools themselves, on the contrary, he considers them to be among the Pious Ancestors. Khān argues that in order to understand Islam properly and practice its instructions sincerely, a believer needs to follow the Qurān and the sound Sunna. But after this departure, the believers stopped following the statements of the Qurān and Sunna directly, and embraced blindly the religious opinions formulated by, or attributed to, the expounders of Islamic jurisprudence mujtahids instead. Furthermore, some believers even claimed that the principles of the religion of Islam could not be understood competently without such formulations, and for Khāns view, this was a grave mistake. Khān argues that the verses of the Qurān and statements of the Prophet Muḥammad preserved in the authentic ḥadīth sources provide all the necessary and sufficient information about all aspects and questions of religious life. The scholars of ḥadīth compiled sound ḥadīths diligently to satisfy the needs of the believers in this context. With the existence of all these essential materials, Khān asserts, the followers of the madhhabs disregard such reliable sources but hold on to the writings of the scholars of their madhhab. Khān regards this attitude as a kind of rejecting the attribute of law-giving shāri for God and His Messenger and states that all types of jurisprudential proofs and sources other than the actual religious texts should be disregarded. In line with such views, Khān designs a fictional history of Islamic jurisprudence fiqh as well as the notions of ijtihād and mujtahid. He emphasizes that the founders of the four madhhabs embraced diligently the instructions of the Qurān and Sunna, followed a religious methodology according to the principles therein, and warned their students and followers against accepting their opinions blindly. In this context, Khāns treatment of Abū Ḥanīfa and especially the Ḥanafī scholars differs from the imams and scholars of the other madhhabs; for his statements regarding the former are more negative in tone. According to Khān the soundest madhhab in Islam is that of the People of the Ḥadīth. Although the science of Islamic jurisprudence fiqh and jurisprudential schools fiqh madhhabs, just like in the case of other religious scholarly disciplines, appeared and developed in the natural course of history and helped the believers understand the instructions of the Qurān and Sunna, and they are products of sincere scholarly efforts to transmit religious knowledge to the following generations, Khāns understanding and evaluating of the fiqh madhhab has been negative. This study aims to provide clues about the historical and sociological motives behind this attitude of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān.

 In this study, I will concentrate on the tension between the People of Opinion ahl al-ray and the People of the Ḥadīth ahl al-ḥadīth in various periods and regions of Islamic scholarship starting from the formative period of the Ahl al-Sunna. The tension in question could be based on similar or different contents and dimensions throughout history, depending especially on the People of the Ḥadīths approaches to the notions and contexts of the personal jurisprudential opinion fiqh al-ray and jurisprudential school madhhab. First, I will analyze historical peculiarities of this tension through providing some exemplary cases from the periods prior to the formation of legal schools in Islam as well as from the periods afterwards. I will attempt to elucidate the heated discussions and efforts of certain scholars from among the Ahl al-Ḥadīth to criticize and discredit the legitimacy of the fiqh al-ray by way of designing an artificial history for it. Then, I will focus on the views of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān d. 13071890, one of the leading representatives of the Community of Ahl al-Hadīth that appeared in the Indian subcontinent in the 19th century, with respect to his understanding of following personal religious opinion ray, blind imitation taqlīd and jurisprudential school madhhab. I will argue that Khān attempted to draw a similar negative historical background for the concepts and figures of the Ahl al-Ray, though he presented his critique in a much more comprehensive and decisive style. Khān seems to understand the notions of fiqh al-ray and taqlīd in the same meaning and context as the notions of religious innovation bida and even polytheism shirk, and thus from a theological perspective rather than a jurisprudential one. In Khāns views, the formation of the four Sunnite jurisprudential schools was the most critical departure from the period of the Pious Ancestors al-salaf al-ṣāliḥ. He does not, however, criticize the imams of the schools themselves, on the contrary, he considers them to be among the Pious Ancestors. Khān argues that in order to understand Islam properly and practice its instructions sincerely, a believer needs to follow the Qurān and the sound Sunna. But after this departure, the believers stopped following the statements of the Qurān and Sunna directly, and embraced blindly the religious opinions formulated by, or attributed to, the expounders of Islamic jurisprudence mujtahids instead. Furthermore, some believers even claimed that the principles of the religion of Islam could not be understood competently without such formulations, and for Khāns view, this was a grave mistake. Khān argues that the verses of the Qurān and statements of the Prophet Muḥammad preserved in the authentic ḥadīth sources provide all the necessary and sufficient information about all aspects and questions of religious life. The scholars of ḥadīth compiled sound ḥadīths diligently to satisfy the needs of the believers in this context. With the existence of all these essential materials, Khān asserts, the followers of the madhhabs disregard such reliable sources but hold on to the writings of the scholars of their madhhab. Khān regards this attitude as a kind of rejecting the attribute of law-giving shāri for God and His Messenger and states that all types of jurisprudential proofs and sources other than the actual religious texts should be disregarded. In line with such views, Khān designs a fictional history of Islamic jurisprudence fiqh as well as the notions of ijtihād and mujtahid. He emphasizes that the founders of the four madhhabs embraced diligently the instructions of the Qurān and Sunna, followed a religious methodology according to the principles therein, and warned their students and followers against accepting their opinions blindly. In this context, Khāns treatment of Abū Ḥanīfa and especially the Ḥanafī scholars differs from the imams and scholars of the other madhhabs; for his statements regarding the former are more negative in tone. According to Khān the soundest madhhab in Islam is that of the People of the Ḥadīth. Although the science of Islamic jurisprudence fiqh and jurisprudential schools fiqh madhhabs, just like in the case of other religious scholarly disciplines, appeared and developed in the natural course of history and helped the believers understand the instructions of the Qurān and Sunna, and they are products of sincere scholarly efforts to transmit religious knowledge to the following generations, Khāns understanding and evaluating of the fiqh madhhab has been negative. This study aims to provide clues about the historical and sociological motives behind this attitude of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān.

Makale detayları

A Quest for Establishing Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqh) without Personal Religious Opinion (Ra’y) and Jurisprudential School (Madhhab): The Case of Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān

Yazarlar:

Ali Hakan Çavuşoğlu

Yayıncı:

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University

Ana Başlıklar:

İslam Hukuku

Dergi:

Rize İlahiyat Dergisi Issue 25, pp.1-16

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001301739

pISSN:

2980-0331

Ra’y

Madhhab

Ijtihād

Taklīd

The Community of Ahl al-Hadīth

Ṣiddīq Ḥasan KhānRe’y

Mezhep

İctihad

Taklid

Ehl-i Hadis Cemaati

Sıddık Hasan Han

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Ali Hakan Çavuşoğlu

Yayıncı: Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University

Ana Başlıklar: İslam Hukuku

Dergi: Rize İlahiyat Dergisi Issue 25, pp.1-16

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 10/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001301739

pISSN: 2980-0331

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Ali Hakan Çavuşoğlu

Yayıncı:

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University

Ana Başlıklar:

İslam Hukuku

Dergi:

Rize İlahiyat Dergisi Issue 25, pp.1-16

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

10/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001301739

pISSN:

2980-0331