Ibn Rushd’s Use and Interpretation of Hadith in Bidāyat al-Mujtahid

Şuayip Seven

Makale detayları

Ibn Rushd’s Use and Interpretation of Hadith in Bidāyat al-Mujtahid

Yazarlar:

Şuayip Seven

Yayıncı:

Ankara University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hadis

Dergi:

Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.65 Issue 1, pp.191-131

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001318604

pISSN:

1301-0522

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The use and interpretation of hadith can vary from person to person and depending on the context in which they are considered. Therefore, a scholars use of hadith may not be the same in all of his works, and may vary depending on the academic discipline to which the subject belongs, the target audience of his works, and their purpose. One of the most striking examples of this is the difference between Ibn Rushds d. 5951198 approach to hadith in his works of fiqh and his approach to hadith in his philosophicaltheological works. Ibn Rushd was one of the rare Islamic thinkers who wrote works in two seemingly distant fields, philosophy and fiqh, and reconciled his identity as a judge-philosopher. So, in his approach to hadith, did the qāḍī Ibn Rushd completely deviate from the philosophical notion of the philosopher Ibn Rushd? In our opinion, Ibn Rushd tried to use his philosophical point of view as much as possible while adhering to the rules and principles of fiqh. This can be seen in his division of rulings into two groups, those understood by reason and those not understood by reason, his acceptance of general rules as criteria for understanding verses and hadiths, and his association of the purposes of Islamic rulings with virtues such as chastity, justice, courage, and generosity al-faḍāʾil al-arbaʿa. Undoubtedly, Ibn Rushd was able to demonstrate high level of analytical and systematic approach in the selection and interpretation of hadiths. So, is it possible to speak of Ibn Rushd, who has proven his identity as a philosopher and jurist, as a hadith scholar? Did he follow a rational and purposive path in the interpretation of hadiths? What was Ibn Rushds attitude towards the methods of ʿamal ahl al-Madīna and al-maṣāliḥ al-mursala of the Mālikī school and the interpretations of hadith by the Ḥanafīs? Was he able to offer original solutions to the reconciliation of conflicting hadiths? This study will seek answers to these questions within the context of the impact of Ibn Rushds identity as a philosopher and jurist on the use and interpretation of hadiths in his work Bidāyat al-Mujtahid.

 The use and interpretation of hadith can vary from person to person and depending on the context in which they are considered. Therefore, a scholars use of hadith may not be the same in all of his works, and may vary depending on the academic discipline to which the subject belongs, the target audience of his works, and their purpose. One of the most striking examples of this is the difference between Ibn Rushds d. 5951198 approach to hadith in his works of fiqh and his approach to hadith in his philosophicaltheological works. Ibn Rushd was one of the rare Islamic thinkers who wrote works in two seemingly distant fields, philosophy and fiqh, and reconciled his identity as a judge-philosopher. So, in his approach to hadith, did the qāḍī Ibn Rushd completely deviate from the philosophical notion of the philosopher Ibn Rushd? In our opinion, Ibn Rushd tried to use his philosophical point of view as much as possible while adhering to the rules and principles of fiqh. This can be seen in his division of rulings into two groups, those understood by reason and those not understood by reason, his acceptance of general rules as criteria for understanding verses and hadiths, and his association of the purposes of Islamic rulings with virtues such as chastity, justice, courage, and generosity al-faḍāʾil al-arbaʿa. Undoubtedly, Ibn Rushd was able to demonstrate high level of analytical and systematic approach in the selection and interpretation of hadiths. So, is it possible to speak of Ibn Rushd, who has proven his identity as a philosopher and jurist, as a hadith scholar? Did he follow a rational and purposive path in the interpretation of hadiths? What was Ibn Rushds attitude towards the methods of ʿamal ahl al-Madīna and al-maṣāliḥ al-mursala of the Mālikī school and the interpretations of hadith by the Ḥanafīs? Was he able to offer original solutions to the reconciliation of conflicting hadiths? This study will seek answers to these questions within the context of the impact of Ibn Rushds identity as a philosopher and jurist on the use and interpretation of hadiths in his work Bidāyat al-Mujtahid.

 The use and interpretation of hadith can vary from person to person and depending on the context in which they are considered. Therefore, a scholars use of hadith may not be the same in all of his works, and may vary depending on the academic discipline to which the subject belongs, the target audience of his works, and their purpose. One of the most striking examples of this is the difference between Ibn Rushds d. 5951198 approach to hadith in his works of fiqh and his approach to hadith in his philosophicaltheological works. Ibn Rushd was one of the rare Islamic thinkers who wrote works in two seemingly distant fields, philosophy and fiqh, and reconciled his identity as a judge-philosopher. So, in his approach to hadith, did the qāḍī Ibn Rushd completely deviate from the philosophical notion of the philosopher Ibn Rushd? In our opinion, Ibn Rushd tried to use his philosophical point of view as much as possible while adhering to the rules and principles of fiqh. This can be seen in his division of rulings into two groups, those understood by reason and those not understood by reason, his acceptance of general rules as criteria for understanding verses and hadiths, and his association of the purposes of Islamic rulings with virtues such as chastity, justice, courage, and generosity al-faḍāʾil al-arbaʿa. Undoubtedly, Ibn Rushd was able to demonstrate high level of analytical and systematic approach in the selection and interpretation of hadiths. So, is it possible to speak of Ibn Rushd, who has proven his identity as a philosopher and jurist, as a hadith scholar? Did he follow a rational and purposive path in the interpretation of hadiths? What was Ibn Rushds attitude towards the methods of ʿamal ahl al-Madīna and al-maṣāliḥ al-mursala of the Mālikī school and the interpretations of hadith by the Ḥanafīs? Was he able to offer original solutions to the reconciliation of conflicting hadiths? This study will seek answers to these questions within the context of the impact of Ibn Rushds identity as a philosopher and jurist on the use and interpretation of hadiths in his work Bidāyat al-Mujtahid.

 Hadislerin kullanımı ve yorumu, şahıstan şahsa ve ele alındıkları bağlama göre farklılık arz edebilmektedir. Bundan dolayı bir âlimin hadis kullanımı bütün eserlerinde aynı olmamış, konunun ait olduğu bilim dalı, eserlerinin hitap kitlesi ve amacına göre farklılık arz edebilmiştir. Bunun en bariz örneklerinden biri İbn Rüşdün ö. 5951198 fıkıh eserinde hadislere yaklaşımı ile felsefikelami eserlerinde hadislere yaklaşımı arasındaki farkta görülmektedir. İbn Rüşd felsefe ve fıkıh gibi birbirine uzak görünen iki farklı alanda eserler vermiş ve kadı-filozof kimliğini kendisinde uzlaştırmış nadir İslam düşünürlerinden biridir. Peki kadı İbn Rüşd, hadislere yaklaşımında filozof İbn Rüşdün felsefi nosyonundan tamamen uzaklaşmış mıdır? Kanaatimizce İbn Rüşd, fıkıh yaparken fıkhın usul ve kaidelerine bağlı kalmakla birlikte, felsefi bakış açışını imkân ölçüsünde kullanmaya gayret etmiştir. Bu, onun hükümleri akılla anlaşılan ve akılla anlaşılmayan şeklinde iki gruba ayırmasında, külli kaideleri ayet ve hadislerin anlaşılmasında kriter kabul etmesinde ve İslami hükümlerin maksatlarını iffetli, adaletli, şecaatli ve cömert olmak gibi erdemler ile el-faḍāʾilul-erbaʿa ilişkilendirmesinde görülebilmektedir. İbn Rüşd, hiç şüphesiz yüksek analitik ve sistematik düşünce kabiliyetini hadislerin seçimi ve yorumunda da gösterebilmiştir. Peki filozof ve fakih kimliğini ispat etmiş İbn Rüşdden bir hadis âlimi olarak bahsetmek mümkün müdür? O, hadislerin yorumunda rasyonel ve makasıtçı bir yol takip etmiş midir? Maliki mezhebinin ʿAmel-i ehl-i Medīne ve mesāliḥ-i mursele metotlarına ve Hanefilerin hadis yorumlarına karşı tutumu ne olmuştur? İhtilaflı hadislerin telfîḳinde özgün çözüm yolları sunabilmiş midir? Bu çalışmada bu sorulara İbn Rüşdün filozof ve fakih kimliğinin hadislerin kullanım ve yorumuna olan etkisi bağlamında kendisinin Bidāyetul-Muctehid isimli eseri kapsamında cevaplar aranacaktır.

Makale detayları

Ibn Rushd’s Use and Interpretation of Hadith in Bidāyat al-Mujtahid

Yazarlar:

Şuayip Seven

Yayıncı:

Ankara University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hadis

Dergi:

Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.65 Issue 1, pp.191-131

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001318604

pISSN:

1301-0522

Ḥadīth

Ibn Rushd

Bidāyat al-Mujtahid

The Relationship between Ḥadīth and Uṣūl al-Fiqh

The Relationship between Ḥadīth and PhilosophyḤadīs

İbn Rüşd

Bidāyetu’l-Muctehid

Ḥadīs-Uṣūlu’l-Fıḳh İlişkisi

Ḥadīs-Felsefe İlişkisi

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Şuayip Seven

Yayıncı: Ankara University

Ana Başlıklar: Hadis

Dergi: Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.65 Issue 1, pp.191-131

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 5/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001318604

pISSN: 1301-0522

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Şuayip Seven

Yayıncı:

Ankara University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hadis

Dergi:

Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi Vol.65 Issue 1, pp.191-131

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

5/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001318604

pISSN:

1301-0522