Evaluation of al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr’s Work Named al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluhu in terms of Historiography of Tafsīr

Ahmet Şehit Tuna

Makale detayları

Evaluation of al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr’s Work Named al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluhu in terms of Historiography of Tafsīr

Yazarlar:

Ahmet Şehit Tuna

Yayıncı:

Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University

Ana Başlıklar:

Din Araştırmaları

Dergi:

ULUM Vol.6 Issue 1, pp.81-103

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

7/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296478

pISSN:

2645-9132

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Although the historiography of tafsīr was started with al-Suyūṭīs d. 9111505 Ṭabaqāt al-Mufassirīn, which was included in the genre of ṭabaqāt, it took on a different color over time. The type of writing, which was initially chronological or alphabetical, changed with Goldziher d. 1921 and al-Dhahabī d. 13971977 in the 20th century. Sectarian and thematic-centered writing came to the fore, and ideological readings became evident in the written works. The problems and deficiencies caused by this type of writing have been expressed by contemporary researchers. For this reason, some researchers have tried to go beyond this type of writing and have attempted different historiographies of tafsīr. The work named al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh, which we have examined, is written by the Tunisian scholar Muḥammad al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr d. 13901970. al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr, the son of the famous commentator Muhammad Ṭāhir b. ʿĀshūr, did not follow the same method as al-Dhahabī, although he was his peer and wrote his book after him. Although it is mentioned under modern writing style by some researchers, it is seen that this is not the case. When the subject headings and the authors method are analysed, it can be said that the book is closer to the genre of ṭabaqāt. In addition to this it is not as comprehensive as classical works and is rather a small-sized work. The author presents a concise overview of the history of exegesis to the readers through the selected names and endeavors to shed light on the periods of the commentators. In our study, the aforementioned work was examined in terms of some problems expressed by contemporary researchers about the historiography of tafsīr. Since he is the first name that comes to mind when it comes to the history of tafsīr in the modern period and the first source to which criticisms are directed, comparisons have been made between al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh with al-Dhahabīs al-Tafsīr wa al-Mufassirūn. By making a detailed analysis, it was tried to understand the views of the author on some issues and to make inferences. It was noticed that this work, in which the chronological order was followed, was consistent within itself, although it had shortcomings. Ibn ʿĀshūr has discussed the main periods of tafsīr from the beginning of tafsīr to the present day, and selected tafsīrs whose names are worth mentioning. Although his views on some issues are not clearly expressed, it is possible to infer them from his sentences. In this context, an attempt has been made to identify the positive and negative aspects of the Book concerning the writing of the history of exegesis, aiming to contribute to the field. The importance of this study is increased by the fact that the ideological perspective of tafsir historiography, which has been widespread in the last century and has been attempted to be overcome by some contemporary scholars, has been differentiated in the case of Ibn ʿĀshūr during the period when it was in vogue. Although al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh is a concise work in the field of the history of tafsīr, it can inspire studies in the field.

 Although the historiography of tafsīr was started with al-Suyūṭīs d. 9111505 Ṭabaqāt al-Mufassirīn, which was included in the genre of ṭabaqāt, it took on a different color over time. The type of writing, which was initially chronological or alphabetical, changed with Goldziher d. 1921 and al-Dhahabī d. 13971977 in the 20th century. Sectarian and thematic-centered writing came to the fore, and ideological readings became evident in the written works. The problems and deficiencies caused by this type of writing have been expressed by contemporary researchers. For this reason, some researchers have tried to go beyond this type of writing and have attempted different historiographies of tafsīr. The work named al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh, which we have examined, is written by the Tunisian scholar Muḥammad al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr d. 13901970. al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr, the son of the famous commentator Muhammad Ṭāhir b. ʿĀshūr, did not follow the same method as al-Dhahabī, although he was his peer and wrote his book after him. Although it is mentioned under modern writing style by some researchers, it is seen that this is not the case. When the subject headings and the authors method are analysed, it can be said that the book is closer to the genre of ṭabaqāt. In addition to this it is not as comprehensive as classical works and is rather a small-sized work. The author presents a concise overview of the history of exegesis to the readers through the selected names and endeavors to shed light on the periods of the commentators. In our study, the aforementioned work was examined in terms of some problems expressed by contemporary researchers about the historiography of tafsīr. Since he is the first name that comes to mind when it comes to the history of tafsīr in the modern period and the first source to which criticisms are directed, comparisons have been made between al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh with al-Dhahabīs al-Tafsīr wa al-Mufassirūn. By making a detailed analysis, it was tried to understand the views of the author on some issues and to make inferences. It was noticed that this work, in which the chronological order was followed, was consistent within itself, although it had shortcomings. Ibn ʿĀshūr has discussed the main periods of tafsīr from the beginning of tafsīr to the present day, and selected tafsīrs whose names are worth mentioning. Although his views on some issues are not clearly expressed, it is possible to infer them from his sentences. In this context, an attempt has been made to identify the positive and negative aspects of the Book concerning the writing of the history of exegesis, aiming to contribute to the field. The importance of this study is increased by the fact that the ideological perspective of tafsir historiography, which has been widespread in the last century and has been attempted to be overcome by some contemporary scholars, has been differentiated in the case of Ibn ʿĀshūr during the period when it was in vogue. Although al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh is a concise work in the field of the history of tafsīr, it can inspire studies in the field.

 Although the historiography of tafsīr was started with al-Suyūṭīs d. 9111505 Ṭabaqāt al-Mufassirīn, which was included in the genre of ṭabaqāt, it took on a different color over time. The type of writing, which was initially chronological or alphabetical, changed with Goldziher d. 1921 and al-Dhahabī d. 13971977 in the 20th century. Sectarian and thematic-centered writing came to the fore, and ideological readings became evident in the written works. The problems and deficiencies caused by this type of writing have been expressed by contemporary researchers. For this reason, some researchers have tried to go beyond this type of writing and have attempted different historiographies of tafsīr. The work named al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh, which we have examined, is written by the Tunisian scholar Muḥammad al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr d. 13901970. al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr, the son of the famous commentator Muhammad Ṭāhir b. ʿĀshūr, did not follow the same method as al-Dhahabī, although he was his peer and wrote his book after him. Although it is mentioned under modern writing style by some researchers, it is seen that this is not the case. When the subject headings and the authors method are analysed, it can be said that the book is closer to the genre of ṭabaqāt. In addition to this it is not as comprehensive as classical works and is rather a small-sized work. The author presents a concise overview of the history of exegesis to the readers through the selected names and endeavors to shed light on the periods of the commentators. In our study, the aforementioned work was examined in terms of some problems expressed by contemporary researchers about the historiography of tafsīr. Since he is the first name that comes to mind when it comes to the history of tafsīr in the modern period and the first source to which criticisms are directed, comparisons have been made between al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh with al-Dhahabīs al-Tafsīr wa al-Mufassirūn. By making a detailed analysis, it was tried to understand the views of the author on some issues and to make inferences. It was noticed that this work, in which the chronological order was followed, was consistent within itself, although it had shortcomings. Ibn ʿĀshūr has discussed the main periods of tafsīr from the beginning of tafsīr to the present day, and selected tafsīrs whose names are worth mentioning. Although his views on some issues are not clearly expressed, it is possible to infer them from his sentences. In this context, an attempt has been made to identify the positive and negative aspects of the Book concerning the writing of the history of exegesis, aiming to contribute to the field. The importance of this study is increased by the fact that the ideological perspective of tafsir historiography, which has been widespread in the last century and has been attempted to be overcome by some contemporary scholars, has been differentiated in the case of Ibn ʿĀshūr during the period when it was in vogue. Although al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluh is a concise work in the field of the history of tafsīr, it can inspire studies in the field.

 Tefsir tarihi yazımı, her ne kadar tabakât türüne giren Suyûtînin ö. 9111505 Tabakâtul-mufessirîn adlı eseriyle başlatılsa da zaman içinde farklı bir renge bürünmüştür. Başlangıçta kronolojik ya da alfabetik tarzda seyreden yazım türü, 20. yüzyılda Goldziher ö. 1921 ve Zehebî ö. 1977 ile farklılaşmıştır. Mezhebî ve tematik merkezli yazım ön plana çıkmış, yapılan teliflerde ideolojik okumalar belirginleşmiştir. Bu tür yazımın yol açtığı problemler ve eksiklikler muasır araştırmacılar tarafından dile getirilmiştir. Bu sebeple bazı araştırmacılar bu yazım türünün dışına çıkmaya çalışmış, farklı tefsir tarihi yazımı denemelerinde bulunmuştur. Makalemizde incelemeye tabi tuttuğumuz et-Tefsîr ve ricâluhu adlı eser, Tunuslu âlim Muhammed Fâdıl b. Âşûr ö. 13901970 tarafından yazılmıştır. Meşhur müfessir Muhammed Tâhir b. Âşûrun oğlu olan Fâdıl b. Âşûr, Zehebî ile akran olmasına ve kitabını ondan sonra yazmasına rağmen, onunla aynı metodu takip etmemiştir. Bazı araştırmacılar tarafından modern yazım türü altında zikredilse de durumun böyle olmadığı görülmektedir. Konu başlıkları ve müellifin metodu incelendiğinde kitabın tabakât türüne daha yakın olduğu söylenilebilir. Bununla birlikte o, mütekaddim eserler gibi kapsamlı olmayıp küçük hacimli bir eserdir. Yazar seçtiği isimler üzerinden özet bir şekilde tefsir tarihini okuyucuya sunmakta, bunu yaparken de müfessirlerin dönemlerine ışık tutmaya gayret etmektedir. Çalışmamızda mezkûr eser, muasır araştırmacılar tarafından tefsir tarihi yazımı hususunda dile getirilen bazı problemler açısından incelenmiştir. Modern dönem tefsir tarihi denildiğinde akla ilk gelen isim olması ve eleştirilerin yöneltildiği ilk kaynak olması sebebiyle zaman zaman Zehebînin et-Tefsîr vel-mufessirûn adlı kitabıyla et-Tefsîr ve ricâluhu arasında karşılaştırmalarda bulunulmuştur. Detaylı inceleme yaparak müellifin bazı konulardaki görüşlerini anlamaya, çıkarımlarda bulunmaya gayret edilmiştir. Kronolojik sıranın takip edildiği bu eserin eksikleri olmakla birlikte kendi içinde tutarlı olduğu fark edilmiştir. İbn Âşûr, tefsirin doğuşundan günümüze gelinceye kadar tefsirin belli başlı dönemlerini, adlarından söz edilmeye değer tefsirlerden seçtiklerini konu edinmiştir. Onun bazı meselelerdeki görüşleri net ifade bulmuş olmasa da kurduğu cümlelerden çıkarımda bulunmak mümkündür. Bu bağlamda eserin tefsir tarihi yazımı açısından olumlu ve olumsuz yönleri verilmeye çalışılarak alana katkısı tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Son yüzyılda yaygın olan ve muasır bazı araştırmacılar tarafından aşılma gayretleri gösterilen ideolojik perspektifli tefsir tarihi yazımının, revaçta olduğu dönemde İbn Âşûr örneğinde farklılaştığının gösterilmeye çalışılması araştırmanın önemini artırmaktadır. et-Tefsîr ve Ricâluhu tefsir tarihi alanında muhtasar bir eser olmakla birlikte alanındaki çalışmalara ilham olabilecek niteliktedir.

Makale detayları

Evaluation of al-Fāḍil Ibn ʿĀshūr’s Work Named al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluhu in terms of Historiography of Tafsīr

Yazarlar:

Ahmet Şehit Tuna

Yayıncı:

Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University

Ana Başlıklar:

Din Araştırmaları

Dergi:

ULUM Vol.6 Issue 1, pp.81-103

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

7/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296478

pISSN:

2645-9132

Tafsīr

Ibn ʿĀshūr

History of Tafsīr

al-Tafsīr wa Rijāluhu

al-Dhahabī

Ṭabaqāt

al-Tafsîr wa al-MufassirûnTefsir

İbn ‘Âşûr

Tefsir Tarihi

et-Tefsîr ve Ricâluhu

Zehebî

Tabakât

et-Tefsîr ve'l-Müfessirûn

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Ahmet Şehit Tuna

Yayıncı: Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University

Ana Başlıklar: Din Araştırmaları

Dergi: ULUM Vol.6 Issue 1, pp.81-103

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 7/2023

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001296478

pISSN: 2645-9132

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Ahmet Şehit Tuna

Yayıncı:

Ankara Yildirim Beyazit University

Ana Başlıklar:

Din Araştırmaları

Dergi:

ULUM Vol.6 Issue 1, pp.81-103

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

7/2023

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001296478

pISSN:

2645-9132