The Connection Between Mutawātir Reports and the Science of Hadīth

Ibrahim Gökçe

Makale detayları

The Connection Between Mutawātir Reports and the Science of Hadīth

Yazarlar:

Ibrahim Gökçe

Yayıncı:

Gaziantep University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hadis

Dergi:

İlahiyat Akademi Issue 20, pp.219-241

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001335791

pISSN:

2149-3979

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 Reports rivāyāt are bridges of knowledge established from the past to the future. Since the existence of the world, people have connected with their past through these bridges, and they have become aware of their civilizations, cultures, origins, and religious values through these connections. The importance of these connections which were possible through reports and narrations are better understood if we consider ancient religions written and oral transmissions to subsequent generations, particularly in the religion of Islam. The concept of reports has been classified and divided within Islamic sciences based on criterias such as their transmission method and the value of the knowledge they convey. It has widely been accepted within these classifications that reports consist of two types: mutawātir and āḥād. However, intense debates have persisted over the centuries regarding the existence, conditions, and acceptance criterias of both concepts. Particularly in the later periods of hadīth history, conceptual discussions have been held regarding mutawātir and āḥād reports. This study aims to investigate the claim that mutawātir is not a subject of the science of hadīth but rather originates from the science of jurisprudence fiqh, along with the justifications for this claim. During the study, it was observed that the debate largely revolves around whether mutawātir reports signify certain and definitive knowledge under specific conditions. Advocates argue that for a report to be considered mutawātir, it must be impossible for all layers of transmitters in its era to unanimously agree on falsehood due to their numerical abundance, thereby ensuring the reports designation as conveying certain knowledge. Consequently, the science of isnād, which determines the acceptability of a report based on the examination of transmitters, would not concern itself with a report that cannot possibly be fabricated due to its numerical abundance. Moreover, when examining the numbers of transmitters across layers, it is nearly impossible to find a report that could be accepted as mutawātir solely due to numerical abundance. Supporters of this view argue based on these two reasons that the concept of mutawātir reports cannot have a direct connection with the science of hadīth. While acknowledging that the impossibility of transmitters unanimously agreeing on falsehood is crucial for a mutawātir report to convey certain knowledge, they argue that this criterion should not be limited solely to numerical or spatial abundance but should also consider the superior qualities possessed by transmitters. From this perspective, mutawātir reports indeed fall within the scope of the science of hadīth, and there are many mutawātir narrations among hadīths. As far as we have seen, these arguments have not been the subject of any previous research. While conducting this study, we primarily relied on works on the principles of hadith. In our consultation of these works, we sought answers to questions such as What is the connection between mutawātir reports and the science of hadīth? Can we speak of a distinct understanding of mutawātir specific to scholars of hadīth? What is the starting point of the debate on whether there are mutawātir reports among hadiths? While attempting to follow a chronological approach in presenting viewpoints, we occasionally had to abandon this method to maintain the integrity of the subject. We also acknowledge that the study employs the method of induction from the specific to the general.

 Reports rivāyāt are bridges of knowledge established from the past to the future. Since the existence of the world, people have connected with their past through these bridges, and they have become aware of their civilizations, cultures, origins, and religious values through these connections. The importance of these connections which were possible through reports and narrations are better understood if we consider ancient religions written and oral transmissions to subsequent generations, particularly in the religion of Islam. The concept of reports has been classified and divided within Islamic sciences based on criterias such as their transmission method and the value of the knowledge they convey. It has widely been accepted within these classifications that reports consist of two types: mutawātir and āḥād. However, intense debates have persisted over the centuries regarding the existence, conditions, and acceptance criterias of both concepts. Particularly in the later periods of hadīth history, conceptual discussions have been held regarding mutawātir and āḥād reports. This study aims to investigate the claim that mutawātir is not a subject of the science of hadīth but rather originates from the science of jurisprudence fiqh, along with the justifications for this claim. During the study, it was observed that the debate largely revolves around whether mutawātir reports signify certain and definitive knowledge under specific conditions. Advocates argue that for a report to be considered mutawātir, it must be impossible for all layers of transmitters in its era to unanimously agree on falsehood due to their numerical abundance, thereby ensuring the reports designation as conveying certain knowledge. Consequently, the science of isnād, which determines the acceptability of a report based on the examination of transmitters, would not concern itself with a report that cannot possibly be fabricated due to its numerical abundance. Moreover, when examining the numbers of transmitters across layers, it is nearly impossible to find a report that could be accepted as mutawātir solely due to numerical abundance. Supporters of this view argue based on these two reasons that the concept of mutawātir reports cannot have a direct connection with the science of hadīth. While acknowledging that the impossibility of transmitters unanimously agreeing on falsehood is crucial for a mutawātir report to convey certain knowledge, they argue that this criterion should not be limited solely to numerical or spatial abundance but should also consider the superior qualities possessed by transmitters. From this perspective, mutawātir reports indeed fall within the scope of the science of hadīth, and there are many mutawātir narrations among hadīths. As far as we have seen, these arguments have not been the subject of any previous research. While conducting this study, we primarily relied on works on the principles of hadith. In our consultation of these works, we sought answers to questions such as What is the connection between mutawātir reports and the science of hadīth? Can we speak of a distinct understanding of mutawātir specific to scholars of hadīth? What is the starting point of the debate on whether there are mutawātir reports among hadiths? While attempting to follow a chronological approach in presenting viewpoints, we occasionally had to abandon this method to maintain the integrity of the subject. We also acknowledge that the study employs the method of induction from the specific to the general.

 Reports rivāyāt are bridges of knowledge established from the past to the future. Since the existence of the world, people have connected with their past through these bridges, and they have become aware of their civilizations, cultures, origins, and religious values through these connections. The importance of these connections which were possible through reports and narrations are better understood if we consider ancient religions written and oral transmissions to subsequent generations, particularly in the religion of Islam. The concept of reports has been classified and divided within Islamic sciences based on criterias such as their transmission method and the value of the knowledge they convey. It has widely been accepted within these classifications that reports consist of two types: mutawātir and āḥād. However, intense debates have persisted over the centuries regarding the existence, conditions, and acceptance criterias of both concepts. Particularly in the later periods of hadīth history, conceptual discussions have been held regarding mutawātir and āḥād reports. This study aims to investigate the claim that mutawātir is not a subject of the science of hadīth but rather originates from the science of jurisprudence fiqh, along with the justifications for this claim. During the study, it was observed that the debate largely revolves around whether mutawātir reports signify certain and definitive knowledge under specific conditions. Advocates argue that for a report to be considered mutawātir, it must be impossible for all layers of transmitters in its era to unanimously agree on falsehood due to their numerical abundance, thereby ensuring the reports designation as conveying certain knowledge. Consequently, the science of isnād, which determines the acceptability of a report based on the examination of transmitters, would not concern itself with a report that cannot possibly be fabricated due to its numerical abundance. Moreover, when examining the numbers of transmitters across layers, it is nearly impossible to find a report that could be accepted as mutawātir solely due to numerical abundance. Supporters of this view argue based on these two reasons that the concept of mutawātir reports cannot have a direct connection with the science of hadīth. While acknowledging that the impossibility of transmitters unanimously agreeing on falsehood is crucial for a mutawātir report to convey certain knowledge, they argue that this criterion should not be limited solely to numerical or spatial abundance but should also consider the superior qualities possessed by transmitters. From this perspective, mutawātir reports indeed fall within the scope of the science of hadīth, and there are many mutawātir narrations among hadīths. As far as we have seen, these arguments have not been the subject of any previous research. While conducting this study, we primarily relied on works on the principles of hadith. In our consultation of these works, we sought answers to questions such as What is the connection between mutawātir reports and the science of hadīth? Can we speak of a distinct understanding of mutawātir specific to scholars of hadīth? What is the starting point of the debate on whether there are mutawātir reports among hadiths? While attempting to follow a chronological approach in presenting viewpoints, we occasionally had to abandon this method to maintain the integrity of the subject. We also acknowledge that the study employs the method of induction from the specific to the general.

 Rivâyetler, geçmişten geleceğe kurulan bilgi köprüleridir. Dünya var olduğu günden beri insanlar geçmişleriyle bu köprüler aracılığı ile bağ kurmuşlar; medeniyetlerinden, kültürlerinden, kökenlerinden ve dinî değerlerinden bu bağ sayesinde haberdar olmuşlardır. İslâm dini başta olmak üzere kadim dinlerin sonraki nesillere yazılı ve sözlü aktarımı düşünüldüğünde haber ve rivâyetin var ettiği bu bağın önemi daha iyi anlaşılmaktadır. İnsanlık tarihinde önemli bir yere sahip olan haber olgusu, İslâmi ilimler içinde aktarılış biçimi, bilgi değeri gibi kriterlere göre farklı tasnif ve taksimlere tabi tutulmuştur. Bu tasnif ve taksimler içinde haberlerin mütevâtir ve âhâd olarak iki kısımdan oluştuğu kabulü daha fazla benimsenmiştir. Bununla birlikte her iki kavram hakkında varlıkları, şartları ve delil kabul edilme durumları gibi konularda geçmişten günümüze devam eden yoğun tartışmalar da yaşanmıştır. Bu bağlamda özellikle müteahhir dönem hadis tarihinde âhâd ve mütevâtir haber üzerine kavramsal tartışmalar yapıldığı bilinmektedir. Çalışmamız bu tartışmalardan biri olan mütevâtirin hadis ilminin konusu olmadığı, fıkıh ilminden alındığı iddiasını ve bu iddianın gerekçelerini araştırmayı hedeflemektedir. Çalışma esnasında, tartışmanın mütevâtir haberin hangi şartlar altında kesin ve yakînî bilgi ifade ettiği noktasında yoğunlaştığı tespit edilmiştir. Bir rivâyetin mütevâtir olabilmesi için naklin yapıldığı dönemin doğal şartlarına göre her tabakadaki râvilerin sayısal çokluklarından dolayı yalan üzere ittifak etmelerinin mümkün olmaması gerektiğini ileri sürenler, mütevâtir kavramının hadis ilminin bir parçası olamayacağını savunmaktadırlar. Onlara göre râvilerin yalan üzere ittifak etmelerinin imkansızlığı çok sayıda olmaları ile gerçekleşmekte ve bu da haberin kesin bilgi ifade ederek mütevâtir olarak nitelenmesini sağlamaktadır. Doğal olarak râvi incelemesi sonrasında rivâyetin makbul olup olmadığına karar veren isnâd ilmi, sayısal çokluk sebebiyle yalan söyleme ihtimali olmayan ve kesin bilgi ifade eden bir haber ile ilgilenmeyecektir. Ayrıca hadislerin tabakalardaki râvi sayıları incelendiğinde sayısal çokluk sayesinde mütevâtir kabul edilebilecek rivâyet bulmak neredeyse imkansızdır. Bu görüş sahipleri bu iki gerekçeden hareketle mütevâtir haber kavramının hadis ilmiyle doğrudan bir bağı olamayacağını savunmuşlardır. Mütevâtir haberlerin kesin bilgi ifade etmesini râvilerin yalan üzere birleşme ihtimallerinin bulunmaması olarak kabul etmekle birlikte bunun sadece sayısal çokluk veya mekânsal uzaklık ile sınırlandırılmaması gerektiğini savunanlar ise, râvilerin sahip oldukları üstün meziyetlerin de hesaba katılması gerektiğini savunmuşlardır. Onlara göre mütevâtir haberin belirleyici şartı yalan üzere ittifakın mümkün olmamasıdır ve bu, râvilerin sıfatları ile de gerçekleşebilir. Bu açıdan bakıldığında mütevâtir haber hadis ilminin konusudur ve hadisler arasında birçok mütevâtir rivâyet bulunmaktadır. Tarafların bu iddiaları gördüğümüz kadarıyla daha önce herhangi bir araştırmaya konu olmamıştır. Biz bu konuyu çalışırken daha çok hadis usûlü eserlerinden istifade etmeye çalıştık. Hadis usûlü eserlerine müracaat esnasında Mütevâtir haberin hadis ilmi ile bağı nedir? Muhaddislere özgü bir mütevâtir anlayışından söz edilebilir mi? Hadislerin içinde mütevâtir olup olmadığı tartışmasının çıkış noktası nedir? gibi soruların cevaplarını aradık. Cevaplar aranırken kronoloji takip edilerek görüşlerin aktarılmasına gayret göstermekle birlikte konu bütünlüğünün bozulmaması için bazen bu yöntemi terk etmek zorunda kaldık. Çalışmada eksik tümevarım yöntemiyle bazı genellemelere yer verdiğimizi de ifade etmek isteriz.

Makale detayları

The Connection Between Mutawātir Reports and the Science of Hadīth

Yazarlar:

Ibrahim Gökçe

Yayıncı:

Gaziantep University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hadis

Dergi:

İlahiyat Akademi Issue 20, pp.219-241

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001335791

pISSN:

2149-3979

Hadīth

Fiqh

Report

Mutawātir

Ibn ḤajarHadis

Fıkıh

Haber

Mütevâtir

İbn Hacer

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Ibrahim Gökçe

Yayıncı: Gaziantep University

Ana Başlıklar: Hadis

Dergi: İlahiyat Akademi Issue 20, pp.219-241

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 12/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001335791

pISSN: 2149-3979

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Ibrahim Gökçe

Yayıncı:

Gaziantep University

Ana Başlıklar:

Hadis

Dergi:

İlahiyat Akademi Issue 20, pp.219-241

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

12/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001335791

pISSN:

2149-3979