The Reasons for az-Zaccâc's Grammatical and Morphological Criticisms of al-Akhfash in Maʿâni al-Qurʾān

Halid Halid; Musab Muhemid

Makale detayları

The Reasons for az-Zaccâc's Grammatical and Morphological Criticisms of al-Akhfash in Maʿâni al-Qurʾān

Yazarlar:

Halid Halid | Musab Muhemid

Yayıncı:

Mustafa Süleyman ÖZCAN

Ana Başlıklar:

Arap Dili ve Belagatı

Dergi:

İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 3, pp.1570-1586

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001328114

pISSN:

2147-1185

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 In his work, Maʻānī al-Qurʼān wa-iʻrābuh by al-Zajjāj meticulously examines the views of scholars, identifying and critiquing those he finds incorrect or weak, and often providing reasons and evidence for his own positions. He usually explained the reasons for his refusal and presented the evidence in support of his view. However, he sometimes lists multiple views without indicating a preference or chooses one view over another without explanation. The present study focuses on cases where al-Zajjāj articulates his reasons and evidence. One scholar whose views al-Zajjāj frequently scrutinizes is the Basran grammarian al-Akhfash al-Awsat, who often diverged from Basran thought and adopted Kufan perspectives. Our study aims to compare and evaluate the positions of al-Zajjāj and al-Akhfash to ascertain the most accurate conclusions. The significance of this research lies in the fact that al-Zajjājs criticisms of al-Akhfash have not been thoroughly examined nor studied independently. We analyze the evidence and reasons al-Zajjāj employs in his critiques. We begin with an introduction that elucidates the relationship between linguistic scholars and the Quran, as well as the critical methodology al-Zajjāj employs. Then, the main theme of this study is divided into two parts. The first part addresses instances where al-Zajjāj explicitly finds al-Akhfashs views erroneous. The second part examines cases where al-Zajjāj considers al-Akhfashs views weak or implicitly incorrect. Methodologically, at the beginning of each topic, we identify the point of contention. We then present al-Zajjājs critique of al-Akhfash. Our examination includes the views of other grammarians, evidence, and analogies supporting each view, and the reasons behind them. We cite the opinions of exegetes only when relevant to grammar or meanings that corroborate the grammarians perspectives. Ultimately, our aim is to determine the most accurate view based on our analysis. This approach allows for a better understanding and evaluation of al-Zajjājs critiques, contributing to significant discussions within the field of grammar.

 In his work, Maʻānī al-Qurʼān wa-iʻrābuh by al-Zajjāj meticulously examines the views of scholars, identifying and critiquing those he finds incorrect or weak, and often providing reasons and evidence for his own positions. He usually explained the reasons for his refusal and presented the evidence in support of his view. However, he sometimes lists multiple views without indicating a preference or chooses one view over another without explanation. The present study focuses on cases where al-Zajjāj articulates his reasons and evidence. One scholar whose views al-Zajjāj frequently scrutinizes is the Basran grammarian al-Akhfash al-Awsat, who often diverged from Basran thought and adopted Kufan perspectives. Our study aims to compare and evaluate the positions of al-Zajjāj and al-Akhfash to ascertain the most accurate conclusions. The significance of this research lies in the fact that al-Zajjājs criticisms of al-Akhfash have not been thoroughly examined nor studied independently. We analyze the evidence and reasons al-Zajjāj employs in his critiques. We begin with an introduction that elucidates the relationship between linguistic scholars and the Quran, as well as the critical methodology al-Zajjāj employs. Then, the main theme of this study is divided into two parts. The first part addresses instances where al-Zajjāj explicitly finds al-Akhfashs views erroneous. The second part examines cases where al-Zajjāj considers al-Akhfashs views weak or implicitly incorrect. Methodologically, at the beginning of each topic, we identify the point of contention. We then present al-Zajjājs critique of al-Akhfash. Our examination includes the views of other grammarians, evidence, and analogies supporting each view, and the reasons behind them. We cite the opinions of exegetes only when relevant to grammar or meanings that corroborate the grammarians perspectives. Ultimately, our aim is to determine the most accurate view based on our analysis. This approach allows for a better understanding and evaluation of al-Zajjājs critiques, contributing to significant discussions within the field of grammar.

 In his work, Maʻānī al-Qurʼān wa-iʻrābuh by al-Zajjāj meticulously examines the views of scholars, identifying and critiquing those he finds incorrect or weak, and often providing reasons and evidence for his own positions. He usually explained the reasons for his refusal and presented the evidence in support of his view. However, he sometimes lists multiple views without indicating a preference or chooses one view over another without explanation. The present study focuses on cases where al-Zajjāj articulates his reasons and evidence. One scholar whose views al-Zajjāj frequently scrutinizes is the Basran grammarian al-Akhfash al-Awsat, who often diverged from Basran thought and adopted Kufan perspectives. Our study aims to compare and evaluate the positions of al-Zajjāj and al-Akhfash to ascertain the most accurate conclusions. The significance of this research lies in the fact that al-Zajjājs criticisms of al-Akhfash have not been thoroughly examined nor studied independently. We analyze the evidence and reasons al-Zajjāj employs in his critiques. We begin with an introduction that elucidates the relationship between linguistic scholars and the Quran, as well as the critical methodology al-Zajjāj employs. Then, the main theme of this study is divided into two parts. The first part addresses instances where al-Zajjāj explicitly finds al-Akhfashs views erroneous. The second part examines cases where al-Zajjāj considers al-Akhfashs views weak or implicitly incorrect. Methodologically, at the beginning of each topic, we identify the point of contention. We then present al-Zajjājs critique of al-Akhfash. Our examination includes the views of other grammarians, evidence, and analogies supporting each view, and the reasons behind them. We cite the opinions of exegetes only when relevant to grammar or meanings that corroborate the grammarians perspectives. Ultimately, our aim is to determine the most accurate view based on our analysis. This approach allows for a better understanding and evaluation of al-Zajjājs critiques, contributing to significant discussions within the field of grammar.

 ez-Zeccâc, Meʿânîl-Ḳurʾân ve İʿrâbuhu adlı eserinde, birçok âlimin görüşünü ele alarak, bunların yanlış bulduğu veya zayıf olarak nitelendirdiği hususları detaylı bir şekilde incelemiştir. Genellikle, reddettiği görüşlerin nedenlerini belirtmiş ve kendi görüşünü destekleyen delilleri arz etmiştir. Ancak bazen birçok görüşü sıralayıp herhangi bir tercih belirtmemiş veya bir görüşü diğerine tercih edip nedenini açıklamamıştır. Bu çalışmada, ez-Zeccâcın nedenlerini ve delillerini belirttiği görüşler incelenmiştir. ez-Zeccâcın özel olarak görüşlerini ele aldığı âlimlerden biri, Basralı olup Basralıların aksine Kûfelilerin görüşlerini benimseyen Nahivci el-Ahfeş el-Evsattır. Çalışmamızda, ez-Zeccâc ve el-Ahfeşin görüşlerini karşılaştırarak ve diğer görüşlerle birlikte değerlendirerek, en doğru sonuca ulaşmayı hedefledik. Bu çalışmanın önemi, ez-Zeccâcın el-Ahfeşe yönelik eleştirilerinin incelenmemiş olmasıdır. Ayrıca, bu eleştiriler bağımsız bir şekilde ele alınmamıştır. Çalışmada, ez-Zeccâcın el-Ahfeşe yönelik eleştirilerinde kullandığı deliller incelenmiştir. Çalışmanın giriş bölümünde dil âlimlerinin Kuranla ilişkisi ve ez-Zeccâcın eserindeki eleştirel metoduna yer verilmiştir. Sonra konumuzu iki ana başlık altında ele aldık. Birinci başlıkta ez-Zeccâcın el-Ahfeşin görüşlerini açıkça yanlış bulduğu yerleri ele aldık. İkinci başlıkta ise, ez-Zeccâcın el-Ahfeşin görüşlerini zayıf bulduğu veya yanlış olduğunu ima ettiği yerleri inceledik. Sonrasında, ulaştığımız sonuçlara yer verdik. Yöntem olarak, her konunun başında incelediğimiz meseledeki anlaşmazlık noktasını belirttik, ardından ez-Zeccâcın el-Ahfeşe olan eleştirisini sunduk. Meselenin incelenmesinde, nahivcilerin görüşlerini, her bir görüşün delil ve kıyaslarını, nedenlerini zikrettik. Müfessirlerin görüşlerinden sadece nahiv veya anlamla ilgili olan ve nahivcilerin görüşlerini teyit edenleri zikrettik. Çalışmanın sonunda ise, kendi kanaatimizce en doğru görüşe ulaşmayı amaçladık. Bu metodolojik yaklaşım sayesinde, ez-Zeccâcın eleştirilerini ve görüşlerini daha iyi anlamayı ve değerlendirmeyi hedefledik. Bu şekilde, nahiv alanındaki bu önemli tartışmalara katkıda bulunmayı amaçladık. Çalışmada şu sonuçlara varılmıştır: Zeccâc, taklitten uzak bir duruş sergilemiş ve kendisinden önceki birçok dilciyi eleştirmiştir. İleri sürdüğü görüşlerini temellendirmek için semâ, kıyas, icma ve istishâbul-asl gibi yöntemlere başvurmuştur. Tartışmalı dil konularında genellikle Basra ekolünü tercih etmiştir. Zeccâc, tercih ettiği görüşler için asah, sahih, savâbdoğru, caiz, zayıf, gayr-ı caiz, hata ve galat gibi kavramları kullanmıştır.

Makale detayları

The Reasons for az-Zaccâc's Grammatical and Morphological Criticisms of al-Akhfash in Maʿâni al-Qurʾān

Yazarlar:

Halid Halid | Musab Muhemid

Yayıncı:

Mustafa Süleyman ÖZCAN

Ana Başlıklar:

Arap Dili ve Belagatı

Dergi:

İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 3, pp.1570-1586

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001328114

pISSN:

2147-1185

Arabic Language

Maʿâni al-Qurʾān wa Iʿrâbuhu

az-Zaccâc

al-Akhfash

Critique

ReasoningArap dili

Zeccâc

Me‘âni’l-Kur`ân ve İ‘râbuhû

Ahfeş

Red

İllet

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Halid Halid | Musab Muhemid

Yayıncı: Mustafa Süleyman ÖZCAN

Ana Başlıklar: Arap Dili ve Belagatı

Dergi: İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 3, pp.1570-1586

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 9/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001328114

pISSN: 2147-1185

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Halid Halid | Musab Muhemid

Yayıncı:

Mustafa Süleyman ÖZCAN

Ana Başlıklar:

Arap Dili ve Belagatı

Dergi:

İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırmaları Dergisi Vol.13 Issue 3, pp.1570-1586

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

9/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001328114

pISSN:

2147-1185