The Prophet, whom Allah sent the whole universe and humanity as mercy, produced not only many judicial rules and practices regarding the relations of a person with Allah and other people in Islam but also uttered sentences about the explanation of holy book, Qur’an, and about how this book can be put into practice. The issue whether and how much these sentences of the prophet (hadith) and acts of the prophet (Sunnah) are binding have been discussed by both hadith (...) methodologists and fiqh methodologists; accordingly, a great many studies were produced. In hadith methodology, the discussions about Sunnah of the Prophet had their reflections in the studies of fiqh methodology; and especially Hanafi jurists propounded considerations about this issue. Hussein b. Ali al-Saymerî (d. 436/1045) one of these jurists, is the student of Muhammad b. Mûsa al-Khwârizmî (d. 403/1012), who is the student of Abû Bakr al-Jassâs (d. 370/980), who is an authority in Hanafi methodology. al-Saymerî, who adopted the method of al-Jassâs in fiqh methodology, systematically categorized several fundamental issues which were discussed and were related to fiqh methodology during his time; and he defended the views of Hanafi scholars about these issues primarily against Shâfiʿîs and several fiqh and kalam schools. While presenting the views and evidences of Hanafis, al-Saymerî initially applied for the views of founder imams of Hanafi sect such as Abû Hanîfa, Abû Yusuf and Muhammad al-Shaybânî; following these scholars, he greatly benefited from Hanafi scholars from Iraq region, such as Abu’l-Hasan al-Karkhî (d. 340/952) and his student, Abu Bakr al-Râzî al-Jassâs. When the relevant parts of his study is analysed, it is seen that the effect of al-Jassâs is especially noticeable. In this article, we will study the binding issue of the Sunnah of the Prophet within the context of al-Saymerî’s study, which has extant and is called Mesâilu’l-hilâf fi usûli’l-fiqh. We consider that the different attitude of al-Saymerî about the Sunnah of the Prophet from the other methodologists and hadith scholars and the underlying reasons of these differences are worth to be investigated and emphasized. (shrink)

Ijmā is ranked as the third shariah evidence after the Qur’ān and Sunnah in the science of Uṣūl. Shafi was the first one who made Uṣūl which had been known and used by the Islamic scholars, into a written document and who ascertained that Ijmā was the third of the shariah evidences. Kalām is one of the sciences in which Ijmā evidence is used. The scholars of Kalām used this evidence as far as the science of Uṣūl made it (...) possible. They always used it without changing any basics of religious beliefs and acceptances. That the aqidah of Ahl al-Sunnah has been supported with Ijmā which is regarded as one of naqly evidences, played an important role in eliminating suspicions which were tried to be aroused in momins’ mind. In this article, the function and importance of Ijmā evidence, which is one of the primary sources of the science of Uṣūl, in the science of Kalām and Aqidah of Ahl al-Sunnah has been studied.SummaryWhat the Qur’ān demands from us is to emphasize the spirit of unity among ummah and to keep out the factors that could trigger separation and division. Indeed, Allah emphasizes in the following verses in the Qur’ān on the protection of the unitary structure of the ummah: “And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided” (Āl a-Imrān 3/103) and “And do not be like the ones who became divided and differed after the clear proofs had come to them” (Āl al-Imrān 3/105). Allah has commanded the Ulul ‘Azm Prophets to hold the religion upright and to avoid division. (al-Shūrā 42/13). The command of holding the religion upright and not to be divided in this religion means to certify what needs to be confirmed in the religion of Allah and to obey those that must be obeyed. This is also the proclamation of the principle of religion that all the prophets have consensus over.Ahl al-Sunnah understanding of Islam is identical to the understanding of the Prophet and his companions. For this reason, Ahl al-Sunna is the school that represents the main backbone of Islam. In Ahl al-Sunna, in many subjects, be it usūlî / primary or furū’ī / secondary, there has been ijmā. These ijmās are Sahaba ijmās and deductive ijmās that come from mutakallimūn (theologians) ijtihāds. Therefore, ijmā and ijtihād are closely connected to each other. Ijmā is supported by ijtihād and ijtihād is also the source of ijmā. Thus, the issue is no longer just a pure ijtihād; it turns out to be a degree that gives a solid knowledge after it has risen to some degree just after the nass/texts.Ahl al- Sunnah theologians are talking about two kinds of ijmā. The first is “ijmā taṣdīqī” (approval consensus) which is the consensus based on Sahaba İjmā. These are the ijmās that occur on the principles called ḍaruratal-diniyya (necessities of the religion), and accepted as solid proofs in religion. Issues such as the principles of faith, obligation of prayer and the fasting are the subjects that are determined by the solid/definite ijmā. Such ijmās are valid approvals on existing provisions. These ijmās based on solid nass (verses and hadiths). Such ijmās do not give any new information. The existing information is strengthened by the alliance of Muslims. In these areas, ijtihād cannot be done and Muslims do not need ijtihād on these issues. There is an consensus of Ahl al-Sunnah scholars about the unfaithfulness of the one who denies one or more of the principles which are accepted as the main obligatory principles in Islam. The other is the “deductive ijmā which the ijtihāds have roles over. This kind of ijmās, are formed as a result of mujtahids’ consensus over the same opinion on the issue of theological secondary issues. The issues related to the secondary theological issues which were open to the ijtihāds and the different results obtained on matters are not accepted as the cause of takfīr. However, depending on the subject he/she can be a sinner. Istidlālī/deductive ijmās are not considered as an independent proofs in ‘Ilm al-Kalām, rather a supportive ones and are considered as textual evidences.Since, texts that are accepted as sources give supposed information. In this regard, the Ahl al-Sunnah scholars accepted other members of the sect who have in secondary theological issues opposed the ijmā of the salaf / predecessor as Ahl al-Qibla, but named them as Ahl al-Bid’a (innovator in religion) because of their opposition to Salaf’s İjmās. Moreover, the scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah did not see them appropriate to participate in the Ijmās, which could occur between the generations that come after Sahābas/companions.Not all disputes have been criticized in Islam. It is a blessing for the ummah to claim different opinions on the issues subject to ijtihād. Since the ummah, in this way, will bring new solutions to emerging issues and as a result, Islam will have a mechanism to produce a dynamic solution. This can only be possible through ijtihād. Dispute is to propose different views on a subject. If this view is not in the actual matters that could harm the unity of the Ummah, rather in the case of ijtihādi issues, this conflict could turn to be mercy.The reason why the methodists evaluate the ijmā within the scope of the authorized evidence is that because they think it is essential that the ijmā be based on a proof. From this point of view, the alliances that occurred in mental matters were not considered as ijmā. The theologians always tried to support their claims with nass/textual proofs. When the ijmā is realized, whether known or not, they have stated that there is certainly a religious proof behind it. Because, the provisions that were reached through ijmā, cannot be against the provisions of the Prophet.Many issues in Islamic Belief and Kalām works are supported by the mental and textual evidences as well as by deductive ijmā. However, many of the claims of Ijmās in these works reflect the inter-sect ijmās of the Ahl al-Sunnah. The sects outside the Ahl al-Sunnah were excluded. This attitude is, above all, the aim of ensuring the integrity within the sect, and trying to protect the Ahl al-Sunnah belief. Since the ijmā evidence has a function that prevents all kinds of arbitrary and divisive thoughts and turns the supposed knowledge into the qat’ī/certain one, it raises the provision to the next level just after the nass, rather than merely being a ijtihādi provision. In the case of the forerunner of the Ahl al-Sunnah, the Māturīdes and Ash‘arites have not differed in in understanding of ijmā in terms of methodology.Although they have different views on the definition and content of the ijmā, they have a common understanding of alliances of Mujtahids on the same view. The mutakallims (theologians) of Māturīdī and Ash’arī schools have used the proof of ijmā as supportive evidence in the cases related to Kalām. al-Ash’arī not only adopted the proof of ijmā but also used it in practice in. He did not make any distinction in proof of ijmā as practical, theological, methodological or sub-divisional; he used it freely in every field. Māturīdī and Ash’arī scholars decided that the ijmā could occur in religious matters and that there would be evidence when it was formed; In the case of mental issues, they have required the knowledge to be based on solid information. In the case of ijmā in purely mental issues, they have disputed over the issue. While some Ahl al-Sunnah scholars stated that since purely mental matters were certain knowledge and therefore don’t need ijmā, they also ruled that because the mujtahids could get this knowledge from religious texts, therefore ijmā could occur in mental matters as well. (shrink)

This study examined scientific tolerance as a human way to life in the context of Sunnah, a much debatable topic among critics and scholars. The study also highlighted prophetic visions in the application of scientific tolerance. Using a normative descriptive approach in this qualitative research, the data was collected from library archives and Islamic data sources. This approach enabled to raise questions about the nature of scientific tolerance in the light of Sunnah, prophetic mechanisms used to establish the (...) scientific tolerance, and its advantages. The findings revealed that scientific tolerance was integrated to the prophetic visions and the Sunnah, aiming at peace, tranquility, and stability for the entire mankind. The study found out how the Sunnah of the Prophet laid the foundation of scientific tolerance, and how it was carried forward by the Companions and mujtahids through their discussions, dialogues, and debates. It was also observed that the scientific tolerance reached its peak in the era of Arab and Islamic civilization, through the translation movement that began in the Umayyad era and reached its culmination, and gained heights through scientific discoveries, innovations, and civilizational achievements. In the Abbasid era, the subsequent transfer and translation of these languages into Latin and other European languages, further enhanced the depth of scientific tolerance in the contemporary renaissance and modern civilization. (shrink)

el-Bâcî is one of the leading jurists and hadith scholars of the Malikis who lived in the tenth century. He contributed to the formation of Andalusian Malikism and was accepted as the leader of Andalusian Malikiism during his time. He came to the fore and was known for his hadithism and proceduralism. He is known for his works in the field of hadith and procedure. He played an important role in authentic hadiths reaching today and understanding Imam Malik's work named (...) al-Muwatta’. el-Bâcî wrote many works in the field of fiqh methodology. He introduced the method of fiqh in his works on methodology and systematically discussed the evidence on which his method is based. He is one of the rare methodologists who explains his fiqh proofs after giving them in a systematic way. The evidence on which it is based in that procedure; he examined it by dividing it into three parts: the original (el-asl), the reasoning of the original, and istishâbu'l-hâl.” He divided his primary evidence, which he expressed with the phrase “al-Asl”, into three parts: the book, the sunnah and the ijma. He divided the understanding of the original (el-asl) into four parts. İstishābul-hāli is discussed in a single part. Unlike the hierarchy of evidence established in the understanding of Islamic procedure, he evaluated qiyas in the part of reasoning about the original (el-asl). In addition to these evidences, el-Bâcî also included the evidence of seddü'z-zerâi' and istihsan; He accepted the istihsan as a weak evidence and the seddü'z-zerâi as confined to a limited area. In his works on procedure, el-Bâcî mentioned the sunnah among the primary evidence, which he called al-asl. He mentioned the dictionary meaning of sunnah and the meaning of the term according to hadith scholars and methodologists. He generally evaluated the sunnah by dividing it into three parts: actual, verbal and confirmation (takriri). He did not directly define the parts of the sunnah, but explained what he meant by the types of sunnah through summary information and some examples. He discussed following the Sunnah on the basis of power and obedience. Cited many verses as evidence in his works on procedure el-Bâcî argued that obedience to the Sunnah is in the same position as obedience to the Quran. He concluded that the sunnah, whose source is certain, ultimately turns into the Quran, and that although it comes after the Quran in the hierarchy of evidence, the sunnah is as effective as the Quran in determining the provisions. Therefore, el-Bâcî defended the view that the verses that command obedience to Allah also implicitly command obedience to the Prophet. He argued that, unlike the common view of the sunnah in the Islamic society, that there is reward in doing it and there is no sin in skipping it, the sunnah is close to the ruling of wajib, not the rule of mandub, and therefore the sunnah cannot be abandoned arbitrarily. He differed from the majority on this issue by accepting the view that the Sunnah abrogates the Quran in some matters. He also focused on the topic of news in order to accurately determine the position of the Sunnah. He evaluated the news as the source of the sunnah by dividing it into two parts: mutawatir and ahad khabar (news from one person). He used mutawatir not only as news that a large group of people transmitted from the Prophet from generation to generation, but also to express situations that were known by everyone and could not be denied. In his understanding of usul, mutawatir khabar conveys essential knowledge. He put forward three conditions for mutawatir to express essential knowledge: the narrator must be intelligent, he must necessarily have the knowledge of what is reported, and the narrators must reach a certain number. Ahad accepted the news as the narration of a single person and as evidence from which no knowledge can be derived. However, he discussed it from a broad perspective in terms of impact. In el-Bâcî's understanding of procedure, ahad khabar explains the summary of the Quran and mutawatir; it allocates the whole of the Quran. He examined the ahad khabar meticulously in order to determine the deed in general. According to whether it requires knowledge and action or not, ahad khabar is divided into two parts: ahad khabar, with which knowledge is formed, and ahad khabar, with which knowledge does not occur. Through whom knowledge was formed, listed six forms of ahad khabar. In order to accept the ahad, he generally took into consideration the narration's narration. He did not accept the Hanafis' principle of umumu'l-balwa. Also he did not mention the condition that ahad news should be in accordance with the practice of the people of Medina and preferred to remain silent on this issue. He claimed that ahad khabar could abrogate the Quran. He cited various examples of this actually happening. (shrink)

One of the common points between Ahl al-Sunnah and Shia is the com-mon hadiths, which both have. These hadiths have been seen as a means of bringing the two sides closer in recent years. Although common narrations, which are seen as a means of bringing the two sects closer, have been men-tioned in recent years, when going into detail, it is understood that there are differences in terms of wording and interpretation. Some of the common hadiths are transmitted in (...) the exactly same way in Shia and Ahl al-Sunnah. The two sects were able to make different evaluations in terms of meaning in such hadiths. The wording differences of a hadith in Shia enable the follow-up of the formation within the sect. A similar situation can be seen in the interpretations attributed to the hadiths in the Ahl al-Sunnah. As a concrete example of these determinations, it is possible to consider the hadith of firâsah, which includes abstract concepts within the scope of faith. The study consists of two parts. In the first part, status of authenticity the hadith of firâsah in Ahl al-Sunnah and the meaning attributed to the hadith are emphasized. It was seen that Sufi scholars concentrated more on this hadith as a result of the research on hadith, tafsir and sufism sources.The hadith of firâset, which is almost identical in terms of text in the books of Shia and Ahl as-sunna, has been accepted as evidence of the understanding of firâset among the Ahl as-Sunnah, especially as a way of Sufis obtaining knowledge. (shrink)

Although there are fundamental differences between Ahl al-Sunnah and Shī‘a on the issue of Mahdī, one of the controversial issues among Islamic sects, Shī‘a has attached much greater importance to the issue. In this study, after the information about Mahdiship in the primary sources of Islam is conveyed, the opinions of the Ahl al-Sunnah and Shī‘a will be given and an evaluation will be made about the evidence and opinions put forward by the two sects. The Shiites, who (...) formed the principles of belief based on the theory of imamate, explained the issue of Mahdism in the axis of imamate and gave it a religious dimension, but the Shi‘ī sects disagreed on the subject of Mahdī. Shi‘ī sources tried to show that the claim of Mahdiship is an important issue, which has preoccupied Muslims, by dating the claim of Mahdiship back to Ali ibn Abi Talib's son, Muhammad ibn Hanafiyah. In a very early period, it was claimed that Muhammad ibn Hanafiyya did not die but was still living on a mountain called Razva in Madinah, and he was the anticipated (muntaẓar) Mahdī. Most of the Zaydiyya did not consider the issue of Mahdiship an important fundamental basis of belief. Ismailiyya maintain that Muhammad ibn Ismail did not die and will come and amend the world one day. Imāmiyya believe that Hasan, whom they accept as the last imam, will reappear as the Mahdī in the latest days of the world, and in line with this belief, they have made great efforts to find proof from the Qur’ānic verses and hadiths and interpreted them. In this way, they attached more importance to the understanding of Mahdiship on the axis of imamate than the other Shi‘ī sects. According to Imāmiyya, since the world cannot be left without a prophet, an open, or a secret imam, Muhammad b. Hasan will remain hidden as long as he wants and appear as the Mahdī near the Doomsday. Based on the clear statement of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) that twelve caliphs would come after him, the Imāmiyya restricted the number of Imams from Ahl al-Bayt to twelve and claimed that the twelfth imam would come again as Mahdī. Although the Imāmiyya believe that the Mahdī will be from the Ahl al-Bayt, just like the other imams, they have not been able to provide valid evidence for the belief that the twelfth imam will be hidden and appear near Judgment Day. Although Imāmiya tried/have been trying to prove that it is possible for a person to live for centuries (more than a thousand years), which is called al-Ghaybat al-Kubrā by Imamiyya, it cannot be said that they have succeeded in doing so. (shrink)

The Holy Quran and the Sunnah provide the Islamic approach to a complete food system, regulating the consumption of food and drinks, clarifying permissibility and prohibition, to protect human health. This analytical study aimed to explore various categories and benefits of food in Islam derived from plants and animals, focusing specifically on how Islamic Shariah advocates halal food consumption, and what permissions or prohibitions are granted, highlighting the underlying religious evidence and reasoning. The data was collected through both inductive (...) and deductive approaches; the inductive method gathered literature on the topic from the Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith commentaries, while the deductive approach classified plant-based and animal-based foods and elaborated on the benefits of halal items versus the harms of prohibited ones. The study found the plant foods endorsed in Islam include fruits, vegetables, grains, and nuts like dates, beans, olives, and ziziphus, while the permissible animal foods comprise seafood, fish, beef, dairy products, and honey. These foods assist in the growth and repair of body tissues, digestion, energy, metabolism, and overall wellbeing. Meanwhile, prohibited foods contained toxins, germs, and substances that lead to obesity, cancer, blood issues, and more. The implications of this study lie in showcasing how Islam forbids monopoly control of commodities and encourages activities like land rehabilitation for farming and public cultivation. Islam also advises only consuming foods from permitted animals while emphasizing sustenance provisions for milk-producing animals to avoid wastage, as commanded by Allah. (shrink)

Prophet (pbuh) has given notice that the Salah [prayer] is the first deed in which the Muslim servant will be brought to account on the Day of Judgement. The Prophet (pbuh) also informed that if the believer’s obligatory (fardh) prayers are lacking this will be made up from voluntary (nawafil) prayers and that the servant comes close to Allah by fulfilling obligatories and continues to draw near to him with voluntary deeds. One of nawafil is the prayer which is performed (...) before and after the obligatory Friday prayer. When we examine the Prophetic narrations about those prayers -which is also called the first and the second sunnah- and their authenticity, we witness that the Prophet (pbuh) performed prayers in differing raka’ah numbers after the obligatory Friday prayer and urged to it, but there is no authentic and clear traditon indicating that He (pbuh) perfomed any prayer before it. However, by taking into account some general statements of Prophet (pbuh), some weak narrations and some practices of companions it has been said that the Friday prayer has a sunnah before it and moreover it is a Sunnah Muakkadah (stressed sunnah) which is performed in two or four raka’ahs. This article aims to present the narrations about whether the Prophet (pbuh) and companions used to perform any prayers before and after the obligatory Juma’ prayer and their number of raka’s, to determine their authenticity and to evaluate them by reporting the comments about them. (shrink)

The Sunnah has an important role in the correct understanding and the protection from wrong interpretations of the Qurʾān. Accordingly, ḥadīth played a crucial role in shaping the opinions of the mufassirs. In this article, the tafsir titled Kur’an Yolu written by a group of scholars and first published by the Presidency of the Religious Affairs in 2003 which is widely read in Tur-key is examined from ḥadīth usage point of view. The problems in ḥadīth usage are classified under (...) headings such as insufficiency/incorrectness in the explanation of verses due to insuffi-cient usage of ḥadīth, not including ḥadīth which corroborate the verse, wrong conclusions derived from ḥadīth, problems with citations, ḥadīth translation problems, wrong explanation of ḥadīth, problems with some issues related to Sunnah. Over fifty examples where there were wrong citations of ḥadīth, wrong conclusions were derived, there was mixing up of ḥadīth and translation errors leading to wrong meanings were determined and the most important ones were studied. Due to these problems regarding ḥadīth usage, it was seen that sometimes the unity of Qurʾān and Sunnah was violated and some wrong explanations were given. The article is important due to determination of these mistakes and attracting attention to care and pre-caution in ḥadīth usage in this kind of works. This study indicates the importance of Qurʾān-Sunnah unity and shows the important role that ḥadīths play in understanding the verses. It is observed that in case hadiths related to a verse are not given or given in an insufficient or in-correct manner the verse in question is understood or interpreted incorrectly. Therefore, the correct translation and explanation of the ḥadīth, avoiding citation mistakes and making use of primary sources are very important. The factors that lead to wrong conclusions are not evalu-ating a ḥadīth in its entirety (taking into account only the first part of the ḥadīth), not evaluat-ing the ḥadīths related to a subject in entirety (taking into account only certain ḥadīths), not making use of commentaries in order to understand a ḥadīth correctly and wrong citation of a ḥadīth. The fact that the ḥadīth which is about the gladness of Allah due to the repentance of a person has been confused with another ḥadīth and an additional error has been made in the text of this ḥadīth indicates that the authors have remembered this ḥadīth incorrectly and they have not verified this ḥadīth in its source. Given the material mistakes in many other examples under the citation errors title, it has been concluded that the wrong citation of ḥadīths in a way that affects the meaning constitutes a serious problem for the work under examination. As to the translation problems, it is observed that they arise from wrong citation of the ḥadīth from its sources (for instance omitting a word or adding expressions that are not found in the ḥadīth) or not making use of commentaries in understanding the ḥadīth. It is necessary that for the analysis of the ḥadīth the authors make use of the tafsir of Ibn Kathīr who is a ḥadīth schol-ar along with the works of other scholars who are not specialized in ḥadīth in order to correct-ly determine the accuracy level and meaning of the ḥadīth. It seems necessary that a commis-sion that includes ḥadīth scholars review this work in order to correct the mistakes that are found and to make use of the suggestions that are put forward. This step is important for cor-recting the mistakes found in this prestigious and widely used work. Furthermore, since many readers gain knowledge about Qurʾān using this work, consideration of issues raised in this study will contribute to the forthcoming edition of the work. It is surprising that despite pro-posed corrections since its initial publication, so many material mistakes still exist in this valu-able work which is a product of great effort. It is hoped that it will continue to become useful for people by making necessary corrections. (shrink)

Environmental sustainability is one of the contemporary discourses that has abundant values embedded in the Quran and Sunnah teachings. Islam gives great emphasis on environment as it is preserved and protected under the Maqasid al-Shariah. The general outlook of Quranic paradigm on utilizing natural environment is based on prohibition of aggression and misuse. It is likewise founded on the construction and sustainable use. Thus, this article attempts to elaborate key concepts of the Quran and Sunnah teachings that reveal (...) imperative values for environmental sustainability. Research method employs in this paper is an analytical study of Quranic verses with special highlights of tafsir bi al-ma’thur, tafsir bi al-ra’yi, and historical narrative. In short, this paper brings to light the relevance of classical and contemporary works of Quran and Sunnah studies that have meticulous values for shaping the better world of human–nature’s interaction. (shrink)

Such questions that may it be essential, necessary, recommended, or free to believe in some matters will be addressed in the article. It is concluded that such an approach is possible for Māturīdis and Ash'arīs. In the study, it was thought that the following two problems should be solved first. The first problem is how can a definitive confirmation be made with speculative information (zannī). Second, if it is a contradiction that the ulema of the relevant school construct the subject (...) of belief with an āḥād report (khabar) even though they explain the true report as mutawātir in the works of Kalām? In the article, three different solutions are proposed for the first problem, and the second problem is tried to be solved with the proposition that tawātur is compulsory for the universal or essential subjects of theology. Then, by giving two examples for each decree (hukm), it was tried to determine what this idea means in practice. It has been determined that the main controversial issues between the Ahl al-sunnah and the Mu'tazila arise in the category of wājib to be believed. It has been determined that the scholars of the aforementioned sects fall into dispute among themselves in matters presented as sunnah to be believed. As a result, in terms of the principles set forth by the Ahl al-Sunnah, it has been deemed possible to implement ʾafʿālu al-mukallafīn (deeds of those obligated) to theological issues. (shrink)

The common narrations in the main hadith books in the tradition of Ahl as-Sunnah and Shia are an essential subject of examination in determining the relations within and between sects. In the significant part of these narrations, the two madhhabs differ by attributing different meanings to the common hadiths. It is understood that Shia's practices such as walaya, the necessity of the imam, being innocent and muhaddath of the imams are proven especially in the common hadiths related to the (...) principles of faith. Aside from who is right, the meaning and wording differences in the common narrations could provide an understanding of the differences and formation processes between and within the sects. For example, the hadith of firâsah, one of the common narrations, has been discussed. An independent study concludes that the hadith of firâsah found a place in the Ahl al-Sunnah, especially in the Sufi tradition and did not pass on to the Ahl al-Sunnah from the Shia. This article has examined the common narrators of whether the hadith passed from Ahl al-Sunnah to Shia and has focused on whether there is an intellectual interaction. It has been determined that the meaning attributed to the understanding of firâsah by the Sufis among the Ahl al-Sunnah is similar to the imams' characteristic of being muhaddath in Shia. It has also been determined that the Shia made some additions to the hadith of firâsah and reached different conclusions from the Ahl as-sunnah. In addition, it has been seen that Ithnâashariya used the hadith of firâsah as evidence against other groups to confirm its justification in the sectarian divisions of the Shia. (shrink)

The Ismāilī/Bātinī movement was criticized by early Ahl al-Sunnah kalam schools on different matters, one of which is the angel belief that is also related to other principles of faith. However, the issue of angels was not a direct subject of criticism; instead, it was mostly discussed in connection with related matters such as prophethood and the afterlife. On that note, the Ismāilī/Bātinī teaching, due to their views on prophethood and the afterlife, was accused of denying angels by some (...) Ash‘arī mutakallims. While Hanafī-Māturīdī kalam scholars found faults with the same points, they did not make such an accusation. Moreover, pointing out as the source of the opinions above to philosophers increased the merit of these criticisms. In the present study, after alluding to the claims and the accusations of the parties concerned, the matter of angels will be discussed in relation to prophethood and the afterlife from the viewpoint of the Ismāilī/Bātinī teaching. While doing so, their own works will be consulted. Subsequently, the criticisms of Ahl al-Sunnah will be compared with the views of the Ismāilī/Bātinī doctrine concerning the issue of angels. Also, the significance and value of different viewpoints put forward by the related schools of thought will be presented in terms of the consequences of those views. (shrink)

The sources show that two different groups of sheikhs were followed in the Hanafi usūl al-fiqh: ‘Iraqi and Samarqandi sheikhs. However, the perception of followers of ‘Iraqi sheikhs formed the dominant Hanafī tradition. This situation has caused different approaches of the theologian methodologists who followed the Samarqandi sheikhs to become in shadow. Considering this separation within this denomination, when the sunnah sections of usūl al-fiqh literature are compared it is possible to see the different points raised within the Hanafi (...) usūl al-fiqh. In this study, “the definition of sunnah”, “the acts of the Prophet”, “the imitating companions”, “the criteria of ard (submission) to the Qur’an” and “the problem of faqīh (jurist) narrator” are determined as differentiated notions. Considering these issues, since the concepts which differentiate theologian methodologists, whose perception have been taken into account in this paper, from the dominant Hanafi usūl tradition have been generally related to theological concerns, it is possible to argue that this distinction can be explained by their approach of usūl in which theological premises considered as important as other concerns. Eventually, this paper aims to show that like any denomination Hanafi sect also does not have a uniform approach about sunnah.Summary: In this study, the marks of differentiations in sunnah topics were followed based on the works of Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh written in the Transoxanian region between 5th-8th centuries A.H. The reason for the limitation of this issue is that there have been some changes and developments in the sect in this region and period. It is because Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh, which is in two different lines, namely ʿIrāqī sheikhs and Samarqandī sheikhs, has improved in favor of one side in this period. It is thought that this dual disintegration occurs due to the effect of different theological tendencies. This situation has caused the different approaches of the theologian methodologists who mostly followed the Samarqandī sheikhs to be overshadowed. Because Ḥanafī tradition, which became a permanent establishment, mostly followed the line of ʿIrāqī sheikhs in terms of both the topics that are discussed and the approaches in these issues. The aim of this study is to determine the different approaches of the line of Samarqandī sheikhs to sunnah. In the study which is based on comparative method, sunnah topics of Dabūsī, Pazdawī, Sarakhsī and those who followed them and the theologian methodologists Abū l-Yusr, Samarqandī, Lamishī and Usmendī’s sunnah topics were compared and the differentiation points of the second group were determined.In this context, it is seen that there are two different approaches in the Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh regarding the definition and scope of sunnah. Because the Ḥanafī principals who followed the ʿIrāqī sheikhs, while describing the sunnah, they included the companions in the scope of sunnah. However, Abū l-Yusr, Samarqandī and Lamishī did not mention the companions in the sunnah description and stated that the only person to be subjected was the Prophet. In addition, the Ḥanafīs in the second group, unlike others, do not accept the opinion that the meaning of absolute sunnah word is only sunnah of the Prophet. At this point they have shared the same conviction with the ahl al-ḥadīth (the traditionists) and cumhūr al-ulemā (majority of ulema).There are two different approaches, which are based on ʿIrāqī and Samarqandī sheikhs in the show of the judgments of the acts of the Prophet. According to the ʿIrāqī Ḥanafīs, the Prophet's act is attributed to mubāh (permissible) when there is no evidence about its feature. According to the Samarqandī sheiks, such an act is attributed to vucūb (obligation) in terms of practice and stopped in terms of faith. Most of the later Ḥanafī scholars have adopted the idea of ​​ibāha (permissibility) of the ʿIrāqī Ḥanafīs. On the other hand, Samarqandī, Lamishī and Itkanī have tended to the opinion of the Samarqandī sheikhs.It is seen that two different approaches were adopted by Ḥanafī scholars in the field of imitation of companions. Most of the Ḥanafīs adopted the view of Bardaī. According to this view, it is necessary to imitate companions and their expression takes precedence over the qiyās (legal analogy). On the other hand Samarqandī and Lamishī adopted the opinion of Māturīdī. According to this opinion, a companion who has reached the rank of fatwā (legal opinion), it is necessary to imitate that person if one of his peers did not oppose his opinion on a subject that is not likely to be hidden because the general public needs it.There is also a dispute between the Ḥanafī scholars on the type of information expressed by the famous report. Dabūsī, Pazdawī and Sarakhsī and later Ḥanafīs believe that the famous report does not refer to certain knowledge but to assured knowledge. However, it is understood that, Abū l-Yusr, Samarqandī and Lamishī believe that the famous report refers to certain knowledge. But this conflict between the Ḥanafīs only affects the issue of the takfīr who denies the famous report. It does not cause any dispute on judgments.There are two different approaches in the sect about the issue of opposition to the Qur'an covered by internal interruption. In this matter, the issue of opposition to the Qur'an, especially through ziyāda alā al-nās, has been evaluated in different ways. According to the ʿIrāqī sheikhs and majority of the Ḥanafīs, which followed them, ziyada ala al-nas is naskh (abrogation). But according to Māturīdī and Ḥanafīs which followed him, it is also possible that ziyāda alā al-nās is naskh and statement. One of them cannot be preferred without any evidence. In addition, according to the ʿIrāqī sheikhs general and apparent words of the Qur'an express certain knowledge. However, according to the Samarqandī sheikhs the general words of the Qur'an don not express certain knowledge. So, these words can be specialized by isolated tradition. But it was observed that this conflict between the Ḥanafīs was related to the fact that the first opinion caused some problems related to the faith.In the issue of the faqīh narrator, it was determined that three different approaches were exhibited by Ḥanafī scholars. Firstly, the attitude towards not accepting the report of the non-faqih narrator, expressed by the ‘Īsā b. Abān in Abū Hurayra, is gradually being softened along with Dabūsī and adopted by the later Ḥanafī principals. However, despite the same scientific environment and period, Abū l-Yusr does not follow this approach. At the same time, it is possible to say that Samarqandī, Lamishī and Usmendī don not adopt the faqīh narrator criterion. While ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Bukhārī and Kakī did not adopt this approach but criticized it openly. As a result, it is seen that Ḥanafī sect which contains different orientations in itself does not have a uniform approach about sunnah. The points which differentiate theologian methodologists, whose perception have been taken into account in this paper, from the dominant Ḥanafī usūl tradition have been generally related to theological concerns. So, it is possible to say that this distinction can be explained by their approach of usūl in which theological premises considered as important as other concerns. In addition, it is seen that some of the opinions theologian methodologists present as an alternative to dominant Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh tradition are close to the ahl al-ḥadīth and cumhūr al-ulemā. (shrink)

1. al-Muqaddimah -- 2-8. Ṣifāt mustaḥabbah -- 9-11. Ṣifāt madhmūmah -- 12. al-Fahāris.

The concept of Ahl as-Sunnah, which is used to describe the vast majority of Muslims, has been interpreted in different ways by different Islamic segments. The difference in the meanings attributed to the word "sunnah" in the concept composition can be seen as the reason for this diversity. This concept, which points to an important situation such as the distinction between right and wrong, has been adopted by Islamic groups and can be used from time to time to (...) exclude those who think differently from themselves. Prof. Dr. Muammer Esen, in his work titled "The Formation and Development Process of the Concept of Ahl as-Sunnah", criticized this exclusionary meaning of the concept, along with he included how this concept emerged in the historical process. The work that we will examine in this article has an important place in terms of shedding light on the historical background and different definitions of the concept of Ahl as-Sunnah. (shrink)

al-mujallad al-awwal. al-Qayim al-īmānīyah wa-al-qiyam al-ijtimāʻīyah -- al-mujallad al-thānī. al-Qiyam al-akhlāqīyah -- al-mujallad al-thālith. -- al-Qiyam al-siyāsīyah wa-al-idārīyah wa-al-qiyam al-iqtiṣādīyah -- al-mujallad al-rābiʻ. al-Qiyam al-ʻilmīyah wa-al-qiyam al-ṣiḥḥīyah wa-al-bīʼah wa-al-qiyam al-wajdānīyah wa-al-jamālīyah.

Bu makalede; Mutezile’nin son temsilcilerinden Şafiî fakîhi, kelâmcı, tefsirci Kâdî Abdülcebbâr’ın (ö. 415/1025) Hz. Peygamber’in Sünnetine bakışı ele alınacaktır. Pek çok konuda eser telif etmiş olan Kâdî Abdülcebbâr’ın, eserelerinde Sünnetten yararlanması, bu konuda günümüze ulaşan müstakil bir eserinin bulunması onu diğer Mutezilî âlimlerden ayıran en büyük özelliğidir. Konu, ilgili literatür ve özellikle Kâdî Abdülcebbâr’ın günümüze ulaşan eserleri ışığında incelenecektir. Mutezile’nin genel olarak Sünnete bakışı ele alındıktan sonra Kâdî Abdülcebbâr’ın bu konuda seleflerinden hangi noktalarda ayrıldığı ve hangi noktalarda onlarla aynı görüşte (...) olduğu ortaya konulmaya çalışılacaktır. (shrink)

Comparative analysis of Koranic ethics and those of the Prophet Muḥammad recorded in Hadith literature.

Religious beliefs; in the Koran and Sunna.