To avoid a clash of civilizations competing traditions must engage in discourse and search for grounds of commonality. Understanding differences and overcoming points of dissonance are essential for peaceful coexistence.

There is a serious problem with arguing that God intended to lock the epistemology of the 7th century into the immutable text of the Qur’an, and then intended to hold Muslims hostage to this epistemological framework for all ages to come. Among other things, this would limit the dynamism and effectiveness of Divine text because the Qur’an would be for ever locked within a knowledge paradigm that is very difficult to retrieve or re-create. The author argues for the recognition of (...) three critical categories in Islamic theology: haqq, hikma and ma‘arifa. While haqq connotes the objective and constant truth, it is not reachable without hikma. Hikma is the balance [mizan] of truths in every historical moment with all of its contingencies. Ma‘arifa is the epistemology or the way to searching the objective and constant truth as well as the search for the hikma appropriate for each stage in human consciousness. The author contends that it is contrary to the very nature of a merciful and compassionate God to leave Muslims with a Revelation that is not fully equipped to deal with the altered states of consciousness and perceptions that are inevitable in every stage of human development. (shrink)

A growing discourse in Europe and North America focuses on questions of the religious and political status of Muslim minorities. This essay tries to bring some historical perspective to current discussions, surveying the ways premodern Muslim jurists approached issues pertaining to Muslims living in non-Muslim territories. As the historical material indicates, Muslim juridical opinion on these matters is very diverse. Individual jurists, while working within one or another of the broad traditions of Islamic jurisprudence (Shafi'i, Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki, or Shi'i), (...) have felt free to craft opinions designed to fit specific situations. Given such variety, I conclude by echoing the judgment given by Rashid Rida earlier in this century: In the final analysis, specific Muslim minorities are the best judges of their own particular situations. (shrink)

The problems that organ transplantation poses to the Muslim mind may be summarized as follows: firstly, a muslim believes that whatever he owns or possesses has been given to him as an amānah (trust) from Alla¯h. Would it not be a breach of trust to give consent for the removal of parts of one's body, while still alive, for transplantation to benefit one's child, sibling or parent? Secondly, the Sharā'ah (Islamic Law) emphasizes the sacredness of the human body. Would it (...) not then be an act of aggression against the human body, tantamount to its mutilation, if organs were to be removed after death for the purpose of transplantation? In this paper I attempt to illustrate how the Muslim jurists have tried to resolve the dilemma of Muslims by providing them with certain guidlines based on the original sources of Islam, namely, the Qur'n and the Prophetic tradition. In order to assist the followers of other religious traditions to grasp the gravity of the problem posed by organ transplantation to the Muslim mind, I begin by discussing the opinions of Muslim jurists on the issue of utilization of human parts. Thereafter, I touch upon the resolutions taken by the various Islamic Juridical Academies on the issue in question. Finally, I shed light upon the inclusion of organ donation in a Muslim Will and the enforceable nature of such a will. (shrink)

This book deal with ethico-legal issues. Muslims believe that everything they own has been given to them as an amanah (trust) from Allah. Would it constitute a breach of that trust to consent to enrol oneself as an organ donor? Cloning could rectify the problem of infertile couples, but such technology could also be abused with dire consequences. While euthanasia may apparently alleviate the suffering of the terminally ill, would that not compound their agony in the life hereafter? The author (...) sheds light on these issues and acquaints the reader with the latest Islamic rulings on these biotechonological manipulations. (shrink)

The problems that organ transplantation poses to the Muslim mind may be summarized as follows: firstly, a muslim believes that whatever he owns or possesses has been given to him as an amānah (trust) from Alla¯h. Would it not be a breach of trust to give consent for the removal of parts of one's body, while still alive, for transplantation to benefit one's child, sibling or parent? Secondly, the Sharā'ah (Islamic Law) emphasizes the sacredness of the human body. Would it (...) not then be an act of aggression against the human body, tantamount to its mutilation, if organs were to be removed after death for the purpose of transplantation?In this paper I attempt to illustrate how the Muslim jurists have tried to resolve the dilemma of Muslims by providing them with certain guidlines based on the original sources of Islam, namely, the Qur'n and the Prophetic tradition. In order to assist the followers of other religious traditions to grasp the gravity of the problem posed by organ transplantation to the Muslim mind, I begin by discussing the opinions of Muslim jurists on the issue of utilization of human parts. Thereafter, I touch upon the resolutions taken by the various Islamic Juridical Academies on the issue in question. Finally, I shed light upon the inclusion of organ donation in a Muslim Will and the enforceable nature of such a will. (shrink)

The raison d'etre of this dissertation is the Muslim dilemma when confronted with some of the biotechnological innovations which relate to the precautionary measures to prevent the birth of children, technological manipulation in order to overcome infertility and the termination of fetal life. All of these issues are directly related to human life and thus pose serious problems. The Muslim is one whose life is regulated by the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah of the Prophet. Hence, his action is (...) considered proper or right if it conforms to their broad teachings and improper or wrong if it contra-dicts the very spirit of their teachings. This study is thus focused on the teachings of the Qur'an and the relevant ahadith pertaining to the beginning of human life, the sanctity of married life, and the sanctions for the termination of human life. The objective is to analyze the relevant injunctions and present them in a systematic way to prepare ground for the assessment of such biotechnological issues so as to ascertain their legality under the Shari'ah. ;In order to comprehend the ethical system envisaged by the Qur'an and Sunnah vis-a-vis the biomedical issues it is essential that we acquaint ourselves with the fundamental concepts pertain- ing to health care, medical treatment and medical ethics. Thereafter, a detailed discussion follows on reproductive control, biotechnical parenting and abortion. Each of these issues are elaborately analyzed in the light of the spirit and principles envisaged by the relevant injunctions. ;Proper grasp of the implications of these issues within the Islamic framework is expected to provide the perplexed Muslims with the necessary guidelines in the event that circumstances demand that they opt for either the contraceptive devices or the modern tech-niques to overcome infertility or abortion. (shrink)

In Islamic theological writings, under the heading of sustenance, the focus is generally on issues such as who is the provider of sustenance, whether haram is considered sustenance, and whether Allah’s consent exists for haram sustenance. Another issue that can be found between the lines of the subject of sustenance is whether it is haram for a person to work for sustenance or not. In fact, the pursuit of means of livelihood in order to sustain one’s life is, according to (...) the general and predominant acceptance of Muslim scholars, permissible and, in cases of necessity, wajib. According to a record in Uṣūl al-niḥal, during the formative period of itizālī thought, there were Mu‘tazilite sufis (ṣūfiyyat al-Muʿtazila) such as Bishr b. al-Mu‘tamir’s disciple Abū Imrān Mūsā b. al-Raqqāshī, al-Naẓẓām’s apostate disciple Fadl al-Hadathī, and Husayn al-Kūfī, about whom no information is available. These names, who seem to have earned their livelihood through almsgiving, defended the forbiddenness (taḥrīm al-makāsib) of all kinds of endeavour for sustenance, contrary to the acceptance of Muslim thinkers. However, it should be noted that for them, the forbiddenness in making an effort for sustenance does not cover the definition of sustenance, which is ‘all the benefits’, but only the effort in obtaining sustenance through means such as trade and agriculture. It is interesting to find such an extreme tendency among the Mu‘tazilites, who came to the fore with their rationalist discourses. “How could a Mu‘tazilite defend tahrīm al-makāsib?”, the issue of abandonment of striving for sustenance (tark al-makāsib), from which the idea of tahrīm al-makāsib is thought to have evolved, is mentioned, and then the Mu‘tazilite sufis views on tahrīm al-makāsib are tried to be based mainly on Mu‘tazilite sources and the criticisms of Mu‘tazilite authors against them are included. It has been determined that Mu‘tazilite sufis justifications for defending tahrīm al-makāsib concentrate on three points: (i) the absence of a just order due to the absence of a just imam and the possibility of supporting the oppressors (rulers) intentionally or unintentionally, and as a result of this, some of them describe the land of Islam as dār al-kufr, (ii) again in relation to the issue of imamate, in an environment where there is no justice, i.e. legal/moral order, the halāl and harām are so intertwined that they cannot be separated from each other, and in order to protect oneself from harām, the things that are subject to sustenance can only be purified through charity and become halāl, and (iii) the fact that trust in Allah is obligatory and any effort to pursue sustenance is contrary to tawakkul. The Mu‘tazilite authors criticised the proponents of tahrīm al-makāsib on the grounds that it is permissible to trade while maintaining a rational and ethical attitude, that one’s intention and interest in trade are important, and that tawakkul cannot be built on the right ground. As a result, the proponents of tahrīm al-makāsib disappeared because they could not gain a foothold in the Mu‘tazilite intellectual climate due to their erroneous reasoning. (shrink)

In the history of İslāmic thought, Māturīdī is a famous scholar both in the field of kalām and tafsir. Being approved by Māturīdī, the distinction of tafsir and ta’wīl, which makes possible to take the comments made about the verses into sistematic framework, is quite important. There is an important information both about content of the distinction approved by Māturīdī and the main reasons that necessiated this distinction in the introduction of Samarqandī’s Sharh at Ta’wīlāt. From this information, it is (...) understood that the distinction of tafsir and ta’wīl had dated back to older time than Māturīdī and previous scholars dealed with the problem that necessiated this distinction and Māturīdī inherited this distinction from his predecessors. Information in the Sharh at Ta’wīlāt reveals that according to Māturīdī the companions had made interpretation (ta’wīl) in addition to tafsir and the explanations made by certain evidences is tafsir too. Therefore this information gives us the opportunity flexing the acceptance of the idea “tafsir, is dedicated to the companions, ta'wīl is dedicated to fuqaha (jurists)” and asserting that companions and scholars made both tafsir and ta’wīl. In this paper, we will research whether the distinction tafsir and ta’wīl regarded by Māturīdī completely belonged to his or not and content of the distinction and its reasons. We will also analyze this distinction according to examples in the Ta’wîlāt. Summary: An important distinction is made between the concepts of tafsir and ta’wīl in the short preface of Māturīdī's tafsir, and this distinction is particularly prominent in contemporary tafsir studies. Because from the point of view of the value they carry, the explanations for these differences and concepts express the legitimacy of the following mufassirūn (writers of a commentary on the Qur’an) to be able to perform tafsir, as well as the value of the explanations found in tafsir literature in terms of certainty. In Ta'wīlāt, tafsir is described as the precise determination of what is intended. Determination of what is exactly intended in verse/wording is bound to certainly know the conditions under which it was revealed. Because they are the first to be addressed directly and they witnessed the context, the tafsir is only for the companions (ṣaḥābah pl. aṣḥāb). On the other hand, ta’wīl is not a definite determination of what is intended, but rather it is explained as putting the possibilities forward. In this case, ta’wīl is dedicated to the scholars after the companions. When we look at the other tafsir sources that include his views, it can be understood that this brief information in the preface of the tafsir which survived to our day is partially incomplete. Samarqandī's Sharhu’t-ta'wīlāt is the most important of these sources. According to the information here, Māturīdī states that some scholars distinguish tafsir and ta’wīl from each other. In these distinctions, tafsir is either described in relation to a definitive statement or in relation to being familiar with the conditions of revelation, while ta’wīl is described as extracting meanings from the verses and making possible meanings without claiming certainty. These explanations show that the distinction between tafsir and ta’wīl in Ta'wīlāt's preface was mainly based on the period before Māturīdī. These statements, which Māturīdī transmitted from some scholars in the beginning of Sharhu’t-ta'wīlāt, were then transmitted by Omar al-Nasafī, Mahāyimī and Molla Husrev. In some sources, it was also transmitted that similar explanations were made by scholars such as an-Nadr b. Shumayl, al-Hussein b. Fadl al-Bacelī and Ibn Durayd before Māturīdī.Some explanations of Māturīdī in Ta'wīlāt enables the theory of tafsir-ta’wīl to be understood at a wider level. When the examples are examined, it is observed that Māturīdī exhibited two types of attitude against the tafsir of the companions. He states that one of these is that if the transmission is true, what is intended is exactly what is stated in the narrated. The second is that he sometimes does not accept these explanations and suggests additional opinions. The reason he refuses is that sometimes he does not find the transmission reliable, and sometimes he thinks that companions performed ta'wīl. If this is the case, the dedication of ta’wīl to those coming later should not be absolutized. Because the companions can perform both tafsir and ta’wīl. The examples in Ta'wīlāt clearly reveal what areas tafsir, which is defined as a definite statement, covers. According to this, first, tafsir is related to the field of “invisible” about the past and the future. Secondly, its meaning and practice is only about the information of the “statement” about the issues that can be revealed by the Prophet (pbuh). In the third aspect, it is related to “revelation” information reporting the context in which the verses descended. In the beginning of Sharhu’t-ta'wīlāt, Māturīdī says that the explanations made based on the definitive evidences such as mutawātir (repetition; narration reported by large number reporters) and ijmā (consensus) also fall under the category of tafsir. However, it is also necessary to add intellectual evidence to these evidences. Because intellectual evidence is also important in the epistemology of Māturīdī. In fact, the truthfulness of nass (text) is primarily based on intellectual evidence. First, the issues of theology are proven by certain intellectual evidence, and then, on the basis of this, the meanings expressed by the nass acquire the value of certainty and truthfulness. With the definitive acceptance of reason in theology, what some nass express confirm each other and are used as evidence in the process of interpretation. Therefore, since some of the intellectual evidence, ijmā and mutawātir news provide definitive information, explanations based on them are also seen as tafsir. Considering the fact that the above-mentioned evidence was also used by those coming after the companions, it can be concluded that tafsir can be performed by not only the companions but also those coming after them. In this case, it should be accepted that tafsir is not performed only by the companions, and that the succeeding mufassirūn can also perform tafsir as well as ta’wīl. When we look at the examples based on these evidence, there are two different situations in Ta'wīlāt. The first is that Māturīdī sometimes has views on evidence based on mutawātir and ijmā and sometimes suggests different opinions from the assumptions that he said there was ijmā in particular. Because these evidences are certain, it is understandable that he remains bound to them. However, as a possible reason for his opposition to ijmā, it can be said that he thinks only the following generations enter the scope of ijmā. Because, according to Samarqandī, Māturīdī's objection to such information does not seem possible, since ijmā of the companions in a matter is accepted. Although he sometimes said that there was ijmā, the reason why no such ijmā was mentioned in other tafsir sources and sometimes, it may be considered that he did not respect other views in the face of ijmā as a reason for including different views or it may be thought that he was unaware of the different views that were transmitted. The second remarkable situation is that according to Māturīdī, intellectual evidence, in particular, can reveal only the “knowledge of existence” of the issues related to theology. Māturīdī thinks that their nature cannot be certainly known, and that the explanations made regarding their nature are only ta’wīl. For this reason, he firmly rejects the interpretation of the khabarī attributes about Allah in accordance with the idea of tashbīh and tajsīm (anthropomorphism). (shrink)

Los Māsilik al-abṣār de Ibn Faḍl Allāh al-'Umarī incluyen un breve resumen de la Historia de los omeyas de al-Andalus. En este trabajo se analizan las relaciones textuales entre ese pasaje y el Muqtabis de Ibn Ḥayyān, crónica que resulta ser la fuente casi única utilizada por al-'Umarī para redactar ese capítulo.

Religious freedoms of minorities in Muslim-majority countries such as Pakistan are compromised due to structural issues as well as social and historical concerns. For instance, the abuse of the blasphemy law has led to minority communities facing threats and violence. And in a country where religious scholars are often absent from, if not against, discourses about human rights, the religious rights of minorities remain a secular and hence culturally unsound discourse. There is thus a need for two parallel movements. One, (...) an awareness within Muslim communities about the need to engage with religious freedoms, and hence the modern human rights regime, as an essentially Islamic process requiring reform from within. And two, the human rights structure also giving religion its due since religious freedoms are part of, and engender, many other rights as well. In this article, a case is made for this dual process, by exploring the work of scholars of Islam such as Abdullahi An-Na’im and Khaled Abou El Fadl as well as the insecurities of religious scholars in Pakistan who have reacted to human rights as a western agenda. (shrink)

Bu çalışma, Suyûtî’nin el-İtkân fî ulûmi’l-Kur’ân isimli kitabının birinci türüyle ilgili bir incelemedir. Bu başlık nüzul zamanı ve mekânı ile ilgili Kur’ân ayetlerinin taksimi konusunda söylenen sözlerin tahlilini içermektedir. Ebu’l-Kâsım el-Hasan b. Muhammed en-Nisabûrî bu türleri et-Tenbîh 'alâ fadl-i ulûmi’l-Kur’ân isimli kitabında 25 türe ayırmıştır. Bu türlerin, Kur’ân ilimlerinin en üstünü ve tefsir ilmine başlamak için şart olduğunu ifade etmiştir. Suyûtî, İtkânı’nda bu türlerin çoğunu müstakil başlıklar altında ele alarak bu görüşe katılmıştır. Bu durum bazı âlimlerin çekingen kaldığı diğer bazılarının (...) abartı ve aşırılık olarak nitelediği, bir kısmının da şüpheye kapı araladığını belirttikleri bir husustur. Bu şüphelerin en önemlilerinden birisi de Kur’ân’ın tarihselliği söylemidir. Zira Mekkî ve Medenî konusunda aktarılanlar, pek çok müsteşrik ve modernistin Kur’ân’ın bütün zaman ve mekânlar için geçerli olmasını reddetmelerinde onların imdadına yetişmiştir. İşte bu araştırma konuyla ilgili en önemli görüş ve söylemlerin problemlerini gidererek çözüm yollarını ortaya koyan bir analiz ve tartışmadır. Ayrıca bu araştırma şüphe yollarının kapatılmasına katkı sağlayacak, Mekkî ve Medenî konusunda geniş bir bakışı açısı sunacaktır. (shrink)

Preface -- Introduction -- 1. Muslim reformists and the transition to English rule -- 2. The making of the "Indian Arab" and the tale of Sayyid Fadl -- 3. Rahmatullah Kairanwi and the Muslim cosmopolis -- 4. Haji Imdadullah Makki in Mecca -- 5. Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan and the Muslim cosmopolis -- 6. Maulana Jafer Thanesri and the Muslim ecumene -- Conclusion -- Notes -- Acknowledgments -- Index.

At the beginning of Nostra aetate, the Church calls for mutual understanding with Muslims in the interests of “peace, liberty, social justice, and moral values.” This paper strives to achieve such an understanding in light of the fragile state of democracy in today’s world. The paper first presents the Church’s approach to democracy through an analysis of the work of the philosopher Jacques Maritain and the Second Vatican Council. It then presents representative views from Islam: the work of the Sunni (...) legal scholar Khaled Abou El Fadl and the Shi’ite scholar Naser Ghobadzadeh. By appealing to the Jesuit scholarDavid Hollenbach’smethodology of “dialogic universalism,” the paper argues finally that there is a rich confluence between the two traditions: Their basic commitment to the dignity and freedom of the human person implies a respect for pluralism, a reverence for reason, and a call for self-transcendence, all of which can serve to enhance democracy. (shrink)

Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn al-Marwarrūdhī is one of the important representatives of Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School. Al-Ta‘līḳa is his famous work, which is one of the first commentaries of al-Muzanī’s Mukḫtaṣar. One of the important features of this work is the introduction to some of the subjects of ijtihād (process of juristic legal reasoning), taqlīd (acting upon the word of another without asking for specific proof), ijmā‘ (consensus of jurists) and view’s of the companions of the Prophet. The first systematic, complete and detailed (...) works of uṣūl al-fiqh (Islamic legal theory) that belonged to the Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School have reached to the present day belong to the second half of the V./XI. century. Making research on the studies which were done about uṣūl al-fiqh and formed the basis of this period is essential to follow the development of uṣūl al-fiqh of the Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School. Transfer of the uṣūl al-fiqh in al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn al-Marwarrūdhī’s al-Ta‘līḳa make it possible to determine the literatüre, which was formed in Khurāsān region in the period from the death of Shāfi‘ī to the first half of the V./XI. century until the first half of the Khurāsān region, which allows the determination of the uṣūl al-fiqh. In this study, on the basis of ijmā‘, al-Qāḍî Ḥusayn al-Marwarrūdhī’s method in al-Ta‘līḳa will be examined.Summary: Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn al-Marwarrūdhī is considered to be one of the most important representatives of the Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School. In addition to receiving fiqh education from al-Qaffāl al-Marwazī, who is accepted as the founder of the Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School in Shāfiʿī fiqh circles. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn, one of the most distinguished students of al-Qaffāl al-Marwazī, has become one of the important bearers of the fiqh heritage of Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School. The fact that the epithet “el-kāḍî” is used in the works of Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School to absolutely refer to al-Qāḍî Ḥusayn, is another issue that shows his being authority on fiqh. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn al-Marwarrūdhī has accomplished many works in the field of fiqh. The most famous and most important work of al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn is the al-Ta‘lîḳa, written according to the Mukḫtaṣar arrangement style of al-Muzanī. He is often cited as the author of the well-known work al-Ta‘lîḳa in the sect. Al-Ta‘lîḳa, commonly cited in fiqh studies to refer to the views of al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn, is one of the first commentary on Mukḫtaṣar by Muzanī. With these characteristics, al-Ta‘lîḳa is one of the outstanding manuscripts for exploring the fiqh legacy of the Khurāsān Shāfi‘ī School. Another important feature of this text is that uṣūl al-fiqh issues such as ijtihād, taqlīd, ijmā‘ and view’s of the companions of the Prophet (qawl al-ṣaḥābah) have been covered in the introduction of the work. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn discusses the issues of evidentiality and types of ijmā‘ and ijmā‘ of ṣaḥābah in the chapter on ijmā‘ in al-Ta‘lîḳa. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn also handles the debates on view’s of the companions of the Prophet in the section on ijmā‘ of ṣaḥābah. It is also seen that the proofs proposed for evidentiality of ijmā since Shāfiʿī’s period became more versatile and differed. The fact that the arguments al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn cites in the chapter of the evidences of ijmā‘ were also mentioned by his contemporary, al-Māwardī, an Iraqi Shāfiʿī jurist, points out the accumulation of knowledge in terms of proofs of ijmā. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn makes two related distinctions that are fundamentally related to the types of ijmā. The first is the division between ijmā supporters, those who argue for knowability of ijmā, and their opponents. According to this, ijmā is divided into two parts as ‘āmm (general public) ijmā‘ and khāṣṣ (scholars) ijmā‘. Opposition to ‘āmm ijmā‘, such as fardhs (obligations) in prayer, rawātib sunnah (the practice that the Prophet regularly performed) and feast prayer requires kufr (blasphemy). Al-Qāḍî Ḥusayn, who considers issues such as ‘awl (a sharing method in Islamic inheritance law), mut‘a marriage (a type of temporary marriage) and riba’l-faḍl (interest in exchange or sale transactions) which are seen as controversial ijmā‘ issues in literature, as khāṣṣ ijmā‘ and evaluates opposition to this type of ijmā‘ as fisq (impiety). The second division al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn makes is between ijmā‘ based on the text and apparent comparison, and the ijmā‘ based on hidden comparison. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn thinks that the opposition to ijmā‘ that is based on ijtihād or the text in terms of sanad (chain of narrators), requires blasphemy. In a sense, this is to accept ijmā‘ as a provision on an equal basis and to reduce the distinctions of ijmā‘ to literary level. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn also discusses evidentiality of qawl al-ṣaḥābah in connection with the issues of ijmā‘. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn opposes the thesis that ijmā‘ is only limited to companions’ era and argues that it can be realized in any century after the Prophet. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn, who discusses ṣaḥābah’s ijmā‘ under two categories: the views of ṣaḥābah that have gained prevalence among other ṣaḥābahs and those that have not gained prevalence among other companions, argues for evidentiality of qawl al-ṣaḥābah, which have gained prevalence and known not to be opposed. He provides significant information on ijmā‘ discussion in Shāfi‘ī fiqh methods with regard to the evidentiality of this type of qawl al-ṣaḥābah, which is referred ijmā‘ al-suqūtī (consensus based on lack of opposition-silence). The knowledge al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn cites with regard to the evidentiality of qawl al-ṣaḥābah which have not gained prevalence among other ṣaḥābahs differs from Māwardī, one of his contemporary, and his predecessors. The fact that he cites Shāfi‘ī’s previous and latest views with regard to the state of such qawl al-ṣaḥābah in the face of qiyās (legal analogy) enables him to make comparison using uṣūl material available in his era. Al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn, who mentions debatable issues among ṣaḥābah, makes controversial narrations. While al-Qāḍī Ḥusayn reports that there is not any conflict on the argument that it is legitimate to express a third view with regard to issues on which ṣaḥābah is divided in two groups and fall into conflict, his contemporary al-Māwardī and other Shāfi‘ī jurists report that it is not legitimate to propose a third view on such an issue as there is ijmā‘ on these issues. (shrink)

I dette bogkapitel skrevet sammen med Ingeborg Ilkjær fremlægges tre etiske positioner herunder dydsetik, pligtetik og konsekvensetik. Disse teorier er sammen med eksempler på etiske principper og værdier det grundlag, som sygeplejersker kan benytte sig af i arbejdet med patientinvolvering og etiske dilemma, hvor der skal foretages et valg, der har betydning for patienter, pårørrende og de klinisk involverede. -/- For at kunne træffe valg af denne art er det vigtigt at kunne gøre det på et oplyst grundlag samt at (...) kunne påtage sig et klinisk lederskab. Derfor er det nødvendigt at benytte sig af en etisk refleksionsmodel. Dette arbejde kan være med til at skabe klarhed over en given situation, der rummer vanskelige etiske dilemmaer. -/- Bogkapitlet findes i bogen Sygepleje & Patientinvolvering Bind 3 redigeret af Steen Hundborg og udgivet på FADL’s Forlag I 2019. (shrink)

Sevgi, Mâtürîdî ahlak anlayışının dayandığı genel karakterlerden biridir. Ahlak içerisinde iradi bir eylem ön planda yer almış olsa da aslında bu eylem sevgi temeline dayanaklık etmektedir. Mâtürîdî’nin sevgi anlayışının temelinde, varlıklara sevginin Allah tarafından verildiğinin bilinmesi gerekliliği vardır. Çünkü insan fıtratında olan bu duygunun yani sevginin, sıradan bir yönelimin dışına çıkması ve insanı yücelten bir nitelik kazandırması bu temele dayanmaktadır. Mâtürîdî, her insanda doğuştan gelen bir güzellik eğilimi ya da güzel olana sevgi besleme gibi bir yatkınlığın olduğunu ifade etmiştir. Allah (...) sevgisinin de insanda fıtri bir duygu olduğu düşüncesindedir. Yaratılıştan gelen bu duygu kişiyi ahlaki açıdan Rabbinin rızasını kazanma ve insanın Rabbini sevme düşüncesinden ayrı değildir. Kendisine karşı sevgi duyulan bir Allah düşüncesi kişide övülen ahlaki fiillere yönlendiren önemli bir unsur olarak görülmektedir. Bu temel sevgi anlayışının bilinmesi, kişinin kendisiyle yüceleceği bir erdeme dönüşmesine zemin hazırlamaktadır. Mâtürîdî’nin izahlarında genellikle fiilde sevgiyi Allah ile bağlantılı olarak ele aldığını görmekteyiz. Ayrıca sevgi erdemi (el-Fadl fi’l-Mevedde), bir fiili gerçekleştirirken Yaratan’ın memnun olması için onu severek yapmak ve sevmediği bir fiilden de sırf O memnun olmayacağı için uzaklaşmak düşüncesini içinde barındırır. Mâtürîdî’nin izahlarının genelinde Allah’tan korkma anlamında “takva” ve bu kökten türeyen kelimelerde içinde sevgiyi barındıran bir korku olduğu vurgulanmaktadır. Ayrıca ifrat ve tefrite düşerek ‘orta yol’dan ayrılanın durumu da ‘takva’ya uygunluktan uzaklaşmakla eşittir. Öyle ki takvaya uygun olan fiilin ifrattan, tefritten uzakta ve ortada, dengeli olması gereklidir. Ayrıca Mâtürîdî adaleti ‘orta yol’ olarak tanımlar ve bir şeyin orta yolunun adalet üzere olmasına bağlar. Bir başka açıdan buna, ‘fiillerde hikmetli davranmak’ da diyebiliriz. Zaten Mâtürîdî’ye göre ‘Hikmet’ isabet etmek demektir. Yani her şeyin yerli yerine konulmasıdır. Mâtürîdî, kalpteki sevgi duygusunun hakikatinin bilinemeyeceğini ifade ederken insandaki muhabbet duygusunun da ancak kendisinden fayda gördüğü kişiye olacağını, fayda görmediği kişiye sevgi duyamayacağını ifade eder. Mâtürîdî’ye göre insan neyin kendisi için iyi olduğunu veya neyin kötü olduğunu, hakiki amaçlarının neler olması gerektiğini belirlemeye çalışan ve erdemli bir yaşayışı nasıl gerçekleştirmesi gerektiğini anlamlandırmakla görevli olan bir varlıktır. İnsanın ahlaki yapısına baktığımızda da hangi gayeler etrafında yaşam sürmesi gerektiğini, iyi ve kötünün, ödev ve sorumlulukların belirlenmesi gibi düşüncelerin insan varlığında ahlaki temel bir amaca dayandığını ya da dayanması gerektiğini görmekteyiz. Biz de bu çalışmamızda Mâtürîdî ahlakına felsefi bir bakışla kavramsal olarak sevgiyi nasıl anlamlandırdığını ele almaya çalışacağız. (shrink)

A number of recently published studies by reformist-minded Muslim scholars have both questioned the normative nature of and emphasized the need to rethink some of the fundamental assumptions and interpretational models governing traditional Islamic legal theories and ethics. As part of this process they have emphasized the need to develop novel Islamic hermeneutics. One major element in this emergence of novel Islamic hermeneutics is the production of an increased number of what I term ‘gender equality affirmative scholarship on Islam’. What (...) is particularly interesting, if not intriguing, from the perspective of the author of this article is that the scholarship on gender equality affirmative interpretations of Islam is theorized by reformist-minded Muslim male scholars at historically unprecedented levels which is what this study seeks to highlight. This article examines the arguments employed by three prominent contemporary Muslim male reformist scholars, both Shī’ī and Sunnī, in developing gender equality affirmative interpretations of Islam – Nasr Abu Zayd, Mohsen Kadivar, and Khaled Abou El Fadl. The focus on male scholars in this article is intentional and seeks to highlight the most fundamental point and indeed the raison d’être behind it, namely to underscore the historically unprecedented support Muslim male scholars are providing to the development of feminist interpretations of Islam. (shrink)

Los Massalik al-absar de Ibn fadl Alláh al-Umari incluyen un breve resumen de la Historía de los omeyas en al-Andalus. En este trabajo se analizan las relaciones textuales entre ese pasaje y el Muqtabis de Ibn Hayyán, crónica que resulta ser la fuente casi única utilizada por al- Umari para redactar ese capitulo.

al-Tabarsī is one of the glossators in the Shī‘ah gloss tradition in the second middle period or first sagacity period. al-Tabarsī who had a wide knowledge in the various knowledge branches was mentioned as a glossator, narrator of Mohammad’s all sayings, deeds and approvals and scribe. One of compilations that al-Tabarsī wrote it in the field of gloss is Macmau-l-bayān fī tafsīri-l-Qur’ān. The glossator who widely included the recitations in this work used some evidence related to their averment while he (...) was reporting the recitations, and he made the recitations’ justification in the framework. The averment is a science which determines the correct recitations as distinguishing the correct one of recitation’s differences from the deficient one, and which founds an aspect of the correct category with all the other transferred and linguistic arguments of recitation in the predilection besides the imputation, the formal Qur’ān. Al-Tabarsī first mentioned the recitations under the subtitle of recitation related to the verses in each sura and then transferred the argument of recitations with the term of argument. So the glossator applied to give evidence on them with the linguistic and transferred arguments in each of the parts that the recitations were nearly mentioned. He mentioned the imputation, the Qur’ān lettering, verse, hadith, companion and natural people’s readings. He used Arabic poetry, Arabic idiom, dialect, grammar and syntax rules for the linguistic arguments. In this study, the evidences which were used in the recitations’ averment are reviewed in the sample of al-Tabarsī’s gloss in the name of Majmau-l-bayān. Summary: Full name of al-Tabarsī who was one of the leading scholar of Shī‘a is Fadl b. Hasan b Fadl al-Tabarsī. He was born in Thabaristan. According to some narration he was born in village named Tafrish which is between Kashan and Isfahan. He was called al-Tabarsī by reference to his hometown Thabaristan, according to another opinion he was called al-Tabarsī which comes from his birth place known as Tafrish located between Kashan and Isfahan. Tafrish was translated into Arabic as Tabars. Also, the commentator was known with nicknames such as Amīnü’l-islām, Amīnü’d-dīn and Umdatü’l-Mufassīrīn. He was called Sebzevarī due to the place where he died and named Maşhadī and Ṭūsī because of the place where he was buried. Although he is proficient in many fields, he has been described in the sources as commentator, muhaddīth and faqīh. Mufassīr has written many works in Islamic sciences. one of his works written in the field of commentary is Mujmau-l-bayān fī tafsīri-l-Qurʾān. Mufassīr stated that he wrote this commentary by taking advantage of Ṭūsī 's (d. 460/1067) al-Tibyān by saying “It is a guide from which I benefited from Tibiān light, and I write the subjects on the basis of his method”. The author started to write this work with the encouragement of some of his friends after he had aged quite a bit and his hair turned white. and he saw a gap in this area. He spent a lot of effort to fill that gap. This commentary, written during the first dirayet of the Shī‘a exegesis, is more moderate than the previous periods of Shī‘a commentators. The most basic indicator of this is the definitive rejection of the falsification of the Qurʾān in this period. The second important indicator is that insults and degrading expressions about the first three of the hulafā-i rashid and some of the companions are not accepted. The third important indicator is that most of the verses have been interpreted in a manner that corresponds to the views of the Ahl al-Sunnah school in linguistic analyses and proved by appealing to Arabic poems and sayings. al-Tabarsī mentioned recitation almost in all verses as a subtopic. He performed this in the surah by using subtopics. Then he has used “hujjatuhu” (its evidence) expression to narrate the evident of qirāʾāt. By doing so, commentator grounded qirāʾāts by using their evidences utilizing linguistic and narrative evidences in nearly every mentioned qirāʾāts. İhtijaj is a science that determines the authentic readings by distinguishing authentic readings from the weak ones, and that grounds the reading in the choice of an angle, which is mentioned in the authentic category, with isnād, Mushaf script and all other narrative and linguistic evidences. There are two types of ihtijaj which are ihtijaj bi-l-qirāʾāt ve ihtijaj li-l-qirāʾāt. İhtijaj li-l-qirāʾāt uses the linguistic evidences such as isnād, Mushaf line, Arabic language, consumables-nahiv pedestals, polish differences and the narrative evidences such as verses, hadith, qirāʾāt, Arabic words and poetry in determination and preference of a reading aspect. ihtijaj bi-l-qirāʾāt is the use of kıraa as evidence for any matter of science. al-Tabarsī has also mentioned detection proofs which reveal the authentic ways of qirāʾāt like isnād and rasm al-mushaf. Isnād is attribution to whom take the qirāʾāt from previous persons. This proportion reaches up to the Prophet. The persons in the chain of isnād constitute this chain. al-Tabarsī has given in preface the names of the recitors and narrators, which are famous in the cities, based on the fact that an authentic attribute is the basic element in the determination of the qirāʾāh. Thus he passed on the chains of isnād that reached up to the Prophet. Another thing that al-Tabarsī used in the determination proof of qirāʾāh is rasm al-mushaf. The commentator has used the spelling of al-mushaf scripture as evidence by saying “written in al-mushaf like this”. al-Tabarsī, also mentioned preferable evidences about ways of qirāʾā’s proof. Preferred proofs, are evidence to make choosing between qirāʾāh whose authenticity is defined by means of determination proofs. These evidences are divided into two parts which are determination proofs-based and special. Special evidence has not relation with the determination proofs. It contains evidence categories used to prefer one of the two authentic qirāʾāh as special. These categories are divided into four parts: linguistic, transplant, mental and private. al-Tabarsī has evidenced with verses of narrative proofs in the preferred evidence category. The commentator has mentioned about this method for qirāʾā evidence extensively. He has grounded qirāʾāh by using verses. al-Tabarsī also has evidenced these matters by using words of the Prophet from narrative proofs in the preferred evidence category. In this method commentator has evidenced from hadith after mentioning qirāʾāh ways. al-Tabarsī evidences from narrative proofs with qirāʾāh preferred evidence category. In this context, the commentator mentioned recitation of companion and followers by saying his qirāʾāh after reporting qirāʾāh. Moreover, the commentator has sometimes mentioned recitations which is related with reading seven of the recitation and reading ten of the recitation sciences qurra recitation and sometimes mentioned recitations which are known as shadhdh. Then, he has examined these recitations with the qirāʾāh of companions and followers. al-Tabarsī has benefited from narrative evidences, Arabic poetry and phrase in the preferred evidence category extensively. Another evidence used for examination of qirāʾāh is linguistic evidences. Qirāʾāh are related with Arabic language because it has connection with Qur’ānic wording which revelated in Arabic. al-Tabarsī has benefited from some things such as Arabic grammar rules and dialectic differences extensively. The commentator has benefited from Arabic grammar by emphasizing the meaning of the words with the literary features. He has explained grammar statement related with qirāʾāh aspects. He has also explained linguistic rules which are about aspects. (shrink)