The Arabic philosophical fable _Hayy Ibn Yaqzan _is a classic of medieval Islamic philosophy. Ibn Tufayl, the Andalusian philosopher, tells of a child raised by a doe on an equatorial island who grows up to discover the truth about the world and his own place in it, unaided—but also unimpeded—by society, language, or tradition. Hayy’s discoveries about God, nature, and man challenge the values of the culture in which the tale was written as well as those of every contemporary society. (...) Goodman’s commentary places _Hayy Ibn Yaqzan _in its historical and philosophical context. The volume features a new preface and index, and an updated bibliography. “One of the most remarkable books of the Middle Ages.”—_Times Literary Supplement_ “An enchanting and puzzling story.... The book transcends all historical and cultural environments to settle upon the questions of human life that perpetually intrigue men.”—_Middle East__ Journal_ “Goodman has done a service to the modern English reader by providing a readable translation of a philosophically significant allegory.”—_Philosophy East and West_ “Add[s] bright new pieces to an Islamic mosaic whose general shape is already known.”—_American Historical Review_. (shrink)

Prophets, Pre-Islamic; conduct of life; early works to 1800.

First Published in 1999. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

al-Zarkashī, an ethnic Turk, is an important hadith, fiqh and commentary scholar who lived during the Mamlūks period. He was taught by some of the leading scholars of his era, such as Alā al-Dīn Mughultay (d. 762/1360), Imād al-Dīn Ibn Kashīr (d. 774/1372) ve Jamal al-Dīn al-Asnawī (d. 772/1370), and he grew up under their mentorship. Nevertheless, his only well-known student is Birmāvī (d. 831/1428). Almost half of his works have been related to fiqh and methodology of fiqh, and he (...) has also written some important works in the field of hadith. Among these, especially al-Tadhkira, al-Nukat alā Ibn al-Salāh, al-Nukat alā al-Umda fī al-Ahkām ve al-Icāba are worthy of mention. The work named al-Tadhkira, which we built our work upon, is the first known work to have been preserved in the field. Due to his being a first in his field, he was vastly studied as to how he evaluated the narrations and what kind of procedure he followed. In this work of his, not only the criticism but also the application of the text criticism adds to the importance of the work. Then, on the basis of this work, scholars such as al-Sakhāwī and al-Aclūnī made complementary works on the same subject. Summary: It is inevitable for a person to be shaped by the society he lives in. During the time when al-Zarkashī lived, Egypt was under the rule of the Mamlūks. The history of Mamlūks is examined under two periods: 1. Bahrī or Turkish Mamlūks (745 / 1344 - 794-1391) 2. Burjī or Circassian Mamlūks (784 / 1382 - 923 / 1517) period. Our author lives in both periods. About forty years of his life was in the period of Bahrī and the rest was in the period of Burjī. In both periods, the state did not have a full political authority in the country, but this was not the case in education and training. In fact, on the contrary to the political situation, scientific activities have accelerated by the arrival of many scholars to the land of Mamlūk because of the Mongol invasions coming from the east and the Crusades from the west. The increase of scientific activity was caused not only by the coming of the scholars but also by the support given by the Mamlūk sultans. In fact, they built many new madrasas in addition to the resurrection of the old ones. In addition to madrasas during the Mamlūks period, mosque, hāngāh, ribat and zāwiya are also among the educational places.Hadith, fiqh and Tafsir scholar al-Zarkashī is originally Turkish. He was born in Cairo at 745 under the conditions mentioned above. His family learned of gold and silverworking because of their subsequent settlement to Egypt, and they made their living with this craft. A person who performs this is called Zarkash in Arabic. Muhammad ibn Bahādır, who learned and did this job, was known as al-Zarkashī. al-Zarkashī, known for his love of science since childhood, was trained hadith by Alā al-Dīn Mughultay (d. 762/1360) and Imād al-Dīn Ibn Kashīr (d. 774/1372) in Damascus, and fiqh by al-Asnawī (d. 772/1370). Among his beneficiaries are distinguished personalities such as al-Subkī (d. 756/1355), al-Azraī (d. 783/1381) and al-Bulqīnī (d. 824/1421). The most remarkable of his student is al-Birmāvī (d. 831/1428).It is known that he wrote about fifty works in hadith, tafsir, fiqh, methodology of fiqh and other fields. Especially among these works al-Burhān fī ʻUlūm al-Qur’ān, al-Tadhkira, al-Ijāba, al-Bahr al-Muhīt fî Usūl al-Fiqh ve al-Mansūr fī al-Qawāid is worth mentioning. Studies on al-Burhān and al-Bahr were carried out at the level of Master and PhD.al-Zarkashī did not hesitate to criticize any person for whom he had found his mistake. For example, even though he has a great love for him, and even because of this love, he has been given the name of al-Minhāj, the criticism of al-Nawawī is the clearest indication of the value given to science. Not just him, critics of scholars such as al-Hākim al-Naysābūrī and Ibn ʻAbd al-Barr who are recognized as authority in hadith can also be considered in this framework.The work named al-Tadhkira which we have studied in our work is of importance in that it shows the accumulation of knowledge in the field of hadith. In order to compose this work, it is necessary to have enough information in this field since the riwāyas must be criticized in terms of isnād and text. To compose his work, al-Zarkashī has benefited from about a hundred and forty works related to hadith, tafsir, al-siyar, history, tabakāt, commentary, jarh - taʻdīl, ilal and maghāzī. The use of such works is an effort to reach all sources and right information as much as possible. Some of these sources are basic hadith books such as al-Bukhārī (d. 256/870) al-Sahīh, Muslim (d. 261/875) al- Sahīh, Abū Dāʾūd (d. 275/889) al-Sunan, al-Tirmidhī (d. 279/892) al-Sunan, al-Nasā’ī (d. 303/915) al-Sunan, Ibn Mādja (d. 273/887) al-Sunan, Mālik ibn Anas (d. 179/795) al-Muwatta, Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241/855) al-Musnad, al-Dārimī (d. 255/869) al-Sunan, ʻAbd al-Razzāq al-Sanʻānī (d. 211/826-27) al-Musannaf, Ibn Abī Shayba (d. 235/849) al-Musannaf, Ibn Rāhwayh (d. 238/853) al-Musnad, al- Bazzār (d. 292/905) al-Musnad, Abu Yaʻlā el-Mawsilī (d. 307/919) al-Musnad, Ibn Hibbān (d. 354/965) al-Sahīh, al-Tabarānī (d. 360/971) al-Muʻjam al-Awsat and al-Muʻjam al-Kabīr, al-Hākim al-Naysābūrī (d. 405/1014) al-Mustadrak.al-Zarkashī divided the riwāyas he had studied into eight subjects. These are judgments, wisdom, zuhd, medicine, virtue, prayer, story, words and riwāyas circulating in language. He shares the information he obtains from sources about him after mentioning the riwāyas he will examine. For example, it is mentioned that there is not a hadith which is transmitted as a hadith, it is a word of a sahāba, tābiun or a person. He transferred on the riwāyas the sources mentioned in the sources, but also stated that he did not participate in some information as the place came.The author has evaluated the narrators of the riwāyas from the point of jarh and taʻdīl. He did not only evaluate riwāyas in terms of isnād, but also text criticism. This activity is a distinctive feature of his work.al-Zarkashī gave information about the misrepresentation of the name of the narrators. He also explained the strange words that are difficult to understand in the text. It is a manifestation of his knowledge in the fiqh area that some of the riwāyas that are considered weak are expressed in some sects. The author described some errors about the riwāyas. For example, he stated that a riwāya that is said to be marfūʻ is a mavkūf. al-Zarkashī also included verses, hadiths and poems about the riwāya that he had studied while writing his work or he defended it by saying that it is not the case of a riwāya that is said to be fictitious.Perhaps it is the weakest point of al-Zarkashī’s work not to give any information about some riwāya, only to mention their isnāds. He also found some riwāyas that did not have a reliable isnāds and stated that their meanings are correct. This knowledge has become an enlightening characteristic for later generations.This work has a great significance in showing that the majority of the riwāyas that spread among the people are not hadiths. As a matter of fact, 73% of the riwāyas examined in the work are weak or irrelevant riwāyas. This work of al-Zarkashī is unique. The existence of such a work has not been determined before him. This work constituted the basis of the works written by scholars such as al-Sakhāwī and al-Aclūnī in the same subject after him. (shrink)

Ibn al-Qāṣṣ (d. 335/946), one of the representatives of the Shāfiʿī school of law in the 4th/10th century, compiled a short treatise of extraordinary nature: Fawāʾid Ḥadīth Abī ʿUmeyr. In this work, he deduces sixty different wajhs (verdicts, comments) from a ḥadīth reporting the Prophet’s interest and affection to a child known as Abū ʿUmayr and his family during a visit he paid after Abū ʿUmayr’s birdie died by jokingly telling him in rhyme, “yā Abā ʿUmayr, mā faʿala al-nughayr” (O (...) Abū ʿUmayr, what happened to the nughayr?) This study deals with the primary goal of the composition of the Fawāʾid, its content, and structural qualities as well as the author’s approach in deducing verdicts. As one of the aṣḥāb al-wujūh, the author’s legal/madhhab notion and the literalist and external perspective he developed regarding the interpretation of texts, seems to have directly affected his deductive reasoning and determined his approach. This concise work not only sheds light over certain aspects of the relationship between ḥadīth and fiqh at the time of Ibn al-Qāṣṣ, but also exemplifies to what extent methodological tendencies and personal factors might affect the process of deriving verdicts from ḥadīth and could push the limits in that regard. Summary: Ibn al-Qāṣṣ (d. 335/946), one of the representatives of the Shāfiʿī school of law in the 4th/10th century, compiled a short treatise of extraordinary nature: Fawāʾid Ḥadīth Abī ʿUmeyr. In this work, he deduces sixty different wajhs (verdicts, comments) from a ḥadīth reporting the Prophet’s interest and affection to a child known as Abū ʿUmayr and his family during a visit he paid after Abū ʿUmayr’s birdie died by jokingly telling him in rhyme, “yā Abā ʿUmayr, mā faʿala al-nughayr” (O Abū ʿUmayr, what happened to the nughayr?) The report of Abū ʿUmayr, which is in the focus of the work, is, in essence, reflects a singular and special aspect of the close relationship between the Prophet and Anas b. Malik’s family. Nevertheless, it is surprising that many ḥadīth scholars from the early times, not only Ibn al-Qāṣṣ, have chosen this ḥadīth as an example in which they can demonstrate their skill in the field of fiqh al- ḥadīth. Fawāʾid seems to be a work in which the juridical point of view centered and resembles the classical fiqh commentaries in a sense. In the work, different variants of the Abū ʿUmayr report were brought together and evaluated within the framework of the text and textual possibilities as possible. The author also analyzed some words in the narrative text for being a base for a verdict, referred to Qurʾānic verses, prophetic ḥadīths, reports, and legal opinions, tried to solve the disputes and the conflicts among legal evidences in various ways, and stated occasionally his personal opinions. Fawāʾid reflects the author’s rich accumulation of legal knowledge, while at the same time gives an idea about his knowledge of ḥadīth and his approach to the ḥadīth. Considering what the author did and wanted to do, it is understood that he deals with ḥadīth as well as fiqh, and he has a certain level of relationship not only with fuqahāʾ (muslim jurisprudents), but also with ḥadīth scholars. Ibn al-Qāṣṣ’s interest in fiqh and ḥadīth must have lead him to take initiative to eliminate the tension between the ahl al-ḥadīth of Shāfiʿī school of law who focused on transmitting ḥadīths and the fuqahāʾ of Shāfiʿī school of law who care about the fiqh perspective, in that period of time. It can also be said that he tried to establish a reconciliation between the ahl al-ḥadīth (the traditionists) and the ahl al-raʾy (the rationalists) and bring the parties together in the middle way. The work seems to have been written as a result of such considerations. As Ibn al-Qāṣṣ was considered as one of the aṣḥāb al-wujūh, that is, as a jurist who was bound of a madhhab Imām for legal reasoning, he seems to have followed the methodology of Shāfiʿī school of law for deriving legal solutions from the sources. Legal notion of the author and his literalist and textualist perspective with regards to the interpretation of texts, seems to have directly affected his way of reasoning from the ḥadīth and determined his approach. This approach, as mentioned in many contemporary studies, is not sufficient and appropriate for the evaluation of ḥadīth texts, which were transmitted by meaning, not word-by-word, and shaped by the transmitter’s dispositions. It is also difficult to say that Ibn al-Qāṣṣ sufficiently considered the physical, historical, social, and cultural context surrounding the text as well as other extra-textual elements, which complete the meaning. This situation implies that some of the wajhs recorded in the work are the author’s attempt to find a base and evidence for his ideas, which he already had, rather than deductions drawn from the ḥadīth. It makes the scientific quality and accuracy of his efforts controversial. The verdicts presented in the work, as wajh and fāʾida are predominantly jurisprudential and compatible with the opinions of the Shāfiʿī School of law, however, there are also controversial ones, and the author pointed to them without revealing his own tendency. It does not seem that these wajhs in the work are systematically ranked. In this vein, similar wajhs are sometimes in succession, sometimes scattered, and some wajhs are repetitive. The degree of accuracy, clarity and quality of some wajhs also seem arguable. Zayn al-Dīn al-ʿIrāqī (d. 806/1404), who made a general evaluation of these wajhs, said that: “Some of the (meanings of the) wajhs in the work are apparent, some of them are hidden and some are strained.” The work’s editor drew attention in the footnotes to the wajhs, which might be subject to objection. The early ḥadīth scholars, who reported this ḥadīth in their compilations, deduced six or seven judgments from the ḥadīth under the headings (bāb) specified for this ḥadīth. This appears quite modest in comparison to the treatise of Ibn al-Qāṣṣ. The given ḥadīth has also taken its place in the fiqh literature, and it has been questioned in the context of the issue of Madīna’s being of ḥarām region (holy land) and hunting ban in this region. In conclusion, Ibn al-Qāṣṣ’s treatise of Fawāʾid Ḥadīth Abī ʿUmayr, is a short but worthy example of the ḥadīth literature in terms of its purpose and interesting content. This work can be considered as a study that exemplifies how the purpose of writing can be determinative on the structure of a work, and in particular to what extent methodological tendencies and personal factors might affect the process of deriving verdicts from ḥadīth and could push the limits in that regard. The author’s universe of meaning, which focused on the apparent meaning and to draw as many judgments as possible from the text, should be related to his personal intention and purpose as well as to the fiqh perspective of his time. Due to the textual approach and the method for drawing inferences, which are observed in the work, the tool-purpose relationship between the text and the judgment sometimes remains obscure and sometimes becomes unimportant. In some respects, this work is a striking example of the consequences of ignoring the context and historical reality surrounding texts for specific purposes. (shrink)

“A Common Word Between Us,” an open letter from Muslim scholars to Christian leaders, is the most developed effort at Muslim-Christian reconciliation to date. Endorsed by well-known Muslim scholars from diverse sects and backgrounds, the letter emphasizes the central role of love of God and the Golden Rule in both religions and cites the catastrophic consequences of conflict. The signatories frame a norm of interreligious covenant for constructive collaborations, present their argument as an authoritative Islamic position, and effectively reject the (...) clash-of-civilizations narrative. Using game-theory models to articulate strategic challenges facing interreligious initiatives, this essay argues that a norm of interreligious covenant can potentially produce successful collective action in situations resembling both coordination and prisoner's dilemma games, depending on the success of norm entrepreneurship. (shrink)

Hadith; commentaries; early works to 1800.

This book identifies the criteria for successful constitutions in both theory and practice using the research and methodology of Vincent Ostrom.

In legal methodology (usul al-fiqh), the problem of the defining istiḥsān and the legitimacy of its definition is among the critical discussion topics. To overcome the rigorism of law, istiḥsān was used by the founder scholars of Ḥanafī school of law and Malik b. Anas - however this use received various objections. Although the Mālikī scholars also used istiḥsān strong criticisms of istiḥsān have been directed on the Ḥanafīs. After the severe criticism of Muḥammad b. Idrīs al-Shāfiʿī, the Ḥanafī (...) scholars carried out various intellectual activities to define istiḥsān and to prove that it is legitimate. This process -which started especially with Abū’l-Ḥasan al-Karkhī and Abū Bakr al-Jaṣṣāṣ, revealed a rich accumulation with the contribution of the legal theorists in other school of laws. It is known that al-Karkhī's definition of istiḥsān has become widespread among the legal theorists, and the legitimacy of istiḥsān in the works of legal theory was based on his definition. Al-Karkhī's considerations on the legaliticamy of using istiḥsān can be traced in his student al-Jaṣṣāṣ, in the following centuries, Abū Zayd al-Dabūsī, Abū l-‘Usr al-Bazdawī and al-Sarakhsī’s works. Al-Jaṣṣāṣ' explanations on the legitimacy of istiḥsān begin with the criticism of Imam al-Shāfiʿī's against istiḥsān. He provides the proof of legitimacy for istiḥsān in divided two sub-headings. Al-Jaṣṣāṣ, who deals with istiḥsān in two parts as word and meaning, argues that there is no disagreement about the use of istiḥsān and that all mujtahids accept istiḥsān, and even al-Shāfiʿī, who opposes to the use of istiḥsān, employs istiḥsān in this sense. The type of istiḥsān on which there is a deabte is the istiḥsān used in relation to its meaning. Al-Jaṣṣāṣ states that this use is a qiyas operation; he justifies his point of view by referring to the works of Muḥammad b. Hasan al-Shaybānī. Indeed, when we look at how al-Shaybānī explained the istiḥsān’s examples in his works, it is seen that there are two conflicting juristic analogy (qiyas) made in many examples. Moreover, al-Shaybānī openly considered some types of istiḥsān part of qiyas by stating that some examples “can be included in this type of istiḥsān” Ḥanafī scholars wanted to break the hostile atmosphere toward istiḥsān by defining and evaluating the istiḥsān in a way that their opponents could accept. The definition of Istiḥsān “to abandon the judgment given to similar ones due to stronger evidence.” has been generally accepted. In this definition, istiḥsān is defined by associating with qiyas, and referred to an istihsan that is presented as the more substantial evidence, and qiyas is the weaker evidence. Although it is appropriate to define istiḥsān in relation to qiyas, the claim that in the definition istiḥsān is put in stronger place than qiyas might casuse to some the contradictions- in particular when the example’s of al-Shaybānī are taken into consideration. Because in most cases, when qiyas conflicts with istiḥsān, istiḥsān is taken. But in an opposite case, qiyas might be taken. Apart from these, there are examples of the types of istiḥsān that al-Karkhī has classified in the works of al-Shaybānī, but sometimes there are also strange situations such as taking the qiyas by istiḥsān. This also means that the term is not sufficiently defined. The negative attitude towards istiḥsān in some Shāfiʿī circles and the criticisms against the legitimacy of istiḥsān continued in the works of the fiqh method. Istiḥsān is defined as making a judgment without evidence by Shāfiʿī circles. Therefore, they did not accept the abandonment of qiyas, which is a sharī proof, because of istiḥsān, which is a non-sharī notable proof. Based on the examples given by the users of istiḥsān, Ibn Ḥazm, one of the Ẓāhirītes, claims that istiḥsān opens the door to arbitrariness. According to him, a situation that is accepted as istiḥsān according to Ḥanafīs can be taken as istiḥsān according to Mālikīs. This creates an apparent contradiction. There are some valid points in the assessment of Ibn Ḥazm. Because while it is seen that the istiḥsān of Mālikīs is criticized in al-Shaybānī's book named al-Ḥujjah, it can be also found that the istiḥsān of Ḥanafīs is charged in the works of Abū’l-Walīd al-Bājī, one of the Mālikīs. The criticism toward istiḥsān was continued by Shāfiʿīs such as Abū Isḥāq al-Shīrāzī, Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwaynī and Abū Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī. While al-Juwaynī sees istiḥsān as a method based on the lust of the soul, not istinbat/legal deduction, al-Ghazālī understands istiḥsān as a personal comment. The main reason for the negative attitude towards istiḥsān is that the content based on the definitions, has been neglected most of the time. However, when we look at the works of al-Shaybānī, it can be seen that there is a proof of istiḥsān contrary to what is believed-and that this can be sometimes a work, sometimes a necessity, sometimes another comparison, or sometimes a custom. (shrink)

Sunnah, one of the two basic sources of the Islamic religion, has survived to the present day through transmission. The Messenger of Allah, the first interpreter of the Quran, explained the obscurities in the verses, the reason for their revelation and their context. Because, in addition to his duty to convey, he also has a duty to inform. For this reason, the Sunnah is considered a basic source, just like the Qur’an. The Qur’an was revealed fourteen centuries ago, gradually over (...) twenty-three years. It came to life with the life of the Prophet. After his passing into the afterlife, Muslims began to strive to understand the Qur’an and Sunnah correctly and to make them dominate their lives. For this reason, they made great scientific journeys and produced various works. At the beginning of these works are commentaries. Commentaries in which the verses of the Qur’an are explained with the words of the Prophet, his companions, and the followers are called narration tafsir. Maâlim at-tanzîl is an important commentary written by Baghawi (d. 516/1122) using this method. Baghawi, who lived during the founding and rise of the Great Seljuks, was born in 433/1041 in a small town called Bagshur or Bag, located between Marwarruz and Harat in the Khorasan region. In reference to this place, he was called Baghawi. He died in Marwarruz in 516/1122. He received a very good education and trained himself to produce works in the sciences of tafsir, hadith, fiqh and recitation. He narrated the Bukhari's al-Jâmi al-Sahîh from Abu Omar Abdulwahid el-Melihi (d. 463/1071), Abu Dawud’s Sunan from Abu Tahir Omar b. Abdelaziz ibn Ahmed al-Marwazi al-Fashani (d. 463/1071), Malik b. Anas’s Muwatta’ from Abu’l-Hasan Muhammed b. Muhammed ibn Saîd al-Shrazi (d.?). So much so that it can be seen that a significant part of the attributed narrations he narrated in his work called Sharhu's-sunna, as well as Maâlim at-tanzil, were the narrations he heard from the mentioned teachers. Baghawi's knowledge of isnad is also at a high level and he knows very well the narrations of the hadiths he narrated and the situations of the narrators in these narrations. In addition to criticizing the hadiths he narrated, he also evaluated their authenticity and showed that he was an authority on this subject. Maâlim at-tanzil is Baghawi's most well-known work and explains the verses with hadiths, the views of the companions, followers and later scholars. Since he was also a good haddith, he criticized the weak and fabricated narrations in the previously written commentaries. In Maâlim at-tanzil, before starting the commentary, the name of the sura, the number of verses, whether it is Meccan or Medinan, where and about what event it was revealed, are stated. First, explanations were made on the verses in terms of dictionary. Then, the interpretation of the verse with other verses and hadiths was started, the views of the companions and the followers were used, the explanation of the recitation aspects was given in detail, the different recitations were mentioned, the grammatical and syntax analyzes were made. The authority of the author in the field of hadith is clearly seen in the interpretation of the verses. The main feature of the work is that it is frequently referred to hadiths, unlike Masâbihu’s-Sunnah, most of the hadiths are narrated with their sources and almost all of them are based on the author himself. Although Israeli news were included in Maâlim at-tanzil, the author sometimes criticized them and rejected some of them. The aim of the article is to determine the author's method of using narrations in the interpretation of Surah al-Sajdah and the authenticity of these narrations. In this context, first Baghawi’s life and commentary are introduced. Later, the extraction and authenticity of the 16 narrations that the author conveyed while interpreting the surah were evaluated. The narrations have been researched in al-Kutub al-Tis'a and other reliable hadith books, especially Sharhu's-sunnah and Masâbihu's-sunnah. Based on the opinions of critics and scholars, the authenticity values of the narrations have been revealed. According to our findings, 12 of the 16 narrations were narrated with isnad and 4 without isnad. While 12 of the narrations are located only in Sharhu's-sunnah, 9 of them are only included in Masâbihu's-sunnah. The remaining 4 narrations are not included in either of his works. The distribution of the narrations in terms of the main hadith sources they are included in is as follows: 15 out of 16 narrations are located in al-Kutub al-Tis'a. 5 of these are in Bukhari, 7 in Muslim, 4 in Abu Dawud, 6 in Tirmidhi, 2 in Nasai, 2 in Ibn Majah, 1 in Darimi and 1 in Malik b. Anas’s Muwatta’ and 10 of them in Ahmed b. Hanbel. In terms of the end of the isnad, 1 is kudsî and 15 is marfû‘. In terms of authenticity, out of 16 narrations, 10 are sahih, 3 of which are muttefakun aleyh, 2 are hasan and 4 are weak. (shrink)

In this article, the introduction to the book of Kitāb al-Mulakhkhas al-Muwatta' by Qābisī (d. 403/1012), one of the hadith scholars of Maghrib geography, is discussed. The author wrote this work in order to bring together the continual documents in the Ibn al-Qāsim narra-tion of Mālik b. Anas' (d. 179/795) al-Muwatta. In the introduction, the author first stated the purpose of the writing of Kitāb al-Mulakhkhas al-Muwatta''s and the method followed in the work. Namely, he states that he compiled (...) this work to respond to the demands of those who asked him to bring together the hadiths of Mālik b. Anas, whose chain is complete. In the compilation of the work, he was content with the only narration of Muwatta. He followed the method of collecting the musnad hadiths in this narration, the ones with clear continuous. However, he preferred not to include the narrations that were closed in his continuous in his work. After this information, the author has included some issues of hadith methodology in the introduction part. The main purpose of the study is to determine the concepts and subjects of the hadith methodology that he discussed in this section. In this context, firstly, information about Qābisī's life was given, and his education was mentioned. Then, some information about the features of the work in question is presented. Afterwards, the concepts of hadith methodology that he mentioned in the introduction of his work and his explanations on these issues were examined under separate headings. Although he is encouraged to narrate hadiths in this introduction, he provides information about the refraining of many hadith transmissions, the conditions of endurance of hadith, the words of the narration considered as 'muttasil and munqati', the narration with the meaning of the hadiths and the lahn in the hadith. When the approaches of Qābisī on these issues are examined, it is revealed that he tends towards the views of the Mālikī school, which he is a follower of and Imam Mālik. For this reason, the parts in which he adopted Mālik’s approaches and tended to explain the issues by referring to him are mentioned. (shrink)

This article argues against the depiction of Ibn Khaldūn as someone whose preoccupation and credulity regarding mysticism or the occult diminish the rationalism and reformism of his thought, rendering it irrelevant to our concerns today. Instead, it argues that he consistently tries to steer his readers away from such pursuits by exposing them as fake when possible, or—in cases where their reality is attested to by unimpeachable religious sources—by highlighting the dangers they pose to both religion and state.

Despite the vast scholarship on Ibn Khaldun, little attention has been devoted to his views on war - views of considerable contemporary significance because he remains one of the few authoritative figures across a broad swath of the Islamic political spectrum. The first part of this article identifies jihad as a crucial element of a broader imperative for Ibn Khaldun: establishing empires of sufficient size, diversity and cosmopolitanism to sustain the kind of civilization he views as necessary for human excellence. (...) The second part of the article demonstrates that for Ibn Khaldun the good military commander, like the good religious guide, is a model for the good or artful statesman in general. In the process, Ibn Khaldun's study of war and empire emerges as one of the most innovative articulations of Realpolitik in Islamic political thought. (shrink)

On the life, philosophy and theology of Averroës, 1126-1198, Arab philospher.

With the increasing interest in Islam and evolution, some Islamic thinkers have vehemently rejected evolution, while others have eagerly embraced it. However, those seeking to embrace evolution sometimes err in their interpretation of historical writings. Indeed, there are texts written by famous historical scholars of Islam who seem to suggest that humans have evolved from lower forms of species. These include Ibn Khaldūn, Jalāl ad‐Dīn Rūmī, al‐Jāhiz, and The Brethren of Purity (Ikhwān al Safā). Although this may be true, such (...) readings are a mistaken interpretation of the aforementioned authors who are actually referring to some form of the scalae naturae (the Great Chain of Being). This reference to the Great Chain of Being is unknown to some contemporary readers who mistakenly believe these writers to be discussing an evolutionary or a proto‐evolutionary theory. This article demonstrates how and why these historical records do not actually represent any notion of evolution as it is currently understood, in the hope of avoiding any further erroneous claims that seem to be proliferating among modern thinkers. (shrink)

In this article, I will attempt to provide a historical case study, I suggest that the demarcation between perception and how a figure is ‘seen’ is the process of perpetual filtering between the levels of sensation and perception. I argue that this filtering operates through the basic visual principles, which may vary and have divergent functions in different paradigms. This historical case study will focus on the fifty-six plates featured in the influential work of the London surgeon William Cheselden, to (...) reveal the paradigm-based filtering in these prints by arguing that the sense data is organized in the simplest manner to view figures in their unity. Thus, I will focus on the visual principle of simplicity, which features the patterns of similarity, contrast and symmetry. An analysis of Cheselden’s usage of these patterns will demonstrate that he aims to show that every bone in human body is united to one another, which forms an organizing structure. I will conclude that these visual principles were used by Chelselden to achieve perfection by conveying right proportions and the correct number of scales of human body since his observations was laden with Newtonian paradigm. Finally, I will compare this usage to that of Ibn Sina’s, to disclose the paradigm-ladenness of scientific observations. (shrink)

Islamic ethics; Muslims; religious life; biography.

The great majority of commentators have evaluated the splitting of the moon. The vast majority of them think that it occurred in the Prophet’s period basing their view on the clear statement of al-Qamar 54/1 verse and on related rumors. However, some commentators claim that the moon will split on the doomsday, by referring to the context of the same verse. The same names criticize the rumors claiming that they cannot constituteevidence for the splitting of the moon. To those who (...) think so, from the fact that the splitting of the moon was related by few companions and that it was not recorded in various geographies it is evident that the incident did not happen. It cannot be said that the commentators, who took that the view that the split of the moon were in the period of the Prophet, have similar views in this regard. They have different interpretations in matters such as the realization and the shape of the event. On the other hand, those who claim that the split of the moon is only an idiomatic statement and that the event is only a lunar eclipse, declare that the split of the moon never actually happened. In this study which deals with various interpretations of tafsirs of the splitting of the moon, it is aimed to criticize different opinions on this issue. Document analysis and comparison methods were applied in the article.Summary: The issue of the splitting of the moon has attracted many names from various disciplines, notably the commentators. In the verse of al-Qamar 54/1 mentioning the splitting of the moon has been an important factor for the commentators to evaluate this issue. The ḥadīth narratives regarding the cleavage of the moon are found in many ḥadīth sources, in particular, Ṣahīh al-Bukhārīand Ṣahīh al-Muslim. The rumors about the splitting of the moon, albeit with different forms, are attributed to Anas b. Mālik (d. 93/712), Jubayr b. Muṭ‘īm (d. 59/678-679), ʿAbdallāh b. ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-688), ʿAbdallāh b. ‘Omar (d. 73/692), and ʿAbdallāh b. Masʿūd (d. 32/652-653) One of the rumors about the splitting of the moon, although it is based on ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661)is not found in the authentic ḥadīth sources. In some narrations, it is said that the miracle of the moon's splitting took place upon the request of the polytheists while the others are only mentioned how this miracle happened. On the other hand, it cannot be said that the commentators agree on the split of the moon. The main purpose of this study is to identify these opinions with its basis. Apart from those who do not accept the occurrence of the incident, there are differences of opinion among the commentators who see this event as a miracle of the Prophet Muḥammad. It is possible to classify the disagreements of the commentators in this subject in two headings as the time and manner of occurrence of this incident.Most of the classical commentators, on the basis of narrations, think that the splitting of the moon occurred during the period of Mecca. Among these commentators, al-Wāḥidī (d. 468/1076) and al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273), as well as the rumors of this evidence, offer as a proof the verse, "if they see a miracle, they turn away and say that this is a great magic." (al-Qamar 54/2). Some commentators, such as al-Qushayrī (d. 465/1072), accept that this phenomenon has taken place in the past by referring to the opinion of the commentators about the split of the moon. The views of many of the modern-day commentators such as Siddiq Ḥasan Khan (d. 1307/1890), Mawdūdī (d. 1399/1979) and Sābūnī, on this issue, apart from the narrations related to the subject have shaped the general opinion of the commentators. There are differences of opinions among some of the commentators, who accept that the splitting of the moon takes place during the time of the Prophet Muḥammad, as to the reasons and arbitrariness of the incident. According to classical period commentators such as al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), al-Samarqandī (d. 373/983), Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210), al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1273), and Shīʿī commentators al-Qummī (d. 329/941), this incident took place upon the Prophet Muḥammad asked for a miracle as evidence for his prophethood by Meccan polytheists. Therefore, these commentators establish a relationship between the splitting of the moon and the prophethood of the prophet Muḥammad. On the other hand, commentators like Sayyid Quṭb (d. 1385/1966) argue that the splitting of the moon cannot be regarded as evidence of the prophethood, citing the fact that the miracles of the Prophet Muḥammad except the Qurʾān were not reported. There is a disagreement about the validity of the narrations related to the events among the commentators, who see the splitting of the moon as a miracle of the Prophet Muḥammad. Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373) and Shawkanī (d. 1250/1834) commentators, such as the rumors about this issue as a precise; ibn ʿĀshūr (d. 1879/1973) does not accept the news on this issue as a precise. There are also some commentators who suggest that the splitting the moon will take place in the future. The commentators, who shared this view, especially Rashīd Riḍā (d. 1353/1935) argued that the splitting of the moon did not take place in the past, pointing out that the validity criteria of narrations related to the splitting of the moon, and contradictory issues in the content of the rumors, also most of the people narrated by him/her cannot witness the incident and that it is not possible for people in a certain geography to witness this incident.There are few classical period commentators who suggest that the moon will be split in the future during the apocalypse. The prominent names are al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī, (d. 110/728), ʿAṭāʾ b. Abī Rabāḥ (d. 114/732) and Abū Bakr al- Aṣamm (d. 200/816). On the other hand, many names such as Rashīd al-Riḍā (d. 1353/1935), al-Marāghī (d. 1364/1945) and al-Shinqīṭī (d. 1394/1974) from the modern period declare that the moon will split during the apocalypse.According to these, in the verses of the al-Qamar 54/1 that apocalyptic scene is mentioned.In the verse, they try to justify the use of the verb meaning of a split in the past tense by introducing some evidence from other verses.According to them, in many verses that speak of apocalyptic scenes, events are expressed in the past tense. There are also commentators who have different evaluations on the way of the occurring event instead of the time concept. Al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111), Muḥyiddīn Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 638/1240) and Shāh Walī Allāh al-Dihlawī (d. 1052/1642) do not see the splitting of the moon as a real split mentioned in the verse of the al-Kamer 54/1. According to them, the event is an optical illusion. Muḥammad Asad (d. 1412/1992) connected this illusion to the lunar eclipse. Trying to explain the splitting of the moon by some commentators is one of the commentary differences in this issue. According to Mawdūdī, who did not see this event scientifically impossible, it is possible to reunite a fragmented star with gravity. Without a doubt, Ṭanṭawī al-Jawharī (d. 1940) is one of the names who make the most striking evaluations in this issue. According to him, the miracle of the moon's splitting has many aspects to shed light on scientific studies. Ṭanṭawī al-Jawharī sees the verse as the sign of the moon instead of any other celestial body, as a sign that the moon had long ago broken off from the world. Therefore, Ṭanṭawī al-Jawharī establishes a relationship between the splitting of the month mentioned in the verse and the theories about the separation of the moon in the modern period.One of the arguments about the splitting of the moon is related to the fineness of the language. Some commentators, who draw attention to the expression of the splitting of the moon, which is the expression in the Qurʾān, argue that the purpose of the separation of the moon is the occurrence of truth. According to the advocates of this view, the Arabs use such a statement to express that a work has come to light. According to this, the term "splitting the moon" as means that the Qurʾān expands the darkness in its period. In summary, the commentators make various comments on different grounds such as the narrative expression of the verse al-Qamar 54/1 regarding the splitting of the moon, the narrations about the event, and the language subtleties. (shrink)

RésuméDepuis les débuts de l'humanité, l'être humain s'est préoccupé de conserver les aliments en vue de les rendre plus longtemps comestibles. Au fil du temps, différentes méthodes pour préserver la nourriture ont été découvertes et perfectionnées, et ces techniques se trouvent décrites dans beaucoup d'œuvres. Ce travail décrit la connaissance des techniques de conservation qu'avaient les habitants de la péninsule ibérique ainsi que les développements qu'ils leur ont apportés. Il s'attache à étudier les divers procédés mis au point entre leieret (...) lexviesiècle, de façon à évaluer leur apport historique respectif. Les œuvres choisies et consultées sont : L.J.M. Columela,Los doce libros de Agricultura, Abū al-Jayr,Kitāb al-Filāḥa. Tratado de agricultura, Ibn Baṣṣāl,Kitāb al-Filāḥa. Libro de agricultura, Ibn al-ʿAwwām,Kitāb al-Filāḥa. Libro de Agricultura, Ibn Luyūn,Kitāb al-Filāḥa. Tratado de Agricultura, Alonso de Herrera,Agricultura general. (shrink)

الأطوار التاريخية في التعامل مع مسألة السماع في الأزمنة الكلاسيكية، إلى القرن السادس أنموذجامسائل السماع والمعازف من المسائل الغنية بالأقوال والاستدلالات، والكثيرة التقلب والتغير في تاريخ الفقه الإسلامي، كان السؤال المحوري فيه هل الأصل في السماع الإباحة أم أن الحرمة هي الأصل، فمع القول بأن الأصل هو الإباحة فإن الأدلة المحرمة لأنواع من السماع هو الاستثناء من القاعدة، وعلى القول بأن الأصل هو الحرمة، فإن الأدلة التي تبيح نماذج معينة من الغناء والمعازف هي الاستثناء منها، وقد جاءت أسئلة أخرى لتسهم (...) في المسألة، ما هي الأدلة الصحيحة فيها، وما هو الفهم الصحيح لها، وما أثر البيئة والمجتمع وتغير الأعراف والأزمان في ترجيح أحد الأقوال فيها، وهل وجدت في السماع رسائل وكتب خاصة به يمكن لنا بجمعها معا أن نلحظ ملامح معينة وأطوار معينة مرت بها تلك الأحكام، فكان ملاحظا لنا أن لكل عصر من العصور الكلاسيكية سمة معينة قلما تنخرم لدى العلماء، فيغلب على عصر الاتجاه الحديثي، وعصر آخر الفقهي المتشدد في التحريم، وآخر معتدل، وعصر يعيد النظر في الأقوال والمواقف التي سبقته وهكذا، فتحاول هذه الدراسة إلى جانب عرض الأقوال في المسألة، أن تفسر أسباب ظهور هذه الأقوال وعلاقاتها بعصورها وبما قبلها وتأثيرها بمن بعدها. (shrink)

In the ḥadīth sources it is being conveyed that the companions (ṣaḥāba) refrained from asking questions to the Prophet. This situation is generally associated with the verse of sūrat al-Māʾida 5:101. An-Navvās b. Samʿān (d. 50/670), Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī (d. 86/705) and Anas b. Mālik (d. 93/711-12) are among the companions who consider this situation as the ban on the asking questions. The concern that asking questions may cause additional obligations that were not presumed to be obligatory also attracts (...) attention in these records. Keeping all numerous questions addressed to the Prophet in mind we may ask if there is a Prophetic prohibition on asking questions. We will seek an answer to this question, which constitutes the main axis of this article, especially in the framework of the narrations mentioned among the reasons of the al-Māʾida 101. We will evaluate the information concerned in their historical context and internal coherence inductively. Our investigation differs in this respect from the investigations, which dealt with the disapproval of excessive and unnecessary questions. As a result of our research, we think that it is possible to talk about a ban on asking questions about religious issues in the last three years of the Medina period. We will first discuss the dating and nature of this ban, from which only Bedouin and visitors who come to Madina were excluded. Then, we especially will evaluate the theological consequences of answer of the Prophet, which mentioned in the same context, of whether the pilgrimage is religious duty for every year. In the last part of the article, the prohibition of asking questions will be discussed in the light of Hans-Georg Gadamer’s principle “Der hermeneutische Vorrang der Frage”, which deals with the effect of the questions on the direction and nature of the answer.Summary: It is reported in Qurʾān and Ḥadīth that the Prophet Muḥammad (PBUH) was asked a lot of questions and he responded based on the revealed knowledge or his own. He did not like the questions which remain outside of the daily religious life like the questions whether he is able to know the end of the world or to show miracle. There are some reports which covey that the Prophet frowned upon some questions because they could cause new assignments or lead to complicate the existing ones. The Companions like an-Nawwās b- Samʿān (d. 50/670), Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī (d. 86/705) and Anas b. Mālik (d. 93/711-12) have been describing this situation as the ban of asking of religious implications.This issue which companions formulated exactly as the ban of the asking questions was regarded in research until now just as the depreciation of the Prophet upon the unnecessary questions. In this interpretation the idea played a role that the ban of the asking may not conform to the religious pedagogic of the Prophet and the real existence of a lot of asked questions contradict that. Therefore the imperative “do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 (O believers, do not ask about things which, if made known to you, may vex you) were interpreted not as the prohibition of the asking questions in real sense, but as just the depreciation of the unnecessary questions.We argue that it is possible to talk about a prohibition of the asking questions in real sense. We are of the view that the asking to religious matters was prohibited in the last years of the Medina period. In a time of Madina period when the fundamental principles of Islam emerged the questions of companions let the Prophet think that they may lead to additional religious obligations. Therefore the Prophet warned his companions in these words: “Do not ask me about the details of the things which I do not mention to you” and “Allāh Taʿālā has remained silent about some things, out of compassion for you, not forgetfulness so do not seek after them.”The imperative “do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 has to been understood in the light of the Prophet’s advice as quoted above. According to the expressions of the companions reported in hadith collections, it is obvious that the imperative “do not ask” signifies not only “do not ask unnecessary questions”, but “do not ask questions related to theology matters in general”.Anas b. Mālik served the Prophet nine or ten years and was not criticised by the Prophet anytime. A companion like Anas cannot have refrained from the asking questions because they may be unnecessary. Anas interpreted “ do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 in words: “We were forbidden in the Qurʾān that we ask the Prophet anything". Anas’s observation reveals that the companions considered the “do not ask” in al-Māʾida 5:101 as a general prohibition for the questions to religious issue.According to our research it seems this ban was promulgated in last three years of Medina Period, and Bedouin and visitors were excluded. Al-Nawwās b. Samʿān noticed that the ban of the asking questions was only for the residents in Medina: “I was in Medina one year. The reason why I did not stay in Medina was my wish to ask the Prophet a religious issue. So, whoever stayed in Medina was not permitted to ask the Prophet questions.” Abū Umāma al-Bāhilī interpreted the ban of the asking in al-Māʾida 5:101 as a general ban. He reported that the companions give a garment (burda) as gift to a Bedouin in order to let him ask the Prophet questions. The ban on asking questions in Medina was not related to unnecessary questions. It was indeed related to the questions that might have caused addition to already well-defined obligatory rulings in Islam. Accordingly, the questions became unnecessary because they were asked in the time of revelation. With the ban of the asking the Prophet questions accentuated that God and his Messenger are aware what necessary and what was not. It means that God can intervene if it is necessary. For that they do not need ask the Prophet. Aṭ-Ṭabarī, al-Qurṭubī, en-Nawawī, Ibn RaJab el-Ḥanbalī and Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī are the scholars who interpreted the ban of asking in this general sense.We especially will evaluate the theological consequences of the Prophet’s response, as reported in the sources: “ If I said yes, the pilgrimage will be a religious duty for every year.” Here one may not misconstrue that the Prophet could determine the religious obligations arbitrarily. He meant that the believers have to practice only that which were revealed to them. The Prophet wanted to teach his followers the principle that became essential rule of Islamic jurisprudence: “What is not forbidden is permitted”.The Prophet did not perform tarāwīḥ-prayer in congregation in the month of fasting due to the apprehension that it might become obligatory for the believers and they would not be able to follow it. In this human reaction of the Prophet we see that the Prophet did not consider himself as the founder of the Islamic norms. In this context the following questions are important: Does God consider the human questions when making something obligatory? Is God influenceable in terms of His orders? Ibn Ḥajar observes: The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah accept the causality in terms of the Islamic norms. Accordingly something can become a religious norm because the humans asked about that. But God’s decision does not depend on the humans. God can consider human questions, if He so wills. (shrink)

The Umayyads (41-132/661-750) were the first Muslim dynastic state established in Damascus after the Rasheedun Caliphs. The Umayyads' transformation of the caliphate into a sultanate, their tribalist and discriminatory approaches, as well as the exaggerated palace life and entertainment of some caliphs have been the subject of criticism. Among the Umayyad caliphs, Yazīd II (101-105/720-724) was remembered for his drinking parties and love affairs with his concubines, and his fondness for entertainment to the degree of debauchery was described. The night (...) life of the caliph in question with his concubines named Sallāma and Habābah and his inclusion of them in the administration did not escape attention.It is known that the Umayyads had some problems in their relations with the new non-Arab Muslims (mawālī). Yazīd II’s elder brother, al-Maslama İbn ʽAbd al-Malik, was prevented on the grounds that his mother was a mawāli, although he was known to be the most worthy candidate for the caliphate among his brothers. Yazīd II, on the other hand, was appointed as the heir apparent with the advantage of being a member of the dynasty on his mother's side and then he was brought to the caliphate.After ‘Umar ibn ʽAbd al-ʽAziz, who was recognised as the ‘Fifth Rasheedun Caliph’ thanks to his piety and effective administrative skills, Yazīd II, who had a completely opposite character and administrative understanding, was brought to the caliphate. Although he imitated ‘Umar ibn ʽAbd al-ʽAziz in the first days of his caliphate, this situation did not last long. Soon after, he came under the influence of his favourites named Sallāma and Habāba and started to govern the state under the influence of these two names. It has also been stated that he jeopardised the future of the state and the dynasty with his arbitrary practices and debauched life. The sources give limited information about the lives of Sallāma and Habābah. Sallāma was born in Mecca as the child of a family whose parents were slaves (muwellada). It is narrated that she memorised almost all poetry and song lyrics from the Jahiliyyah period until the time she lived, and that she was extremely knowledgeable in the al-Qur’ân al-Karîm, hadiths and religious sciences. But with her mesmerising voice and physical beauty, she became famous as a singing courtesan. She gained her real fame when she met Yazid ibn ʽAbd al-Malik and became a part of the palace life. After Yazid II became the caliph, she rose in the palace and started to have a say in the state administration. It has been stated that Habābah was not inferior to Sallāma with her physical beauty, superior performance in singing, knowledge and manners, and even more advanced. As a matter of fact, Yazīd II was enamoured of her at first sight and wanted her very much, but his brother Caliph Sulaymān prevented him. Henceforth Yazīd II seated these two combines on his right and left in his palace and did not leave them until his death.Sallāma was an extremely intelligent, knowledgeable and beautiful woman who could be called Yazīd II’s first love. She almost ruled the state by using the affection and trust that the caliph cherished for her. So much so that the highest bureaucrats of the state could only be appointed with her approval. With her beauty, voice, and sharp intelligence, Habābah also enchanted the caliph, and her intervention in the state administration cost the caliph his life. Yazīd II was very saddened by the sudden death of Habābah during an entertainment party. His body was kept waiting for days and could only be buried after the warning of the caliph’s elder brother al-Maslama. The caliph, who knew the cause of her death from himself, never left her grave day or night. Weeks after the burial, he had her grave opened, embraced and kissed her decomposed corpse, lamented, and it was recorded that he died of grief. This situation, which cost the caliph his life, was expressed as ‘lovesickness’.This information and details are mentioned in Islamic historical sources. In this study, by using classical (Arabic) sources, two of the women who we think were influential on politics are introduced. Thus, we have contributed to the discussions on the presence and role of women in state administration in an early period of Islamic history. In this study, the portraits of two women, Habāba and Sallāma, who we think were involved in politics during the Umayyad period, albeit limited to the reign of Yazīd II, are given. While their short biographies are discussed, the status of women in the Umayyads, palace life and entertainments are touched upon. Again, the concepts of concubine and qayna (singing concubine) and umm al-walad, which express their art and social status in the person of these two concubines are explained. (shrink)

ʿAbd al-Malik ibn Ḥabīb (d. Cordova, 238/853?), Kitāb al-Waraʿ, is a series of about 350 quotations, topically organized. Most section headings name things to avoid, waraʿ referring to scrupulosity, meaning to keep away from the forbidden by avoiding even the doubtful. Quotations go back to persons of all generations, from earlier prophets to Ibn Ḥabīb himself. Particularly notable is a section on trade, in which the Prophet calls traders and cultivators the worst of his community. It presumably reflects local, Andalusian (...) concern with assimilation to the subject population. Ibn Ḥabīb, al-Waraʿ, cites the Prophet much more often than other collections on waraʿ. Altogether, scarcely one item in six in Ibn Ḥabīb’s collection lacks a parallel in other extant collections of pious sayings. Relatively numerous quotations of Asad b. Mūsā (d. 212/827) not found in his Kitāb al-Zuhd tend to confirm that the extant text is only a fragment of the original. However, the chief significance of Ibn Ḥabīb, al-Waraʿ, may be to confirm that other works at our disposal reliably represent the larger literature of piety in the ninth century CE. (shrink)

En el presente escrito se estudian varias piezas hasta ahora inéditas tanto al corpus de precintos producidos durante el períodod inicial de al-Andalus, como al de los ponderales realcionados con las emisiones monetarias de épocas diversas en la historia andalusí.

Bu makale kapsamında, XII. yüzyılda yaşamış önemli Yahudi din âlimlerinden Musa bin Meymûn (öl. 601/1204) ile XVII. yüzyılda yaşamış olan ve düşünceleri neticesinde ateist olduğu suçlamasıyla yirmi dört yaşındayken aforoz edilip bağlı bulunduğu Yahudi cemaatinden kovulan Spinoza’nın (öl. 1088/1677) vahiy ve nübüvvet anlayışları ele alınmıştır. Spinoza, Teolojik-Politik İnceleme adlı eserinde, teolojinin felsefeden ayrılması gerekliliğini göstermek amacındadır. Spinoza’nın bu arzusu onu, İbn Meymûn’la ve onun temsil ettiği gelenekle karşı karşıya getirmiştir. Neticede Spinoza’nın vahiy ve nübüvvet konusunda İbn Meymûn’dan etkilendiği ve onunla (...) bir hesaplaşmaya girdiği görülmektedir. Onun İbn Meymûn’dan hangi bakımdan etkilendiği ya da onunla nasıl bir hesaplaşmaya girdiği makalenin asıl konusunu teşkil etmektedir. Çalışmamız giriş, ana bölüm ve sonuç olarak üç bölümden oluşmaktadır. Giriş bölümünde öncelikle vahiy kavramının ne ifade ettiğine ve hem İslam düşünürlerinin hem de İbn Meymûn’un beslendiği ana kaynak olması nedeniyle Platon ile Aristoteles’in kehanet ve rüya hakkındaki görüşlerine kısaca değinilmiştir. Ayrıca Spinoza’nın İbn Meymûn’dan etkilenmesi veya onunla hesaplaşmasının, İbn Meymûn’un da mensubu olduğu İslam filozoflarının temsil ettiği gelenekle alakalı olmasından dolayı giriş bölümünde, bazı İslam filozoflarının görüşlerine de ana hatlarıyla değinme gereği duyulmuştur. Bunu yaparken Müslüman filozofların ilklerinden ve en önemlilerinden kabul edilen Kindî (öl. 252/866?), Fârâbî (öl. 339/950) ve İbn Sinâ’nın (öl. 428/1037) düşüncelerine özlü şekilde değinilmesi yeterli görülmüştür. Bu arada tarihsel açıdan İbn Meymûn’la Spinoza arasında bir yerde duran diğer bir Yahudi filozof Levi ben Gershom’un (öl. 745/1344) fikirleri de kısaca ele alınmıştır. Bu filozofların düşüncelerinden yola çıkılarak vahyin mütehayyile kuvvetiyle, ayrıca rüya ve kehanetle ilgisi gösterilmeye çalışılmıştır. Çalışmanın asıl bölümünde ise öncelikle İbn Meymûn’un vahiy ve nübüvvet anlayışı incelenmiş, akabinde bu, Spinoza’nın vahiy ve nübüvvet anlayışıyla mukayese edilmiştir. İbn Meymûn’un nübüvvet anlayışı incelenirken yer yer İslam filozoflarından etkilendiği kısımlara değinilmiştir. Bu mukayesede bilhassa İbn Meymûn’un Delâletu’l-Hâirîn adlı eseriyle Spinoza’nın Teolojik-Politik İnceleme adlı eseri ana kaynaklar olarak değerlendirilmiştir. Bu çalışma neticesinde hem iki düşünürün teolojik yaklaşımının daha iyi anlaşılması hem de Aydınlanmanın müjdecilerinden biri sayılan Spinoza’nın eleştirel dahi olsa İbn Meymûn’a kadar uzanan düşünce kodları gösterilmek istenmiştir. İbn Meymûn’a kadar uzanan bu kodların aynı zamanda İslam düşünce dünyasına uzandığı da vurgulanmak istenmiştir. Bu makalede, konunun kapsamı iki düşünürün peygamber, vahiy ve vahyin oluşmasında rol alan enfüsi ve afaki etmeler ile vahyin dili yönündeki düşünceleriyle sınırlandırılmıştır. İki düşünürün teolojiye ait mucize gibi diğer görüşlerindeki farklılıklar ya da benzerlikler makalenin kapsamı dışında tutulmuştur. (shrink)

Hadislerin doğru anlaşılması ve yorumlanması çabası ilk defa Hz. Peygamber döneminde başlamış, tâbiîn ve tebeu’t-tâbiîn döneminde hadislerin tedviniyle birlikte hız kazanmış ve bu hususta önemli çalışmalar yapılmıştır. İlerleyen süreçte fıkıh usulünün verilerini kullanarak ahkâm hadislerinden hüküm çıkarma ve lafız-mâna ilişkisi konusunda hakikat-mecaz ekseninde yeni yorum yöntemleriyle uygulamalı olarak ele alınan eserler telif edilmiştir. Bu eserlerin başında İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in, Şerḥu’l-İlmâm bi-eḥâdîs̱i’l-aḥkâm’ı gelmektedir. Şerḥu’l-İlmâm hadis şerh edebiyatında muhteva zenginliğini arttıran ve kullanılan bazı izah yöntemlerini geliştirerek kendisinden önceki şerhleri geride bırakmış bir eserdir. (...) Bu çalışmada İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hadisleri anlamada ve yorumlamada mecazi anlatım üslubu babında ortaya koyduğu yaklaşım ele alınmıştır. Böyle bir konunun tercih edilmesindeki ana etmenlerin başında mezkûr eserde hüküm istinbâtında hakikat-mecaz bağlamında benzer şerh çalışmalarına nispetle, analitik yaklaşımların ön plana çıkması ve alana katkı sağlaması gelmektedir. Çalışmanın hedefi, Şerḥu’l-İlmâm’da hakikat-mecaz ekseninde İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hadisleri nasıl yorumladığını ortaya çıkarmak ve elde edilen bulgularla yeni yorum imkânlarına alan açmaktır. Lafzın mânaya delaleti konusunda hakikat ve mecaz arasındaki ilişki ve kesişim noktaları çoğu zaman bir problem olarak durmaktadır. Hadis metinlerinin yorumlanmasında hakikat ve mecazın birlikte kullanım alanlarının tespit edilmesi ve hakikat-mecaz ayırımının işlevsel yönünün ortaya çıkarılması, hadislerin doğru anlaşılmasına ve yorumlanmasına katkı sağlayacaktır. Araştırmada öncelikli olarak Şerḥu’l-İlmâm’ın hadis ve fıkıh sahasındaki önemi ve değeriyle ilgili bilgi verilmiş, sonra hakikat ve mecaz kavramlarının tanımlarına geçilmiştir. Mecaz türleri arasında sadece İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in atıf yaptığı istiare, teşbih, teşbîhu’l-mânevî ve teşbîhu’s-sûrî gibi kavramlara yer verilmiştir. Son olarak İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hakikat ve mecazı bir yöntem olarak nasıl kullandığı konusu örnekler çerçevesinde tahlil edilmiştir. Araştırmada, İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hakikat ve mecazın zamansal boyutuna, hakikat ve mecaz ayırımında tazmînin rolüne, hakikat ve mecazın cemʿine, hakikate en yakın mecazlara ve hakikat-mecaz arasındaki tercih sebeplerine değinerek hakikat ve mecazı bir yöntem olarak kullandığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hakikat ve mecazı birlikte kullanmasının işlevsel yönleri ve faydaları arasında; lafızların lugatlarda geçtiği anlamları keşfetmek, lafzın anlamında derin ve net açılımlar yapmak, tekellüflü mânaları ayıklamak, mecaza hamledilmeyi gerekli kılan alâkaları/bağları belirlemek, çözümlemeci yaklaşımla muhtemel mânaları ortaya çıkarmak gibi hususlar yer almaktadır. Eğer İbn Dakîku'l-Îd, el-İlmâm'da sadece 57 hadisi değil de bütün hadisleri şerh etme imkânı bulmuş olsaydı Şerhu'l-İlmâm, hadislerin hakikat ve mecaz temelinde şerh edildiği bugün üzerinde en çok konuşulan eserlerden biri olurdu. (shrink)

Aristoteles, zamanı harekette açığa çıkan öncelik ile sonralıktan ve ânın birimler hâlinde düşünülmesinden dolayı sayı olarak betimlemiştir. Bu bağlamda Peripatetik doğa felsefesinde zaman, hareketin sayılması çerçevesinde tartışılmıştır. Halbuki bu sistemde zaman sürekli, sayı süreksiz niceliktir. Dolayısıyla tanım cümlesindeki sayı kavramı; zamanın sayı olmasının nasıl anlaşılacağı, sayının bir sayanı gerektirmesi ve çokluklarla ilişkili olması gibi hususlarda süreksizlik sorununu meydana getirmiştir. Nitekim Aristoteles, sürekli olması dolayısıyla zamanı, sayılan anlamında sayı kabul eder. Helenistik şârihler de zamanın sayı formunda betimlenmesinde, nicelikler arasında süreklilik ve (...) süreksizlik geçişkenliğini çözmeye çalışmıştır. Bu makalenin ana iddiası, İbn Sînâ’nın zaman anlayışının, Aristotelesçi zaman kavrayışının yeniden yapılandırılmış versiyonu olduğudur. İbn Sînâ zamanı, nicelikler arasındaki sürekli– süreksiz ilişkisine karşı, öncelikle hem büyüklük hem de ölçü olarak tartışılabilen miktar kavramıyla kurar. İbn Sînâ’ya göre miktar sürekli olduğundan, zaman bizzat süreklidir; sayı ise arazî biçimde zamana eklenir. Ayrıca, miktar olması bakımından zaman, sayan nefsi zorunlu kılmaz. Bu makale, İbn Sînâ’nın zaman kavramında gerçekleştirdiği yeniden yapılandırmasını; sayı, miktar, süreklilik ve göksel küreler üzerinden incelemektedir. (shrink)

The Umayyad State is widely criticized in the West as well as in its own region. Actually, this is normal situation. Because Hijaz Arabs who had no state experience, built a multinational state in short period of time. Yet, this caused serious matters. The fundamental point of the criticism is the payment of tax, also called jizya, which is taken from residents (mawālī) of Khorasan and Transoxania. However, in most studies on this subject, it is understood that the jizya taken (...) from mawālī is combined jizya and kharja, which is different type of tax. Although mawālī was tested for whether it passes religious criteria in critic periods or not, this situation did not last throughout the entire Umayyad history. It was continued for fifteen and twenty years. In this period, it was understood that the jizya tax taken from the mawālī, was caused by the unlawful practices of some regional governors, most of them were non-Muslim local tax officials and all their purpose was to collect the amount of combined jizya. It cannot be said that the Umayyad caliphs officially ordered written instructions in order to take the conceptual sense from the mawālī part. But some Khorasan governors, who detected that taxes were decreasing, blinked at the collection of the jizya from the mawālī.Summary: The tax policies of a state are of great importance for the political, social, and economic stability. A regular tax system minimizes the problems that the state mechanism might face. The establishment of a fair and just tax scheme is undoubtedly possible with a deep-rooted state experience. It is known that the Umayyad state which is the subject of this research has no state experience. Furthermore, ruling to the area which is on 13 million square kilometers and reaching to Kashgar in the East and to South France in the West and governing this multinational structure who are living on these regions, put the Umayyad government in a very difficult condition. With the vast borders and the stoppage of the conquests, some political, social and economic problems were experienced and these problems deeply affected the government. The groups which had argued with Shiites and Khārijites because of some various reasons led the country into collapsing. It is also known that many plague epidemics in the region of Damascus affected the society in a negative way, changing the capital and changing some of the border cities in favor of the Eastern Roman Empire.All these negativities certainly shaken the Umayyad state economically. It is understood from the data that the instability and political uncertainties in the country led to a decrease in the tax rates. For example, the Umayyad caliph ‘Abd al-Malik İbn Marwān period, only half of the tax was collected at the time of Hazrat ‘Umar could be collected. It can be said that the public who avoided the general policies of the state avoided giving tax, in other words, the tax evasion. Also, the increasing migration from village to city and due to that, the vacancy of tribute tax collected land, failure to obtain expected yield because of rent fights on fertile lands, and conversion process in non-Muslim community are included in other reasons of reduction of taxes.In the Umayyad period, the issue of taking the jizya from the mawālī can be considered in this context. We do not have an independent work or research article on how this practice was initiated, how it was and how it was taken from mawālī, and how it was a state policy, and how long it was sustained. The studies that touch on this subject are far from being holistic. Even in the main sources it is seen that the concepts of kharāj and jizya are not fully understood and therefore used interchangeably. This may be considered normal for the first period in which the concepts are not in place. However, in the following centuries, the works that were copyrighted and, except for a few, instead of understanding and explaining this confusion, chose to use the word jizya from these two words which can be used interchangeably in texts. Therefore, this approach has led to the widespread conviction that the Umayyad state has taken jizya from the mawālī in the conceptual sense.Al-Ḥajjāj ibn Yūsuf is claimed to have started the application of taken jizya from mawālī. However, Haccac aimed to provide the regularity of both agricultural products and the kharāj which is taken from farmers because of the status of the soil by sending Sawad villagers who migrated to the big cities and became Muslims by changing their religions. The status of the lands seized was decisive in taxation. According to this, the conquest and the territorial lands were taxed differently, but in some cases the same tax (kharāj) was taken. Non-Muslims who living in the territory of conquest were demanded jizya per capita. The jizya and kharāj tax collected from this category can be expressed as “joint jizya”. Regardless of whether the person is a Muslim or not, the fact that he was demanded from him due to the status of the land was interpreted by some researchers as juristic. However, in times of political instability, it is also a fact that mawālī is demanding jury in addition to the tribute tax. The point that is misunderstood or interpreted is that this practice was carried out throughout the entire Umayyad territory and the history. When examined, this distorted tax concept is actually concentrated in the area of Transoxania. Although some attempts were made to take the jizya from the mawālī to the country, the Umayyad caliphs have not allowed it. The practice of taking the jizya from the mawālī is actually followed by the killing Qutayba ibn Muslim al-Bāhilī (d. 96/715). This started political instability in the Transoxania and continued by some Khurāsān governors. These governors act according to the provocations of the Turkish governors and tax collectors of the region in order to be able to send their taxes completely. They claimed that the region in the region was not a sincere Muslim and, they continued to take the jizya from them.It can be said that jizya is not demanded as it is taken from non-Muslims in the common meaning from mawālī. Because any Umayyad caliph wrote no written instructions regarding this issue in the sources. It is understood that until the caliphate of ‘Umar b. ‘Abd al-‘Azîz, the Umayyad caliphs were not even aware of this distorted tax policy in the area of Transoxania. To put it once again, this practice was initiated by some Khurāsān governors with the concern that tax revenues might decrease. However, it should not be forgotten that this unfair practice after 96/715 is limited to certain governors. For example, during the tenure of Naṣr b. Seyyâr, the last governor of Khurāsān (120-131 / 738-748), the jizya tax was completely removed from the mawālī. Another activity that shows this action is regional and that was ordered by some governors of Khurāsān. Therefore, this practice does not reflect the Umayyad state policy. This is also apparent in the fact that the Shiites, Kharijites, and those who carried out the Abbasid Revolution for thirty-two years, did not make an anti-Umayyad propaganda with provoking the slave by the way of wrong application. (shrink)