Tasavvuf
geleneğinin halk tarafından birçok irili ufaklı tarikatlarla özümsenmiş olması
Osmanlı Devleti’nin en önemli özelliklerinden biriydi. Şüphesiz ki Osmanlı’yı
altı asır boyu ayakta tutan devlet-millet bütünleşmesinin en başat kültürel
kodlarını oluşturan şey de tasavvufun bizzat kendisi olmuştur. Bu çerçevede
Osmanlı ulemâsının tasavvufla ilgisiz olan kısmı umum yekûn içinde yok denecek
kadar azdır. Osmanlı Devleti’nin “Yükselme Dönemi” diye anılan zaman diliminin
son kısmında yaşamış âlimlerden biri de İmam Takiyyüddîn Muhammed Birgivî’dir.
Başta Arap Dili ve Fıkıh olmak üzere pek çok alanda eser veren müellifin Fâtiha
ile birlikte Bakara sûresinin ilk doksan sekiz âyetini kapsayan bir tefsiri de
bulunmaktadır. Birgivî’nin diğer pek çok Osmanlı âlimi gibi tasavvuftan oldukça
üst seviyede istifade etmiş olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. Babasının dedesi Şeyh
Lütfullah, meşhur sûfîlerden Hacı Bayram-ı Velî’nin halifesidir. Kendisinin de
aynı tarikatın (Bayramiyye) müntesibi olduğu bilinmektedir. Bu makalede Birgivî’nin,
bahsi geçen tefsirindeki tasavvufî-işârî te’vîl ve yorumları incelenmiştir.
Tasavvuf yolunu istismar eden sahte sûfîleri sert bir şekilde eleştiren
Birgivî, özellikle İbâhiyye mensuplarının küfür ve dalâlette olduğunu
belirtmektedir. Bu yönüyle kimileri tarafından tasavvufa karşı olduğu
zannedilen müellifin istikamet üzere olan mutasavvıfları benimsediği hatta
İbnü’l-Arabî’nin düşünce sistemi ile özdeşleşen vahdet-i vücûddan bile
etkilendiği görülmektedir. Onun mevcut tavrı, tefsirde işârî te’vîli tasdik
mahiyetindedir. Dahası, bu duruş işârî te’vîl yapan sûfî müfessirleri sapkın
“Bâtınîlik”le itham edenlere verilmiş fiilî bir cevap niteliğindedir.
It was one of the most
important characteristics of the Ottoman Empire that the Sufi tradition was
adopted by the people through many large and small sects (tariqats). There is no doubt that tasawwuf itself has been the
most dominant cultural code of the state-nation integration that kept the
Ottoman Empire alive for six centuries. Within this framework, we can say that the part of the
Ottoman scholars which is not related to the tasawwuf is almost absent in the
general population. Imam
Taqiyyuddīn Muhammad Birgivī is the scholar who
lived in the last part of period that known the “Rising Period of the Ottoman
Empire”. It is known that Birgivī was considered as one of the most prominent
scholars in his own time, also extremely distinguished, honest and
uncompromising in his religious and moral character. It is understood that
Birgivī, like many other Ottoman scholars (ulamas), has benefited from the
tasawwuf very highly. His father’s grandfather, Sheikh Lutfullah, is the caliph
of Haci Bayram-i Velī one of the famous sufis. It is also known that Birgivī is
a member of the same tariqa (Bayramiyya).
Imam Birgivī, who
produced works in many fields, especially Arabic Language and Fiqh, also has a
tafsir covering the first ninety-eight verses of the Surah al-Baqara. This tafsir is the only work in his field of tafsir
(Quranic exegesis).
This work contains important data about his attitude
towards both tasawwuf and sufi (ishari) tafsir/ta’wil. The
study of tahqīq on this tafsir by Abdourrahmaan b. Sālih b. Sulaiman ad-Dahsh is a master thesis. This
study, which was accepted in the University of Imam Muhammed (Saudi
Arabia/Riyadh) was published in 2004 under the name of “Muqaddimatu’l-Mufassirīn”. In this study, microfilms of the two copies of Medina
Islamic University were used and it was stated that the original was in
al-Madrasah al-Mahmudiyyah in Medina. The work is also called “Tafsīru Surah
al-Baqara” and “Tafsīru’l-Qur’an al-Karim”.
In this paper, ishari
ta’wils and sufi commentaries of Birgivī are examined. Birgivī, who strongly criticized the false sufis who
abused the tasawwuf, especially stated that the members of the Ibāhiyya were
denialist and deviant.
Because the
Ibāhiyya, some of whom appear to be Sufi but are so deviated, have rejected
compulsory worship such as prayer (salah) and fasting (sawm). In fact, according to them, a perfect Sufis cannot sin
in terms of its spiritual structure because even his acts which seem
illegitimate should be understood differently. In terms of this line, it is
seen that Birgivī, who is supposed the against to the
tasawwuf (sufism) by some, has confirmed the true sufis and even influenced by
the wahdat al-wujud, which is identified with the thought system of Ibn
al-‘Arabī. In
fact, this is not surprising because the work entitled “Dafʻu Mataʻin
al-Sūfiyyah” which belongs to Akshamsaddin and defends Ibn al-ʻArabī shows that the members of the Bayramiyya
are not foreign to the wahdat al-wujud concept.
We briefly record one
of several examples (al-Baqara/27) on the subject from this short tafsir of
Birgivī and refer the enthusiasts to the detailed reading: “Merging things that
are apparently separate; it is possible by seeing that the kasrat
(multiplicity) is a relative kasrat, and that there is a genuine wahdat
(unity).
However, they oppose this order and believe in the
fact that the Wahid who have a genuine wahdat is the Kathir. Thus, they obscure
the wahdat with the kasrat.
They do not gather different things together; on the
contrary, by breaking up the collective, they break what Allah commanded
unification.
Thus, they damage and corrupt the worshiping fields of
those who cannot see the wahdat of the being.”
We do not know in detail
how and to what extent Imam Birgivī has adopted the view of wahdat al-wujud but
his ishari ta'wil which is mentioned here as an example makes references
directly to the idea of wahdat al-wujud. According to him, the spiritual sign
(isharat) in the verse commands to avoid drowning in the kasrat (multiplicity)
and to combine the everything with the wahdat (unity).
In four different
places of Imam Birgivī’s tafsir (27, 28, 67 and 68th verses of the chapther al-Bakara),
he gave a place to ishari ta'wils (interpretations). In this case, in terms of
numerically, it can be said once in every twenty-five verses have been made
ishari ta’wil.
From here, we can conclude that if Birgivī had written
a tafsir explaining the whole of the Qur’an, it would be possible to encounter
his two hundred and fifty ishari ta’wils. This
figure is not a figure to be underestimated at all. In our opinion, if such a
complete tafsir had been written, then we might have counted it as an ishari
tafsir now.
His stance on this
issue means confirmation of ishari ta’wil in tafsir. Moreover, this posture is a response to those who
accuse the sufi mufassirs by being part of deviant Bātiniyya. On the other hand, Birgivī’s approach to the subject;
It is one of the rare examples of the attitude that should be demonstrated by a
principled scholar.
Primary Language | Turkish |
---|---|
Subjects | Religious Studies |
Journal Section | Research Articles |
Authors | |
Publication Date | June 20, 2019 |
Published in Issue | Year 2019 Issue: 12 |
Amasya İlahiyat Dergisi-Amasya Theology Journal Creative Commons Alıntı-GayriTicari-Türetilemez 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.