Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî’nin Usûlu’n-Nahv İlmindeki Yeri

Yıl 2019, Sayı: 13, 535 - 555, 30.12.2019

Selim Tekin

https://doi.org/10.18498/amailad.585220

Öz

Gramer çalışmalarında doğuşundan
günümüze kadar birçok Arap dilci birbirinden farklı görüş ve yorumlarda
bulunmuşlardır. Bu görüşlerin farklı olmasındaki temel ve en önemli etken
kullanılan dil metodudur. Bir nahiv meselesinde bir dilci nahiv delillerinden
birine dayanarak bir görüş ortaya koyarken başka bir dilci diğer bir nahiv
deliline dayanarak farklı bir görüşte bulunmuştur. Bunun sonucunda ise gramerle
alakalı farklı yorumlar meydana gelmiştir. Bu dilcilerden biri de Ebû Hayyân
el-Endelüsî’dir. (ö. 745/1344) O, kimi zaman nahiv imamlarından ve ekollerinden
farklı olarak özgün, kimi zaman da bu imam ve ekollerden birinin görüşünü
tercih şeklinde görüşlerde bulunmuştur. Nahiv delillerinden bazılarını
diğerlerine göre daha önemsemiş ve görüşlerini bu doğrultuda ortaya koymuştur. Ebû
Hayyân ilk dil bilginlerinden farklı olarak Kuran'ın bütün kıraatlerini, kendi
görüşleri için delil olarak kullanmış, İbn Mâlik’in (ö. 672/1275)
yaygınlaştırdığı hadisle istişhad yöntemini reddetmiştir. Bu makalede Ebû Hayyân’ın
usûlu’n-nahv ilmine olan katkısı, görüşlerini ortaya koyarken benimsediği dil
metodu ve usûlu’n-nahv ilminde kullandığı nahiv delilleri gösterilmeye
çalışılacaktır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Arap Dili, Gramer, Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî, Usûl, Delil

The Place of Abu Hayyân al-Andalusî in the Methodology of Syntax (Usûlu'n-Nahw) Science

Öz

The Methodology of Syntax (Usûlu’n-Nahw)
Science means the evidence that is used in determining the rules of a language.
This evidence, which is also called Nahw evidence, consist of four elements
which are; Semâ (i.e. Sensation) Icma, Comparison and Istishâbü’l-hal.
The language scholars used these to determine the rules of language. The source
of the first and the most important one of these is the Qur'an, the Hadiths and
poetry. The Quran is recited not only with one single recitation method, but
with many different methods. Some linguists relied on the ones that were Mutevatir
(Reliable) of these Qara’ats (recitation method), while others
determined linguistic rules by relying on other Qara’ats other than the
Mutevatir. One of these linguists was Abu Hayyân al-Andalusî (d. 745/1344), who is the subject of our article.

Abu Hayyân, who was an important linguist of the
eighth century A.H., was influenced by the viewpoints of the predecessor
linguists, and acquired different viewpoints on Arabic language studies with
his own knowledge making important contributions with his works. Whether
Mutevatir or not, Abu Hayyân used all Qara’ats
as an evidence for his viewpoints and applied a method that was different from
early language scholars. He rejected the method of placing the rules on the
non-fluent Arabic dialects and Hadiths which were proposed by Ibn Malik (d. 672/1275) and tried to protect the Nahw method of the
early-period language scholars, especially those who were from Basra. When he
established his viewpoints on Nahw, he relied on all the reciting methods and
the fluent (i.e. fasih) Arabic poetry, and in this way, introduced a
unique Nahw methodology.

Abu Hayyân used all Nahw evidences, which consisted of
Sema, Comparison, Icma and Istishâbu’l-hâl; and
paid more importance to Sema than any other. According to him, firstly
the Quran recitation methods are referred to, and whether there is any use that
is heard from the Arabs is checked in any Nahw issue. If there is a usage, then
the other evidences are considered. If not, these Nahw evidences do not make
sense, and cannot be respected. Also, a Nahw rule cannot be produced. Even if a
rule is proposed, such a rule will be weak and invalid.

Sometimes there may be conflicts between Nahw
evidences. According to Abu Hayyân, when Sema and Comparison
evidence are in conflict, Sema is preferred; if there is no Sema,
no Comparison can be made. In case there is a conflict between different
dialects on any subject, Abu Hayyân argued that there was a use for each
dialect, and one of them could not be compared to the other. Again, in case
there is a conflict between the original and the common one, he argued that the
original use must be preferred.

Among the language scholars, the most influential
linguist was Sîbeveyhi (d. 180/796) on Abu Hayyân. He accepted the viewpoints and method of
Nahw of Sîbeveyhi as a basis and criticized the scholars who opposed him in
some Nahw issues. It was Ibn Malik, the linguist, who was criticized mostly by
Abu Hayyân due to his viewpoints. He wrote commentaries on the works of Ibn
Malik and abbreviated some of them. The focus of his criticism on Ibn Malik was
that he used Hadiths for Istishad (using the Hadiths as evidence), he
trusted some weak Arabic dialects, and preferred the viewpoints of Kufa school
in some Nahw issues. In this sense, Abu Hayyân enabled the following
generations recognize Ibn Malik and make evaluations on his viewpoints.

Abu Hayyân did not use the Hadiths as evidence for Nahw
issues like the early language scholars in Istishad with the Hadiths. on this
subject, he criticized Ibn Malik because he made Istishad with the Hadiths and
stated that most of the Hadiths were narrated spiritually, that a Nahw rule
could not be established based on them, and that the Hadith could not be used
as evidence for a v rule. In this sense, Abu Hayyân became the pioneer of the
scholars who defended the idea that Istishad could not be made with hadiths
together with his teacher Ibn Dâi (d. 680/1283). About the issue
of making Istishad with the Hadiths, some linguists agreed to Abu Hayyân, while
others criticized him and others followed a middle course. According to Abu
Hayyân, there is no harm in using the Hadiths as an example of a Nahw issue in
terms of representation or explaining the meaning of a word. When his works are examined, it is possible to see that he also included
many hadiths; however, he did not use hadiths in this sense.

In making Istishad with poetry, Abu Hayyân made
Istishad with the poems of the first three poets who were adopted by people;
and did not make Istishad with the poems of other poets. Again, he preferred
using fluent Arabic dialects, which were used to collect the language
materials, and criticized the Kufa school, and sometimes Ibn Malik, who agreed
to them because of making Istishad with non-fluent dialects.

Abu Hayyân also had preferential viewpoints and
comments in addition to his original viewpoints on Nahw. He made original
interpretations by using his unique Nahw method, and sometimes preferred the
viewpoints of any Nahw imam or school. When the Nahw viewpoints of Abu Hayyân
are examined, it is seen that he sometimes preferred the Basra language school,
and sometimes Kufa or other Nahw schools. Although it is seen that he is closer
to the Basra language school among other Nahw schools, he determined a Nahw
method that was unique to him and evaluated Nahw issues in the light of this
method.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Arabic language, Grammar, Abu Hayyân al-Andalusî, Methodology, Evidence

Kaynakça

• Bağdâdî, Şeyh Abdulkadir b. Ömer. Hizânetu’l-edeb ve lubbu lubâbi lisâni’l-Arab. 1. Baskı. 4 Cilt. Beyrut: Dâru Sadır, ts.
• Ebû Halîb, Ziyâd Halef ‘Avde. “İ’tirâzâtu Ebî Hayyân el-Endelusî fî kitabihi İrtişâfu’d-darab ale’l-Ferrâ: Dirâsetun vasfiyye”. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazze İslam Üniversitesi, 2011.
• Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî, Muhammed bin Yusuf bin Ali bin Yusuf. İrtişâfu’d-darab min lisâni’l-Arab. Thk. Recep Osman Muhammed. 1. Baskı. 5 Cilt. Kahire: Mektebetu’l-Hanci, 1418/1998.
• Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî, Muhammed bin Yusuf bin Ali bin Yusuf. Tefsîru’l-bahri’l-muhît. Thk. Şeyh Adil Ahmed Abdulmevcut - Şeyh Ali Muhammed Muavvid. 9 Cilt. Beyrut: Dâru’l-kutubi’l-ilmiyye, 2010.
• Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî, Muhammed bin Yusuf bin Ali bin Yusuf. et-Tezyîl ve’t-tekmîl fi şerhi kitabi’t-Teshîl. Thk. Hasan Handavi. 1. Baskı. 11 Cilt. Dımeşk: Dâru’l Kalem, 1417/1997.
• Efgânî, Saîd. Fî usûli’n-nahv. Beyrut: el-Mektebu ’l-İslâmî, 1407/1987.
• Fâsi, Ebû Abdullah Muhammed bin et-Tayyib. Feydu neşri’l-inşirâh min revdi tayyi’l-İktirâh. Thk. Dr. Mahmut Yusuf Feccâl. 2. Baskı. el-İmârâtu’l Arabiyye el-Muttahide-Abu Dabi: Dâru’l-Buhûs lid-Dirâsâti’l-İslamiyye ve İhyâi’t-Turâs, 2002.
• Hassân, Temmâm. el-Usûl. el-Mağrib: Dâru’s-Sekâfe. 1411/1991.
• Hulvânî, Muhammed Hayr. Usûli’n-nahvi’l-Arabî. Ribat: en-Nâşiru’l-Atlasî, 1983.
• İbn Cinnî, Ebû ’l-Feth Osman. el-Hasâis. Thk. eş-Şirbini Şeride. 3 Cilt. Kahire: Dâru’l-Hadis, 1428/2007.
• Kerchou, Lazhar. “Ebû Hayyân’ın el-Bahru’l-muhît Tefsiri Bağlamında Nahve Dair Metodik Esasları”. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 1/41 (2015): 313-336.
• Mahmud, Hüsnî Mahmud. el-Medresetu’l-Bağdâdiyye fî tarihi’n-nahvi’l-Arabî. Beyrut: Müessesetu’r-Risâle, 1986.
• Nâzıru’l-Ceyş, Muhibbuddin Muhammed bin Yusuf bin Ahmed. Temhîdu’l-kavâid bi-şerhi Teshîli’l-fevâid. Thk. Ali Muhammed Fahir. 1. Baskı. 10 Cilt. Kahire: Dâru’s-Selâm, 1428/2007.
• Süyûtî, Celâleddin Abdurrahman bin Ebû Bekr. Kitabu’l-İktirâh fi ilmi usûl’in-nahv. Thk. Dr. Selahaddin el-Hevvarî. 1. Baskı. Beyrut: el-Mektebetu’l-Asriyye, 1432/2011.
• Şûrân, İsmail Miftah Muhammed. “Usûlu’n-Nahv beyne Ebî Hayyan ve Nâzıru’l-Ceyş: Dirâsetun mukârene”. Doktora Tezi, Kahire Üniversitesi, 2013.
• Yahyavî, Fetiha. “Ba’du mezâhiri’t-tefkîri’l-luğaviyyi inde Ebî Hayyan el-Endelusî min hilâli İrtişâfu’d-darab min lisâni’l-Arab: Dirâsetun sarfiyye terkîbiyye”. Doktora Tezi, Seyyidî Muhammed b. Abdullah Üniversitesi, 2015.