Bu çalışma, Hanefî mezhebinde “‘umûmu’l-belvâ”
ile ilgili âhâd haberlerin terk edilmesi meselesini ele almaktadır. Çalışmada
öncelikle konuyla ilgili terimler incelenmiş ve ilk dönem Hanefî âlimlerinin
görüşleri ele alınarak konunun vuzuha kavuşturulması hedeflenmiştir. Ebû Hanîfe’den
nakledilen görüşlerde konuyla ilgili bazı esaslar bulunsa da bu meselede bize
ulaşan en erken metin Cessâs’a aittir. Cessâs, umûmu’l-belvâyla ilgili
zikrettiği görüşleri Îsâ b. Ebân’a nispet etmekle birlikte zikrettiği deliller
ve muhaliflerin tenkitlerine verdiği cevaplarla konuyla ilgili ilave
açıklamalar da yapmıştır. Çalışmada, umûmu’l-belvânın şartları da ele
alınmıştır. Söz konusu şartlar, cumhurun bu konuda Hanefîlere yönelttiği
tenkitlere cevap niteliği taşımaktadır. Son olarak konunun, fıkhî meselelerdeki
işlevselliği ve Hanefî mezhebi dışındaki fıkıh literatürüne ve hadis tenkit
metoduna girişi bazı örnekler zikredilerek ele alınmış ve bu şekilde çalışma
nihayete erdirilmiştir.
يناقش هذا البحث مسألة عدول الحنفية عن العمل
بالحديث الآحاد، فيما إذا جاء فيما تعم به البلوى، فيحرر هذه المصطلحات، ويؤصل
للمسألة عند متقدمي الحنفية لتكون الصورة أكثر وضوحا ودقة، فالمسألة لها أصول عند
أبي حنفية، ولكن أقدم نص جاءنا هو عن الجصاص، وقد نسب القول بالمسألة لعيسى بن
أبان، ولكن إضافات الجصاص فيها واسعة ودقيقة، وأهمها الاستدلال لها والرد على من
ينتقدها. ثم انتقل البحث إلى الكلام في ضوابط عموم البلوى التي بها يجاب على معظم
الاعتراضات الآتية من الجمهور على الحنفية، ثم انتهى البحث إلى التوظيف الفقهي
لها، وخصوصا كيفية دخول المسألة إلى نظام النقد الحديثي وإلى مدونات الفقه غير
الحنفي.
The aim of this
research is to discuss the issue of Ḥanafī scholars’ abandoning the isolated ḥadīth in the context of ‘Umūm al-Balwā, which is one of the
controversial issues in contrast to Ahl
al-Ra’y. Most of the Mutakallimūn and Muḥaddithūn do not
accept this criterion in differentiating between the accepted prophetic
narrations and the rejected ones.
There are two
methodologies in the classical Islamic points of view that govern this topic.
The first is the causal approach, which seeks the integration of evidence and
the coherence in the texts. In the context of the supposed conflict of evidence,
they resort to interpretation, they do not accept breaking the general rules
except for the context of certainty, which means the authentic certain mutawātir
or the mashhūr ḥadīth.
The Second is
the apparent "Ẓāhirī" approach that looks for the individual evidence
and texts. It works on making all of the narrations applicable. In the context
of the contradiction between the general and special texts, they erase the
conflict by specialization or restriction, and resort to the interpretation
only when it is necessary.
These two
approaches appeared during the earliest Islamic era, when the companions
interpreted the famous hadith of Banū Qurayẓa about praying the ‘Aṣr prayer and
then they appeared in the following historical periods, especially in the main
two streams of Sunnī schools, namely Ahl
al-Ḥadīth and Ahl al-Ra’y.
One of the
results of these two methods is the issue of ‘Umūm al-Balwā which is
appealed to by the first approach. It means not accepting the isolated ḥadīth which reaches us by the individual narrators and rejecting it in
the case that its details and contexts requires it to be mutawātir,
because the content requires that not only should many people have learnt it but
that it then needs to have been transmitted. When such a hadith brings us down to
one person, it makes itself suspicious, and it needs to be reconsidered as to whether
it will be accepted or left to the original rules and aḥkām. It is clear that the second approach does not accept such an
argument. That approach deals with each
hadith as an independent hadith.
So, this issue
is located in a common area between the Uṣūl
al-ḥadīth and Uṣūl al fiqh. Both the
Muḥaddithūn and the Uṣūliyyūn studied it. This research aims
to take a profound look at this issue in the earliest texts of Ahl al-Ra’y. Thus, to explore it and
trying to understand it from their point of view and not the later views, i.e.
the muta’akhirūn, of the Ḥanafī
scholars.
‘Umūm al-Balwā isolated ḥadīth ‘Īsā b. Abān Jaṣṣāṣ Ḥanafī school of jurisprudence
Birincil Dil | Arapça |
---|---|
Bölüm | Araştırma Makalesi |
Yazarlar | |
Yayımlanma Tarihi | 30 Aralık 2018 |
Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2018 Cilt: 55 Sayı: 55 |
Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi
Marmara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi açık erişimli bir dergidir
Açık Erişim Politikası için tıklayınız.