An investigation on the layers of mujtahids
Abstract
In this article, classifications about the ranks of mujtahids are mentioned. Some evaluations have been made on these classifications. Qualitative research method was used in the study. The obtained findings were evaluated and classified under appropriate titles. It is seen that among hundreds of thousands of companions, those who give fatwas are only about one hundred. Fatwas given by most of them do not exceed one or a few. It is known that some of these fatwas are conveyance about a subject. In other words, some of them do not have a real fatwa. It is understood that the companions who do ijtihad in real terms are limited. It was reported that about ten of them were intensely occupied with fatwa and ijtihad. In this context, it should be easily stated that the majority of companions are far from the rank of ijtihad. The same is true for the tābi’in and next generation. Considering the fact that not every one of the scholars in the mujtahid period is at the mujtahid level will be useful in terms of understanding the subject. In some studies on our subject of study in our country, the classification of Hanafis has generally been mentioned. Sometimes the classification of faqih jurists was mentioned. However, the classifications of Malikî and Hanbali faqihs were not mentioned. For this reason, the ranks of four sect mujtahids have been examined in our study. The first classification in the Hanafi sect is belong to the scholar Kemalpaşazâde. Ibn Abidîn and Ömer Nasuhi Bilmen recorded his classification as it is. In this respect, the classification recorded by Ibn Abidin and Bilmen was not mentioned separately. During the study, the views of Ibn Abidin and Bilmen were referred from time to time. Due to their originality, the classifications of Leknevi and Marwani in the Hanafi sect have been clarified under the independent title. It was determined that mujtahids were subjected to a distinction between absolute and non-absolute before Kemalpasazade. Despite this distinction, there was no clear classification before the scholars in question. The two classifications determined in the Malikî sect are far from being detailed. The systematic classification of Ibn al-Salah in the Shafii sect has attracted the attention of scholars. Shafii scholars generally adopted his classification. Scholars' interest was not limited to their own sect. As a matter of fact, many Hanbali scholars have benefited from the classification of Ibn al-Salah. Meanwhile, there are scholars who oppose the idea of the rank of mujtahids. Because, according to them, it is out of question to limit the ijtihad. It can be said that this opinion is weak. The faqihs determined a varying number of ranks starting from the sect imams. The number of the stages of the ranks in question are between two and seven. These classifications, which are the product of a purely ijtihad effort, are valuable, however, contain various flaws. In these ranks, the imams of the sects took the first place in unanimity. Sect imams are expressed with features such as absolute mujtahid, absolute independent mujtahid and mujtahid in religion. The judicial activity carried out by the sect imams was described as founding ijtihad. The majority of scholars agree that these scholars do not imitate any scholar. In other words, they acted independently in terms of usul and furu. According to the common belief, the period of mujtahids ended with the imams of the sects. Hanafi, Maliki and Shafii faqihs, that is, the public, adopted this view. On the other hand, Hanbalis defended the view that mujtahids could be found in all periods. Some scholars agreed with Hanbalis. Some Hanbalis stated that Ibn Taymiyya was the absolute independent mujtahid in this context. In this context, there is no doubt that the mujtahid, about whom there is a debate, is the independent mujtahid.
Keywords
Müctehidlerin tabakaları hakkında bir inceleme
Abstract
Bu makalede, müctehidlerin tabakaları hakkındaki tasnifler tespit edilerek onlar üzerinde bazı değerlendirmeler yapılmıştır. Ülkemizde konuya ilişkin yapılan kimi çalışmalarda genellikle Hanefîlerin tasnifi esas alınmıştır. Bazen Şâfiî fakihlerin tasnifine değinildiği de olmuştur. Ancak Mâlikî ve Hanbelî fakihlerin tasniflerine hiç temas edilmemiştir. Bu sebeple biz, çalışmamızda dört mezhebe göre müctehidlerin mertebelerini inceledik. Fakihler genellikle mezhep imamlarından başlamak üzere mukallidlere doğru sıralanmış ve bu sıralamada değişen sayıda tabaka tayin edilmiştir. Söz konusu tabakaların aşamaları iki ile yedi arasında değişmektedir. Pek çok açıdan değerli olan bu tasnifler çeşitli kusurlar ihtiva etmektedir. Tabakaların hazırlanması ve her bir mertebeyi temsil ettiği düşünülen fakihlerin seçilmesinde yeterince titiz davranılmaması bu kusurlara örnek verilebilir. Bu tabakalarda ittifakla ilk sırada mezhep imamları yer almıştır. Mezhep imamları, mutlak müctehid, mutlak müstakil müctehid ve dinde müctehid gibi vasıflarla ifade edilmiştir. Âlimlerin çoğunluğu, bu fakihlerin hiçbir âlimi taklid etmediği fikrinde birleşmiştir. Bu âlimlere göre müctehidler devri mezhep imamlarıyla son bulmuştur. Hanbelîlerin de dâhil olduğu bir kısım âlim, müctehidlerin her devirde bulunabileceği görüşünü savunmuştur. İkinci sırada yer alan fakihler, mezhepte müctehid, mutlak müntesip müctehid vb. kavramlarla nitelenmiştir. Bu fakihler hakkındaki temel tartışma, onların müstakil müctehid olup olmadığı noktasına odaklanmıştır. Bütün müctehid tabakaları için belirli bir ilmî müktesebat şart kılınmıştır. Son sırada zikredilen mukallidlerin fetva vermesi uygun görülmemiştir.
Keywords
