This study focuses on Kamal Pashazade's evaluations and criticisms about mushakala and aims to reach his views on the mushakala’s theory and practice through these. Because, besides being a literary art, mushakala is also related to al-kalâm and al-tafsir that Kamal Pashazade was well specialized in. So, his approach to this art is important in our opinion. The art of mushakala in Arabic language rhetoric that can be described shortly as using the same word with two different meanings in the same context contains many problems in it as its structure and examples. For example, metaphorical meaning in the second word, the relevance of this metaphor and the nature of this relevance have always been discussed. Kamal Pashazade also did not state his thoughts about the art of mushakala clearly. However, he inclined to the view that it was a kind of metaphor based on the companionship of meanings. So, he analyzed many examples of mushakala in the literature of Arabic language rhetoric in different ways without mentioning the art of mushakala. Naturally, mushakale art in his Tafsir has revealed as the last option in places where real meaning cannot be reached and strong literary arts are not applied. In this context, we can say that Kamal Pashazade has a tendency not to bring such a controversial type of metaphor closer to the Qur'anic commentary. On the other hand, Sari ad-Din al-Mısrî responded to his critiques against Mulla al-Fanari, Abu Yaʿqub al-Sakkaki and al-Sayyid al-Sharif al-Jürjani about the mushakala art in the same tone by establishing his arguments on solid foundations.
Bediʿ discipline is one of three main topics that form the eloquence of the Arabic language. The mushakala that means ‘similarity’ in the dictionary as literary art in bediʿ discipline and is defined as using the same word with two different meanings in the same context is one of the arts that caused controversy among eloquence scholars due to its complex structure. Even if the formal similarity between two words in the same sentence the second word has a different meaning in this art. For example in the sentence “Laugh! The days I will laugh at you are close!” ‘laugh’ is originally used in the true sense in the previous sentence. Nevertheless, in the following sentence, the same word means “I will make you regret laughing at me.” It is clear that the same word has completely different meanings in two sentences. This art has much more complex examples than which we gave here. Kamal Pashazade (d. 940/1534), Ottoman Shaykh al-Islam, reveals his views which is also the topic of this study by using this kind of example.
Mushakala is an art that has been used frequently in Arabic literature and defined with different names. It is said that is the first rhetorician who used this art which has many examples in the Qur'an, the hadiths and poetry of Jahiliyya with current usage in bedi’ science is Abu al-Qāsim Maḥmūd ibn ʿUmar al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144). However, mushakala took its place and literal definition in the science of bedi’ by Abu Yaqub Yusuf al-Sakkaki (d. 626/1229). Later, with the additions of Khatib al-Qazwini (d. 739/1338) this definition was expanded and the following one became commonly accepted: “To use the same word with two different meanings in the same context evidentially or imaginary. With this definition, mushakala is divided into two parts, evidential and imaginal mushakala.
Our study is about Shaykh al-Islam Kamal Pashazade's approach to the art of mushakala described above. Kamal Pashazade discussed the subject in depth both in his tractate about mushakala and his other tractates about metaphor. However, he put forward his views in the form of criticism as usual. On the other hand, Kamal Pashazade's Quran Tafsir contains important clues as to where he puts the art of mushakala in interpreting the Qur'anic verses. In this context, it was deemed necessary to address the issue in three stages in this article. Firstly, Kamal Pashazade’s works on metaphor were examined and it was tried to determine in which kind of literary art he put the mushakala. In the second stage, it was tried to determine how he described the mushakala. In addition, Kamal Pashazade's critiques based on the art of mushakala and the answers he received are discussed in this section. In the third stage, the Tafsir of Kemal Pashazade was examined and it was tried to determine how he benefited from the mushakala art in interpreting the verses of the Qur'an.
According to the results we have reached, it can be obviously said that the mushakala is a kind of metaphor in Kamal Pashazade's thinking due to the presence of companionship relation between word and meaning.
The main problem of Kemalpaşazâde’s work on mushakala is the nature of the companionship relation that brings out the metaphorical meaning in the art of mushakala. Because, a metaphor must be based on an existing relation. According to Muhammad ibn Hamzah al-Fanari (d. 834/1431), this relation is the connection in the mind, and the companionship of words is its evidence. And according to Hafid al-Herawi (d. 916/1510), this relation is only the connection in the mind. At this point, Kamal Pashazade with reference to Allama al-Taftazani (d. 792/1390) says: “This relation is the companionship, but this is a companionship of meanings, not words”. Indeed, with this view, Kamal Pashazade seems to have responded to al-Herawi and al-Fanari both. On the other hand, the Egyptian scholar İbn as-Saig Sari ad-Din al-Daruri (d. 1066/1656), opposed all of this, particularly Kamal Pashazade's view and he argued that the companionship in the art of mushakala is between words.
Another issue on that Kamal Pashazade emphasizes is the deficiency in the description of the mushakala. Because, he finds Sekkaki's description incomplete. According to him, this description does not cover the mushakala between the opposite words. On the other hand, Sari ad-Din defended al-Sakkaki by stating that the literary writers took the most used examples of arts into account and criticized Kamal Pashazade implicitly.
Finally, it should be said that when the Kamal Pashazade's Tafsir is examined, it is understood that he did not accept the mushakala as a suitable art for interpreting the verses of the Qur'an.
Bu çalışma Kemalpaşazâde’nin müşâkele hakkındaki değerlendirme ve eleştirilerini konu edinmiş, bunlar üzerinden onun müşâkelenin teorisi ve uygulanması noktasındaki görüşlerine ulaşmayı hedeflemiştir. Zira edebî sanat olmasının yanında tefsir ve kelam gibi ilim dallarını da ilgilendiren müşâkeleye tüm bu alanlara hâkim bir âlim olan Kemalpaşazâde’nin bakış açışı kanaatimizce önemlidir. Arap dili belâgatında kısaca bir mânayı ona işaret eden bir lafızla değil de söz içinde geçen başka bir lafızla ifade etme şeklinde tarif edilmesi mümkün olan müşâkele sanatı yapısı ve örnekleri itibariyle birçok tartışmayı beraberinde getirmiştir. Şöyle ki bu sanatta aynı söz içinde ikinci kez gelen lafzın mecazlığı, bu mecazı sahih hale getiren alâkanın ne olduğu ve bu alâkanın mahiyeti konusu hep tartışılmıştır. Bu noktada Osmanlı Şeyhülislâmı Kemalpaşazâde de müşâkele sanatına dair düşüncelerini açık ve net olarak ifade etmemiş ancak onun kelimelerin medlüllerinin müsâhabetine istinaden bir mecaz türü olduğu görüşüne meyletmiştir. Zira Arap dili belâgatı literatüründe geçen birçok müşâkele örneğini o, müşâkeleyi telaffuz etmeden farklı şekillerde tahlil etmiştir. Haliyle onun tefsirinde de müşâkele sanatı, hakikî mânaya hiçbir şekilde gidilemeyen ve istiare gibi muhkem edebi sanatların söz konusu olmadığı yerlerde başvurulacak son bir izah yolu olarak kalmıştır. Tabiri yerindeyse Kemalpaşazâde mecâzi ve hakikî anlam arasındaki alâkanın bu denli tartışmalı olduğu bir mecaz türünü Kur’ân âyetlerinin tefsirine yaklaştırmama eğilimindedir. Diğer yandan onun müşâkelenin alâkası, tarifi ve bazı örnekleri üzerinden Molla el-Fenârî, Ebû Yaʿkûb es-Sekkâkî ve Seyyid Şerif el-Cürcânî’ye yönelttiği sert eleştirilere Mısırlı âlim Seriyyüddîn ed-Derûrî aynı ton ve sertlikte ve argümanlarını sağlam temeller üzerine kurarak karşılık vermeye çalışmıştır.
Publication Date : June 30, 2020
|ISNAD||Çi̇fçi̇, Mehmet Faruk . "Kemalpaşazâde’ye Göre Müşâkele Sanatı (Problemler ve Eleştirler)". Hitit Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 19 / 1 (June 2020): 119-150 . https://doi.org/10.14395/hititilahiyat.674844|