Hanbelî mezhebinin günümüze ulaşan mütekâmil ilk usûl-i fıkıh eseri V. (XI.) asrın ortalarında kaleme alınmıştır. Bu tarihten sonra usûl-i fıkıh eserleri önceki döneme nispetle daha yoğun bir şekilde kaleme alınmış olsa da söz konusu eserler Mu‘tezilî ve Eş‘arî kaynaklara sıklıkla müracaat etmiş, tedris ve telif faaliyetlerine konu olmak açısından mezhepte yeterince ilgi görmemiştir. Fakat İbn Kudâme’nin (ö. 620/1223) Ravzatü’n-nâzır adlı eseri önceki usûl-i fıkıh eserlerinin aksine tedris faaliyetlerinde kullanılmış ve mezhepteki usûl-ı fıkıh telifatına kaynaklık etmiştir. Eş‘arî geleneğinin önemli temsilcilerinden olan Gazzâlî’nin büyük oranda el-Mustasfâ adlı eserinden istifade edilerek kaleme alınmış olmasından dolayı Ravzatü’n-nâzır’ın da önceki eserler gibi ilgi görmemesi beklenebilir. Fakat İbn Kudâme, bazı tasarruflarla eserini el-Mustasfâ’dan ayrıştırmaya çalışmıştır. Bu çalışmada İbn Kudâme’nin Ravzatü’n-nâzır’ı el-Mustasfâ’nın standart bir ihtisarı olmaktan çıkaran ve Hanbelîler’in geleneksel tavırlarına daha yakın bir eser haline getiren tasarrufları üzerinde durulacaktır. Ravzatü’n-nâzır’daki usul görüşleri ile kelamî uzantıları olan meselelere dair yaklaşımlar, eserde takip edilen sistematik ve kullanılan kaynaklar el-Mustasfâ ile karşılaştırılarak analiz edilecektir.
The Hanbali school of law has, since its formation, been distinct in its approach to the juristic methodology and theology. While the juristic activities of the other schools of law can be traced back to early Islamic history, the first remarkable juristic effort of the Hanbali school appeared only in the first half of the fifth/eleventh century. The first complete work on the principles of Islamic jurisprudence, titled al-ʿUddah fī uṣūl al-fiqh by Abū Yaʿlā al-Farrāʾ, was a product of this effort. Farrāʾ’s students advanced this effort; Abu al-Khaṭṭāb al-Kalwadhānī’s (d. 510/1116) al-Tamhīd fī uṣūl al-fiqh and Abū al-Wafāʾ Ibn ʿAqīl’s (d. 513/1119) al-Wāḍiḥ fī uṣūl al-fiqh grew into prominent works within the school. These three works, which did not have a long-lasting impact on the Hanbali school, seem to have been written based on works in the Muʿtazilī and Ashʿarī traditions. In addition, we do not have sufficient information to determine whether these sources were adopted as textbooks or were the subject of commentary or summary. This fact may be because these works include certain issues that contradict the distanced attitude of the Hanbalis to theological problems or because they were based on certain books authored by scholars and groups who have traditionally been opponents of the Hanbalis. In addition to these three works, many works on the principles of Islamic jurisprudence were authored by Hanbali scholars, a majority of whom were Farrāʾ’s students, until Muwaffaq al-Dīn Ibn Qudāma (d. 620/1223) wrote Rawḍat al-nāẓir. However, as these works have not survived to the present, we find limited information on their contents in relevant sources. This fact shows that the focus by “Farrāʾ and his students” on the principles of Islamic jurisprudence should not be viewed as representative of the general Hanbali school of law, and that a lack of interest in legal issues mixed with theological issues still persists.
The fact that Ibn Qudāma’s Rawḍa was based on al-Mustaṣfā by al-Ghazālī, who was one of the most prominent representatives of the Ashʿarī school, raised questions on the nature of Ibn Qudāma’s use of al-Mustaṣfā. While some scholars hold that Rawḍa was a summary of al-Mustaṣfā, some view it as more than merely a summary of al-Mustaṣfā despite an extensive resemblance between the two texts. In any case, all concur that Rawḍa was principally based on al-Mustaṣfā. Therefore, one may expect that Rawḍa would receive similar reactions as previous works on the principles of Islamic law because of its reliance on a work in the Ashʿarī school. However, even though Ibn Qudāma has been criticized for his inclusion of an introduction on logic by following Ghazālī, Rawḍa, unlike previous works, was received positively by the school and was adopted as a textbook in teaching. This could be because the author tried to save Rawḍa from the shadow of al-Mustaṣfā by making interventions related to its content and classifications; he thereby dressed up his work with a Hanbali identity. He chose to be selective in addressing issues with theological connotations and respected the sensitivities of his school. He reordered issues discussed in al-Mustaṣfā and added previous Hanbali scholars’ views on the principles of Islamic law.
The most remarkable interventions in Rawḍa were related to theological issues. Even though Ibn Qudāma quoted from Ghazālī on many occasions, he disregarded Ghazālī and remained selective while discussing certain issues with theological connotations. This attitude distinguishes Rawḍa from the works penned by previous Hanbali scholars. Considering the fact that previous works containing theological discussions held a marginal place within the school, one of the most critical factors for Rawḍa’s positive reception and its adoption as a textbook may have been that Ibn Qudāma wrote a book on the principles of the Islamic law by observing the Hanbali principle of believing by “sukūt (silence)” and “bilā kayf (without asking ‘how’).” Therefore, a book on the principles of the Islamic law that conformed with the school’s traditional line appeared for the first time. Further, Ibn Qudāma’s reliance on a work in the Ashʿarī school can be explained by the fact that Ashʿarī thought held a unique place as a field for intellectual discussions among the Sunnis. In addition, a scholarly milieu shaped by the powerful Shāfiʿī scholars existed in the time and place Ibn Qudāma lived.
Ibn Qudāma Rawḍat al-nāẓir Hanbali school of law principles of the Islamic law Ghazālī al-Mustaṣfā
Primary Language | Turkish |
---|---|
Subjects | Religious Studies |
Journal Section | Makaleler |
Authors | |
Publication Date | February 9, 2022 |
Published in Issue | Year 2022 |