Âmîn lafzı, yapılan duanın kabul edilmesinin Allah’tan istenmesi anlamına gelen bir dua cümlesidir. Günlük kullanımda daha ziyade dilek bildiren cümlelerden sonra söylenen âmîn lafzı, sadece İslam’da değil, diğer kutsal dinlerde de bulunan bir temenni ifadesidir. Dindar insanlar tarafından çok sık kullanılan bu lafız, Müslümanlar tarafından özellikle Fâtihâ Suresi’nden sonra söylenmektedir. Aynı şekilde namazlarda da Fâtihâ’dan sonra söylenmesi Hz. Peygamber tarafından tavsiye edilmiştir. Bu uygulamanın temelinde konuya dair rivayetler yer almaktadır. Söz konusu rivayetlerden hareketle farz, nâfile tüm namazlarda, Fâtihâ’dan sonra âmîn demenin sünnet olduğu konusunda mezhepler ittifak halindedir. Bununla birlikte cemaat halinde kılınan namazlarda âmîn lafzının imam veya cemaat tarafından söylenip söylenmeyeceği meselesi bir ihtilaflı alanı, açıktan mı yoksa gizli mi söyleneceği de konuya dair ikinci ihtilaf noktasını oluşturur. İlk ihtilaf konusu, Mâlikî fakihlerle diğerleri arasındadır. Mâlikîlere göre cemaat halinde ve açıktan kılınan namazlarda âmîn lafzını imam değil sadece cemaat söyler. Diğer mezhep âlimlerine göre sünnet olan, imamla birlikte cemaatin de söylemesidir. İkinci ihtilaflı alan, bu tür namazlarda imamın ve cemaatin âmîn lafzını açıktan mı yoksa gizli mi söyleyecekleri meselesidir. Hanefîlere göre âmîn lafzını hem imam hem de cemaatin, Mâlikîlere göre ise sadece cemaatin gizli olarak söylemeleri sünnete uygun olan uygulamadır. Şâfiî ve Hanbelîler ise âmîn lafzının imam ve cemaat tarafından açıktan söylenmesinin sünnet olduğunu savunurlar. Uygulamadaki bu farklılık namazın sıhhatine zarar verecek bir durum değildir. Ancak mezheplere göre farklılık arz eden bu uygulamanın nereden kaynaklandığı merak konusu olmakta ve konuya dair birtakım soru işaretleri oluşmaktadır. Mezhepler arasında meseleyi ihtilaflı hale getiren temel sebep, bu görüş sahiplerinin tamamını destekleyen rivayetlerin kaynaklarda yer almasıdır. Çalışmada söz konusu rivayetler sübut ve delalet açısından incelenmekte, özellikle de Hanefî fakihlerin hadisle istidlâl meselesine dair birtakım tespitler yapılmaya çalışılmaktadır.
The word amen, which is said after sentences expressing prayer and desire, is a sentence that is pronounced in similar ways which exists not only in the Islamic Religion but also in other sacred religions. It is seen religiously beautiful (mustahab) that the word of the amen, which is repeated frequently by Muslims in their daily lives, is said after the Surat al-Fatiha in prayers. This practice, is based on narrations from the Prophet.
It does not matter whether it is obligation or supererogatory, although it is considered as a sunnah to say the word of the amen in all prayers, there are some conflicts in practice among Islamic scholars. Although there is no disagreement about the person saying the word of the amen in the prayers he/she performs alone, it is controversial whether the word of the community will say openly or secretly in the form of a congregation and in prayers where the Qur'an is read openly. According to this, in the form of congregations and open prayers, only the community, not the imam, tells the word of the amen according to the Maliki scholars. According to other sectarian scholars, it is a sunnah for the community to say with the imam. This is the first point of dispute about the issue. The second controversial area is the question of whether the community says the word of amen openly or secretly in such prayers. According to Hanafis and Malikis, the sunnah is saying secretly the word of amen by both the community and the imam. Shafii and Hanbelîs, on the other hand, argue that it is a sunnah to speak the word of the amen clearly by the imam and the community. Although this difference in practice does not harm the validity of prayer, it still causes some confusion in people and according to the denominations in question, it is wondered where this practice difference originated.
The controversy among the sects arises from the difference in the signification of the verses and hadiths and rather the approach of the hadiths. In this study, firstly, the issue of the health of the hadiths about telling the word of the amen in prayers where the recitation is read openly will be discussed. In this study, firstly, the issue of the authenticity of the hadiths about saying the word amen in prayers where the recitation is read openly will be discussed. Then, the disputes about the understanding of these narrations contains its certainty will be mentioned. From this point of view, especially the approach of the Hanafi and Shafi sect to the hadiths will be evaluated as comparative. Although, in this regard, the Malikis agree with the Hanafis and the Hanbalis with the Shafii jurisprudents, both from Imam Malik and Ahmed b. Hanbel two different opinions are conveyed. For this reason, it can be said that the main dispute on the issue took place between the Shafiis and Hanafi jurists. As a result, when the sources belonging to the sects are examined, it is seen that the issue is examined more in the main and descendent sources of Hanafi and Shafiis.
Before narrations Hanafi jurisprudents cite the evidence of "Pray to your Lord secretly, pleading to your Lord" in the 55th verse of Surah A'râf in order to defend their views. According to them, the essential thing in all prayers is to be done in secret and awe. Since the word amen is actually a prayer sentence, the truth is that it is said secretly by both the community and the imam. When the rumors put forward in this regard in order to defend the views of the sectarian scholars, it is seen that the narration that the most controversy was experienced was the news conveyed from Vail b. Hucr. Because Hucr transmitted two different applications from the Prophet stated as the word of the amen should be said by the community both secretly and openly during prayers when the recitation performed openly. According to the fıqh and hadith scholars from Shafiî sect, the narration, which is authentic among them, is supported by both the community and the imam. This narration comes from Süfyân es-Sevri. According to Hanafis, the narrative that is suitable for action is the news transmitted from Vail b. Hucr via Şu’be b. Haccâc.
According to Shafii ahl al hadith scholars, Şu’be version of Vail b. Hucr narration is not suitable for acceptance since it is defective in some aspects. These defects have been stated by prominent al-jarh wa al-ta’dil scholars such as Buhârî and Dârekutnî. Therefore, according to them, it is more appropriate that the news source for the deed is the news coming through Süyân es-Sevri. According to the assessment of the muhaddid scholars who are competent in the hadith science, especially from the Hanafi sect, such as Kudûrî, Aynî, İbnü'l-Hümâm, Leknevî, and Tehânevî, the narration of Şu’be is more robust than the Sufyân’s narration. In the works of these authors, it is seen that they responded to the objections of Bukhari and other opponents by using the criteria of hadith criticism. In the article, based on the discussion on the subject, it is tried to be revealed that Hanafi scholars are not only contented with the criticism of the text and content, but also use the criteria of text and narrative criticism while evaluating the narrations.
Süfyân es-Sevri version of the narration seems to be more robust in terms of hadith validity criteria. Because the hadith has other supporters that support that version of it. Besides the leading hadith scholars such as Buhârî and Dârekutnî stated that this version was more reliable, the practices of the Companions and subsequent generations supported this. In addition, we find the evaluations of Hanafi scholars on the subject is important. Because, while Hanafis make a judgment about a matter, they take into consideration not only the authenticity of the hadiths about the subject, but also the practice of the Qur'an and the predecessor. In addition, the objections of the Hanafis against their opponents show that the authenticity problem of the hadith is not independent from the conflict.
When we look at the other narrations suggested by both Hanafis and Shafii scholars, it is understood that some of them are not robust in terms of certainty and some do not have direct signs on the subject. All of these narrations are evaluated under separate headings in the study and the problems of the hadiths regarding the certainty and indication are pointed out.