Bid‘at kavramının İslamî literatürdeki kullanımını sahabe dönemine kadar götürmek mümkündür. Zira bu kavramın Hz. Peygamber’in hadislerinde yer alması başlangıç tarihi için yeterli bir gerekçedir. Ancak kavramın gerek toplum nezdinde yüklendiği anlamları gerekse farklı disiplinler tarafından yapılan tanımlamaları daha sonraki dönemlerdedir. İslamî ilimler alanındaki disiplinler teşekkül ettikçe ilgili kavrama dair bir literatürün de oluştuğu söylenebilir. İslamî ilimler kendi aralarında muhtevalarının ağırlık yönlerine göre farklı kısımlara ayrılmakla beraber hepsinin birçok müşterek konu ve kavrama sahip olduğu bilinen bir husustur. Bunlardan biri de bid‘at mevzusudur. Mezkûr kavram çeşitli yönlerden fıkıh, kelam, hadis ve tefsir gibi ilimlerin konusu olabilmektedir. Her ne kadar diğer ilimler kadar olmasa da bid‘atin konu olduğu alanlardan biri de tefsirdir. Ancak burada özellikle ifade edilmek istenen husus hadislerde bid‘at olarak nitelenen bir meselenin ya da fıkıhta bid‘at addedilen bir amelin tefsir kaynaklarında zikredilmesi değil bizzat Kur’an’ın bir âyetine dair yapılan bir tevil veya tefsirin “bid‘at bir tefsir” olarak nitelendirilmesidir. Dolayısıyla Kur’an âyetlerini Rasûlullah, selef-i sâlihîn ve ümmetin muteber âlimleri indinde makbul sayılacak manalar dışında birtakım garip lafız ve mefhumlarla anlamlandırmak tefsirde bid‘at addedilecek bir durumdur. Tefsir kaynaklarında bid‘at konusunun izleri sürüldüğünde bu konunun özellikle Zemahşerî ile başladığı daha doğrusu mezkûr kaynaklarda zikredilen “tefsir bid‘ati nitelendirmesi” kullanımının Zemahşerî’ye ait olduğu görülmektedir. Bu araştırmada söz konusu kavramın tefsir kaynaklarındaki kullanımı Zemahserî’nin el-Keşşâf adlı tefsiri üzerinden bir okuma yapılarak incelenecektir. Bu örnekler tek tek ele alınarak hangi gerekçelerin bu kavramın kullanımını gerekli kıldığı ve mezkûr kavramla ne kastedildiği tespitinin yanı sıra hangi hususların tefsir bid‘ati sayılacağı mevzusunda birtakım neticeler de çıkarılmaya çalışılacaktır.
Islam, both with the belief and ethical system it presents to people and with its legal system, is an offering made to the society for positive change. Societies, while reacting positively or negatively to the changes brought by Islam, they were forced to disown their cultural heritages and practices which they had been preserving since the past. Islam, since it does not ignore activities of the society, while dissolving cultural practices which does not conform to its belief system, allowed the cultural practices which conform to its belief system to survive, in other words, to become Islamised. However, while some of these practices completely embraced Islamic values, some of them were not able to do achieve this. These practices, having survived by being transferred to the next generation with various ways became accepted and tolerated by the society and it became hard to change these practices. These practices have been referenced by terms such as bıdat, superstition, false belief and apocrypha.
It is possible to trace the usage of the term bıdat in the Islamic literature, back to the period of the Shabah. Moreover, the fact that this term has been mentioned in the hadiths of Prophet Mohammad is enough reason to state its beginnings. However, both the meanings given to this term by society and definitions of this term made by different practice, happened in the later periods. It can be said that a literature for the related term has been created in accordance with the creation of the disciplines concerning the Islamic Scholarships. Even though the Islamic Scholarships are divided between themselves in accordance with their contents, it is a fact that they have many common topics and terms. One of those common topics is the subject of bıdat. Said term, with its various aspects, can be a subject of scholarships such as fiqh, kalam, hadith and tafsir.
As it is stated above, the framework of the term bıdat has been created by the texts of related hadiths. Under the scope of the texts of hadiths, the term has been a subject for various scholarships concerning both its content and definition. Even though it is not as included as it is in the scholarships of fiqh, hadith, kalam, it is also a subject of tafsir. However, the main point which is being tried to told here is not that a subject defined as bıdat in hadiths and fiqh being mentioned in the sources of tafsir, it is that an interpretation or tafsir of one of the verses of Qur’an being evaluated as “one of the bıdat in tafsir”. Therefore, to reinterpret the verses of Qur’an in a curious wording and conception other than the ways which can be considered acceptable in the understanding of the Prophet Mohammad, Salaf-I Salih and respected scholars, can be considered as a bıdat in tafsir.
When we follow the traces of the subject of bıdat in the sources of tafsir, it can be observed that this topic started especially with the Zamakhshari, more correctly, the usage of “qualification of bıdat in tafsir” which has been mentioned by the before said sources, belongs to Zamakhshari. Because there were no such uses of this term belonging to the glossators before Zamakhshari and forthcoming glossators used this term by constantly referencing Zamakhshari. This situation and accessible data empower the thesis claiming that first qualifications of bıdat in tafsir has been made by Zamakhshari. Thus, Abdullah Muhammed Sıddik el-Gammari who is the owner of one of the works conducted concernins the bıdat in tafsir, also states that this term belongs to Zamakhshari. Zamakhshari conducts this qualification with various reasons. These reasons can be in relation to the grammatical structure of the language as well as it can be arbitrary interpretation which is not accepted or valued in the understanding of a sect or a motive resulting from a sect or in the understanding of the Muslims.
Despite his ideas concerning the secession, the prestige of the tafsir work of Keshshaf of Zamakhshari, has been one common topics with which even the supporters of different ideas had been in accord. Not even his ideas of secession which the Zamakhshari has defended masterfully, the sect of belief of which he was a member and his excessive comments about the people who are not a member of his sect, prevented his work from becoming famous. Additionally, many or less of the glossators after him who can be considered as authorities of schools different than of Zamakhshari, has referenced him. Therefore, despite his ideas concerning the secession, his fame and expertise in the field of tafsir and Arabic language, is enough evidence for us to attend what he had said about these topics.
The qualifications of bıdat in tafsir which has been first expressed by Zamakhshari in the literature of tafsir, is an important definition in the related field. Following studies handled the same topic by making references to Zamakhshari. These references only, can be enough to attract our attention for the effect of the glossator in the literature of tafsir. In most of the examples where Zamakhshari is making qualifications of bıdat, the glossator also states the reasoning of these qualifications. When we carefully examine the examples in the Keshshaf, it is possible to detect various reasoning for these qualifications. It is possible to say that, in these examples, generally, bıdat qualifications has been made because of reasons such as opposition to the meaning of the verse, inconsistency with the known respected language facts, sects and ideas resulting from the perspective of sects.
In this research, the usage of the said term in the sources of tafsir, shall be examined by making a reading of the tafsir of Zamakhshari, called Keshshaf. Zamakhshari uses the before said term in twenty-two different places in his work. By examining these examples one by one, it will be tried to be unearthed as to what reasons made it necessary for this term to be used, what the author meant by using the said term in addition to making some comments as to which examples can be considered as bıdat in tafsir.