SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Kader / 2014 / Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2

Haris el-Muhasibi'ye Göre Haberi Sıfatlar

Mustafa YÜCE
Journal
Kader
Pages
277–294
Publication Date
2014-08-21
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In this respect, he was criticized by scholars of predecessors in his time

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:III. century of Hegira is important as it is the time when Islamic sciences were systematically discussed.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Although Muhasibi didn’t try to establish a sect, because of the method he used, he is among the scholars who contributed to the formation of the kalam of Ahl al-Sunnah.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In this respect, he was criticized by scholars of predecessors in his time
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler Muhâsibî · reported attributes · ta’wil

Abstract

III. century of Hegira is important as it is the time when Islamic sciences were systematically discussed. Although Muhasibi didn’t try to establish a sect, because of the method he used, he is among the scholars who contributed to the formation of the kalam of Ahl al-Sunnah. He is the scholar having the highest number of texts in the Sıfatiyye school. His text, Fahmu'l-Qur'an, is important since it reflects Muhâsibî's views on kalam. Predecessors had accepted only what God said and what was transmitted from the Prophet without questioning their meaning. They had paid attention to reject every kind of anthropomorphism having a conflict with God’s own specific subjects presented by Qur’an. As for their successor scholars, they had asserted that the apparent meaning of the basic religious sources associtaing the God with the created ones should explain God by referring to attributes which are possible to define Him. In this respect, Muhasibi had made a comprehensive evaluation and rational explanations by following a way between the scholars of predecessors and successors. He was among the first ones who supported the God’s attributes against Mu'tazila. In this respect, he was criticized by scholars of predecessors in his time

Özet

III. century of Hegira is important as it is the time when Islamic sciences were systematically discussed. Although Muhasibi didn’t try to establish a sect, because of the method he used, he is among the scholars who contributed to the formation of the kalam of Ahl al-Sunnah. He is the scholar having the highest number of texts in the Sıfatiyye school. His text, Fahmu'l-Qur'an, is important since it reflects Muhâsibî's views on kalam. Predecessors had accepted only what God said and what was transmitted from the Prophet without questioning their meaning. They had paid attention to reject every kind of anthropomorphism having a conflict with God’s own specific subjects presented by Qur’an. As for their successor scholars, they had asserted that the apparent meaning of the basic religious sources associtaing the God with the created ones should explain God by referring to attributes which are possible to define Him. In this respect, Muhasibi had made a comprehensive evaluation and rational explanations by following a way between the scholars of predecessors and successors. He was among the first ones who supported the God’s attributes against Mu'tazila. In this respect, he was criticized by scholars of predecessors in his time.

🔖

Cite This Article

YÜCE, M. (2014). Haris el-Muhasibi'ye Göre Haberi Sıfatlar. Kader, Cilt: 12 - Sayı: 2, 277–294. https://ajindex.com/articles/106088

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Abde, Muhammed-Tarık, Abdülhalim, el-Mu’tezile Beyne’l-Kadîm ve’l- Hadîs, Birmingham 1987.
  2. Altıntaş, Ramazan, “Haşeviyye’nin Doğuşu ve Kelâmî Görüşleri”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Sivas 1999, S. 3. Aydın, Hüseyin, Muhâsibî’nin Tasavvuf Felsefesi, Ankara 1976.
  3. Aydın, Ömer, “Haberî sıfatları Anlama Yolları”, İstanbul Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Yıl: 1999, S.1. Aydın, Hüseyin, Ebu’l-Hasan el-Eş’arî’de Nazar ve İstidlal, Malatya 2003. Bağdâdî, Ebû Mansûr Abdulkâhir b. Tâhir et-Temîmî, Usûlü’d-dîn, Dâru’l- Kütübi’l-İlmiyye, Beyrut 1981.
  4. Baktır, Mehmet, “Mütekaddimûn Selefiyye ve Metod Anlayışı”, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Sivas 2004, c. 8, S: 2. Budak, Ali, “Haberi Sıfatlara Dair Rivayetlerin Tevil Yoluyla Çözümü Bağlamında Razi’nin Esâsu’t-Takdis Adlı Eseri”, Hitit Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 2011, cilt: X, sayı: 19. Cüveynî, Abdülmelik, el-Akîdetü’n-Nizâmiyye, Kahire 1992.
  5. Çelebi, İlyas, İmam-ı Azam Ebû Hanife’nin İtikadî Görüşleri (Beyazizade ve el-Usûlü’l-Münîfe), MÜİFV. Yay., İstanbul 1996.
  6. Çelik, İbrahim, “Kur’ân’da Haberî Sıfatlar ve Mukâtil b. Süleyman’a İsnâd Edilen Teşbih Fikri”, Uludağ Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 2, S. 2. Çubukçu, İbrahim Âgâh, Gazzali ve Şüphecilik, A.Ü.İ.F. Yay., II. Baskı, Ankara 1989. Desûkî, Muhammed, Menhecu’l-Bahs fi’l-ulûmi’l-İslâmiyye, (b.y) 1984.
  7. Düzgün, Şaban Ali, Nesefî ve İslam Filozoflarına Göre Allah-Âlem İlişkisi, Ankara 1998.
  8. Erginli, Zafer, “Muhâsibî”, DİA, İstanbul 2006,
  9. XXXI. Ess, J. Van, “Muhasibi”, İslam Ansiklopedisi, M.E.B. Yay., İstanbul 1971. Eş’arî, Makâlât, (nşr.: Ritter), Weisbaden 1980. Gazzâli, Ebû Hâmid, el-İktisâd fi’l i’tikâd, Beyrut 1983.
  10. Gölcük, Şerafeddin, Kelâm Tarihi, Kitap Dünyası Yay., Konya 2011.
  11. Güllüce, Veysel, “Kur’ân-ı Kerim’de Allah’a Müşâkele Yoluyla İsnat Edilen İfadelerin Değerlendirilmesi”, Atatürk Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Erzurum 2006, sayı: 25. Işık, Kemal, Mu’tezile’nin Doğuşu ve Kelâmî Görüşleri, Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi, Ankara 1967.
  12. İbn Haldun, Mukaddime (trc.: Süleyman Uludağ), İstanbul 1983. İbn Hallikân, Ahmed Muhammed Ebu Bekr, Vefeyâtu’l-A’yân, (tah.: İhsan Abbas), Dâru’s-Sadr, Beyrut trs. İbn Teymiye, Mecmûu Fetâvâ İbn Teymiye, (thk.: Muhammed b. Kasım el- Asımî en-Necdî) Mekke 1398. İşler, Emrullah, Muhâsibî ve Fehmu’l-Kur’ân’ı, Basılmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, A.Ü.İ.F, Ankara 1989.
  13. İzmirli, İsmail Hakkı, Yeni İlm-i Kelâm, İstanbul 1343. Karadaş, Cağfer, Ana Ha