AI Summary & Key Takeaways
AI InsightRegarding his knowledge of hadith, the most true approach is that he did not engage in hadith science as much as he did in “İslamic law” (fiqh), “methodology of İslamic law,” and “kalam” and rather than those fields, he did not write a single work in hadith science and accordingly have such a high authority as the eminent hadith scholars.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
Abstract
Al-Juwaynī was charged of being incompetent with hadiths, presimably due to some misjudgments of his in sort of technical issues of hadiths. Of “Muadh’ Hadith” mentioned by the methodologists as one of the foundations of Qiyas/Ijtihad, his judgment “It is compiled in the sahih books of hadiths; its being authentic (sihhat) is unanimous.” was singled out for heavy criticism. Despite the fact that “Muadh’ Hadith” was recognized by the great majority of methodologists including al-Juwaynī, most of hadith scholars regarded it as weak (zaeef). Al-Juwaynī grew up together with the hadith activities since his childhood and took a serious hadith education. In our opinion, the suggestion that he had no command of knowledge of “hadiths” and “hadith science” simply with reference to some misjudgments that he made, does not correspond to the truth. Regarding his knowledge of hadith, the most true approach is that he did not engage in hadith science as much as he did in “İslamic law” (fiqh), “methodology of İslamic law,” and “kalam” and rather than those fields, he did not write a single work in hadith science and accordingly have such a high authority as the eminent hadith scholars.
Özet
Cuveynî, hadislere dâir birtakım teknik konularda bazı hatalı değerlendirmelerde bulunduğundan olsa gerek, hadis bilmemekle ithâm edilmiştir. Onun, usûlcüler tarafından kıyâsın/ictihâdın dayanaklarından biri olarak zikredilen “Muʻâz hadisi”ne dâir “sahîh kitaplarda müdevvendir; sıhhati üzerinde ittifâk edilmiştir” şeklindeki değerlendirmesi, şiddetli eleştirilere konu olmuştur. “Muʻâz hadisi,” Cuveynî’nin de dâhil olduğu usûlcülerin büyük çoğunluğu tarafından kabûl görse de hadis tekniği açısından problemli görülmüştür. Cuveynî, küçüklüğünden beri hadis faaliyetleriyle iç içe olmuş ve ciddi bir hadis eğitimi almıştır. Yaptığı birtakım hatalı değerlendimelerinden hareketle, onun “hadisleri” ve “hadis ilmi”ni bilmediğini öne sürmek, kanaatimizce gerçeği yansıtmamaktadır. Cuveynî’nin hadisçi yönü hakkında benimsenecek en isâbetli yaklaşım, onun “fıkıh,” “fıkıh usûlü” ve “kelâm”la uğraştığı kadar hadisle uğraşmadığı, söz konusu alanların aksine hadis ilminde müstakil bir eser yazmadığı ve ünlü hadisçiler düzeyinde otorite sâhibi bir hadisçi olmadığıdır.