SavedAdd your journal

Journals / EKEV Akademi Dergisi / 2017 / Sayı: 71

How Should We Benefit From The Heritage of Islamic Law That The Past Has Left? (A General Evaluation on the Fiqhi Discussions)

؟ ّ كيف نستفيد من التراث الفقهي الذي خل (قراءة فقهية شاملة حول اختلافات المجتهدين)

M. Rahmi TELKENAROĞLU
Pages
107–180
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)

This respect, however, should not lead to religious bigotry and sectarian fanaticism, the enemy of sincere dialogue.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Islamic scholars disagree among themselves is a manifestation of the quest for truth.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Disagreements around the religious questions are sometimes related to the scientific facilities of the mujtahids and sometimes to the nature of religious texts.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This respect, however, should not lead to religious bigotry and sectarian fanaticism, the enemy of sincere dialogue.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Islamic scholars disagree among themselves is a manifestation of the quest for truth. Disagreements around the religious questions are sometimes related to the scientific facilities of the mujtahids and sometimes to the nature of religious texts. On the other hand, this phenomenon is a sign of the value that Islam gives to freedom of thought. The use of such controversies should be based on choosing the right one, not on the choice of goodwill from different opinions. Therefore, the person who is faced with contradictory interpretations should use his choice where the evidence shows. Such authority, of course, is for those who have the potential to evaluate the relevant evidence. Those who do not have the scientific sufficiency to evaluate religious texts should follow a reliable scholar or a particular school. Real benefit from the views of fiqh scholars is at the same time to respect their own person and the work they do. This respect, however, should not lead to religious bigotry and sectarian fanaticism, the enemy of sincere dialogue.

Özet

ق ّ إن والخلافات التي تدور حول المسائل الفقهية ترتبط أحيانا بالمؤهلات العلمية للمجتهدين التعبير عن الرأي َّ وترتبط أيضا بطبيعة النصوص الشرعية. وتعكس هذه الظاهرة حق وإقرار الإسلام حرية التفكير الفقهي. أما الاستفادة من هذه الآراء الاجتهادية المختلفة ف وليس على الأخذ بما يشتهيه الهوى ، وتمييز مصيبها من مخطئها ّ بنى على تحري الحق ُ ت و حّ على الانتقاء من أطيبها إلى النفس. فمن واجه أقوالا متعارضة بحث عن دليل مرج دا بالدليل الأقوى َّ كان أحدها مؤي بينها؛ وإن أخذ به، وهذا لمن عنده قدرة على التمييز ّ كان من عامة الناس لا يحسن التعامل مع النصوص الشرعية فإن بين الأدلة. وأما إن د إمام ّ وظيفته أن يقل الإفادة من آراء الأئمة ّ نا. وتتم ّ ا من الأئمة الثقات أو يتبع مذهبا معي والمجتهدين جميعهم -بمعناها الحقيقي- م قدره ّ بمعرفة مكانة هؤلاء الأئمة وعلو وجليل أعمالهم. وهذا الشعور أن يرافقه عدم التعصب ّ بالإعجاب إزاء الأئمة والمجتهدين لابد ونبذ التحزب المذهبي الذي . اء والحوار النزيه ّ

🔖

Cite This Article

TELKENAROĞLU, M. R. (2017). How Should We Benefit From The Heritage of Islamic Law That The Past Has Left? (A General Evaluation on the Fiqhi Discussions). EKEV Akademi Dergisi, Sayı: 71, 107–180. https://ajindex.com/articles/153954

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (1)

  1. Abdullah b. Abdulmuhsin b. Mansûr et-Tarîkî. el-İnkâr fî Mesâili’l-hilâf, Mecelletü’l-buhûsi’l-İslâmiyye, er-Riâsetü’l-âmme li idârati’l-buhûs, C. 47, s. 193-274. Abdullah b. Beyye. Sınâ’atü’l-fetvâ ve fıkhu’l-ekalliyyât, Rabât: Merkezü’d-dirâsât ve’l-ebhâs, 1. b., 1433/2012. Abdullah b. Şa’bân. Davâbitu’l-ihtilâf fî mîzâni’s-sünne, Kahire: Dâru’l-hadîs, 1. b. 1417/1997. Abdurrahman b. Mu’allâ b. Me’îd el-Luveyhık. Kavâ’id fi’t-teâmül maa’l-ulemâ, Dâru’l-verrâk, 1.b., 1415/1994. Abdulvahhâb Hallâf. İlmü usûli’l-fıkh, Mektebetü’d-da’ve, 8.b., ts. Aclûnî, Ebu’l-fidâ İsmâîl b. Muhammed b. Abdulhâdî. Keşfü’l-hafâ ve müzîlü’l-ilbâs, Thk. Abdulhamîd b. Ahmed b. Yûsuf b. Hindâvî, el-Mektebetü’l-asriyye, 1. b., 1420/2000. Alî Cumu’a ve Muhammed Abdulvehhâb. el-Medhal ilâ dirâseti’l-mezâhibi’l-fıkhiyye, Kahire: Dâru’s-selâm, 2. b., 1422/2001. Âli İbn Teymiyye (Mecdüddîn Abdüsselâm b. Teymiyye, Abdülhalîm b. Teymiyye ve Ahmed b. Teymiyye). el-Müsevvede fî usûli’l-fıkh, Thk. Muhammed Muhyiddîn Abdülhamîd, Dâru’l-kitâbi’l-Arabî, trs. Âmidî, Ebu’l-Hasen Seyyidüddîn Alî b. Ebi Alî b. Muhammed es-Sa’lebî, el-İhkâm fî usûli’l-ahkâm, Thk. Abdurrezzâk Afîfî, Beyrut ve Dımaşk: el-Mektebü’l-İslâmî, trs. ‘Atıyye Muhammed Sâlim. Mevkıfü’l-ümme min ihtilâfi’l-eimme, Medine: Dâru’l-cev-here, 1.b., 1426. Cürcânî, Alî b. Muhammed b. Alî ez-Zeyn eş-Şerîf. et-Ta’rîfât, Beyrut: Dâru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye, 1. b., 1403/1983. Cüveynî, Ebu’l-Meâlî Abdulmelik b. Abdillâh b. Yûsuf. el-İctihâd, Thk. Ebu’l-hamid Ebu Züneyd, Dımaşk ve Beyrut: Dâru’l-kalem ve Dâru’l-ulûmi’s-sekâfe, 1. b., 1408. Cüveynî,et-Telhîs fî usûli’l-fıkh, Thk. Abdullah Gulâm en-Nepâlî ve Beşîr Ahmed el-Umerî, Beyrut: Dâru’l-beşâiri’l-İslâmiyye, ts. Debûsî, Ebu Zeyd Abdullah b. Ömer. Takvîmü’l-edille fî usûli’l-fıkh, Beyrut: Dâru’l-kütübi’l-ilmiyye, 1421/2001. Dehlevî, Şâh Veliyyullâh Ahmed b. Abdurrahmân b. eş-Şehîd. Ikdü’l-cîd fî ahkâmi’l-ic-tihâd ve’t-taklîd, Thk. Muhibbüddîn el-Hatîb, Kahire: el-Matba’atü’s-selefiyye, ts. Ebu Ya’lâ el-Ferrâ, el-Kâdî Muhammed b. el-Hüseyn b. Muhammed b. Halef. el-Udde fî usûli’l-fıkh, Thk. Ahmed b. Alî b. Seyr el-Mübârek. Riyad: Câmiatü’l-Melik Muhammed b. Suûd, 2. b., 1410/1990. Ebu Zeyd Bekr b. Abdillâh b. Muhammed b. Abdillâh. el-Medhalü’l-mufassal li mezhebi’l-İmâm Ahmed ve tahrîcâtü’l-ashâb, Cidde: Dâru’l-âsıme, 1. b. 1417. Fellânî, Sâlih b. Muhammed b. Nûh. Îkâzu himemi uli’l-ebsâr li’l-iktidâ bi seyyidi’l-muhâcirîne ve’l-ensâr, Beyrut: Dâru’l-ma’rife, trs. Feyyûmî, Ebu’l-abbâs Ahme