Journals / Hitit Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 36

The Relatıonshıp Between Maghazı and Hadıth ın Early Islamıc Scholarshıp

İlk İslâm Âlimlerine Göre Megazî ile Hadis Arasındaki İlişki

Pages
683–705
Publication Date
2022-10-18
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)

While traditions that originated and were shaped in one field were sometimes transferred to the other, the transfer of traditions from one field to the other apparently did not as a rule involve any deliberate changes to the text.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The relationship between the traditional biographical material on Muhammad (maghazi- or sîra-material) and the narrations of his words and deeds (hadith-material) has long been debated in Islamic studies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This article argues that both views are untenable and that maghazi and hadith emerged as separate fields; each influenced the other but they preserved their distinctive features.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:While traditions that originated and were shaped in one field were sometimes transferred to the other, the transfer of traditions from one field to the other apparently did not as a rule involve any deliberate changes to the text.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The relationship between the traditional biographical material on Muhammad (maghazi- or sîra-material) and the narrations of his words and deeds (hadith-material) has long been debated in Islamic studies. While some scholars have argued that the biographical material is fundamentally hadith material arranged chronologically, others have argued the opposite: that hadith material originally consists of narrative reports about the life of Muhammad which were later deprived of their historical context to produce normative texts. This article argues that both views are untenable and that maghazi and hadith emerged as separate fields; each influenced the other but they preserved their distinctive features. While traditions that originated and were shaped in one field were sometimes transferred to the other, the transfer of traditions from one field to the other apparently did not as a rule involve any deliberate changes to the text.

Özet

[Hz.] Muhammed’in hayatını anlatan biyografi malzemesi (megâzî -veya sîre- malzemesi) ile söz ve fiillerinin anlatımı (hadis malzemesi) arasındaki ilişki İslâm araştırmalarında uzun zamandır tartışılmaktadır. Bazı araştırmacılar, biyografi malzemelerinin temelde hadisin kronolojik düzenlenmesiyle oluştuğunu iddia ederken, diğerleri tam tersini, hadis malzemesinin, aslında normatif metinler üretmek için tarihi bağlamından soyutlanan [Hz.] Muhammed’in hayatı hakkındaki anlatımlardan türediğini iddia etmişlerdir. Bu makale, iki görüşün de savunulamaz olduğunu ve megâzî ile hadisin ayrı alanlar olarak ortaya çıktığını, birbirlerini etkilediklerini fakat kendine özgü niteliklerini koruduklarını iddia eder. Bir alanda ortaya çıkan ve şekillenen rivayetler bazen diğerine aktarılır. Bir alandan diğerine rivayetlerin aktarımı görünüşe göre, çoğunlukla metinde herhangi bir kasıtlı değişikliğin yapılmış olduğu anlamına gelmez.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZDOĞAN, K. (2022). The Relatıonshıp Between Maghazı and Hadıth ın Early Islamıc Scholarshıp. Hitit Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 36, 683–705. https://ajindex.com/articles/537563

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Beaumont, Daniel. “Hard-boiled: narrative discourse in early Muslim traditions”. Studia Islamica 83 (1996): 5-31.
  2. Becker, Carl Heinrich. “Prinzipielles zu Lammens’ Sīrastudien”. Der Islam 4 (1913): 263-269. Buhârî, Muhammed b. İsmâîl. Sahîh’ul-Buhârî. 3 cilt. Vaduz: Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation 2000.
  3. Crone, Patricia. Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam. Oxford: Blackwell, 1987. Dūrī, ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. The Rise of Historical Writing among the Arabs, ed. ve trc. Lawrence I. Conrad. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983.
  4. Faizer, Rizwi S. “The issue of authenticity regarding the traditions of al-Wāqidī as established in his Kitāb al-Maghāzī’. JNES 58 (1999): 97- 106. Gibb, Hamilton A. R. “Taʾrīkh”. Enzyklopaedie des Islam Geographisches ethnographisches und biographisches Wörterbuch der muhammedansichen Völker. Ergänzungsband: 249-263. Leiden: Brill, 1938.
  5. Görke, Andreas - Schoeler, Gregor. Die ältesten Berichte über das Leben Muḥammads: Das Korpus ʿUrwa ibn az-Zubair. Princeton: The Darwin Press, 2008.
  6. Görke, Andreas. “Eschatology, history and the common link: a study in methodology”. Method and Theory in the Study of Islamic Origins. Ed. Herbert Berg. Leiden ve Boston: Brill, 2003.
  7. Hinds, Martin. “al-Maghāzī”. EI2. 5: 1161-1164.
  8. Hinds, Martin. “Maghāzī’ and ‘Sīra’ in early Islamic scholarship”. La vie du prophète Mahomet Colloque de Strasbourg. Ed. Toufic Fahd. 57-66. Paris: 1983.
  9. Horovitz, Josef. “Alter und Ursprung des Isnād”. Der Islam 8 (1908): 39-47.
  10. Horovitz, Josef. The Earliest Biographies of the Prophet and their Authors. Princeton: Darwin Press, 2002. İbn Mâce, Muhammed b. Yezîd. Sünen-i İbn Mâce. Vaduz: Thesaurus Islamicus Foundation, 2000. İbn Sa’d. Ṭabaḳāti’l-kebîr. Ed. E. Sachau. 9 cilt. Leiden: Brill, 1904-28. İbn Şahin. Kitabü Nâsiḫu’l-ḥadîs̱ ve mensûḫihi. Ed. Kerime bt. Ali. Beyrut: Darü’l-Kütübi’l-ilmiyye, 1420/1999.
  11. Jarrar, Maher. Die Prophetenbiographie im islamischen Spanien Ein Beitrag zur Überlieferungs- und Redaktionsgeschichte. Frankfurt am Main: 1989.
  12. Juynboll, Gautier H. A. “Some isnād-analytical methods illustrated on the basis of several women-demeaning sayings from ḥadīth literature”. al-Qantara Revista de estudos árabes 10 (1989): 343-383.
  13. Juynboll, Gautier H. A. Encyclopedia of Canonical Ḥadīth. Leiden: Brill, 2007.
  14. Khoury, Raif Georges. Wahb b. Munabbih Teil 1: Der Heidelberger Papyrus PSR Heid Arab 23. Leben und Werk des Dichters. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1972.
  15. Kister, Meir J. “The Sīrah literature”. The Cambridge History