Language and Style in Refutation Texts: The Case of Minhaj al-Sunna

Abstract

Language and style occupy a very important place in inter-sectarian relations as well as interreligious relations. One of the most important variables in which inter-sectarian relations based on language and style take root and become permanent is the refutation texts. The refutation texts, which have existed as the basis of the way in which the sects see and read each other since the early periods of Islamic thought, deserve analysis and criticism in many ways. Perhaps the most prominent characteristics of refutation texts, which should be analyzed the most, are non-comprehensible, exclusionary and marginalizing language in these texts. When we look at the history of refutation texts, it is seen that Shiite-Sunni refutation texts are the most important works in which exclusionary and marginalizing language is used most. The Shiite refutation of Minhaj al-Sunna by the Hanbalite scholar Ibn Taymiyya has a distinctive position in terms of language and style. This text, because of its distinctive and marginalizing language, has influenced both Shiite-Sunni relations and has survived as a reference source even today. For this reason, in our paper, the discriminatory language and style preferred by Ibn Taymiyya in his refutation of Shi'ism called Minhaj al-Sunna will be analyzed in terms of text criticism, sectarian belonging and inter-sectarian relations.SummaryDifferent topics of discussion, concepts, individuals, artifacts, thought systems and sects have taken place in the history of Islamic thought. The legacy of Islamic intellectual thought, which owes its dynamism to freedom of thought to a great extent, has not been able to maintain its timeliness and richness with the same vitality in every period. One of the most important reasons of this situation can be said that the sects themselves as institutionalized structures. In fact, sects, which appear as the institutionalized state of the common mind of a community which is clamped around certain principles, are subject to an ontological change in a sense after the formation process. Especially in the institutionalization process, differences have been seen as wealth in terms of sects, and even sects have emerged by being fed from the differences and freedom of thought itself. However, after completing the institutionalization process, sects have become static structures by forming their own doctrines and defining their main fields of action. From this moment on, every different point of view and interpretation has been perceived and condemned almost as a sectarian opposition. This is not only a matter of self-perceptions of the sects, but also the main points of departure of the relations and perceptions with the other sects. Thus, the doctrines of sects, which gained a systematic structure and appearance with the institutionalization of their ideas, were mostly seen as the truth itself, and the other perception was arranged and depicted through this concept of truth. As a result of this situation, the marginalization and pushing out of the circle of truth has become extremely easy.It can be said that one of the most important instruments of the conceptions of truth discourse where sects are putting themselves at the center and othering them is refutation texts. This is because the texts of refutation appear as texts where both the truth-centered self-image is shaped and the other perception is sharply expressed. These works, which are among the most senior texts in the history of Islamic thought, have taken their place in history as a collection of discourses in which the other perception of the sects are embodied and poured into certain patterns. It is possible to come across such works in the literature activities of almost all sects which existed on the basis of politics and creed. Regardless of the name and the system of thought, all the political-religious Islamic sects have created refutation texts with different names, purposes, contents and reasons. It should be noted that the relationship forms developed by some sects in terms of the activity of refutation texts have certain characteristics of their own and some sects are more visible in this process. In the early periods of the history of Islamic thought, numerous refutation texts were created between the Ahl al-Hadith mentality and Mutezila. In the following periods, it is known that numerous refutation texts were created as a result of the interlocutory relationship experienced between Mutezila and Shia over different variables. Since the last period of the formation of Islamic thought h. the 4th and 5th centuries, it is seen that the works of refutation have become the product of the tension-filled struggle between Shi'a and Ahl al-Sunnah. Since then, many political and socio-cultural factors have made it necessary for these two structures to be fully aware of each other and to be truly aware of each other's existence. One of the most important products produced by this obligatory contact state is the refutation texts written between the Shia and the Ahl al-Sunnah in different periods but with similar contents and reasons.One of the most important components of the Ahl al-Sunnah, which is formed by the combination of multiple structures and not a sect in the classical style, is the Ahl al-Hadith mentality and the school of Hanbalite fiqh where this mindset is articulated. The Ahl al-Hadith-Hanbalite tradition stands at a different point under the roof of the Ahl al-Sunnah due to its unique characteristic structure. Thus, this tradition's rigid discourse of truth, its adoption of othering rather than understanding of the other, and the imagination of bid’at determined the lanes of the forms of relations it established with other sects. All these issues are the main determinants of this tradition both in shaping the discourse of refutation and in the formation of the content of refutation works. Since Ahmad ibn Hanbal, one of the most influential figures and founding figure o

Özet

Dinler arası ilişkilerde olduğu gibi mezhepler arası ilişkilerde de dil ve üslûp, son derece önemli bir yer işgal etmektedir. Dil ve üslûba dayalı mezhepler arası ilişkilerin kök saldığı ve kalıcı hale geldiği en önemli değişkenlerden biri olarak ise karşımıza reddiye metinleri çıkmaktadır. İslam düşünce tarihinin ilk dönemlerinden itibaren mezheplerin birbirlerini görme ve okuma biçimlerinin kalıba dökülüp somutlaştığı zemin olarak varlık kazanan reddiye metinleri, birçok açıdan tahlil ve tenkidi hak etmektedir. Reddiye metinlerinin doğası gereği en fazla öne çıkan belki de en çok tahlil edilmesi gereken karakteristik özelliği ise bu metinlerde kendisine sıkça yer bulan anlama çabasından uzak, dışlayıcı ve ötekileştirici dildir. Reddiye metinlerinin tarihine bakıldığında dışlayıcı ve ötekileştirici dilin en çok kullanıldığı eserlerin başında Şiî-Sünnî reddiye metinlerinin geldiği görülür. Daha çok imamet ve hilafet gibi tarihin derinliklerine kök salmış tartışma konularının yer aldığı bu edebiyatta Hanbelî âlim İbn Teymiyye’nin Minhācu’s-Sünne adlı Şiîlik reddiyesi, dil ve üslûp açısından ayırt edici bir konuma sahiptir. Zira bu metin, yer verdiği ayrıştırıcı ve ötekileştirici dili nedeniyle hem Şiî-Sünnî ilişkilerine etki etmiş hem de günümüzde dahi referans kaynağı olarak kendisini var kılmayı başarmıştır. Bu nedenle makalemizde İbn Teymiyye’nin Minhācu’s-Sünne adlı Şiîlik reddiyesinde tercih ettiği ayrıştırıcı dil ve üslûp; metin tenkidi, mezhebî aidiyet ve mezhepler arası ilişkiler açısından analiz edilecektir.

Keywords: İslam Mezhepleri Tarihi, Minhacu's-Sünne, Reddiye, İbn Teymiyye, Dil, Üslûp