Cumhuriyet Ä°lahiyat Dergisi - Cumhuriyet Theology Journal
Not a member yet
57 research outputs found
Sort by
A Word in the Qurʾān with a General Meaning: Blessing
No full textÇalışmada temel Kur’anîkavramlardan biri olan nimet kelimesi incelenmektedir. Bu bağlamda Kur’an’da nimet kelimesinin anlamözelliği, geçtiği bağlama göre yüklendiği anlamlar, yakın ve zıt anlamlıları,insanı iman, ibadet ve ahlâk boyutuna taşıması üzerinde durulmaktadır. Buhususlar Kur’an’da nimetin anlatımı ile müfessirlerin kelimeye ilişkinaçıklamaları esas alınarak işlenmektedir. Nimetin Kur’an’daki anlatımı onunmüspet ve geniş anlamlı olduğuna işaret eder. Kelimenin geniş anlam özelliğionun kapsamına giren hususların kısmen belirlenebileceğini gösterir. Ancaknelerin nimet sayılıp sayılamayacağı Kur’an’da örneklerle sunulmuştur. Bununyanı sıra müfessirler bu kelimenin geçtiği bağlamı dikkate alarak ona anlamlarbelirlemişlerdir. Nimetin Kur’an’da anlatılma gayesinin, insanı iman, ibadet veahlâk boyutuna yöneltmek olduğu anlaşılmaktadır. İnsanın nimete karşı şükrü buamacı hayatında görünür kılmakla mümkün olabilir.In this study, theterm of ‘blessing’, which is a basic Qurʾānic concept, is analyzed. In this regard, the studyfocuses on the definition of ‘blessing’, its different meanings in the variouscontexts, synonyms and antonyms and its leading individuals to the dimensionsof faith, worship and morality. These subject matters are studied by takinginto consideration of the meanings of ‘blessing’ in the Qurʾān and commentators’ explanations about the word.The expression of the ‘blessing’ in the Qurʾān indicates that the word has an extensive andconstructive meaning. The fact that having an extensive meaning demonstratesthat the points the word encompasses can be determined to some extent. It isexemplified in the Qurʾān what can be regarded as ‘blessing’. Furthermore, the commentatorsdetermine various meanings to the word by considering the contexts in which theword is used. It is understood that the aim of using the word in the Qurʾān is to lead the individuals to the dimensions ofthe faith, worship and morality. It is possible for people to be grateful toGod by making this aim more visible in their lives.SUMMARYThe word blessing mentioned in the Qurʾān has a general meaning. This type of words contains more than onesubject inside them. The fact that the blessing contains more than one subjectmay be seen in the Qurʾānic attributions of it aswell as seen in its dictionary and term meaning. Also, the way of explaining apart of subjects, which are in its content, points out this aspect. Thus, inthe Qurʾān, the new ones are being added in anotherplace to things referred as blessing in one place. Also, sometimes theblessings with entirely different contents are included. For example, theblessing of God upon Muslims is His support on a battle. In another placerendering them as brothers is a blessing. This is also an example that blessingwas partially explained in the Qurʾān. Theexplanation of the word is sometimes in the same context and sometimes indifferent contexts. For example, in the verse 47 of the Surah al-Baqara, the blessing given to Jews in the time of Moses ismentioned. Starting from the next verse, between the verses 49-61, these blessingsare aligned. Moreover, the blessing that was given to prophets, martyrs andrighteous (siddiq) can be an examplefor the explanation of blessing in the different verses of the Qurʾān. These people who have been given blessing are mentioned side by sidein the verse 69 of al-Nisā’. However,it is not explained that what the blessing given to them is. Each blessingmentioned is explained in different places in the Qurʾān.While some part of blessing is determined bythe Qurʾān itself, the other part is attempted to bedetermined by commentators. Given that the explanations in the Qurʾān and commentaries, the subjects that affected by blessing can bedivided into two as tangible and intangible blessings. The resources offeredfor humans to maintain their lives, emancipation a slave, the wind that helpsthe ship to move forward and Muhammad himself as a prophet are the tangibleones. Faith, miracle, mercy, reward, retrieving safety, the place where allkind of resources and ease, peace and happiness exist (Heaven) can becommentated as intangible blessings.The subjects included in the concept ofblessing in the Qurʾān are changing according tothe context. The blessing from God upon believers is “the faith granted by Godon the earth” in one place, and “the Heaven bestowed in the afterlife” inanother place. When determining the close and opposite meanings of the word, itshould not be ignored this aspect of the blessing. In other words, it changesaccording to the context. For example, if the content of blessing is “theresource presented to human beings”, the close meaning of it in the Qurʾān is “compassion”, the opposite meaning of it is “harm”. However, if thething that fell within blessing is “reward”, the close meaning will be “gooddeed”, opposite meaning will be “torment”.The blessing changes according to theaddressed person as well. It is the all kind of resource that God presents tohumans if the human kind is in question. If it is for a believer, it meansmoral support and every kind of reward as well as the resources offered.However, if it is relevant to a prophet, the prior meaning is prophethood aswell as the meanings above. The expression of blessing in the Qurʾān helps us to have more opinion about it. For example, blessing has apositive meaning according to the Qurʾān. The word’spositive aspect is emphasized by comparing things that cannot be blessing tonegative person types. The perception of blessing of Pharaoh and a hypocritethat is expressed in the Qurʾān can be evaluated in thiscontent. According to the Qurʾān, the blessing theyqualify is not in the context of blessing.Another aspect that draws attention in theexpression of blessing in the Qurʾān is the relationshipbetween the blessing giver and receiver. This relationship between God andservants takes place both in the earth and the afterlife. First, God haspresented blessing to humans by considering that he/she is worth creating.Human beings show ingratitude or gratitude for being created and all otherblessings. Here, the blessing is a test tool for humans. God responds accordingto the behaviors of human beings in test. He gives this response either only inthe afterlife or both in the afterlife and the earth. If the humans respond theblessing with gratitude, God puts him/her to the heaven full of blessings inthe afterlife. The blessing here is the result of the test on the earth. So thepurpose of expression of blessing in the Qurʾān is to directthe humans to exhibit the behavior with that God is pleased, gain His contentment,deserve His heaven full of blessings. This is the reason that prophets remindthe blessings of God to humans while they invite them to religion. Prophetsinvite people to believe, worship and be moral toward God as a response tothese blessings.Even though the content of blessing changesaccording to addressed person and time, the principle of the relationshipbetween God and His servants does not change. Blessing and gratitude orblasphemy shall continue to exist as long as mankind exists. Here, theprinciple of “Every blessing’s gratitude is its own type” can be remembered.This principle recommends that giving thanks to God by tongue only forblessings will not be enough. Because of that, how should be grateful fordifferent blessings should be exemplified. These definitions containingexamples help us to understand better the purpose of expression of blessing inthe Qurʾān. For example, the gratitude for humans’ ownequipment can be through remembering always Him who gave that equipment, obeyand worship Him constantly. Gratitude for children and good fortune happens bydirecting them towards God’s sake. As for the gratitude for the blessing of theuniverse, that contains signs of the existence of God, can be throughrecognizing his/her Creator and maintaining its existing order. If human beingsbreak this order, he/she would be ungrateful because this would be an attitudeagainst the one who created this order. Just as a servant might be ungratefulto God when he/she does not appreciate the blessing of prophet that reminds usGod, exhibiting negative attitude against the universe that points out theexistence of God is a kind of ungratefulness against God as well. So that, theblessing carries humans to faith and worship dimensions and also to moral dimensionin terms of relationship between himself/herself and other things. The modern-daypeople need this Qurʾānic perspective. A humanbeing should review his/her relationship between himself/herself, God, otherpeople and the nature, then he/she should try to reach the Qurʾānic dimension by being grateful properly for blessings that he/she has
Mâtürîdî-Hanefî Aidiyetin Osmanlı’daki İzdüşümleri
No full textMāturīdism is an Ottoman identity and this identitywas not limited, as is commonly believed, to the last period of the Empire. Itmaintained its formal existence throughout the Ottoman history. Nevertheless,the context in which the Māturīdism was located or with which it was associatedchanged in the course of time. In the early period when the eclectic way ofthinking was dominant, Māturīdism as a creed was apparent mainly in the juristswhose ascetic identity was prominent and partly in the mystical currents thatwere essentially continuations of Yasawiyya. At this point, theBukhara-centered Ḥanafī legal literature played a distinctive role. Atthe time of Meḥmed II and in the following period during which thephilosophical kalām dominated the scene, the Māturīdism was relatively passiveand was in search of a position against the Ash‘arism. The new Rāzian paradigmof thought that began to be felt strongly in the Ottoman lands with Meḥmed II as an attempt of integration into the global circulation of knowledgeprevented to a certain extent the visibility of Māturīdism. However, even inthis period, Māturīdism was remarkably reflected in the muqaddimāt-i arba‘aliterature which was directly sponsored by Meḥmed II. The tradition ofphilosophical kalām in the Ottoman scholarship, just when it was about to yieldsignificant results, was interrupted due to the struggle against the Ṣafawids. Transformation of this political tension, at the same time, intoa fight against Shiism also brought about a constriction in the religiousthought of the Ottomans. Shiism and its all other variants were bitterlyattacked under the main heading of Rāfiḍa. Unfortunately such arefutational approach proved a boomerang and returned in time striking theOttoman Ṣūfīs who stood near the line of the Ardabil Shrine before itsShiitization. Ḥanafī fatwā literature was used extensivelyin the refutation texts against Ṣafawids. This brought to thefore at first the Ḥanafite and then the Māturīdite identity. This paperattempts to analyze this changing emphasis on Māturīdism in the Ottoman periodand the political and intellectual factors that supported and nourished it.SUMMARYIt can be argued thatthe debates around Ash‘arism and Māturīdism in the Ottoman period and theresulting meant more than attempts of the members of the two sides tounderstand each other and that Māturīdism, particularly from the 16th centuryonwards, was gradually brought fore as the identity of Ottomans. In fact, thisidentity was not limited, as is commonly believed, to the last period of theEmpire; it maintained, in form, its existence throughout the Ottoman history.Nevertheless, the context in which the Māturīdism was located or with which itwas associated changed in the course of time. In the early period when the eclectic way of thinking was dominant,Māturīdism as a creed was apparent mainly in the jurists whose ascetic identitywas prominent and partly in the mystical currents that were essentiallycontinuations of Yasawiyya. At thispoint, the Bukhara-centered Ḥanafī legal literature played a distinctive role. At the time of Meḥmed II and in the following period during which thephilosophical kalām dominated the scene, the Māturīdism was relatively passiveand was in search of a position against the Ash‘arism. In this period, Ottoman scholars stillembraced the Māturīdī-Ḥanafī line in their theological views. Ḫiḍir Beg’s al-Qaṣīda al-Nūniyya,and al-Khayālī’s commentary upon it, and the commentary written by Aḥmad b. Oġuz Dānishmand al-Aḳshahrī on al-I‘timād of Abū al-Barakāt al-Nasafīwere the most noticeable Māturīdite texts from that time. Besides, al-Khayālī’ssupercommentary (ḥāshiya) upon the commentary of al-Taftāzānī written on al-‘Aqā’idof Najm al-Dīn ‘Umar al-Nasafī was also of central importance. However, the newRāzian paradigm of thought that began to be felt strongly in the Ottoman landswith Meḥmed II as an attempt of integration into the globalcirculation of knowledge prevented to a certain extent the visibility ofMāturīdism. But, this should not betaken to mean that Māturīdism lost its ground of existence. That the Ash‘ariteworks produced in this new paradigm were transferred to and fully integrated inthe madrasa curriculum was not because they were Ash‘arite texts but becausethey were the most original and highest achievements of the philosophicaltheology. These texts that aimed at combining all fields of knowledge on asingle platform, despite the Ash‘arism they included, constituted the peak ofthe Islamic thought of the time. In the preference of these texts, the factthat the Māturīdī tradition generally stood, in course of time, distant to thephilosophy and chose to continue the kalām in the classical line also played arole. Māturīdī theologians Muḥammad b. Ashrafal-Samarqandī, partly, but Ṣadr al-Sharī‘a al-Maḥbūbī, to a greater extent, were notable exceptions to this general Māturīdītendency. These figures were theologically Māturīdite, but their framework ofproducing discourse was the combination of philosophy and kalām as with theirAsh‘arī counterparts. Therefore, Ṣadr al-Sharī‘a’s criticism of Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, and throughhim, of against the Ash‘arism in the context of muqaddimāt arba‘a waswholeheartedly supported by the Ottoman ulama. Even it was Meḥmed II who sponsored the debates regarding muqaddimātarba‘a. The works written by such scholars as Muṣliḥ al-Dīn al-Kastallī, al-Ṣamṣūnī, ‘Alā’ al-Dīn al-‘Arabī, Mollā ‘Arab al-Anṭākī, Khaṭībzāde, Sa‘dī Chalabīduring his and his son Bāyazid II’s reigns were the supercommentaries writtenupon the related chapter of al-Talwīḥ,al-Taftāzānī’s commentary on Ṣadr al-Sharī‘a’s al-Tawḍīḥ where the former responded to the criticism of thelatter from an Ash‘arī point of view. The Ottoman ulama, in their workswereforced to choose between the two scholars and they mostly supported Ṣadr al-Sharī‘a and Māturīdism. The tradition ofphilosophical kalām in the Ottoman scholarship, just when it was about to yieldsignificant results, was interrupted due to the struggle against the Ṣafawids. Transformation of this political tension,at the same time, into a fight against Shiism also brought about a constrictionin the religious thought of the Ottomans. The reflex of of identifying oneselfthrough ‘the other’ made, to a certain extent, the theological andphilosophical debates regarding faith meaningless, and gradually gave theOttoman Sunnism a doctrinal and political tone. In such a context, theOttomans’ paradigm of producing thought in line with the philosophical kalāmbegan to lose its function, and, the focus of scholarhsip shifted; Shiism withits all variants were began to be bitterly attacked under the main heading ofRāfiḍa. When the refutation texts composed from the reignof Bāyazid II onward to criticize the Ṣafawids arechronologically analyzed, it is seen that the contents of the texts evolvedfrom criticism of Rāfiḍa to criticism of Sūfism. Ḥanafī fatwā literature was used extensively in these refutations. Sothe fatwās issued against Rāfiḍa and Ṣūfīs in malāmatī line in earlier centuries in different contexts fordifferent reasons were employed to criticize the new opponents. This caused twoimportant results: First, such an approach proved a boomerang and returned intime striking the Ottoman Ṣūfīs who stood near theline of the Ardabil Shrine before its Shiitization. Ḫalwatīs, Bayrāmīs, Gulshanīs, Baktāshīs and Mawlawīs werethe sufi groups influenced by this situation in varying degrees. Second, Sunnism was exposed to the narrowization andcentered around the fiqh, particularly Ḥanafī fiqh, in the context of Ḳāḍīzādelīs who were the mainadversaries of above mentioned groups. The culture of catechism (‘ilm-i ḥāl)that came to the fore through the efforts of Ḳāḍīzādelīs was acrystallization and was mainly fuelled from this tension. Such acrystallization led the Ṣūfīs, the opponents of Ḳāḍīzādelīs, to a higher levelof discourse deemphasizing the Ḥanafī aspect: They underscored the discourse of Ahlal-Sunna and four madhhabs, and mostly turned towards the Shāfiʿī and Ash‘arī traditions to look for supportfortheir views.This process during which the emphasis of sharī‘aand tradition began to come to the fore once again paved the way for the zuhdand fiqh-centered religious thought that was maintained from the time ofthe Seljukids in Anatolia and was influential until Meḥmed II’ reign. Therefore in the Ottomans,particularly starting with the reign of Suleymān I, an intensive emphasis onAbū Ḥanīfawas witnessed. Abū Ḥanīfawas at the very center of the debates revolving around zuhd and fiqhwhich came about in the same period and in which the sharī‘a sensitivity was adetermining factor. Al-Māturīdī, whose name was overshadowed for a long time bythe name of Abū Ḥanīfa,but who became prominent in the tradition with Abū al-Mu‘īn al-Nasafī, had totransfer his gains for a period of time to Abū Ḥanīfa. Emphasis on Abū Ḥanīfa looks like a rope that when pulled, all thetradition comes with it. When the topics began to be discussed in a manner thatwould also include the theological context, the contribution of the worksascribed to Abū Ḥanīfa,namely al-Fiqh al-Akbar, al-Waṣiyya and al-‘Ālim wa al-Muta‘allim to thediscussions would be limited. For this reason, the need to refer to al-Māturīdīor to the theological formation bearing his name was inevitable. So, theliterature on the points of disagreements between the Ash‘arism and theMāturīdism developed both vertically and horizontally in the 18th century and,corollary to that, the debates of free will as a corolloary to that, once againbrought Māturīdism to the fore. Mâtürîdîlik bir Osmanlı kimliğidir ve bu kimlikzannedildiği gibi son dönemle de sınırlı değildir; bütün bir Osmanlı tarihiboyunca biçimsel olarak varlığını korumuştur. Bununla birlikte Mâtürîdîliğinilişkilendirildiği veya konumlandırıldığı bağlam zaman içerisindefarklılaşmıştır. Eklektik düşünme biçiminin hâkim olduğu ilk dönemdeMâtürîdîlik, ağırlıklı olarak zahid kimliği belirgin fakihlerde kısmen deYesevîliğin uzantısı mahiyetindeki tasavvufî eğilimlerde itikādî bir muhtevadagörünür haldedir. Mâtürîdîlik, felsefî kelamın hâkim olduğu Sultan II. Mehmedve sonrası süreçte nispeten edilgen konumdadır ve Eş‘arîliğe karşı bir mevziarayışındadır. II. Mehmed’le birlikte başlayan ve bilginin küresel dolaşımınaentegre olma çabası ihtiva eden Razici yeni ilim paradigması Mâtürîdîliğingörünürlüğünü belli ölçüde engellemiştir. Maturidilik bu süreçte Sultan II.Mehmed tarafından bizzat himaye edilen mukaddimât-ı erbaa tartışmalarında kaydadeğer ölçüde karşılık bulmuştur. Felsefi-kelam çizgisi, tam meyvelerini vermeaşamasındayken Safevîlerle yaşanan mücadele nedeniyle sekteye uğramıştır. Bumücadelenin aynı zamanda Şiîlikle de bir mücadeleye dönüşmesi (ya dadönüştürülmesi) Osmanlı dinî düşüncesinde bir daralmayı beraberindegetirmiştir. Böyle bir bağlamda bir reddiye mantığı üzerinden Râfızîlik üstbaşlığı altında Şiîliğe ve tüm varyantlarına hücum edilmiştir. Fakat bureddiyeci tutum Safevîlere fırlatılan bir bumerang işlevi görmüş, zamanla gerigelmiş ve Osmanlı’nın Erdebil Tekkesi’nin Şiîleşmeden önceki çizgisine yakınduran kendi sufilerini vurmuştur. Hanefî fetva literatürü bu reddiyelerde yoğunolarak kullanılmıştır. Bu ise önce Hanefi ardından da Maturidi kimliği ön planaçıkarmıştır. Osmanlı döneminde Mâtürîdîlik vurgusu ve bunu besleyen siyasî vefikrî unsurlar tahlil edilecektir.
A Linguistic Examination of Kitāb al-Idrāk li-lisān al-Atrāk of Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī
No full textMemlükler, Mısır’da uzun birsüre hüküm sürmüş ve bir devrinde de Kıpçak Türkleri orada yönetimde nüfuzsahibi olmuştur. Bu dönemde Türk idarecilerin Arapçayı iyi bilememeleri,sarayda Türkçe konuşulması ve ayrıca Türk idarecilerine daha yakın olmadüşüncesi Türkçeyi öğrenmeye karşı bir ilgi meydana getirmiştir. Bu ilgininfarkına varan o devrin meşhur âlimlerinden birisi de Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî’dir(ö. 745/1344). Ebû Hayyân özellikle Fahreddîn Divriğî’den Türkçe öğrenerek vedaha önce yazılan eserleri de tetkik ederek Kitâbu\u27l-İdrâk li-lisâni\u27l-Etrâk’ı telif etmiştir. Bu kitapmukaddime, sözlük ve gramerden oluşmaktadır. Biz de bu çalışmamızda Kitâbu\u27l-İdrâk’i önce içerik açısından tanıtmayı ve dahasonra dilbilim dallarından sözlük bilim açısından incelemeyi hedefledik.Mamluks reigned inEgypt a long time is an era of Kipchak Turks that have influence management,and Kipchak Turks has been influential in a period in the administration there.During this period, that Turkish rulers do not know Arabic language well,Turkish language is spoken in the palace and also idea of being closer toTurkish manager screated an interest in learning. One of the famous scholarsrealizing that interest is Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī. Abū Ḥayyān by learning Turkish language especially from Fakhr al-dīn Divrigi andanalysing written previously works, wrote Kitāb al-Idrāk li-lisān al-Atrāk. This book has consisted of introduction,vocabulary and grammar section. We also aimed in our study to examine Kitāb al-Idrāk in terms of content and than in terms oflexicography of the linguistic branch.SUMMARYMamluks reigned in Egypt a long time and inits reign Kipchak Turks had influence in management. Because of the Turkishrulers who have military background did not know Arabic language well, Turkishlanguage was spoken in the palace and also idea of being closer of scholars andnotable people to Turkish rulers got brought an interest in learning Turkish.One of the famous scholars realizing that interest is Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/ 1344).The true name of Abū Ḥayyān is Muḥammed b. Yūsuf b. Ali b. Ḥayyān al-Tawḥīdī and he is anAndalusian linguist and exegete. Abū Ḥayyān who came from a Berber family born inthe Matahsharesh village of Granada in 654/1256 and died in Cairo in 28th time745 (11 July 1344). There is not much information about his family in thesources, but it is mentioned that he has a daughter whose name is Nada, a sonnamed Hayyân in his name, and some grandchildren which are named Muḥammad and Ummu Ḥayyān.Abū Ḥayyān became a famous as Ethīr al-dīn and atthe same time, he is also known as Naḥvī, Ghirnātī (Granadian), Ceyyānī, and Nafzī. Hetook lessons in Granada from great scholars such as Abd al-ḥaķ b. Ali al-Anṣarī, Abū Ḥasan al-Ubbezī,Abū Cafer Aḥmed b. Ibrahīm b.Zubair, Ibn Abū al-Ahvas and became a proficient scholar and teacher in matterssuch as morphology, syntax, language, commentary, hadith, methodology of Fiqhand Kalām. He wrote about 18 works in different sciences and if we mention someof that are al-Baḥr al-muhīt, al-Nahr al-mād, Tuhfat al-arīb bimāfī al-Qur\u27ān min al-gharīb and some of his works have reached to ourtime and some of those did not.Abū Ḥayyān left Andalus for various reasons andvisited many centers of science and eventually continued his scientificactivities in Cairo. Abū Hayyān, who is a great interest in learning languages,has learned Turkish language with the other popular languages such asPersian, Amharic and Himyarite language and written books about theselanguages. His mainly works about Turkish language are the Kitāb al-Idrāk li-lisān al-Atrāk, Zehv al-mulk finaḥv al-Turk, al-Af\u27alfi lisān al-Turk and al-Durret al-mudiyye fi lughat al-Turkiyye.These works did not reach to our days except Kitābal-Idrak.Kitāb al-Idrāk consists of three sections,namely introduction, dictionary which includes 2200 words, and grammar that iscomposed of morphology and syntax and this book which is known as al-Idrākis written in the Turkish which is spoken in XIV-XVI century tongue and namedas Middle Turkish Period-Mamluk Kipchak Turkish.The first chapter begins with basmala andcontinues with detailed his genealogy, personal record, praise to Allah and salawatand salaam to Prophet Muhammad. After this introduction, it is explained the intentionof writing this work. The second chapter is a dictionary which the words areexplained in alphabetical order. Although Abū Ḥayyān speaks about 23letters in the Kipchak alphabet, he does not explain the words related to all,but examines 19 items. In this dictionary, it does not take part some letters,that is letters sā, zāl, zā (letters of lips which is written in English th); letters dâd, ayn, fa (letters ofthroat) which Arabs use.In the third chapter, there is a part of thetasrif (knowledge of morphology) which is generally called knowledge ofmorphology today. In this section, it is dealt with about the types of wordsnamely, name of diminutive, name of belonging name, plural, agent name, passive name, exaggerated factorname, infinitive, name indicating the location, name of device, arbitrary name,and idâd (which adds are derivation of noun from name like lık, lik at the end of the word) and then it comesto the end with shadda.Section of syntax which is called by theauthor as consisted of compound and is prepared according to systematic ofArabic grammar begins with the sentence structure in Kipchak language. Afterthat it continues with definite-ambiguous names, verb (orders, past, imperfectverbs), subject-predicate in nominal sentence, nevāsiḫ (additional actions helpedchange the meaning of the noun phrase), Arabic leyte which express by the actual wish mold and the like, such as twomef\u27ūl area of the heart of verbs in Arabic told (I think)were deaf ( Turkmen thinks he), acts like it yetscientists (verb phrase in), acts offender (verb-subject), the abutment of theverb nefiy prepositions, prepositions, the nehiy (ban), passive verbs andnaib-i fail (so-called subject); other elements of the sentence, called the actmüteallakat are: cognate accusativ, direct object, time period (time complement), the envelope space (locatedcomplement), state (envelope), causative object, the exception, thespecification, conflict of laws, the annexation, the oat, the dependencies:adjective, conjunction, confirm, the apposition; conditional structure. After these, he mentions to letters ofmeanings (huruf al-maani), and concludes this chapter with information aboutthe date, place, and name of the author of the book. Abū Hayyān used induction method in the book.Since he gave the forms of the words in double, then the triple, quadruple,quintet and other forms. He tried to teach the pronunciation of words byexplaining the etymology of word sand the changes of the voices. He examinedthe words which are synonyms/ contrasted, synonym voice, singular/plural, andwords that are passed by foreign languages into Turkish dialects then they areturned into Turkish word structure; brought out witnesses from proverbs andpoetries.As a result, in thiswork, which consists of dictionary and grammar sections, it can be said that itis used predominantly in linguistic information - translation method .
Demir, Abdullah. “The Kalām Method of Abū Isḥāq al-Zāhid al-Ṣaffār”. PhD. Dissertation, Cumhuriyet University Graduate School of Social Sciences, Sivas/Turkey 2014.
No full textEbû İshâk İbrâhim ez-Zâhid es-Saffâr, Mâtürîdî kelâm anlayışının önemli bir temsilcisidir. O, Mâtürîdîliğin ortaya çıktığı sosyokültürel çevre olan Mâverâünnehir bölgesinin Buhara şehrinde, takriben 450/1058 yılında doğdu, öğrenimini burada tamamladı ve Merv şehrine sürgüne gönderilinceye kadar Buhara Hanefî âlimlerinin reisi olarak anıldı. Sürgün dönüşü Buhara’da 534/1139 yılında vefat etti. Bu çalışmada, onun kelâm yöntemi konu edildi. Giriş bölümünde; araştırmanın konusu, önemi, amacı, yöntemi ve kaynakları hakkında bilgi verildi. Saffâr’ın yaşamını sürdürdüğü Mâverâünnehir bölgesinin V. (XI.) ve VI. (XII.) yüzyıllardaki siyasî, sosyoekonomik ve ilmî durumu ile bölgede varlık gösteren din, mezhep ve felsefî akımların etkinlikleri birinci bölümde tespit edildi. İkinci bölümünde onun hayatı, ilmî kişiliği, eserleri ve atıf yaptığı kaynaklar belirlendi. Son bölümde ise Saffâr’ın kelâm yöntemi tanıtılmaya çalışıldı. Bunun için onun günümüze ulaşan Telḫîṣü’l-edille li-ḳavâʿidi’t-tevḥîd ve Risâle fi’l-kelâm adlı kelâm eserleri tahlil edilerek öncelikle itikadî konularda akla değer vermeyi ve gerektiğinde fikrî tartışmalara girmeyi savunan kelâm ilmine bakışı ve kelâm müdâfaası tespit edildi. Daha sonra bilgi teorisi kapsamına giren bilginin tanımı, imkânı, kaynakları ve bilgi türleri hakkındaki görüşleri ile savunduğu ve eleştirdiği bilgi anlayışları belirlendi. Ayrıca onun kelâm yöntemini ortaya koyabilmek adına aklın ve naklin bilgisel değeri konusuna bakışı ele alındı. Zita bu husus, mütekellimlerin ve İslâm mezheplerinin yöntemlerinde belirleyicidir. Son olarak görüşlerini temellendirirken ve savunurken Saffâr’ın kullandığı istidlâl türleri belirlendi ve örneklerle tanıtıldı.Abū Isḥāq Ibrāhīm al-Zāhid al-Ṣaffār is one of the important representatives of the Kalām thought of the Ḥanafī-Māturīdī School. He was born in A.H. 450/ C.E. 1058 in Bukhara that is one of the city of Transoxiana/Mawara al-nahr where Maturidi School has been emerged around this socio-cultural environment. He completed his education and served as a leader (rais/ ṣadr) of the Hanafite scholars there until he was exiled to the city of Marv. Upon his return from exile, he passed away in Bukhara in A.H. 534/ C.E. 1139. The present study aims to determine his method in Kalām. The introduction outlines the subject, significance, purpose, method and sources of the research. In this study, it was employed a method that focuses on a person in which he/she is examined with his/her views and thoughts by taking into account his/her socio-cultural factors. By doing this, the first chapter of this study deals with the political, socio-economic and scientific situation in Transoxiana, and the activities of diverse religions, sects and philosophical schools in this region in A.H. V-VI/C.E. XI-XII. In the second chapter, it studies al-Ṣaffār’s life, scientific personality, works as well as the sources that he made references to in his works in detail. In the third chapter, the kalām method of al-Ṣaffār has been tried to be determined. For this purpose, it analyzes his extant works, Talkhīṣ al-adilla li-qawāʿid al-tawḥīd and Risālah fī al-kalām and elaborates first at his defense of the Kalām that gives a great importance to reason (ʿaql) and to intellectual debates, if necessary, in theological issues. Then it explores his theory of knowledge with his ideas on the definition, possibility, sources and types of knowledge, and the epistemological understandings he defensed or criticised. Furthermore, to determine his Kalām method, it evaluates his approach towards the value of ‘aql and naql (Qurʾān-Ḥadīth) as sources of knowledge. Since this issue is a distinctive tool for unveiling the kalām methods of different mutakallims and Muslim sects. Finally, it finds out the types of istidlāl, meaning inference of one thing from the other that he used when he argues and defends his views, and illustrates with examples.
Gazâlî ve Thomas Aquınas’ta Tanrı’nın Kudreti ve İmkânsızlık
No full textABSTRACT: During the Middle Ages, most of theological and philosophical works, like Avicenna’s eş-Şifā: Ilahiyat (The Healing: Metaphysics), al-Ghazālī’s Maqāsıd al-Falāsifa (The Aims of Philosophers), and Averroes’s commentaries on Aristotle’s books were translated into Latin language. Through these translations, many controversial issues in the Islamic thought, like “whether God knows partials in their essence”, “whether God acts necessarily because of His nature”, and “whether reason and revelation can be reconciled or not” were conveyed into Latin West. In addition to these issues, the problem of scope of God’s absolute power has been known by Latin thinkers as well. In this paper, I tried to show the idea of “God can do logically possible affairs and this does not limit God’s absolute power” conveyed in to Latin West through translations of Avicenna’s al-Şifā and al-Ghazâlî’s Makāsıd. As far as I can see, there is a drastic textual similarity between the ideas of al-Ghazâlî and Thomas Aquinas about this matter. Based on the similarities between al-Ghazâlî and Thomas Aquinas, it should be assumed that it is highly probable that Thomas Aquinas’ idea about God’s power goes back to Islamic tradition.SUMMARY: Is there any limit to God’s Power? Many theist thinkers argue that God is omniscient, omnipotent and wholly good. Like other theist thinkers al-Ghazālī and Thomas Aquinas approve that God is omnipotent. But the problem is whether God’s power has a limit or not. If God is omnipotent, then He can do whatever He wants, like a square-circle or another logically impossible state of affairs. However, most of theist thinkers argue that God can do logically possible state of affairs. If He cannot do a square-circle, it does not limit God’s absolute power. According to some contemporary authors, the idea that “God can do logically possible state of affairs” is accepted since Thomas Aquinas time. According to them, since the time of Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274), it has been recognized that the exercise of God’s power must be limited to what is logically possible. Looking at this assertion, there is no one asserting that God can do logically possible state of affairs before Thomas Aquinas. In this study, I tried to show that these debates have their roots in Islamic tradition.The eminent Muslim thinkers Avicenna and al-Ghazālī (d. 1111) evaluated the issue whether God can do logically impossible. According to Avicenna, if something is possible itself, it should be connected with power. He writes “It is, hence evident -clear- that the meaning of a thing possible in itself is other than the meaning of its being enactable by power, even if, in subject, the two are the same. Its being enactable by power is necessary concomitant of its being possible in itself.” It is clearly seen that, for Avicenna, possibility and impossibility do not depend on an agent’s power.In order to explain this point, al-Ghazālī makes a distinction between propositions. According to him, some propositions are first principles (awwaliyāt), like “The number two is more than one” and “The whole is greater than its parts.” This kind of beliefs cannot be attained via senses, but they can be attained by the intellect. Some of the propositions are the judgment of perception (maḥsūsāt), like “The sun shines” and “The light of moon increases and decreases”; the judgment of experience (tajrubiyāt), like “The fire burns”; generally accepted opinions (mutawatirāt), like knowing that there is a city called Mecca; estimative opinions (wahmiyāt), like “everything that has no place, either in the world or outside of it, is impossible”; customary beliefs (mashḥūrāt), like “falsehood is improper”, “the justice is necessary”, “God is omnipotent”, etc.It is clearly seen, al-Ghazālī counts the proposition “God is omnipotent” in the customary beliefs. These beliefs are based on habits and depend on the socio-cultural situations. According to al-Ghazālī, while some of these propositions might be true, some of them are false. For this reason, we need to make a detailed examination of the proposition “God is omnipotent” in order to determine whether this proposition is true or not. Many people suppose this proposition is absolutely true, but for al-Ghazālī, this proposition is not absolutely true. When we closely examine the proposition, we can clearly see that God cannot create a being like Himself. For this reason, we need to say that “God can do everything is possible for Him to do”. Similarly, when we say that God is omniscient”, we need to understand that God can know everything that is possible for Him to know. Because God cannot know a being like Himself. He writes “…when we say that ‘God is omnipotent’, we cannot see immediately that there might be something over which He did not have power until we realized that He could not create another being like Himself. Then we became aware of the error of our assertion. But the true assertion is that ‘He can do everything that is possible for Him to do. This has no contradictory that is true.”It can be seen, al-Ghazâlî obviously states that the proposition “God is omnipotent” is not a first principle but a customary belief. He also states that the proposition “God is omniscient” can be understood as “God can know everything that it is possible for Him to know”. However, al-Ghazālī keeps on the same idea not only in Maqāsıd but also in his other works, like Mi’yār al-ʿİlm (Criterion of Knowledge in the Art of Logic) and al-Iqtisād fī al-İʿtiqād (Median in Belief).My suggestion is that al-Ghazālī might get this idea from Avicenna. According to Avicenna, the proposition “God is omnipotent and omniscient” is a customary belief, like “justice is necessary” and “falsehood is improper.” In this course, he writes in his work Dānişname-i Ālai (The Highest Knowledge), “It is impossible to say that “God can do impossible things” and “God is omniscient and knows everything because of an assistant.”Similarly, Thomas Aquinas, like Avicenna and al-Ghazālī, states that God can do everything that is possible. He says in Summa Theologica, “All confess that God is omnipotent; but it seems difficult to explain in what His omnipotence precisely consists: for there may be doubt as to the precise meaning of the word “all” when we say that God can do all things. If, however, we consider the matter aright, since power is said in reference to possible things, this phrase, “God can do all things” is rightly understood to mean that “God can do all things that are possible” and for this reason He is said to be omnipotent.”As we can see, there is a similarity between al-Ghazālī’s understanding of God’s absolute power and Thomas Aquinas’s. It is well known that Thomas Aquinas reads -Ghazālī’s Maqâsıd. Based on the textual similarity, it is possible to argue that Thomas inherited this idea from al-Ghazālī’s Maqasıd. Consequently, we can assert that the idea that “God can do possible itself and this cannot limit God’s absolute power” began with the Islamic tradition rather than Thomas Aquinas, unlike Micheal Peterson, William Haskers, and the others argued. Therefore, it is possible to say that Thomas Aquinas thanks to his reading of al-Ghazâlî’s Maqāsıd about this matter. Ortaçağ’da, İslam düşüncesi içerisinde yazılmış olan İbn Sînâ’nın eş-Şifâ: İlahiyat’ı, Gazâlî’nin Makâsıdu’l-Felâsife’si ve İbn Rüşd’ün, Aristoteles’in eserlerine yazmış olduğu şerhler gibi pek çok felsefî ve teolojik eser Latinceye çevrilmiştir. Söz konusu çeviri eserler vasıtasıyla, İslam düşüncesinde carî olan, Tanrı’nın tikelleri kendi zatlarında bilip bilmediği, Tanrı’nın zatı gereği fiilde bulunup bulunmadığı, din ve felsefenin uzlaşıp uzlaşmayacağı gibi tartışmalı pek çok mesele Batı’ya intikal etmiştir. Bunlara ilaveten Tanrı’nın mutlak kudretinin alanının ne olduğu sorunu da Batı düşüncesinde bilinir hale gelmiştir. Bu çalışmada, “Tanrı mantıksal olarak mümkün olanı yapabilir ve bu durum Tanrı’nın mutlak kudretine halel getirmez” anlayışının Latin Batı dünyasına İbn Sînâ’nın eş-Şifâ’sı ve Gazâlî’nin Makâsıd’ının çevrileri vasıtasıyla intikal ettiği ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır. Tespit edebildiğimiz kadarıyla, Gazâlî’nin Makâsıd’ta bu konuya ilişkin serdettiği fikirler ile Hıristiyan teolog/düşünür Thomas Aquinas’ın fikirleri arasında önemli ölçüde benzerlik söz konusudur. Söz konusu benzerlik temele alınarak, Thomas Aquinas’ın bu hususta İslam düşüncesinden beslendiği düşüncesinin kuvvetle muhtemel olduğu söylenebilir
Guidelines for Authors
No full textcumhuriyet theology journal reguires writers to use the The Chicago Manual of Style “notes and bibliography” system of referencing.cumhuriyet theology journal reguires writers to use the The Chicago Manual of Style “notes and bibliography” system of referencing
Kaya, Emrah. “A Comparative Study: Epistemology and Theology of Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn Taymiyya”. Doktora tezi, Nottingham Üniversitesi, İngiltere, 2016.
No full textThis thesis explores the epistemology and theology of a Sufi theorist Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 1248) and one of the most controversial Muslim scholars Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328) comparatively. Although scholars have long emphasized the differences between these two influential and significant figures, the purpose of this thesis is to focus on their potential similarities. The present work at the outset shows that both Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn Taymiyya regard revelation, the human intellect, and inspiration – unveiling (ilhām – kashf) to be the main epistemological means for acquiring religious knowledge. However, they differ over the relative value of these means or tools. Both Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn Taymiyya place revelation at the top of the hierarchy, but after that Ibn al-ʿArabī places inspiration – unveiling ahead of reason while Ibn Taymiyya reverses the order.The other main subject elaborated in this thesis is the theological issue of the divine names and attributes. This subject is connected to many other theological problems, and both Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn Taymiyya pay considerable attention to it. Just as many similar approaches, ideas, and interpretations may be seen concerning their epistemological stances, it is possible to see similarities in their theological positions although there are crucial distinctions as well. The unique way of finding out this similarity is to keep in mind the existence of the duality found in the thought and expression of Ibn al-ʿArabī.Briefly, the main finding of the thesis is that Ibn al-ʿArabī and Ibn Taymiyya are more similar in their epistemologies and theologies than many scholars have thought. They are benefitting from the same epistemological means while putting them in different order. Also, they share similar theological points concerning the divine names and attributes, creation, the divine will, and the incomparability of God while expressing them through different conceptions and styles. Bu tez, Sûfi kuramcı İbnü’l-Arabȋ ve en tartışmalı Müslüman âlimlerden birisi olan İbn Teymiyye’nin bilgi felsefesini ve teolojisini karşılaştırmalı olarak incelemektedir. Alan çalışması yapanlar tarafından uzunca bir dönem bu iki önemli ve etkili figürün farklılıkları vurgulanmış olmasına rağmen bu tezin amacı bu iki düşünürün arasında bulunabilecek potansiyel benzerliklere odaklanmaktır. Bu çalışma, başlangıç olarak İbnü’l-Arabȋ ve İbn Teymiyye’nin dinî bilgi elde etmede vahyi, insan aklını ve ilhamı temel epistemolojik araçlar olarak gördüğünü belirtmektedir. Buna karşın, onlar bu epistemolojik araçlara değer atfetmede farklılık gösterirler. İbnü’l-Arabȋ ve İbn Teymiyye vahyi epistemolojik hiyerarşilerinde en üste yerleştirirken, birincisi ilhamı-keşfi aklın üstünde tutmayı, ikincisi ise insan aklını ilhamın üstünde tutmayı tercih etmiştir.Bu çalışmamızda ele alınan bir diğer ana konu da teolojik bir mesele olan ilahî isim ve sıfatlardır. Diğer birçok teolojik mesele ile ilişkili olan bu konuya hem İbnü’l-Arabȋ hem de İbn Teymiyye dikkate değer bir şekilde önem vermişlerdir. Tüm önemli farklılıklarına rağmen nasıl ki epistemoloji meselesindeki tutumlarında benzer yaklaşımlar, düşünceler ve yorumlar görülebiliyorsa aynı şekilde teolojik pozisyonlarında da benzerlikleri görmek mümkündür. Bu benzerliği bulmanın yegâne yolu ise İbnü’l-Arabȋ’nin düşünce ve ifadelerinde var olan çift yönlülüğün akılda tutulmasıdır.Kısacası, bu tezin elde ettiği asıl bulgu İbnü’l-Arabȋ ve İbn Teymiyye’nin epistemolojilerinde ve teolojilerinde alanda çalışma yapanların düşündüklerinden daha fazla benzerliklerin olduğudur. Farklı sıralama yapılsa dahi bilgiyi aynı epistemolojik araçlardan elde ettiklerini görmekteyiz. Aynı zamanda farklı terimler ve ifade tarzlarıyla ortaya konulmuş olsa da ilahî isim ve sıfatlar, yaratma, ilahî irade ve Allah’ın münezzeh oluşu gibi teolojik meselelerde benzer bir pozisyon aldıkları de görülecektir
Mahmad Fadlullah al-Sivāsī\u27s Mathnawi Named al-Itidāl fī-Mohabbati\u27l-Āl
No full textMehmed Fazlullâh Es-Sivâsî, Türk siyâsî ve ictimâî tarihi açısından önemli olduğu kadar Türk Edebiyatı tarihi açısından da önemli bir isimdir. Osmanlı’nın son dönemlerini ve Cumhuriyet’in ilk yıllarını idrak eden Mehmed Fazlullâh, Türkiye’nin farklı şehirlerinde öğretmenlik mesleğini icra etmiş, memleketin necat bulmasında önemli kararların alındığı Erzurum Kongresine Sivas delegesi olarak katılmış önemli bir zattır. Onun, bu özelliklerinin yanısıra edebî kişiliği de ön plandadır. Kaleme almış olduğu eserler vesilesi ile Divan Edebiyatının son müellifleri arasında yer almıştır. Birçok eser kaleme alarak velûd bir müellif olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu eserlerden biri, Hz. Peygamber’in ehl-i beytine duyulan sevginin dile getirildiği El-İtidal fî-Muhabbetü’l-âl adlı eserdir. Bu makalede mezkûr eser tanıtılarak eserin tam metni ilim âlemine sunulacaktır. ABSTRACT: Mahmad Fadlallah al-Sivāsī as well as important in terms of political and social history of Turkey, he is also is an important person for Turkish literature. Realizing the late Ottoman period and the first years of the republic, Mahmad Fadlullāh, is a momentous person who taught in many different cities of Turkey and participateded in Erzurum Congress -where there have been made decisions for development and prosperity of the country-as delegate of Sivas. That the literary personality of these features, as well as the foreground. By the pieces he indited he took part in the last authors of Divan Literature. Wrote many pieces, he has shown that he is a prolific author. One of these works al-Itidal fī-Mohabbati\u27l-Āl which expresses the love to ahl al-beyt. In this article, the aforementioned work will be presented to the realm of science by introducing full text of the work.SUMMARY: Mahmad Fadlallah al-Sivāsī is an important figure in Turkish literature as well as being an important person in terms of political and social history of Turkey. He was an important person, who experienced the late period of Ottoman Empire and the first years of Turkish Republic, worked as a teacher in several cities of Turkey and joined to Erzurum Congress as a Sivas delegate in which some important decisions for the salvation of the country were taken. Besides his historical personality, his literary personality also comes to the fore. The author who was among the latest representatives of Divan Literature with the works he wrote proved himself as a prolific author by writing lots of works. al-Itidal fī-Mohabbati\u27l-Āl, in which the necessity of moderation in the love to Ahl al-Bayt was expressed, is one of his first works. This work which is composed of 535 couplets is the longest one among his existing works. Published in 1911 in Aleppo, the work comprises two parts as introduction and the main body where the basic subject was handled. In the introduction part bearing the title “Ifade-i Meram”, Mahmad Reshad V. who was the 35th Sultan of Ottoman Empire and the 114th caliph of Islam was highly praised. That Sultan Mahmad Reshad ruled the country in justice and protected Islam was mentioned and it was noted that the Sultan must be prayed for his qualities in this part. After the Introduction comes the part, in which the main topic is dealt, with Basmala (The name of Allah). This part begins with a couplet expressing thank to Allah and praising his lover Prophet Mohammad (PBU). al-Itidal fī-Mohabbati\u27l-Āl is based on the concepts “tawalla” (Loving Ahl-al Bayt and those who love them) and “tabarra” (Not loving those who do not love Ahl-al Bayt). On the other hand, he noted that the same love and respect for Ahl-al Bayt must be shown to the companions of the Prophet without exception, saying they were not different from the members of Ahl-al Bayt. Here, the author mostly mentions about Muawiya b. Abu Sufyan – prophet Momammad’s (PBU) brother-in-law- and highly praises his qualities. The event in which Hussain and his followers who did not obey Yezid b. Muawiya were made martyr is one of the saddest events in history of Islam. That event causing an untreatable wound in the hearts of Muslims has mostly been handled in the works of Turkish Literature either as a part or in a way to be a subject by itself in individual works. Mahmad Fadlallah dealt Karbala Event in this work as well. Besides noting that he was quite overwhelmed by sorrow when the name of Hussain passed, he also cursed those who were responsible for this upsetting event for their being deprived of Allah’s forgiveness and mercy. The work ends with giving such several advices to readers as Ahl-al Bayt and the companions of the Prophet must always be remembered with respect and appreciation, hatred should be felt for the sake of Allah, and the the love for Ahl-al Bayt ought to be in moderation. In this article, the mahtnawi named al-Itidal fī-Mohabbati\u27l-Āl by Mahmad Fadlallah al-Sivāsī is unveiled and the full text of the work is presented
Son Dönem Bir Osmanlı Düşünürü: Harputlu İshak Efendi’nin Din Felsefesinin Bazı Meselelerine Yaklaşımı ve Felsefecilere Karşı Tutumu
No full textABSTRACT: What was the point of view of the Ottoman thinkers or scholars in general to philosophy and in particular to subjects of the philosophy of religion and to philosophers? In Ottoman, what was the existence and level of philosophy according to the other sciences? These kinds of questions have been frequently asked by those who deal with philosophy. The answers given to these questions are as important as at least the questions. To discuss such an important subject, what we need is to accept scientific issues as basis. To answer these questions together with a different motivation which is far from scientific methods may lead us to a vicious circle. The first thing of this kind of scientific attitude is to examine the Ottoman thinkers’ studies and try to understand them. General aim of this article is to shed a light to these discussions and in particular, to understand the approach of Harputlu Ishak Efendi to some issues of the philosophy of religion and his attitude towards some philosophers.SUMMARY: What were the perspectives of Ottoman thinkers or scholars towards philosophy in general and the subjects of the philosophy of religion and philosophers in particular? What was the presence and level of philosophy in Ottoman compared to other sciences? These are the questions usually asked by those who work on philosophy. The answers provided to such questions are as important as at least the questions themselves. To discuss such an important subject, what we need is to accept scientific issues as basis. Answers tried to be given with other motivation elements outside of the scientific frame and method can take us to a vicious circle. The first step of this scientific perspective should be an examination of the books of Ottoman thinkers. The overall purpose of our article is to shed light on such discussions to some extent, while the specific purpose is to explain Harputlu Ishak Efendi’s approach towards some matters of the philosophy of religion and his attitude towards philosophers in general terms. When the courses, which were studied by Harputlu Ishak Efendi, and the masters, who taught these courses, are investigated, it will be seen clearly that he took a good education. Ishak Efendi, who executed important duties in different bureaucratic positions of the Ottoman such as inspection duties, then was assigned to be the judge (qâḍî) of Medina and Isparta. Harputlu Ishak Efendi expressed opinions on the relationship of religion-philosophy, status of prophets and philosophers, place of the intellect in religion and especially the “Knowledge of God”, “Resurrection”, “Creation of the Universe” which are very controversial issues among Gazzâli and the Islamic philosophers. Providing a statement on such controversial issues requires being an expert on the Kalâm theology and philosophy. As for wording, we see that he has studied the subject with all dimensions. Harputlu Ishak Efendi is a unique Ottoman thinker. The reason behind this is that he has never studied on annotation and elucidation, but he was a scholar paying attention to the human intellect (ʿaql) and use of the intellect. He expresses that he prefers using intellectual evidences as a method and this is a beneficial approach and he experienced this himself. Stating that Islam is a religion definitely based on the intellect, he expresses that “God shall not propose something contrary to the sound intellect in the religion of Islam”, and claims that God does not request from human beings something contrary to the sound intellect and those requested comply with the sound intellect only. We know that some scholars educated in Ottoman Madrasas assumed took a sharp position against thoughts established and philosophy in particular. Considering the methods used by Harputlu Ishak Efendi on dealing with the issues, we see that he tries to indicate the views of other people expert on the subject while he investigates it.Because the thinkers he often refers to in his works are Ibn Sina, Nasîrüddîn et-Tûsî Devvânî and Gelenbevî, we think that his philosophical thought emerges from such views. He has more references to Ibn Sina. Harputlu Ishak Efendi tried to understand what philosophers try to explain instead of declaring the philosophers as unbelievers and showing the philosophy out of religion. As some previous Ottoman scholars, he has considered the prophets as a philosopher and so tried to bring a new perspective to the discussion of religion-philosophy relation which has been continuing for centuries. Harputlu Ishak Efendi claims that the human intellect (ʿaql) alone can know the presence of God and His attributes such as knowledge and power. For instance, regarding the oneness of God, he puts similar views with Kindî. He also states that it is not possible both rationally and traditionally that there is an existent equal and similar with God. He provides evidences from scholars, Ibn Sina in particular. However, he stresses that there are some religious matters which cannot be known by the intellect.Providing opinions on whether the resurrection will be bodily and spiritual or spiritual only, Harputlu Ishak Efendi gives his views on that God knows totals but partials, which is why Gazzâlî declared the Islamic philosophers as unbelievers. Harputlu Ishak Efendi also provides ideas on the eternity of the universe which has been one of the main problems between the philosophers and Gazzâlî. The matters studied by Harputlu Ishak Efendi are the main subject of the religion and majority of which corresponds to the three basic fields of philosophy: existence, knowledge, and value. As many of the previous scholars, Harputlu Ishak Efendi studied these matters through a method of question and answer. In explaining these subjects, he firstly provided verses from the Qur’an and then provided the hadiths, if any. Then he wrote down what the philosophers, Kalâm theologians, and sûfis said about the matter. And what is significant is that he did not provide any adverse remark while referencing such approaches of this group of three.We, recently, see more often the oral statements and approaches in this regard which signify that the philosophy of religion should be built upon its own resources and thinkers in the Islamic lands. The meaning of this excitement with regards to the philosophy of religion is more meaningful in specific terms. The problem, as often stated by the recent philosophers of religion, that we do not still have a unique philosophy of religion model despite we owe very rich, important classic and scientific works, is still under discussion. We hope that trying to understand what Ottoman scholars and thinkers remarked on such significant matters shall contribute to the project of “developing a unique philosophy of religion to us.”.Osmanlı düşünürlerinin ya da âlimlerinin genelde felsefeye özelde din felsefesinin konularına ve felsefecilere bakışı ne idi? Osmanlı’da felsefenin diğer ilimlere nispetle varlığı ve seviyesi ne durumda idi? gibi sorular felsefe ile uğraşanların sıkça sordukları sorular olmuştur. En az bu sorular kadar bu sorulara verilen cevaplar da önemlidir. Böylesine önemli bir konunun sağlıklı bir şekilde tartışılabilmesi, ancak ilmi verilerin temel kabul edilmesiyle yapılabilir. Bu sorulara bilimsel çerçevenin ve metodun dışında başka motivasyon unsurlarıyla hareket edilerek verilmeye çalışılan cevaplar bizi bir kısır döngüye götürebilir. Bu bilimselliğin ilk adımı Osmanlı düşünürlerinin eserlerinin incelenerek fikirlerinin anlaşılması olsa gerektir. Makalemizin genel amacı bu tartışmalara bir nebze ışık tutmak iken özel amacı Harputlu İshak Efendi’nin din felsefesinin bazı meselelerine yaklaşımı ve filozoflara karşı tutumunun nasıl olduğunu genel hatlarıyla anlamaya çalışmaktır
Yayın İlkeleri
No full text Editorial Policies Publishercumhuriyet theology journal is published by Cumhuriyet University, Faculty of Theology, Sivas/Turkey. Scopecumhuriyet theology journal publishes academic articles that produced in the area of Religious Studies.Basic Islamic Sciences: Tafsir, Kalam, Hadith, Islamic Law, History of Islamic Sects, Sufism, Arabic Language and Literature.Philosophy and Religious Sciences: Philosophy of Islam, Philosophy of Religion, Psychology of Religion, Sociology of Religion, Religious Education, History of Religions, History of Philosophy, Logic.Islamic History and Arts: History of Islam, History of Islamic Arts, Turkish Islamic Literature, Religious MusicPeriodBiannualy (15 June & 15 December)Review of ArticlesArticles submitted to cumhuriyet theology journal are first reviewed by the Editorial Board in terms of the journal\u27s publishing principles.Those found unsuitable are returned to their authors for revision.Academic objectivity and scientific quality are considered as the paramount importance. Submissions found suitable are referred to two referees working in relevant fields. The names of the referees are kept confidential and referee reports are archived for five years. If one of the referee reports is positive and the other is negative, the article may be forwarded to a third referee for further assessment or alternatively, the Editorial Board may make a final decision based on the nature of the two reports. The authors are responsible for revising their articles in line with the criticism and suggestions made by the referees and the Editorial Board. If they disagree with any issues, they may make an objection by providing clearly-stated reasons. Submissions which are not accepted for publication are not returned to their authors.This journal uses double-blind review fulfilled by at least two referees. In addition, all articles are checked by means of a program in order to confirm they are not published before and avoid plagiarism Yayın İlkeleriYayıncı: cumhuriyet ilahiyat dergisi, Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi (Sivas/Türkiye) tarafından yayımlanır. Kapsam: cumhuriyet ilahiyat dergisi, Dinî Araştırmalar alanında hazırlanan akademik çalışmaları yayımlar.Yayın Sıklığı: cumhuriyet ilahiyat dergisi, yılda 2 sayı sayı (15 Haz. – 15 Aralık) yayımlanan hakemli bir dergidir.Değerlendirme Süreci: Dergimize gönderilen yazılar, önce Yayın Kurulu’nca dergi ilkelerine uygunluk açısından incelenir. Uygun görülmeyenler düzeltilmesi için yazarına iade edilir.Yayın için teslim edilen makalelerin değerlendirilmesinde akademik tarafsızlık ve bilimsel kalite en önemli ölçütlerdir. Değerlendirme için uygun bulunanlar, ilgili alanda iki hakeme gönderilir. Hakemlerin isimleri gizli tutulur ve raporlar beş yıl süreyle saklanır. Hakem raporlarından biri olumlu, diğeri olumsuz olduğu takdirde, yazı, üçüncü bir hakeme gönderilebilir veya Yayın Kurulu, hakem raporlarını inceleyerek nihai kararı verebilir. Yazarlar, hakem ve Yayın Kurulunun eleştiri ve önerilerini dikkate alırlar. Katılmadıkları hususlar varsa, gerekçeleriyle birlikte itiraz etme hakkına sahiptirler. Yayına kabul edilmeyen yazılar, yazarlarına iade edilmez. Yayınlanmak üzere gönderilen makaleler, intihal tespitinde kullanılan özel bir program aracılığıyla intihal kontrolünden geçirilir.