Search

ولد الإمام الماتريدي في حي ماتريد في سمرقند، وتوفي في تلك المدينة القديمة في عام 333 هـ/ 945 م، كان إمامًا لإحدى الطائفتين الكلاميتين الاعتقاديتين من أهل السنة، والإمام الماتريدي صاحب تأثير كبير في المجتمع الإسلامي إلى يومنا هذا بأعماله العديدة. ومن المؤسف أنه لم تصل إلينا معلومات كثيرة عن حياة الماتريدي. ولكن يمكن لنا الكشف عن البيئة العلمية ومراكز العلم في سمرقند مسقط رأس هذا العالم الكبير والمدينة التي سكن بها طول حياته مع عدد من المصادر الرئيسة والأعمال البحثية التي انتقلت إلينا. كانت سمرقند عاصمة ما وراء النهر منذ العصور القديمة، وبينما لم تكن المدارس في العواصم والمراكز الرئيسة مثل بغداد ودمشق والقاهرة منتشرة- كانت النماذج الأولى من المدارس في سمرقند والمدن المحيطة بها خلال الفترة السامانية قد ظهرت. ونحن على علم بوجود مدارس في سمرقند في الفترة التي عاش فيها الإمام الماتريدي، مثل دار الجزجانية ودار العياضية وقثم بن العباس. كما نشهد في هذه الفترة أن الحكام السامانيين أولوا أهمية كبيرة للعلم والعلماء، وأنهم فتحوا قصورهم ومكتبات القصور الثرية التي أنشؤوها أمام العلماء. ونتيجة لذلك فإن هذه المدينة، التي كانت محمية من قبل العديد من الأديان والتوجهات الفكرية منذ العصور القديمة، والتي تتمتع ببيئة ثقافية مفعمة بالحيوية احتفظت بميزاتها في فترة الحكم الإسلامي. وعلى الرغم من أن هذا النسيج الثقافي الغني في المدينة أدى إلى ظهور العديد من التوجهات التي تتعارض مع الفكر الإسلامي والعقيدة الإسلامية في المنطقة إلا أنه في الوقت نفسه أسهم بشكل فعال في نشأة الإمام الماتريدي الذي دافع بحزم عن الإسلام وبنيته العَقَدية ضد الأفكار المتناقضة، وفي تنشئة علماء الكلام الأقوياء الذين اتبعوا طريقته في هذه المدينة والمنطقة المجاورة لها., Ehl-i Sünnetin yaşayan iki itikad/kelâm mezhebinden birinin imamı kabul edilen, kaleme aldığı birçok eseri ile İslâm toplumu üzerinde günümüze kadar büyük etkiler oluşturan İmam Mâtürîdî, Semerkant’ın Mâtürîd mahallesinde doğmuş ve 333/945 tarihinde yine bu kadim şehirde vefat etmiştir. İmam Mâtürîdî’nin hayatı hakkında maalesef günümüze fazla bir bilgi ulaşmamıştır. Bununla birlikte bu büyük âlimin içinde doğup büyüdüğü, yetiştiği ve ömrünün tamamını orada geçirdiği ve kadim zamanlardan beri Mâverâünnehir’in başşehri konumunda olan Semerkant’ta o günkü ilmî ortam ve ilim öğrenme merkezlerini bize ulaşan bir takım ana kaynak ve araştırma eserlerle ortaya koyabiliriz. Nitekim daha Bağdat, Dımaşk ve Kâhire gibi başşehir ve ana merkezlerde medreselerin varlığından bahsedilmezken Sâmânîler döneminde Semerkant ve çevre şehirlerde medrese yapılarının ilk örnekleri görülmekte, İmam Mâtürîdî’nin yaşadığı bu dönemde Semerkant’ta Dâru’l- Cüzcâniyye, Dâru’l-Iyâziyye, Kusem b. Abbâs gibi medreselerin varlığından haberdar olmaktayız. Yine bu dönemde Sâmânî hükümdarlarının ilme ve âlimlere büyük değer verdiğine, saraylarını ve oluşturdukları zengin saray kütüphanelerini âlimler için ardına kadar açtıklarına şahit olmaktayız. Netice olarak eski tarihlerden itibaren birçok din ve düşünce yapısının himaye gördüğü, dolayısıyla canlı kültürel bir ortamın var olduğu bu şehir, İslâm döneminde de aynı özelliğini büyük oranda devam ettirmiştir. Her ne kadar şehirdeki bu zengin kültürel yapı İslâm inanç ve akidesine ters, bölgede birçok düşünce yapısının ortaya çıkmasına yol açsa da aynı zamanda bu aykırı düşünceler karşısında İslâm’ı ve onun akîdevi yapısını sağlam bir şekilde savunan İmâm Mâtürîdî ve onun yolunu takip eden güçlü kelâmcıların bu şehir ve bölgede yetişmesine vesile olmuştur.

The sources show that two different groups of sheikhs were followed in the Hanafi usūl al-fiqh : ‘Iraqi and Samarqandi sheikhs. However, the perception of followers of ‘Iraqi sheikhs formed the dominant Hanafī tradition. This situation has caused different approaches of the theologian methodologists who followed the Samarqandi sheikhs to become in shadow. Considering this separation within this denomination, when the sunnah sections of usūl al-fiqh literature are compared it is possible to see the different points raised within the Hanafi usūl al-fiqh. In this study, “the definition of sunnah ”, “the acts of the Prophet”, “the imitating companions”, “the criteria of ard (submission) to the Qur’an” and “the problem of faqīh (jurist) narrator” are determined as differentiated notions. Considering these issues, since the concepts which differentiate theologian methodologists, whose perception have been taken into account in this paper, from the dominant Hanafi usūl tradition have been generally related to theological concerns, it is possible to argue that this distinction can be explained by their approach of usūl in which theological premises considered as important as other concerns. Eventually, this paper aims to show that like any denomination Hanafi sect also does not have a uniform approach about sunnah . Summary: In this study, the marks of differentiations in sunnah topics were followed based on the works of Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh written in the Transoxanian region between 5th-8th centuries A.H. The reason for the limitation of this issue is that there have been some changes and developments in the sect in this region and period. It is because Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh , which is in two different lines, namely ʿIrāqī sheikhs and Samarqandī sheikhs, has improved in favor of one side in this period. It is thought that this dual disintegration occurs due to the effect of different theological tendencies. This situation has caused the different approaches of the theologian methodologists who mostly followed the Samarqandī sheikhs to be overshadowed. Because Ḥanafī tradition, which became a permanent establishment, mostly followed the line of ʿIrāqī sheikhs in terms of both the topics that are discussed and the approaches in these issues. The aim of this study is to determine the different approaches of the line of Samarqandī sheikhs to sunnah . In the study which is based on comparative method, sunnah topics of Dabūsī, Pazdawī, Sarakhsī and those who followed them and the theologian methodologists Abū l-Yusr, Samarqandī, Lamishī and Usmendī’s sunnah topics were compared and the differentiation points of the second group were determined. In this context, it is seen that there are two different approaches in the Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh regarding the definition and scope of sunnah . Because the Ḥanafī principals who followed the ʿIrāqī sheikhs, while describing the sunnah , they included the companions in the scope of sunnah . However, Abū l-Yusr, Samarqandī and Lamishī did not mention the companions in the sunnah description and stated that the only person to be subjected was the Prophet. In addition, the Ḥanafīs in the second group, unlike others, do not accept the opinion that the meaning of absolute sunnah word is only sunnah of the Prophet. At this point they have shared the same conviction with the ahl al-ḥadīth (the traditionists) and cumhūr al-ulemā (majority of ulema). There are two different approaches, which are based on ʿIrāqī and Samarqandī sheikhs in the show of the judgments of the acts of the Prophet. According to the ʿIrāqī Ḥanafīs, the Prophet's act is attributed to mubāh (permissible) when there is no evidence about its feature. According to the Samarqandī sheiks, such an act is attributed to vucūb (obligation) in terms of practice and stopped in terms of faith. Most of the later Ḥanafī scholars have adopted the idea of ​​ ibāha (permissibility) of the ʿIrāqī Ḥanafīs. On the other hand, Samarqandī, Lamishī and Itkanī have tended to the opinion of the Samarqandī sheikhs. It is seen that two different approaches were adopted by Ḥanafī scholars in the field of imitation of companions. Most of the Ḥanafīs adopted the view of Bardaī. According to this view, it is necessary to imitate companions and their expression takes precedence over the qiyās (legal analogy). On the other hand Samarqandī and Lamishī adopted the opinion of Māturīdī. According to this opinion, a companion who has reached the rank of fatwā (legal opinion), it is necessary to imitate that person if one of his peers did not oppose his opinion on a subject that is not likely to be hidden because the general public needs it. There is also a dispute between the Ḥanafī scholars on the type of information expressed by the famous report. Dabūsī, Pazdawī and Sarakhsī and later Ḥanafīs believe that the famous report does not refer to certain knowledge but to assured knowledge. However, it is understood that, Abū l-Yusr, Samarqandī and Lamishī believe that the famous report refers to certain knowledge. But this conflict between the Ḥanafīs only affects the issue of the takfīr who denies the famous report. It does not cause any dispute on judgments. There are two different approaches in the sect about the issue of opposition to the Qur'an covered by internal interruption. In this matter, the issue of opposition to the Qur'an, especially through ziyāda alā al-nās , has been evaluated in different ways. According to the ʿIrāqī sheikhs and majority of the Ḥanafīs, which followed them, ziyada ala al-nas is naskh (abrogation). But according to Māturīdī and Ḥanafīs which followed him, it is also possible that ziyāda alā al-nās is naskh and statement. One of them cannot be preferred without any evidence. In addition, according to the ʿIrāqī sheikhs general and apparent words of the Qur'an express certain knowledge. However, according to the Samarqandī sheikhs the general words of the Qur'an don not express certain knowledge. So, these words can be specialized by isolated tradition. But it was observed that this conflict between the Ḥanafīs was related to the fact that the first opinion caused some problems related to the faith. In the issue of the faqīh narrator, it was determined that three different approaches were exhibited by Ḥanafī scholars. Firstly, the attitude towards not accepting the report of the non- faqih narrator, expressed by the ‘Īsā b. Abān in Abū Hurayra, is gradually being softened along with Dabūsī and adopted by the later Ḥanafī principals. However, despite the same scientific environment and period, Abū l-Yusr does not follow this approach. At the same time, it is possible to say that Samarqandī, Lamishī and Usmendī don not adopt the faqīh narrator criterion. While ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Bukhārī and Kakī did not adopt this approach but criticized it openly. As a result, it is seen that Ḥanafī sect which contains different orientations in itself does not have a uniform approach about sunnah . The points which differentiate theologian methodologists, whose perception have been taken into account in this paper, from the dominant Ḥanafī usūl tradition have been generally related to theological concerns. So, it is possible to say that this distinction can be explained by their approach of usūl in which theological premises considered as important as other concerns. In addition, it is seen that some of the opinions theologian methodologists present as an alternative to dominant Ḥanafī usūl al-fiqh tradition are close to the ahl al-ḥadīth and cumhūr al-ulemā.

Zerefşan Nehri’nden beslenen, çevresinde Buhara, Keş, Tirmiz, Hocent gibi şehirlerin bulunduğu ve İpek Yolu olarak adlandırılan ticaret yolunun geçtiği kavşakta yer alan tarihi bir şehir olan Semerkant, Buhara ile birlikte Maveraünnehir’in en önemli şehirlerinden biridir. Şehir sahip olduğu jeopolitik konumu sebebiyle tarih boyu hâkimiyet mücadelelerine sahne olmuş ve tarihi süreç içerisinde farklı devletlerin egemenliği altında bulunmuştur. Şehrin sosyal yapısı ve iktisadi durumu gibi özellikler tarihi olayları anlamlandırmada gerekli olmaktadır. Çalışmanın temelinde de bu durum yatmakta ve çalışmada Semerkant’ın hanlıklar devrindeki demografisi, sosyal yapısı, iktisadi durumu, mimarisi hakkında bilgiler verilmeye çalışılmaktadır. Bu konuda özellikle 19. yüzyılda bölgeyi gezen kişilerin yazdıkları seyahatnamelerden ve ikincil kaynaklardan yararlanılmıştır. Konunun sınırlanmasında ise önceki dönemlere kıyasla bir gerilemenin olduğu gözetilerek hanlıklar devri seçilmiştir.

Kadim Şehirler Semerkant-Buhara

Timurlu Devleti’nin kurucusu Emir Timur, 12 Ramazan 771/0 Nisan 1370 tarihinde 34 yaşındayken Belh’i zapt ederek Semerkant’ta tahta oturdu. Kısa bir sürede Mâverâünnehir ve Horasan bölgesindeki tahta mücadelelerini fırsat bilerek etrafında topladığı âlim, arif ve seyyidlerin desteğiyle hâkimiyet alanını Bağdat, Anadolu ve Moskova’ya kadar genişletti. Zapt ettiği bölgelerden getirdiği âlim, arif, şair, tabip, astronom ve sanatçılarla Semerkant’ı siyasi birliğin yanı sıra kültür ve medeniyetin de merkezi haline getirdi. Timur, Devleti’nin temellerini memleketi Keş’te tanıştığı ünlü mutasavvıf Şeyh Şemseddin Fahûrî’nın duasıyla attı. Horasan’da marifet bulduğu Şeyh Zeyneddin Havâfî’nin destek ve himmetiyle devlet yapılanmasını geliştirdi. Mekke’den gelen Seyyid Bereke’nin bereketiyle iktidarını zirveye taşıdı. Horasan ve Bağdat seferlerine çıktığı sıralarda İmam-ı Azam, Ahmed Rifâî, İmam Hüseyin gibi âlim, arif ve seyyidlerin mezarlarını ziyaret edip Ehl-i Beyt’e karşı beslediği sevgisiyle tüm Müslümanların gönlünü fethetti. Devletinde barındırdığı mutasavvıf kadrosuyla toplumun din, diyanet ve ahlakını güzelleştirdi. Çatışma ve şiddetten uzak insanların gönlüne hitap edip huzur bahşeden Ehl-i Sünnet çizgisine uygun tasavvufî geleneği hâkim kılmaya çalıştı., The founder of the Timurid State, Emir Timur, conquered Balkh on April 9, 1370 at the age of 34 and sat on the throne in Samarkand. In a short time, with the support of the scholars, arifs and sayyid’s he gathered around his throne managed to cross the Mâverâunnehir and Khorasan region, he expanded his field of dominance to Baghdad, Anatolia and Moscow. With the scholars, arif, poets, physicians, astronomers and artists he brought from the conquered regions, he made Samarkand the center of culture and civilization as well as a symbol of political unity. Timur laid the foundations of the State with the prayer of the famous sufi Sheikh Shamsuddin Fakhûrî, whom he met in his hometown Kesh. He improved the state structuring with the support and patronage of Sheikh Zaynaddin Khavafi, whom he found in Khorasan. With the help of Sayyid Barakah from Mecca, he carried his power to the summit. When he went to Khorasan and Baghdad expeditions, he visited the graves of scholars, arifs and sayyid’s such as Imam-i Azam, Ahmad Rifai, Imam Huseyin and conquered the hearts of all Muslims with his love for Ahl-i Bayt. He praised the religion and morality of the society with the sufism in its state. He tried to dominate the Sufi tradition in line with the line of Ahl al-Sunnah, which appealed to the hearts of people who were far from conflict and violence.

Turkish International Cooperation Agency.