Search

Copyright of Tahkik Journal of Critical Editions of Islamic Manuscripts is the property of Hacveyiszade Foundation for Science & Culture and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of the Faculty of Theology / Kilis 7 Aralik Universitesi Ilahiyat Fakultesi Dergisi is the property of Kilis 7 Aralik Universitesi Ilahiyat Fakultesi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The current study will focus on the epistle of Sharḥ al-irādah al-juzʾiyyah which Muḥammad Ibn Muṣtafa al-ʿAlāī claims to have authored and which is attributed to him by successive generations but in reality is a modified version of Dāwūd al-Qarṣī’s (d. 1169/1756) Risālâh fi’l-ikhtiyārāt al-juzʾiyyah wa’l-irādāt al-qalbiyyah. A close examination of the content of Sharḥ al-irādah al-juzʾiyyah epistle, which ʿAlāī reconstructed by removing some contexts and topics that he did not need from Qarṣī’s Risālah, and taking some parts he deemed fitting from Abu Saʿīd al-Khādimī’s al-Barīḳa al-maḥmūdiyyah fī sharḥ al- Ṭarīqah el-Muḥammadiyyah, reveals the fact that it is a work in which plagiarism is most obvious. Considering the Ottoman intellectual tradition, it is known that a vast textual literature in the form of several epistles on human will and actions has been produced and these epistles have effected the introduction of certain ideas about the subject. We know for a fact that there may occur interchanges and overlapping between various intellectual activities, but copying an original work in kernel with minor and insignificannt modifications and reclaiming it for oneself is intellectually unethical and unacceptable. We, thus, intend to demonstrate that the epistle of ʿAlāī was created by partially changing Qarṣī’s treatise on the subject and no reference was made to latter. In order to do achieve our goal, we comparatively studied both texts from beginning to end through tables, determined and showed the commonalities and different points. As a result of this comparison, we also strove to determine whether this plagiarism phenomenon was made by ʿAlāī himself or by someone else. Furthermore, the instances that ʿAlāī copied from Abu Saʿīd al-Khādimī without citing the source were also determined and shown in a different color on the text. Finally, the treatise of ʿAlāī was also reviewed in order to provide a holistic view. In the analysis of the text, words and sentences that are present in Qarsī’s text but not in ʿAlāī’s text and that complete the meaning are shown in square brackets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Tahkik Journal of Critical Editions of Islamic Manuscripts is the property of Hacveyiszade Foundation for Science & Culture and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Tahkik Journal of Critical Editions of Islamic Manuscripts is the property of Hacveyiszade Foundation for Science & Culture and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mutefekkir, Faculty of Islamic Sciences is the property of Aksaray University, Faculty of Islamic Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Tahkik Journal of Critical Editions of Islamic Manuscripts is the property of Hacveyiszade Foundation for Science & Culture and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The issue of "takfîr" (to declare someone as an unbieliever), throughout the history, is one of the important subjects of both theology and Fiqh. It is not only a naming to whom called the "believer" or "unbeliever", but the issue has been dealt with as a problem that has serious consequences both legally and socially. For this reason, many articles have been written on the subject. Abu al-Fath Muzaffar al- Khatîb's work, "Alfâz al-Kufr", is one of the famous works on this subject. This work, through examples of words and behaviors touches on many issues of tekfîr without explaining the methodology of it. This treatise has similarities with other works in the field and it is understood that it was written according to Hanafi jurisprudence. In this study, we have edited this work, based on three manuscripts in various libraries and aimed to introduce it to today's people. The words and behaviors that are included in the treatise, we took them in eight topics. We tried to show comparatively how the subjects were handled in the work. We made evaluations on each subject and in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result of the social and political events which followed the death of the Prophet, the definition of faith and blasphemy and scope of these terms, relationship between faith and deeds, had begun to be discussed issues. So, the matter of faith and blasphemy indubitably has been the first problem that must be overcome. Therefore, it is observed that sects have different or similar approachment models about relations between faith and blasphemy. About this subject, it is possible to divide the Islamic sects to sects inserting deeds in faith and sects setting deeds apart from faith. The strongest evidences used in this issue are "the conditional evidence" and "the conjunctional evidence". The conditional evidence is based on the syntactical rule which states that the conditional verb is different from its correspondence. And the conjunctional evidence is based on another syntactical rule which states that the conjunctive is different from the coordinating conjunction. These two evidences were used by two kalam schools of Ahl al-Sunnah with some differences. İn this study, we analyzed the emergence of these evidences historically and its effects on both of Ahl al-Sunnah schools. At the end of our study, it was concluded that the source of these two evidences was the Murjiah sect, and that all the Maturidists used this evidence, and the first Ash'arites did not use these evidence, but later Ash'arites used the same two evidences. There has been a connection between the use of these evidences and the matter of the increase or decrease of faith. The use of these evidences by the Murjiah and the Maturidism shows that they refuse the fact of increase or decrease in faith. The fact that the previous Ash'arite peers did not use these evidences, on the contrary of there later theologians who did, showed that there were different opinions on this issue and that there was a process of evolution in this regard in Ash'ariah. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of the possibility of rational knowing the existence of God has been always one of the most important philosophical and theological matters of debate through the history. This issue was handled by Mâtürîdî (333/944) who is the most powerful figure in Ebû Hanîfe School and has the biggest share in the establishment of Followers of Sunnah kalam. Mâtürîdî, who put the principle of "Things have reality" into the basis of the thinking system, says that the created universe on the basis of "eternal and created things" difference (Allah-universe) signifies Allah (the Eternal) who is the Creator of universe, and this signification does not mean that these two different things are ontologically equal, and Mâtürîdî sublates the created features in Allah. Mâtürîdî who used the method of "istidlâl bi'ş-şâhid ale'l-gâib (reaching the knowledge of the unseen by deducting from the seen)" stated that the possibility of metaphysical information is inferred by mind, and he also thought that a relation might be established between the seen and the unseen due to a provision in the seen. He reached the idea of "first creator" from the idea of "things are created" (the created) which needs a "creation reason", and he also stated that all things, including even the bad things (malignity), come up for the appearance of a "hidden cause". Mâtürîdî, who says that Allah is excluded from all kinds of deficiency and qualified with perfection, argues for that some positive qualities used for human may also be used for Allah without any figurative expression. With reference to the idea that the human is a cognizant (rational) creature, Mâtürîdî argues that he has reasonable and fair reasons for believing in a Creator; and he also uses the evidences such as creation what he called as "hadesü'l-ayân (known case)", "aim and law" that he uses with reason and measure, and "disposition" (skills coming with creation) that he links with the term nature. By this way, we reached an idea in which the disposition evidence, which comes from cosmological, and teleological ideas and the nature of human that also takes place in the thinking system of Mâtürîdî, accounts for a more reasonable and successful explanation than the agnostic and atheistic explanations for the interpretation of the meaning of universe and life as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]