Papers by Imam Rabbani Çelik
İslam Tetkikleri Dergisi, 2024
Eş‘arî kelâmını meşşâî felsefenin dili ve kavramlarıyla yeniden inşa eden Fahreddin er-Râzî (ö. 6... more Eş‘arî kelâmını meşşâî felsefenin dili ve kavramlarıyla yeniden inşa eden Fahreddin er-Râzî (ö. 606/1210) kulların fiillerinin cebr altında olduğunu ileri sürmüştür. Onun bu görüşünü ispat için getirdiği argüman klasik sonrası dönemde Hanefî kelâmcı ve usûlcülerinin de gündemini belirlemiştir. Mâverâünnehir’de Hanefî geleneğin kelâm ve usûldeki birikimini meşşâî felsefenin ve mantığın kavram ve meseleleriyle yeniden ele alan ilk düşünürlerden olan Şemseddin es-Semerkandî (ö. 702/1303) ve Sadrüşşerîa (ö. 747/1346) yazdıkları eserlerle Râzî’nin bu argümanına eleştiriler yöneltmiştir. Modern literatürde özellikle müstakil olarak Râzî’nin ve Sadrüşşerîa’nın insan fiillerine yaklaşımlarını konu edinen çalışmalar yapılmakla birlikte Semerkandî’nin bu husustaki görüşlerini hususen bu iki düşünürle irtibatlı şekilde ele alan bir çalışmaya ihtiyaç vardır. Söz konusu ihtiyaca cevap vermeyi amaçlayan bu makalede zikri geçen iki Hanefî ismin Râzî’nin argümanına getirdikleri eleştiride süreklilik ve değişimin izi sürülecek ve Mâverâünnehir’deki Hanefî geleneğin klasik sonrası dönem Eş‘arî birikimiyle hesaplaşmasının irade tartışmalarına nasıl yansıdığı gösterilecektir. Bu makalede mezkûr iki Hanefî düşünürden Semerkandî’nin Râzî’yi eleştirisine rağmen onun cebr argümanının hiyerarşik sebeplik zincirini benimseyerek illet anlayışında onunla benzeştiği, Sadrüşşerîa’nın ise farklı bir tam illet tasavvurundan hareketle hâlleri de bu illete dâhil ettiği tespit edilmiştir. Sadrüşşerîa eleştirisinde selefinden bir adım öteye giderek cebr argümanın öncüllerini çürütmeye çalışmıştır.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Ilahiyat Studies, 2022
Al-Taftāzānī (d. 792/1390), a well-known theorist/theologian of the post-classical era of Islamic... more Al-Taftāzānī (d. 792/1390), a well-known theorist/theologian of the post-classical era of Islamic thought, not only elucidated the statements of Ṣadr al-sharīʿah in his ḥāshiyah (super-commentary), titled al-Talwīḥ, which he wrote on al-Tawḍīḥ, but also introduced several criticisms against his arguments. Al-Taftāzānī’s work, al-Talwīḥ, was received with great interest by Ottoman scholars, who then composed many ḥāshiyahs on it in the fifteenth century. Although the number of ḥāshiyahs significantly diminished, the practice of ḥāshiyah writing on al-Talwīḥ continued in the sixteenth century. Surūrī Chalabī (d. 969/1562) was one of the scholars who penned a ḥāshiyah on al-Talwīḥ during this period. The literary works of Surūrī Chalabī have recently been the subject of numerous academic studies, yet his legacy in Islamic sciences has not received the same interest. This article, aiming to fill this gap in the literature, scrutinizes synchronically and diachronically the place of Surūrī’s Ḥāshiyah on al-Talwīḥ within the tradition of Ottoman ḥāshiyah writing on al-Talwīḥ and eventually demonstrates that Surūrī primarily dealt with the arguments and comments of Ḥasan Chalabī, a previous ḥāshiyah author who commented on al-Talwīḥ and criticized them in his argument-based ḥāshiyah thus endeavors to position himself within the tradition of ḥāshiyah writing of the previous century through Ḥasan Chalabī’s work.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Osmanlı'da İlm-i Fıkıh, 2022
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
İslâm Araştırmaları Dergisi, Dec 1, 2017
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
İslâm’da Medeniyet Bilimleri Tarihi, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The linguistic imaginations of Islamic legal theoreticians are centered on the theory of assignat... more The linguistic imaginations of Islamic legal theoreticians are centered on the theory of assignation (wad‘). The term wad‘ refers to assigning a meaning to a noun, or, as more classically called, an expression. The literal meaning of an expression in language refers to the truth (haqīqa) whereas its usage in another meaning, in some sense connected to the original meaning, refers to the figurative/metaphorical meaning. Theoretical jurisprudential literature has debated whether the literary meaning of an expression changes by the conduct of the Shāri‘ and, if so, whether jurists can use the term al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya (legal truths) as a kind of truth for the nouns that are argued to have acquired different meanings.
In this article, I will first examine some aspects of the concepts related to al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya in a historical and intellectual context. Then, by a close reading of the classical works of theologians and Hanafi legal scholars, I will try to show how the argument evolved from total denial of al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya (after al-Bāqillānī) into a gradual acceptance in almost all Sunni traditions (especially starting with al-Juwaynī). My objective is to outline the landmarks concerning the ideas on the conduct of the Shāri‘ on the meanings of nouns by pointing particularly to al-Bāqillānī and, after him, certain theologians and Hanafi jurists. I aim to highlight the changes in ideas in their proper intellectual and historical contexts.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, living in a period in which the philosophical-logical terminology started t... more Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, living in a period in which the philosophical-logical terminology started to dominate within the theoretical-universal disciplines, wrote his book of usul, al-Mahsul, with a style composed of usage of philosophical-logical terminology. He reconsidered the essence of umum concept, which had a fertile debate in its background, with facilities of that writing style. Using the philosophical-logical terminology, he reconstructed the definitions inherited from the tradition of theologians’ fiqh methodology. Razi contributed to two definitions offered by Abu’l-Husayn al-Basri and Gazzali in usul tradition by adding some excluding qualifications. Moreover he laid stress on “signifying the essence” in a third definition.
In the first umum definition, he highlighted “embracement (istighraq) all of that to which it is suited” while he emphasized “signification (dalalat) unlimited plurality” in the second. In his third definition, however, he put emphasis on “signification the essence with the qualification of undetermined plurality”. Taking into account all of these definitions, according to Razi, umum is a vocable that embraces all of individuals corresponding to a common essence. While, universality in classical logic means the corresponding of the individuals/particulars to a common essence; generality (umumiyyah) in the fiqh methodology is the signification of all of those individuals/particulars with the embracement of all of them. Thus, Razi’s definition determined the acceptability of umum forms (siyagh al-umum).
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Book Reviews by Imam Rabbani Çelik
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conference Presentations by Imam Rabbani Çelik
Osmanlı Düşüncesi: Kaynakları ve Tartışma Konuları, İstanbul: Mahya Yay., 2019
The scholarly works of Sa‘d al-Dīn al-Taftāzānī (d. 792/1390) produced an impact on several schol... more The scholarly works of Sa‘d al-Dīn al-Taftāzānī (d. 792/1390) produced an impact on several scholarly circles. Yet, taking account of al-Sayyid al-Sharīf al-Jurjānī (d. 816/1413), it is possible to say that the intellectual circle which ideas of aforementioned scholars most influenced on and most determined their knowledge production was Ottoman scholars. It appears from the old-dated copies of al-Taftāzānī’s works that his works concerning various disciplines was known by Ottoman schoolars at least prior to author’s death, i.e. towards the end of forteenth century. Indeed, historical sources indicate that al-Taftāzānī’s works became widely known in the lands of Anatolia at the end of forteenth century when Molla Fenārī (d. 834/1431) was a professor and judge in Bursa. The beginning of the fifteenth century, when the works of al-Taftāzānī were widely known and some of them was read as textbooks, falls on the period of the formation of “self-sustaining” intellectual milieu. In the second half of the fifteenth century, the educational instutions “were put in a certain hierarchy” and the scholarly tradition became self-sustaining. Essential part of knowledge production of this intellectual milieu took place through the works of al-Taftāzānī and al-Jurjānī. In the aforementioned period, a large number of glosses (hāshiya) were written by Ottoman scholars on al-Taftāzānī’s al-Talwīh in legal theory, Sharh al-Aqā‘id in theology and Mutawwal, the commentary entitled on Talhīs al-Miftāh in semantics and rhetoric. In this study, it will be shown how al-Taftāzānī was accepted as an authority shaping Ottoman intellectual tradition in the second half of fifteenth century, with reference to historical/bio-bibliographical sources and the works based on Taftāzānī’s scholarly heritage.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Sürgün Bir Şeyhe Armağan: Atpazarî Kutup Osman Kitabı, 2019
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Papers by Imam Rabbani Çelik
In this article, I will first examine some aspects of the concepts related to al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya in a historical and intellectual context. Then, by a close reading of the classical works of theologians and Hanafi legal scholars, I will try to show how the argument evolved from total denial of al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya (after al-Bāqillānī) into a gradual acceptance in almost all Sunni traditions (especially starting with al-Juwaynī). My objective is to outline the landmarks concerning the ideas on the conduct of the Shāri‘ on the meanings of nouns by pointing particularly to al-Bāqillānī and, after him, certain theologians and Hanafi jurists. I aim to highlight the changes in ideas in their proper intellectual and historical contexts.
In the first umum definition, he highlighted “embracement (istighraq) all of that to which it is suited” while he emphasized “signification (dalalat) unlimited plurality” in the second. In his third definition, however, he put emphasis on “signification the essence with the qualification of undetermined plurality”. Taking into account all of these definitions, according to Razi, umum is a vocable that embraces all of individuals corresponding to a common essence. While, universality in classical logic means the corresponding of the individuals/particulars to a common essence; generality (umumiyyah) in the fiqh methodology is the signification of all of those individuals/particulars with the embracement of all of them. Thus, Razi’s definition determined the acceptability of umum forms (siyagh al-umum).
Book Reviews by Imam Rabbani Çelik
Conference Presentations by Imam Rabbani Çelik
In this article, I will first examine some aspects of the concepts related to al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya in a historical and intellectual context. Then, by a close reading of the classical works of theologians and Hanafi legal scholars, I will try to show how the argument evolved from total denial of al-haqīqa al-shar‘iyya (after al-Bāqillānī) into a gradual acceptance in almost all Sunni traditions (especially starting with al-Juwaynī). My objective is to outline the landmarks concerning the ideas on the conduct of the Shāri‘ on the meanings of nouns by pointing particularly to al-Bāqillānī and, after him, certain theologians and Hanafi jurists. I aim to highlight the changes in ideas in their proper intellectual and historical contexts.
In the first umum definition, he highlighted “embracement (istighraq) all of that to which it is suited” while he emphasized “signification (dalalat) unlimited plurality” in the second. In his third definition, however, he put emphasis on “signification the essence with the qualification of undetermined plurality”. Taking into account all of these definitions, according to Razi, umum is a vocable that embraces all of individuals corresponding to a common essence. While, universality in classical logic means the corresponding of the individuals/particulars to a common essence; generality (umumiyyah) in the fiqh methodology is the signification of all of those individuals/particulars with the embracement of all of them. Thus, Razi’s definition determined the acceptability of umum forms (siyagh al-umum).