Author
Ersin Celik
Publication Place
Hits University -
Hits University
Subject
Hittite Journal of Theology, 2022-06, Vol.21 (1), p.451-478
Type
Book
Language
ara,tur
Digital
Yes
Manuscript
No
Library
Leitir Library
Library Asset ID
EISSN: 2757-6949, DOI: 10.14395/hid.1073575
Record ID
cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_aaf1b25aa6b24e2d9a793201e69d5677
Library Location
DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals
Notes
Muqātil b. The commentary of Süleyman (d. 150/767) is very important as it is the oldest commentary that has survived to the present day. While the importance of this commentary is indisputable, the sectarian identity of the author is equally controversial. The author's sectarian affiliation is closely related to the source value of this commentary. Because the evaluations about Muqatil are at two extreme points: "lying" and "being an authority in tafsir". In the contemporary period, some researchers have taken these discussions on the author's sectarian identity to the point that Muqātil was seen as "objectionable" in the Sunni tafsir tradition, and this caused the author's commentary to be ignored. Indeed, it is a fact that references to Muqatil are either not included at all or very little in the early commentaries that compiled the narrations such as Tabari and Ibn Abi Hatim. Therefore, the researchers in question make the problem not only a matter of Muqatil's sectarian identity and argue that his commentary was sacrificed to ideological motives in the tafsir tradition. As for Muqatil's sectarian identity, there are different opinions as to whether he is attributed to Mushabbiha, Murjia or Shia/Zaydiyya. This study focuses especially on the claim that Muqatil was Shiite/Zaydi. The claim that Muqātil was Shiite/Zaydi was first put forward by Ibn al-Nadīm (d. 385/995), who is famous for his tendency towards Shia. Shiite scholar al-Kashshi (III-IV. /IX-Xth century) and Abu Ca'fer al-Tusi (d. 460/1067) also claimed that he was Shiite/Zaydi. Additionally, Ebû Ca'fer et-Tûsî emphasized that Mukâtil was one of the companions of Muhammed el-Bâkır (d. 114/733) and Ca'fer-i Sâdık (d. 148/765). Muqātil, who is mostly accused of believing in simile in the Sunni tradition, has been described as a Shiite/Zaydi in the contemporary period by Abdullah Mahmud Şehhāte (b. 1951), the researcher of his tafsīr, and also by names such as Muhammad Abu Zehre (d. 1974). A relationship between Muqatil and Zaydiyya was also established by orientalists such as Louis Massignon (d. 1962) and Montgomery Watt (d. 2006). Our research has two main purposes: First, to make some convincing determinations that the author is not a Shiite/Zaydi, based on his own interpretation. The second is to make some evaluations about Muqatil's place and influence in Shiite tradition, especially in tafsir and hadith sources. Here, we will try to determine whether the narrations from Muqatil are included in the basic commentary and hadith sources of Shia, and if so, to what extent, and compare these narrations with the author's existing works. In this way, it will be examined whether the narrations attributed to Muqatil in Shiite sources are found in his own sources and especially in the works of commentators who benefited from him a lot, such as Salebî. In addition, the content analysis of the narrations attributed to Muqatil in these Shiite sources will also be made. As a result, in this study, Hijri II., which is claimed to be Shiite/Zaydid by some Sunni and Shiite authors. The sectarian affiliation of Muqatil, one of the leading commentators of the century, is evaluated through Shiite sources.
Detaylı Başlık
Mukâtil b. Süleymân’ın Şiî/Zeydî Olduğu İddiası ve Şiî Kaynaklardaki Mukâtil Rivayetleri
