Author
Acar, Yusuf, Demir, Abdullah
Publication Place
Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Theology -
Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Theology
Subject
Cumhuriyet journal of theology, 2021, Vol.25 (3), p.1341-1358
Type
kitap
Language
Arabic
Digital
Yes
Manuscript
No
Library
Leitir Library
Library Asset ID
EISSN: 2528-987X, DOI: 10.18505/cuid.989336
Record ID
cdi_idealonline_journals_IDEAL_159965
Library Location
DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), ProQuest Central
Notes
Since it reports about an event, situation or person in history, each narration or text has a history that sheds light on both its formation and its arrival to us, and illuminating this history is at least as important as the content analysis. For this purpose, it is necessary to examine whether a news source has survived to the present day as created by the author without being exposed to any external intervention, and the narration must be examined in terms of reliability and evidence within the integrity of the attribution-text. Then, when text criticism is mentioned, an understanding of criticism/Literary Criti-cism (nakdu'l-isnâd ve'l-metn) should come to mind, which includes both the investigation of the source work/Scholarly editing and the annotation of the narration by making an authentic research in terms of attribution and text. Many classical sources, which have been relatively vetted and published due to reasons such as not being able to follow a standard method, the small number of copies available and/or the distance of the copies from the author by date, and commercial concerns, contain errors that require re-verified publication. One of them is the work of Ibn Hibban (d. 354/965) called el-Mecrûhîn. Ibn Hibban, who divided the narrators into two groups according to their reliability and collected those he considered weak in his work called al-Majrûhîn, placed Abu Hanifa (d. 150/767) at the top of the list. First, Sahib al-Ray criticized Abu Hanifa as a slave child, a slanderer, a taqiyyah, a Murji'i with little hadith knowledge, a heretic and a propagandist, a narrator who was vilified by the imams, and then he tried to justify his claims with around thirty narrations from the predecessor scholars. These news are completely different from the discussions and criticisms of scholars such as Evzâʿî (d. 157/774), Ibn Abi Leylâ (d. 148/765) and Ibn Abi Shayba (d. 235/849) with Abu Hanifa and his school, which are largely scientifically based. Because these news compiled by Ibn Hibban are entirely insulting and polemical narrations aimed at the person and credibility of Abu Hanifa. It is important to examine and criticize these news in terms of narration techniques, as they serve as a source for later periods. The history of a narration in al-Mecrûhîn, one of the leading works of cerh-taʿdîl literature, which constitutes an important part of the hadith sciences in terms of volume and location, is remarkable in many respects. In this narration, Abu Hanifa Nu'man b. Thabit b. Zuta b. It is reported that Mah said, "If a man serves this mule in order to get closer to Allah, I would not see any harm in that." According to our analysis, Ibn Abi Müshir in the source of this news is unknown, Mahfûz b. The narrator, written as Ebî Sevbe, but the correct name is Tevbe, was written by Metrûk, Ahmed b. el-Velîd el-Mahramî el-Kerhî is weak, the source person is Yahyâ b. Hamza, on the other hand, is a fateful but trustworthy narrator who narrates from qualified people. Said b. As for Abdilaziz, he has nothing to do with the tolerance and tone of the news. In addition, there is a tenancy in the promissory note. First of all, what is expected from a basic work like al-Majrûhîn, whose subject and purpose is entirely to examine the narrator, is that the news in it are acceptable, at least in terms of attribution. Therefore, the news in question is so weak that it cannot be taken as evidence in terms of its evidence. When the news in question, which is also included in earlier period sources such as Fesevî (d. 277/890), is evaluated in terms of both the document and the text, it is seen that a statement circulating as gossip against Abu Hanife in Damascus around the issue of irjā, which was one of the most heated debates in the second half of the second century of the Hijri, turns into semaʿ in terms of is-nad and also/in terms of text. The word النعل shoe-shoe is translated into البغل/mule. Apart from the weak source of the news, the narration states that Saîd b. has nothing to do with the tolerance and tone of the news. Abdilaziz became the narrator/source of the news with his voice in the sky. It would be a reductionist and overly optimistic approach to assume that all of these may have resulted from the corrections and distortions of the copyists. The narration we are considering is a typical example in terms of showing the effect of the conflict of ideas between the people of hadith and the people of ra'y on the narrations. But it is not the only example.
Detaylı Başlık
مغامرة رواية تحوّل فيها النعل الى البغل في سياق أهمية التحقيق ونقد المتن
