Publication: İbn Mâlik’in Zemahşerî’ye yönelik eleştirilerine Ebû Hayyân’ın yaklaşımı
Date
2024-05-02
Authors
Authors
Kişmir, Abdulkadir
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi
Abstract
Bu makale, nahiv tarihinde önemli bir yere sahip İbn Mâlik’in (ö. 672/1274) kendisinden yaklaşık bir asır önce yaşamış, nahiv ve tefsir ilminde araştırma yapanların kendisine çokça atıfta bulunduğu Zemahşerî’ye (ö. 538/1144) yönelttiği nahvî eleştirilerini ve nahvin yanı sıra fıkıh, tefsir, kıraat, hadis gibi birçok farklı alanda eserleriyle ön plana çıkan Ebû Hayyân el-Endelüsî’nin (ö. 745/1344) bu eleştirilere yaklaşımını irdelemeyi amaçlar. Ebû Hayyân, el-Baḥru’l-muḥîṭ adlı tefsirinde, Zemahşerî’yi, nahvin genel kural ve kaidelerinin dışına çıkarak âyetleri çarpıttığı ve zorlama yorumlara bıraktığını ifade etmekle birlikte, et-Teẕyîl ve’t-tekmîl fî şerḥi Kitâbi’t-Teshîl eserinde aynı itikâdî yönelimi paylaştığı İbn Mâlik’in, Zemahşerî’ye yönelik bazı nahvî eleştirileri karşısında Zemahşerî’ye hak verdiği görülür. Bir yönüyle Ebû Hayyân’ın olgun ilmî şahsiyetine işaret eden bu durum başka bir açıdan esas aldığı ilmî metodolojinin sağlamlığını gösterir. İbn Mâlik’in Şerḥu’t-Teshîl ve onun şerhi olarak kaleme alınan Ebû Hayyân’ın et-Teẕyîl ve’t-tekmîl fî şerḥi Kitâbi’t-Teshîl eserleriyle sınırladığımız bu çalışma kanaatimizce nahiv tarihindeki derinliğe ve zenginliğe işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca itikâdî sınırları aşan tartışmaları gün yüzüne çıkartması bu çalışmayı önemli kılan hususlardandır.
This article aims to examine the grammatical criticisms directed by Ibn Mālik (d. 672/1274), who holds an important place in the history of naḥw (Arabic grammar), towards al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144), a scholar who lived approximately a century before him and was frequently referred to by researchers in the fields of naḥw and tafsīr (Qurʾānic exegesis). It also intends to analyze the approach of Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), a prominent figure known for his works in various fields including naḥw, fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), tafsīr, qirāʾāt(Recitation of the Qurʾān) and ḥadīth, to these criticisms. In his tafsīr titled al-Baḥr al-Muḥīṭ, Abū Ḥayyān accuses al-Zamakhsharī of deviating from the general rules and principles of naḥw by distorting verses and resorting to forced interpretations. However, in his work al-Tadhyīl wa-al-Takmīl fī Sharḥ Kitāb al-Tashīl, Abū Ḥayyān, sharing the same doctrinal orientation as Ibn Mālik, is seen to agree with Zamakhsharī in response to certain syntactic criticisms directed at Zamakhsharī by Ibn Mālik. This situation, which in one respect points to Abū Ḥayyān’s mature scientific personality, in another aspect shows the soundness of the scientific methodology on which he is based. By focusing on Ibn Mālik’s Sharḥ al-Tashīl and Abū Ḥayyān’s al-Tadhyīl wa-al-Takmīl fī Sharḥ Kitāb al-Tashīl as the main sources, this study, in our opinion, points to the depth and richness of naḥw history. Additionally, its ability to bring to light discussions that transcend doctrinal boundaries is one of the significant aspects that make this study noteworthy.
This article aims to examine the grammatical criticisms directed by Ibn Mālik (d. 672/1274), who holds an important place in the history of naḥw (Arabic grammar), towards al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144), a scholar who lived approximately a century before him and was frequently referred to by researchers in the fields of naḥw and tafsīr (Qurʾānic exegesis). It also intends to analyze the approach of Abū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī (d. 745/1344), a prominent figure known for his works in various fields including naḥw, fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), tafsīr, qirāʾāt(Recitation of the Qurʾān) and ḥadīth, to these criticisms. In his tafsīr titled al-Baḥr al-Muḥīṭ, Abū Ḥayyān accuses al-Zamakhsharī of deviating from the general rules and principles of naḥw by distorting verses and resorting to forced interpretations. However, in his work al-Tadhyīl wa-al-Takmīl fī Sharḥ Kitāb al-Tashīl, Abū Ḥayyān, sharing the same doctrinal orientation as Ibn Mālik, is seen to agree with Zamakhsharī in response to certain syntactic criticisms directed at Zamakhsharī by Ibn Mālik. This situation, which in one respect points to Abū Ḥayyān’s mature scientific personality, in another aspect shows the soundness of the scientific methodology on which he is based. By focusing on Ibn Mālik’s Sharḥ al-Tashīl and Abū Ḥayyān’s al-Tadhyīl wa-al-Takmīl fī Sharḥ Kitāb al-Tashīl as the main sources, this study, in our opinion, points to the depth and richness of naḥw history. Additionally, its ability to bring to light discussions that transcend doctrinal boundaries is one of the significant aspects that make this study noteworthy.
Description
Keywords
Eleştiri, Arap dili, Nahiv, Zemahşerî, İbn Mâlik, Ebû Hayyân, Arabic language, Naḥw, al-Zamakhsharī, Ibn Mālik, Abū Ḥayyān, Criticism