Fıkhın Kelâma Tercihi İmam Ebû Hanîfe ve İmam Şâfiî Örneği
Preference of Jurisprudence to Kalam: Example of Imam Abū Ḥanīfa and Imam Shāfiī

Summary/Abstract: The sciences of kalam and fiqh have a special importance in the history of Islamic thought and science. Both Islamic sciences step forward with their interactions with other sciences in their formation processes and contributions to the evolution of religious/Islamic thought. Along possessing particular methods, both sciences were combined under the concept of “jurisprudence” due to having some functions specific to themselves in Islamic sciences. In the literature, the field representing the linguistic, religious, intellectual and practical aspects of fiqh has become widespread with the concepts of “uṣūl-i fiqh” and “fürū-i fiqh”, and the part about creed with “uṣūlü’d-dīn” or “fiqhu’l-akbar”. With this regard, some assessments and approaches at the level of extremeness and understatement occurring around Abū Ḥanīfa and Shāfiī, the founders of two great Sunni sects specific to kalam-jurisprudence, have attracted our attention. Some narrations about how these imams of Islamic law stayed away from the science of kalam and showed negative reaction to it, have given a place in this literature. This study was chosen in order to emphasis the background of the issues in question. In this regard, the jurisprudence preferences of the two imams are evaluated from the angle of general criticism. It is possible to tell the followings about the findings, fixations and results of the subject: the Umayyad and Abbasid periods when imam Abū Ḥanīfa lived and the Abbasid period when imam Shāfiī lived have been accepted as the most important periods of Islamic history. Together with the newly conquered places, the administrative and scientific cosmopolitan regions were congregated with so many people that intellectual and cultured societies emerged there. Compiling books and translation activities contributed to the development of intellectual sciences and intellectual debates. Sciences such as kalam and jurisprudence went through planned, the systematic and dynamic developments. However, when these developments led to contradiction to basic truths, this caused some unwanted reactions. The most prominent among these is systematic activation of sects and the formation of marginal groups such as Khawarij, Shia, Jahmiyyah, Mu’tazila, Mushabbiha, Qadiriyyah and Jabriyah which started to appear since the companion’s time. Generally, the religious/belief-related limits were exceeded in such issues as declaring someone as a disbeliever who committed a sin, attributes of Allah, creation of the Qur’an, ru’yetullah, fate, the torment in the grave, and creation of heaven and hell. Therefore, some scholars such as imam Abū Ḥanīfa and and imam Shāfiī appeared on the stage of history against thoughts and currents that were not fed by the source of Qur’anic revelation and that did not compliment deviator and fictional thought. These two leaders of ahl al-ra’y and ahl al-ḥadīth opposed the methods of ahl-i kalam which they thought they handled matters of faith independent from the Qur’an and Sunnah. Both objected to the debates that thinkers, philosophers and their followers put forth about the bases of religious faith. The fact that they saw some inevitable harm of decrees that the religion did not accept, lead to the two scholars to stay away from the abovementioned debates. They headed towards the science of jurisprudence which they saw as the most reasonable preference and which they believed to provide more benefits to Muslims in the political and religious atmosphere of the time. This preference, understood to be a logical/principled decision, has a close relationship with the methodical thoughts of the two imams. In this particular context, while Abū Ḥanīfa took juristic preference, Shāfiī took comparison as the bases. During the phase of preferring the science of jurisprudence, Abū Ḥanīfa carried out comparisons and research between Islamic sciences. Shāfiī, even at the very beginning, headed towards the science of jurisprudence and adopted a distant attitude towards kalam. Both imams gave their most and toughest struggles against Mu’tazila, which they saw as ahl-i bid’at. In this struggle, Abū Ḥanīfa became more prominent, and participated in numerous debates spending a great deal of time. On the other hand, Shāfiī, during the majority of his scientific life, stayed away from debates on Kalam. However, it is seen that both scholars’ thoughts about preferences for jurisprudence overlapped.

• Details
• Contents