Eş‘arî ve Şâfiî Bir Âlim Olarak İlkiyâ el-Herrâsî ve Ahkâmü’l-Kur’ân Adlı Eserinin Kelâmî Boyutu
As an Ashʿarī and Shāfi'ī Scholar al-Kiyā al-Harrāsī and Theological Dimension of His Book Aḥkām al-Qurʾān

Summary/Abstract: There are some categorical perspectives on the basis of the works that divide the sects into action and faith. A group that stands out among these categories is the Ashʿarī-Shāfi’ī structure. In order to understand this work, it is necessary to understand first the sources and scholars who feed this structure. We have specified a sample as the method of this article and we tried to examine al-Harrāsī in the first place by observing the axis of the Ashʿarī- Shāfi’ī, b­­ut rather the Ashʿarī. In this work we are also in the impressions of his life, we aimed to make a methodical contribution to the understanding of the contemporary Ashʿarī-Shāfi’ī structure both in the present era by giving some evaluations of the method and baling of al-Harrāsī. We have determined the examples we have given about al-Harrāsī as the axis of universalism that reflects the main elements of the generally reflecting process and the Kalām. Thus, Harrāsī's place in the history of Kalām becomes clearer. We also aimed to give an idea about the muta’akhkhirūn period Kalām’s foundations that became to mature in his own time.Ashʿariyya was adopted as the first representative school of the Ahl al-sunna. Although the founder of the Ashʿariyya was Abū’l-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī, the sect had undergone strong changes after him. The active Muslim theologians after the founder played an active role in this sectarian process. Especially in these, al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) and his student al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111) are two important names. Many studies have been done especially about al-Ghazālī because he was influential in giving a new direction to kalām by including kalām in logic and criticizing philosophers. However, al-Ghazālī is not the only scholar in his age and he is not the only student of al-Juwaynī. Al-Harrāsī is also remarkable for both being a name al-Juwaynī refers to with praise and, like al-Ghazālī, he is an important madrasah teacher.The first point of interest about al-Harrāsī is that he is a dark Shāfiʿī follower. Although not all of the works given in the tabaḳāt books are present today, his Aḥkām al-Qurʾān has been an important source of reference for those who have been writing for the first time. In fact, Aḥkām al-Qurʾān is a kind of interpretation; it can be considered as a study of the kind of thematic interpretation. The works of this kind are written in order to explain rules (aḥkām) mentioned in the Qurʾān. However, a false judgment that arises here is that the interpretation of aḥkām relate only to duty and transaction. However, in view of the reader's interpretation of aḥkām, it also shows the prophetic direction of his own writer. This situation manifests itself in al-Harrāsī's Aḥkām al-Qurʾān. His ta’wīls, which he practically made in support of the Shāfiʿī sect and his belief, are in the coexistence of the Ashʿarī – Shāfiʿī in his age. This is a typical example of the religious structure desired to be established during the period. al-Kiyā al-Harrāsī is a scholar who works as a teacher at the al-Niẓāmiyya al-Madrasahs at a time when the Abbāsī state weakened and bowed to the Saljūqs. The Saljūqs were engaged in sectarian conflicts during this period. In particular, the Shīʿa and Bāṭinī movements have presented a structure threatening the state. In contrast, the Saljūqs built an institution to represent the Sunnī understanding as well as the military measures: al-Niẓāmiyya al-Madrasahs. In these al-madrasas, the most important scholars of the age have made efforts to establish the belief of the Ahl al-Sunna. Vizier Niẓām al-Mulk activated these madrasahs to prevent the ideological and practical conflicts already prevalent in the state before him and especially to prevent the occurrence of an event similar to Miḥna which was against As̲h̲ʿariyya. Within this structure, al-Harrāsī's point of view developed in Aḥkām al-Qurʾān sheds light on both the ages and gives an idea about the methodology of Islamic sciences.In al-Harrāsī's Aḥkām al-Qurʾān, his methodology is open to various forms. While he was evaluating the mandub, it was his figurative command; so there was no punishment for its abandonment. This view is parallel to Ḥanafī's sunna line. It is in the axis of sunna that it is possible that the ʿām can be allocated by the act of the prophet. But he has avoided expressing any positive or negative opinion on the subject of the appropriation with the syllogism of the ʿām. In the understanding of al-Harrāsī's scientific understanding, mutawātir ḥadīth weight to abrogate the Qurʾān. However, it is not possible to abrogate like this by syllogism. While al-Harrāsī was evaluating the abrogate, he kept it separate from his home and told Shāriʿ that he could change the previous sentence in naṣṣ. The procedural wisdom that al-Harrāsī used in dealing with the Sakīfe event is also remarkable in his Ashʿarī staidness. "Al-a’imma min Quraysh" ḥadīth is mentioned here, that the Imāms are in the sense that the recitation of Lām al-taʿrīf is expressing istighrāq, that is to say, generality. Abū Bakr therefore, when the envoy said this to them, the anṣār did not oppose him. All these examples show the balance and the balance he gives to reason and revelation.Considering that ʿUmūm al-Belwā is the evidence of khabar al-wāḥid, al-Harrāsī thinks that such ḥadīths cannot be used as evidence in the belief. In this way we find some examples of evaluating the ḥadīth of the fāsiqs put forward an authentic acknowledgment without evaluating the narrations and said that the ḥadīth of the fāsiqs could be accepted. However, this narrator has a tendency to accept the ḥadīth conditions. Or it should not be mentioned in the deeds fāsiq. It is not possible that an ijmāʿ that they made during the time of the scholars is destroyed in the next period. All of al-Harrāsī's evaluations of this process show that the sectarian work that has been made up to the time of the day is now being tried to be grounded. Although the name of al-Ghazālī is widely mentioned in the Ashʿarī and Shāfiʿī methods, al-Harrāsī seems to have an idea in a systematic way, just like al-Ghazālī.Apart from the procedural issues of al-Harrāsī, it is seen that Aḥkām al-Qurʾān also operates many theological issues in the Ashʿarī system. al-Harrāsī has made many theological assessments of the existence and unity of Allāh around ḥudūth demonstration. In the Qurʾān, Allāh commanded man to think and obey by looking at a world. This, in turn, points to the invalidity of the saying of not approaching the books in a rational way, that is, the Salafī discourse. According to al-Harrāsī, the most important basis in the ḥudūth is that the substance and the accidents are created later. Once a person understands the existence of any object or event, all the other things are self-evident. Allāh intervenes in this world as a constant creative actor. Also tasalsul is impossible. So, as philosophers claim, there is no sense of god that does not intervene in the world.In the examples that al-Harrāsī expresses his or her theological understanding, his approach to livelihood has an original appearance. Allāh gives the sustenance of mankind, but not in a collective manner at once. It connects people to their work. So, when a person works, he sees that he gets his labour back. This leads to the idea that man actually "leads to good results". Human beings understand that with these intellectual inferences, good works in the world will lead to good results in the hereafter. This evaluation of al-Harrāsī is a sociological ta’wīl example.Many other theological assessments are beyond the scope of these statements in al-Harrāsī 's Aḥkām al-Qurʾān. Although Harrāsī’s views, the place of Ashʿarī and Shāfiʿī line, it should be kept in mind that al-Harrāsī is an important member of the his age.

• Details
• Contents