Hadislerin doğru anlaşılması ve yorumlanması çabası ilk defa Hz. Peygamber döneminde başlamış, tâbiîn ve tebeu’t-tâbiîn döneminde hadislerin tedviniyle birlikte hız kazanmış ve bu hususta önemli çalışmalar yapılmıştır. İlerleyen süreçte fıkıh usulünün verilerini kullanarak ahkâm hadislerinden hüküm çıkarma ve lafız-mâna ilişkisi konusunda hakikat-mecaz ekseninde yeni yorum yöntemleriyle uygulamalı olarak ele alınan eserler telif edilmiştir. Bu eserlerin başında İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in, Şerḥu’l-İlmâm bi-eḥâdîs̱i’l-aḥkâm’ı gelmektedir. Şerḥu’l-İlmâm hadis şerh edebiyatında muhteva zenginliğini artırarak ve kullanılan yöntemleri geliştirerek daha önceki şerhleri geride bırakmış (...) bir eserdir. Bu çalışmada İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hadisleri anlamada bir yöntem olarak kullandığı hakikat-mecaz konusu ele alınmıştır. Böyle bir konunun tercih edilmesindeki ana etmenlerin başında mezkûr eserde hüküm istihrâcında hakikat-mecaz bağlamında diğer çalışmalara nispetle, analitik yaklaşımların ön plana çıkması ve alana katkı sağlaması gelmektedir. Çalışmanın hedefi, Şerḥu’l-İlmâm’da hakikat-mecaz ekseninde İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hadisleri nasıl yorumladığını ortaya çıkarmak ve elde edilen bulgularla yeni yorum imkânlarına alan açmaktır. Lafzın mânaya delaleti konusunda hakikat ve mecaz arasındaki ilişki ve kesişim noktaları çoğu zaman bir problem olarak durmaktadır. Hadis metinlerinin yorumlanmasında hakikat ve mecazın birlikte kullanım alanlarının tespit edilmesi ve hakikat-mecaz ayırımının işlevsel yönünün ortaya çıkarılması, hadislerin doğru anlaşılmasına ve yorumlanmasına katkı sağlayacaktır. Araştırmada öncelikli olarak Şerḥu’l-İlmâm’ın hadis ve fıkıh sahasındaki önemi ve değeriyle ilgili bilgi verilmiş, sonra hakikat ve mecaz kavramlarının tanımlarına geçilmiştir. Mecaz türleri arasında sadece İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in atıf yaptığı istiare, teşbih, teşbîhu’l-mânevî ve teşbîhu’s-sûrî gibi kavramlara yer verilmiştir. Son olarak İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hakikat ve mecazı bir yöntem olarak nasıl kullandığı konusu örnekler çerçevesinde tahlil edilmiştir. Araştırmada, İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hakikat ve mecazın zamansal boyutuna, hakikat ve mecaz ayırımında tazmînin rolüne, hakikat ve mecazın cemʿine, hakikate en yakın mecazlara ve hakikat-mecaz arasındaki tercih sebeplerine değinerek hakikat ve mecazı bir yöntem olarak kullandığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. İbn Dakīkulʿîd’in hakikat ve mecazı birlikte kullanmasının işlevsel yönleri ve faydaları arasında; lafızların lugatlerde geçtiği anlamları keşfetmek, lafzın anlamında derin ve net açılımlar yapmak, tekellüflü mânaları ayıklamak, mecaza hamledilmeyi gerekli kılan alâkaları/bağları belirlemek, çözümlemeci yaklaşımla muhtemel mânaları ortaya çıkarmak gibi hususlar yer almaktadır. Eğer İbn Dakīkulʿîd, 57 hadisi değil de İlmâm’da yer alan tüm hadisleri şerh etme fırsatı, bulabilseydi bugün hadislerin hakikat ve mecaz eksenli şerh edildiği en çok konuşulan eserlerin başında Şerḥu’l-İlmâm gelebilirdi. (shrink)

Bu makalede Giritli Sırrı Paşa’nın (1844-1895) Şerhu’l-Akāid Tercümesi analiz edilmektedir. Makalede öncelikle Sırrı Paşa’nın entelektüel arka planı ve diğer eserlerine değinilerek tercüme tarihsel bağlamına yerleştirmeye çalışıldı. Özellikle mütercimin kelâm tasavvurunu yansıtan mukaddime kısmına dikkat çekildi. Mâtürîdî kelâmına dair klasik bir metnin on dokuzuncu yüzyıl Osmanlı okuyucusu için Şerhu’l-Akāid’in diğer şerh ve haşiyelerindeki farklı yorumları içerecek şekilde tercümenin nasıl genişlediği gösterildi. Tercümede farklı görüşlerin bir araya toplanması, aynı mesele karşısında farklı yaklaşımların birbirleriyle karşılaştırılabilmesini sağlamaktadır. Sırrı Paşa sadece metni tercüme edip diğer (...) yorumları nakletmekle kalmamış, kendi yorumlarını da ortaya koymuştur. Bu nedenle bu tercümeyi “yorumlu tercüme” olarak adlandırmaktayız. Örnek olarak bu çalışma Mâtürîdî ve Eşʿarî ekolleri arasındaki temel ihtilaflardan biri olarak görülen irâde-i cüzʾiyye kavramı üzerine odaklanmaktadır. Sırrı Paşa ve faydalandığı kaynaklardan Cevdet Paşa bu meselede Mâtürîdî görüşü benimsemişlerdir. (shrink)

Mu‘allâkâtların, tefsir, nahiv, sarf ve dil ilimlerindeki önemli rolünün yanı sıra Arap dili ve edebiyatı âleminde de yüksek ve önemli bir konumu bulunmaktadır. Cahiliye devri müfredatlarının pek çoğunu kapsamasından ötürü dil ve edebiyat erbabı ona önem atfetmiştir. Onlardan biri de, ‘Şerhü’l-Kasâ’idi’l-السبع’ adıyla el-Muâ‘llekât’a yaptığı şerhiyle Ebu Bekir Muhammed bin el-Kasım bin Beşar bin el-Anbari. Bu eserinde pek çok nahiv, zamirin aidiyeti, harflerin manası, zarf ile car ve mecrûrun bağlı olduğu yerin belirlenmesi, müfredatlarıni‘râbı, illetler arasındaki üstünlükler, kıyasa ve luğatta asıl olana, (...) kelimenin irabını belirlemede bazı seslerin etki nedenlerine, sarf, lügat, belağat, eleştiri vb. konulara değinmektedir. Bu itibarla bu araştırma, betimsel analitik yöntemini kullanarak et-Anbari’ninMu‘allâkât şerhindeki nahiv yöntemini, Arap nahiv ilminde iki önemli konu olan kıyas ve ta‘lîl ile ilgili duruşunu açıklayarak değerlendirmeyi hedeflemektedir. (shrink)

Dâwûd al-Qarisî (Dâvûd al-Karsî) was a versatile and prolific 18th century Ottoman scholar who studied in İstanbul and Egypt and then taught for long years in various centers of learning like Egypt, Cyprus, Karaman, and İstanbul. He held high esteem for Mehmed Efendi of Birgi (Imâm Birgivî/Birgili, d.1573), out of respect for whom, towards the end of his life, Karsî, like Birgivî, occupied himself with teaching in the town of Birgi, where he died in 1756 and was buried next to (...) Birgivî. Better known for his following works on Arabic language and rhetoric and on the prophetic traditions (hadith): Sharḥu uṣûli’l-ḥadîth li’l-Birgivî; Sharḥu’l-Ḳaṣîdati’n-nûniyya (two commentaries, in Arabic and Turkish); Şarḥu’l-Emsileti’l-mukhtalifa fi’ṣ-ṣarf (two commentaries, in Arabic and Turkish); Sharḥu’l-Binâʾ; Sharḥu’l-ʿAvâmil; and Sharḥu İzhâri’l-asrâr, Karsî has actually composed textbooks in quite different fields. Hence the hundreds of manuscript copies of his works in world libraries. Many of his works were also recurrently printed in the Ottoman period. One of the neglected aspects of Karsî is his identity as a logician. Although he authored ambitious and potent works in the field of logic, this aspect of him has not been subject to modern studies. Even his bibliography has not been established so far (with scattered manuscript copies of his works and incomplete catalogue entries). This article primarily and in a long research based on manuscript copies and bibliographic sources, identifies twelve works on logic that Karsî has authored. We have clarified the works that are frequently mistaken for each other, and, especially, have definitively established his authorship of a voluminous commentary on al-Kâtibî’s al-Shamsiyya, of which commentary a second manuscript copy has been identified and described together with the other copy. Next is handled his most famous work of logic, the Sharhu Îsâghûcî, which constitutes an important and assertive ring in the tradition of commentaries on Îsâghûcî. We describe in detail the nine manuscript copies of this work that have been identified in various libraries. The critical text of Karsî’s Sharhu Îsâghûcî, whose composition was finished on 5 March 1745, has been prepared based on the following four manuscripts: (1) MS Kayseri Raşid Efendi Kütüphanesi, No. 857, ff.1v-3v, dated 1746, that is, only one year after the composition of the work; (2) MS Bursa İnebey Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi, Genel, No.794B, ff.96v-114v, dated 1755; (3) MS Millet Kütüphanesi, Ali Emiri Efendi Arapça, No. 1752, ff.48v-58r, dated 1760; (4) MS Beyazıt Yazma Eser Kütüphanesi, Beyazıt, No. 3129, ff.41v-55v, dated 8 March 1772. While preparing the critical text, we have applied the Center for Islamic Studies (İslam Araştırmaları Merkezi, İSAM)’s method of optional text choice. The critical text is preceded by a content analysis. Karsî is well aware of the preceding tradition of commentary on Îsâghûcî, and has composed his own commentary as a ‘simile’ or alternative to the commentary by Mollâ Fanârî which was famous and current in his own day. Karsî’s statement “the commentary in one day and one night” is a reference to Mollâ Fanârî who had stated that he started writing his commentary in the morning and finished it by the evening. Karsî, who spent long years in the Egyptian scholarly and cultural basin, adopted the religious-sciences-centered ‘instrumentalist’ understanding of logic that was dominant in the Egypt-Maghrib region. Therefore, no matter how famous they were, he criticized those theoretical, long, and detailed works of logic which mingled with philosophy; and defended and favored authoring functional and cogent logic texts that were beneficial, in terms of religious sciences, to the seekers of knowledge and the scholars. Therefore, in a manner not frequently encountered in other texts of its kind, he refers to the writings and views of Muhammad b. Yûsuf al-Sanûsî (d.1490), the great representative of this logical school in the Egyptian-Maghrib region. Where there is divergence between the views of the ‘earlier scholars’ (mutaqaddimûn) like Ibn Sînâ and his followers and the ‘later scholars’ (muta’akhkhirûn), i.e., post-Fakhr al-dîn al-Râzî logicians, Karsî is careful to distance himself from partisanship, preferring sometimes the views of the earliers, other times those of the laters. For instance, on the eight conditions proposed for the realization of contradiction, he finds truth to be with al-Fârâbî, who proposed “unity in the predicative attribution” as the single condition for the realization of contradiction. Similarly, on the subject matter of Logic, he tried to reconcile the mutaqaddimûn’s notion of ‘second intelligibles’ with the muta’akhkhirûn’s notion of ‘apprehensional and declarational knowledge,’ suggesting that not much difference exists between the two, on the grounds that both notions are limited to the aspect of ‘known things that lead to the knowledge of unknown things.’ Karsî asserts that established and commonly used metaphors have, according to the verifying scholars, signification by correspondence (dalâlat al-mutâbaqah), adding also that it should not be ignored that such metaphors may change from society to society and from time to time. Karsî also endorses the earlier scholars’ position concerning the impossibility of quiddity (mâhiyya) being composed of two co-extensive parts, and emphasizes that credit should not be given to later scholars’ position who see it possible. According to the verifying scholars (muhaqqîqûn), it is possible to make definition (hadd) by mentioning only difference (fasl), in which case it becomes an imperfect definition (hadd nâqis). He is of the opinion that the definition of the proposition (qadiyya) in al-Taftâzânî’s Tahdhîb is clearer and more complete: “a proposition is an expression that bears the possibility of being true or false”. He states that in the division of proposition according to quantity what is taken into consideration is the subject (mawdû‘) in categorical propositions, and the temporal aspect of the antecedent (muqaddam) in hypothetical propositions. As for the unquantified, indefinite proposition (qadiyya muhmalah), Karsî assumes that if it is not about the problems of the sciences, then it is virtually/potentially a particular proposition (qadiyya juz’iyyah); but if it is about the problems of the sciences, then it is virtually/potentially a universal proposition (qadiyya kulliyyah). This being the general rule about the ambiguous (muhmal) propositions, he nevertheless contends that, because its subject (mawdû‘) is negated, it is preferable to consider a negative ambiguous (sâliba muhmalah) proposition like “human (insân) is not standing” to be a virtually/potentially universal negative (sâliba kulliyyâh) proposition. He states that a disjunctive hypothetical proposition (shartiyya al-munfasila) that is composed of more than two parts/units is only seemingly so, and that in reality it cannot be composed of more than two units. Syllogism (qiyâs), according to Karsî, is the ultimate purpose (al-maqsad al-aqsâ) and the most valuable subject-matter of the science of Logic. For him, the entire range of topics that are handled before this one are only prolegomena to it. This approach of Karsî clearly reveals how much the ‘demonstration (burhân)-centered’ approach of the founding figures of the Muslim tradition of logic like al-Fârâbî and Ibn Sînâ has changed. al-Abharî, in his Îsâghûjî makes no mention of ‘conversion by contradiction’ (‘aks al-naqîd). Therefore, Karsî, too, in his commentary, does not touch upon the issue. However, in his Îsâghûjî al-jadîd Karsî does handle the conversion by contradiction and its rules. Following the method of Îsâghûjî, in his commentary Karsî shortly touches on the four figures (shakl) of conjuctive syllogism (qiyâs iqtirânî) and their conditions, after which he passes to the first figure (shakl), which is considered ‘the balance of the sciences’ (mi‘yâr al-‘ulûm), explaining the four moods (darb) of it. In his Îsâghûjî al-jadîd, however, Karsî handles all the four figures (shakl) with all their related moods (darb), where he speaks of fife moods (darb) of the fourth figure (shakl). The topic of ‘modal propositions’ (al-muwajjahât) and of ‘modal syllogism’ (al-mukhtalitât), both of which do not take place in the Îsâghûjî, are not mentioned by Karsî as well, either in his commentary on Îsâghûjî or in his Îsâghûjî al-jadîd. Karsî proposes that the certainties (yaqîniyyât), of which demonstration (burhân) is made, have seven, not six, divisions. After mentioning (1) axioms/first principles (awwaliyyât), (2) observata/sensuals (mushâhadât), (3) experta/empiricals (mujarrabât), (4) acumenalia (hadthiyyât), (5) testata (mutawâtirât), and (6) instictives (fitriyyât), that is, all the ‘propositions accompanied by their demonstrations,’ Karsî states that these six divisions, which do not need research and reflection (nazar), are called badîhiyyât (self-evidents), and constitute the foundations (usûl) of certainties (yaqîniyyât). As the seventh division he mentions (7) the nazariyyât (theoreticals), which are known via the badîhiyyât, end up in them, and therefore convey certainty (yaqîn). For Karsî, the nazariyyât/theoreticals, which constitute the seventh division of yaqîniyyât/certainties, are too numerous, and constitute the branches (far‘) of yaqîniyyât. Every time the concept of ‘Mughâlata’ (sophistry) comes forth in the traditional sections on the five arts usually appended to logic works, Karsî often gives examples from what he sees as extreme sûfî sayings, lamenting that these expressions are so widespread and held in esteem. He sometimes criticizes these expressions. However, it is observed that he does not reject tasawwuf in toto, but excludes from his criticism the mystical views and approaches of the truth-abiding (ahl al-haqq), shârî‘â-observant (mutasharri‘) leading sufis who have reached to the highest level of karâmah. (shrink)

The book under study is "Kitāb al-Uṣūl" and its commentary "Sharḥ al-Uṣūl" written by Ibn Ḥallād al-Basrī, one of Abū Ḥāshim al-Jubbāʾī's leading students. This work is the result of the Mu'tazilite Manuscripts Project conducted by Sabine Schmidtke and D. E. Sklare, and has been published in an edited edition by Camilla Adang, Wilferd Madelung, and Sabine Schmidtke. The study, entitled "-A Critical Edition of the Ziyādāt Sharḥ al-uṣūl by the Zaydī Imām al-Nāṭiq bi-l-ḥaqq Abū Ṭālib Yaḥyā b. al-Ḥusayn b. (...) Hārūn al-Buṭḥānī " begins with quotations from Ibn Ḥallād's Kitāb al-uṣūl or its incomplete commentary, Sharḥ al-uṣūl. This is followed by various quotations written in addition to Ibn Ḥallād's incomplete commentary, which are mostly from Kādī ʿAbd al-Jabbār's Sharḥ. Then the commentary of the Zaydī Imam Nāṭīq-Bilḥāq is added, and finally, the text is completed by the commentary of his student and annotator, Abū al-Ḳāsīm Aḥmad b. Mahdī al-Ḥasan. Although the text does not directly define the usūl al-hamsa, the reader can recognize this progression. Beginning with tawhid, the text moves on to justice, followed by va'd-va'id, and finally concludes with topics such as predestination, sustenance, accident, and fate. (shrink)

Mu‘allâkâtların, tefsir, nahiv, sarf ve dil ilimlerindeki önemli rolünün yanı sıra Arap dili ve edebiyatı âleminde de yüksek ve önemli bir konumu bulunmaktadır. Cahiliye devri müfredatlarının pek çoğunu kapsamasından ötürü dil ve edebiyat erbabı ona önem atfetmiştir. Onlardan biri de, ‘Şerhü’l-Kasâ’idi’l-السبع’ adıyla el-Muâ‘llekât’a yaptığı şerhiyle Ebu Bekir Muhammed bin el-Kasım bin Beşar bin el-Anbari. Bu eserinde pek çok nahiv, zamirin aidiyeti, harflerin manası, zarf ile car ve mecrûrun bağlı olduğu yerin belirlenmesi, müfredatlarıni‘râbı, illetler arasındaki üstünlükler, kıyasa ve luğatta asıl olana, (...) kelimenin irabını belirlemede bazı seslerin etki nedenlerine, sarf, lügat, belağat, eleştiri vb. konulara değinmektedir. Bu itibarla bu araştırma, betimsel analitik yöntemini kullanarak et-Anbari’ninMu‘allâkât şerhindeki nahiv yöntemini, Arap nahiv ilminde iki önemli konu olan kıyas ve ta‘lîl ile ilgili duruşunu açıklayarak değerlendirmeyi hedeflemektedir. (shrink)

Muhyiddîn el-Kâfiyecî (öl. 879/1474), on beşinci yüzyıl Saruhanoğulları, Osmanlı ve Memlüklü alimlerindendir. Yüzden çok eser yazmıştır. Makale Kâfiyeci’nin hayatı ve eserlerini araştırır. Yazdığı eserler, onun, Arap dili, Arap grameri, belagat, tarih metodolojisi, hadis ve usulü, tefsir ve usulü, fıkıh ve usulü, kelâm, tasavvuf, dil felsefesi, semantik, metafizik meseleler, geometri, optik ve astronomi gibi konularda uzmanlaştığını göstermektedir. Kâfiyeci en önemli eserlerini Arap dili ve mantık sahalarında yazmıştır. Eserleri içerisinde yaptığı linguistik çözümlemeler, onun yetkin bir dil alimi olduğunu göstermektedir. Kâfiyeci eserlerini yazarken (...) linguistik, mantıki, ilmi ve felsefi bir yöntem kullanmıştır. Araştırmada, Kâfiyeci’nin, hayatı boyunca en az yüz on iki eser yazdığı tespit edilmiştir. Bu eserlerden, doksan altısının adı belirlenmiştir. Kâfiyeci’nin eserleri konularına göre şöylece tasnif edilebilir: Arap Dili ve Dil Felsefesi: Şerḥu’1-i‘râb ‘an Ḳavâ‘idi’l-i‘râb, el-Unmûzec fî baḥsi’l-isti‘âre, Şerḥu’l-isti‘âre, Risâle fî Kâne Zeydun Ḳâimen, Risâle fî Zeydun Ḳâimun, Risâle fi’l-mebâḥisi’l-mute‘alliḳa bi Emmâ, Nuzhetu’l-mu‘rib fi’l-Meşrıḳ ve’l-Maġrib, Nuzhetu’l-aṣhâb fî mes’eleti’l-kuhl, Remzu’l-esrâr, en-Niseb li ehli’l-edeb, el-İşrâḳ fî meratibi’ṭ-ṭıbâk, Ḥâşiye ‘ale’l-Muṭavvel, Risâle fî “men” eş-şartiyye. Mantık: et-Terġîb fî keşfi rumûzi’t-Tehẕîb. Tarih Metodolojisi: el-Muḫtaṣaru’l-mufîd fî ‘ilmi’t-târîḫ, en-Naṣru’l-ḳâhir ve’l-fetḥu’ẓ-ẓâhir. Akâid ve Kelâm: Envâru’ṣ-Ṣa ‘âde, Şerḥu’l-‘Aḳâidi’l-‘Aḍuḍiyye, Hâşiye ‘alâ Şerḥi’l-‘Aḳâidi’l-‘Aḍuḍiyye, Şerḥu’l-Mevâḳıf, Telḫîsu Şerḥi’l-Mevâḳıf, el-Hidâye li beyâni’l-ḫalḳ ve’t-tekvîn, Risâle fî beyâni’l-mu‘cizât, Nehru’l-hayât fî ma‘rifeti’ṣ-ṣıfât, ‘İlmu’l-kumûn ve’l-burûz, Risâle fî Kavlihi Teâlâ “Lâ ye’menu mekr Allâhi ille’l-kavmu’l-hâsirûn” [A‘râf, 7/99]. Kur’ân, Kırâat ve Tefsir Bilimleri: Şerḥu’l-İsti‘âẕe ve’l-Besmele, Ḥâşiye ‘ale’l-Keşşâf, Şerḥ fî muḥâkemât beyne’l-mutekellimîn ‘ale’l-Keşşâf, Ḥâşiye ‘alâ Tefsîri’l-Beyḍâvî, eẓ-Ẓafer ve’l-ḫalâṣ, et-Teysîr fî ḳavâ‘idi ‘ilmi’t-tefsîr, Risâle fî ‘ilmi’t-tefsîr ve vucûhi’l-ḳırâat, Keşfu’n-niḳâb li’l-aṣḥâb ve’l-aḥıbbe fî ‘icâzi’l-Ḳur’ân, et-Temhîd fî şerḥi’t-taḥmîd, Ḳarâru’l-vecd fi şerḥi’l-ḥamd, el-İlmâ‘ bi ifâdeti Lev li’l-imtinâ‘ fî ḳavlihi Te‘âlâ “Lev kâne fîhimâ âlihetun illallâh le fesedetâ” [Enbiyâ, 21/22], Cevâb ‘an suâl fî ḳavlihi Te‘âlâ “Ve’n-Necmi iẕâ hevâ” [Necm, 62/1], Nuzhetu’l-iḫvân fî tefsi¬ri ḳavlihi Te‘âlâ “Yâ Lûṭu İnnâ Rusülü Rabbike” [Hûd, 11/81], Neylu’l-merâm fi tefsîri ḳavlihi Te‘âlâ “Ve Mâ Rabbuke bi Ẓallâm” [Fussilet, 41/46], el-Bişâra fî ḳavlihi Te‘âlâ “Fe’tû bi sûratin min mislih” [Bakara, 2/23], Nuzhetu’l-aṣḥâb, el-Ġurratu’l-vâḍıḥa fî tefsîri’l-Fâtiḥa, Zeḫîratu’l-ḳaṣr fî tefsiri Sûrati’l-‘Aṣr. Hadis Bilimleri: Muḫtaṣar fî ‘ulûmi’l-ḥadîs, Menbe‘u’d-durer fî ‘ilmi’l-eser, Ḫulâṣatu’l-‘aḳvâl fî ḥadîsi “İnneme’l-a‘mâlu bi’n-niyyât”. Fıkıh, Usûl ve Fetva: Risale fî mesʹeleti’l-istisnâʹ, Ḥâşiye ‘ala şerḥi’l-Hidâye, Vecîzu’n-niẓâm fî ıẓhâri mevâridi’l-aḥkâm, el-Feraḥ ve’s-surûr fî beyâni’l-meẕâhîbi’l-erba‘ati fi’l-‘uṣûr, Neşâtu’ṣ-ṣudûr fî şerḥi Kitâbi’l-Feraḥ ve’s-surûr, et-Taḥrîr lima zukira fi’d-Dureri’l-manẓûm, Muhâveratu’l-fıḳhiyye, Risâle fi’stiḳbâli’l-Ḳıble, Telḫîṣu’l-Câmi‘i’l-kebîr ve’l-Mecma‘, Kitâbu’t-Teẕkira/Risâle fi’l-vaḳf, Ravḍatu’ẓ-ẓahira en-nâfi‘a fî’d-Dünya ve’l-Âḫira, Kitâbu’l-muḫtasar fî ‘ilmi’l-istibdâl, er-Remz fî ‘ilmi'l-istibdâl, el-Kâfî fî beyâni’ṣ-ṣaffi’ṭ-ṭavîli’l-mustaḳîm, Risâle fî ṭabaḳâti’l-butûn li beyâni’l-vaḳf ‘alâ evlâdi’l-evlâd, el-İḥkâm fî ma‘rifeti’l-Eymân ve’l-aḥkâm, Ferâid baḥri’l-fevâiḍ. Siyasetname, Adap ve Ahlak: Niẓâmu ḳalâidi’l-‘ıḳyân, Seyfu’l-kuḍât ‘ale’l-buġât, Seyfu’l-mulûk ve’l-ḥukkâm el-murşid lehum ilâ sebîli’1-Haḳḳ ve’1-aḥkâm, Seyfu’l-ḥaḳḳ ve’n-nuṣra ‘alâ riḳâbı ehli’l-baġy ve’l-fitne, ed-Durratu’l-‘âliyetu’l-ġâliye. Metafizik, Tasavvuf ve Felsefe: el-Kâfî eş-şâfî, Kitâbu’r-ravḥ fî ‘ilmi’r-rûḥ, Kitabu’r-raḥme fî beyânı aḥvâli ‘alemi’l-berzâḫ, en-Nuzhe fî ravḍati’r-rûḥ ve’n-nefs, Neşâtu’l-bişâra bi’l-işâra fî kıbleti’l-ervâh, Ḳıbletu’l-ervâḥ fi’t-taṣavvuf, Nuzhetu’l-ervâḥ ve ġıbṭatu’l-eşbâḥ fi’t-taṣavvuf, Menâzilu’l-ervâḥ fi’t-taṣavvuf, ‘Ikdu’l-ferâid min baḥri’l-fevâiḍ fî şerḥi Esmâillâhi’l-husnâ, el-Unsu’1-enîs fî ma‘rifeti şeʹni’n-nefsi’n-nefîs. Siyer, İrşat ve Fazâil: Zeynu’l-feraḥ bi mîlâdi’n-Nebî (s.a.v.), Muḫtasar fî ‘ilmi’l-irşâd, Risâle fi’l-maḥabbe, Ḳalâidu’l-‘ıḳyân fî baḥri faḍâili Raceb ve Şa‘bân: Fen Bilimleri: Ḥallu’l-işkâl fî mebâhisi’l-eşkâl fi’l-hendese, Şerḥu’l-caġmînî fi’l-heyʹe, er-Remz fî ‘ilmi’l-uṣturlâb. Diğer Eserleri: Remzu’l-ḫıṭâb bi raşḥi’l-‘ıyâb, Benâtu’l-efkâr fî şeʹni’l-‘i‘tibâr, Keşfu’l-vucûhi’l-ḥasene’l-mestûra bi’n-niḳâb li faḍlillâhi’l-Cevâdi’l-Vehhâb, el-Keşf ‘an şerafi Ehli’l-Beyti’l-kirâm li efḍali’r-rusuli ve’l-enâm, ‘Iḳdu’l-ferâid min taḥrîri’l-fevâid, Risâle mustaḳılle bi ‘ilmi’n-nefs ve vucûhi’l-ḳırâa, Cevâbu’l-enẓâr, Ḥusnu’l-ḫıtâm li’l-merâmi min haẕa’l-kelâm, Ḫıtâmu’l-misk. (shrink)

Grammar studies on Arabic started with Abu Aswad ad-Duali (d. 69/688) in Basra, the center of science and culture. Grammar studies have improved with scholars such as Khalil b. Ahmed (d. 175/791) and Sibeweyhi (d. 180/796) during the Abbasid period (750-1258). These studies, which continued in the style of commentary and annotation after the Abbasid period, reached its peak in the Ottoman period (1300-1922). One of the scholars who wrote a work in the style of commentary on the science of (...) nahw (syntax) is Ali b. Muhammed b. Mas‘ud al-Bistami al-Shahrudi (d. 875/1470). He became famous with the nickname Musannifak because he started to write books at a young age. 15th-century Ottoman scholar Alaaddin Musannifak Mas‘ud al-Bistami al-Shahrudi (d. 875/1470) grounded the nahw issues, he used the Qur’an, hadith and Arabic theology; he also applied to rational proofs such as qiyas and istishab. In this article, Musannifak’s method of applying only to narrated sources such as the Qur’an, hadith and Arabic words in order to reveal his methods of commentary is discussed. In this context, Musannifak’s method of reference to narrative sources in his commentary has been revealed with a qualitative approach by analysing his work on al-Misbah by Nasir b. Abdiseyyid b. ‘Ali al-Mutarrizi (d. 610/1213), Sharḥ al- Miṣbâḥ fi al-naḥw. (shrink)

In this study, some postscripts (Ḥashiyah) written on Sharḥ al-Aqâid in the Ottoman Empire were examined and their sectarian identities were tried to be determined in the context of the Takwīn. Our aim is to determine the correctness of the opinion that the Ottoman Empire adopted the Ash’arism based on the reading of Ash’arian kalâm books in the Ottoman madrasahs. The book of al-Taftâzânî named Sharḥ al-Aqâid is an important kalâm book that was read together with its postscripts in the (...) time of the Ottoman Empire. This book, in which the views of Omar al-Nasafī in his book named Aqâid is evaluated from the perspective of Ash’ari, is one of the important examples of the commentary and postscript period. In this book, al-Taftâzânî explained both the views of al-Nasafī, who adopted the school of Mâturidism, and his own evaluations together. This structure of the book led to the writing of postscripts and to discuss the views of the two theological schools of Ahl al-Sunnah through this book. In this study, the postscripts written by the Ottoman period famous kalâm scholars such as Ahmad b. Mûsâ al-Khayâlî (875/1470), Muṣliḥ al-dîn Moṣtafâ al-Kastalî (901/1496) and Ramaḍân b. Moḥammad (1017/1608) on the views of al-Taftâzânî were examined. In order to understand the views of al-Khayâlî, the postscripts of Ḳûl (or Ḳavl) Aḥmad b. Ḫıżır al-Kâzarûnî (950/1543) and Abd al-Ḥakîm al-Siyâlkûtî (1067/1657) are also included. (shrink)

One of the most important issues that distinguishes the Baghdādī branch of the Muʿtazila from the Baṣran branch is their view on ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661). Basra branch accepts the order of virtue of the first four caliphs as their order of coming to office, while the Baghdad branch considers the first three caliphs legitimate, but considers Ali more virtuous than them. The Baghdādī Muʿtazilīs who outspokenly defended this idea were Abū Jaʿfar al-Iskāfī (d. 240/854), Abū al-Qāsim al-Kaʿbī (...) (d. 319/931) and Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd (d. 656/1258). Among them, Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd was renowned as “the greatest scholar of the Muʿtazila” and was considered one of the last representatives of this school. He ardently defended ʿAlī's superiority in his commentary on Nahj al-Balāgha, the famous collection of Ali’s sermons, letters and wisdom sayings. In his defense, he rebutted some criticisms about ʿAlī’s political decisions from his school’s point of view. Many items of Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd’s rebuttal are worthy of analysis in terms of their content, style and approach. This article aims to present a detailed account of Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd’s aforementioned refutations. In addition to the descriptive method, the interpretative method was also employed in the article. Although Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd did not consider Ali's infallibility necessary (wājib), unlike Imamiyya, he accepted it. Therefore, he responded to the criticisms directed at Ali, starting from the point of Ali's innocence. According to Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd: (a) After the death of the Prophet, ʿAlī insisted on becoming the new leader of the Muslim community. He did not act hastily to assume the caliphate because he was not expecting any opposition to that. However, when the events took a different turn, he did not escalate the situation, rather accepted the status quo. (b) ʿAlī also did the right thing by participating in ʿUmar b. Al-Khaṭṭāb’s (d. 23/644) electoral shūrā. This was an opportunity for him to become the next caliph, and reinstitute a system in accordance with the Qurʿānic principles and sunna of the Prophet. (c) It was also not an error when ʿAlī decided to stay in Medina during the events of ʿUthmān’s murder (d. 35/656). He played an active role in dissuading the rebels from their attempt to kill ʿUthmān, but he was in no position to know that his activity would be used against him later by the Umayyads who accused ʿAlī of being complicit in ʿUthmāns’s murder. (d) ʿAlī took the caliphate after ʿUthmān because of his popularity among the people. In this way, he managed to prevent an unqualified person to occupy the seat of the caliphate. (e) When the Battle of Camel broke out, those who demanded justice and opposed ʿAlī were in error. (f) When ʿAlī became the new caliph, his decision to remove Muʿāwīya (d. 60/680) from the governorship of Syria was correct. This is because Muʿāwīya would have refused to accept ʿAlī’s leadership even had he stayed in office as a governor. ʿAlī understood that the conflict would end only through fighting, so he did not lose time in marching against Muʿāwīya. (g) During the battle he abided by the sharīʿa and allowed the Syrian army to access water. (h) It was not ʿAlī, but those defectors in his army who obliged him to end the fighting through arbitration. (i) When ʿAlī agreed to sign the Ṣiffīn ceasefire agreement and did not use his title amīr al-muʾminīn, he followed the Prophet's example since the latter also refrained from using his title during the Ḥudaybiyya agreement. (j) ʿAlī also cannot be blamed for those among his supporters, such as the poet al-Najāshī, who defected and joined the ranks of Muʿāwīya. The motivations for the defectors were either to attain worldly gains or to escape from punishment for the crimes which they had committed. (k) When Muʿāwīya managed to conquer Egypt, ʿAlī’s governors of the province, Qays b. Saʿd (d. 60/680) or Muḥammad b. Abī Bakr (d. 38/658), did nothing for which they could be blamed. (l) And finally, ʿAlī never had guards to protect him because he was never afraid of being assassinated. Although Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd took Ali's innocence as a basis while presenting these views, he did not make inconsistent comments in general and did not say things contrary to historical facts. Therefore, it is necessary to acknowledge historical value of his views in question. (shrink)

Moral philosophers agree that welfare matters. But they disagree about what it is, or how much it matters. In this vital new work, Wayne Sumner presents an original theory of welfare, investigating its nature and discussing its importance. He considers and rejects all notable theories of welfare, both objective and subjective, including hedonism and theories founded on desire or preference. His own theory connects welfare closely with happiness or life satisfaction. Reacting against the value pluralism that currently dominates moral philosophy, (...) he advances welfare as the only basic ethical value. He concludes by discussing the implications of this thesis for ethical and political theory. Written in clear, non-technical language, and including a definitive survey of other work in this area, Sumner's book is essential reading for moral philosophers, political theorists, and welfare economists. (shrink)

US Supreme Court rulings concerning sanctions for juvenile offenders have drawn on the science of brain development and concluded that adolescents are inherently less mature than adults in ways that render them less culpable. This conclusion departs from arguments made in cases involving the mature minor doctrine, in which teenagers have been portrayed as comparable to adults in their capacity to make medical decisions. I attempt to reconcile these apparently incompatible views of adolescents’ decision-making competence. Adolescents are indeed less mature (...) than adults when making decisions under conditions that are characterized by emotional arousal and peer pressure, but adolescents aged 15 and older are just as mature as adults when emotional arousal is minimized and when they are not under the influence of peers, conditions that typically characterize medical decision-making. The mature minor doctrine, as applied to individuals 15 and older, is thus consistent with recent research on adolescent development. (shrink)

Reporting peers’ counterproductive work behaviors (CWBs) is important for maintaining an ethical organization, but is a significant and potentially risky action. In Bandura’s Theory of Moral Thought and Action (Bandura, 1991) he states that such acts require significant moral agency, which is generated when an individual possesses adequate moral self-regulatory capacities to address the issue and is in a context that activates and reinforces those capacities. Guided by this theory, we assess moral potency (i.e., moral courage, moral efficacy, and moral (...) ownership) as key capacities predicting peer reporting intentions and assess three contextual factors influencing the generation and effects of moral potency: whether a potential informant (1) works for an ethical leader, (2) is embedded in a psychologically safe climate promoting interpersonal risk-taking, and (3) operates in a more normal or extreme context. We assess the proposed model across three field studies entailing both normal and extreme (i.e., firefighting units) contexts. Results show that ethical leaders raise employees’ moral potency, promoting greater willingness to report their peers’ CWBs. In normal work contexts, psychological safety positively moderated both the relationship between ethical leadership and moral potency and between moral potency and peer reporting intentions. However, psychological safety had the opposite effects in more extreme work contexts. Whereas psychological safety strengthens the positive association between moral potency and peer reporting intentions in normal work contexts, in contexts where individuals are more frequently exposed to extreme events, psychological safety weakens this relationship, thus highlighting the unforeseen downsides of psychological safety in extreme contexts. (shrink)

My purpose in what follows is not so much to defend the basic principle of utilitarianism as to indicate the form of it which seems most promising as a basic moral and political position. I shall take the principle of utility as offering a criterion for two different sorts of evaluation: first, the merits of acts of government, social policies, and social institutions, and secondly, the ultimate moral evaluation of the actions of individuals. I do not take it as implying (...) that the individual should live his life on the basis of constant evaluations of this sort. For there are different levels of decision making each with its appropriate criteria. For example, we each inevitably make many of our decisions from the point of view of our own personal self-fulfilment and this cannot regularly take a directly utilitarian form, nor should the utilitarian want it to do so. His claim is at most that we should sometimes review our life from the point of view of a kind of impersonal moral truth of a universalistic utilitarian character. (shrink)

In _Civilization and Its Discontents_, Freud made abundantly clear what he thought about the biblical injunction, first articulated in Leviticus 19:18 and then elaborated in Christian teachings, to love one's neighbor as oneself. "Let us adopt a naive attitude towards it," he proposed, "as though we were hearing it for the first time; we shall be unable then to suppress a feeling of surprise and bewilderment." After the horrors of World War II, the Holocaust, Stalinism, and Yugoslavia, Leviticus 19:18 seems (...) even less conceivable—but all the more urgent now—than Freud imagined. In _The Neighbor_, three of the most significant intellectuals working in psychoanalysis and critical theory collaborate to show how this problem of neighbor-love opens questions that are fundamental to ethical inquiry and that suggest a new theological configuration of political theory. Their three extended essays explore today's central historical problem: the persistence of the theological in the political. In "Towards a Political Theology of the Neighbor," Kenneth Reinhard supplements Carl Schmitt's political theology of the enemy and friend with a political theology of the neighbor based in psychoanalysis. In "Miracles Happen," Eric L. Santner extends the book's exploration of neighbor-love through a bracing reassessment of Benjamin and Rosenzweig. And in an impassioned plea for ethical violence, Slavoj Žižek's "Neighbors and Other Monsters" reconsiders the idea of excess to rehabilitate a positive sense of the inhuman and challenge the influence of Levinas on contemporary ethical thought. A rich and suggestive account of the interplay between love and hate, self and other, personal and political, _The Neighbor_ will prove to be a touchstone across the humanities and a crucial text for understanding the persistence of political theology in secular modernity. (shrink)

To better understand the multiple individual factors that contribute to college cheating, we undertook a multivariate analysis of a national sample of 2,503 college students. Our findings indicated that demographic characteristics, character qualities, college experience, and student perceptions and attitudes are all significantly associated with academic cheating.

This volume brings together a collection of essays on the history and philosophy of probability and statistics by one of the eminent scholars in these subjects. Written over the last fifteen years, they fall into three broad categories. The first deals with the use of symmetry arguments in inductive probability, in particular, their use in deriving rules of succession. The second group deals with four outstanding individuals who made lasting contributions to probability and statistics in very different ways: Frank Ramsey, (...) R. A. Fisher, Alan Turing, and Abraham de Moivre. The last group of essays deals with the problem of 'predicting the unpredictable' - making predictions when the range of possible outcomes is unknown in advance. The essays weave together the history and philosophy of these subjects and document the fascination that they have exercised for more than three centuries. (shrink)

L. Nandi Theunissen offers an original and provocative account of the value of humanity. Human beings have value just as anything of value has value: because we are capable of being of value to someone--in the first place, to ourselves. And this explains the key forms of ethical responsiveness that we owe to one another.

The paper argues against Sosa’s claim that sensitivity cannot be differentially supported over safety as the right requirement for knowledge. Its main contention is that, although all sensitive beliefs that should be counted as knowledge are also safe, some insensitive true beliefs that shouldn’t be counted as knowledge are nevertheless safe.

The federal government is funding a sea change in health care by investing in interventions targeting social determinants of health, which are significant contributors to illness and health inequity. This funding power has encouraged states, professional and accreditation organizations, health care entities, and providers to focus heavily on social determinants. We examine how this shift in focus affects clinical practice in the fields of oncology and emergency medicine, and highlight potential areas of reform.

Pickering & Garrod's (P&G's) integrated model of production and comprehension includes no explicit role for nonlinguistic cognitive processes. Yet, how domain-general cognitive functions contribute to language processing has become clearer with well-specified theories and supporting data. We therefore believe that their account can benefit by incorporating functions like working memory and cognitive control into a unified model of language processing.

While central to the Christian religion, the act of faith has been notoriously difficult to define. This essay is an attempt to illuminate, with the aid of insights from cognitive science and process philosophy, what it means for a Christian to have faith, specifically in God. In doing so, the apriori and aposteriori aspects of faith are explored, along with its connections to science and empirical evidence, revelation, knowledge, doubt, morality, and additional Christian beliefs.

This article describes a representation-based framework of distributed cognition. This framework considers distributed cognition as a cognitive system whose structures and processes are distributed between internal and external representations, across a group of individuals, and across space and time. The major issue for distributed research, under this framework, are the distribution, transformation, and propagation of information across the components of the distributed cognitive system and how they affect the performance of the system as a whole. To demonstrate the value of (...) this representation-based approach, the framework was used to describe and explain an important, challenging, and controversial issue — the concept of affordance. (shrink)

L. Stasyuk «Projection of Humanistic and Reformational reception in Protestant Ortodoxy». There is performed a philosophical and theological reflection of the process in which main subjects of Renaissance and Reformation changes adhere to the principle of getting back to sources such as appeal, thorough rethinking, borrowing of the antique heritage within which a foundation of the Humanism philosophy is laid, as well as to the Holy Scriptures and to the teachings of spiritual and religious leaders of Christianity. There is made (...) a comparative analysis of the attitude to the antique philosophical and medieval scholastic achievements and to the philosophy as a way of thinking generally by representatives of Humanism and Protestant Orthodoxy which typify the spiritual paradigm of European history. (shrink)

The contributors to the volume discuss various approaches to bioethical thinking and the political and institutional contexts of bioethics, addressing underlying concerns about the purposes of its practice.

When medical assistance in dying (MAiD) was legalized in Canada in June 2016, the question of allowing decisionally capable persons to make advance requests in anticipation of later incapacity was reserved for further consideration during the mandatory parliamentary review originally scheduled to begin in June 2020 (but since delayed by COVID-19). In its current form the legislation does not permit such requests, since it stipulates that at the time at which the procedure is to be administered the patient must give (...) “express consent” to receiving it. Since express consent presupposes decisional capacity, this requirement rules out administering MAiD to a patient who has lost capacity. Amendments to the legislation passed by Parliament in March 2021 open the door slightly by allowing advance requests by patients after they have been approved for MAiD, if they fear losing capacity before the procedure can be administered. But this provision would apply only to patients whose natural death was deemed to be “reasonably foreseeable”, and would continue to exclude (a) requests made after diagnosis of a “grievous and irremediable medical condition” but in advance of approval for MAiD, and (b) requests made before such a diagnosis. My aim in this paper is twofold: to explore the ethical and legal issues concerning advance requests for MAiD, and to argue for expanding provision for such requests to include both of these further scenarios. (shrink)

In the postscript to The Varieties of Religious Experience William James distinguishes two types of belief in the supernatural, conceived as an essential component in religion, crass or piecemeal supernaturalism, on the one hand, and refined supernaturalism on the other.

The relationship between Bentham's ‘enunciative principle’ and his ‘censorial principle’ is famously problematic. The problem's solution is that each person has an overwhelming interest in living in a community in which they, like others, are liable to punishment for behaviour condemned by the censorial principle either by the institutions of the state or by the tribunal of public opinion. The senses in which Bentham did and did not think everyone selfish are examined, and a less problematic form of psychological hedonism (...) than Bentham's is proposed. (shrink)

Hate speech, understood broadly, is any form of expression intended to arouse hatred or contempt toward members of a particular social group. When university administrators have reason to believe that a planned speaking event on campus may feature hate speech (at least in the eyes of some), how should they respond? In this paper I address this question as it arises for Canadian universities. I argue that, where the regulation of campus speech is concerned, the right course of action for (...) university administrators is nearly always to do absolutely nothing. They will have reason to become actively involved only in order to ensure that a speaking event proceeds safely, or when it threatens to disrupt the functioning of the university, or when it is itself threatened with disruption by protesting groups. In those instances the justification for intervention will be to protect and facilitate speech, not to shut it down. (shrink)

The man in the street to-day is aware that recent developments in the physical sciences have necessitated a fundamental revision of the concepts of physics; he finds that Einstein is no less upsetting to his ideas than was Copernicus to those of his own time or than Darwin was to Bishop Wilberforce. The plain man who has “ philosophical leanings ” is aware that questions previously regarded as metaphysical—and about which philosophers have written much that is unintelligible—are now recognized as (...) falling within the scope of physics. Every reader of this Journal is aware that the criticism to which the main concepts of physics—space, time, matter—have been subjected is so fundamental that it is no longer possible to say that there are material bodies in space, which have events happening to them at a given time. We must substitute the conception of a fourfold continuum within which space, time and matter are inextricably involved. Finally, we are told that this new way of regarding the classical trinity suggests the consequence that we know nothing about the “ inner nature ” of the terms with which we deal, we can make no assertions as to the ultimate nature of that to which they may refer. In this respect the prevailing temper of the present-day scientist is to be contrasted with the cocksureness of most nineteenth-century physicists l who, even if they did not go so far as to say “ we know what matter is,” at least suggested that only the metaphysician had, or could have, any doubts as to its nature and reality^. (shrink)

This chapter contains section titled: Rights and Goals Rules, Rights, and Utility Rights and Liberty.