Abdülganî b. İsmâil en-Nablusî’nin el-Hâmil fi’l-felek ve’l-mahmûl fi’l-fülk fî ıtlâkı’n-nübüvvet ve’r-risâle ve’l-hilâfe ve’l-mülk Başlıklı Risâlesinin Tahkik ve Tahlili

Autor: Borsbuğa, Mustafa
Rok vydání: 2017
Předmět:
Zdroj: Issue: 38 167-231
İslam Araştırmaları Dergisi
ISSN: 1301-3289
2822-2903
Popis: This study is a critical editionand examination of a treatise titled al-hāmil fī al-falak wa al-mahmūl fīal-fulk fī itlāq al-nubuwwah wa al-risālah wa al-khilāfah wa al-mulk penned by‘Abd al-Ghanī ibn Ismā‘īl al-Nāblusī (d. 1143/1731), who was a salient representativeof the Sufi school of “wahdat al-wujūd” (“oneness of being”). Taking theclassical sources as reference points, this treatise examines the issue of“itlāq”, which is related to whether the concepts of “nabī” (prophet) and“rasūl” (messenger) can be used for people other than proper prophets. In otherwords, if these concepts are to be used for people other than prophets, it aimsto discuss their manner and aspects that can be applied to ordinary people; andif this application is not allowed, then it seeks to explain the reasons. FirstI introduce briefly the author’s life, education, teachers, students, various worksand death. Then I present in detail manuscript copies of the treatise, the librariesthat hold these copies and the reliability of each of them. I also inform thereaders on the content of the treatise, the sources of the author and themethodology of the author in discussing the subject. Theologians, Sufis andjurists have discussed the subject of the treatise in their classical books. Infact, the issue is directly related to many principles of the religion invarious aspects. Using the concepts “nabī” and “rasūl” may potentially be inconflict with the essentials of the religion such as “nubuwwah” (prophethood).Al-Nāblusī tries to present thesubject by taking into consideration the accumulated literature both in theSufi perspective that reflects discoverable (kashfī) and personally experienced(dhawqī) knowledge and in the theological perspective that works with theknowledge built by reason, senses and information. Therefore, without limitinghimself to a single tradition, al-Nāblusī approaches the issue with a holisticperspective by employing theological, judicial and Sufi schools of thought. Forexample, on the same subject, he cites a Sufi source like al-Futūhātal-Makkiyya of Ibn al-Arabī (d. 638/1240), a judicial treatise like Durar ofMolla Hüsrev (d. 885/1480) and a theological work like Sharh al-Aqā’idal-‘Adudiyya of Jalal al-Dīn al-Dawwānī (d. 908/1502).When Niyāzī-i Misrī (d. 1105/1694), the founder of Misriyya branchof the Halvatiyya Sufi path, says that he believes that Ali and his sons Hasanand Husayn were prophets, rasūl (messenger) and nabī (prophet), and that thosewho do not believe in them are not Muslims, this poses several questions. Someheavily criticize this idea whereas some others approved of it. Due to thedelicacy of the issue that is asked to al-Nāblusī, a famous scholar of theeighteenth century, he examines it with extreme caution. Al-Nāblusī first focuseson the question of “takfīr” (declaring someone unbeliever). He underlines that“takfīr” is a critical matter in religion that has certain conditionsassociated to it and that declaring someone an unbeliever is not as easy aspeople usually think. While making this argument, al-Nāblusī cites sources ofjurisprudence such as Khulāsat al-fatāwā, Durar and Majmū‘. He also brings intoattention the state of mind when Niyāzī-i Misrī articulates this idea, becauseif he said these words at a time of “ghaybat” or “sakr,” meaning losing one’sconsciousness due to a probability or inspiration, it would not mean anything.Therefore, the true responsibility comes with perfect consciousness. Inaddition, al-Nāblusī extends his analysis on the subject by considering thelevels of interpretation allowed within the principles of Arabic grammar.The concept of Nabī means multiple things in Arabic. For example,it includes the meaning of “tarīq” (way) in Arabic. Therefore, Hasan and Husaynwere the ways that lead to God in their missions of guidance and warning.Sometimes, nabī means “mukhbir” (the one brings news). Therefore, Hasan andHusayn delivered the things inspired through God’s message as well as theknowledge and wisdom inherited from the prophet and from their father, Ali.Sometimes, nabī means “sharīf” (noble/superior) in respect to one’s overallmanners and moral integrity. As for Hasan and Husayn, they have been consideredthe most noble and virtuous individuals of their time. Likewise, the concept of“rasūl” carries multiple meanings. We observe that the Quran includes severalusages of rasūl corresponding certain occasions other than referring toprophets. Hasan and Husayn were messengers (rasūl) in transferring theprophet’s message to later generations. Therefore, based on these literalmeanings, using the concepts of “nabī” and “rasūl” for Hasan and Husayn isacceptable as long as they are not considered to have brought new law(shari‘a), because the Quran clearly declares the end of prophethood. Someonefrom a scholarly background could not make statements contrary to this principle.The author Abd al-Ghanī al-Nāblusīfinds the statement of Niyāzī-i Misrī on Hasan and Husayn acceptable accordingto rules of interpretation and principles of Arabic grammar, therefore he seesno need to declare the maker of the statement as an unbeliever. However, healso thinks that using the concepts of “nabī” and “rasūl” for anybody otherthan the prophets is inappropriate in respect to the decorum. According to him,no intelligent and right-minded individual would ever use these concepts foranybody other than the prophets. It is clear that someone with wisdom likeNiyāzī-i Misrī would never use these concepts in their literal meanings.
Bu çalışma, tasavvuf ekolünün önemli temsilcilerinden Abdülganî b. İsmâil en-Nablusî’nin (ö. 1143/1731) el-Hâmil fi’l-felek ve’l-mahmûl fi’l-fülk fî ıtlâkı’n-nübüvvet ve’r-risâle ve’l-hilâfe ve’l-mülk başlıklı risâlesinin tahkik ve tahlilinden oluşmaktadır. Risâle, “nebî” ve “resul” kavramlarının peygamberler dışındaki kimseler için kullanımının câiz olup olmadığına ilişkin “ıtlak” konusunu ele almaktadır. Risâlenin konusu, hem kelâmcılar hem de mutasavvıflar tarafından klasik eserlerde ele alınmıştır. Zira bu mesele, muhtelif yönlerden dinin birçok esası ile alâkalı bulunmaktadır. Peygamber dışındaki birine “nebî” ve “resul” kavramlarını kullanmak zarûriyyât-ı dîniyyenin esaslarından olan “nübüvvet” açısından problem teşkil edecek niteliktedir. Ayrıca Arap dili prensiplerinin bu kullanıma ne ölçüde imkân tanıdığı göz önünde bulundurularak konuya ilişkin analizler yapılmaya çalışılmıştır.Nablusî, meseleye çözüm getirmek amacıyla keşfî ve zevkî bilgiyi dikkate alan sûfî yaklaşımının yanı sıra, evrensel ve genel geçer bilgi kaynağı olan akıl, duyu ve haberî bilgiyi dikkate alan kelâmî metodun yaklaşımını da göz önünde bulundurarak geleneksel müktesebatı bu bağlamda değerlendirmeye çalışmıştır. Nablusî’nin ele aldığı konuya ilişkin nasıl bir yaklaşım ortaya koyduğu ve katkı sağladığı ifade edildikten sonra, söz konusu risâlenin nüshaları ve mevsukiyeti hakkında da bilgi verilmiştir.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: