Zemahşerî’nin 'Ruûsu’l-Mesâil' İsimli Hilâf Türü Eserinin Tahlil Edilmesi
The Analysis of the Zamakhsheri’s Controversial Work called 'Ruus al-Mashail'
Yazar: Tekin, Abdülkadir
Dergi: Hitit Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Vol. 18 No. 36, 2019
Anahtar kelimeler: Canon law,Zamakhsherı,al-Hanafi,Ruus al-mashail,Science of Dıspute ; Zemahşerî,Fıkıh,Hanefî,Ruûsu’l-mesâil,Hilâf ilmi

Arap dili ve belâgatı konusunda otorite kabul edilmişbir şahsiyet olan Zemahşerî (ö.538/1143) çok yönlü bir âlimdir. Tefsir, fıkıh,hadis ve kelâm gibi disiplinlerde de geniş bir ilme sahip olan Zemahşerîitikatta koyu bir mu’tezilî olup, amelde ise Hanefî mezhebine mensuptur. Onunfıkıhla ilgili kaleme almış olduğu “Ruûsu’l-mesâil” isimli eseri hilâf ilmiaçısından önemli bir yere sahiptir. Zemahşerî bu eserinde, mensubu olduğuHanefî mezhebinin Şâfiî mezhebinden farklı olan hükümlerini çoğunlukla herhangibir tercihte bulunmadan karşılıklı deliller bağlamında mukayeseli olarakokuyucuya sunmaktadır. Bu yönüyle Zemahşerî’nin yaygın olarak bilinen diğeryönlerinin yanında iyi bir fakîh olduğunu söylemek mümkündür. Zira iki tarafındelillerini ortaya koymak suretiyle Hanefî ve Şâfiî mezhepleri arasındakiihtilafları muhtasar bir biçimde ortaya koyan bir eser kaleme almak, her ikimezhebe de vâkıf olmayı gerektirir. Diğer eserlerinde itikâdî olarak mu’tezilîtaraftarlığı dikkat çeken ve bu yönde muhaliflerini sert bir dille eleştirdiğigöze çarpan Zemahşerî’nin bu eserinde amelde mensubu olduğu Hanefî mezhebinoktasında aynı üslubu takip etmediği ve daha müsamahakar bir çizgi izlediğinigörmekteyiz. Müellifin bu yönüyle okuyucuya fürû’ fıkıhta mezhep taassubundanuzak çok yönlü bir fıkıh düşüncesi kazandırmayı amaçladığını söylemekmümkündür. Bu çalışmada fıkhın alt disiplinlerinden uzmanlık gerektiren hilâftüründe muhtasar olarak kaleme alınan “Ruûsu’l-mesâil” isimli eseri bağlamındaZemahşerî’nin fıkıhçılık yönü tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır.

Zamahsheri, a figure recognized as anauthority on the subject of Arabic language and literature, is a versatilescholar. Zamahsheri, who has extensive knowledge in science such as commentary,fıqh, hadith and kalam, is a dark Mutazıla in the belief and a member of theHanafi denomination in practice. His work titled “Ruus al-mashail”, which hereceived a remnant of relevance to the jurisprudence, has an important place inthe science of the Dispute. In this work, Zamahsheri presents to his readersthe comparative provisions of the Hanafi sect, whose members are different fromthose of the Shafi sect, mostly without any preference, in the context ofmutual proofs. It is possible to say that this aspect is a good jurist besidesother widely known aspects of Zemahsharı. In his other works, we see that hedid not follow the same style in the Hanafi sect, which is a member of theoperative in this work of Zemahsari, who is attracted to the mu'taziliansupporters and criticized his opponents hardly, and is more tolerant. It ispossible to say that the author intends to make a multi-faceted fıqh thoughtaway from the confession of the reader in this direction. In this study, it wastried to determine the direction of Zemahshari's fiqhism (jurisdiction) in thecontext of his work "Ruus al-mashaıl", which in the field of disputescience, which requires expertise from the subordinate disciplines of fiqh.SummaryZamahsherıwho came to the forefront with his competence in the fields of language,eloquence and commentary, has many works in different fields and especiallyfame with his exegesis called “al-Khessâf”. Zamahsherı has written his workcalled “Ruus al-mashail” which contains controversial issues between Hanafi andShafi'i sects. His work titled “Ruus al-mashail”, which he received a remnantof relevance to the jurisprudence, has an important place in the science of theDispute. There is no hesitation when this work belongs to Zamahsherı. The onlymanuscript of this work dated a.h. 576 by Abdullah Nazır Ahmad has beenprinted. This work is a rare work that reflects and reveals his relatively morebackground-like jurist personality. This work reveals that Zamahsherı is also acompetent jurist among other widely known aspects. Because, by revealing theevidence of the two sides, to obtain a work that reveals the controversiesbetween the Hanafi and Shafi sects in a clear form requires that both sectshave a claim. In this work, which was written at a time when there was a strongsectarian commitment, we witnessed that Zamahsherı displayed a permissiveattitude and a mutilated approach without showing any commitment to the Hanafisect. Zamahsherıused the sources in his work; “Qur'an-Sunnah/ Hadith-Sahaba Narratives,Companions of Sahaba and Reason” we can be grouped into five groups. He used126 ruling verses and 347 ruling hadiths as sources / evidence in his work. Healso included companions and natural narratives in his book and conveyed 77different narratives in total. Zamahsherıdidn’t deal with all the subjects of fürû-i fiqh in his concise work calledRuû'u’l-mesâil. He presented the main controversial issues between Hanafi andShafi'i sects in a comparative, easy, understandable and concise manner forboth the beginners of fiqh and the students who have come a long way in thisfield. With these aspects, it is a precious work in which readers can have amulti-faceted opinion about hundreds of issues and gain a general idea of fiqh.In addition, we can clearly see that Zamahsherı pursues goals such as educationand abolish sectarianism and opening the door to exploiting the views of othersects in daily practice.  Moreover, it isseen that the Issues which are in different chapters and which have similarprovisions are gathered under a single chapter. These features also show thatthe work is written for educational purposes, it is a method that providesgreat benefit in the memory of the student's important provisions appear.Whilestudying the subjects under the title of Zamahsherı after submitting theverdict of Hanafi and Shafi sect, he presents the evidence of both sides. Whiledoing this, first of all the views of Abu Hanifa, then Shafi. But, in rarecases, he mentioned the views and proofs of Shafi and then Abu Hanifa. Heapproached Zemahshari issues objectively, conveyed the views and evidences ofboth denominations as they are. He made no choice and didn’t enter into adispute or argument between the evidence. However, due to Zamahsherı Hanafi, hetried to answer the objections against Hanafi views on the procedural groundsin the framework of scientific-logical measures and tried to put forward somereasons for not pursuing the sect. In this context, he also complied with thetradition of controversy, which is the general characteristic of implicitcaliphate books, which made comparisons between evidences in some Issues. Zamahsherıpresented the matter with his style of asking questions and stripped from thegeneral method he followed in very few places, and then answered this.In additionto Abu Hanifa and Shafi, in his work, It also included the views of Abu Yusufand Muhammad al-Shayban and Enes the son of Malik. If there is a dispute aboutthe provision in the Hanafi sect, it did not include this conflict within thesect. However, Zamahsherı mentions the issues that Abu Yusuf and Muhammadal-Şhayban agree with Shafi, unlike Abu Hanifa, together with the evidence.He aftergiving some proofs on the subject in some of issues, if there is a closednessin them, the conflict between Hanafi and Shafi sects and the explanation ofthis issue made it easier to understand the issue. He also explained some ofthe issues by making comparison with only the mental evidence. Furthermore, thefact that the Hanafi and Shafi sects are separated from each other by not onlymentioning all the evidences of the two sides shows that Zamahsherı aims togive the reader a broad idea of fiqh instead of teaching sectarian views.