{"id":5981,"date":"2025-06-03T13:08:07","date_gmt":"2025-06-03T10:08:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/?page_id=5981"},"modified":"2025-06-03T13:08:07","modified_gmt":"2025-06-03T10:08:07","slug":"abdurrahim-kozali-el-muvafakat-7-seminer-ozeti","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/abdurrahim-kozali-el-muvafakat-7-seminer-ozeti\/","title":{"rendered":"ABDURRAH\u0130M KOZALI: el-MUV\u00c2FAK\u00c2T 7. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130"},"content":{"rendered":"

ABDURRAH\u0130M KOZALI: el-MUV\u00c2FAK\u00c2T 7. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Dersin Amac\u0131 ve \u0130\u00e7eri\u011fi<\/strong>
    \nAbdurrahim Kozal\u0131\u2019n\u0131n el-Muv\u00e2fak\u00e2t<\/em> okumalar\u0131n\u0131n 7. semineri, eserin 5. ve 6. mukaddimelerinin ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bi\u00e7imde incelendi\u011fi kapsaml\u0131 bir oturumdur. Bu seminerde \u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee\u2019nin bilgi ve y\u00f6ntem anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131, \u00f6zellikle \u201cameli neticesi olmayan ilmin \u015fer\u2019an makbul g\u00f6r\u00fclmemesi\u201d prensibi \u00fczerinden tart\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131r. M\u00fcellifin spek\u00fclatif d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye ve \u00f6zellikle kelam\u2013felsefe birlikteli\u011fine mesafeli duru\u015fu ele al\u0131n\u0131rken, alternatif bir usul tasar\u0131m\u0131 \u00f6nerdi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca \u015feriatta kullan\u0131lan dilin ve anlat\u0131m bi\u00e7iminin halk\u0131n anlayabilece\u011fi sade yap\u0131da olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulan\u0131r.<\/li>\n
  2. Ana Temalar ve Tart\u0131\u015fmalar<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
      \n
    1. Ameli Neticesi Olmayan \u0130lmin Reddedilmesi<\/strong><\/li>\n
    2. mukaddimenin temel iddias\u0131, \u201cameli sonucu olmayan meselelerle me\u015fgul olman\u0131n \u015fer\u2019an makbul olmamas\u0131d\u0131r.\u201d Kozal\u0131, bu yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n \u00f6zellikle kelam ve spek\u00fclatif felsefeye y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funu, \u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee\u2019nin bu t\u00fcr ilimleri me\u015fruiyet d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tuttu\u011funu ifade eder. Niyet, ahlak, niyete dayal\u0131 fiiller gibi kalbi ameller de pratik sonu\u00e7 do\u011furdu\u011fu i\u00e7in bu ilimlerle ilgilenmek me\u015fru kabul edilir.<\/li>\n
    3. \u0130stikra (T\u00fcmevar\u0131m) Y\u00f6nteminin Ele\u015ftirisi<\/strong>
      \nM\u00fcellifin bu prensibi istikra y\u00f6ntemiyle temellendirmesi, yani Kur\u2019an, hadis ve sahabe prati\u011finden bu sonucu \u00e7\u0131karmas\u0131, metodolojik a\u00e7\u0131dan ele\u015ftirilir. Kozal\u0131, bu istikran\u0131n manip\u00fclatif olabilece\u011fini, yani \u00f6nceden belirlenen sonuca uygun \u00f6rneklerin se\u00e7ildi\u011fini belirtir.<\/li>\n
    4. Kelam ve Felsefenin D\u0131\u015flanmas\u0131<\/strong>
      \n\u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee, \u00f6zellikle R\u00e2z\u00ee sonras\u0131 geli\u015fen kelam-felsefe ili\u015fkisinden rahats\u0131zd\u0131r. Spek\u00fclatif d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceyi, \u00fcmmi bir \u00fcmmet i\u00e7in inen \u015feriata uygun g\u00f6rmez. Ona g\u00f6re bu t\u00fcr d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce tarz\u0131 felsefecilere aittir ve M\u00fcsl\u00fcmanlar bundan uzak durmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/li>\n
    5. \u015eeriat\u0131n Ameli Merkezli Yap\u0131s\u0131 ve \u00dcmmili\u011fi<\/strong>
      \n\u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee\u2019ye g\u00f6re \u0130slam \u00fcmmeti ve \u015feriat \u00fcmmi oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in, karma\u015f\u0131k felsefi kavramlara ihtiya\u00e7 yoktur. Bu nedenle mant\u0131k ve tarifi hakiki gibi teknik kavramsalla\u015ft\u0131rmalardan uzak durulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Kozal\u0131, bu tutumun \u00fcmmetin evrensel iddias\u0131 ile \u00e7eli\u015fti\u011fini savunur.<\/li>\n
    6. Matlup Bilgiye G\u00f6t\u00fcren Y\u00f6ntemler: Takribi vs. Tahkiki<\/strong><\/li>\n
    7. mukaddimede \u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee, bilgiyi elde etmede iki y\u00f6ntemden bahseder: takribi (yakla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131c\u0131) ve tahkiki (kesinle\u015ftirici). \u015eeriat\u0131n takribi y\u00f6ntemi esas ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tahkiki y\u00f6ntemin ise zor, karma\u015f\u0131k ve gereksiz oldu\u011funu savunur. \u00d6rnek olarak tan\u0131mlar\u0131n teknik de\u011fil sade olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ifade edilir.<\/li>\n
    8. Mant\u0131\u011f\u0131n ve Tan\u0131mlar\u0131n Reddi<\/strong>
      \n\u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee, e\u015fyan\u0131n hakikatine ula\u015f\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc i\u00e7in tarifi hakiki yapman\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtir. Bu noktada mant\u0131\u011f\u0131n kavramlar (tasavvurat) k\u0131sm\u0131na mesafeli durur. Ancak tan\u0131m\u0131n yerine e\u015f anlaml\u0131 s\u00f6zc\u00fckle a\u00e7\u0131klamay\u0131 (tarifi lafz\u00ee) tercih eder.<\/li>\n
    9. Selefin Y\u00f6ntem \u00dczerinden Savunulmas\u0131<\/strong>
      \n\u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee, selef alimlerinin arg\u00fcmanlar\u0131n\u0131n mant\u0131ksal kurallara uydu\u011funu ama bunu bilin\u00e7li yapmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131, yaln\u0131zca kendi uzmanl\u0131k alanlar\u0131na yo\u011funla\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 i\u00e7in sa\u011flam sonu\u00e7lara ula\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 belirtir. Bu da mant\u0131k kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 zorunlu k\u0131lmayan bir anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 temsil eder.<\/li>\n
    10. Kozal\u0131\u2019n\u0131n Ele\u015ftirisi ve Mahiyet Farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/strong>
      \nSeminer sonunda Kozal\u0131, \u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee\u2019nin \u201chakiki tan\u0131m yap\u0131lamaz\u201d arg\u00fcman\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, Cevdet Pa\u015fa\u2019n\u0131n \u201cmahiyet-i itibariyye\u201d kavram\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6rnek verir. Bu t\u00fcr tan\u0131mlar\u0131n itibar\u00ee oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in ger\u00e7ekli\u011fe tam vukuf gerektirmedi\u011fini ve f\u0131k\u0131h usul\u00fc gibi alanlarda teknik tan\u0131mlar\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilece\u011fini savunur.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
        \n
      1. Sonu\u00e7<\/strong>
        \nBu seminer, \u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee\u2019nin bilgi anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 \u015fekillendiren temel prensipleri detayl\u0131 bi\u00e7imde analiz eder. Kozal\u0131, m\u00fcellifin tutarl\u0131 bir d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce \u00e7izgisi izledi\u011fini, ancak bunun zaman zaman \u0130slam d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinin geli\u015fim \u00e7izgisiyle \u00e7eli\u015febilece\u011fini vurgular. \u00d6zellikle kelam, mant\u0131k ve felsefe gibi alanlara mesafeli duru\u015f, \u00fcmmetin bilimsel geli\u015fimini s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 potansiyele sahiptir. Yine de \u015e\u00e2t\u0131b\u00ee\u2019nin metodolojik netli\u011fi ve alternatif usul \u00f6nerisi, \u00e7a\u011fda\u015f hukuk d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan dikkate de\u011fer bir sistem in\u015fas\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirilir.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

         <\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Purpose and Content of the Seminar<\/strong>
          \nThe seventh seminar in Abdurrahim Kozal\u0131\u2019s al-Muw\u0101faq\u0101t<\/em> reading series focuses on the detailed analysis of the 5th and 6th introductory chapters (muqaddim\u0101t<\/em>) of al-Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b\u2019s work. These chapters are central to understanding Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b\u2019s epistemological framework, particularly his insistence that knowledge without practical consequences is not valid in the Shar\u012b\u02bfa. The seminar explores his critical stance toward speculative theology and philosophy, his rejection of formal logic, and his emphasis on a methodology tailored to an unlettered (umm\u012b<\/em>) community. Kozal\u0131 evaluates this critique while raising broader questions about the implications of Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b\u2019s methodology.<\/li>\n
        2. Key Themes and Discussions<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
            \n
          1. Rejection of Knowledge Without Practical Benefit<\/strong>
            \nThe 5th muqaddima<\/em> asserts that engaging in knowledge that lacks practical consequences is not acceptable in Islamic law. Kozal\u0131 explains that this position primarily targets speculative theology (kal\u0101m<\/em>) and philosophical reasoning, which Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b sees as irrelevant or even harmful to the aims of the Shar\u012b\u02bfa.<\/li>\n
          2. Critique of Inductive Methodology<\/strong>
            \nSh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b supports this principle via istiqr\u0101<\/em>\u02be<\/em> (induction), using examples from the Qur\u2019an, \u1e25ad\u012bth, and the practices of the Companions. Kozal\u0131 critiques this use of induction, noting that it may be selectively applied to confirm conclusions already presupposed.<\/li>\n
          3. Exclusion of Kal\u0101m and Philosophy<\/strong>
            \nSh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b expresses discomfort with the post-R\u0101z\u012b fusion of kal\u0101m and philosophy. He sees speculative reasoning as alien to the Shar\u012b\u02bfa, which was revealed to a simple and unlettered community. Philosophical inquiry, in his view, is appropriate for philosophers, not believers.<\/li>\n
          4. Simplicity of Shar\u012b<\/strong>\u02bfa and the Ummah<\/strong>\u2019s Umm<\/strong>\u012b Identity<\/strong>
            \nSh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b contends that because the Shar\u012b\u02bfa was revealed to an umm\u012b<\/em> nation, its language and concepts must remain simple and accessible. Technical formulations, including logical definitions and philosophical discourse, are thus inappropriate. Kozal\u0131, however, warns that such a stance may conflict with the universal aspirations of Islam.<\/li>\n
          5. Two Epistemic Approaches: Approximative vs. Definitive<\/strong>
            \nIn the 6th muqaddima<\/em>, Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b introduces two epistemic approaches: taqr\u012bb\u012b<\/em> (approximative) and ta<\/em>\u1e25q\u012bq\u012b<\/em> (definitive). He argues that the Shar\u012b\u02bfa prefers the former, as it is simpler and more practical. He believes technical definitions are unnecessary and even counterproductive.<\/li>\n
          6. Rejection of Logic and Real Definitions<\/strong>
            \nSh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b denies that true, essential definitions (ta<\/em>\u02bfr<\/em>\u012bf <\/em>\u1e25aq\u012bq\u012b<\/em>) are attainable, which leads him to reject the necessity of logic\u2014particularly the conceptual side of it. Instead, he advocates for ta<\/em>\u02bfr<\/em>\u012bf laf<\/em>\u1e93\u012b<\/em> (verbal or synonymous definitions) that use plain language.<\/li>\n
          7. Defense of the Salaf\u2019s Methodology<\/strong>
            \nSh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b maintains that although the Salaf did not consciously use logical methodology, their arguments nevertheless conformed to sound reasoning because of their piety and expertise. Thus, logic is not a prerequisite for valid knowledge production.<\/li>\n
          8. Kozal\u0131\u2019s Critique: Possibility of Functional Definitions<\/strong>
            \nAt the end of the seminar, Kozal\u0131 counters Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b\u2019s view that real definitions are impossible. He draws on Cevdet Pa\u015fa\u2019s notion of ma<\/em>\u1e25iyyat-i i<\/em>\u02bftib<\/em>\u0101riyya<\/em> (constructive or nominal essences), arguing that legal theory can, and often does, rely on functional or context-based definitions without requiring full metaphysical clarity.<\/li>\n
          9. Conclusion<\/strong>
            \nThis seminar thoroughly examines Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b\u2019s epistemological framework and his insistence that knowledge must serve practical, legal, or ethical ends. Kozal\u0131 acknowledges the coherence of Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b\u2019s approach but critiques its dismissive stance toward speculative and philosophical disciplines. By rejecting logic and philosophy, Sh\u0101\u1e6dib\u012b risks narrowing the intellectual horizon of Islamic scholarship. Nonetheless, his methodological clarity and his aim to ground legal theory in functional utility make his project a significant and thought-provoking contribution to Islamic legal philosophy.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

            ABDURRAH\u0130M KOZALI: el-MUV\u00c2FAK\u00c2T 7. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130 Dersin Amac\u0131 ve \u0130\u00e7eri\u011fi […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-5981","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5981","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5981"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5981\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5982,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5981\/revisions\/5982"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5981"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}