%0 Journal Article
%T A Critical Edition and Analysis of Eb¨¹ssu£¿d¡¯s Ma£¿¨¡qid al-£¿ir¨¡f f¨© awwal s¨±rat al-Fat£¿ min al-Kashsh¨¡f
%A Harun Bekiro£¿lu
%J -
%D 2019
%X Eb¨¹ssu£¿d (d. 982/1574), who is famous for his fatw¨¡s (legal opinions), also has outstanding works in the field of exegesis. Among them is his commentary titled Ma£¿¨¡qid al-£¿ir¨¡f f¨© awwal s¨±rat al-Fat£¿ min al-Kashsh¨¡f. Eb¨¹ssu£¿d wrote the commentary as a review of Zamakhshar¨©¡¯s (d. 538/1144) exegesis, al-Kashsh¨¡f, focusing on the ¡°Chapter of Victory¡± (s¨±rat al-Fat£¿). This is more detailed than the relevant section in Eb¨¹ssu£¿d¡¯s own exegesis, Irsh¨¡d al-£¿aql al-sal¨©m. The most salient characteristic of the commentary is that it contains rejections and criticism of Zamakhshar¨©¡¯s opinions. Eb¨¹ssu£¿d was appointed as a military judge (kazasker) of Rumeli in 1537. He accompanied Suleyman the Magnificent on his expedition to the west (945/1538). He also participated in the campaigns of Moldovia, Buda and Estergom. He led the first Friday prayer in Buda after its conquest on 2 September 1541. According to sources, particularly Katip £¿elebi (d. 1067/1657), he wrote the commentary during the campaign to Northern Hungary (950/1543). According to sources, a number of scholarly sessions took place between Suleyman and Eb¨¹ssu£¿d during the campaign to Northern Hungary. In these sessions, Eb¨¹ssu£¿d discussed al-Kashsh¨¡f with the sultan, and since they were on a campaign of conquest, they discussed the ¡°Chapter of Victory¡± in particular. Along with the sessions, Eb¨¹ssu£¿d wrote his Ma£¿¨¡qid explaining the controversy between the Mu£¿tazila and the Sunnis on the issue of ¡°human actions¡± (af£¿¨¡l al-£¿ib¨¡d). This study contains a close examination of Ma£¿¨¡qid and a critical edition of the text. I accessed nine manuscripts of Eb¨¹ssu£¿d¡¯s commentary. Among these, the copy in the Library of Budayriyya in Jerusalem is the author¡¯s draft. Since it contains the record of ownership and the date of writing, I adopted it as my master copy and used ISAM¡¯s principles for critical editions. Eb¨¹ssu£¿d belonged to the Ottoman tradition of exegesis and was closely interested in Zamakhshar¨©¡¯s ideas. He tried to understand Zamakhshar¨© within his own context and evaluate consistencies among his ideas. He endeavored to explain Zamakhshar¨©¡¯s interpretation and exegesis on the ¡°Chapter of Victory¡± by taking into consideration principally the outputs of Arabic syntax and logic and more particularly the principles of theology (al-Kal¨¡m) and logic. While doing this, however, he never compromised or diverged from the Sunni perspective. Major subjects of Ma£¿¨¡qid al-£¿ir¨¡f are the following: 1. Past tense (khalq al-af£¿¨¡l) to distinguish the reality and metaphor: Both Zamakhshar¨© and Eb¨¹ssu£¿d understood the verb
%K Tefsir
%K Eb¨¹ssu£¿d Efendi
%K Maak£¿d¨¹¡¯t-t£¿raf f£¿ evveli s£¿reti¡¯l-Feth mine¡¯l-Ke£¿£¿af
%K Zemah£¿er£¿
%K Ke£¿£¿af
%K Osmanl£¿ tefsir £¿al£¿£¿malar£¿
%U http://dergipark.org.tr/isad/issue/47006/571907