A’RAF SURESİ 40. VE DUHAN SURESİ 29. AYETLERİN MECAZ’UL-KUR’AN AÇISINDAN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ

Bu makalede dilde bir anlatım biçimi olan mecaz konusunu A'raf Suresi 40. ve Duhan Suresi 29. ayetleri merkeze alınarak değerlendirilmeye çalışılmıştır Mecazın terim ve ıstılah anlamlarına kısaca değindikten sonra Kur'an'da mecazın varlığı konusunda süregelen tartışmalara da temas edilmiştir. Hakiki manalarının dışında lafızların mecazî manaya hamledilebilmesi için zorunlu şartların oluşması gerektiğine dikkat çekilmiştir. Çalışmanın temelini oluşturan ayetlerin "Mecazu'l-Kur'an" açısından değerlendirmesi yapılmıştır. Ayetlerin tetkiki sırasında mecazın tarihi seyrini dikkatlere sunmak için Taberi'den önceki, Taberi'den sonraki dönem ve modern veya son dönem olmak üzere ayetlerin seyrini üç ana tefsir arteri takip edilerek incelenmiştir. Bu bağlamda hem dilde hem de Kur'an-ı Kerim'de bazı lafızların mecaza hamledilmedikleri takdirde anlam alanlarının daralıp daralmadığı ve vermek istediklerin mesajın yeterince anlaşılıp anlaşılmadığı hususu da tespit edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Ayrıca ayetlerdeki mecazı kullanımın, meal müellifleri tarafından meallere yansıtılıp yansıtılmadığı konusu da irdelenmiştir. Sonuç olarak ele alınan iki ayet örnekliğinden hareketle Kur'an'da mecazi anlatımın geniş bir şekilde bir çok ayette mevcut olduğunu, zaman ilerledikçe çeşitli saiklerin etkisiyle de yapılan yorumlarda mecaza hamletmenin arttığını söyleyebiliriz. Mutezilenin yaptığı gibi mezhebi kaygılarla zorlama mecazi yorumlara gitmenin de doğru olmadığını ifade etmekte fayda vardır. Bununla birlikte gerek tefsir gerekse meallerde lafızlar hakiki manalarıyla verilmek istenen mesajı karşılamıyorsa veya üslup gereği, muhatap kitlenin o yöndeki algısını da dikkate alınarak, gerekli şartlar oluştuğunda ve muhataba mesaj daha güçlü verilecekse Kur'an'da mecazi anlatıma baş vurulduğu da bir gerçekliktir

THE CONSIDERATION OF VERSICLES AL-AR’AF 40 AND ALDUKHAN 29 IN TERMS OF MAZAJ AL- QUR’AN

In this study we have tried todiscuss the concept of metaphor, which is a way of epression, by focusing on the Qur’anic verses Al-A’raf 40 and Al-Dukhan 29. After mentioning the terminological meaning of metaphor briefly, we adressed the discussions about the existence of metaphor in the Qur’an. We tried to draw attention to necessary conditions for attributing the metaphor other than the original meaning of the wordings. The considerations of the versicles which constitutes the groundwork of this study, has been made with regard to Mazaj Al-Qur’an. While examining the versicles, we deal with the interpretations in three main categories in order to see the historical process of the metaphor: the era of Taberi and before, the era after Tabari and the modern era. We tried to determine that unless some wordings attributed to the metaphor, whether the meaning area of these wordings became narrow or not and the message wanted to given is understood or not, in the in the language as well as in the Qur’an. As a result it can be said that by the examining of the two verses, metaphorical expression is in existence widely in the Qur’an and as time progresses attribution to the metaphor has been increased. It is beneficial to state that making far-fetched metaphorical interpretations as in with the sectarian motives, as in Mutezile, is not true. With that in mind, it is a fact that both in interpretations and in translations if the true meanings of the wordings do not answer the message wanted to given or as a matter of tone, metaphorical expression has been applied when the necessary conditions are met in order to giving a strong message to the interlocutors with regard to interlocutor mass’s perception about the given subject. STRUCTURED ABSTRACT In this study we have tried todiscuss the concept of metaphor, which is a way of epression, by focusing on the Qur’anic verses Al-A’raf 40 and Al-Dukhan 29. After mentioning the terminological meaning of metaphor briefly, we adressed the discussions about the existence of metaphor in the Qur’an. We tried to draw attention to necessary conditions for attributing the metaphor other than the original meaning of the wordings. The considerations of the versicles which constitutes the groundwork of this study, has been made with regard to Mazaj Al-Qur’an. While examining the versicles, we deal with the interpretations in three main categories in order to see the historical process of the metaphor: the era of Tabari and before, the era after Tabari and the modern era. We tried to determine that unless some wordings attributed to the metaphor, whether the meaning area of these wordings became narrow or not and the message wanted to given is understood or not, in the in the language as well as in the Qur’an. Also we mentioned that whether the use of metaphor in the versicles is represented in the translations of the Qur’an or not. We concluded this study by assessing the obtained data.The concepts of truth and metaphor were not associated with each other at the first era that the Islamic sciences issued and organized. But it is a fact that every science which came to existence with the effect of cultural development, has built its own terminology in the historical process. The concepts of truth and metaphor which are the main subjects of literature and rhetoric, has become a term in result of such a historical process. At first metaphor wording came into existence in the field of interpretation and then it change towards to field of literature and get firm. The role of these two attributed to literature concepts while interpreting the Qur’an, sustained the relation between the metaphor and interpretation. Because the discussions about attributing the meaning of a statement in the Qur’an to metaphor, makes the concepts of truth and metaphor valuable with regard to interpretation. Truth, “is the thing that the essence of the matter is relied on.” It means I learned the essence of the matter, the reality. The meaning of truth with regard to linguistics, is the meaning that established when a word first come to existence, came to mind when the word is said and the people who speaks the language came to an agreement. Metaphor(Mazaj), means “ entering a path, walking on a path, centering the path.” Additionally, in the form Prepositions of Place. It used as “ location, place that passed.” It’s meaning in the linguistics is “the way of speech.” Metaphorical meaning of a word is the use of the word based on the signification relation, other than the true meaning of the word. Metaphorical expression is a way of expression that applied by indoctrinating the semantic rules within the linguistic bounds, when the true meanings of the words are incapable of transmitting the feelings and the ideas during the communication. Even though metaphorical comments can be seen in the early era interpretations, it is not possible to say that metaphor commonly used in that era. As a rhetorical term in the Islamic thought gains prevalence with the work of Ebu Ubeyde Mazaj Al- Qur’an. But the meaning of the metaphor is not approached in the way that the later meaning of the term especially at the work of Mu’tezile. Unlike the use of the true meanings of the words in the Qur’an, the existencs of the metaphor in the Qur’an is contradictive topic among the scholars. Most of the scholars of Islam has accepted the existence of the metaphor in the Qur’an. But some scholars thought that metaphor is the brother of lie hence it cannot be in the Qur’an. But the Qur’an is excluded from such things. A person uses the metaphor in the case of having difficulties to express the truth. Such a thing is not in question for Allah. Suyuti says that after expressing the hesitations about the existence of metaphor in The Qur’an are irrelevant, If the Qur’an does not have the metaphor, the half of Its beauty would have gone. Because the rhetoric scholars are in agreement that metaphor is more eloquent than the truth and more impressive on the interlocutor. Even though the metaphor exist in the Qur’an , approaching the spreading metaphor only with regard to literature without taking the political, social and theological discussions in the Muslim world into the consideration would be misleading without a doubt. In this context, the factors that affect the formation of metaphor can be gathered in these titles: the matter of imamate, faith discussions, the situation of great sinners, arising of Mu’tezile, Kalami discussions that blazed with the encounter of different cultures and religions, names of Allah and the matter of interpretation. Opinions of the scholars which accepts or denies the metaphor are seem to be shaped with regard to their positions on these mentioned matters. Thus the main reason of Ibn Teymiyye’s denial of metaphor, who is the center of the discussions about the denial of metaphor, is the theological concerns. The religious extent of the discussion will be significant in consideration of the both sides of the discussion show verses and hadiths as evidence to back up their opininons. “To those who reject Our signs and treat them with arrogance, no opening will there be of the gates of heaven, nor will they enter the garden, until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle: Such is Our reward for those in sin.” (A’raf 7/40) The expressions can be attributed to the metaphor in this verse are “ the opening the gates of heaven and a camel passing through the eye of a needle”. While examining the verse, we deal with the interpretations in three main categories in order to see the historical process of the metaphor: the era of Tabari and before, the era after Tabari and the modern era. When the era of Tabari and before is examined, even though the word of metaphor is not used much, it can be observed that some interpretations are more inclined to metaphor. However while interpreting the verse the scholars mostly underscored that whom and why the gates of heaven will opened or not. And there is not much interpretations about how that opening would be. In the same way the interpretations about the expression of “until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle” mostly focused on whether the word is camel (cemel) or rope (cummel) because the difference of the pronunciation. When the interpretations by the last era interpreters are examined it can be seen clearly that they are attributing the verse to metaphor. Besides the verse has been interpreted mostly by the expression of “until the camel can pass through the eye of the needle”. “ (Duhan 44/ And neither heaven nor earth shed a tear over them: nor were they given a respite (again)” 29) In the era of Tabari and before it is possible to say that although there were partial mentions about the “shedding of the heaven and earth”, mostly for who the heaven and earth is shedding or not is underscored. In the chosen interpretations to be the examples of the last era, it is remarked that the existence of metaphor in the verse clearly emphasized. The matter of the heaven and earth is not shedding for who find less place in comparison with the first era. As a result it can be said that by the examining of the two verses, metaphorical expression is in existence widely in the Qur’an and as time progresses attribution to the metaphor has been increased. It is beneficial to state that making far-fetched metaphorical interpretations as in with the sectarian motives, as in Mutezile, is not true. With that in mind, it is a fact that both in interpretations and in translations if the true meanings of the wordings do not answer the message wanted to given or as a matter of tone, metaphorical expression has been applied when the necessary conditions are met in order to giving a strong message to the interlocutors with regard to interlocutor mass’s perception about the given subject

___

  • Afacan, Hülya, Mecazın Terimleşme Süreci ve İbn Teymiyye Öncesi Mecaza İtirazlar, Sakarya Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: XVII, Sayı: 30 (2014/2).
  • el-Alusi, Mahmud b. Abdullah Şihabuddin, Ruhu’l Meani fi Tefsiri’l Kur’ani’l Azim, Dar İhyau’t Turasi’l Arabi, Beyrut trhs.
  • Arpa, Abdulmuttalip, Kur’an’da Mecaz Tartışmaları ve İbn Teymiye’nin Meseleye Yaklaşımı, Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi, sayı 44, 2010.
  • Ateş, Süleyman, Yüce Kur’an’ın Çağdaş Tefsiri, Yeni Ufuklar Neşriyat, İstanbul 1989.
  • Aydın, İsmail, Hakikat ve Mecazın Terimleşme Süreci, İslami İlimler Dergisi, Yıl 8, cilt VIII, sayı 1, Bahar 2013.
  • Bayraklı, Bayraktar, Yeni Bir Anlayış Işığında Kur’an Tefsiri, Bayraklı Yayınları, İstanbul, 2013.
  • el-Beydavi, Nasuruddin Ebu’l Hayr Abdullah b. Ömer, Envaru’t Tenzil ve Esraru’t Te’vil, (tahkik: Muhammed Abdurrahman el-Mar’aşli), Dar İhyau’t Turasi’l Arabi, Beyrut 1418/1998.
  • Cerrahoğlu, İsmail, Tefsir Usulü, TDV Yayınları, Ankara 1985.
  • Çağıl, Necdet, Hakikat-Mecaz Kutuplaşması Bağlamında Kur’an’da Temsili (Simgesel) Anlatım, İslami İlimler Dergisi, Yıl,8 Cilt 8 Sayı:1,Bahar 2013. ss, 93-112.
  • Çalışkan, İsmail, Hakikat ve Mecazın Belirleyicisi Müfessirdir –Günümüz Tefsirinde Mecazın İmkânlarından İstifade Edilmesi, İslami İlimler Dergisi, Yıl,8 Cilt 8 Sayı:1,Bahar 2013.
  • Ebu Hayyan El-Endelusi, Muhammed b. Yusuf, Bahru’l Muhit, Dar el-Kütubü’l İlmiyye, Beyrut 1413/1993.
  • Esed, Muhammed, Kur’an Mesajı Meal Tefsir, (Çev. Cahid KOYTAK - Ahmet ERTÜRK), İşaret Yayınları, İstanbul 1999.
  • el-Ferahidi, Halil b. Ahmed, Kitabu’l Ayn, Dar Kütubü’l İlmiyye, Beyrut, 1424/2003.
  • Firuzabadi, Muhammed b. Yakub, Tenviru’l Mikbas min Tesiri İbn Abbas, Dar Kutubü’l İlmiye, Beyrut 1412/1992.
  • Gemuhluoğlu, Zeynep, İslam Düşüncesine Özgü Bir Poetikadan Söz Edilebilir mi? : İlk Dönem Kelam ve Dil Alimlerinde Din Dili-Mecaz/Şiir-Mecaz ilişkisi Üzerine Bir İnceleme, M. Ü. İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi 36 (2009/1).ss.109-134.
  • Heyet, (Hayrettin Karaman, Mustafa Çağrıcı, İbrahim Kafi Dönmez, Sadrettin Gümüş,) Kur’an Yolu, Diyanet İşleri Başkanlığı Yayınları, Ankara 2014.
  • el-Huvvari, Hud b. Muhakkem Tefsir’u Kitabi’llahi’l-Aziz, Dar el-Ğarbu’l İslami, Beyrut 1990. (IIV).
  • İbn Aşur, Muhammed Tahir, et-Tahrir ve’t Tenvir, Dar et-Tunisiyye, Tunus 1984.
  • İbn Kayyım El-Cevziyye, Şemsuddin Ebi Abdullah, es-Sava’iku’l Mursele ala’l Cehmiyeti ve’l Muattıla, (tahkik: Ali b. Muhammed Rakhilullah), Daru’l Asıma, Riyad trs.
  • İbn Kesir, Ebu’l Fida İsmail b. Ömer, Tefsiru’l Kur’ani’l Azim, (Tahkik: Sami b. Mumhammed Sellame), Dar Taybe, Riyad 1420/1999.
  • İbn Kuteybe, Ebu Muhammed Abdullah b. Müslim ed-Dineveri, Te’vilu Müşkili’l Kur’an, (thk. İbrahim Şemsuddin), Dar Kütubü’l İlmiyye, Beyrut 1391/1971.
  • el-İsfahani, Ebu’l Kasım b. Muhammed Rağıb, el-Mufredat fi-Garibi’-Kur’an,(Tahkik: Muhammed Seyyid Keylani), Daru’lMa’rife, Beyrut trs.
  • İzzeddin, Abdulaziz b. Abdusselam, Mecazu’l Kur’an, (Tahkik: Muhammed Husey ezZehebi),Londra 1419/1999.
  • Kahveci, Nuri, Hanefi Fıkıh Literatüründe Mecazi Anlam, İslam Hukuku Araştırmaları Dergisi, sayı: 18. 2011.
  • Kayhan, Mustafa, Dil, Tefsir ve Meal Bağlamında Kurân’da idrab Üslûbu, İlâhiyât, Ankara 2016.
  • Kısa, Mahmut, Kur’an-ı Kerim ve Kısa Açıklamalı Meali, Armağan Kitaplar, Konya 2009, s.497.
  • el-Kurtubi, Ebu Abdillah Muhammed b. Ahmed b. Ebi Bekr, el-Camiu li-Ahkami’l Kur’an, (Tahkik: Abdullah b. Abdu’l Hasen et-Turki), Muessetu’l Risale, Beyrut 1427/2006.
  • Kutub, Seyyid, Fizilali’l Kur’an, Matabi eş-Şuruk, Beyrut 1405/1985.
  • el-Maturidi, Ebu Mansur Muhammed b. Muhammed b. Mansur, Te’vilatu Ehli’s Sunne, (Tahkik Fatıma Yusuf el-Haymi), Risale, Beyrut, 1425/2004.
  • el-Maverdi, Ebu’l Hasan b. Muhammed b. Habib, en-Nüket ve’l- Uyun, Dar Kütubü’l İlmiye, Beyrut trs.
  • el-Meraği, Ahmed Mustafa, Tefsiru’l Meraği, Mustafa el-Halebi matbaası, Kahire 1365/1946.
  • Mukatil, b. Süleyman, Tefsir’u Mukatil b. Süleyman, (Tahkik Ahmet Ferit) Dar Kütubü’l İlmiye, Beyrut 1424/2003.
  • er-Razi, Fahruddin, Mefatihu’l Ğayb, Daru’l Fikr, Beyrut 1401/1981.
  • Salih, Ali Salih-Emine Şeyh Süleyman Ahmed, el-Mu’cemu’s Safi fi-Luğati’l- Arabiyye, Riyad, 1401/1981.
  • es-Sem’ani Ebu’l Muzaffer, Tefsiru’l Kur’an, (tahkik: Ebu Temim Yasir b. İbrahim), Daru’l Vatan, Riyad 1418/1997.
  • es-Suyuti, Celaluddin, el-İtkan fi Ulumi’l Kur’an, (Tahkik: Ahmed b. Ali), Daru’l Hadis, Kahire 1427/2006.
  • eş-Şevkani, Muhammed b. Ali, İrşadu’l Fuhu’l ila Tahkiki’l Hakki min İlmi’l Usul, (tahkik: Ebu Hafs Sami), Daru’l Fadıyleti, Riyad 1421/2000.
  • et-Taberi, Ebu Cafer Muhammed b. Cerir, el-Camiu'l-Beyan an Te'vili Ayi'l-Kur'an, (Tah. Abdullah b. Abdi’l Muhsin et-Turki) Dar Hacer, Beyrut 1422/2001.
  • et-Tabersi, Ebu Ali Fadl b. Hasen b. Fadl, Mecmau’l Beyan fi-Tefsiri’l Kur’an, (Tahkik: İbrahim Şemsuddin), Dar Kutübi’l İlmiyye, Beyrut 1418/1997.
  • et-Tusi, Ebu Cafer Muhammed b. Hasan, et-Tibyan fi-Tefsiri’l Kur’an, (Tahkik: Ahmed Habib Kasir el-Amili), Dar İhya-u Turasi’l Arabi, Beyrut trs.
  • Yazır, Elmalılı Muhammed Hamdi, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, Azim Dağıtım, İstanbul 1992.
  • ez-Zemahşeri, Carullah Ebi’l Kasım Mahmud b. Ömer, el-Keşşaf an Ğavamidu’t Tenzil ve uyunu’l Ekavil fi Vucuhi’l Te’vil, Dar Kütbu’l İlmiyye Beyrut 1437/2015. (I-IV)
  • ez-Zerkeşi, Bedruddin Muahmmed b. Abdullah, el-Burhan fi Ulumi’l Kur’an, (Tahkik: Ebu’l Fadl ed-Dımyati), Daru’l Hadis, Kahire 1427/2006.