Divine respite in the Ottoman tafsīr tradition: reconciling exegetical approaches to Q.11:117

Mol, A.J.W.; Boyalık, M.T.; Abacı, H.

The tafsīr tradition is, as an accumulative and overarching science, a direct reflection of the trends emerging in other Islamic sciences. Exegesis on verses as Q.2:29, which concerned ontological ethics, Q.17:15, which concerned responsibility, and Q.11:117, which concerned worldly punishment, became important markers for Islamic theological typologies. Two important exegetical trends developed surrounding verse Q.11:117: (A) The exegesis of the Muʿtazila, as represented by al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144): God transcends any form of injustice, therefore when He destroys a people it is caused by their own theological injustice i.e., unbelief/idolatry/major sins. (B) The exegesis of the Sunnī orthodox, as represented by the Later Ashʿarī scholars al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) and al-Bayḍāwī (d. 685/1286): God does not destroy a people for their theological injustice i.e., unbelief/idolatry, but rather provides them respite when they are just towards others. Al-Zamakhsharī and al-Bayḍāwī...Show moreThe tafsīr tradition is, as an accumulative and overarching science, a direct reflection of the trends emerging in other Islamic sciences. Exegesis on verses as Q.2:29, which concerned ontological ethics, Q.17:15, which concerned responsibility, and Q.11:117, which concerned worldly punishment, became important markers for Islamic theological typologies. Two important exegetical trends developed surrounding verse Q.11:117: (A) The exegesis of the Muʿtazila, as represented by al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144): God transcends any form of injustice, therefore when He destroys a people it is caused by their own theological injustice i.e., unbelief/idolatry/major sins. (B) The exegesis of the Sunnī orthodox, as represented by the Later Ashʿarī scholars al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) and al-Bayḍāwī (d. 685/1286): God does not destroy a people for their theological injustice i.e., unbelief/idolatry, but rather provides them respite when they are just towards others. Al-Zamakhsharī and al-Bayḍāwī became central references in the post-classical tafsīr tradition. This is reflected both in the Ottoman curriculum, and in original exegetical works such as by Aḥmad b. Ismaʿīl al-Gūrānī (d. 893/1488), Ibn Kamāl Pāshā (d. 940/1534), Abū al-Suʿūd al-Efendī (d. 982/1574) and Ismāʿīl Ḥaqqī (d. 1127/1715), and supercommentary works by Shaykh Zādah (d. 951/1544), al-Khafājī (d. 1069/1658), and ʿIṣām al-Dīn al-Qūnawī (d. 1195/1781). This paper seeks to discuss how the Ottoman tafsīr tradition engaged the different exegetical approaches to verses such as Q.11:117, and how Māturīdī theology provided the possibility for a unique synthesis of al-Zamakhsharī and al-Bayḍāwī wherein divine respite becomes grounded in divine wisdom and justice.
Show less

Leiden University Scholarly Publications

View statistics

Documents

In Collections

Divine respite in the Ottoman tafsīr tradition: reconciling exegetical approaches to Q.11:117

Publication Series