İslam Hukuk Literatürü Siyâsetin bir Tezâhürü müdür?: İstitâbe Hakkındaki Anlatı Değişimi Özelinde Bir Analiz

Abstract

Orientalists such as Schacht claimed, without sound evidence, that Islamic legal writings as a whole represent politics. Others such as Humphreys followed their lead and looked almost obsessively for any divergences across classical writings in various disciplines including Islamic law with an eye to taking the changes in the narrative structure across classical writings as an indication of an allegedly surreptitious political agenda of classical Muslim scholars. Is Islamic legal literature really a manifestation of politics? In an effort to provide an answer to this question against this background, this paper deals with the narrative change seen in the scope of application of istitāba between the 8th and the 11th century legal writings of al-Šāfiʿī and al-Ghazālī on istitāba, a legal institution that refers to calling on an apostate (murtadd) to repent in cases of apostasy (irtidāt). It particularly examines the alleged impact which the narrative change across classical jurists’ writings on the notion of istitāba had upon the formation of Sunnism as purported by some. In fact, some Western scholars claim that in the 11th century al-Ghazālī deviated from the norm set in the 8th century by al-Šāfiʿī when the former limited the scope of istitāba only to common people, removing that right from dāʿīs (the propagandists), an apparent divergence which was then linked to another earlier apparent divergence between al-Baghdādī and al-Ašʿarī. Looking at these divergences, they argue that al-Baghdādī and al-Ghazālī served as state apparatuses to protect the Sunnī identity of the Seljukid state against her enemies, a claim which has been skillfully used to make it appear that contemporary intolerant applications of the institution of istitāba is rooted in Islamic law and the “Sunni orthodoxy.” Providing a close comparative reading of the relevant classical works by al-Ašʿarī and al-Baghdādī as well as al-Šāfiʿī and al-Ghazālī along with others such as Abū Yūsuf and al-Sarakhsī, this work argues that such divergences are more apparent than real, while also showing that these Western scholars have done much disingenuity to make it appear the otherwise, in an effort to form a myth about Islamic law and Sunnism. This seems to represent, this paper further argues, what seems to be quite a common tendency among some western scholars to link narrative changes across classical sources to politics especially when it serves to compromise the strength of unity of practice and belief of the people of Turkish Republic. Finally, on the basis of the analysis on istitāba and relevant matters, this paper rebuts the idea that Islamic law is a manifestation of politics.