"مسالك العلماء في التعامل مع اختلاف النسخ في رموز "الجامع الصغير

Ibrahim Abdullah Mohammed Al Madhani, Kabiru Goje
{"title":"\"مسالك العلماء في التعامل مع اختلاف النسخ في رموز \"الجامع الصغير","authors":"Ibrahim Abdullah Mohammed Al Madhani, Kabiru Goje","doi":"10.33102/jmqs.v17i2.320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The book ‘al-Jami as-Saghier’ of Al-Suyuti has become the major source for scholars, jurists, and preachers regarding the Prophet’s narrations. The reason for that is the easy access to the narration in it, with the addition of Al-Suyuti's classifications, and followed by the sources of the narration. But unfortunately, there occurred some differences in the manuscript copies regarding Al-Suyuti’s symbols, whether for sources or for strength and weakness of the narrations, which distracts the reader of this book. And caused the scholars to differ about these symbols and giving them lack trust. That is why this study came with the aim of choosing a scientific methodology to reach the rulings of Al-Suyuti, relying on the inductive approach in collecting texts. And it was found that the differences were caused by omission and misspelling, as well as the additions of some scholars such as Ibn Maghlabai and Sharif. And accordingly, the scholars’ approach towards these symbols differed: some of them removed them, like Al-Albani and Al-Nabhani. And others took the path of probability and likelihood, such as Al-Manawi and Al-San’ani, using correspondence between copies and the author’s handwriting, but their results are different. Therefore, I took what Al-Alqami mentioned as my main source, but since his explanation did not cover the whole book, we also relied on the copy of Testarbiti, due to its closeness to the author’s era and his acknowledgement of the copier. However, it contains blur and blanks, and a similarity between the two symbols of strength and weaknessص, ض) ) which affects the knowledge of the symbol. If Al-Alqami did not transmit anything, and we found an obliteration in the copy of Testarbiti, and the copies differed, then what Al-Manawi and Al-San’ani agreed upon is chosen. And even in the occasion one of them made a unique choice, because they took care of the book regarding their explanation and in comparing the copies. If Al-San’ani and Al-Manawi differ, or one of them is unique in contrast to the rest of the copies, as well as when there is a fear that a correction may occur in a copy of Testarbiti, then what agrees with the rule mentioned by Al-Suyuti in Al-Jami’ Al-Kabeer is given preference regarding the degree of the narration above the symbol of its correctors, or by Al-Suyuti’s statement in his other books as Al-Alqami used to do when giving preference.","PeriodicalId":276672,"journal":{"name":"Maʿālim al-Qurʾān wa al-Sunnah","volume":"140 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Maʿālim al-Qurʾān wa al-Sunnah","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33102/jmqs.v17i2.320","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The book ‘al-Jami as-Saghier’ of Al-Suyuti has become the major source for scholars, jurists, and preachers regarding the Prophet’s narrations. The reason for that is the easy access to the narration in it, with the addition of Al-Suyuti's classifications, and followed by the sources of the narration. But unfortunately, there occurred some differences in the manuscript copies regarding Al-Suyuti’s symbols, whether for sources or for strength and weakness of the narrations, which distracts the reader of this book. And caused the scholars to differ about these symbols and giving them lack trust. That is why this study came with the aim of choosing a scientific methodology to reach the rulings of Al-Suyuti, relying on the inductive approach in collecting texts. And it was found that the differences were caused by omission and misspelling, as well as the additions of some scholars such as Ibn Maghlabai and Sharif. And accordingly, the scholars’ approach towards these symbols differed: some of them removed them, like Al-Albani and Al-Nabhani. And others took the path of probability and likelihood, such as Al-Manawi and Al-San’ani, using correspondence between copies and the author’s handwriting, but their results are different. Therefore, I took what Al-Alqami mentioned as my main source, but since his explanation did not cover the whole book, we also relied on the copy of Testarbiti, due to its closeness to the author’s era and his acknowledgement of the copier. However, it contains blur and blanks, and a similarity between the two symbols of strength and weaknessص, ض) ) which affects the knowledge of the symbol. If Al-Alqami did not transmit anything, and we found an obliteration in the copy of Testarbiti, and the copies differed, then what Al-Manawi and Al-San’ani agreed upon is chosen. And even in the occasion one of them made a unique choice, because they took care of the book regarding their explanation and in comparing the copies. If Al-San’ani and Al-Manawi differ, or one of them is unique in contrast to the rest of the copies, as well as when there is a fear that a correction may occur in a copy of Testarbiti, then what agrees with the rule mentioned by Al-Suyuti in Al-Jami’ Al-Kabeer is given preference regarding the degree of the narration above the symbol of its correctors, or by Al-Suyuti’s statement in his other books as Al-Alqami used to do when giving preference.
科学家如何处理小小块的不同版本
Al-Suyuti的《al-Jami as-Saghier》一书已经成为学者、法学家和传教士关于先知叙述的主要来源。这样做的原因是很容易进入其中的叙述,加上Al-Suyuti的分类,然后是叙述的来源。但不幸的是,关于Al-Suyuti的符号,无论是来源还是叙述的强弱,在手稿副本中出现了一些差异,这分散了本书读者的注意力。并导致学者们对这些符号的看法不一,缺乏信任。这就是为什么这项研究的目的是选择一种科学的方法来得出Al-Suyuti的裁决,依靠归纳方法来收集文本。结果发现,这些差异是由于遗漏和拼写错误造成的,以及一些学者如伊本·马格拉拜和谢里夫的补充。因此,学者们对这些符号的处理方法也有所不同:有些人删除了这些符号,比如阿尔-阿尔巴尼和阿尔-纳卜哈尼。还有一些人采用了概率和可能性的方法,比如Al-Manawi和Al-San 'ani,他们使用了抄本和作者笔迹之间的对应关系,但他们的结果却不同。因此,我把Al-Alqami提到的作为我的主要资料来源,但由于他的解释没有涵盖整本书,我们也依赖于Testarbiti的副本,因为它接近作者的时代,并且他承认了复印机。然而,它包含了模糊和空白,以及强弱两个符号之间的相似性((,)),这影响了对符号的认识。如果阿尔卡米没有传递任何东西,而我们在Testarbiti的副本中发现了一个删除,并且副本不同,那么马纳维和Al-San 'ani同意的就被选中了。甚至在这种情况下,他们中的一个人做出了一个独特的选择,因为他们在解释和比较副本时照顾了这本书。如果Al-San ' ani和Al-Manawi不同,或者其中一个与其他副本相比是独特的,以及当人们担心在Testarbiti的副本中可能发生纠正时,那么与Al-Suyuti在Al-Jami ' Al-Kabeer中提到的规则相一致的是优先考虑其纠正者符号以上的叙述程度,或Al-Suyuti在他的其他书中的声明,就像Al-Alqami过去在给予优先时所做的那样。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信