Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Hitit Theology Journal, cilt.24, sa.2, ss.515-532, 2025 (ESCI, Scopus, TRDizin)
Since the early period of Islam, the Indian Subcontinent has served as a vibrant center for Qur’anic sciences. Despite the political upheavals of the 18th century, it preserved its scholarly tradition in cities such as Panīpat. This tradition produced prominent figures like Qāḍī Muḥammad Sanāʾullāh Panīpatī, whose roots trace back to ʿUthmān ibn ʿAffān and Abū Ayyūb al-Anṣārī, and who was educated by the greatest authorities of the era, notably his spiritual master Mīrzā Maẓhar Jān-i Jānān and Shāh Walīyyullāh al-Dihlawī. Sanāʾullāh Panīpatī’s multifaceted identity as a jurist, Sufi, and exegete has often been explored from partial perspectives in the existing scholarship. However, these segmented approaches risk overlooking the foundational element that unifies his exegetical method. While the literature generally acknowledges his deep familiarity with the science of Qur’anic recitations (qirā’āt), it has yet to adequately examine how he employed this science as a systematic and analytical exegetical tool that supports his legal, theological, and mystical interpretations, or the principled framework underpinning this approach. This study aims to fill that gap by reassessing Panīpatī’s contribution to the relationship between qirā’āt and tafsīr, highlighting the originality of his approach and reevaluating his place in the history of Qur’anic interpretation. To achieve this aim, the article adopts a textual analysis methodology centered on his magnum opus, al-Tafsīr al-Maẓharī, a work he completed over a period of approximately thirteen years. The analysis begins by tracing the intellectual biography of the author and situating him within the robust qirā’āt tradition in which he was trained. The main argument of the article is structured around the identification of three core principles that form the foundation of Panīpatī’s exegetical methodology, and the demonstration of their practical applications. According to the findings, the first principle is Panīpatī’s pragmatic binary classification of recitations: unlike the classical multi-layered gradations of authenticity, he considers all transmissions from the ten canonical reciters (al-Qurrāʾ al-ʿAsharah) to be mutawātir (mass-transmitted) and treats all others under the single category of shādh (anomalous). The second principle is his rejection of the preference (tarjīḥ) approach that privileges one reading over others; instead, he adopts a reconciliatory method (tawjīh) that justifies and harmonizes each variant. This principle frames the multiple readings not as contradictions or problems, but as complementary and divinely inspired dimensions that enrich the meaning of the Qur’anic text. The third principle lies in his epistemological hierarchy, wherein he treats mutawātir recitations as part of revelation and hence as sources of qaṭʿī (definitive) knowledge, while historical reports (akhbār) are evaluated as ẓannī (probabilistic) and interpreted in light of the recitations. Through this, he establishes a consistent epistemic order in which less-certain information is subordinated to higher-certainty sources. These three principles are illustrated through case studies in legal, theological, and mystical exegesis. The legal analysis shows how two variant readings of the ablution verse are reconciled using grammatical rules such as al-jarr ‘ala’l-jawār (governance by proximity) and corroborated by mutawātir Sunnah, revealing them not as contradictory but as complementary indicators of obligation (washing) and concession (wiping over footwear). In the theological case, an expression seemingly contradicting prophetic infallibility is interpreted through two readings that depict complementary internal (self-accountability) and external (rejection by the people) dimensions of the prophetic trial. The mystical analysis demonstrates how a phonetic variation (al-silm/al-salam) opens the way to a spiritual reading that integrates both the outward (sharīʿah) and inward (submission) dimensions of Islam. This study demonstrates that Sanāʾullāh Panīpatī did not treat the science of qirā’āt as a mere catalog of phonetic variants; rather, he transformed it into a dynamic and analytical tool that deepens meaning, reveals intertextual and semantic relationships, and expands interpretive possibilities within tafsīr. His distinctive methodology, most clearly exemplified in al-Tafsīr al-Maẓharī, thus offers more than a traditional commentary—it provides a living model of how the qirā’āt–tafsīr relationship can be made methodologically productive and systematically integrated.