MATURİDİ'NİN KUR'AN YORUM YÖNTEMİ

Abstract

M?tur?d? makes a clear-cut distinction between ta’v?l and tafs?r of the Holy Qur’?n, but he does not take these two as alternatives but as complementary to each other. The term tafs?r is set to give the exact meaning of any given word, while ta’v?l implies interpretation or hermeneutics as it is widely accepted. Ta’v?l is the method of gaining the real meaning of what we have as a literal text, i.e. to attain what stands under (so it is called understanding) or behind the literal meaning of any given word.  In tafs?r the focus is text, whereas in ta’v?l the interpreter is the focus. M?tur?d? mostly refers both literal (haq?q?) and metaphorical (mecaz?) meanings of any word, which enriches his commentary interpretation. Characteristically he fixes three frames for interpreting any verse: first, the time the verse was revealed; secondly his time which is the contemporary context of the interpreter and finally the rational/intellectual context. This three contexts give  a full-blown understanding for any given verse.   As the Samarqand region was very far-off from philosophical debates, as opposed to Ash’ar?te Baqdat, M?tur?d? mostly relied on literal analysis of the text on the one hand, and endeavored to get rational/intellectual meaning of it on the other, which was a heritage of Hanaf?te school of law.