İbn Kayyim El-Cevziyye'ye göre muhâkeme usulü (et-turuku'l-hükmiyye bağlamında)
Yükleniyor...
Dosyalar
Tarih
2015
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
İnönü Üniversitesi
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
Özet
Bu tez çalışmasında İbn Kayyim'in muhakeme usulüne dair görüşlerini tespit etmeye çalıştık. Tezimizin ilk bölümünde İbn Kayyim'in hayatını, ilmi şahsiyetini, yetiştiği ortamı ve eserlerini açıkladık. İkinci bölümde kadı, kadıda aranan nitelikler, davacı ve davalının nitelikleri, dava çeşitleri ve davada aranan şartlar hakkında genel bir bilgi verdik. Bununla birlikte kadı ve dava kelimelerinin terim ve sözlük anlamlarını da izah ettik. Üçüncü bölümde ispat yükünü ve ispat vasıtalarını açıkladık. İkrar, şahitlik, yemin, kasâme, liân, karine, kur'a, hâkimin şahsi bilgisi olmak üzere ispat vasıtalarını gerekli detaylarıyla birlikte açıklamaya çalıştık. Dördüncü bölümde ise bilirkişi, keşif, sorgulama teknikleri, iz bilimi gibi vasıtalarla delillerin toplanması mevzularına değindik. Ardından da toplanan bu delillerin değerlendirilmesi hakkında genel bir bilgi verdik. Zikrettiğimiz bu bölümlerde İbn Kayyim'in görüşleri hakkında bilgi vermekle beraber mezheplerin görüşlerini de izah ettik. Bu sayede okuyuculara muhakeme usulü konularındaki farklı görüşleri mukayese etme fırsatı vermeyi amaçladık.
In this thesis we have tried to put forth Ibn Qayyims methodology of arbitration. In the first part of our thesis we have explained Ibn Qayyims life, scholary identity, the environment in which he grew in and his works. In the second part we gave general information regarding a qadi (muslim judge), the qualifications required of a qadi, the various types of litigation and the necassary conditons required for it. Alongside this we elucidated upon the technical and dictionary terms for qadi and litigation. Within the third part we explained what the word bayyineh is and the medium for substantiation. We tried to elaborate upon avowals, testimony, oaths, kasâmah (group testimony), liân, presumptions, lottery, individual knowledge of judges, and in detail upon mediums for substantiation. As for the forth part we touched upon topics of gathering evidence using mediums such as expert witness, discovery, inquisition techniques and criminal science. After this we gave general information regarding the evaluation of the evidence that is gathered. Within these parts which we mentioned, alongside providing Ibn Qayyims views, we also explained the views of the school of thoughts and some scholars. With this regard, we aimed at providing the opportunity for the readers to compare the different views of opinion within the topics of methodology of arbitration. In conclusion, it is apparant that Ibn Qayyim does not follow any specific school of thought and that he holds contradictory views against the consensus. At times he's in complete agreement with Hanafî, Mâlikî, Şâfiî and Hânbelî opinion and at times he opposes all of them.
In this thesis we have tried to put forth Ibn Qayyims methodology of arbitration. In the first part of our thesis we have explained Ibn Qayyims life, scholary identity, the environment in which he grew in and his works. In the second part we gave general information regarding a qadi (muslim judge), the qualifications required of a qadi, the various types of litigation and the necassary conditons required for it. Alongside this we elucidated upon the technical and dictionary terms for qadi and litigation. Within the third part we explained what the word bayyineh is and the medium for substantiation. We tried to elaborate upon avowals, testimony, oaths, kasâmah (group testimony), liân, presumptions, lottery, individual knowledge of judges, and in detail upon mediums for substantiation. As for the forth part we touched upon topics of gathering evidence using mediums such as expert witness, discovery, inquisition techniques and criminal science. After this we gave general information regarding the evaluation of the evidence that is gathered. Within these parts which we mentioned, alongside providing Ibn Qayyims views, we also explained the views of the school of thoughts and some scholars. With this regard, we aimed at providing the opportunity for the readers to compare the different views of opinion within the topics of methodology of arbitration. In conclusion, it is apparant that Ibn Qayyim does not follow any specific school of thought and that he holds contradictory views against the consensus. At times he's in complete agreement with Hanafî, Mâlikî, Şâfiî and Hânbelî opinion and at times he opposes all of them.
Açıklama
09.08.2018 tarihine kadar kullanımı yazar tarafından kısıtlanmıştır.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynak
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
Sayı
Künye
Tozal, Ö. (2015). İbn Kayyim El-Cevziyye'ye göre muhâkeme usulü (et-turuku'l-hükmiyye bağlamında). İnönü Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. 1-175 ss.
