Bir Uzakdoğu Müfessiri Muhammed b. Ömer En-Nevevî'nin Hayatı ve Merâhu Lebîd Adlı Tefsirinin Genel Özellikleri
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Endonezya asıllı âlim Muhammed b. Ömer en-Nevevî (1230/1815-1316/1898), otuz küsur yaşına kadar ülkesinde ilim öğrenmekle meşgul olmuş, da-ha sonra Mekke'ye hicret edip orada ilim tahsil etmiş, kısa bir süre de Mısır ve Suri-ye'de bulunmuş ve İslamî ilimlerde geniş bir bilgi birikimi elde etmiştir. İslamî ilim-lerin hemen her alanına ait onlarca esere şerh yazmakla şöhret bulan Nevevî, telif olarak da Merâhu lebîd adında orta hacimde iki ciltlik bir tefsir kaleme almıştır. Tef-sirinde geleneksel tefsir anlayışına sadık kalan müellif, Ehl-i sünnet-Şafiî çizgisini takip etmiş, yorumlarında bir kısım isrâiliyata ve uydurma rivayetlere yer vermekle beraber, üslup olarak akıcı, sade, anlaşılabilir bir dil kullanmış, hiçbir âyeti atlama-yarak her âyeti ayrı ayrı tefsir etmiş; bunun yanında muhkem-müteşâbih, nâsih-mensûh gibi usûl konularına değinmiş, kıraatlere ve esbâb-ı nüzûle ise özellikle yer vermiştir. A Far East Commentator Muhammad b.Omar An-Nawavî His Life and General Characteristics of Commentary Marâhu Labîd Indonesian scholar Muhammad b. Omar al-Nawawi (1230/1815-1316/1898), studied in his home country till he was about thirty year's old, then migrated to Mecca and continued his education. For a short time, he also visited Syria and Egypt and he attained extensive knowledge in Islamic studies. Nawawi, who became famous for writing commentaries on tens of books in almost every field of Islamic studies, wrote his two volume exegesis Marâhu labîd. The author, who was loyal to the traditional methods of exegesis, followed the Shafi'ite school. Even though he sometimes gave place to the narratives from the Bible and apoc-ryphal stories, he employs a clear, smooth and perceptible language in his com-mentary. He comments on every single verse in the Qur'an, in addition to his ex-planations related to the methodology of Qur'anic exegesis, e.g. muhkam-mutashābih (Clear and allegorical verses), nasih-mensūh (abrogating and abrogat-ed verses); He especially dealt with different versions of recitation and reasons for revelation. https://www.marife.org/marife/article/view/485
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".