The Historical and Semantic Background of the Hadiths in the Context of the Lizard Narrative Kertenkele Rivayeti Bağlamında Hadislerde Tarihî ve Anlamsal Arka Plan
Mutefekkir, cilt.13, sa.25, ss.242-262, 2026 (Scopus)
- Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
- Cilt numarası: 13 Sayı: 25
- Basım Tarihi: 2026
- Doi Numarası: 10.30523/mutefekkir.1781718
- Dergi Adı: Mutefekkir
- Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus, ATLA Religion Database, MLA - Modern Language Association Database, MLA International Bibliography, Social Sciences Abstracts, Sociology Source Ultimate (EBSCO)
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.242-262
- Anahtar Kelimeler: Hadith, Historical Background, Lizard Narration, Semantic Background, Transmitter Influence
- Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
- Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
This article examines the historical and semantic background of ḥadīths concerning the killing of the lizard (wazagh), focusing on the justifications cited in narrations attributed to the Prophet. It aims to trace how historical and socio-cultural context, together with the narrator’s (rāwī) interpretive choices, contributed to the transformation of certain justifications into ḥadīth form. While previous studies have addressed these narrations from various perspectives, this study analyzes all reported justifications and examines in detail the impact of the rāwī’s interpretive links between religious texts. The study adopts a qualitative design based on ḥadīth sources and related literature. The study analyzes the narrations through isnād (chain of transmission) and matn (text) criticism, compares textual variants, and evaluates narrators according to jarḥ–taʿdīl (narrator criticism) and ʿilal (hidden defects in transmission). It further interprets the narrations within their historical and socio-cultural context, comparatively assesses classical and modern approaches, and examines selected motifs in relation to Isrāʾīliyyāt. The findings show that only narrations permitting the killing of the lizard in inhabited settlements (maskūn maḥall) due to harm are ṣaḥīḥ, while those justifying it as ‘a devil’ or as having ‘blown on Abraham’s fire’ are ḍaʿīf. The inclusion of this report in al-Bukhārī’s al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ does not necessarily indicate its acceptance for practice, nor does the evidence support its classification as Isrāʾīliyyāt. It is further argued that misinterpretations and incorrect intertextual connections by some narrators contributed to the formation of such justifications. The study concludes that a multidimensional approach considering the rāwī, context, and intertextual relations is essential for a sound and reliable understanding of semantic transformations in ḥadīths.