The phrase of “?adithu Fulan” is a concept used during the report period. One of the people who used the concept in question remarkably is Tirmidhi. He uses aforementioned phrase in his Sunan in different ways. “La na?rifu illa min ?adithi fulan”, “Gharibun min ?adithi fulan”, “A?a??u min ?adithi fulan”, “Nahwa/Mithlu ?adithi fulan”, “Huwa/hadha ?adithu fulan” are among these usages. In this article, we tried to determine in which mean Tirmidhi uses especially the phrase of “Huwa/hadha ?adithu fulan” in his Sunan. As far as we determined, Tirmidhi uses this concept twenty-one times in his work for the narrators (ruwat) outside of companions. As a result of the research, it is understood that this phrase, which used for the mu?addithun in the category of tabi?in and mostly atba? al-tabi?in, refers to copies of hadith of mu?addithun in question and these copies were used by Tirmidhi.

The issue of the word sunnah’s content that is the subject to various researches in the modern period also has been discussed in the classical methodology books in a certain frame. The subject of sunnah’s content has been usually discussed in these books in connection with some forms used by companions and successors in the narrations. There is a conflict among the scholars about how to understand these narrations which used inside it absolute sunnah, amr and nahi words. Most of the scholars think that these narrations are like the elevated hadithwhile a group of scholars whose majority was occurred by Hanafi jurists opposed this opinion. When the evidences are examined, it seems that the main difference between them is their assumption about companions’ general attitude in the transmission. In addition, it should be taken into consideration that jurists’ understandings about accepting the companions’ words as evidence lead to their opinion about involving companions in sunnah. The different evaluations of these words have had a significant impact on provisions given by the sects in certain issues. When these discussions are taken into consideration it is understood that considering some clues is important for reaching the most accurate result.

In addition to his being a good mu?addith, because he is one of the great scholars of the ?anafi school, al-?Ayni is an important example for the classification of the mu?addith-faqih scholar, which is rarer in the ?anafi school than in other schools of Islamic law. On the other hand, given that Bukhari’s ?a?i? is regarded as the most reliable book after the Qur’an, since ?anafis, who have been come under criticisms in many aspects in consequence of being ahl al-ra’y, such as opposing to authentic prophetic sayings (a?adith) and practicing with weak prophetic sayings, have not practiced with some prophetic sayings in Bukhari’s ?a?i?, criticisms have been intensified against them and they had been accused further in regard to practicing with ?adith. In the hope of being a response for the claims in question, this article examines how ?Aynî, who had twice been a ?anafi judge during his life, assesses these ?adiths with both his identity of faqih and mu?addith and how he responses to the criticisms directed against ?anafis.

Some scholars adopted the approach that the variant readings other than seven readings of the Qur’an are completely unacceptable. According to them, those versions can neither be recited in prayer nor have any value for the commentary of the Qur’an. Abu al-Fath Uthman Ibn Jinni (d. 392/1002), provided a strong opposition to this opinion in his book al-Muhtasab due to the reason that those versions can have a close relationship with the Qur’anic revelation. In his viewpoint, those versions can be beneficial in the Qur’anic commentaries even though they cannot be recited in prayer. This paper aims to deal with Ibn Jinni’s approach to the reading versions other than seven variant readings as well as comparing his position with other scholars’ perspective in this regard.

Ibn Khaldun, in his famous Muqaddimah, an “Introduction to History”, explained the stages of the rise and fall of nations through his comprehensive theory of history and society, underpinned by the concept of ‘asabiyyah or “group feeling”. Ibn Khaldun applied his theory to the main topics of the pre-Islamic religions as well, especially the Jewish religion. This paper aims to look at Ibn Khaldun’s interpretation of the history of the people of Israel through his concept of ‘asabiyyah, and to highlight some possible implications of it as regards the idea of the election of Israel, emphasis being made on parallels with Baruch Spinoza’s interpretation of the idea.