To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Asharites.
Journal articles on the topic 'Asharites'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 27 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Asharites.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Khalil, Atif. "Al-Ghazali’s Unspeakable Doctrine of the Soul." American Journal of Islam and Society 23, no. 1 (January 1, 2006): 126–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.35632/ajis.v23i1.1655.
Full textAbstract:
Gianotti’s purpose behind this monograph is to draw out Ghazali’s positionon the vexed question of the true nature of the soul and its state in the afterlife.Ghazali’s actual views on this question have been a point of seriousdebate in both the Muslim intellectual tradition and Ghazali scholarship inthe West. At the heart of this debate lies the question of his true allegiance:Was the man, widely held to be the mujaddid (renewer of religion) of thefifth Islamic century, a full-fledged Asharite, as tradition has made him outto be, or was he, as others have suggested, a closet Avicennian? Or was he,to complicate matters even further, neither? The source of the problem restson the apparently conflicting doctrines he articulated in various places concerningthe soul in various places in his vast and multi-layered literary oeuvre.These seeming inconsistencies led Averroes, in the thirteenth century, toaccuse Ghazali of adhering “to no one doctrine in his books,” and of beinga Sufi with Sufis, an Asharite theologian with the Asharites, and a philosopherwith the philosophers (p. 19).Gianotti confesses that the “tensions and ambiguities are real and begresolution” (p. 8). He poignantly asks, however, whether they were the“unintentional mess left by a brilliant but indisciplined mind,” or whether ...
2
Toosi, Javad Fakhkhar. "The Ashari Theological School and the Authority of Human Reason in Ethics." ICR Journal 11, no. 1 (June 15, 2020): 110–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.52282/icr.v11i1.26.
Full textAbstract:
This article endeavours to show the compatibility of significant trends in the largest Islamic theological school, namely the Ashari, with the authority of reason in ethics. On the one hand, this authority requires reason to understand moral values while, on the other, proving that this authority does not conflict with the creation of actions by God. Asharism has accepted the ability of reason to understand moral values, while also accepting practical reason. Moral values and their antithesis are examples of good and evil and can be understood by rational reasoning. Nevertheless, Asharism also regards acts as the creation of God, yet without negating the ability of reason to understand good and evil. This article explains the differences between the Asharites and Mutazilites regarding the authority of independent reason in ethics. The negation of the ability of reason to discern God's acts and commands, thereby accepting the need for religion, has made the Asharite theological school unique. Accordingly, religion and reason are the two references in ethics within this school. This article concludes that the authority of reason is compatible with Asharism if we base our reading on the view of many prominent Ashari scholars. Furthermore, this foundation could be used to study the compatibility of Islam with modern ethical theories.
3
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes) On the Methods of Substantiating the Principles of Creed. Part Five." Minbar. Islamic Studies 12, no. 4 (January 12, 2020): 1003–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2019-12-4-1003-1049.
Full textAbstract:
This is a continuation of the translation into Russian of Ibn-Rushd’s treatise, in which he criticizes the principles of Kalam theology, especially those of Asharites, and juxtaposes them to the Quranic arguments. The present part deals with the last three questions from the fi fth section “God’s deeds” – predestination, God’s justice-injustice and resurrection, as well as with the Conclusion, which provides the author’s concept of allegorical exegetics.The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.
4
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "On Ibn Rushd’s critics of Asharite Kalam." Minbar. Islamic Studies 11, no. 3 (December 24, 2018): 553–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2018-11-3-553-562.
Full textAbstract:
The article is in fact an introduction to the treatise by the last prominent representative of Islamic philosophy (falsafa) Ibn Rushd (Averroes 1126–1198) al-Kashf `an manahij al-adilla fi `aqa’id al-milla (“On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed”) translated from Arabic into Russian. The authors identify the place of this work within the framework of Ibn Rushd's theological and philosophical heritage. They see in this treatise the philosopher’s Credo where he brings forward the rational foundation of Islamic dogmatics. This foundation lays within the argumentation of the Holy Qur’an as the alternative of the methods of Kalam. They also highlight the basic principles of Ibn Rushd’s criticism of the Asharites, in the first instance the concept about the five modes of argumentation and the concept of allegorical exegesis, an original version of which was elaborated by Ibn Rushd himself.
5
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes) On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed. Part Three." Minbar. Islamic Studies 12, no. 1 (June 4, 2019): 113–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2019-12-1-113-149.
Full textAbstract:
This is a continuation of the publication of the translation into Russian of IbnRushd’s treatise, in which he criticizes the principles of Kalam theology, especially those of Asharites, and juxtaposes them to the Quranic arguments. This part deals with apophatic attributes and pays a special attention to the issues of God’s incorporality, His presence in a certain “side” and His visibility. The author condemns Kalam allegorization of anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Quran and Hadith, regarding this approach as contrary to the Quranic method of education of the public and as а cause of division of Islam into different sections.
6
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes). On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed. Part Four." Minbar. Islamic Studies 12, no. 2 (July 8, 2019): 463–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2019-12-2-463-498.
Full textAbstract:
This is a continuation of the publication of the translation into Russian of IbnRushd’s treatise, in which he criticizes the principles of Kalam theology, especially those of Asharites, and juxtaposes them to the Quranic arguments. The present part deals with the first two questions from the fifth section “God’s deeds” – the creation of the world and the sending of the prophets. The author defends the eternalist view on the phenomenon of Creation, which was typical for the falsafa. He also suggests an original concept of two types of miracle as a proof for the authenticity of Prophetic missions.
7
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes). On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed. Part Two." Minbar. Islamic Studies 11, no. 4 (February 4, 2019): 783–804. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2018-11-4-783-804.
Full textAbstract:
This is a continuation of the publication [1] of the translation into Russian of a treatise by Ibn Rushd (Averroes 1126–1198 AD). In this treatise he criticizes the principles of Kalam theology, especially those of Asharites. They are juxtaposed to the Qur’anic arguments. The present chapter deals with the Divine attributes, such as the God’s Unity Kalam argument cataphatic descriptions. Critically assessed is the main argument of the`ilm al-kalamthedalil at-tamanu`(proof of mutual prevention). In the chapter are also discussed the fundamental theological issues of whether the Qur’an (as Divine Speech) is eternal or created as well as the relationship between the Divine attributes and His essence.
8
Manshur, Fadlil Munawwar, N. Hani Herlina, and Ahmad Nabil Atoillah. "Doktrin Predestinasi dan Determinisme: Antara Muktazilah dan Asy’ariyah." TAJDID 29, no. 2 (March 25, 2023): 167. http://dx.doi.org/10.36667/tajdid.v29i2.501.
Full textAbstract:
In classical Islamic thought, ‘divine predestination’ (qada’ wa’l-qadar) versus ‘human free will’ (ikhtiyar) is one of the most hotly contested topics. This article critically analyses the contribution made to this discourse by the two prominent schools of Islamic theology, the Asharites and the Mu’tazilites, by focusing on a topic that is crucial to the philosophy and theology of theology. This article seeks to properly understand Islamic intellectual history and culture by arguing that the treatment of the two schools of Islamic theology on the issue of qada’ wa’l-qadar and ikhtiyar is innovative, influential, and fundamentally more complex than previously acknowledged. On the subject of free will versus fate, the study’s findings indicate that the Mu’tazilah and Ash’ariyah have made compromises between philosophical, theological (kalam), and esoteric (sûfi) perspectives. Given that the subject matter and methodology of kalam, falsafah, and tasawwûf are frequently considered to be very different or even contradictory, this attitude of accommodation is plainly exceptional.
9
البدري ، سامية بنت ياسين. "الصلة بين الصوفية والأشعرية وواقعها المعاصر : دراسة تحليلية نقدية = The Connection between Sufis and Asharites and Its Contemporary Reality : An Analytical and Critical Study." مجلة الدراسات العقدية 10, no. 21 (March 2018): 323–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.12816/0053970.
Full text
10
Mahmood, Abdull Rahman, Ibrahim Hamed Hassan Abu Suailk, Wan Haslan Khairuddin, and Nur ‘Izzati Hashim. "Al- Ghazālī's Approach In Defending The Islamic Faith." Islamiyyat 44, IK (June 1, 2022): 3–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/islamiyyat-2022-44ik-01.
Full textAbstract:
Al-Ghazālī is considered as imam (the most prominent) in epistemological critique and religious sects during his time, and one of the most prominent in defending the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamā‘ah (Sunni Muslims, Sunnis, Sunnites). He is also considered one of the most prominent of theorizing of the Ash‘arī theology (Asharites or Ashʿarism) and Sufi thought. He was able to purify philosophy from superstition, and clarifies what is bad from what is sound, and he is considered as mujaddid (reformer) in his time. He was also distinguished by his intelligence, quality of writing, and erudition, as the objectives of the research were the manifestation of al-Ghazālī’s approach in defending the Islamic faith and his opinion on philosophy, theology, mysticism, and al-Bāṭiniyyah (The Sect of Batiniyya; esotericism) through studying his position in his book al-Iqtiṣād fī al-Iʿtiqād (The Moderation in Belief), Tahāfut al-Falāsifah (The Incoherence of the Philosophers), al-Munqidh min al-Ḍalāl (The Rescuer from Error) and Fadā’ih al-Bāṭiniyyah (The Infamies of the Esotericists). His positions were studied according to the historical, inductive, analytical, and critical research method. The study found that al-Ghazālī was able to be the master of his time in defending and establishing the belief of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamā‘ah, as he was also aware of the war to the al-Bāṭiniyyah and scholars, sultans, and the common people were charged with its war. Likewise, al-Ghazālī worked on establishing the Islamic faith and demonstrating it with textual and rational evidence. He criticized ‘Ilm al-Kalām (Islamic scholastic theology) and aiming it in accordance with the Islamic faith, and its use in defending and defining the Islamic faith and called for it to be preserved from the common people and to be used only in defence of the Islamic faith.
11
Alsamaani, Nader. "An Epistemic Defeater for the Asharite Metaethical Theory." Res Philosophica 99, no. 1 (2022): 25–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.11612/resphil.2172.
Full text
12
Volf, Marina. "“THE BOOK OF SECTS AND CREEDS” BY AL-SHAHRASTANI AS AN ISMAILI SOURCE: SWITCH THE PARADIGM IN HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY." Respublica literaria, RL. 2021. vol.2. no. 2 (March 29, 2021): 18–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.47850/rl.2021.2.2.18-34.
Full textAbstract:
Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Karīm al-Shahrastani is a well-known source in the West about Islamic and non-Islamic religious teachings. His “Book on Sects and Creeds” has so far been considered in the history of philosophy among the Asharite doxographic works. At present, the evaluation of this work in the history of philosophy is radically changing: from the Asharite doxography its evaluation is shifted to the opposite pole - Isma’ili heresiography. The paper presents historical and biographical facts, as well as a brief description of the main works that allow us to include al-Shahrastani in the Isma’ili context. It analyzes the Shahrastani's preface to Kitab al-milal wa-n-nihal, which clearly shows the coherence of this section, including the methodology and structure of the treatise indicated by the author himself, with other Isma’ili books, in particular with the “Chapter on Shaytan” from Kitab al-Shajar Abu Tammam. Using the example of the switching of this book evaluations, we want to argue against the point of view that insists on the conservatism of the philosophical canon ostensibly created and observed by the history of philosophy, and to show that the history of philosophy research, although it depends on speculative interpretations, is fundamentally an empirical work, essentially dependent on the facts which role played by the sources, and the decisive factor in changing the "paradigm" in history of philosophy or the philosophical canon is primarily our trust in the sources and their careful reading in various contexts.
13
Trego, Kristell. "Les actes de l’homme." Articles spéciaux 69, no. 2 (February 7, 2014): 295–308. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1022497ar.
Full textAbstract:
Résumé Qui agit quand j’agis ? Cet article s’intéresse à la réception philosophique de deux versets scripturaires, Jn 15,5 et Ph 2,13, qui, l’un comme l’autre, énoncent une certaine intervention de Dieu dans les actes que l’homme effectue. On prend en premier lieu en considération l’occasionnalisme malebranchiste. On envisage ensuite, au sein du kalâm, le courant asharite, souvent présenté comme « occasionnaliste », et sa réfutation par le philosophe chrétien de l’école de Baghdad Yaḥyâ ibn ‘Adî. On regarde enfin comment la tradition médiévale a, à la suite d’Augustin, concilié nos deux versets avec l’affirmation de la libre volonté humaine.
14
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes). The Incoherence of the Incoherence. Part Three." Minbar. Islamic Studies 14, no. 1 (April 7, 2021): 117–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2021-14-1-117-151.
Full textAbstract:
This series of publications is a translation of selected sections from the book “The Incoherence of the Incoherence” (Tahafut at-Tahafut) of peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), written in response to the book of asharite mutakallim al-Ghazali (d. 1111) “The Incoherence of the Philosophers” (Tahafut al-Falasifa). In this part Ibn Rushd examines the second of two objections raised by al-Ghazali against the main proof for the eternity of the world – “from complete cause” (in Ghazali’s wording, “impossibility of the temporal proceeding from absolute eternity”), as well as his criticism of another proof based on the eternity of time (in two formulations).
15
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes). The Incoherence of the Incoherence. Part Four." Minbar. Islamic Studies 14, no. 2 (June 27, 2021): 337–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2021-14-2-337-369.
Full textAbstract:
This series of publications is a translation of selected sections from the book “The Incoherence of the Incoherence” (Tahafut at-Tahafut) by a peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), written in response to the book by asharite mutakallim al-Ghazali (d. 1111) “The Incoherence of the Philosophers” (Tahafut al-Falasifa).In this part Ibn Rushd completes the analysis of al-Ghazali’s criticism of the philosophical proofs for the eternity of the world. Here are the answers to the last part of Ghazalian objections to the second proof (“from the eternity of time”), as well as to the objections to the third (“from the eternity of possibility”) and the fourth (“from the eternity of matter”).
16
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "<i>Ibn-Rushd (Averroes)</i>. The Incoherence of the Incoherence. Part Five." Minbar. Islamic Studies 15, no. 3 (October 6, 2022): 695–714. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2022-15-3-695-714.
Full textAbstract:
This series of publications is a translation of selected sections from the book “The Incoherence of the Incoherence” (Tahafut at-Tahafut), written by the peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198) in response to the polemical treatise of asharite mutakallim alGhazali (d. 1111) “The Incoherence of the Philosophers” (Tahafut al-Falasifa).This section deals with the third of the theses attributed to the philosophers and singled out by the opponent as heretical – about the alleged God’s ignorance of particulars. Showing the incorrectness of both the attribution of the thesis to the philosophers and the Ghazalian objections raised against it, the philosopher points out that, from the Falsafa point of view, God’s knowledge of world beings cannot be qualified in terms of “universal” or “particular”.
17
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "On the Falsafa concept of God’s knowledge." Minbar. Islamic Studies 15, no. 3 (October 6, 2022): 673–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2022-15-3-673-694.
Full textAbstract:
This article serves as an introduction to the translation of the book “The Incoherence of the Incoherence” (Tahafut at-Tahafut) of the peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, 1126–1198), written in response to the work of the theologian-asharite al-Ghazali (1058–1111) “The Incoherence of the Philosophers” (Tahafut al-Falasifa). The paper highlights the Quranic paradigm, the Kalam and Falsafa approaches to the demonstration of the “knowledge” attribute.The work presents a brief overview of the controversy of two thinkers around related issues – about God’s knowledge of the universals and about His knowledge of Himself. Moreover, the research notes the connection between the book of Ibn Rushd and his earlier theological and polemical treatises: “On God’s knowledge”, “On the correlation between philosophy and religion” and “On the methods of proof for the principles of creed”.
18
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes).The Incoherence of the Incoherence. Part Two." Minbar. Islamic Studies 13, no. 4 (December 27, 2020): 863–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2020-13-4-863-899.
Full textAbstract:
(Translation from Arabic into Russian, intoduction and comments)This series of publications is a translation of selected sections from the book «The Incoherence of the Incoherence» (Tahafut at-Tahafut) of a peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198), written in response to the book of asharite mutakallim al-Ghazali (d. 1111)«The Incoherence of the Philosophers» (Tahafut al-Falasifa). The first of these sections and the longest one is devoted to the question of the world’s eternity.In this part Ibn Rushd continues examining the first of the two objections raised by al-Ghazali as the main proof for the pre-eternity of God’s creation – «from the complete cause», or, in Ghazaliane wording, «It is impossible that the temporal should proceed from the absolutely eternal». According to this objection, it is the God’s eternal will that predetermined the specific moment when the world came into being.
19
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn-Rushd (Averroes). The Incoherence of the Incoherence. Part Six." Minbar. Islamic Studies 16, no. 4 (January 10, 2024): 833–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2023-16-4-833-847.
Full textAbstract:
This work completes the series of publications that began in № 3 (2020), which is a translation of selected sections from the book «The Incoherence of the Incoherence» (Tahāfut at-Tahāfut), written by a peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, d. 1198) in response to the polemical treatise of asharite mutakallim al-Ghazali (d. 1111) «The Incoherence of the Philosophers» (Tahāfut al-Falāsifa).Dealing in this section with the third of the “heretical” (kufr) theses attributed to philosophers – about the alleged denial of bodily resurrection and sensory retribution, Ibn Rushd rejects this accusation and points out that from a Falsafa point of view, such principles of religion are necessary for the establishment of practical and theoretical virtues, and therefore are not subject to discussion. The philosopher notes the advantage of a bodily description of afterlife, however claims that bodies will be similar to earthly ones, but not identical to them.
20
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "Ibn Rushd (Averroes). On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed. Part One." Minbar. Islamic Studies 11, no. 3 (December 24, 2018): 563–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2018-11-3-563-591.
Full textAbstract:
The article offers for the first time a translation from Arabic into Russian of a treatise by Ibn Rushd (Averroes 1126–1198 AD), which deals with the islamic belief system (aqida). The treatise is of exceptional interest for both the students of theology and philosophy: it was authored by a philosopher who used the language of a theologian – a phenomenon that does not have a precedent in Muslim culture. Ibn Rushd here shapes his understanding of aqida by polemically using as a background the Asharite theology. In the translation is offered the first chapter of the treatise, which deals with proofs of the God’s existence. The arguments used by the representatives of the Kalam, such as dalil al-huduth (“de novitiate mundi”), the dalil al-jawaz (or dalil al-imkan, argument of “contingent mundi”)are critically assessed. They are juxtaposed to such Qur’anic arguments dalil al-`inaya argument “from design” or “de providentia” or the dalil al-ikhtira` “de inventione” or “de creatione”.
21
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "On Averroes’ response to al-Ghazali’s critique of philosophy." Minbar. Islamic Studies 13, no. 2 (July 5, 2020): 378–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2020-13-2-378-400.
Full textAbstract:
The article serves as an introduction to the translation of the book «The Incoherence of the Incoherence» (Tahafut at-Tahafut) by the peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, 1126–1198), written in response to the work of the theologian-asharite al-Ghazali (1058–1111) «The Incoherence of the Philosophers» (Tahafut al-Falasifa). The paper highlights the motives of al-Ghazali’s attack on Muslim peripatetism (Falsafa) and its infl uence on the fate of this school in the Muslim world. The research describes the basic understanding of the Falsafa picture of the world that comes as a framework for the discussions unfolding the fi rst of the three main points of al-Ghazali’s criticism, which is the thesis of the world eternity. The connection between Ibn Rushd’s book and his earlier theological and polemical treatises as «On the Correlation between Philosophy and Religion» and «On the Methods of Proof for the Principles of Creed» is shown.
22
Muhyidin, Muhyidin, and Zamroni Ishaq. "Metodologi Al-Asy’ari (Studi atas Bangunan Teologi Al-Asy’ari)." Ummul Qura Jurnal Institut Pesantren Sunan Drajat (INSUD) Lamongan 18, no. 1 (April 24, 2023): 32–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.55352/uq.v18i1.115.
Full textAbstract:
The A thought cannot be separated from the historical context in which the thinker lived. Al-Ash'ari lived in an atmosphere of conflicting ideas, between the highly rational Mu'tazilites on the one hand, and the highly textual Hanabilah (Hadith or Salafists), on the other. At first, al-Ash'ari was a loyal follower of the Mu'tazilites, then at the age of 40 he left the Mu'tazilites. There were many reasons behind al-Ash'ari coming out of the Mu'tazilites. But most importantly, after al-Ash'ari left the Mu'tazilites, he developed a concept of thought that sought to combine the rational method of the Mu'tazilites and the textual method of Hanabilah. Not only that, in order to prove the truth of his thoughts, al-Asha'ri attacked the Mu'tazilite thoughts. Therefore, it can be concluded that the method used by al-Ash'ari in constructing his theology was to use the 'middle axis' methodology; synthesis between textual and rational. It was this methodological building pattern that ultimately led to Asharite theology being followed by the majority of Muslims in the world today.
23
Ibrahim, T., and N. V. Efremova. "On Averroes’ response to al-Ghazali’s critique of Falsafa interpretation of bodily resurrection." Minbar. Islamic Studies 16, no. 4 (January 10, 2024): 816–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.31162/2618-9569-2023-16-4-816-832.
Full textAbstract:
This article serves as an introduction to the translation of the section on bodily resurrection, from the book «The Incoherence of the Incoherence» (Tahāfut at-Tahāfut) of the peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, 1126–1198), written in response to the work of the theologian-asharite al-Ghazali (1058–1111) «The Incoherence of the Philosophers» (Tahāfut al-Falāsifa). The paper reveals the presentist-intellectualist intention of Falsafa eschatology; it also gives a compendium of the polemics of two thinkers around two related issues that are the rational proofs for the immateriality of the soul and its incorruptibility. Moreover, the research provides a brief summary of the section of the Ghazalian book regarding resurrection. The authors also disclose the connection between the book of Ibn Rushd and his earlier theological and polemical treatises «On the correlation between philosophy and religion» and «On the methods of proof for the principles of creed».The article is intended to serve as an introduction to the translation of the section on bodily resurrection, which concludes the book of the peripatetic philosopher Ibn Rushd (Averroes, 1126–1198) «The Inconsistency of Inconsistency», compiled in refutation of the critical treatise «The Inconsistency of the Teachings of the Philosophers» by the mutaqallimah-ash'arite al-Ghazali (1058–1111).
24
العمري, محمد نبيل. "تحقيق القول في مسألة التكليف بما لا يطاق عند الأشعرية = Investigation of the View about the Issue of Delegation of What Is beyond Capacity According to Asharittes." Dirasat Shari a and Law Sciences 44, no. 1 (April 2017): 287–302. http://dx.doi.org/10.12816/0040196.
Full text
25
Karim, Karim H. "Shia Ismaili Leadership." American Journal of Islam and Society 33, no. 2 (April 1, 2016): 102–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.35632/ajis.v33i2.907.
Full textAbstract:
The self-declaration of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as khalīfah in 2014 has onceagain brought to the fore the topic of Muslim leadership. There are numerousforms of leadership in Muslim societies today. Apart from presidents, primeministers, kings, emirs, and shaykhs, religious heads like the Shaykh al-Azharas well as certain Sufi shaykhs and pirs have varying levels of prominence.The Supreme Leader of Iran is the head of state and the county’s highestrankingpolitical and religious authority. Aga Khan IV, the current Shia NizariIsmaili Imam, leads a transnational community and has established the AgaKhan Development Network. Fethullah Gulen is founder of the transnationalHizmet (service) movement that has roots in Turkey.The issue of Muslim leadership initially came into focus following theProphet’s death in 632, when Abu Bakr al-Siddiq was nominated as the firstkhalīfah. Ali ibn Abi Talib, married to the Prophet’s daughter Fatima, assertedhis claim but eventually agreed to accept Abu Bakr’s selection. Ali became thefourth khalīfah after Abu Bakr, Umar al-Khattab, and Uthman ibn Affan. Hisclosest followers, who came to be known as the Shī‘at ‘Alī and later just Shia,upheld the belief that the Prophet’s family possessed the right of leadership.This group has adhered to Ali and Fatima’s descendants as Imams.The Shia Imama is a religious institution that embodies authority in thedomains of faith (dīn) and world (dunyā). It is generally characterized by ahereditary succession of leaders from father to son, except among the Zaydis(living mostly in northern Yemen), who select their Imams from any male descendantof Ali and Fatima. The largest Shia group, the Ithna Asharis (Twelvers),are concentrated mainly in Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Azerbaijan,and the Gulf region. Their name refers to the belief that their Twelfth Imamwent into occultation in 873 and is expected to re-emerge as the messianicMahdi. In his absence, the community is guided by ulama led by the ayatullahs ...
26
Годованець, Н. І. "ASHARI’S SCHOOL OF KALAM." Proceedings of the National Aviation University. Series: Philosophy, Cultural 17, no. 1 (March 2, 2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.17.9801.
Full text
27
BARAN, İlhan. "Eyyûbîler Döneminde Felsefe Karşıtlığı Ekseninde Eşarîlik." Bingöl Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, November 28, 2023. http://dx.doi.org/10.34085/buifd.1377574.
Full textAbstract:
Öz
Mezhepleri bilmek mezhep mensubu âlimleri iyi tanımayı gerektirir. Bu nedenle önemli görülen bazı şahıslar üzerinde derinleşmek zorunluluk arz etmektedir. Mezhepler Tarihinde ele alınan birçok olayın arka planında tek bir kişi ya da bu kişinin etkilediği topluluklar yer aldığı görülmektedir. Fakat bir süreci ele alan araştırmalarda bu metot yeterli gelmediği için daha kapsayıcı bir çerçeve olan ve birden çok kişinin müdahil olduğu olaylar üzerinde derinleşmek gerekmektedir. Bu bağlamda araştırmamızda Sühreverdî Maktûl ve Seyfüddin Amidî üzerinde yoğunlaştık. Ayrıca onların etrafında gelişen ve bazı Eyyûbî sultanları ile birçok fakihin müdahil olduğu olaylardan hareketle Eşarilîğin söz konusu dönemdeki seyriyle ilgili kanaatimizi ortaya koyduk.
Büyük Selçuklular döneminde Gazâlî, Fâtımîler Devleti’nin ideolojisi Bâtınîliği hedef almış, bu bağlamında felsefeye karşı da mücadeleye girmişti. Onun çabaları sonucunda ciddi bir felsefe karşıtlığı ortaya çıkmış, Fâtımîler’e son veren Eyyûbîler döneminde ise bu durum daha belirgin bir hal almıştı. Nitekim fakihlerin baskısı sonucunda felsefî ve bazı itikâdî görüşlerinden ötürü Sühreverdî Maktûl idam edilmişti. Eyyûbîler döneminde güçlenen felsefe karşıtlığı önemli bir sonuç doğurmuş; Eşarîliğin daralmasına neden olmuştur. Söz konusu durumun oluşmasında Eşarîlerin muhaliflerinin arasında Mutezilenin bulunmayışı etili olmuştur. Bununla birlikte Fahreddin Râzî ve Seyfüddin Amidî’nin etkisiyle Felsefî Eşarîliğin sınırlı da olsa devam ettiği görülmüştür.
Anahtar Kelimeler: İslam Mezhepleri Tarihi, Eyyûbîler, Eşarîlik, Felsefe, Kelâm.
Asharism in the Axis of Opposition to Philosophy in the Ayyubid Period
Abstract
Knowing the sects requires knowing the scholars of the sect well. For this reason, it is imperative to deepen on some important individuals. In the background of many events dealt with in the History of Sects, it is seen that there is a single person or the communities influenced by this person. However, since this method is not sufficient in researches that deal with a process, it is necessary to deepen on events in which more than one person is involved, which is a more inclusive framework. In this context, we focused on al-Suhrawardi Maqtul and al-Sayf al-Din Amidi in our research. In addition, based on the events that developed around them and in which some Ayyubid sultans and many jurists were involved, we put forward our opinion about the course of Asharism in the period in question.
During the period of the Great Seljuks, al-Ghazali targeted the Fatimid ideology of the Fatimids, and in this context, he also fought against philosophy. As a result of his efforts, a serious opposition to philosophy emerged, and this situation became more pronounced during the Ayyubid period, which put an end to the Fatimids. As a matter of fact, as a result of the pressure of the jurists, Suhrawardi Maqtul was executed for his philosophical and some theological views. The opposition to philosophy, which became stronger during the Ayyubid period, had an important consequence and led to the narrowing of Asharism. The absence of the Mutazilites among the opponents of the Asharites contributed to this situation. However, it was observed that philosophical Asharism continued, albeit limited, under the influence of Fakhr al-Din al-Razi and Sayf al-Din Amidi.
Key Words: History of Islamic Sects, Ayyubids, Ashari, Philosophy, Theology.