Search

When Mu’tazila is the case, one of the first matters that comes to mind is rationalism. Similarly, when Mu'tazilite rationalism is the case, ma'rifatullah is one of the first examples to be given. In Kalām, ma'rifatullah is discussed under the subjects of al‐Husn‐al‐Qubh, knowledge and opinion. As a central matter of discussion for Kalām schools, ma'rifatullah has been the subject of a great many studies in today’s world. In some of these studies, the matter was analysed either generally according to sects in general, or according to major Mu'tazilite scholars. Here it is stated that Mu'tazila considers ma'rifatullah as a mental responsibility and that it regards intelligence as the ultimate source of knowledge, however the role of khawatir is not mentioned. Yet, in certain studies the role of khawatir in ma'rifatullah has been touched upon only briefly. In this study, however, the quality, source and the required conditions of khawatir, a motive to which theoretical content was attributed by Mu'tazila specifically in the context of reaching ma'rifatullah, are analysed. Furthermore, towards the role of khawatir in the subjects of intellect and ma'rifatullah, Mu'tazilite views are provided. Finally, the state of Mu'tazila for being adjudged as rationalist is evaluated within the context of ma'rifatullah. In this regard, it has been determined that Mu'tazilite thinkers increased the functionality of intelligence, which they consider to be an important epistemological source, by supporting it with khawatir. They even stated that khawatir needs to possess certain requisite qualifications to eliminate the mind’s possibility of making mistakes about obtaining knowledge, and with that they showed that it is actually possible to have objective information in a metaphysical field. Besides, khawatir was attributed a kind of warning function acting as a precaution for guiding to the right path, rewarding –which is the purpose of being created- and especially for reaching to ma'rifatullah because it warns about the negative consequences of actions. However, in connection with the act of reasoning initiated by khawatir, they stated that responsibility for ma'rifatullah can emerge out. For this reason, they almost achieved a consensus on the suggestion that it is wajib/obligatory for everyone to have khawatir, and one cannot be obliged to be responsible about reaching ma'rifatullah. As a result, according to Mu'tazila in religious and moral fields the functionality of intelligence, which is connected to Allah in one sense, increases with khawatir. On the other hand, just as “intelligence” independent from Allah is unimaginable, people don’t have a certain thinking potential, but they have thinking potentials in a rate defined by Allah. Therefore, in terms of ma'rifatullah, the provision that Mu'tazila is rationalist can be said to be wrong, or at least deficient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]