Search

In Muʿtazilite thought, reasoning precedes religion and deserves to be the first of the obligatory duties. For this reason, it is the first duty of man to use the intellect, which is a special gift of Allah. This is because man is a special being who has the ability to remove possible harms from himself through his thinking, to obtain benefits, and to reach the unknown based on the evidence to which his mind is directed. Therefore, by enduring the arduous nature of reasoning, this duty, which is the basis of unity, must be fulfilled. A person can turn to the evil eye and to himself/herself (inner voice) with the fear of not thinking and ignorance and realize that thinking is necessary. He/She has a nature that makes him think, and he is a being under the influence of stimuli that call him to think. In Muʿtazilite thought, the fear of not thinking that prepares the individual for the evil eye before the evil eye is called ḥātır. One of the themes that will be emphasized in this article is that the ḥātır can occur due to many reasons arising from the individual's self and the external environment. In this article, we will try to examine the ontological and epistemological importance of the reasoning and the khawatır for a rational being, the logical relation of both concepts to the fear of ignorance, and the qualities and characteristics of their essence through a descriptive method. In our study, we will not include detailed lexical and terminological analyses of the basic concepts and their historical background. We will focus on the basic parameters that the Mu'tazilites wanted to achieve with both concepts and construct the main theme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, the relation of taqlīd with knowledge and belief in the sense of being attached to an opinion or a group without seeking evidence and proof will be discussed. The evaluation of inspiration as the knowledge that the intelligent individual finds ready in his mind without allowing him to think will be examined in terms of Muʿtazilah First, the Muʿtazilites’approaches to imitation and inspiration will be determined, and then both tendencies that contradict the intellectual effort of human beings in the acquisition of knowledge will be analyzed. By presenting the logical justifications for the exclusion of both concepts from the sources of knowledge, an individual and social problem will be pointed out at the same time. The main goal and originality of the article is to approach the issue in the context of criticizing an ongoing problem. After a brief lexical analysis of the concepts that constitute the main theme of the article, the subject of discussion will be evaluated under two headings. For the purposes of this article, imitation and inspiration will not be directly related to faith but will be discussed purely in terms of their epistemic value. Since the research is not a comparative study, the subject will be handled in the center of Muʿtazilites and an effort will be made to describe it within the limits of the thematic context. In addition to the classical sources specific to Muʿtazilite scholars, the works of Zaydī-Muʿtazilite scholars and similar works written today will constitute the scientific literature of the article. As a result, evaluations will be made through the descriptive method since the approach of a sect is at the center. Ultimately, it will be emphasized that unconscious obedience and the search for private knowledge do not have the value of knowledge, that the correct method is reasoning and thinking, and that true obedience should be to knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discussion of the theology of divinity is the most important thing in Islam. This is very important because it involves aqidah for a Muslim and has a role in the formation of kaffah Muslim personalities. The purpose of this discussion is to describe the basics of thought of the jabariyah, qodariyah, and mu'tazilah groups. This research is a library research or literature review. The results of this study are that theology has many dimensions of understanding, but in general, theology is a science that discusses the facts and symptoms of religion and hostility to the relationship between God and humans, either by investigation or by pure reasoning, or by way of revelation. The third group has fundamental differences related to the form of Allah, Muhammad's apostleship, and the qur'an.

As one of the examples of interaction between sectarian tendencies, Qaderîte-Murjiite individuals are the people who have been seen in the tradition of fırak in Murjia or Mu'tazilah, accepted some basic ideas of both tendencies. While their status in Mu'tazila were rejected by some scholars on the ground of opposition to "five principles "and this opposition did not prevent them from being mentioned in the classes of the Mu'tazilah. For this reason, different definitional and various classification efforts for these people have been in the sectarian traditions. However, these efforts were resulted in some problems. In addition, their position in Mu'tazilah was not positively depicted even by the writers who gave them a place in the Mu'tazilite classes and they showed an exclusivist attitude towards them because of their view of irja. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Mu'tazilah, which adopted a more rational/philosophical ground from the beginning, was founded by Wasil b. Ata. As a result of a discussion about faith and great sin, Wasil b. Ata, who rejected the opinion of his teacher Hasan Basrī and left his teacher's class with a group of students following him, made the first definitions of the most basic principles of Mu'tazilah. Due to his own theological approach, Wasil b. Ata, who also tried to justify the relationship between the essence of God and His attributes, considered the negating of attributes as necessary for the unity/tawhid of the divine essence. This preference of Wasil b. Ata, who prominently defended the absolute tawḥīd and tanzīh of God against the Mujassima and the Mushabbiha, who understood the texts attributing anthropomorphic limbs such as hands, faces, eyes, etc. to God with hāshawī interpretations, and also against the sanawī claims that emphasised the dualistic conception of God, was followed as the most important and unchangeable itizāl principle. The approach to Wasil b. Ata's negation of attributes is first mentioned in Shahristani's al-Milal wa'n-Nihal. There is a time gap of about four centuries between Wasil b. Ata and Shahristani. Therefore, Shahristani's transmission on the related issue can be met with hesitation. However, it must be admitted that this Muʿtazilite principled stance regarding tanzīh and rather tawḥīd, which Shahristani expresses in relation to Wasil b. Ata, was adopted by the later defenders and imams of the sect in an uninterrupted and strong way. Therefore, when the concepts and their contents preferred by Wasil b. Ata in expressing his own view and the concepts and conceptual contents preferred by the theologians who followed him on the same subject are compared and evaluated to a certain extent, the approaches attributed by Shahristani to Wasil b. Ata can be verified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Dergiabant is the property of Dergiabant and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Bozok University Journal of Faculty of Theology / Bozok Üniversitesi Ilahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Bozok University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Theories of reason (aql) have an impact on the act of thinking, all the activities that are carried out on this axis and, accordingly all the acts that are performed subsequently. Individuals or societies often plan and perform the acts that they think about, knowingly or unknowingly, within the framework of the prevailing theory of reason and movement of thought. Therefore, the meanings and concepts attributed to reason or separated from reason and the nature of reasoning are as important as the nature, position and functions of the reason for humanity. In this context, one of the issues that is worth examining in many ways is the relationship between reason and morality. First, it should be stated that unlike its counterparts, in this article, it is aimed to make a comparison between Mu'tazilah rationality and the Enlightenment reasoning on the basis of reason-morality relation. At this level, in this study, evaluations were made about the effects and results of the theories of reason and the thoughts on the reason-morality relationship on the evolution of humanity. In the research, the promising or destructive effects of alternative intellectual structures, theories of reason and approaches to the reason-moral relation on behalf of the human species and other living things were emphasized. The mentioned points reveal some of the original and contributing aspects of this study, as well as similar ones. It is obvious that there are difficulties arising from very different meanings and interpretations attributed to the concepts of reason and morality in terms of religious traditions, philosophical traditions and philology. Aiming for comparative study also means undertaking additional difficulties in terms of investigating the issue. However, the importance of the position that the theories of reason and the reasonmoral relation perspective possess through their connections with the groups, social life, states and international relations, and moreover, with the metaphysical realm, make such comparisons useful and inevitable. Considering all these issues, two basic thought formations have been selected in this study, one to represent Islamic thought in specific to ecoles of kalam, the other to represent Western philosophy. Moreover, the ideas that have been put forward by these thought traditions about the relationship between reason and morality on the axis of the theories of reason they produce, and their consequences have been examined in outline. The first of these is the Mu'tazilah thought, also known as the "rationalists of Islam", and the other is the Enlightenment philosophy, which symbolizes the Enlightenment thought called the "age of reason". Different factors played a role in the preference of Mu'tazilah and the Enlightenment philosophy as the determined period and school. What stands out from these factors in the first plan is that both thought practices meet in the denominator of "rationality", even though they are very different from each other in terms of content, meaning, nature, and philosophy. Although this is not the main purpose, one of the results that these schools understanding is in a deep divergence in terms of the basic paradigm. Comparisons have been made between the two movements of thought in terms of the objective or instrumental dimension of the theories of reason, the presence/absence of a connection between reason and the metaphysical realm, whether reason can be independent of morality, and the experiences that the ideas and claims put forward in these fields ultimately provide to humanity. On the other hand, it was emphasized that today's people have still personally experienced the effects of the Enlightenment but they stayed away from applying the positive or negative consequences of the reason-morality relation idealized by Mu'tazilah in the context of the theory of reason proposed by Mu'tazilah. In this context, this study makes an effort to find answers to the following questions: "If it were possible to apply the views on the mind-moral relationship proposed by the Mu'tazilah or the world of thought he represents, would it have made possible a founding and transforming position on the current conjuncture, or what kind of results would this have?" Finally, the potentials of the realization of the things that were promised by Mu'tazilah and the philosophy of Enlightenment within the framework of mind-moral relationship and the results that emerged in real life were discussed. The mentioned movements of thought are compared over the current situation of the world, nature, human structure, and common and basic values that are valuable for humanity. In addition, to what extent justice could be established in terms of these traditions and, as a result, the possibility of realizing of virtue, pleasure, and happiness are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

İslam kelâmının ana kaynaklarının incelenmesi ve bu kaynaklardaki kelâmî görüşlerin ortaya çıkartılması kelâmî problemlerin kökenine inilmesine, daha doğru anlaşılmasına ve dolayısıyla da çözümüne katkı sağlamaktadır. Bu açıdan bakıldığında kelâmî fırkaların esas görüşlerini ana kaynaklarından öğrenmek önemlidir. Böylece zamanla siyasi ve tarihi şartlarla değişikliğe uğramış veya yeni bir söylemle ortaya çıkmış bazı düşüncelerin mensubu olduğu düşünceyle ne kadar örtüştüğü ortaya konulacaktır. Şîa mezhebi tarihi seyri içerisinde zaman zaman siyasi ve sosyal nedenlerle kurucu görüşlerini savunma ve metodolojik olarak izah etme konusunda Mu'tezilî kelâmından da etkilenmenin yol açtığı nedenlerden dolayı sapmalar yaşamıştır. Bu sapmalar bir bakıma Şîa’nın kurucu unsurlarının görüşleriyle çelişen yeni durumlar ortaya çıkartmıştır. Bu açıdan Şeyh Müfîd’in (ö. 413/1022) kelâmî görüşlerini bilmek Şiî-İmâmiyye’sinin kurucu ana fikirlerini de bilmek anlamına geldiğinden önemlidir. Şeyh Müfîd Şiî-İmâmiyye hakkında yapılan çalışmalarda eserlerine mutlaka müracaat edilmesi gereken önemli bir isimdir. Kendisi Şiî-İmâmiyye’nin usûlî ekolünü sistematik hale getiren kişi olarak kabul edilmektedir. Şeyh Müfîd başta kelâm olmak üzere fıkıh gibi birçok alanda eserler yazmıştır. Şeyh’in eserlerine bakıldığında özellikle Ebu’l-Kâsım el-Belhî (ö. 319/931) ve Kâdî Abdulcebbâr (ö. 415/1025) gibi Mu‘tezilî kelâmcılardan etkilenmiş olduğu görülmektedir. Şeyh Müfîd’in el-Evâilu’l-makâlât ve ele alacağımız en-Nüketu’l-i'tikâdiyye adlı eserlerinde bu durum daha fazla göze çarpmaktadır. Şeyh Müfîd'in en-Nüket’i içerik bakımından daha çok Kâdî Abdülcebbâr'ın eserlerine benzemektedir. Özellikle eserin tasnifindeki şekli ve içeriği Kâdî’nın eserlerini andırmaktadır. Aynı zamanda eserdeki kelâmî/itikadî görüşleri de Kâdî Abdulcebbâr’ın görüşleriyle benzerlikler göstermektedir. Bu durum Kâdî Abdulcebbâr’ın Şiîlikte usûlî anlayışının oluşmasında Şeyh’e önemli bir etki sağladığını göstermektedir. Fakat eserin esas gövdesini Şiî-İmâmiyye’ye ait görüşler içermektedir. Bakıldığında eserde Allah ve sıfatları, âlemle ilgili kozmolojik meselelerde özellikle Bağdat Mu‘tezilesi’nin etkisi görülürken diğer konularda Şiî İmâmiyye’nin görüşleri savunulmaktadır. Şeyh Müfîd en-Nüket’de zaman zaman bazı konularda cebir ve tefviz arasında bir konumda bulunarak Ehl-i Sünnet ile de yakın görüşleri savunmaktadır. Bazı aksine iddialar olsa da genel kanaat en-Nüketu’l-i‘tikadiyye adlı eserin Şeyh Müfîd’e aidiyeti konusunda bir şüphe yoktur. en-Nüket diyalog şeklinde yazılmış akıcı bir üsluba sahiptir. Bu eserde Şeyh Müfîd tevhid, nübüvvet, adalet, imamet ve meâd konularını ele alarak Şiî-İmâmiyye’nin itikâdi görüşlerini sistemli bir şekilde sunmaktadır. Bu makalede ülkemizde üzerinde fazla bir çalışma yapılmamış olan Şeyh’e ait Şiî-İmâmiyye kelâmını içeren en-Nüketu’l-i‘tikadiyye adlı eserdeki ona ait kelâmî görüşleri ele alınacaktır. Şeyh Müfîd’in Şîa ve Mu‘tezile kelâmı ile uyumlu görüşleri yanında her iki fırkadan farklı düştüğü konular en-Nüketu’l-i‘tikadiyye’si esas alınarak anlaşılması hedeflenmektedir. Dolayısıyla ilgili eser bağlamında Şeyh’in kelâmî görüşleri tespit edilmeye çalışılacaktır.

The relationship and interaction between Zaydism and Mu'tazilism, which is claimed to date back to the formative periods, entered a stronger phase as a result of the invitation of al-Qadi 'Abd al-Jabbar by the Buwayhid vizier al-Şahib ibn 'Abbad to Rayy which afterwards became the center of Mu'tazilism, and his appointment as the chief judge (qadi l-qudat). In this process, many scholars from the Taba-ristan/Caspian Zaydıs took lessons from al-Qadi and became his students. Ibn Sharwin, whose Zaydi-Mu'tazili identity is clear, is one of these scho-lars. He wrote important works in the field of kalam and fiqh, and his works did not remain within the borders of Tabaristan, but reached the Zaydıs of Yemen. One of his valuable theological works that reached the Zaydıs of Ye-men is Yâqütat al-îmân wa-wâsitat al-burhân, which is thought to be lost un-til recently and found along with sev-eral other important Zaydî-Mu'tazilı works in a compilation discovered by us. Ibn Sharwın systematized al-Yâqütah, as seen from time to time in partially different forms in the Zaydı-Mu'tazilı kalâm texts, in an eight-fold classification of the basic principles of religion (usul al-dîn) as i. al-Tawhîd, ii. al-'Adl, iii. al-Wa'd, iv. al-Wa'îd, v. al-Amr bi-l-ma'rüf, vi. al-Nahy 'an al-munkar, vii. Prophethood, viii. Imam-ate. On this text of his, an important representative of the Bahshamı tradi-tion among the 6th/12th century Ye-meni Zaydıs, al-Hasan ibn Muhammed al-Raşşâş wrote a comprehensive com-mentary focusing only on the sections of "al-Tawhîd" and "al-'Adl" under the title of al-Tibyân li-Yâqütat al-îmân wa-wâsitat al-burhân. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Kur’ân’ın yorumunda daha çok aklı belirleyici olarak gören Muʿtezile, bu yönüyle diğer ekollerden bariz bir şekilde ayrılmaktadır. Meseleleri, geliştirdikleri “Beş Usûl” çerçevesinde ele alan söz konusu mezhep, naslarda akla muhalif gibi görünen hususları tevillerle aşmaya çalışmışlar ve diğer oluşumların hedefi haline gelmişlerdir. Özellikle Kur’ân’ın mahlûk olduğu, büyük günah işleyen bir müminin kâfirle aynı akıbete maruz kalacağı, kulun kendi fiilinin yaratıcısı olması, kerametin mümkün olamayacağı gibi görüşleri bilhassa Ehl-i Sünnet âlimleri tarafından çok sert bir şekilde eleştirilmiş ve gayri meşru ilan edilmiştir. Söz konusu eleştiriler İslam akidesine ters düştüğü ve Müslümanları yanlış kabullere sevk edebileceği endişesiyle bilhassa kelâm âlimlerinin sürekli gündeminde olmuş ve eserlerinde onların fikirlerini çürütmeye çalışmışlardır. Ehl-i Sünnet müfessirleri de Muʿtezile’ye karşı benzer tepkiler vermişler ve kendi görüşlerine delil gösterdikleri âyetleri izah ederken mevzu bahis mezhebin görüşlerini uzun uzadıya tartışıp onları reddetme yoluna gitmişlerdir. Mu'tezile'nin ileri sürdüğü görüşlerin, kelâm âlimlerinin yanı sıra tasavvuf ehli tarafından eleştirildiği de görülmektedir. Zira hakikati anlayıp idrak etme noktasında Tasavvuf’un akla daha az önem verip kalbi onun önüne geçirmesi, Allah’ın, irade ve kudretinin mahlûkatı her yönüyle kuşatıp her an onlarda tecelli ettiği düşüncesi ve vahdet-i vücûd anlayışı gibi hususların manevi tecrübeyi ölçü olarak kabul etmeyen Muʿtezilî düşünce sistemi içerisinde hemen hemen hiçbir karşılığı yok gibidir. Doğrusu mevzu bahis fırkaya ait fikirlerin sûfî gelenek içerisinde Kur’ân eksenli olarak nasıl ve hangi boyutlarda değerlendirildiği meselesi araştırmaya değer bir konudur. Muʿtezile ekolüne ait fikirlerin sûfî gelenek içerisinde Kur’ân eksenli olarak nasıl ve hangi boyutlarda değerlendirildiği meselesi araştırmaya değer bir konudur. Bu makale, sûfî geleneğin Muʿtezilî düşünceye Kur’ân merkezli olarak nasıl baktığı konusunu işârî tefsir sahasında önemli bir yere sahip olan İsmail Hakkı Bursevî’nin Rûhu’l-beyân adlı tefsiri örneğinde ele almaktadır. Bu çalışma sayesinde, 18. Yüzyıl Osmanlı tasavvuf ve tefsir geleneğinin Muʿtezilî düşünce sistemine nasıl baktığı sorusuna daha sağlıklı bir cevap sunma imkânı elde edilecektir. Makalede Bursevî’nin, söz konusu mezhebin hangi görüşlerine temas ettiği ve bunları hangi ayetler çerçevesinde ele aldığı tespit edilmiş ve ilgili başlıklar altında konu işlenmiştir. İsmail Hakkı Bursevî, hem bir mutasavvıf hem de güçlü bir müfessir kimliğine sahiptir. Oldukça donanımlı ve çok yönlü olması ona, farklı görüşlere sahip fırkaları daha geniş ve daha birikimli bir şekilde değerlendirme imkânı sunmaktadır. Bu çerçevede o, tefsirinde, sadece aklı ve tevili nasları yorumlamada bir referans kabul eden Muʿtezile mezhebine birçok yerde temas etmiş, görüşlerini ve delillerini ayetler ışığında tenkit etmiştir. Bursevî’nin Muʿtezile mezhebine pek de sıcak baktığı söylenemez. Yetmiş üç fırkaya ayrılan ümmetin sadece Ehl-i Sünnet olan gurubunun hidâyet üzere ve geri kalan yetmiş iki gurubun ise sapkınlık ve dalalet üzere olduğu düşüncesinde olan müfessir, kendi düşünce sisteminde manevi tecrübeye yer vermeyen ve daha çok aklı ön plana çıkaran Muʿtezile’yi de bu sapkın guruplar içerisinde değerlendirmektedir. Bu çerçevede o, yeri geldikçe onların fikirlerini çok sert bir şekilde eleştirmekten geri durmamıştır. Âyetleri tefsir ederken Ehl-i Sünnet mezhebini esas alan ve bunu bir ölçü olarak kabul eden müfessirin Muʿtezile’ye karşı oluşunu basit bir mezhep tarafgirliği olarak değerlendirmek oldukça naif bir tutumdur.

Copyright of Contemporary Islamic Thought / Al-Fikr al-Islāmī al-Muʿāṣir is the property of International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Makalede, Mu‘tezile ile İbn Sînâ’nın sofist iddialara yaklaşım tarzları arasındaki etkileşim incelenmektedir. Aristoteles, Fârâbî, İbn Sînâ ve bazı Mu‘tezilî kelâmcıların sofistlere karşı tutumu karşılaştırmalı analiz ile ele alınmaktadır. İbn Sînâ sofistlerin iddialarına cevap verirken Aristoteles ve Fârâbî’nin izlediği yöntemden farklılaşmakta, onlara eleştiri yöneltmektedir. Makalenin varsayımı İbn Sînâ’nın Aristoteles ve Fârâbî eleştirisindeki tercihinin bazı Mu‘tezilî bilginlerin etkisinde şekillendiğidir. Bu noktada özellikle Ka‘bî’nin daha ön planda olduğu varsayılmaktadır. Makalede öncelikle İbn Sînâ’nın Aristoteles ve Fârâbî’den ayrıldığı ve her ikisine yönelik metodolojik eleştirisi tespit edilmiştir. Ardından İbn Sînâ’nın yöntemsel değişikliğinin arkasında Ka‘bî’nin etkisi ortaya konulmuştur. İbn Sînâ’nın sofist iddialara karşı ilkesel ve metodolojik tutumunda Aristo ve Fārābī’den ayrıştığı ve bu ayrışmada Ka‘bî’nin etkisini bir varsayım olarak ele alan makale, karşılaştırmalı ve içerik analizleri yardımıyla müsterşid ve tenbih gibi kavramsal ve içerik açısından İbn Sînâ’nın Ka‘bî’den etkilendiğini ortaya koymuştur. Makaledeki varsayımı temellendirmek, felsefe ve kelâm düşünce gelenekleri açısından oldukça özgün bir noktadır. Bu meyanda makalenin; konusu, varsayımları ve sonuçları açısından özgünlük taşıdığı, kelâm ve felsefe literatürüne katkı sağlayacak bir çalışma olması hedeflenmektedir.

Tulisan ini menyajikan hasil penelitian tentang munculnya sebab-sebab aliran dan paham akidah dalam Islam. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kajian pustaka untuk meneropong atau memotret lahirnya aliran dan paham akidah dalam dunia Islam. Pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan menelaah sumber primer dan sekunder dalam mendukung kajian munculnya aliran dan paham akidah yang berada di tengah-tengah umat Islam saat ini. Hasil telaah dan penelitian menemukan bahwa telah sepakat para ulama dan cendekiawan Islam bahwa aliran dan paham akidah dalam Islam yang pertama kali muncul adalah aliran Khawarij, Murji’ah, Syi’ah, Mu’tazilah, Asy’ariah dan Maturidiyah. Akan tetapi, dalam tulisan ini belum membahas aliran Syi’ah dan juga aliran Maturidiyah

İtikadî mezhepler arasında tartışılan va‘d-vaîd konusu temelde büyük günah problemiyle ilgili önemli bir konudur. Büyük günah sorunu çerçevesinde iman-amel ilişkisi bağlamında ele alınan bu önemli konu, ortaya çıkan fırkaların iman tanımlarına bağlı olarak şekillenmiştir. Va‘d ve vaîd ayetleri, kapsamı açısından ele alınarak umum veya husus ifade edip etmediği, ilâhî va‘d ve vaîdin değişip değişmeyeceği gibi soruların cevapları aranmıştır. Başlangıçta Mürcie ile Mu‘tezile arasında meydana gelen tartışmalar daha sonraki süreçte Mâtürîdîler’le Mu‘tezile kelâmcıları arasında önemli tartışma konularından birisi olmuştur. İmam Mâtürîdî, konu hakkında Hâricîler ve Mu‘tezile’ye ortak eleştiriler getirmekle birlikte daha ziyade Mu‘tezilî düşünceyi eleştirmektedir. Mu‘tezile, bu ilkeyi ilâhî adaletin bir gereği olarak mü’minleri ödüllendirip isyankârları cezalandırmanın Allah’a vacip olduğu düşüncesi üzerinden ele almaktadır. Onlara göre tövbe edilmeyen büyük günah ebedî olarak cehennemde kalmayı gerektirdiği için o kişiye şefaat edilmesi de mümkün değildir. Ancak Mâtürîdî, sürekli bir tasdik hali olan imanın ebedî cezaya engel olduğunu vurgulayarak adalet noktasında böyle bir iddianın geçerli olmayacağını savunmaktadır. Bu makalede Mâtürîdî’nin eleştirileri, konuyla doğrudan ilişkili olan ilâhî adalet, büyük günah ve şefaat açısından ele alınmıştır.

The sect of Muʿtazilah considers the reason/al-aql as a determinant in the interpretation of the Qur’an and clearly differs from other sects in this respect. This sect deals with issues within the framework of the “Five Methods”, which is developed by them, and tries to overcome the issues that seem contrary to divine decrees/al-nas and thus became the target of other sects. Particularly, some of their views were criticized very harshly by the scholars of the Ahl as-Sunnah and were declared illegitimate. Some of these views are that the Quran is created; a believer who commits a great sin will be subjected to the destiny of an unbeliever; humans are creators of their own actions; miracles are not possible. These criticisms have always been on the agenda of theologians/al-Mutakallimun, who believe that such views contradict the doctrine of Islam, and fear that they may lead Muslims to misconceptions, and they have tried to refute these ideas in their works. The Ahl as-Sunnah commentators/al-mufassirun gave similar reactions to Muʿtazilah. They discussed the views of this sect at length while explaining the verses/al-ayah and rejected the evidence Muʿtazilah showed for their views. It is seen that the views put forward by Muʿtazilah are criticized by the Mystic scholars / Sufis, as well as the theologians. Because Sufism attaches less importance to reason and gives priority to the heart/al-qalb in terms of understanding and comprehending the truth, some Sufi concepts nearly have no equivalent in the thought system of Muʿtazilah, which denies spiritual experience as a legitimate criterion. The Sufist view that Allah’s will and power surround all the creatures in every aspect and are manifested in them at all times and the concept of wahdat al-wujud, etc. can be counted as examples for such aforementioned concepts. The issue of how and in what dimensions the ideas of the Muʿtazilah are evaluated within the Sufi tradition in line with the Quran is a matter worth researching. This article discusses the issue of how the Sufi tradition approaches Muʿtazili thought with a Qur'anic point of view, in the example of Ismail Haqqi Bursevi’s commentary named Ruh al-Bayan. Through the article it will be possible to present a healthier answer to the question of how the 18th century Ottoman mysticism and tafsir/commentary tradition see the Muʿtazili system of thought. In this article, the Muʿtazili views mentioned by Bursevi and the verses he used while dealing with those views were determined, and the subject was discussed under the related headings. Ismail Haqqi Bursevi is a sufi and a sound mufassir/commentator. Being highly equipped and all-rounder, he could evaluate different views of different groups in a wider and more cumulative way. In this context, he touched in many places in his tafsir/commentary on the Muʿtazilah sect, which accepts the reason and interpretation/tavil as reference in explaining the divine decrees and criticized their opinions and evidence in the light of verses. It cannot be said that Bursevi looked very favourably at the Muʿtazilah. According to the tradition which states Muslims/ummah will be divided into seventy-three sects and only one will be on guidance and the remaining seventy-two groups are on perversion and heresy, the commentator accepted Ahl as-Sunnah group as that only sect and regarded the Muʿtazilah as one of those deviant groups, because of their excluding spiritual experience in their thought system and giving priority to the reason. In this context he did not hesitate to criticize their ideas very harshly. It would be a very naive to consider his Muʿtazilah opposition as a simple sectarian bigotry, whereas he took the Ahl as-Sunnah sect as a basis and accepted it as a criterion while interpreting the verses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Nazariyat: Journal for the History of Islamic Philosophy & Sciences / Nazariyat Islam Felsefe Bilim Tarihi Arastirmalari Dergisi is the property of Ilmi Etudler Dernegi (ILEM) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Islamic Research / İslâmi Araştırmalar Dergisi is the property of Turkey Economical & Cultural Solidarity (TEK-DAV) Foundation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Ilahiyat Researches / Ilahiyat Tetkikleri Dergisi is the property of Ataturk University Coordinatorship of Scientific Journals and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The collapse of the Abbasid Dynasty has a major impact to the influence and presence in the Mu’tazilah school of thought at the time. Mu’tazilah subsequently faded away. Nevertheless, Mu’tazilah’s offer that gives a large portion of reason in understanding the context of revelation and time attracts a lot of contemporary Muslim intellectuals attention. One of them is Harun Nasution who preserves his theological ideology with the Neo-Mu’tazilah, as the successor of the earlier Mu’tazilah. Harun plays an important role in reviving the Mutazilah’s point of view in understanding the religious context, especially in Indonesia. Theological studies of Islam in Indonesia are no more than footnotes from the point of view that Harun and his disciples have disseminated. One conversation that is of great concern among Mu’tazilah and other ‘Ilm al-Kalâm schools of thought is the concept of monotheism, which leads to the discussion about the nature of God, justice, will, and deed of humankind. Harun is inseparable with his Neo-Mu’tazilah from this discussion. Harun does not contradict the classical Mu’tazilah opinion of the concept of Tawhid. The review and analysis of this article use literature review referring to the primary references; classical Mu’tazilah fgures, Neo-Mu’tazilah that Harun has been the voice of, as well as the authoritative literature outside Mu’tazilah as the material of analysis and comparison.

While investigating Islamic thought, the defects in the form of reading and interpretation can be added to some structural difficulties. The more deficient it is to consider thought out of the nature of its occurrence and development, the more wrong it is to perceive it as an object that suddenly dies and disappears. It is as wrong to dedicate the history of thought only to a state or dynasty as it is to think around a school or person. As far as it is to attribute the achievements of political history to the history of thought, to condemn thought for the failures of political history is also open to question. Qadi Abd al-Jabbar, handled in the light of these approaches, is one of the most important representatives of the thought of Mu'tazilite. He was one of the leading names in the intellectual adventure of his school, as he had active duties in the palace of the Buyids. This article tries to shed light on the political relations that he wrote his works reflecting his views. On this occasion, it was tried to eliminate some question marks on the theological thought of Mu'tazilah and Qadi Abd al-Jabbar. Thus, different perspectives can be presented to the world of ideas formed through Qadi Abd al-Jabbar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Mutefekkir, Faculty of Islamic Sciences is the property of Aksaray University, Faculty of Islamic Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The promise and the threat (al-wa'd wa al-wa'īd) issue, which has been debated among theological sects, is primarily related to the problem of grave sin. This critical issue discussed in the framework of the problem of grave sin and in the context of the faith-action relationship has been shaped based on the definitions of faith of the emerging sects. Through examining the Qur'ān verses about al-wa'd and al-wa'īd, answers to such questions whether the Qur'ān verses about to indicate generality ('umūm) or specification (khusūs) and whether divine promise and threat can change have been sought. In the beginning, the disputations occurring between Murji'ah and Mu'tazilah, afterward, have become one of the essential matters of debate among Māturīdīs and the Mu'tazilī scholars. Even though Imām Māturīdī expresses common criticisms against Khawārij and Mu'tazilah, he mainly condemns the Mu'tazilī doctrine. Mu'tazilah treats the principle in question based on the idea that, by force of divine justice, it is necessary for God to reward the faithful and punish the disobedient. According to them, because a grave sin that is not repented requires to stay permanently in the hell, intercession (shafā'ah) is not possible for such a person. However, Māturīdī argues that a claim of this kind cannot be valid from the point of justice by emphasizing that faith, which is a state of constant assent, prevents the punishment. In this essay, Māturīdī's criticisms have been discussed with regard to directly related issues such as justice, grave sin, and intercession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Eş’arî Mutezile içinde yetişmiş ve uzun yıllar bu düşünce sistemini samimiyetle savunmuştur. Kırklı yaşlarda Mu’tezile mezhebinden ayrılarak Ehl-i Sünnet düşüncesine katılmış ve Mu’tezile’nin şiddetli hasımlarından biri olmuştur. Bu makalede Eş’arî’nin Mu’tezile’den ayrılması bağlamında kaynaklarda zikredilen rivayetler farklı varyantlarıyla ele alınıp incelenecektir.

Abstract: The article aims to elaborate patterns of theological thought of KH Siradjuddin Abbas (1905-1980). In the midst of mainstream theological schools established in the Islamic world: traditionalists (Sunni) and rationalists (Mu'tazila), Abbas turns out consistently defend traditional theology. In theological thinking, Abbas positioned parallel to al-Ash'arite classical theology (Ahl al-Sunnah wa ’l-Jamā’ah). He stressed all a round of God, revelation paced and use the reason is very little. He put God as absolute ruler, do as His Will. Therefore, theology of Siradjuddin Abbas is very strong hold on revelation and theocentric pattern, and everything begins and centered on God, good or bad all determined by God. Thus theology Siradjuddin Abbas less in line with modern thinking, which is progressive and forward the reason. In other words, theology of Siradjuddin Abbas less actual and contextual for the purposes of contemporary social reality if that expected from such thinking is an applicative conceptual thinking. Abstrak: Artikel ini bertujuan mengelaborasi corak pemikiran teologi K.H. Siradjuddin Abbas (1905-1980). Di tengah mainstream aliran teologi yang sudah mapan di dunia Islam: tradisionalis (Sunni) dan rasionalis (Mu’tazilah), Abbas ternyata konsisten membela teologi tradisional. Dalam pemikiran teologinya, Siradjuddin Abbas sejalan dengan pemikiran teologi klasik al-Asy’ariyah (Ahl al-Sunnah wa ’l-Jamā’ah). Ia menekankan segala suatu serba Tuhan, serba wahyu dan sangat sedikit menggunakan akal pikiran. Ia menempatkan Tuhan sebagai berkuasa mutlak semutlak-mutlaknya, berbuat sehendak-Nya. Karena itu, teologi Siradjuddin Abbas sangat kuat berpegang pada wahyu dan bercorak teosentris, dan segalanya bermula dan memusat pada Tuhan, baik atau buruk semua ditentukan oleh Tuhan. Dengan demikian teologi Siradjuddin Abbas yang ber­corak tradisional ini kurang sejalan dengan pemikiran modern, yang bersifat progresif dan lebih mengedepankan akal. Dengan kata lain, teologi Siradjuddin Abbas yang bercorak tradisional kurang aktual dan kontekstual untuk keperluan realitas sosial kontemporer jika yang diharapkan dari pemikiran tersebut adalah sebuah pemikiran yang bersifat konseptual aplikatif.

Contemporary jurisprudents have studied the issue of Altahseen and Altaqbeeh as if the disagreement was between the People of Speech, following the method of the Contemporary Scholars. The researcher noticed that their review of the opinions of the Ash’aryah, the Maturidiyyah and the Mu’tazilah needs to be investigated, so the researcher has: 1. Corrected reviewing the opinions of the People of Thought. 2. Investigated thoroughly the opinions of the Four Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. 3. Gave a just judgment of Aba Alhassan Ala’sh’arie who agreed with Malek, Alshafie, Ahmad and the majority of their followers. 4. Clarified that Ibn Taymiya has disagreed with the majority of the scholars, be they contemporary or early. 5. Clarified the mistake of most contemporary scholars in reviewing the opinion of the Maturidiyyah, making sure to get out this issue from the framework of Speech to that of Jurisprudence. This research has been divided into four chapters; the first is concerned with the meaning of the Husn and the Qubh linguistically and technically; the second is concerned with the opinions of the Scholars in Alhusn and Alqubh Aldhati; the third is concerned with the way to know Alhusn and Alqubh; the fourth is concerned with the comparison of the Maturidiyyah’s opinion with those of the Mu’tazilah and Ibn Taymiyyah. The researcher has concluded that Alhusn and Alqubh is a matter of thought for early Hanafi, Mu’tazila and Ibn Taymiya. However, Alhusn and Alqubh is a jurisprudential matter for Ash’aryah, Malekis, Hanablis, Shafi’es and some late Hanafis. This researched was titled as: “ A jurisprudential, An analytical and A comparative Study of Al - Tahsin and Al - Taqbih in the Four Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence”. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As one of the examples of interaction between sectarian tendencies, Qaderîte- Murjiite individuals are the people who have been seen in the tradition of fırak in Murjia or Mu'tazilah, accepted some basic ideas of both tendencies. While their status in Mu'tazila were rejected by some scholars on the ground of opposition to "five principles "and this opposition did not prevent them from being mentioned in the classes of the Mu'tazilah. For this reason, different definitional and various classification efforts for these people have been in the sectarian traditions. However, these efforts were resulted in some problems. In addition, their position in Mu'tazilah was not positively depicted even by the writers who gave them a place in the Mu'tazilite classes and they showed an exclusivist attitude towards them because of their view of irja. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Al-Ameed Journal is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

al-Baydâwî, acknowledging Kalâm (Islamic theology) as the basis of religious sciences, was engaged in the science of Kalâm and compiled his works such as Tavâli’ al-Anvâr fî ‘İlm al-Kalâm, Misbâh al-Arvâh, and Muntaha al-Munâ. al-Baydâwî also commented on some of the verses, related to theology in his commentary of Anvâr al-Tanzîl in the context of the science of Kalâm. The topics such as the conflict of the arguments, the relation of faith and deeds, the situation of ones who commit a great sin, provision, seeing Allah and intercession are of the topics, addressed in Anvâr al-Tanzîl. al-Baydâwî occasionally and comparatively discusses the different views of theological schools (or sects) of Ahl al-Sunnah and Mu’tazilah. Accordingly, he individually mentions the views of these schools and their existing arguments, and touchs on the issues between them. In these disputed issues, al-Baydâwî generally prefers the view of Ahl al-Sunnah and endeavors to prove this view with different arguments but at times he disagrees with the scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah and prefers al-Zamakhsharî’s view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As one of the central figures in Islamic studies in Indonesia, Harun Nasution has made a great impact of influence. His model of theology has become a trend-setter and a blue-print in Islamic studies in this country for decades since the 1970’s. As a loyal admirer and follower of the Mu'tazilah, Harun Nasution gave rise to the idea that Muhammad Abduh was a prominent Islamic reformer who agrees with Mu'tazilah doctrine and is even more liberal than the Mu'tazilah. To support his idea, Harun Nasution put forward Hashiyah 'ala al-Sharh al-‘Aqa’id Dawwani li al-Adhudhiyyah by Muhammad Abduh which is the main reference for his famous book Muhammad Abduh dan Teologi Rasional Mu'tazilah. Harun Nasution’s thought needs to be analyzed and reviewed methodologically, in order to make the theological thought always passionate and spared the stagnation and status quo. This study uses the main work of Harun Nasution Muhammad Abduh dan Teologi Rasional Mu’tazilah as its main source in addition to the book Al-Syaykh Muhammad ‘Abduh bayna Al-Kalamiyyin wa Al-Falasifah by Sulayman Dunya. Nasution’s concepts are analyzed through content analysis which consists of data collection, classification, reduction, analysis, and conclusion.

Copyright of Annals of Gazi Husrev-Beg's Library / Anali Gazi Husrev-Begove Biblioteke is the property of Gazi Husrev-Begove Biblioteke (GHB) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article focuses Balaghah (rethoric) which objectiv is to express the beauty of spoken and written words. This science had developed since Jahiliyah period (pre-Islam) and continued to grow during the Islamic era. Among many groups developed the science, there was Mu'tazilah with the members such as Bisyr ibn Mu'tamir, al Jahiz, and Zamakhsyari. This groups is known as the adherents of schoolof rational since they put ratio first before texts (nash al-Qur'an and Hadis). They developed this science for propaganda and to confirm their throughts. According to Bisyr there are three requirements for the level of sentences beauty in Balaghah: pronunciation must be clear, easy to be understood, and use qafiyah (structured) well.

The aim of liberal theology was, basically, to promote the freedom of thought. However, it also can be trapped into an authoritarian system leading to tyranny when the aim is forced. It was true in the case of Mu’tazilite, a sect that is considered the symbol of liberalism in Islamic theology. The sect, in one side, campaigned freedom of thought, but in other side, it also applied mihnah, a tool of measuring the state theology. Yet, when mihnah was applied, the people had no freedom, even the caliph also participated to impose the idea that the Qur'an was created. As a result of the implementation of mihnah, there was the emergence of a gap, prolonged anxiety and tension among the Islamic society. Hence, their opponents increased which in turn encouraged the Caliph al-Mutawakkil to launch a new policy to cancel the mihnah, then ordered the people to follow muhadditsīn, the majority people believing in the Hadits, as well as a forerunner to the birth of the term ahl al-Sunna wa al-Jama’a.

In this article, creating and purposeful problem in the Mutazilah and the utility theory which presented as a solution to the problem are examined. According to this theory, God creates an existence on three main purposes. The first one, it is to the utility existence; and the second one it is to benefit from the exist This manifests itself in the form of benefits to attainthe infinite blessings of the people in the other world in the ultimate sense hence and the third one, he was creating to realize two purpose together. This theory which covering all worldly and otherworldly benefits refers to Gods that is generous and good aims the man's benefit and happiness. In this article, Mutezilah theology will be examined in this regarded. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intercession means prophets asking for forgiveness of sinner believers, for reaching of those without sin to a higher position, praying and asking for forgiveness of the sins. It is uncertain if sinners will gain intercession or not. In this study, we try to explain view of the Mutazilah sect about the intercession. Mutazilah sect says that intercession means not accept the agreement in the form of forgiveness of sins. According to them, it means getting higher positions in the heaven afterdeath fort he believers. Except for those opinions about intercession, all other opinions are not accepted because they are contrary to the belief of Mutazilah tawhid, va'd vel-vaid and justice principles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sharif al-Murtada (d. 436/1044) who is a Shiite-Mu'tazilite scholar in the fifth century AH, an eminent theologian as well as a commentator of Qur'an. In his remarkable work entitled Gureru'l-fawaid wa dureru'l-kalaid (Amali al-Murtada), he exegises various Qur'anic verses according to Shiite-Mu'tazilite theological thought. This article deals with the problem of the vision of God (ru'yatullah) and predestination (Qadha-Qadar) from the point of view Shiite-Mu'tazilite perspective of the Qur'anic interpretation. Also I will compare this Qur'anic understanding with the Sunni Qur'anic interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is not possible to comprehend the exact meaning of judgments of Kalam without evaluation of religious and political conditions which reveal Kalam. Mutakallimûn discussed sufficiently on the concepts of 'right way' and 'heresy' and then reached a number of judgments in accordance with their own theological preferences. However, to what extent these judgments to be associated with the Text (Qur'an and Hadith) are discussable. The term of 'meshiah' (will, wish) mentioned in the Quran along with the terms of "the right way" and the "heresy" should also be included in new assessments. Such an approach will not only help to solve the difficulty of understanding the terms of 'heresy' and 'right way', but also will give an idea about the building process and the validity of other judgments of Kalam. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abu'l-Hasan al-Ash'ari is the founding father and theoretician of al-Ash'ari sect which is one of the two important and common branches of Ahl-Sunnah thinking. al-Ash'ari has been an influential figure since 10th century on the al-Ash'ari Theological School which is an important institution for the majority of the conservative Muslims worldwide. The serious criticism of Mu'tazili thought system, of which he was once a member, made by al- Ash'ari who has had a deep influence on the scholars that are systemizing the thought of Ahl-Sunnah. As well as his effort to find out the rational basis of ideas belonging to with Ashabu'l-Hadith whom he shared his views, make quite important the studying his theological method and reviewing his ideas related to belief. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hz. Muhammad's sunnah and hadiths has been always a centre of attention in Islamic culture. Until today, most of the discours has been made around the sunnah and hadith, focused on the problem of its belonging to Hz. Muhammad or true understanding and practising of the sunnah. Most striking matter that has been seen on these discussions, describing of the parties as hadith and sunnah denier each other. It is obvious that there has been a defensive and emotional psychology became effective on these descriptions. By the recently researchs made on the views of the school of Muz'tazilah (al-Jâhiz was also a member of this school), it is appeared that the cliche about the Muz'tazilah's denying of the hadith and sunnah is negated. Here, in this article we will try to definite of al-Jâhiz's ideas about sunnah and hadith without repeating the known and obvious knowledges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abu al-Mu‘în al-Nasafî is one of the most important theologians of Maturidiyyah Kalam School. He explains his theological opinions generally in “Tabsiratu’l-adilla fî usûli’d-dîn” and his other books. Al-Nasafî depends on two things in human beings acts: One of them is the creator of the whole acts is only Allah. Second, human beings are definitely responsible for their acts (kasb/acquisition). According to al-Nasafî, man acquires his own acts by using his own will; but no doubt that the creator of his acts is Allah. The responsibility of man is because of his acquisition in his act. While al-Nasafî explains his ideas about human acts he refers to some opinions of Mu’tazilah’s and criticizes them. The one of Mu’tazilah’s opinions that an-Nasafi criticizes is “Man creates his own acts not Allah.” Another matter that al-Nasafî criticizes on the opinions of Mu’tazilah is that, power for act comes before acts. Whereas according to al-Nasafî, the power of act is present the time of act. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Suyûtî has indicated in his annotation on Baydawi's Qur'anic commentary to some ideas that exist in this commentary which belong to the Mu'tazilah. His student Shâmî has collected these different and criticized ideas in a booklet. An Ottoman scholar, Hocazâdah Muhammad Wacîh has written an another booklet about these ideas that are in this booklet. Zabîdî has written an onother booklet to take consideration these ideas which exist this booklet. In this article, the Mu'tazilitah effects on the Baydawi's Qur'anic commentary are taken under study in the limit of this annotation and these three booklets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Excerpted from the manuscript of a forthcoming book project, this article provides essential English-language source material on Ḥusayn Badr al-Dīn al-Ḥuthī and an alternative framework to that of the mainstream media for exploring what are likely the genuine causes and nature of the wars against Ṣaʿdah, Yemen, undertaken with backing and technical assistance from the United States, if not direct complicity in the name of then President George W. Bush's administration's 'war on terror'. In addition to shedding light on the voluminous Malazim of Ḥusayn Badr al-Dīn and providing analysis of its various influences including Khomeini and Lebanon's Ḥizb Allah, while at the same time demonstrating a lack of evidence for direct support by either Ḥizb Allah or Iran, the article examines the distinct Jarudī Zaydī nature of the only contemporary Zaydī political discourse and formulation of its kind, which is distinct from Twelver Shīʿism and antithetical to the 'wilayat al-faqīh' in Iran. The article examines the origins of the Lebanese group known as al-Shabab al-Muʾmin that would later evolve into Ḥizb Allah and the history of Yemen's Tanẓīm al-Shabab al-Muʾmin from which al-Ḥuthī would draw his core group of supporters, and it aims to decipher the nature of the relation between al-Ḥuthī's thought and Khomeini's Islamic Revolution in Iran as well as its grounding in the Jarudī Zaydī sect and the Zaydīyah at large. The article includes excerpts from an interview with Ayatollah Muḥammad Ḥusayn Faḍlallah on the subject, new statements from the Office of ʿAbd al-Malik al-Ḥuthī in Ṣaʿdah, and in-depth analysis of the Malazim with exhaustive citations in translation - all never before published - all of which provide essential reading for understanding the objective historical conditions as well as the political, cultural, tribal, ideological, and sectarian dimensions of the wars against Ṣaʿdah. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sunni (Orthodox) scholars attempted to make definitions not only concerning Mu'tazila's name, structure, nature and its basic ideology but also its theology. Sünnî scholars, as a reaction to the oppressive attitudes of Mu'tazilah supporters in Mihne practice encouraged by the state, and their subjective and deliberately distorting explanations based on İbn al-Râvendî accusations, have been forced to consider this sect and its followers outside the Islamic World. In this context, Mu'tazilah sometimes has been blamed for ideas it doesn't approve like the description of God, certain views concerning Qur'an, superiority of rationality, the concept of "fasık", "vacib 'alallah'", the suffering of deads, sufferings in their graves and mercy. And this led to a misunderstaning concerning Mu'tazilah in the Muslim world. In this article, the extend to which distortions have been made concerning Mu'tazilah thought, due to the concscious referred, have been brought to day light while introducing the theology of the scholars of Ahl Sunnah. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]