جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "mutazila" در نشریات گروه "علوم قرآن و حدیث"

This paper addresses Imamayya Mutazila in Baghdad from the beginning of this school of Islamic theology in mid-third century AH to before the advent of Shaykh Mufid in the earlier fourth century. The ultimate goal of this paper is to shed light to hidden aspects of a part of the history of Shiite ideas and the indication of the evolution of Shia theology before the formation of the theological school of Baghdad centered on Shaykh Mufid. In this research the fundamental question is whether the Shia of Baghdad, has been influenced by the opinions Mutazilite. It follows with the hypothesis that the thought of Mutazilites has been effective in intellectual approach of Imamayya in Baghdad, it seems that Some Shiites in Baghdad in the second half of the third century took the teachings of the Mutazilites into account. Therefore in the presence of Qomian followers of Hadith in Baghdad, Imamayya Mutazila was in the margins and isolated before the advent of Shaykh Mufid

The issue of the possibility or the impossibility of seeing God discussed in Ilm al-Kalām has caused many controversies in the literary interpretation of different Quranic ayahs. One of these controversies is the accompaniment of the word "Nazara" with the preposition "Ila" which in the view of Asharist scholars means seeing while in Mutazila scholar's perspective this combination does not mean vision but the turning of the human eyes toward a seeable object. These two groups have tried to prove their own literary theory by citing examples form Quranic ayahs, Arabic poems and everyday conversations. In the present article, it is proved that, Asharist view is correct because in the Arabic literature and consequently in the eloquent language of the Quran, the verb Nazara" with the preposition "Ila" means seeing and turning one's eyes is a requirement for seeing. Therefore, Mutazila scholars have confused the verbal meaning of the verb with its external requirement, hence their claim is a paralogism.

The knowledge of the Imām is one of the perennial issues of theology. Sharīf Raḍī has collected¡ in the Nahj al-Balāgha¡ some traditions about the knowledge of the unseen that Imām ʿAlī (‘a) and other Imāms after him possessed. Among some schools of thought¡ such as the Mu‘tazilis¡ it is believed that only Imām ʿAlī (‘a) had knowledge of the unseen and was an infallible. One of the most important commentators [of Nahj al-Balāgha] is Ibn Abī alḤadīd who was a Mu‘tazili and was of the opinion that Imām ʿAlī was infallible and possessed knowledge of the unseen. Despite this¡ other Shi‘i commentators of Nahj al-Balāgha believe that the Nahj al-Balāgha contains allusions and explicit statements about the generic nature of knowledge of the unseen. Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd is considered by the Shi’is to be¡ at the very least¡ fair and unbiased in his views about the political events that transpired after the Prophet. It is with this objectivity and theological background that he embarked upon the commentary of a book wherein the knowledge of the unseen is portrayed as generic to the Imāms. This very issue was the cause of a kind of internal struggle between his objectivity and theological persuasion related to some of the passages of Nahj al-Balāgha that he experienced. As a result¡ he would at times lean towards his fair and unbiased approach and at other times he was pulled towards his dogmatic beliefs. The Shi‘i commentators of Nahj al-Balāgha have also tried to challenge his dual approach. The present paper examines the views of Shi‘i commentators as well as Ibn Abī al-Ḥadīd regarding the generic or personal nature of the Imām’s knowledge.

Al-Māturīdī is one of the theological divisions of Islam, which still has followers from the adherents of legal school of Ḥanafī. The founder of this theological sect is Abū Manṣūr Muhammad b. Muhammad al-Māturīdī (d. 333 AH) who is the author of several works, including a Quran commentary titled Taʼvīlāt Ahl al-Sunnah. In this work, applying mild intellectual and textual reasoning, he elaborates on the bases of his theological school as opposed to the ones of Ashari and Muʻtazila schools. In his theological discussions he gets involved in issues such as necessary intellectual cognition of God before the prophets being assigned, the belief in the creation of faith which results in belief in the creation of human acts, his special approach to the possibility of sighting God, which can be seen everywhere throughout his commentary. This study aims at identifying the methods and approaches applied in this commentary, a work reflecting al-Māturīdī's views as an exegete with theological presuppositions. Also, we seek to notify the differences and similarities of his methods from those of his contemporaries. As it will be indicated, he is more like a theologian than an exegete in his work, a fact that has caused the work to lack other aspects of exegesis such as linguistic, historical and legal discussions.

The oldest works of Muslim scholars in the fields of kalām, ḥadīth and tafsīr during the 2nd and 3rd centuries AH rarely offer an explicit basis for regarding the Qur’ān as an inimitable miracle of the Prophet. However, the issue appears fully fledged in the works of scholars such as al-Bāqillānī, Qāḍī ‘Abd al-Jabbār and al-Sharīf al-Murtaḍā. This silence in the early Islamic centuries, when considered side by side with the profusion of other Qur’ānic discussions in the same period, raises the question of when and under what conditions the early Muslim scholars began to deal with the subject of i‘jāz al-Qur’ān. The essay identifies two factors that gave impetus to the emergence and development of theories about the Qur’ān’s inimitability: first, Christian-Muslim polemics about the signs of Muhammad’s prophecy, and second, the literary and theological endeavors of the Mu‘tazilīs of Baghdad and Basra.After initiating discussion and speculation about the nature of the Qur’ān’s inimitability, some Mu‘tazilī theologians extended the scope of the topic during the 4th century, until it assumed the form of a bona fide Qur’ānic issue in tafāsīr. From the beginning of the 5th century until the present, speculation about the i‘jāz and its nature became a common feature of theological and exegetic works for all Islamic sects.

There is a dispute among Shi‘a and Ash‘arites over divine justice. Shi‘a and Mu‘tazila accept divine justice – and that is why they are called‘Adliyya (those who believe in ‘adl, i.e., divine justice) as well – but Ash‘arites raise some question as to that. In the present essay, we discuss meanings of divine justice as well as Shiite and Sunni perspectives in this connection referring to the four-fold proofs of intellect, Quran, hadiths, and consensus.

Sheikh Mofid, who has had remarkable influence upon the next theologians, is an important milestone in the history of the Imamiyah theology. This article first considers Sheikh Mofid's academic biography and his social and political status in his lifetime. Thus, in addition to considering the scientific and cultural context of Sheikh Mofid's age, the political condition of that period has been taken into account. Pointing out the richness and diversity of Sheikh Mofid's scientific works, this article also shows that he was the first scholar who concerned himself with writing on multiple subjects as well as monograph in the Shiite rational theology. The main purpose of this article is to give an account of Sheikh Mofid's reading of the beliefs of the Imamiyah. This account is based upon his Al-Nokat fi Moqaddamat-Al-Osul. Meanwhile, his other Kalām books have been considered so that a complete picture of his views can be provided. The author also attempts to show the points of interaction or contrast of his views with other theological trends by considering the theological context of Sheikh Mofid's time.