خلافات المتكلمين في الصفات الإلهية وموقف إبن تيمية منها
خلافات المتكلمين في الصفات الإلهية وموقف إبن تيمية منها
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2015-05-11
Authors
صالح المأمون, أمير
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
UOFK
Abstract
The doctrine of the person of Allah (Al-tawhied) as developed in Muslim
thought, covered the great part of the field of Muslim Theology.
Evedently, the ninety nine most beautiful names, the abstract qualities
(sifat) which lie behind them, and the anthropomorphic expressions (such as:
God’s face, eyes and hands) raised dangers to the Unity (tawhied) of God
religiously and philosophically. Avery important problem in Muslim Theology
is the relation of the these qualities or attributes (Sifat) to his essence (dhat).
The Mutazila claimed that divine attributes are not eternal entities added to
his essence, but identical with the being (Abu Al-Hudhail), negations of
shortcomings (Knowledge: negation of ignorance etc.; Al-Nazzam), or inherent
in the essence through mani-ahwal (Abu Hashim). The resultant Orthodox
(Ahl-Alsunna) statement, after a long controversy over the relation of these
attributes to his essence, is that they are not He, nor are they other than He. The
struggle was to maintain the internal unity of the personality of Allah.
In the matter of anthropomorphism some theologians ( Hashwiya,
Korramia, and some Shiea sects) Lay too much stress on the literal meaning of
some Koranic and sunna terms that model Allah after the image of man. The
Jahmiya, the Mutazila, and latter Ashariets held opposite view, and so were
anxious to avoid anthropomorphic expressions. They applied the allegorical
method (tawil) to all anthropomorphic expressions, like God’s hands or his
face, and took them in the sense of bounty and Knowledge. The Orthodox
(Ahl- Alsunna) were obliged to take a middle position. They believed that God
attributes as confirmed in Koran and Sunna must be taken in their literal sense
without asking Questions “bila Kaif.” This rule should be applied to all
anthropomorphic expressions. The struggle was to do justice to the Koranic
and Sunna descriptions of him.
Ibn Tymia, the most eminent Muslim Jurist and Theologian of the 13th-14th
centuries in Syria and Egypt, who belonged to the Hanbalite school of Islamic
law, was relentless enemy of Islamic speculative theology(Kalam), Sufism,
Sheism, Greek philosophy, and Aristotelian logic.
8
His criticism of speculative theology of God attributes (sifat), as far as I
know, has never been fully and systematically examined. This thesis “Muslim
theologians controversies over God attributes with special reference to Ibn
Taymya’s position” attempts to do that.
The thesis is divided into four parts. The first part is introductory, and it
acquaints the reader with the literature review.
Part two and three examined the Muslims theological debate upon the
ninety nine most beautiful names, the anthropomorphic expressions, the
application of the allegorical method (tawil), and the dangers raised to the unity
of God (tawhied)religiously and philosophically.
The last part expound and examined Ibn Taymiya’s attack against Muslim
Theologians who believed that by reason they could reach ultimate truth. He
assured that reason could never grasp the nature of Allah because he is
unknowable to human powers, and we must accept and believe what we are
taught by him and by his messenger, the prophet.
The significance of Ibn Taymiya’s criticism of Muslim speculative
theology of God attributes lies in the fact that it defines what I called, “A new
Muslim Theology” which consists of a system of dogmatics full of fertile new
ideas. Throughout his criticism he demonstrated great skill in finding
weaknesses in his fellow Muslims speculative theology of God attributes
(Sifat).