CC BY
1Research BIB / Index Copernicus
THE FATE OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE HISTORY OF ISLAM
Kholmuminov Jafar Muhammadiyevich,
Doctor of Philosophical sciences (DSc), Professor of the "INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF FINANCE TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE" INSTITUTE
Dr. Mohammad Esmael Abdollahi,
Faculty of Governance, University of Tehran (Iran) E-mail: m.e. abdollahi@ut.ac.ir
Dr. Abolfazl Tajik,
Assistant Professor of the Religions and Mysticism Department, AhlulBaytInternational University (Iran,Tehran) Email : a.tajik@abu.ac.ir
Throughout its integration into Islamic culture, philosophy has encountered diverse fates and challenges. At times, it has been revered in its broadest sense, with scholars of intellectual science occupying esteemed positions. Conversely, there have been periods of disdain and neglect, where intellectual pursuits were outright rejected. Philosophers and logicians faced condemnation, hindrance, and excommunication, with some even sacrificing their lives for their beliefs. Nonetheless, within Islamic culture, there have always been movements both in favor of and in opposition to philosophy and intellectual sciences, varying in degrees of acceptance. Generally, these opposition groups can be classified into three main groups, as follows:
1- Theological movement of Ash'arites.
2- Movement of textualism ("traditionalism " - Akhbarism) among Shiites and "people of traditions" (Ahl al-Hadith) among Sunnis.
3- Movement of mysticism and sufism.
Key words: Philosophy, Intellection, Ash'arites, Textualistm, Mysticism (Sufism - Irfan).
j afarmuhammad@mail .ru
ABSTRACT
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
ISLOM TARIXIDA FALSAFA TAQDIRI
Xolmo'minov Jafar Muhammadievich,
falsafa fanlari doktori (DSc),
"INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF FINANCE TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE" instituti professori j afarmuhammad@mail .ru
Doktor Muhammad Ismoil Abdullohiy,
Tehron universiteti boshqaruv fakulteti (Eron) Elektron pochta: m.e. abdollahi@ut.ac.ir
Doktor Abolfazl Tajik,
"Dinlar va tasavvuf " kafedrasi dotsenti, Ahlu-Bayt xalqaro universiteti (Eron, Tehron) Elektron pochta: a.tajik@abu.ac.ir
Islom madaniyati integratsiyasi davomida falsafa turli muammolarga dush keldi. Ba'zan uni keng ma'noda, intellektual fan olimlari faxriy lavozimlarni egallaganlarida hurmat qilishgan. Aksincha, ba^zida intellektual mashg'ulotlar butunlay rad etilgan, ratsional bilimlarga nisbatan nafratlanish va beparvolik davrlari ham bo'lgan. Faylasuflar va mantiq ahli ta^na-malomatlar, to'siqlar va diniy markazlardan uzoqlashtirish holatlariga duch kelishgan. Ba 'zi faylasuflar o 'z g^oya va maslaklarini himoya qilishyolida hayotini qurbon qilgan.
Shuningdek, islom madaniyatida falsafa va intellektual fanlarga qarshi foydalanish uchun turli shakldagi fikriy-aqidaviy yo^nalishlar ham mavjud bo'lgan. Bu muxolif guruhlarni uch asosiy guruhga bo 'lish mumkin:
- Ashariya ilohiyot maktabi;
- Shialar va "an 'anachilar" (Ahl al-Hadis);
- Tasavvuf va Irfon falsafasi.
Kalit so'zlar: Falsafa, aql, Ashariylar, Tekstualizm, Mistika (Tasavvuf - Irfon).
ANNOTATSIYA
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
СУДЬБА ФИЛОСОФИИ В ИСТОРИИ ИСЛАМА
Холмуминов Джафар Мухаммадиевич,
доктор философских наук (DSc), профессор MHCTmyra'TNTERNATIONAL SCHOOL OF FINANCE TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE"
Доктор Мохаммад Исмаэль Абдоллахи,
Факультет управления Тегеранского университета (Иран) Электронная почта: м.э. abdollahi@ut.ac.ir
Доктор Абольфазл Таджик,
доцент кафедры религий и мистицизма, Международный университет АхлулБайт (Иран, Тегеран) Электронная почта: a.tajik@abu.ac.ir
АННОТАЦИЯ
На протяжении своей интеграции в исламскую культуру философия столкнулась с разнообразными судьбами и проблемами. Временами его почитали в самом широком смысле, когда ученые интеллектуальной науки занимали почетные должности. И наоборот, были периоды презрения и пренебрежения, когда интеллектуальные занятия полностью отвергались. Философы и логики сталкивались с осуждением, препятствиями и отлучением от церкви, а некоторые даже жертвовали своей жизнью за свои убеждения. Тем не менее, в исламской культуре всегда существовали движения как в пользу, так и против философии и интеллектуальных наук, различающиеся по степени признания. В целом эти оппозиционные группы можно разделить на три основные группы:
1- Богословское учение Ашаритов.
2- Движение текстуализма («традиционализм» - ахбаризм) среди шиитов и «традиционалистов» (Ахль аль-Хадис) среди суннитов.
3- Движение суфизма.
Ключевые слова: Философия, разум, Ашариты, Текстуализм, Мистика (суфизм - Ирфан).
j afarmuhammad@mail .ru
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
1- Theological movement of Ash'arites
In the middle of the second century AH, ash'arites were developed in Islam in the course of thinking about the doctrine.
A) Certain individuals held the conviction that the human intellect possesses the capacity to contemplate doctrines and draw conclusions. Consequently, they argued that all matters concerning God, resurrection, angels, law, and other topics ought to be subjected to intellectual scrutiny as a primary step. Subsequently, advocates of this viewpoint became recognized as the "Mu'tazila"
B) Another faction posited that the intellect was incapable of delving into ideological matters and doctrines. This group advocated for worship and wholehearted submission to the verses and traditions, a stance that eventually became identified as the "Ash'arites", with some members also referred to as the "Ahle Hadith"
"Mu'tazilites believed in "rational good and evil, The Mu'tazilites subscribed to the belief in "rational good and evil", emphasizing the application of reason in discerning moral principles and ethical judgments. This doctrine underscored the significance of intellectual inquiry and critical thinking in understanding concepts of morality and determining right from wrong. Furthermore, Mu'tazilite thought emphasized the importance of human agency in making moral choices, advocating for the use of reason to navigate ethical dilemmas and promote virtuous behavior. This perspective contrasted with other theological schools that placed greater emphasis on divine command or revelation as the sole basis for morality, highlighting the Mu'tazilites' distinctive approach to ethical philosophy. "Whereas Ash'arites, believed in "legal good and evil" (Abd Rahman, 2020; al Khatib, 2022) Contrary to the Mu'tazilites, the Ash'arites held firm to the belief in "legal good and evil". For them, the determination of what constitutes good and evil is primarily rooted in divine law and decree rather than rational analysis alone. This perspective places significant emphasis on adherence to religious teachings and divine commandments as the foundation for moral guidance. According to Ash'arite theology, what is deemed morally right or wrong is established through divine revelation and interpretation of religious texts, with human reason playing a subordinate role in understanding and applying these laws. Consequently, the Ash'arite perspective prioritizes obedience to divine authority and adherence to religious teachings as the primary means of determining ethical conduct, distinguishing it from the more rationalistic approach of the Mu'tazilites. This struggle between worship and wisdom, which was started at the end of Umayyad era, reached its peak in the early
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
Abbasid era, because the Abbasid caliphs, such as Mansur, Harun and Ma'mun, supported intellect and rationality. Mansour Abbasi, ordered Greek and Syriac works to be translated, and Aaron sent some Byzantium people to find manuscripts, and finally, Mamun, officially supported the rational sciences by the establishment of the "House of Wisdom (Bayt Al- Hikma)".(HATÎPOGLU, 2023; Heidari, 2022; Rofiq, 2022) Superficial Scholars, such as Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (Motahari), were imprisoned in this period. Nevertheless, with the rise of Mutawakkil (d. 232 AH), the situation changed entirely. He strongly opposed the rational sciences (Nasikhin, 2022), and therefore, traditionists and apparentists returned to their previous court positions. Ahmad ibn Hanbal was one of these traditionists who was released, and then, he achieved great status. Among these traditionists was Ahmad ibn Hanbal, a prominent figure who garnered significant recognition and esteem. Initially detained due to his steadfast adherence to traditionalist beliefs, Ahmad ibn Hanbal ultimately gained freedom and ascended to a position of eminence within the Islamic scholarly community. His resilience and unwavering commitment to preserving the integrity of prophetic traditions earned him widespread respect and admiration among his contemporaries. Notably, Ahmad ibn Hanbal's contributions to the compilation and authentication of Hadith literature solidified his reputation as a preeminent authority in Islamic jurisprudence and theology. His enduring legacy continues to shape Islamic scholarship and jurisprudence to this day, underscoring the enduring significance of his scholarly endeavors and the enduring impact of his teachings. (Pervez, 2022)
Abulhassan al-Ash'ari (d. 324 AH), a pupil of Mu'tazilite school of thought, renounced beliefs of Mu'tazilism, and introduced Mu'tazila ideas as misleading beliefs (Tariq, 2008). He considered intellect unable to reach the doctrine, and decided to reveal "disgraces and defects" of Mu'tazila. (Ullah, 2013)
Some Ash'ari beliefs are as follows:
1- The Quran is deemed uncreated, regarded as the word of God. Just as other attributes of God are considered uncreated, His Word holds the same status. It's understood that the essence of God is distinct from His attributes, including His Word.
2- A term such as "hand," as mentioned in the Holy Quran in phrases like "The Hand of God", is to be accepted as it is, without delving into its specifics. It should not be subject to allegorical or metaphorical interpretations; rather, it is to be understood without questioning its literal meaning.
3- Issues related to the hereafter should be accepted as they have been mentioned in verses and traditions, rather than as virtual interpretations.
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
4- Introducing the idea of "acquiring" by Ash'arites in contrast with Mu'tazila, who believed in the will in human actions.(Nasir, 2016)
Muhammad al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH) was the other theologian who opposed philosophers. Ghazali mentioned himself in his book as "al-Munqidh min al-dalal" (Rescuer from Error) "(Ghazali). He learned philosophy after three years of studying the philosophical works of Ibn Sina, of course without a teacher, and he wrote a book called "aims of the Philosophers". He addressed to explain philosophers comments in "aims of the philosophers", according to himself.
In his work "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" (Tahafut al-Falasifah), Al-Ghazali undertakes a comprehensive critique of philosophical ideas as articulated in "The Aims of the Philosophers" (Maqasid al-Falasifah). Drawing from his own philosophical background and deep understanding of Islamic theology, Al-Ghazali offers a meticulous examination of various philosophical doctrines and arguments presented by thinkers of his time.
Al-Ghazali's primary objective in "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" is to challenge and refute what he perceives as erroneous philosophical assertions that contradict Islamic tenets. He meticulously dissects the arguments of philosophers, exposing what he views as logical fallacies, inconsistencies, and deviations from Islamic orthodoxy. One of the key issues Al-Ghazali addresses is the philosophers' understanding of causality and the nature of God's relationship to the world. He argues against the philosophers' assertion of a necessary connection between cause and effect, instead advocating for a view that emphasizes God's direct and constant involvement in the functioning of the universe. Furthermore, Al-Ghazali criticizes the philosophers' conception of the afterlife, particularly their denial of bodily resurrection and the immortality of the soul. He presents counterarguments rooted in Islamic theology, affirming the resurrection of the body and the eternal nature of the soul as essential aspects of Islamic eschatology. Throughout "The Incoherence of the Philosophers", Al-Ghazali demonstrates his mastery of both philosophical reasoning and Islamic theology, effectively dismantling philosophical positions that he perceives as incompatible with Islamic doctrine. By doing so, he aims to reaffirm the primacy of revelation and religious faith as sources of truth and knowledge, while also engaging in a sophisticated dialogue with philosophical thought of his time.
Then, Ghazali strongly opposed philosophers in his book as "the incoherence of the philosophers". In this book, he has rejected ideas of philosophers in twenty issues. He has considered philosophers as heretics in seventeen cases and infidels in three cases. The three cases are: "the belief in eternity of the world", "denial of God's knowledge of details" and "denial of the bodily Resurrection of the dead". According
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
to Ghazali, these three beliefs show explicit unbelief, and no Islamic sects believe in these issues.In his renowned work "The Incoherence of the Philosophers", Ghazali launched a rigorous critique against the philosophical currents of his time. Across twenty distinct issues, he systematically dismantled the philosophical doctrines that contradicted Islamic principles. Among these critiques, Ghazali categorically labeled philosophers as heretics in seventeen instances and as outright infidels in three particular cases. These cases, as delineated by Ghazali, encompassed beliefs such as the eternity of the world, the denial of God's omniscience concerning details, and the rejection of the bodily resurrection of the deceased.
Ghazali's stance was unequivocal: he viewed these philosophical positions as incompatible with the tenets of Islam, representing explicit disbelief. He argued fervently that no legitimate Islamic sects endorsed such ideas, emphasizing the fundamental divergence between philosophical thought and religious doctrine. Through his comprehensive refutation, Ghazali aimed to safeguard the integrity of Islamic faith and to reaffirm the primacy of religious revelation over speculative philosophy. (Riker, 1996)
Ghazali divides philosophers into three groups: The materialists (dahriyyun), the naturalists or the deists (tabi'iyyun) and the theists (ilahiyyun). He considers materialists as 'zanadiqah' (heretics) because they deny God and consider that the universe has been developed by itself. Because, naturalists (tabi'iyyun) see the wonder of creation in natural world, they admit the existence of a wise creator or deity but this group denies the Hereafter, reward and punishment. This group is also called 'zanadiqah' (heretics). According to Ghazali, although theists (ilahiyyun) including Socrates, Plato and Aristotle criticized materialists and naturalists, the remains of disbelief and heresy of these groups can also be found in their opinions; so excommunicating of them and the followers of Muslim philosophers, e.g., Ibn Sina, Farabi and other philosophers, is an obligation. (Rayan, 2004)
Abdulkarim bin Ahmed Shahristani (d. 549 AH) is also a theologian who has criticized the philosophy and philosophers. However, his fame is mainly due to the book "The Book of Sects and Creeds (Kitab al-Milal wa al-Nihal). Also, he wrote a book entitled "wrestling philosophers" refuting the ideas of philosophers, and considered them worthy of rejection for seven reasons. (Abdul Karim Shahrestani, wrestling philosophers, p.)
Imam Fakhr Razi (d. 606 AH) has also mentioned disagreement with the intellectual and philosophical topics in his statement, verses and traditions with specific interpretations. (Al-Razi, 1990)
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
After Ghazali, other three books titled "The Incoherence of the Philosophers" were also written. One of them was written by Qutb al-Din Ravandi, but there is not much information about it. The other one was written by Ala al-Din Tusi, known as Al-Ghazali and the wise men in the trial. The third book was written by Musleh al-Din Khajazadeh, a book with a little difference with the books written by Ghazali and Ala al-Din Tusi .
Ala al-Din Tusi has also criticized thoughts of philosophers in twenty cases and excommunicated them in three cases.
Those three cases are: Belief in eternity of the world, denial of God's knowledge of details and denial of bodily resurrection. (Voss, 1992)
2- Movement of textualistm
Textualists, also referred to as Traditionalists (Akhbarism) within Shiites and People of the Traditions (Ahl al-Hadith) among Sunnis, prioritize the Book and Sunnah (Quran and traditions) as the primary sources for understanding and interpreting religious teachings. They eschew reliance on wisdom or intellect to grasp divine knowledge, asserting that such faculties are inadequate and ineffectual in deducing divine laws. This movement emphasizes a strict adherence to textual sources, regarding wisdom as irrelevant in the pursuit of religious understanding.
This movement was known as the name of "Traditionalism" (Akhbarism) among Shiites and "People of the traditions" (Ahl al-Hadith) among Sunnis.
1-2 - "People of the traditions" (Ahl al-Hadith):
In Islamic world, textualists were those people who opened hostilities and opposed the intellect for the first time. The first sign of radical textualism was shown among "Kharijites" in the early days of Islam. These textualists, who are known as "people of the traditions" (Ahl al-Hadith) among Sunnis, primarily were founders of a Jurisprudential movement. This movement restricted source of its religious knowledge to the Book (Quran), tradition and consensus, and did not enter intellect to the realm of inference of religious decrees. This group gradually extended this method to the realm of beliefs so that they believed that all ideas should be elicited and deduced from the Book and Sunnah (Quran and tradition). This movement reflected perfectly in Ahmand ibn Hanbal's ideas. Ahmand ibn Hanbal, representative of the early Islamic textualists, did not respect for the dignity of intellect in the sphere of religion, and he considered unlawful and heretical use of intellect in religious knowledge. (Subhi & Umar, 2023)
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
He believed that religious texts were the only sources to prove the existence of God and his attributes, and therefore, he accepted the appearance of religion without interpretation or rational justification. Ibn Taymiyya, in the seventh and eighth centuries (AH), tried to revive the ideas of Ahmand ibn Hanbal and introduced him as his leader. Ibn Taymiyya was trying to proof the opinion that in the case of any conflict between reason and religion, reason should be advocated by writing a detailed book called "Averting the Conflict between Reason and [religious] Tradition". He even criticized people like Abu Hamid al-Ghazali and Fakhr Razi because they believed that religious knowledge was based on rational knowledge and teachings. (El-Tobgui, 2018)
He interpreted Philosophy as the main cause of the emergence of the conflicts and heresies in Islam, and therefore, philosophy was considered as a result of disbelief. (Stroumsa & Sviri) He considered getting from intellect as the criterion of closeness to God, and he believed that philosophers can ever achieve the essence of religious knowledge. He was a very prolific writer and wrote several works in refutation of logic and philosophy. Some of his works are as follows: ar-Radd 'ala al-Mantiqiyyin (The refutation of the Logicians) (Veto logic)
The refutation of the philosophy of Ibn Rushd) (Averting the Conflict between Reason and Tradition)
He rejected this statement of logicians limit that was the way to achieve conception and "Syllogism" was the way to achieve "Confirmation", and He also believed in relativity of theoretical and axiomatic propositions (Abd Rahman & Ali, 2021). He has excommunicated philosophers and logicians, such as Avicenna, Farabi, etc.
After Ibn Taymiyya, Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab tried to revive his legacy in 12th century. His rationalistically and ossified viewpoints also led to the rejection of rational sciences, and his ideas caused him to be sentenced to death by Amir Ahsa. Finally, his ideas were developed when he escaped to Hijaz (Kazi, 2013).
As noted earlier, the People of the Traditions (Ahl al-Hadith) played a pivotal role in initiating a jurisprudential movement, which subsequently influenced various religious scholars. Consequently, efforts were made within this movement to issue judgments against philosophy and intellectual sciences. Several fatwas (judgments) were rendered in this regard, including:
Sheikh Jamal al-Din Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Abbas al-Khwarizmi (d. 383 AH) was one of the jurists who disagreed with the philosophers and Greek philosophers in
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
his book titled " "Useful of science and exterminator of worries" in a section called "The refutation of philosophers". He writes:
Back in ancient Greece, there were these thinkers called philosophers. They were really into contemplative sciences and believed they had superior intelligence in those areas. However, their intense focus on these subjects sometimes led them down a path of madness and astonishment. They would delve into deep philosophical questions, including those related to theology, which is the study of religious beliefs and practices. It's kind of like they got so absorbed in their thoughts that it became overwhelming and even bewildering at times. It's fascinating to see how their pursuit of knowledge could have such profound effects on their mental state. They were the most ignorant and the most stupide creatures of God. Heresy and heterodoxy are based on their school. Philosophers believe in three gods and deny the attributes of God."(Wierenga, 2018)
Ibn Salah Shahrazuri (d. 643 AH) is among the jurists who passed judgment against logic and philosophy in a response to a question. The question and his response are briefly given below:
Has Divine legislator allowed to be engaged at teaching and learning logic? What is obligatory on obligator to do about a philosopher who is known as a teacher and writer of philosophy? Ibn Salah replies:
"Philosophy is the main cause of foolishness and losing faith, the reason of confusion and misguidance, abandoning truth, and in general means heresy. So, whoever is engaged in philosophy, his heart is blind to see the benefits of the holy law which is confirmed by apparent arguments and clear proofs. The logic is the entryway of philosophy and also the entryway of evil. So, it is an obligatory on the king to save Muslims from them and force someone who has philosophical beliefs to accept Islam or put him to the sword to extinguish the fire of sedition (Plantinga & Wolterstorff, 1983).
Mohiuddin Abu Zakaria (d. 677 AH) considered philosophy as magic and sorcery and declared prohibited. He has stated in his book titled "The total explanation of the looted" such a fatwa (Judgment). (Ibrahim et al., 2015)
Ibn al-Qayyim Jozi (d. 751 AH), one of the students of Ibn Taymiyya, followed his teacher's way in opposing philosophy and passed judgment on philosophy to be prohibited in his book titled " The key to the abode of happiness and the publication of the guardianship of knowledge and will". (Hampton, 1990)
Ahmed bin Mustafa, known as Tash Cobrazadeh (d. 961 AH), has passed judgment against philosophy as follows:
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
"Beware of them (Philisophers)! Their engagement in wisdom (Hekmat) is certainly prohibited in our religious law and their harm to ordinary Muslims is more than Jews and Christians. (Mahallati, 2006)
Ala'eddin Haskafi (d. 1088 AH) also believed that: "Learning philosophy, magic, occultism, geomancy and temple priesthood is prohibited." (Stern, 2003)
2.2 Akhbaris (Traditionalists)
The reason of the movement of textualism, Known as "Akhbaris", in the Shiite world was because they were in contrast to mojtaheds, performing all four kinds of religious sayings (hadith) including: accurate, reliable, good and poor. Another reason for this name was that they gave credit to "tradition" among four reasons to infer religious laws: Quran, Tradition, Consensus and intellect, and they considered that valid reasons were limited to "Akhbar" (narratives).
Although traditionalism in the 11th century AH was developed by the efforts of Mullah Mohammed Amin Astarabadi (d. 1036 AH), he believed that this attitude was related to years and centuries before him, the period of the great traditionalists, such as Koleini. (Heern, 2011).
Sheikh Yusuf al-Bahrani was among "Akhbari" Elders who knew Sheikh Saduq as a leader of Akhbari (Muhammad ibn Hasan Hurr Ameli, Alfavaed Altusiah, modified: Mahdi Lazverdi and Muhammad Dorudi, Qom, 1403 AH, p. 446). Sheikh Horr Ameli, writer of "Wasa'il al-Shia", attributed this movement to the prophet and Imams (AS) and he used the term of "Akhbari" about them. (Yusuf Albhrani, 1376 AH, vol. 1, p. 170)
In contrast, some others believed that the historical background of traditionalism is related to 11th century. They distinguished between traditionists at the time of Imams (AS) and contemporary Akhbaris. (Ref: Mohammad Taqi Razi Najafi Isfahani, Research: Institute for Islamic publication, Qom, Islamic publishing institution, 1430 AH, 1st edition, Vol. 3, p. 687; Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, Almalem alJadida Lelosul, Tehran, Makatb Alnahaj, 1395 AH, 2nd Edition, p. 80 -81.)
However, traditionalism in the 11th and 12th centuries culminated by Mirza Mohammad Astarabadi (d. 1036 AH) and, more than him, by Mullah Mohammad Amin Astarabadi.
Mullah Mohammad Amin Asterabadi says on this issue:
... Then, after teaching all traditions to me, (Mirza Mohammad Asterabadi) emphasized that: revive the method of Akhbaris because Lord of Glory had ordained it to be written by your pen." (Mohammad Amin Astarabadi, Favaed almadaniah, pp. 17-18)
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
Astarabadi believed that intellect plays no roles in knowledge and cognition. He generally denied validity and value of intellectual perceptions, and considered intellectual matters suspicious and doubtful (Ibid, P. 122 -124). Generally, Akhbaris believed that the use of reason to deduce the religious laws had no results but losing the essence of religion. (ALseyed Nematollah al-Moussawi Aljazayeri, Alanwar Alnamaniyah, Haj Seyed Hadi Bani Hashim press, vol. 3, pp. 127-131)
They spoke out to criticize and reproach intellect. The reasons for the rejection of intellect can be misperception of this group about narrations related to criticism and disapproval, including the use of "syllogism" (Ref: Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Hurr al-Ameli, Alfavayed altusiyah, pp 350-355 and pp. 417-428. See also: Yusuf Albhrani, Alhadaeq alnazerah, vol. 1, pp. 125-126). Akhbaris invoked traditions, such as "The Sunnah, if measured by the rights of religion." (Bihar al-Anwar, vol 101, p 405). Akhbaris considered this kind of traditions as criticism and absolute rejection of intellect and rational argumentation, unaware of that, these traditions are criticizing judicial reasoning by analogy, as same as logical syllogism. In jurisprudential syllogism, a partial judgment is concluded from another partial judgment. In fact, these traditions seek to criticize those who try to achieve religious law and knowledge by their speculation, based on which, it is known as "intellect" (Ref: ALseyed Mohammad Baqer al-Sadr, Al-Majmoua Al-kamlh Lemualefat Al-Seyed Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, Beirut, 1410 AH, vol. 3, pp. 49-52.)
Akhbaris rejected all sciences that were based on the use of intellect as a mean of recognition. Logic, theology and philosophy were among these sciences. From their point of view, the theoretical sciences were divided into two categories:
A) The sciences that pertain to the material realm, closely tied to sensory perception, and whose principles are grounded in sense experience, include disciplines such as geometry, arithmetic, mathematics, and the majority of topics within logic. In these domains, errors are rare occurrences.
B) The sciences that deal with material matters yet have principles that transcend sensory experience, making it impossible to verify them solely through sense perception, include disciplines such as theosophy, natural science, theology, principles of jurisprudence, theoretical aspects of jurisprudence, and certain logical rules. These sciences operate beyond the realm of direct sensory observation, rendering them susceptible to potential errors that cannot be rectified through sensory means alone. (Saeidinasab, 2014)
Akhbaris believe that there is no law in logic to keep human from errors in syllogism. All the logic is to construct the shape and the appearance of syllogism. The Akhbaris assert that logic lacks the inherent capacity to prevent errors in
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
syllogistic reasoning. According to their perspective, logic serves primarily to structure and visually represent syllogisms, shaping their form and appearance without necessarily ensuring their correctness. This viewpoint contends that while logic provides tools for organizing arguments, it does not inherently guarantee their validity or accuracy. In essence, Akhbaris argue that the role of logic is limited to constructing the external framework of syllogisms, such as their logical structure and coherence, rather than offering foolproof mechanisms for error prevention. This belief reflects a skepticism towards the absolute reliability of human reasoning and emphasizes the need for additional sources of guidance and verification.By highlighting the potential limitations of logic in safeguarding against errors, Akhbaris advocate for alternative approaches to ensuring the correctness of syllogistic reasoning. This may involve placing greater reliance on authoritative sources such as religious texts or the teachings of infallible figures, rather than solely depending on logical principles (Bouhafa, 2021). If not so, logicians and philosophers would not make any mistakes. Therefore, the infallible Imams must be resorted to keep them from errors (Hasan, 1972). Asterabadi says: "If you see that Muslim philosophers and scholars make mistakes and errors in their knowledge, this false occurs in the sciences whose syllogism's materials are far from sense". Therefore, the rules of logic are not infallible in materials of syllogism, but the infallible Imams are immune from mistakes .In the case of theology, the Akhbaris consider theology as a theoretical science, in which there is the possibility of errors. They also believe that the Imams (peace be upon them) prohibit their followers from theology (science of kalam), which is based on intellectual thoughts". (Kalin, 2005).
From the perspective of Sheikh Hurr Ameli, all or the most of arguments in theology (Kalam) are incomplete and based on suspicions. Many Quranic verses and traditions have prohibited us from following suspicions (Najafi & Kazmi, 2010). For Akhbaris approach about philosophy, it also must be said that Akhbaris considers philosophy as a theoretical science, such as logic or the science of theology, which their materials are far from sense. Consequently, there is a possibility of error in them. Sheikh Horr Ameli says: "It is clear that if intellectual proofs are agreed with the Qur'an and the narratives of the prophet, reason and tradition go hand in hand and support each other, so that there are no obstacles in the sort of intellectual arguments, and Prophet and the Imams tried to provide such intellectual reasoning. Texts containing the intellectual arguments are successive and they are available in Usul al-Kafi, ehtejaj, Tawhid, Nahjolbalagheh, etc. Basically, these are among traditional arguments, which are trusted by and agreed with Qur'an and the tradition. These
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
kinds of intellectual arguments will make us free from other poor arguments quoted from philosophers, atheists, the public and others like them".
Allama Mohammad Baqer Majlesi also considers philosophers to be misled and misleading, as follows:
"They not only did not believe the prophet, but also did not even accept Quran. They had confidence in their corrupt intellects and undue viewpoints. They interpreted clear and correct texts from guiding Imams (as), because these texts did not agree with philosophers' creed. I wonder how they dared to interpret clear texts issued by Ahl al-Bayt (AS), because of their optimism towards Greek infidels who did not believe in the "religion" .
Generally, Akhbaris' reasons for inefficiency and invalidity of intellect to infer religious orders can be summarized in five cases:
1- Inability of intellect to realize religious orders:
Human can only achieve knowledge about general issues rather than details Religious orders include both details and generalities, and so, these kinds of intellectual argument in religious orders will not even lead to doubt and delusion .
2- Restriction of the religious orders:
Most of Akhbaris believe that religious orders are restricted and must only be heard from infallible Imams. Therefore, intellect can play no roles in inferring the religious decrees
3- Traditions indicating invalidity of intellect:
Akhbaris rely on traditions in which intellect has been censured and rejected by infallible Imams Two examples of these traditions are as follows:
Imam Ali (AS) said: "Surely a believer will not get religion by his ideas, but he gets whatever comes from God". Abu Hamza al-Thumali also has cited a quote said by Imam Sajjad (AS): the religion of Allah will not be grasped by incomplete intellects, wrong views and incorrect comparisons" (Muhammad Baqir Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 2, p. 303).
4- Fallibility intellectual judgment:
Akhbaris believe that rational reason is always subjected to error, and if we do them, it is not clear that we have done our duty. Sayings the Imams (AS) are the only things which are immune from error .
5- The necessity of defeating the purpose with the assumption of the reliability of the intellect is as follows:
Akhbaris believe that one of the main purposes to send the prophets has been resolving differences between the servants. If God devolves understanding laws to intellects of people, the purpose will be defeated. On the other hand, the intellect has
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
authority over religious orders, and there is no more need for prophets and Imams (Ibid., P. 91)
3- Movement of mysticism and Sufism
The mysticism and Sufism movement stands out as a vocal critic of philosophy, reason, and rationalism. Within this movement, abundant documents exist that actively oppose and critique the intellect and philosophical thought. Therefore, the bitterness of these interpretations is to the extent that mysticism seems to avoid any kind of rational thinking and rational tendency:
Oh, Sanayee, if you want to achieve sublimity thanks to God Sacrifice the intellect in the shrine of the Prophet Mustafa How is it that Mostafa is the world and someone speaks of the intellect? How is it that the sun in the sky and someone speaks of Suha (a twinkling and dim star)?
By referring to statements of mystics, two points can be understood: Firstly, Mystics' opposition to philosophy and generally the intellect and rationality- in contrast to "Apparentists" who tried to maintain the outward appearance of religious texts- is because the truth that a mystic seeks to achieve, is out of reach of our intellects. Hafiz says:
Much loftier than reason is the court of the fold of love That threshold that one kisses who, his life in his sleeve, hath. Mystics believe that although intellect is used and needed to achieve some things, entering the realm of divine proximity is not possible for the intellect.
The comparison of reason is up to the point where the creator appears as the reason
Think about the road ahead of you, either the mountain or the well A mystic considers legs of intellect to be lame to reach that lofty status: How long can you think of this way to the wisdom of Nazi Hakim? If he reached the bottom of the sea, he took wisdom from his nature A mystic believes that the reason of philosophical astonishment is inability to understand the essence of God.
Philosophical sage, because he is an animal, does not see impossible things Z makes it possible to prove the obligatory nature of the obligatory nature A mystic believes in a phase beyond the intellect which is not possible to be grasped by the intellect.
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
Beyond reason, there is a way for man to know those hidden secrets Someone who has a far-sighted mind has a lot of confusion ahead of him For the mystic, the intellect serves as a valuable instrument for navigating the complexities of worldly matters and engaging in logical discourse. It aids in understanding empirical phenomena and solving practical problems. However, when it comes to matters of the divine and spiritual truths, the mystic asserts that the intellect reaches its limits. Instead, the mystic emphasizes the importance of intuitive insight, spiritual experience, and inner contemplation as pathways to apprehending the transcendent reality of God.
In the mystical tradition, the intellect is often regarded as a veil that obscures direct communion with the divine. It is seen as a limited faculty that operates within the confines of human perception and conceptual frameworks. True knowledge of God, according to the mystic, transcends the realm of rational thought and can only be attained through mystical experience and spiritual transformation.
Therefore, while recognizing the intellect's role in the realm of human understanding, the mystic ultimately places greater emphasis on transcending intellectual limitations in the pursuit of divine truth. This perspective underscores the mystical journey as a path of inner purification, spiritual awakening, and union with the divine, where the intellect serves as a stepping stone rather than the ultimate arbiter of truth.
Shahid Motahari say that "Viewpoint of mystics is not based on the denial of the value of the intellect, argument and reasoning, but it is based on preferring the heart, spiritual journey and purification of the soul". From the mystic's point of view:
It was a rational discussion of Darr and Marjan, but it was a discussion of life The discussion of life is another matter, but life is another matter Rational arguments that a philosopher is looking for, do not transcend beyond the limits of imaginations, mental concepts and convincing the rational faculty. Indeed, this, in itself, has a great value, but the imparted knowledge that a mystic is looking for is a kind of achieving and tasting .
Secondly, criticism, sarcasm and humiliation of the intellect by the mystic are just related to the "partial intellect".
From the mystic's point of view, the intellect can be divided into two parts: "general intellect" and "partial intellect".
The general intellect or the "intellect of the intellect" is an intellect that helps human to distinguish between the right way from the wrong way, and sometimes mystics call it the "truth of Muhammadiyeh (PBUH)"
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
The intellect of the notebooks is a black book, the intellect of the horizons is full of moon or:
The clause of rationality came philosophical Shaheswar Aql Aql came Safi
The partial intellect is a kind of intellect that is also named "Aql e Maash" This intellect is disapproved by mystics because of paying pure attention to the world. In this section, some mystics' statements in the early centuries will be mentioned in chronological order. Mystics in the early centuries of Islam did not provide an epistemological image from position of the intellect. These mystics believed that the accuracy of the intellect and observing divine revelation led to the knowledge of God but they were not its cause. The cause is merely grace and providence of God. Intellect and rational arguments can't be guided and directed without God's grace (Moreland, 2014).
Hassan Basri (d. 110 AH) believes that thinking invites human to do well and practice it. He believes that worldliness deviate the intellect from its real path .Therefore, it is worthwhile that a wise man receive the amount that is required from the world (Ibid, Pp. 138-139).
Mohammad Sammak (183 AH) Believes that a wise person is someone who takes principles and puts chapters down and tries to be saved from the world (Ibid, p 204).
Shaqiq Balki (d. 194 AH) considers a believer to be wise, and a wise believer is busy to learn from the world and think, but a hypocrite is busy to greed and desire (Ibid, Vol. 8, p. 61 and 71).
Ebrahim Adham (d. 161 or 162 AH) believes that the fear of God causes the intellect to be free from dependence on the world, and it also enhances intellect and peace of heart (Ibid, Pp. 18-19).
Bishr Hafi (d. 227 AH) believes that a wise man is not only the identifier of good and evil, he is but also a person who does good and avoids evil, after knowing good and evil (Ibid, Vol. 9, p. 339).
Ahmad ibn al-Havari (d. 230 AH) considers intellect as a mean of knowing God. He believes that a wiser man equally is more aware of God .
Dhul-Nun al-Misri (d. AH 245 or 246) considers intellect and thinking as a result of seeing and viewing. This thought leads to knowledge and action and ultimately is helpful to remove the veil between the mystic and God (Abu Naim Al-Esfahani). In his view, a perfect wise is the one who implements divine laws, and obeys God's orders and prohibitions (Ibid, p 372). Ultimately, Dhul-Nun considers intellect to be insufficient to know God. He says: "I knew God by God" (Ibid, p 145).
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
Among the mystics of the early centuries, Hareth Mahasebi is the only one who tried to create a coherent definition of the intellect. Mahasebi has named a chapter dedicated to the subject of intellect as "Ketab al-aqhl" in his book titled "al-amal al-qoloub val-javareh"
He believes that the intellect must follow revelation, and therefore, no separation should occur between intellect and revelation .In the Akhbari perspective, there exists a fundamental belief that the intellect must be subservient to revelation. This principle underscores the notion that human reasoning, represented by the intellect, should align and conform to the teachings and guidance provided by divine revelation. According to this viewpoint, there should be no dichotomy or separation between the dictates of intellect and those of revelation.
Essentially, Akhbaris emphasize the harmony between reason and revelation, advocating for their integration rather than their isolation or conflict. They argue that the intellect, while capable of rational inquiry and deduction, must operate within the framework established by divine revelation. In this way, revelation serves as a guiding light, providing a foundation upon which the intellect can operate and make sound judgments.
By asserting the primacy of revelation over the intellect, Akhbaris aim to emphasize the importance of religious authority and divine guidance in shaping human understanding and behavior. They reject the notion of an autonomous intellect divorced from religious teachings, advocating instead for a holistic approach that acknowledges the supremacy of revelation in guiding human thought and action.(Ibid, P. 36). According to Mahasebi, assignment, bringing proofs, promises and threats, commands and prohibitions is executed by the intellect (Ibid., P. 238). This is fixed in each adult including jinn and mankind, and the intellect is a necessary proof that they need (Ibid, p 240).
In Mahasebi's view, the intellect will reach its perfection if the wise has the following three characteristics:
1. Fear of God
2- Believe in God and what is said about promises and threats of God.
3- Having insight into the religion of God and recognizing religion (Ibid, P. 248).
Mahasebi has also discussed the issue of intellect in his other book titled "Care
for the rights of God" (Lachkar, 2021).He believes that, however, the intellect is required to achieve divine satisfaction; the wayfarer of the divine path should trust in God, not in his own understanding (Ibid, p 145). So, the most perfect intellect is an intellect that expresses frustration over achieving the knowledge of God
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
Serri Saqati (d. 251 AH) considers the intellect as the cause of commands and prohibitions, and also he believes that "good manner indicates the intellect" (Ibid, Pp. 51-53).
Yahya bin Muaz Razi (d. 258 AH) considers a wise man to be a hermit (leaver of the world) before he leaves the world, maker of his grave before death and satisfier of God before meeting God (Rahman, 2023).
Hakim Tirmizi (d. 258 AH) believes in "the greatest intellect" and suggests that the other intellects are derived from that. However, he limited the intellect to appearance, and distinguished differences between the intellects of a saint of God and the others, because: "The other monotheists understand matters by their minds, but he -a close guardian- understands by God" (Хайдаров & Каримов, 2017). Abu Hafs Haddad (d. 264 AH) believes that a wise is the one who wills sincerity from himself (Makhsudjonovna, 2022). Sahl ibn Abdullah Tostari (d. AH 273 or 283) believes that respecting for commands, prohibitions, traditions and customs is necessary for man's relationship with God; and someone who lacks these, his faith is incomplete, his wisdom is imperfect, his life is horrible and he will not enjoy worship God .
Abu Saeed Kharraz (d. 277 AH) also considers that intellect guides to good, but he believed that the intellect of a wise man will be astonished in the position of annihilation (fana) (Wainwright, 2015). Junayd Baghdadi (d. 297 AH) considers intellect as an auditor of affairs. In his view, research in decent affairs is the attribute of a wise ma.
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Attar (d. 307 AH) considers intellect as a mean of worshiping, not being aware of divinity (Modir et al., 2021). Abu Bakr vaseti believes that intellect is disqualified from the manifestation of God. In his view, for God's circle, knowledge of the divinity is the cancellation of the intellect because intellect is a mean of performing worship not grasping the truth of divinity (Ibid, p 274).
Abu Ali Saghafi (d. 328 AH) believes that a wise man does not resort to a thing keeping him on entertaining. It means that a wise man refrain from the world and his deceptions
Muslim Bukhari (d. 385 AH) also says that if there was no intellect, people would have been incapable of serving God (Razak, 2020) .
Abu Talib Makki (d. 386 AH) considers intellectual sciences, judging and syllogizing based on the appearance of the Holy Quran and Traditions to be reprehensible.
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
Overall, it seems that as mentioned earlier, the early mystics has had no epistemological perspective on the intellect and has not provided any precise definition of the intellect.
They consider the intellect to be in the service of worshiping God and, in other words, they consider it as an instrument of servitude and obeying God: "Intellect is something that God is worshipped and paradise is obtained by it. (Allama Muhammad Baqir Majlisi, Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 1, p. 116). This group of mystics considers the intellect as a separator of good and evil so that, ultimately, the common sense follows the good and tries to gain God's satisfaction.
In their opinion, a wise person is not a world lover, and, with the fear of God, he has benefitted from the world and has not been deceived by the world. Nevertheless, the contradiction that was appeared between intellect and love in mysticism in the next century - especially with the emergence of great men such as Ahmad Ghazali and Ayn al-Quzat Hamedani- could not be seen in this period.
The result:
In the history of Islamic culture, three movements of Ash'arites, Textualism and Sufism opposed to philosophy and generally rationality; but each of them had a different reason and purpose to oppose. Ash'arites, a science of theology, opposes and excommunicated philosophers because of the beliefs, such as "the belief in eternity of the world", "Denial of bodily resurrection" and "denial of God's knowledge of details".
Textualists, divided in to branches of Ahle Hadith (people of traditions) among the Sunnis and Akhbaris among the Shi'ites, believed that there were no places for intellect to deduce religious rules, and they gave priority to narratives of the prophet (PBUH) and Ahl al-Bayt (AS) and his companions.
Mystics' views on intellect and thinking can be divided into two parts. Mystics in the early centuries, until the 5th century, mostly, considered the intellect as a criterion to make distinguish between good and evil, and an instrument to achieve paradise and staying away from the world and its belongings as well. In the next centuries, Mystic's attitude toward intellect took another form. However, they attributed positive functions to the intellect; they considered intellect to be inadequate to reach the truth and God.
REFERENCES
1. Abd Rahman, A. A. (2020). BETWEEN THE CLASSICAL MU'TAZILITES AND NEO-MU'TAZILITES: AN ANALYSIS OF HARUN NASUTION'S
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
MODERN ISLAMIC THOUGHT IN INDONESIA. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 5(1).
2. Abd Rahman, M. M., & Ali, M. B. H. (2021). Autentikasi Hadith-Hadith Kitab Al-Nikah Daripada Kitab Bulughul Maram Karya Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani: The Authenticity of Hadith in Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani's Bulugh Al-Maram: A Study on Kitab al-Nikah. Ma alim al-Qur an wa al-Sunnah, 17(2), 20-44
3. Adamson, P. B., F. (2023). Good and Evil. In The Heirs of Avicenna: Philosophy in the Islamic East, 12-13th Centuries (pp. 640-699). brill
4. Al-Razi, F. a.-D. (1990). al-Tafsir al-Kabir. Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah.
5. al Khatib, M. (2022). Ethics and religion. International handbook of practical theology (Vol. 103).
6. Bouhafa, F. (2021). Towards New Perspectives on Ethics in Islam: Casuistry, Contingency, and Ambiguity. Casuistry, Contingency, and Ambiguity.
7. El-Tobgui, C. S. (2018). Ibn Taymiyya on the Incoherence of the Theologians' Universal Law: Reframing the Debate between Reason and Revelation in Medieval Islam. Journal of Arabic and Islamic Studies, 18, 63-85.
8. Ghazali. doubt and knowledge. Amir Kabir
9. Hampton, C. (1990). Pleasure, knowledge, and being: An analysis of Plato's Philebus. State University of New York Press.
10. Hasan, A. (1972). The concept of infallibility in Islam. Islamic Studies, 11(1), 1-11.
11. HATtPOGLU, R. (2023). Translation Activities at Dar al-ilm (The House of Knowledge) or Dar al-Tarjamah (The House of Translation) in Gondesaphur and the Influence of Translations on the Persian and Arab World. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Ara§tirmalari Dergisi, 35, 1474-1486.
12. Heern, Z. M. (2011). Usuli Shi'ism: The Emergence of an Islamic Reform Movement in Early Modern Iraq and Iran Department of History, University of Utah].
13. Heidari, S., & Rahimikarami, Z. . (2022). A Study of Iranian Physicians' Immigration to Baghdad: The Effects of Immigration on the Prosperity of Medicine Practice in the Abbasid Period. Journal of Research on History of Medicine, 11(3), 181-196.
14. Ibrahim, B., Arifin, M., & Abd Rashid, S. Z. (2015). The Role of Fatwa and Mufti in Contemporary Muslim Society. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 23.
15. Kalin, I. (2005). Islam and peace: A survey of the sources of peace in the Islamic tradition. Islamic Studies, 44(3), 327-362.
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
16. Kazi, Y. (2013). Reconciling Reason and Revelation in the Writings of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328): An Analytical Study of Ibn Taymiyya's" Dar'al-ta'arud". Yale University.
17. Lachkar, M. (2021). Al-Ghazali's Image in Al-Jabri's works. RUDN Journal of Philosophy, 25(2), 233-249.
18. Mahallati, M. J. (2006). Ethics of war in Muslim cultures: a critical and comparative perspective.
19. Makhsudjonovna, T. N. (2022). Influence of Guilt in the Teachings and Practices of the Qalandar in Central Asia. Miasto Przysziosci, 24, 166-170.
20. Modir, A., Ashrafzadeh, R., & Ghezelhesar, J. M. (2021). Reflection of three prominent religious, mythological and epic themes in mystical texts. Propósitos y representaciones, 9(1), 48.
21. Moreland, J. P. (2014). Love your God with all your mind: The role of reason in the life of the soul. Tyndale House.
22. Motahari. Montgomery Watt, Islamic philosophy and theology. 219-317.
23. Najafi, S. I. H., & Kazmi, S. S. H. (2010). Taqleed & Ijtihad. Islamabad: Markaz Fikr-e-Islami.
24. Nasikhin, N., Ismutik, I., & Albab, U. (2022). PHILOSOPHY OF ISLAMIC SCIENCE IN AL-FARABI'S PERSPECTIVE. RUSYDIAH. Journal Pemikiran Islam, 3(1), 20-34.
25. Nasir, M. N. (2016). The Concept of" TaklTf' according to Early Ash'arite Theologians. Islamic Studies, 291-299.
26. Pervez, S. (2022). Muslim Intellectual History: A Survey.
27. Plantinga, A., & Wolterstorff, N. (1983). Faith and rationality. Reason and Belief in God. Notre Dame/London.
28. Rahman, M. (2023). Studies and Evaluation on the Translations of the Holy Qur'an in Bengali During the British Colonial Time in the Indian Sub-Continent.
International Journal of Social, Political and Economic Research, 10(1), 23-48.
29. Rayan, S. (2004). Al-Ghazali's Method of Doubt. Review of Middle East Studies, 38(2), 162-173.
30. Razak, S. H. A. (2020). Zakat and waqf as instrument of Islamic wealth in poverty alleviation and redistribution: Case of Malaysia. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 40(3/4), 249-266.
31. Riker, S. (1996). Al-Ghazali on Necessary Causality in" The Incoherence of the Philosophers". The Monist, 79(3), 315-324.
Research BIB / Index Copernicus
32. Rofiq, A. C. (2022). ISLAMIC MODERATION IN THE GOLDEN AGE OF ISLAM. In Proceeding of Conference on Strengthening Islamic Studies in The Digital Era. 2, 437-454.
33. Saeidinasab, F. (2014). A description of the theories of Akhbari and Usuli scholars regarding Ijtihad focusing on the theories of muhammad Amin Astarabadi and Vahid Behbahani. Advances in Environmental Biology, 8(10), 1455-1460.
34. Stern, G. (2003). Philosophy in Southern France: Controversy over Philosophic Study and the Influence of Averroes upon Jewish Thought.". The Cambridge Companion to Medieval Jewish Philosophy, 281-303.
35. Stroumsa, S., & Sviri, S. JERUSALEM STUDIES IN ARABIC AND ISLAM 36 (2009).
36. Subhi, A. F., & Umar, M. H. (2023). DINAMIKA HUKUM ISLAM:(Studi Pemikiran Ahl Al-Hadis dan Ahl Al-Ra'yi). Jurnal Indragiri Penelitian Multidisiplin, 3(1), 37-43.
37. Tariq, M. M. (2008). he ideological background of rationality in Islam. Al-
Hikmat Journal Philosophy, 28, 31-56.
38. Ullah, K. (2013). Al-Kashshaf: Al-Zamakhshari's (d. 538/1144) Mu'tazilite exegesis of the Qur'an Georgetown University].
39. Voss, S. (1992). Understanding eternal life. Faith and Philosophy, 9(1), 3-22.
40. Wainwright, J. (2015). Treading the path of salvation: The religious devotion of Shaqiq al-Balkhi, al-Harith al-Muhasibi, and Abu Sa'id al-Kharraz University of Oxford].
41. Wierenga, E. R. (2018). The nature of God: An inquiry into divine attributes. Cornell University Press.
42. Хайдаров, И. М., & Каримов, Н. Р. (2017). Classification of the scientific heritage of Hakim Tirmidhi. European research,
