Explore the vast range of titles available.

Öz:İbn Teymiyye’nin felsefe, kelam ve tasavvufa; Şîa, Cehmiyye, Muʻtezile ve Eşʻarî mezheplerine yönelik tenkitleri çeşitli çalışmalara konu olmuştur. Ona yapılan eleştirilere dair metodolojik bir çalışmanın bulunmayışı, bizi reddiyelerin kaynaklarını, gerekçelerini ve buna yön veren faktörleri incelemeye sevk etmiştir. Bu araştırma, İbn Teymiyye’nin vefatından sonraki bir asırlık dönemde ortaya çıkan reddiye literatürü üzerinden ona yönelik eleştirilerin gerekçelerine ve bunlara yön veren faktörlere odaklanmıştır. Bahsi geçen süre zarfındaki reddiyelerin çoğu Şâfiî Eşʻarî gelenek mensuplarınca kaleme alınmakla birlikte, Hanefî ve Mâlikîlerden de reddiye edebiyatına katkıda bulunanlar olmuştur. İbnü’l-Muallim el-Kureşî, İbnü’z-Zemlekânî, Şehâbeddin İbn Cehbel, Takıyyüddin es-Sübkî, Bahâeddin el-İhmîmî ve Takıyyüddin el-Hısnî Şâfiî Eşʻarî geleneğe mensubiyetleriyle ön plana çıkmışlardır. Bahsi geçen isimlerden sadece Takıyyüddin el-Hısnî 9./15. asrın başlarında vefat etmiştir. Diğer ulemanın tamamı 8./14. asırda vefat etmişlerdir. Bu araştırmada, Memlükler döneminde 9./15. asrın ilk çeyreğine kadar ortaya çıkan İbn Teymiyye’ye yönelik eleştiriler analiz edilerek, reddiyelerin neden ortaya çıktığı saptanmaya çalışılmıştır. İbn Teymiyye’nin kelam ilmine ve özelde Ebü’l-Hasan el-Eşʻarî, Ebü’l-Meâlî el-Cüveynî, Fahreddin er-Râzî ve Ebû Hâmid el-Gazzâlî gibi Eşʻarî büyüklerine metodik tenkitlerde bulunması, reddiye edebiyatının oluşmasının temel nedenlerindendir. İbn Teymiyye’nin ashabının taassubu ve muhaliflerinin ona yönelik tenkit ve ithamları birbirini beslemiş, bunun sonucunda İbn Teymiyyecilik ve İbn Teymiyye muhalifliği olgusu erken sayılabilecek bir dönemde ortaya çıkmıştır. Hanbelîlerin tevile ve kelam ilmine yaklaşımı zemmü’l-kelâm geleneği etrafında şekillenmiştir. Belirli dönemlerde bu anlayış, kelam yöntemini benimseme şeklinde ortaya çıksa da kelam karşıtlığı, mezhebin hâkim görüşü olarak varlığını sürdürmüştür. Kelam ilmini yöntem olarak kullanmak, Eşʻarîliğin varlık sebebidir, ancak Memlükler’deki akide Eşʻarîliği, inancı koruduğu sürece ona tolerans göstermiştir. Bununla birlikte, dönemin Şâfiî Eşʻarî uleması İbn Teymiyye ile yükselişe geçen Hanbelîliğe karşı Eşʻarî büyüklerini savunmak adına kelam ilminin meşruiyetini müdafaa etmek durumunda kalmışlardır. Eşʻarîler ile Hanbelîlerin tasavvufi geleneklerinin farklılığı ve kelamın ilmi hüviyetine yaklaşımları, ayrışmanın diğer bileşenini oluşturmuştur. Taraflar birbirlerini tenkit ederken bu mezhebî ve kültürel mirasa müracaat etme ihtiyacı duymuşlardır. İbn Teymiyye’nin kabir ziyareti, tevessül, istigâse, talâk, haberî sıfatlar ve kelâmullaha dair görüş ve fetvaları nedeniyle muhakeme edilip çeşitli şekillerde cezalandırılması, nihayetinde hapisteyken vefat etmesine kadar giden süreç, meselenin toplumsal ve siyasi boyutlarını ortaya koymaktadır. Özellikle mutasavvıfların, İbn Teymiyye'yi yönetime şikâyet etmeleri sonucunda ona çeşitli cezalar verilmesine neden olduklarına dair kayıtlar, bu bağlamda büyük önem taşımaktadır.

Contemporary philosophers and epistemologists as well as scholars of Islamic studies have not failed to notice some striking similarities between aspects of the Islamic notion of the “fiṭra” (humanity’s archetypal nature) articulated by the medieval Hanbalī traditionalist jurist and theologian Ibn Taymiyya (d.728/1328) and the account of the sensus divinitatis (an innate, direct perception of God) espoused by the reformed philosopher Alvin Plantinga (1932–present). This article systematically compares both these notions and more by first situating them within the antecedent historical factors and developments leading up to their emergence in their respective intellectual milieu, the theological anthropology espoused by both thinkers and the religious epistemology of each respective thinker. The article will also discuss salient differences between each doctrine and their broader parent epistemologies and will examine major objections raised against them. The comparative study reveals not only a rich source of Islamic religious epistemology to be mined by diligent researchers but the exciting application of philosophical analysis to the thought of Ibn Taymiyya. Finally, the article argues that Ibn Taymiyya’s account of the fiṭra faces some problematic epistemological conundrums, one of which will be explored in detail.

Ibn Taymiyya proposes his unique epistemology by employing the concept of the fiṭra. When his statements describing the fiṭra are collected, we see that Ibn Taymiyya has presented a detailed view of human nature and how that nature relates to God and the universe as a whole. His fiṭra-centric theory of human nature can be usefully compared to other theories, not only within the Islamic tradition but also in theories of the self found in other religions or even contemporary scientific theories. As of yet, Ibn Taymiyya’s work has not been studied through the lens of Cognitive Science of Religion (CSR). Ibn Taymiyya is an ideal candidate for applying CSR research to Islamic thought in order to reach broader insights about theories of human nature within the Islamic scholarly tradition. CSR findings are relevant to Ibn Taymiyya’s work specifically because Ibn Taymiyya claims that certain human emotions, intuitions, and behaviors are inborn and universal. By applying CSR, we can conclude that some aspects of Ibn Taymiyya’s theological perspective are grounded in deeper and more universal features of human cognition that are not specific to the particularities of his biases, his milieu, political pressures of his time, etc.

Al-Walā’ wal-Barā’ (Allegiance and Disassociation) explains the essence of the Muslim’s relationship with the ‘Other’ in socio-political terms. However, the concept has been marred with controversies and misunderstandings emanating from Muslim jihadists and Islamophobes. While jihadists interpret Al-Walā’ wal-Barā’as a basis for attacking non-Muslims, Islamophobes exploit jihadists’ narrow definition to project Islam as a violent religion. In essence, al-Walā’ wal-Barā’ reinforces the true spirit of Islam defined in both the Qurʾānic and Prophetic traditions. While the current study conceptualises it from an Islamic perspective, its aims are twofold. First, it examines the concept of al-Walāʾ and al-Barāʾ; its interpretation, and how it was semantically convoluted from its inception to the present day. Second, it argues how misunderstanding the concept can fuel both Islamophobia and militancy. The article further argues that the rules or codes of exclusion will continue to exist, but the form of execution has to concord at least minimally with the fundamental tenets of human rights and international relations.

This paper addresses the longstanding tension between reason and revelation in Islamic religious epistemology, with a focus on the thought of Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728/1328). It aims to reassess his critique of philosophical theology (falsafa and kalām) and explore his constructive alternative to rationalist metaphysics. The study adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology, combining close textual reading of Darʾ Taʿāruḍ al-ʿAql wa al-Naql and Naqd al-Manṭiq with conceptual analysis informed by contemporary religious epistemology and philosophy of religion. The findings reveal that Ibn Taymiyyah advances a triadic epistemological model centered on revelation (naql), reason (ʿaql), and innate disposition (fiṭrah). He refutes the autonomy of reason, redefines logic as a tool rather than a judge, and repositions fiṭrah as an intuitive foundation for belief. His approach emphasizes the harmony of sound reason with authentic revelation and challenges the epistemic assumptions of speculative theology. By presenting a comparative table of rationalist and Taymiyyan epistemologies, the study demonstrates how Ibn Taymiyyah’s framework anticipates key themes in Reformed Epistemology and the cognitive science of religion. The conclusions suggest that his vision offers a coherent, theocentric paradigm for religious knowledge that is highly relevant to the contemporary philosophy of religion and Islamic theology.

Sufism has generated from the ancient time a very staunch polemics among Muslim scholars. The controversy over sufism has attracted various comments and remarks over the unique and peculiar tenets of sufis. Among the Muslim scholars who have contributed to the discourse were al-Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah. This research aims to compare the views of these two scholars. Library research with analytic and comparative methodology was adopted. Findings show that both scholars are credited to have reformed some popular and conventional doctrines of the Sufis of their respective times. In addition, al-Ghazali and Ibn Taymiyyah agreed that some innovations and perversions have found their way into sufism. A major phenomenon in the views of the two scholars on sufism is that while al-Ghazali was to a very large extent influenced by some sufi superstitions, Ibn Taymiyyah strongly subjects sufism to the literal provisions of the Quran and Sunnah. It is the conclusion of this paper that while it is accurate to ascribe al-Ghazali to sufism, it is inaccurate to regard Ibn Taymiyyah as one despite some of his sympathetic views on some sufis.

The current sectarian conflicts in the Middle East did not arise solely from renewed geopolitical rivalries between regional powers. They are also rooted in a solid, theological articulation proposed by classic Islamic political theology. The exclusivist approach, which is a decisive part of the political, social and religious reality of today's Middle East, benefits from a formidable theological legacy. Coining the notion of 'othering theology', this paper not only explores the ideas of leading classical theologians who have articulated a puritanical understanding of faith, but also explicates the politico-historical context in which these theologians rationalised their quarrels. Given the pervasive presence of these theologies in the contemporary sectarian polemics, the study of classical othering theology is highly relevant and, indeed, crucial to any attempt to overcome sectarianism in the region.

From the cleric-led Iranian revolution to the rise of the Taliban in Afghanistan, many people have been surprised by what they see as the modern reemergence of an antimodern phenomenon. This book helps account for the increasingly visible public role of traditionally educated Muslim religious scholars (the `ulama) across contemporary Muslim societies. Muhammad Qasim Zaman describes the transformations the centuries-old culture and tradition of the `ulama have undergone in the modern era--transformations that underlie the new religious and political activism of these scholars. In doing so, it provides a new foundation for the comparative study of Islam, politics, and religious change in the contemporary world. While focusing primarily on Pakistan, Zaman takes a broad approach that considers the Taliban and the `ulama of Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, India, and the southern Philippines. He shows how their religious and political discourses have evolved in often unexpected but mutually reinforcing ways to redefine and enlarge the roles the `ulama play in society. Their discourses are informed by a longstanding religious tradition, of which they see themselves as the custodians. But these discourses are equally shaped by--and contribute in significant ways to--contemporary debates in the Muslim public sphere. This book offers the first sustained comparative perspective on the `ulama and their increasingly crucial religious and political activism. It shows how issues of religious authority are debated in contemporary Islam, how Islamic law and tradition are continuously negotiated in a rapidly changing world, and how the `ulama both react to and shape larger Islamic social trends. Introducing previously unexamined facets of religious and political thought in modern Islam, it clarifies the complex processes of religious change unfolding in the contemporary Muslim world and goes a long way toward explaining their vast social and political ramifications.

This article aims to study Sufism (taṣawwuf) and inspiration (ilhâm), which is the main means of the mystical knowledge, in the thought of Ibn Taymiyya who is known generally as an exponent of a tradition grounded on the understanding of Salaf. He is considered by majority to be a rigid opponent of Sufism because of his unconventional interpretations of Sufi terminology. Also, since Ibn Taymiyya constantly offers the Qur'ān, ḥadīth, and the opinions of Salaf as the base of religious knowledge, the idea that he does not lean toward inspirational and rational knowledge and he does not give a place for them in his epistemology came out and has grown in the course of time. As a result of our research, however, we realize Ibn Taymiyya admits the epistemological value of inspiration along with Sufism conditionally. While he divides Sufism into Early and Later periods, he examines inspiration in the context of knowledge (bâb al-?ilm) which is considered to be a subcategory of supernatural events. Ibn Taymiyya, who believes that inspirational knowledge must be tested by means of the Qur'ān, Sunna, and the opinions of Salaf, without rejecting its reality, assesses the subject matter in detail through his own criteria. Therefore, this article, in which the subject is elaborated critically and descriptively, focuses on the approach of Ibn Taymiyya to Sufism and inspiration that is the basic element of Sufi knowledge.

The purpose of this study is to examine Ibn Taymiyya's criticism of Aristotelian logic, and to test the arguments he raises against it, as well as the theory he proposes as an alternative. Ibn Taymiyya tries to prove that Aristotelian logic cannot contribute to knowledge because it is based on metaphysical foundations. He raises arguments that are intended to expose the contradictions of Aristotelian logic. These arguments are based partly on the principles of relativity and skepticism, and partly on empirical presuppositions. Ibn Taymiyya proposed the use of analogical reasoning (qiyās al-tamthīl) which is a type of evaluation and measurement based on the comparison between particulars, or the relations between two similar or dissimilar things. It can be seen that the most important and decisive thing in this relation is the common attribute that links two particular occurrences. Therefore, this inference deals with the relations between things and the causal connections between them. This is expressed in the research method used in the Islamic juridical sciences, which are causal methods, such as: the coextensiveness and coexclusiveness (ṭard wa-῾aks), coextensiveness-cum-coexclusiveness (dawarān), and classification and successive elimination (al-sabr wa l-taqsīm).