I'm your man.
Does anybody want to learn Fiqh, Hadith, Seerah, Islamic Philosophy?
- Thread starter The Ash'ari
- Start date
- Status
Q. What Orthodox positions with regard to epistemology exist?
Mostly sparked by debates regarding evolution, I have become curious what epistemological positions exist in orthodox schools of the major Islamic sects.
I understand the doctrinal priority of Quran and Sunnah, so from an Islamic point of view they take precedence over scientific ideas in case they clash.
My question is with regard to which specific methods are used to arrive at the conclusion that the central texts are divinely revealed. Usually talks about this are filled with words like "logical", "rational", or other terms of a similar nature. What I never saw is a description of what constitutes logical or rational methods, how they are derived, how they lead to acceptance of what Islam considers revelation, and how they disqualify the validity of other methods in case of conflicting results. Also, how do those same methods applied to the claims of other religions lead to rejection of those claims while leading to acceptance of an Islamic position?
I am interested in the epistemological methods that the orthodox schools of theology use to arrive at the conclusion that Quran and Sunnah are revelation, which seem to me to be necessarily a priori to the revealed texts, or in other words: they cannot come from commandments within the texts.
Mostly sparked by debates regarding evolution, I have become curious what epistemological positions exist in orthodox schools of the major Islamic sects.
I understand the doctrinal priority of Quran and Sunnah, so from an Islamic point of view they take precedence over scientific ideas in case they clash.
My question is with regard to which specific methods are used to arrive at the conclusion that the central texts are divinely revealed. Usually talks about this are filled with words like "logical", "rational", or other terms of a similar nature. What I never saw is a description of what constitutes logical or rational methods, how they are derived, how they lead to acceptance of what Islam considers revelation, and how they disqualify the validity of other methods in case of conflicting results. Also, how do those same methods applied to the claims of other religions lead to rejection of those claims while leading to acceptance of an Islamic position?
I am interested in the epistemological methods that the orthodox schools of theology use to arrive at the conclusion that Quran and Sunnah are revelation, which seem to me to be necessarily a priori to the revealed texts, or in other words: they cannot come from commandments within the texts.
I will primarily give you the opinions of the Ash'ari School.
Key points:
1. Is it probable for Revelation to come from a Deity? Yes or no. If so, how can it be determined? What is the job of the Rationalist?
2. How does this method disqualify other methods with different results
3. Different religions
1. To answer this question, we must already have established the fact that a Deity exists. As Al Ghazali himself mentions in his book al Mustasfa, Ill translate it myself, I have the original Arabic:
والمتكلم هو الذي ينظر في أعم الأشياء وهو الموجود ، فيقسم الموجود أولا إلى قديم حادث
"The rationalist is the one who observes the most pressing point: Existence. As for Existence, we divide it into two main segments: Ancient (the Creator) and the Contemporary (the Creation)."
Continuing on the sequence:
ثم ينظر في القديم فيبين أنه لا يتكثر ولا ينقسم انقسام الحوادث ، بل لا بد أن يكون واحدا وأن يكون متميزا عن الحوادث بأوصاف تجب له وبأمور تستحيل عليه وأحكام تجوز في حقه ولا تجب ولا تستحيل
"Then we observe the Ancient, and it becomes clear that it doesn't partition like the Contemporary. Rather, it has to be a single Entity, Distinct from the Contemporaries, possessing distinct descriptions which is a Must, and others which does not befit, and other issues that is probable for this Entity that incorporates neither obligation nor impossibility."
Revelation falls under probability.
A clearer example yet:
ثم يبين أن أصل الفعل جائز عليه ، وأن العالم فعله الجائز ، وأنه لجوازه افتقر إلى محدث ، وأن بعثة الرسل من أفعاله الجائزة ، وأنه قادر عليه وعلى تعريف صدقهم بالمعجزات ، وأن هذا الجائز واقع
"Then it becomes clear that the essence of an Action is probable for this Entity and the (creation of the) Earth is from this category, this probability requires a Creation. The sending of Messengers is from this category."
He then goes onto the crux, after establishing all the prior points:
بل العقل يدل على صدق النبي
"Rationality leads to verification of Prophethood."
[Me: Does rationality have to encompass everything or a part of something? And does this part of something suffice? According to our theologians, no to the former and yes to the latter. If there exists a basis or a foundation, full comprehension doesnt need to be extended to all aspects, provided that the basis is authentic.]
To continue:
ويعترف بأنه يتلقى من النبي بالقبول ما يقوله في الله واليوم الآخر مما يستقل العقل بدركه ولا يقضي أيضا باستحالته
"Then (after this) logic dictates verifying the claim of a Prophet in what he says about the Deity from among the affairs that logic/rationality in itself cannot fully grasp nor deny outright."
[Me; The argument here is, if logic cannot fully affirm, it cannot fully deny either with the exact same probability.]
Continuing:
ويقضي بوجوب صدق من دلت المعجزة على صدقه ، فإذا أخبر عنه صدق العقل به بهذه الطريق فهذا ما يحويه علم الكلام
"It then becomes an act of obligation to verify the truthfulness, after sufficient evidence that points to it, after in which the logic confirms it. This is the essence of the Knowledge of the Rationalists."
[Me: Everything that comes after this point is a direct study of the revelations, because through this sequence we have realised that revelation is probable and rationality coincides with it. This is where the Rationalist stops. The next step is a direct study and analysis of the 'revelation' itself. This is the point in which different views can be qualified or disqualified. The first key point is an area of consensus amongst all theists.]
2 &3:
This can only be determined through studying the claim itself.
Ref: Al Mustasfaa fee 'Ilm al Usool (Al Ghazali).
Just wanted to know how did you acquire these knowledge, also did you study under a sheikh or
did you self study.
did you self study.
I traveled across Africa.
And took hold of a possession of books given by my mentors, students and teachers. I have a library
Sheesh, it was a joke.
As for the Somali women. I meant everything I said.
Do not derail this topic, please.
Prince of Lasanod
Eid trim pending
Unfortunately, knowledge doesn't benefit some people. Some even use their knowledge for evil. The previous Mufti of Egypt made fatawa that drinking khamri & eating pork is halal in the West. He also forced a women to take off her niqab.
I don't know what the joke was, but I've seen you do it multiple posts
I joke around a lot. None of you know me in real life. So don't take things so seriously.
Just take it easy. Everything is fine.
Just take it easy. Everything is fine.
the red hat guys lemme guess? egypt seems to be home to strange fatwas
Are you talking about Mufti Ali Jumuah? He is a knowledgeable scholar. Although, I have my own qualms about him. But do not be quick to judge.
I have a book called:
الجواهر النقية في فقه السادة الشافعية
The Mufti of Egypt wrote the introduction. Its a classic. I kissed it. It was so beautiful
Prince of Lasanod
Eid trim pending
So you have your true character online and show a false persona in real life? It doesn't matter because Allah is watching you in both scenarios ultimately.
Leave Ali Jumuah alone.
Have you watched his commentary on the book:
النظم الزبد في فقه الشافعي
It's a classic.
Have you watched his commentary on the book:
النظم الزبد في فقه الشافعي
It's a classic.
I haven't memorised Alfiyyah, but I've studied it for a period of over two years.
Layth, if you like Sarf, this is a good book written by a Somali Shaykh from the 18th/19th century.
It's a new publication
It's called:
فتح اللطيف شرح حديقة التصريف
It's a new publication
It's called:
فتح اللطيف شرح حديقة التصريف
I prefer to stick to traditional books sxb: binaa al-af3aal, al-masood, laamiyat al-af3aal, etc. with their shuruuh.Layth, if you like Sarf, this is a good book written by a Somali Shaykh from the 18th/19th century.
Nothing beats the modus operandi of the traditional ulamaa.
How far did you get on fiqh (name a well-known matn on the Shafi'i madhab as a benchmark)?
I've finished:
منهاج الطالبين وعمدة المفتين
By An Nawawi.
Now I'm focusing my efforts outside the traditional curriculum, I'm now reading:
الوسيط في المذهب
By Al Ghazali. The new 9 volume book, printed not too long ago.
- Status
Trending
-
Oromo nationalist got a hold of all the simping you niggas were doing- Started by Laiis
- Replies: 222
-
-
