INSTRUCCIONES PARA CUMPLIMENTAR LA FICHA P202

Classical period of KalClassical period of Kal

Classical period of Kal┐┐┐┐mmmm

Fazlur Rahman's studies on the history of

kal┐m

attempted to ascertain the underlying theological and moral doctrines that influenced the temper and trajectory of the Community.121 _{Fazlur Rahman analysis yielded that the doctrines of: (1) Islam and Iman (2)} Qadar (3) Human freedom and Accountability; were the most significant in shaping the ‘historical trajectory of the Community’. These doctrines had implications in the realms of: (1) politics (2) law and (3) suf┘sm (4) ╓ad┘th. Politically, the doctrine of

I’rj┐

was borne forth from the practical attitude towards belief (

iman

) and non-belief (

kufr

). Legally, the doctrine of qadar influenced the doctrine of reason (‘

aql

) and revelation (

naql

). In the realm of Suf┘sm, the doctrine of human freedom and accountability influenced the Qur’┐nic world-view. Finally, the Community's attempts at achieving the value of social cohesion forced them to formulate

kal┐m

content through the principle of

Ijtih┐d

and

I’jm┐‘

or ‘living Sunnah’. He accepted Ibn Taym┘ya’s evaluation of

kal┐m

that the

kal┐m al-mu╒dath – neo-kal┐m

or innovated

kal┐m

, was a departure and deviation from the Community's

kal┐m

.122

The social cohesion and unity of the Community was opposed by the schisms (

firaq

) that developed in the Caliphates of ‘Uthman and ‘Al┘. The groups that initiated a split in the unity of the community in the political realm are the Khawarij and Sh┘‘a. Ya╒ya ╓uwa┘d┘ considers that the emergence of

kal┐m

began with the problem of political leadership after the death of the Prophet (

Imama

and

Khilafa

) between the Khawarij and Sh┘‘a and the doctrine of Islam and Iman subsequently followed and are interrelated. He contends that the political debate between the two rival sects is interrelated and connected to the doctrine of ‘Islam and Iman’.

He claims that it was not only a theological issue but was more of political in nature. He argues that since the Khawarij would declare the Sh┘‘a disbelievers (

kuffar

) and vice versa, and thereby ineligible for political leadership of Muslims, the first theological discourse (

kal┐m

) emerged i.e. what is Iman and Islam? The result of this dialectic (

jadal

) resulted in determining the relationship between faith (

┘man

) and deeds (

‘aml

) He concludes that despite the political nature of this theological issue both the Khawarij and Shia considered deeds (

‘aml

) to be a part of faith (

┘man

).123

Fazlur Rahman contends that the doctrine of ‘

Islam

and

Iman

’ and its relationship between ‘

Iman

and

‘Aml

, resulted in the practical attitude of political pacifism (

Irja

). He agrees with Goldziher’s view that the community became pacifists (Murji) practically and under the political influence of Abdul Malik b. Marwan the doctrine of

Irja

was formulated.124 _{Hasan al-} Sh┐f‘┘ argues that there is no definitive evidence that the community became Murj‘i by supporting and protecting Umayyad rule.125 _{Fazlur Rahman contends that al-Shaf‘┘ reacted in} formulating his doctrine of ╓ad┘th which he considers to be uncreative, static and literal. He concludes that the combined effect on the community's

kal┐m

content – theological ╓ad┘th, was a product of the community's deviation from the Qur’┐n and the ‘prophetic Sunnah’ and their inability to correctly formulate the ‘living Sunnah’ of the Prophet.

The Sh┘‘a and Murj┘’a were brought into conflict over the doctrine of qadar. Fazlur Rahman argues that the link between the doctrine of Qadar and the doctrine of ‘Islam and faith (iman)’ is the doctrine of ‘faith and works’. In the same vein, the doctrine of ‘human freedom

123 _{Ya╒ya ╓uwa┘d┘, Dar┐s┐t f┘ ‘ilm ul-Kal┐m wa al-Falsafat ul-Islam┘ya, Dar ul-Thaq┐fa, Cairo, 1979, pp.95-7} 124 _{Ignaz Goldziher, Introduction to Islamic Theology and Law, trans. Andras & Ruth Hamori, co-ed., Charles} Issawi and Berhard Lewis, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1981, p.76

125 _{╓asan al-Shaf‘┘, Madkhal ila darasat ‘ilm ul-Kal┐m, p.54, See Ali Sam┘ al-Nashshar, Nash’at al-Fikr al-Islam┘,} vol.1, p.245

and Divine Omnipotence’ logically was affected by the doctrine of ‘faith and works’ and this brought about a significant development of a new schism, the Mu‘tazila. The action-reaction or interaction between the Mu‘tazila and the community bore forth

kal┐m

as theology proper. The community at this stage refused to base theological doctrines on the basis of reason at all, whereas the Mu‘tazila refused to accept the

content

of tradition (

╒ad┘th

) not tradition as a

source.

Fazlur Rahman considers that the early schools of dialectical theology (

kal┐m

) emerged in the 2nd _{century Hijri through the action of foreign ideas – particularly Greco-Christian – on} certain fundamental moral issues raised within the Islamic community. Abu Rayyan also considers that foreign cultural attacks (

ghazw al-Thaq┐f┘ al-Ajnab┘

) were factor that influenced the emergence of

kal┐m

.126 _{These moral issues clustered particularly around the problems of} the freedom of the human will, God's omnipotence and justice, and God's relationship to the world. Fazlur Rahman considered that there were two theological schools: (1) Mu‘tazila (2) Orthodoxy (

Ahl ul Sunnah wal Jam┐‘ah

). Abu Rayyan states that another important factor that influenced the emergence of

kal┐m

which Fazlur Rahman does not highlight to be the ambigious verses (

ayat al-Mutash┐bih┐t

). Abu Rayyan argues that a significant proportion of

kal┐m

literature is dedicated to interpreting (

ta’w┘l

) of these Qur’┐nic verses.127

The Mu‘tazila school maintained the freedom of the will, insisting that right (

╒usn

) and wrong (

qub╒

) are knowable through reason independently but confirmed by revelation, and claimed that God's attributes are identical with his essence and that God cannot do what is

126 _{Muhammad Ali Abu Rayyan, Tar┘kh al-Fikr al-Islam┘, Dar ul-Marifat ul-Jam┘‘iya, (al-Azari═a: Egypt), 2000,} pp.221-22

unreasonable or unjust. However, the Mu‘tazilah posed and solved all these problems theologically, not philosophically; their entire thought was theo-centric. Their opponents, the orthodoxy, (

Ahl ul Sunnah wal Jam┐‘ah

), who came to constitute the orthodoxy, accused them of stark humanism and opposed them on all these major questions. The orthodoxy, after a long, hard struggle, completely routed the Mu‘tazila as a theological school, but the spark of the Mutazila kindled the purely rationalist movement in philosophic thought.128

Fazlur Rahman considered Al-Ash‘ar┘'s synthesis between reason and revelation as a deviation from the

élan

of the Qur’┐n. Al-Ash‘ar┘ establishing reason as the foundation of theology and rendering theology as the crown of the religious sciences turned Islam upside down viz., Shar┘‘ah is established on D┘n, not D┘n is established on Shar┘‘ah. Further, this developed a contradiction between the

élan

of the Qur’┐n, Qur’┐nic worldview and theology's connection to law. Ash‘ar┘sms influence upon the interpretation of the Qur’┐n which was one-sided entirely further became more intellectually sophisticated when it came into contact with philosophy129_.

In document A N E X O DOCUMENTACIÓN PARA LA ELABORACIÓN DE LOS PRESUPUESTOS GENERALES DEL ESTADO (página 36-42)