Prophethood (nubuwwah) is a divine institution that teaches the healthy progression of relations between Allah and humans, as well as between humans and the universe. However, from another perspective, it is also considered a human institution. Some opponents of religion, lacking strong evidence to challenge the existence of Allah, direct their objections towards prophethood, which is seen as a manifestation of Allah’s attribute of speech (kalām). To counter the rejection of prophethood, scholars of theology (kalām), hadith, and Prophetic biography (sīrah) (...) have compiled a body of literature known as Dalāʾil al-nubuwwah (Proofs of Prophethood). Their aim has been to collect proofs supporting prophethood as a response to these refutations and to dispel doubts regarding it. All extraordinary events occurring from before the birth until the death of Prophet Muhammad are considered evidence.During the fifth century, a notable figure in this tradition was the Shāfiʿī scholar al-Māwardī, who defended prophethood in his book Aʿlām al-nubuwwah (The Signs of Prophethood). Aʿlām al-nubuwwah has inspired subsequent works in this field due to its clarity and robust proofs. It became known by both names, Aʿlām al-nubuwwah and Dalāʾil al-nubuwwah, as it encompassed methods of narration and debate. Within his work, al-Māwardī mentions figures like Barāhimah, Dahriyyah, and certain philosophers as representatives of the idea rejecting prophethood. According to him, Barāhimah, of Indian origin is a sect that denies prophethood despite accepting the unity of Allah. Dahriyyah is a denialist sect attributing eternity to the universe and creativity to nature. Al-Māwardī considers these philosophers as infidels due to their comments on prophethood rather than outright denial. The basis of these movements' idea of denying prophethood lies in their efforts to portray reason (ʿaql) as an alternative to revelation (waḥy). Jews and Christians, on the other hand, are portrayed as groups that accept the concept of prophethood, however they reject Muḥammad’s. prophecy. Their objection stems from the fear of their religions being superseded. Al-Māwardī counters those rejecting prophethood by addressing the public interest (maṣlaḥah) of humans, the necessity of prophets, and the role of miracles. He illustrates that prophet charged with the duty of prophethood proves it through spectacular events orchestrated by Allah but carried out through his own hand. The prophet serves the public interest by conveying matters beyond human intellect and presenting them in a comprehensible manner, thereby ensuring the worldly and eternal felicity of humanity. Furthermore, he provides evidence for the Prophet Muḥammad’s prophethood through his moral character, prophetic biography, and accounts of miracles. The biography of Prophet Muhammad’s begins before his birth, and the method of proof is used to demonstrate his prophethood. In essence, al-Māwardī’s method of proving prophethood in Aʿlām al-nubuwwah can be seen as a synthesis of the approaches used by scholars of theology and hadith. One prominent figure in this tradition during the fifth century was the Shafi'i scholar al-Māwardī who defended prophethood through his book " ʿA'lām al-Nubuwwa" (The Signs of Prophethood). In his work, al-Māwardī mentions figures like Barahima, Dahriyya, and certain philosophers as representatives of the idea rejecting prophethood. While the Jews and Christians accept the concept of prophethood, they reject the prophecy of Muhammad (P.B.U.H). These groups attempt to present logic as an alternative to divine revelation (Wahy), as their objection stems from their concern that their religions may be abrogated. Al-Māwardī responds to those who reject the institution of prophethood by addressing the public interest (maslaha) of humans, the necessity of prophets, and the role of miracles. He also provides evidence for Muhammad's (P.B.U.H) prophethood through his moral character, prophetic biography, and accounts of miracles. In short, al-Māwardī's method of proving prophethood in "A'lām al-Nubuwwa " can be seen as a synthesis of the approaches used by scholars of theology (Kalam) and hadith. (shrink)

Ontolojinin tam ortasında bağlantı, aşkınlaşma ve geçişlilik sorunu tarafından kat edilen bir parça-bütün bilmecesi durmaktadır. Materyalizm, onun geleneksel formu olan determinizm ve ortaya çıkış (emergence) şeylerin aynı anda içsel ve dışsal varoluşlarını ve birbirleriyle etkileşimlerini, yani varoluşun sürekliliğini ifade etmeyi başaramayarak ontolojiyi metafizik bir boşlukla baş başa bırakmışlardır. Halbuki mevcudat, güzellik temelinde anlaşıldığı an, varoluşun kaleydoskopik sürekliliği birden kendini görünür kılar. Güzellik, aşkınlaşmayı ve zihinselliği mevcudatın zati niteliği kılarak tüm eşyayı güzellik temelinde ve yönelimiyle inşa olan kesintisiz bir estetik akışı (...) olarak yeniden kurgularken ontoloji ve estetik birbirlerinin ayna görüntüsü oluverir: “Güzellik onları komşu parçalarla olan ilişkilerinden çekip almaksızın parçaların diğer bütünler için görülebilir ve erişilebilir olmalarına izin verir.” İşte Lars Spuybroek, başta Platon, Kant ve Burke olmak üzere Alfred North Whitehead, Charles Hartshorne ve William Hogarth gibi isimleri birlikte okuyarak Heidegger’in dört katmanlı statik Varlığına alternatif, mevcudat arenasının estetik sürekliliğini gözler önüne seren kendi diyagramını ortaya koyuyor. (shrink)

Klasik fizik anlayışını değiştiren kuantum kuramı, bilimsel sahada ilk defa ortaya çıkan indeterminizm olması bakımından felsefe ve teoloji alanlarında da büyük etkiler meydana getirmiştir. Evrene yönelik yeni bir bakış açısı sunan bu kuram, tarihte çığır açarak yepyeni bir dönemi başlatmıştır. Devrim niteliğindeki kuantum kuramı, yirminci yüzyılın en önemli entelektüel başarılarındandır. Atom ve atom altı sistemleri inceleyen kuantum kuramı Max Planck’in kuantum hipoteziyle başlamış, kuramın temel prensipleri yine onun tarafından ortaya konulmuştur. Kuantum kuramı; hiçbir kesinliğin olmadığı, nesnelerin ölçüm yapılıncaya kadar hiçbir (...) özelliğinin bulunmadığı sıradışı bir dünyayı betimlemektedir. Kuantum dünyası; parçacıkların uzayda sürekli şekilde bir var olup bir yok olduğu, bir nesnenin aynı anda evrenin her yerinde bulunabildiği ve bir duvarın içinden rahatlıkla geçebildiği, iki cismin galaksiler arası uzaklıkta bile ışık hızından çok daha hızlı ve anlık bir iletişim hâlinde olabildiği tuhaflıklarla doludur. Bütün bunlar tamamen bilimsel olup gerçek sonuçları ve uygulamaları hem mikrodünyada hem de makro dünyada mevcuttur. Kuantum yasaları hiçbir yasanın edilmediği kadar test edilmiş ve bunlardan istisnasız geçmiştir. İslam düşüncesinde önemli bir yeri olan Gazzâlî, mûcizeyi nedensellik bağlamında tartışmıştır. Mûcizeyi âdetullah teorisi üzerine temellendirerek zorunlu nedenselliği reddetmiştir. Ona göre varlıklar özsel niteliklere sahip değildir, onları da aralarındaki ilişkileri de yaratan hakîkî fail olan Allah’tır. Dolayısıyla onların aralarında gerçekleşen neden-sonuç ilişkisi zorunlu değildir. Bu ilişkideki kuralları koyan da değiştirebilecek olan da Allah’tır. Neden-sonuç ilişkisindeki genel kurallar âdetullah, kurallardaki istisnâî değişiklikler ise mûcizelerdir. Gündelik yaşamdaki genel geçer kurallar (âdetullah) işlemekte olup bilim vs. bu kurallara göre yapılır. Mûcizenin gerçekleşmesi ise düşük bir ihtimal olarak her zaman vardır. Gazzâlî’nin, zorunlu nedenselliğin geçersizliğini ispat bağlamında getirdiği ateşin pamuğu yakması örneğinde ateş ile yanma arasında zorunlu bir ilişki yoktur. Başka bir deyişle ateşin özsel bir yakma özelliği bulunmamaktadır. Ona göre bunların kaynağı tamamen Allah’tır ve esasen âdetullah dışında -zıtların bir arada bulunması gibi muhaller hariç- her türlü ihtimal mevcuttur. Gazzâlî’nin bu görüşleri, günümüz kuantum kuramının neden-sonuç ilişkisine dair verileriyle uyum içindedir. Kuantum kuramına göre de maddenin en küçük yapı birimi olan temel parçacıkların farklı özsel nitelikleri bulunmamaktadır. Onların dünyasında dolayısıyla tüm evrende belirsizlik hakimdir. Her parçacık her an evrenin her yerindedir. Bu belirsizlikler ancak gözlemci etkisiyle/ölçümle belirlenir, böylece varlıklar ve olaylar oluşur. Bu oluşta her türlü ihtimal mevcutken gözlemci etkisi/ölçüm, bunu tek ihtimale düşürür. Kuantum kuramına göre gündelik yaşantıdaki yani makro âlemdeki alışılagelen klasik fizik kurallarının işleme sebebi, olasılıklarının çok yüksek olmasıdır. Fakat çok düşük ihtimalle de olsa sıra dışı ya da tabiat dışı olayların meydana gelmesi mümkündür. Bu ise mûcizelerin imkanını göstermektedir. (shrink)

: Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf al-Sanūsī, who was one of the theologian of later Muslim Asʿharī theologians, is one of the scholar came to the fore in Maghrib. Although al-Sanūsī shapes his thoughts within the Asʿharī’s kalam system, he presents new contributions to this system with his own unique perspective. In particular, his effort to give importance to reason in maʿrifat Allāh is remarkable. According to him, maʿrifat Allāh can only be reached with reflection. Also the reflection is waʿẓ or contexture (...) process done in the reason. When a method is followed, such an reflection leads to the maʿrifatullāh. In particular, the ruling wisdom adds a form to the functioning of the reason through its perceived and compassionate perceptions. For a believer to know the necessary, the permissible and the impossible is to use the reason. In this context al-Sanūsī imposes a central role in the concept of judgment. If the human can operates its reason in this way, necessarily will comprehend that he/she is created. In the process of acquiring the knowledge, al-Sanūsī draws attention to the heart as much as the reason and that shows that he is in the effort of combining these two. Summary: Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf al-Sanūsī is a scholar raised at the Maghreb geography. Although al-Sanūsī, living in the 9th/15th century, gave a lot of work in different fields, his theologian identity became front-line. By standing against the innovation that he had seen during his era, he wrote many beliefs works. Among these works, the relation of maʿrifat Allāh-reason attracts attention. al-Sanūsī thinks that the most important means of delivering to maʿrifat Allāh is deduciton. According to him, the deduction is “to reveal the known to reach the desired thing or to arrange two or more works”. If we evaluate this definition in terms of Asʿharī tradition, we will see that al-Sanūsī is in the effort to emending the definition of his al-Qāḍī al-Bayḍāwī’s definition who is his contemporary. al-Bayḍāwī described deduction as ‘to organize things that are not known to be known’. al-Sanūsī made a contribution to this recognition. He has adopted the arrange part completely and also add the waʿẓ expression into that. The reason why al-Sanūsī goes to such a separation is the reason for trying to explain the functioning of the reason in a logical form. In the logical sense, the thought consists of envision and confirmation. From these concepts that constitute thought, envision refers to waʿẓ, and confirmation refers to arrange. If the definition of al-Bayḍāwī is accepted as valid, the envision in reason is incomplete. This shows the importance that al-Sanūsī gives to the functioning of the reason in terms of the achievement of the maʿrifat Allāh. The confirmation made without envision can lead a person to imitation. Therefore, the deduction made by waʿẓ must be taken into account. It can be imagined groundlessly that in the definition of deduciton which al-Sanūsī made, he had an understanding of reason that doesn’t base on Allah. However, al-Sanūsī has never broken the Asʿharī tradition in this matter. According to al-Sanūsī, both the deduction and the knowledge formed as a result of this, is Allah’s creation without means. There is no influence of deduction on knowledge and also the knowledge on deduction. Also, the human has no influence neither in inference nor knowledge. It seems to be contradictory to the definition of such a discourse. However, he made his interpretations within the framework of the understanding of the omnipotence that the Asʿharites had drawn. It is unthinkable that Allah, who created everything and even man’s actions, can’t be imagine that doesn’t create thought. Intellect produces knowledge, but Allah creates both intellect and the knowledge produced by intellect. al-Sanūsī, while describing deduction, said that it could be produced with waʿẓ in the sense of envision. However, there is another very important concept that creates a conception from his point of view, which is “judgment”. According to him, judgment is “the proof or negation of something”. The phrases “the universe is created” or “Allah is not created” are the examples of a proof or negation of an issue. See, this is a judgment. In this sense, envision is a road to judgment. That is, the information obtained by envision reaches a judgment in the forms of the reason. al-Sanūsī classify the judgment in to three: lawful, ordinary, intellectual. The lawful judgment is the salutation of Allah with the demand related to the actions of the amenable, not being good deed or sin or waʿẓ. Ordinary judgment is the link between the existence or absence of a state and the existence or absence of another state. The most important of these three judgments is the intellectual judgment. As for the intellectual judgment, it is the proof or the negation of a work without waʿẓ and repetition. It is separated from lawful judgment without being waʿẓ and separated from ordinary judgment with being not repeated. In this sense, if the mind needs the examination or repetition while deciding for a work’s certainty or negation, this kind of a judgment is not lawful or ordinary but it is intellectual judgment. The reason judges either a work’s certainty or absence together, or accepts only the certainty or accepts the negation. According to al-Sanūsī, having the right to comment on belief is pertain to intellectual judgment in the first place. al-Sanūsī takes the maʿrifat Allāh to the center in matters related to the place of reason and examines the relation of the maʿrifat Allāh with these three concepts. What al-Sanūsī tends in doing so is that to show that there is an inherent meaning of reason as well as having relevance of knowing some things. As a result, according to al-Sanūsī, knowing these three parts of the intellectual judgment is the reason itself. Anybody who does not know these, is the person without reason. al-Sanūsī thinks that it is necessary for the amenable to know the intellectual judgments and its parts. This necessity is to make the amenable separate the things about Allah or his prophets related to necessity, permissible and impossible attributes; but also, the things exist within the limits of intellectual judgment or not. The amenable who know these has evidence and thereby can defeat the doubts that may have formed or may will form in him. al-Sanūsī also emphasizes the deduction of reason to reach the maʿrifat Allāh with reason. According to him, it is the best deduction method in terms of the evidence that Allah exists is that the deduction from causing agent to cause and the deduction from one correlative to another The acceptance of the possible entity has agent who wills its existence, oppose to the Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, that this proposition is whether imperative or not. According to him, these propositions are not imperative, they need deduction. In this respect, deduction is necessary for the maʿrifat Allāh. The reason which is considered in the sense of logic in al-Sanūsī is not a structure which merely functions as a analogy and a deduction. On the contrary, according to al-Sanūsī, there is a direction going towards the heart from the point of reason and it seems that the heart is used in meaning of reason. This is an example of al-Sanūsī’s attempt to combine mystical knowledge with reason and legal injunction. This is a remediation project in terms of his time. (shrink)