Muḥammad Karīm Khān Kirmānī (d. 1871) wrote Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah (Naṣīrean Epilogue), a concise treatise of a few pages, in 1865 (eighteenth of Rajab of 1273 hijri); thirteen years after the emergence of the Bābī movement and seven years after the execution of Sayyid ʿAlī Muḥammad Shīrāzī (d. 1850) in Tabriz. In this treatise, he expresses his loyalty to both the fourth Qajar monarch, Nāṣir al‐Dīn Shah (d. 1896) and Twelver Shīʿīsm. Furthermore, he expounds on the political inclination of Kirmānī Shaykhīsm as well as the suspicious affiliation of his school with the Bābīs, which was a matter of speculation for the court. Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah, which took its name from the Shah, should be treated as Kirmānī's political manifesto, reflecting his uncomfortable attitude toward the presence of foreigners in a Muslim country, which was resented by the monarch as well. Kirmānī not only takes sides with him, but also warns him of the harm of becoming too close to infidels, which may even result in the dominance of kuffār on Muslim territories.Kirmānī's outlook toward politics was largely shaped by the Bābī movement. As no hint of having any political philosophy is traceable in his writings prior to 1260 H/1852, and since Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah was written shortly after the suppression of the movement, one can come to the conclusion that the socio‐religious anxiety and the radical tone of Bābīsm made him adopt such a conservative approach, which seemed to be the only tenable way of representing his patriotism. Moreover, Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah, should be treated as the official response of the Shaykhī school to the messianic radicalism of Shīrāzī and his followers. Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah has a sister text, Nāṣirīyyah dar jihād (Naṣīrean in Jihād), which was finished in the same year, although it is lengthier and discusses Jihād, inter alia, in a more nuanced way. In some copies, Nāṣirīyyah is published with Khātamah as its epilogue.In this paper, I will read and analyze both Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah and Nāṣirīyyah dar jihād to investigate Kirmānī's stance on politics, religion and nationalism. Relevant to this are his arguments against any probable affiliation with Bābīsm. As a product of its time, Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah reflects the concerns of a jurist‐theologian who was able to foresee how the religious messianism and social radicalism of Bābīsm and similar movements, can bring considerable changes to state, society and faith.
{"title":"Political Philosophy of Shaykhīsm: Conservative Nationalism in the Time of Crisis","authors":"Leila Chamankhah","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12485","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12485","url":null,"abstract":"Muḥammad Karīm Khān Kirmānī (d. 1871) wrote Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah (Naṣīrean Epilogue), a concise treatise of a few pages, in 1865 (eighteenth of Rajab of 1273 hijri); thirteen years after the emergence of the Bābī movement and seven years after the execution of Sayyid ʿAlī Muḥammad Shīrāzī (d. 1850) in Tabriz. In this treatise, he expresses his loyalty to both the fourth Qajar monarch, Nāṣir al‐Dīn Shah (d. 1896) and Twelver Shīʿīsm. Furthermore, he expounds on the political inclination of Kirmānī Shaykhīsm as well as the suspicious affiliation of his school with the Bābīs, which was a matter of speculation for the court. Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah, which took its name from the Shah, should be treated as Kirmānī's political manifesto, reflecting his uncomfortable attitude toward the presence of foreigners in a Muslim country, which was resented by the monarch as well. Kirmānī not only takes sides with him, but also warns him of the harm of becoming too close to infidels, which may even result in the dominance of kuffār on Muslim territories.Kirmānī's outlook toward politics was largely shaped by the Bābī movement. As no hint of having any political philosophy is traceable in his writings prior to 1260 H/1852, and since Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah was written shortly after the suppression of the movement, one can come to the conclusion that the socio‐religious anxiety and the radical tone of Bābīsm made him adopt such a conservative approach, which seemed to be the only tenable way of representing his patriotism. Moreover, Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah, should be treated as the official response of the Shaykhī school to the messianic radicalism of Shīrāzī and his followers. Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah has a sister text, Nāṣirīyyah dar jihād (Naṣīrean in Jihād), which was finished in the same year, although it is lengthier and discusses Jihād, inter alia, in a more nuanced way. In some copies, Nāṣirīyyah is published with Khātamah as its epilogue.In this paper, I will read and analyze both Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah and Nāṣirīyyah dar jihād to investigate Kirmānī's stance on politics, religion and nationalism. Relevant to this are his arguments against any probable affiliation with Bābīsm. As a product of its time, Khātamayah nāṣirīyyah reflects the concerns of a jurist‐theologian who was able to foresee how the religious messianism and social radicalism of Bābīsm and similar movements, can bring considerable changes to state, society and faith.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"55 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140666002","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the most important developments in modern Islamic missionary activism was the establishment in 1972 of the Libya‐based World Islamic Call Society (WICS, originally the Islamic Call Society) which acted as a leading think tank advocating Muslim unity and Pan‐Arabism throughout the Qaddafi era. Despite the severe challenges facing post‐revolutionary Libya, WICS remains active today, albeit with reduced global visibility. This article demonstrates the ways that WICS's endeavors in publishing were innovative in the Northern African Arabic context, notably when it comes to the al‐Muṣḥaf al‐Jamāhīriyya (1983) and the various Qur'an translations it produced, and argues that its activities are a neglected yet critical aspect of modern Islamic missionary endeavors at the nexus of Pan‐Islamism and Pan‐Arabism. Through exploring WICS's historical background, the individual actors affiliated with it, and its primary publishing projects, the current study sheds light on an overlooked chapter in modern Islamic missionary activity. It also explores the contextual factors that have influenced the success of its Qur'an translations beyond issues of religious identity, offering new insights into the intersection of politics and religion that underlie many modern translations of the Qur'an.
{"title":"Qaddafi's Hidden History? The Libyan World Islamic Call Society's Editions and Translations of the Qur'an","authors":"Mykhaylo Yakubovych","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12484","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12484","url":null,"abstract":"One of the most important developments in modern Islamic missionary activism was the establishment in 1972 of the Libya‐based World Islamic Call Society (WICS, originally the Islamic Call Society) which acted as a leading think tank advocating Muslim unity and Pan‐Arabism throughout the Qaddafi era. Despite the severe challenges facing post‐revolutionary Libya, WICS remains active today, albeit with reduced global visibility. This article demonstrates the ways that WICS's endeavors in publishing were innovative in the Northern African Arabic context, notably when it comes to the al‐Muṣḥaf al‐Jamāhīriyya (1983) and the various Qur'an translations it produced, and argues that its activities are a neglected yet critical aspect of modern Islamic missionary endeavors at the nexus of Pan‐Islamism and Pan‐Arabism. Through exploring WICS's historical background, the individual actors affiliated with it, and its primary publishing projects, the current study sheds light on an overlooked chapter in modern Islamic missionary activity. It also explores the contextual factors that have influenced the success of its Qur'an translations beyond issues of religious identity, offering new insights into the intersection of politics and religion that underlie many modern translations of the Qur'an.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"127 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140709003","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although it is difficult to pinpoint an exact time as to when waḥdat al‐shuhūd (the unity of witnessing) or any other relevant idea originated, a number of scholars ascertain that it was Qāḍī ʿAḍud a‐Dīn Ījī (d. 756 or 760/1355 or 56), the prominent metaphysician, mutakallim, jurist, and the poet of the eighth century1, who should be regarded as the first one who used waḥdat al‐shuhūd. Ījī was also a contemporary of the famous Kubrawī Sufi, ʿAlāʾ u‐Dawla Simnānī (d. 736/1355), who believed in waḥdat al‐shuhūd and might have taken it from Ījī. Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī (d. 786‐87/1385), who brought Islam to Kashmir through Sufism, was an indirect student of Simnānī. He paid special attention to the ʿirfān of Ibn ʿArabī by writing a commentary on the latter's al‐Fuṣūṣ ul‐ḥikam, called Ḥall u‐fuṣūṣ, which played an important role in the further merging of the teachings of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar into Kubrawī Sufism. However, there exists a number of scholars who believe that Hamadānī's stance was somewhere in between waḥdat al‐wujūd and waḥdat al‐shuhūd.This paper is an attempt to locate Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī in Islamic Sufism by contextualizing him in the intellectual history of Sufism in Kashmir and beyond through focusing on his Ḥall ul‐fuṣūṣ to evaluate how he elaborated on the legacy of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar. Pertinent to this is the study of the terms wujūd and shuhūd in the teachings of Ibn ʿArabī to understand how Hamadānī understood and used them in his mysticism.
{"title":"Ḥall ul‐fuṣūṣ and its Main Tenets: A Reading into Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī's Commentary on Fuṣūṣ ul‐ḥikam","authors":"Leila Chamankhah","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12477","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12477","url":null,"abstract":"Although it is difficult to pinpoint an exact time as to when waḥdat al‐shuhūd (the unity of witnessing) or any other relevant idea originated, a number of scholars ascertain that it was Qāḍī ʿAḍud a‐Dīn Ījī (d. 756 or 760/1355 or 56), the prominent metaphysician, mutakallim, jurist, and the poet of the eighth century1, who should be regarded as the first one who used waḥdat al‐shuhūd. Ījī was also a contemporary of the famous Kubrawī Sufi, ʿAlāʾ u‐Dawla Simnānī (d. 736/1355), who believed in waḥdat al‐shuhūd and might have taken it from Ījī. Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī (d. 786‐87/1385), who brought Islam to Kashmir through Sufism, was an indirect student of Simnānī. He paid special attention to the ʿirfān of Ibn ʿArabī by writing a commentary on the latter's al‐Fuṣūṣ ul‐ḥikam, called Ḥall u‐fuṣūṣ, which played an important role in the further merging of the teachings of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar into Kubrawī Sufism. However, there exists a number of scholars who believe that Hamadānī's stance was somewhere in between waḥdat al‐wujūd and waḥdat al‐shuhūd.This paper is an attempt to locate Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī in Islamic Sufism by contextualizing him in the intellectual history of Sufism in Kashmir and beyond through focusing on his Ḥall ul‐fuṣūṣ to evaluate how he elaborated on the legacy of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar. Pertinent to this is the study of the terms wujūd and shuhūd in the teachings of Ibn ʿArabī to understand how Hamadānī understood and used them in his mysticism.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139808210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Although it is difficult to pinpoint an exact time as to when waḥdat al‐shuhūd (the unity of witnessing) or any other relevant idea originated, a number of scholars ascertain that it was Qāḍī ʿAḍud a‐Dīn Ījī (d. 756 or 760/1355 or 56), the prominent metaphysician, mutakallim, jurist, and the poet of the eighth century1, who should be regarded as the first one who used waḥdat al‐shuhūd. Ījī was also a contemporary of the famous Kubrawī Sufi, ʿAlāʾ u‐Dawla Simnānī (d. 736/1355), who believed in waḥdat al‐shuhūd and might have taken it from Ījī. Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī (d. 786‐87/1385), who brought Islam to Kashmir through Sufism, was an indirect student of Simnānī. He paid special attention to the ʿirfān of Ibn ʿArabī by writing a commentary on the latter's al‐Fuṣūṣ ul‐ḥikam, called Ḥall u‐fuṣūṣ, which played an important role in the further merging of the teachings of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar into Kubrawī Sufism. However, there exists a number of scholars who believe that Hamadānī's stance was somewhere in between waḥdat al‐wujūd and waḥdat al‐shuhūd.This paper is an attempt to locate Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī in Islamic Sufism by contextualizing him in the intellectual history of Sufism in Kashmir and beyond through focusing on his Ḥall ul‐fuṣūṣ to evaluate how he elaborated on the legacy of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar. Pertinent to this is the study of the terms wujūd and shuhūd in the teachings of Ibn ʿArabī to understand how Hamadānī understood and used them in his mysticism.
{"title":"Ḥall ul‐fuṣūṣ and its Main Tenets: A Reading into Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī's Commentary on Fuṣūṣ ul‐ḥikam","authors":"Leila Chamankhah","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12477","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12477","url":null,"abstract":"Although it is difficult to pinpoint an exact time as to when waḥdat al‐shuhūd (the unity of witnessing) or any other relevant idea originated, a number of scholars ascertain that it was Qāḍī ʿAḍud a‐Dīn Ījī (d. 756 or 760/1355 or 56), the prominent metaphysician, mutakallim, jurist, and the poet of the eighth century1, who should be regarded as the first one who used waḥdat al‐shuhūd. Ījī was also a contemporary of the famous Kubrawī Sufi, ʿAlāʾ u‐Dawla Simnānī (d. 736/1355), who believed in waḥdat al‐shuhūd and might have taken it from Ījī. Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī (d. 786‐87/1385), who brought Islam to Kashmir through Sufism, was an indirect student of Simnānī. He paid special attention to the ʿirfān of Ibn ʿArabī by writing a commentary on the latter's al‐Fuṣūṣ ul‐ḥikam, called Ḥall u‐fuṣūṣ, which played an important role in the further merging of the teachings of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar into Kubrawī Sufism. However, there exists a number of scholars who believe that Hamadānī's stance was somewhere in between waḥdat al‐wujūd and waḥdat al‐shuhūd.This paper is an attempt to locate Mīr Sayyid ʿAlī Hamadānī in Islamic Sufism by contextualizing him in the intellectual history of Sufism in Kashmir and beyond through focusing on his Ḥall ul‐fuṣūṣ to evaluate how he elaborated on the legacy of al‐Shaykh al‐Akbar. Pertinent to this is the study of the terms wujūd and shuhūd in the teachings of Ibn ʿArabī to understand how Hamadānī understood and used them in his mysticism.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"14 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139867922","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ghafla in Ghazālī's Scale of Action Meaningful Word or Device of Argument?","authors":"Adrien Leites","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12482","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"137 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140488241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article explores the genealogy of the Persian Qur’ān translation of the eighteenth‐century Indian scholar Shāh Walī Allāh (d. 1762/3). Firstly, I argue that this translation engendered a populist engagement with the Qur’ān, which allowed Walī Allāh to decentralize the interpretive agency of the Mughal scholarly class, all the while building his own authority. Including the Arabic text with the Persian translation allowed lay Muslims to recite the text, but with the new caveat of understanding it. Secondly, I argue that Walī Allāh's amalgamation between ‘under‐the‐line’ and ‘succinct summary’ models in his interlinear translation affirmed the inimitability doctrine. This is the belief that the Qur’ān is inherently defined as an Arabic text, in word and meaning. Thirdly, I argue that the inclusion of the Arabic text in this translation prevented the potential emergence of a hegemonic interpretation by a subversive political authority. The results of this hypothesis can be observed in relation to nineteenth‐century British efforts of translating Islamic law texts into English common law in India; and twentieth‐century attempts by secular nationalists in producing a Turkish‐only Qur’ān in modern Turkey. Walī Allāh's Qur’ān translation also carved a path for later Urdu and English Qur’ān translators to follow.
{"title":"Layers of Authority in Shāh Walī Allāh's Persian Interlinear Qur’ān Translation","authors":"Nihal Ahmad Khan","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12481","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12481","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the genealogy of the Persian Qur’ān translation of the eighteenth‐century Indian scholar Shāh Walī Allāh (d. 1762/3). Firstly, I argue that this translation engendered a populist engagement with the Qur’ān, which allowed Walī Allāh to decentralize the interpretive agency of the Mughal scholarly class, all the while building his own authority. Including the Arabic text with the Persian translation allowed lay Muslims to recite the text, but with the new caveat of understanding it. Secondly, I argue that Walī Allāh's amalgamation between ‘under‐the‐line’ and ‘succinct summary’ models in his interlinear translation affirmed the inimitability doctrine. This is the belief that the Qur’ān is inherently defined as an Arabic text, in word and meaning. Thirdly, I argue that the inclusion of the Arabic text in this translation prevented the potential emergence of a hegemonic interpretation by a subversive political authority. The results of this hypothesis can be observed in relation to nineteenth‐century British efforts of translating Islamic law texts into English common law in India; and twentieth‐century attempts by secular nationalists in producing a Turkish‐only Qur’ān in modern Turkey. Walī Allāh's Qur’ān translation also carved a path for later Urdu and English Qur’ān translators to follow.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140485956","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article1 is focused on Muḥammad Qāsim Nānawtawī's two important books Ḥujjat al‐Islām and Qiblah Numā. These books are Nānawtawī's response to Christian missionaries and Hindu critic of Islam. Nānawtawī's polemics led the foundation of neo‐ʿilm al‐kalām (neo‐Islamic scholastic theology) in South Asia. This article is an effort to trace Nānawtawī's corpus in polemics and the dialectics, which he covered in these books. Most of his works include his critiques and strong arguments against Christian and Hindu critics of Islam. However, this article is concise and covers a limited part of Nānawtawī's dialectical discussions. This article focuses on a precise response to a Hindu critic of Islam, man's merits and his status among all creatures and thus, man's selection by God as His khalīfah (vicegerent) on the earth.
{"title":"19th Century Polemic at Shahjahanpur: Muḥammad Qāsim Nānawtawī's Philosophy of Khilāfat‐Allāh and his Response to the Critics of Islam in regard to Kaʿbah","authors":"A. Siddiqui","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12476","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12476","url":null,"abstract":"This article1 is focused on Muḥammad Qāsim Nānawtawī's two important books Ḥujjat al‐Islām and Qiblah Numā. These books are Nānawtawī's response to Christian missionaries and Hindu critic of Islam. Nānawtawī's polemics led the foundation of neo‐ʿilm al‐kalām (neo‐Islamic scholastic theology) in South Asia. This article is an effort to trace Nānawtawī's corpus in polemics and the dialectics, which he covered in these books. Most of his works include his critiques and strong arguments against Christian and Hindu critics of Islam. However, this article is concise and covers a limited part of Nānawtawī's dialectical discussions. This article focuses on a precise response to a Hindu critic of Islam, man's merits and his status among all creatures and thus, man's selection by God as His khalīfah (vicegerent) on the earth.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"43 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140488930","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper offers an occasionalist reading of al‐Ashʿarī's theory of kasb in Kitāb al‐Lumaʿ against Richard Frank's reading. Frank argues that according to al‐Ashʿarī human beings have causal power that is created by God over their acts. Binyamin Abrahamov argues against Frank's reading because while al‐Lumaʿ does not support this interpretation, the text suggests al‐Ashʿarī's denial of causal efficacy from the created power. I expand Abrahamov's claims through a deeper comparison of al‐Lumaʿ and Frank's analysis. First, I argue that the only textual evidence might be al‐Ashʿarī's use of the verb waqaaʿ bi when al‐Ashʿarī says that acquisition come through a created power. A mere employment of this word does not indicate a causal relation between the created power and acquisition. Moreover, al‐Ashʿarī uses waqaaʿ bi to describe the concurrence of the so‐called natural causes while he never attributes causal efficacy to them. Another problem in Frank's reading is that the attribution of causal efficacy to the created power not only takes al‐Ashʿarī's theory out of the boundaries of occasionalism, but also approaches it to mere conservationism. Second, I agree with Abrahamov's occasionalist reading according to which the relation between the created power and acquisition can be a conditional relation.
{"title":"An Occasionalist Reading of Al‐Ashʿarī's Theory of Kasb in Kitāb al‐Lumaʿ","authors":"Zeyneb Betul Taskin","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12478","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12478","url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers an occasionalist reading of al‐Ashʿarī's theory of kasb in Kitāb al‐Lumaʿ against Richard Frank's reading. Frank argues that according to al‐Ashʿarī human beings have causal power that is created by God over their acts. Binyamin Abrahamov argues against Frank's reading because while al‐Lumaʿ does not support this interpretation, the text suggests al‐Ashʿarī's denial of causal efficacy from the created power. I expand Abrahamov's claims through a deeper comparison of al‐Lumaʿ and Frank's analysis. First, I argue that the only textual evidence might be al‐Ashʿarī's use of the verb waqaaʿ bi when al‐Ashʿarī says that acquisition come through a created power. A mere employment of this word does not indicate a causal relation between the created power and acquisition. Moreover, al‐Ashʿarī uses waqaaʿ bi to describe the concurrence of the so‐called natural causes while he never attributes causal efficacy to them. Another problem in Frank's reading is that the attribution of causal efficacy to the created power not only takes al‐Ashʿarī's theory out of the boundaries of occasionalism, but also approaches it to mere conservationism. Second, I agree with Abrahamov's occasionalist reading according to which the relation between the created power and acquisition can be a conditional relation.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"65 36","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140486671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article examines the YouTube videos of Egyptian activist Sherif Gaber, an important voice among contemporary critics of religion who have a Muslim background. We scrutinize his ideas, with a focus on Gaber's conceptualization of science, and advance a proposal on how to critically yet moderately engage with Gaber's arguments.
{"title":"Ḥuṭṭ awlawīya lil‐ʻilm! Sherif Gaber's YouTube Videos and His Views on Science and Religion","authors":"Stefano Bigliardi, Abdelmojib Chouhbi, Mohamed Amine Ghafil, Malak Sounani, Issra Tikrout","doi":"10.1111/muwo.12480","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/muwo.12480","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the YouTube videos of Egyptian activist Sherif Gaber, an important voice among contemporary critics of religion who have a Muslim background. We scrutinize his ideas, with a focus on Gaber's conceptualization of science, and advance a proposal on how to critically yet moderately engage with Gaber's arguments.","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"59 35","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140486602","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Some Other Cloud","authors":"A. Gawad","doi":"10.1111/MUWO.12388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/MUWO.12388","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":83192,"journal":{"name":"The Muslim world","volume":"4178 1 1","pages":"261-279"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86774063","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：