Shahristānī's View of God: A Critique of Anthropomorphism in the Context of Negative Theology

Tarık Tanrıbilir

Makale detayları

Shahristānī's View of God: A Critique of Anthropomorphism in the Context of Negative Theology

Yazarlar:

Tarık Tanrıbilir

Yayıncı:

Siirt University

Ana Başlıklar:

Kelam

Dergi:

Marifetname Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.211-236

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001320284

pISSN:

2757-752X

Anahtar kelimeler:

Özet:

 The concept of God is considered one of the most essential problems in the history of Islamic philosophy. Gods transcendent existence makes it impossible to define Him in standard terms. Communication and interaction between the divine and the human creates a number of problems due to structural differences. The anthropomorphic conception of God is one of these problems. This conception is an important issue for religions and philosophy to analyze. We studied how Shahristānī, the leading historian of religions and philosophy in the Middle Ages, as well as a scholar of theology, reports and analyzes this issue and what suggestions he offers for the solution of the problem. Thanks to this study, the views and methods of schools whose members and works have almost disappeared in the official context will be reliably revealed and the history of philosophy will be enlightened in one extent. Shahristānī claims that neither God can be similar to creatures nor creatures can be similar to God. Therefore, according to him, God cannot be substance, body, accident, dependent on space-time, capable of accepting accidents, and a location for creatures. He reports that the Ghulāt al-Shīa make two types of analogies about God: The first is to compare the Creator with the created, and the second is to compare the created with the Creator. This statement indicates that there can be neither the sign of creation in God nor the attribute of divinity in creatures. In his opinion, these views of the Ghulāt al-Shīa were influenced by non-Islamic beliefs and ideologies. Shahristānī also accuses some members of the Qarrāmiyya of characterizing God as a substance and a body. The lack of a terminological agreement in the early stages of Islamic philosophy opened the door to such debates in later periods. Shahristānī also claims that they describe Gods essence as a location for created things. The Karrāmiyya, on the other hand, distinguishes between what is created in Gods essence and the eternal attributes, and characterizes created things not as divine attributes but as concepts such as khālikiyyat, murīdiyyat, and mutakallimiyyat. Finally, Shahristānī categorizes the statements of the Qarrāmiyya as strict anthropomorphic ones that cannot be interpreted.

 The concept of God is considered one of the most essential problems in the history of Islamic philosophy. Gods transcendent existence makes it impossible to define Him in standard terms. Communication and interaction between the divine and the human creates a number of problems due to structural differences. The anthropomorphic conception of God is one of these problems. This conception is an important issue for religions and philosophy to analyze. We studied how Shahristānī, the leading historian of religions and philosophy in the Middle Ages, as well as a scholar of theology, reports and analyzes this issue and what suggestions he offers for the solution of the problem. Thanks to this study, the views and methods of schools whose members and works have almost disappeared in the official context will be reliably revealed and the history of philosophy will be enlightened in one extent. Shahristānī claims that neither God can be similar to creatures nor creatures can be similar to God. Therefore, according to him, God cannot be substance, body, accident, dependent on space-time, capable of accepting accidents, and a location for creatures. He reports that the Ghulāt al-Shīa make two types of analogies about God: The first is to compare the Creator with the created, and the second is to compare the created with the Creator. This statement indicates that there can be neither the sign of creation in God nor the attribute of divinity in creatures. In his opinion, these views of the Ghulāt al-Shīa were influenced by non-Islamic beliefs and ideologies. Shahristānī also accuses some members of the Qarrāmiyya of characterizing God as a substance and a body. The lack of a terminological agreement in the early stages of Islamic philosophy opened the door to such debates in later periods. Shahristānī also claims that they describe Gods essence as a location for created things. The Karrāmiyya, on the other hand, distinguishes between what is created in Gods essence and the eternal attributes, and characterizes created things not as divine attributes but as concepts such as khālikiyyat, murīdiyyat, and mutakallimiyyat. Finally, Shahristānī categorizes the statements of the Qarrāmiyya as strict anthropomorphic ones that cannot be interpreted.

 The concept of God is considered one of the most essential problems in the history of Islamic philosophy. Gods transcendent existence makes it impossible to define Him in standard terms. Communication and interaction between the divine and the human creates a number of problems due to structural differences. The anthropomorphic conception of God is one of these problems. This conception is an important issue for religions and philosophy to analyze. We studied how Shahristānī, the leading historian of religions and philosophy in the Middle Ages, as well as a scholar of theology, reports and analyzes this issue and what suggestions he offers for the solution of the problem. Thanks to this study, the views and methods of schools whose members and works have almost disappeared in the official context will be reliably revealed and the history of philosophy will be enlightened in one extent. Shahristānī claims that neither God can be similar to creatures nor creatures can be similar to God. Therefore, according to him, God cannot be substance, body, accident, dependent on space-time, capable of accepting accidents, and a location for creatures. He reports that the Ghulāt al-Shīa make two types of analogies about God: The first is to compare the Creator with the created, and the second is to compare the created with the Creator. This statement indicates that there can be neither the sign of creation in God nor the attribute of divinity in creatures. In his opinion, these views of the Ghulāt al-Shīa were influenced by non-Islamic beliefs and ideologies. Shahristānī also accuses some members of the Qarrāmiyya of characterizing God as a substance and a body. The lack of a terminological agreement in the early stages of Islamic philosophy opened the door to such debates in later periods. Shahristānī also claims that they describe Gods essence as a location for created things. The Karrāmiyya, on the other hand, distinguishes between what is created in Gods essence and the eternal attributes, and characterizes created things not as divine attributes but as concepts such as khālikiyyat, murīdiyyat, and mutakallimiyyat. Finally, Shahristānī categorizes the statements of the Qarrāmiyya as strict anthropomorphic ones that cannot be interpreted.

 Tanrı tasavvuru, İslam düşünce tarihinin en temel problemlerinden biri kabul edilmektedir. Tanrının aşkın varlığı, Onun standart kalıplarla tanımlanmasını olanaksız kılmaktadır. İlahi olanla beşeri olanın iletişimi ve etkileşimi, yapısal farklılık bakımından bir takım sorunları da beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu sorunlardan biri de insan biçimci Tanrı tasarımıdır. Bu tasarım, dinlerin ve felsefenin çözümlemesi gereken önemli bir mesele olarak önümüzde durmaktadır. Biz de Orta Çağın önde gelen dinler ve felsefe tarihçisi, aynı zamanda da kelâm bilgini Şehristânînin bu meseleyi nasıl aktardığını, analiz ettiğini ve meselenin çözümüne ilişkin hangi önerilerde bulunduğunu araştırdık. Bu çalışma sayesinde kurumsal anlamda mensupları ve eserleri neredeyse yok olmuş ekollerin görüş ve yöntemleri güvenilir bir şekilde ortaya konularak düşünce tarihi bir boyutuyla aydınlanmış olacaktır. Şehristânî, ne Tanrının mahlûkata ne de mahlûkatın Tanrıya benzeyebileceğini savunmaktadır. Dolayısıyla ona göre Tanrı; cevher, cisim, araz, uzay-zamana bağımlı, arazları kabule elverişli ve yaratıklara mahal olamaz. O, Gulât-ı Şîanın Tanrı konusunda iki tür teşbihbenzetme yaptığını aktarmaktadır: Birincisi, yaratanı yaratılana; ikincisi ise yaratılanı yaratana benzetmektir. Bu ifade, ne Tanrıda yaratılış emaresi ne de mahlûkatta ulûhiyet vasfı bulunabileceğine dikkat çekmektedir. Ona göre Gulât-ı Şîa, bu görüşlerinde gayr-i İslami inanç ve ideolojilerin etkisinde kalmıştır. Şehristânî, kimi Kerrâmiyye mensuplarını da Tanrıyı cevher ve cisim olarak nitelendirmekle itham etmektedir. İslâm düşüncesinin henüz erken dönemlerinde terminolojik bir ittifakın oluşmaması ilerleyen dönemlerde böylesi tartışmalara kapı aralamıştır. Ayrıca Şehristânî, onların Tanrının zâtını hâdis şeylere mahal olarak konumlandırdığını da iddia etmektedir. Oysaki Kerrâmiyye, Tanrının zâtında sonradan ortaya çıkan şeylerhavâdis ile ezeli sıfatlar arasında bir ayrım yapmakta ve sonradan ortaya çıkan şeyleri ilahi sıfat olarak değil, hâlikiyyet, mürîdiyyet ve mütekellimiyyet gibi kavramlarla nitelendirmiştir. Nihayetinde Şehristânî, Kerrâmiyyenin söylemlerini tevil kabul etmeyecek katı antropomorfik ifadeler olarak nitelendirmektedir.

Makale detayları

Shahristānī's View of God: A Critique of Anthropomorphism in the Context of Negative Theology

Yazarlar:

Tarık Tanrıbilir

Yayıncı:

Siirt University

Ana Başlıklar:

Kelam

Dergi:

Marifetname Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.211-236

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001320284

pISSN:

2757-752X

Kalām

God

Negative Theology

Anthropomorphism

Qarrāmiyya

Ghulāt al-Shī

ShahristānīKelâm

Tanrı

Negatif Teoloji

Antropomorfizm

Kerrâmiyye

Gulât-ı Şîa

Şehristânî

Sayı

Makale detayları

Yazarlar: Tarık Tanrıbilir

Yayıncı: Siirt University

Ana Başlıklar: Kelam

Dergi: Marifetname Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.211-236

Belge Tipi: Makale

Yayın Tarihi: 6/2024

Belge Dili: Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.): 2001320284

pISSN: 2757-752X

Sayı

Yazarlar:

Tarık Tanrıbilir

Yayıncı:

Siirt University

Ana Başlıklar:

Kelam

Dergi:

Marifetname Vol.11 Issue 1, pp.211-236

Belge Tipi:

Makale

Yayın Tarihi:

6/2024

Belge Dili:

Türkçe

Document ID (Org No.):

2001320284

pISSN:

2757-752X