Countries with religious/athiest populations

[pashtanajan]

where is the proof that mu'tazilah even exist today?

There are a lot of Muslims who are Mu'tazilah today. You don't hear of them because they're not bombing people and mosques. A lot of wahabbis and whatnot see them as 'apostates' or those gone astray because they analyze the Quran, and base their beliefs on logical reasoning – which of course, is seen as 'blasphemy' in the eyes of illiterate and uneducated folk.

By the way, I'm not a Mu'tazilah (so my assumptions are not biased towards them) lol.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I think the Mu'tazilah are the most logical sect in Islam. They base their beliefs on science and the Quran.

welcome sister

[RevolutionThroughReason]

One thing; you don't have to declare yourself a Mu'tazilah to BE a Mu'tazilah; just look at the world logically, don't blindly read passages of the Qur'an so literally and look to exploring nature. science and reason as tools to examine the relevance of the Qur'an.

[Pisho]

it goes by percentages

But still it low I thought it would at least be like 5-10% cuz of the way some people are
But I guess it's culturally "wrong" to be atheist that's why ppl are scared to admit cuz just because u pray 5 times a day doesn't mean ur not an atheist

[BarakzaiAbdali]

One thing; you don't have to declare yourself a Mu'tazilah to BE a Mu'tazilah; just look at the world logically, don't blindly read passages of the Qur'an so literally and look to exploring nature. science and reason as tools to examine the relevance of the Qur'an.

Scimitar, since you introduced the Mutazilah philosophy I decided it was interesting enough to read up on. Fortunately in New Haven exists of the rare translations of Kitāb al-Ibāna ‘an Usul al-Diyāna

1) From my readings of Ashari, he was sort of like the Annikan Skywalker of that movement. He was deemed by his mentors amongst the Mutazilah as a brilliant scholar. If this is the case, what is the current Mutazilah thought on Ashari? Is he being misrepresented in the modern era by die hard sunniyaan? Or is it that he himself was off.

2) There was never a Mutazilah rejoinder to the Kitab al Ibana and it was what led to them going underground.

Here is a pretty nice tract about the issue:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/isl/isl32.htm

To sort of inject some light hearted nerd humor, I guess what I am asking is - Wasn't Ashari sort of like the equivalent of a your guys's renegade Annikan who came along and used his light saber to pretty much decimate the movement?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Here is the only discussion I find on the topic:
http://asharis.wordpress.com/2010/08...ari-authentic/

But they dont really provide any evidence from the cited Mutazilah showing that the work is a fraud or riddled with interpolations.

And finally what about the the fact that the Hanbalis, a major faction in Sunni Islam also suffered under one of the Mutazilah Caliphs?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I guess their whole argument rests on the premise that Ibn Tamiyaah cited the work in question as the last but that there is no proof it. Wouldnt it be fair enough to say that Tamiyaah was closer to the era and despite the low opinion many have of Tamiyah due to his influence on the Salaf; It seems sort of illogical and ahistorical that a Mutazilah would have progressed retrograde and started off declaring things against the philosophy only to write the earlier texts endorsing it. That is, the earlier works show his evolution of thought and learning on the movement. Also, then the history appears to show the subsequent burning of Mutazilah texts and the Caliphate going after the movement. It seems that history is on the side of Tamiyaah in that the Caliphate needed a scholarly sort of voice to justify the purge and that would mean the work would be placed later in Ashari's life. So though the author addressed potential internal compromises to the text; external history from the era doesnt appear to support his view.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

The problem these days when evaluating and understanding the classiical Mu'tazilah tradition is that we have to learn about it often from external sources. But Mu'tazilah sources do still exist to this day.

The Mu'tazilah didn't become underground due to the 'Ashari movement spreading; rather it was the Asharites and Atharis who AFTER the Mongol conquests and destruction of most of the major centers of learning, swooped in and took advantage of the vacuum.

As per Asharis views, they're actually not too distant from traditional Mu'tazilah outlook. We differ however in how we understand the Attributes of God and the Epistemological basis of reason on comparison to revelation

I think one of the best resources you can find is in a Book called Defenders of Reason in Islam.

I'm not sure of responses to the 'Asharis, but I think the Mu'tazili works existent are replete in responding to 'Ashari contentions.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The problem these days when evaluating and understanding the classiical Mu'tazilah tradition is that we have to learn about it often from external sources. But Mu'tazilah sources do still exist to this day.

The Mu'tazilah didn't become underground due to the 'Ashari movement spreading; rather it was the Asharites and Atharis who AFTER the Mongol conquests and destruction of most of the major centers of learning, swooped in and took advantage of the vacuum.

As per Asharis views, they're actually not too distant from traditional Mu'tazilah outlook. We differ however in how we understand the Attributes of God and the Epistemological basis of reason on comparison to revelation

I think one of the best resources you can find is in a Book called Defenders of Reason in Islam.

I'm not sure of responses to the 'Asharis, but I think the Mu'tazili works existent are replete in responding to 'Ashari contentions.

I may be wrong but I thought Ashari was himself a mutazilite. Is this wrong? Tamiyah describes him as mutazila gone rogue. I think it may be key to get hold of those refutations as in the coming years the Muslim world will need to define its views on utilizing hikmah.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I may be wrong but I thought Ashari was himself a mutazilite. Is this wrong? Tamiyah describes him as mutazila gone rogue. I think it may be key to get hold of those refutations as in the coming years the Muslim world will need to define its views on utilizing hikmah.

That's right he was a Mu'tazilah, I wouldn't quite say he was a rogue. Perhaps his later followers were more zealous.

I think what we have to realize is that the Mu'tazilah doctrine is not a static system, it can be revised depending on the merits of arguments. While I don't embrace Asha'arism, I can recognize it as a valid position so long as it doesn't act obstructively.

[Khostai]

But still it low I thought it would at least be like 5-10% cuz of the way some people are
But I guess it's culturally "wrong" to be atheist that's why ppl are scared to admit cuz just because u pray 5 times a day doesn't mean ur not an atheist

Yes not only that, you can be jailed if you say that you are an atheist. Or even worse get an death penalty, you must have heard about that guy who become christian and what was done to him, imagine what they would do if you say that there is no God. So 5% can be atheist but they will never admit it.

There are not that many Afghans who are born in the west, majority have lived some time in Afghanistan or in the neighbouring countries, but still there are a lot of Afghans that are atheist.

[faye]

what i read is that the mu'tazilah went out of favour because an advocate of mu'tazilism, who was in a position of power, tried to force it on the population, which caused a reaction from the more traditionalists. not because of the mu'tazilahs activities, themselves.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

what i read is that the mu'tazilah went out of favour because an advocate of mu'tazilism, who was in a position of power, tried to force it on the population, which caused a reaction from the more traditionalists. not because of the mu'tazilahs activities, themselves.

Faye I heard similar and I thought the threat was double fold. In the Western narrations of the history (I am not sure where they derive their source from) one was that the guy named Ashari was a Mutazilah scholar who himself attacked it intellectually and that this then paved the way for the purge to occur when a particular Caliph looked for a reason to minimize them.

Scimitar was indicating the Mongol hoardes and the destruction that followed left behind a power vacuum into which Asharis stepped. I need to read up on it but it sounds plausible.

Whatever the case, its a fascinating era of history and the writings come out of these key cities are so detailed that when I was reading them it was like reading a higher level philosophy textbook as opposed to polemic.

[RevolutionThroughReason]

what i read is that the mu'tazilah went out of favour because an advocate of mu'tazilism, who was in a position of power, tried to force it on the population, which caused a reaction from the more traditionalists. not because of the mu'tazilahs activities, themselves.

That's what Asharites tend to want to portray so they can claim themselves as they "Traditional Sunni Islam", but the fact is that Avicenna and Avveroes were intellectual heavy weights who emphasized the Mu'tazilah doctrines focus on reason long after Ashari came, which indicates that Ashari's initial refutation was not even considered worthy of a reply.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

That's what Asharites tend to want to portray so they can claim themselves as they "Traditional Sunni Islam", but the fact is that Avicenna and Avveroes were intellectual heavy weights who emphasized the Mu'tazilah doctrines focus on reason long after Ashari came, which indicates that Ashari's initial refutation was not even considered worthy of a reply.

Is there one text or scholar above all others you would recommend as essential reading for someone with limited time?