Publication: Mu’tezile'de tevlîd teorisi - Kâdî Abdülcebbâr örneğ
Abstract
Fiil konusu, çeşitli disiplinler tarafından farklı perspektiflerden ele alınmıştır. İslâmî ilimler arasındaki küllî ilim rolünü üstlenen kelâm, fiil konusunu en geniş çapta ele alan ilimdir. Kelâm, fiil meselesini incelerken hem fiilin meydana geliş aşamasını hem de bu fiilin hukuki ve ahlâkî boyutunu ele almıştır. Kelâm tarihindeki en büyük tartışmalardan birisi insan fiillerinin gerçek manada fâilinin kim olduğu konusudur. Fiilin gerçek fâilinin kimliği konusu da kişinin hukuksal ve ahlâkî sorumluluğunu doğrudan belirleyen bir husustur. Ekollerin bu konuda farklı düşünmelerinin en büyük nedenlerinden biri ise kozmolojik açıdan farklı fikirlere sahip olmalarıdır. Fiil konusunun da önemli bir kısmını mütevellid fiiller oluşturur. Mütevellid fiiller, insanın ilk fiilinden doğan ikinci fiilleri için kullanılan bir terimdir. Bu mesele hakkında kelâmcılar, mütevellid fiiller hangi aşamalardan geçer, bu fiillerin fâili kimdir, bu fiilleri meydana getiren sebepler sonuçlarını zorunlu kılar mı gibi sorulara cevap aramışlardır. Bunun neticesinde kelâmcılar tarafından konuyla ilgili olarak birçok farklı görüş ortaya konmuştur. Mütevellid fiillerin ele alındığı konuya, kelâm tarihinde tevlîd denir. Bu meselede etkili olan bir diğer husus ise Mu`tezile'nin adalet prensibidir. Mu`tezile ekolü genel olarak tevlîd teorisini kabul eder. Ancak Basra Mu`tezilesi ve Bağdat Mu`tezilesi arasında bu konuda farklı yaklaşımlar mevcuttur. Bağdat Mu`tezilesi nedenselci, Basra Mu`tezilesi ise meseleye daha çok fiil – fâil açısından yaklaşan bir tavır takınmıştır. Bu iki kelâm okulu arasındaki görüş ayrılığının nedeni, kozmoloji konusundaki farklı anlayışlarıdır. Kâdî Abdülcebbâr da Basra Mu`tezilesine mensup bir kelâmcı olarak tevlîd görüşünü benimsemiştir. Ancak nedenselliği reddeden Kâdî Abdülcebbâr, bu konuda ılımlı bir tavır takınmıştır. Ehl-i Sünnet ise tevlîdi tümüyle reddeder. Evrende hiçbir şekilde zorunluluk fikrine yer vermeyen Ehl-i Sünnet'in bu konuda da tavrı nettir. Biz de bu çalışmada Kâdî Abdülcebbâr'ın tevlîd teorisi hakkındaki görüşlerini ele aldık. İlk bölümde tevlîd konusunun tartışma zemini olan adâlet prensibi ve cevher araz teorisine yer verdik. İkinci bölümde ise Bağdat ve Basra Mu`tezile kelâm ekollerinin teori hakkındaki görüşlerine ve iki ekol arasındaki benzerlik ve farklılıklara yer vermeye çalıştık. Ayrıca teoriye yönelik eleştirilere de değindik. Üçüncü ve son bölümü ise Kâdî Abdülcebbâr'ın mesele hakkındaki görüşlerine ayırdık.
The issue of act has been handled from different perspectives by various disciplines in classical Islamic thought. Kalam, which is regarded as universal science among the Islamic sciences, has dealt with the subject of act in the widest way. While Kalam analyses the act it had been dealt with both the stage of it's formation and it's legal and moral dimension. One of the biggest debates in the history of Kalam is the question of who is the real agent of human actions. The subject of who is the real perpetrator of the act was a situation that directly determined the legal and moral responsibility of the person. The main reason why schools think differently on this issue is that they have different thoughts in terms of cosmology. Part of the subject of acts are mutawallid acts. Mütevellid acts are a noun used for the second acts of the human being born from the first act. About this issue, what are the stages of mutawalid acts go through? Who is the agent of these acts? They sought answers to questions such as whether the causes of these actions necessitate their consequences. As a result of this, many different views were put forward by the Islamic theologians (mutakallimûn) on the subject. The subject dealing with mutawalid verbs is called tawlid in the history of kalam. Another issue that is decisive in this matter is Mu'tazila's principle of justice. Mu'tazila generally accepts this theory. However, there are different approaches on this issue between the Basra Mu'tazila and the Baghdad Mu'tazila. The Baghdad Mu`tazila took causalist attitude while the Basra Mu`tazila tackled the problem from act-perpetrator dimension . al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār adopted the view of tawlid as a theologian from the Basra Mu`tazilite. However, al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār, who denied causality, took a moderate attitude in this regard. On the other hand Ahl as-Sunnah mutakallimun rejects the tawlid completely and the manner of Ahl as-Sunnah mutakallimun who do not include the idea of natural necessity in the universe is strict. We, too, took the opinion of al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār about the tawlid on board. In the first part we have given place to the prenciple of justice and theological atomism, which are the basis of discussions of the subject of tawlid. In the second part, we tried to include the opinions of Baghdad and Basra Mu'tazila schools on theory, and the similarities and differences between the two schools. We have devoted the third and last part to the views of al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār on the issue.
The issue of act has been handled from different perspectives by various disciplines in classical Islamic thought. Kalam, which is regarded as universal science among the Islamic sciences, has dealt with the subject of act in the widest way. While Kalam analyses the act it had been dealt with both the stage of it's formation and it's legal and moral dimension. One of the biggest debates in the history of Kalam is the question of who is the real agent of human actions. The subject of who is the real perpetrator of the act was a situation that directly determined the legal and moral responsibility of the person. The main reason why schools think differently on this issue is that they have different thoughts in terms of cosmology. Part of the subject of acts are mutawallid acts. Mütevellid acts are a noun used for the second acts of the human being born from the first act. About this issue, what are the stages of mutawalid acts go through? Who is the agent of these acts? They sought answers to questions such as whether the causes of these actions necessitate their consequences. As a result of this, many different views were put forward by the Islamic theologians (mutakallimûn) on the subject. The subject dealing with mutawalid verbs is called tawlid in the history of kalam. Another issue that is decisive in this matter is Mu'tazila's principle of justice. Mu'tazila generally accepts this theory. However, there are different approaches on this issue between the Basra Mu'tazila and the Baghdad Mu'tazila. The Baghdad Mu`tazila took causalist attitude while the Basra Mu`tazila tackled the problem from act-perpetrator dimension . al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār adopted the view of tawlid as a theologian from the Basra Mu`tazilite. However, al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār, who denied causality, took a moderate attitude in this regard. On the other hand Ahl as-Sunnah mutakallimun rejects the tawlid completely and the manner of Ahl as-Sunnah mutakallimun who do not include the idea of natural necessity in the universe is strict. We, too, took the opinion of al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār about the tawlid on board. In the first part we have given place to the prenciple of justice and theological atomism, which are the basis of discussions of the subject of tawlid. In the second part, we tried to include the opinions of Baghdad and Basra Mu'tazila schools on theory, and the similarities and differences between the two schools. We have devoted the third and last part to the views of al-Qāḍi 'Abd al-Jabbār on the issue.