بیشترتوضیحاتافزودن یادداشت جدید
61He is generally included among the Ash`arite. But strictly speaking he is not an Ash`arite; though he, admitted that the Ash`arite. Ash`arite mode of thought was excellent for the masses. "He held", says Shibli (`Ilm al-Kalam, p. 66), "that the secret of faith could not be revealed; for this reason he encouraged exposition of the Ash`arite theology, and took good care in persuading his immediate disciples not to publish the results of his private reflection." Such an attitude towards the Ash`arite theology, combined with his, constant use of philosophical language, could not but lead to suspicion. Ibn Jauzi, Qadi `Iyad, and other famous theologians of the orthodox school, publicly denounced him as one of the "misguided"; and `Iyad went even so far as to order the destruction of all his philosophical and theological writings that existed in Spain. It is, therefore, clear that while the dialectic of Rationalism destroyed the personality of God, and reduced divinity to a bare indefinable universality, the antirationalist movement, though it preserved the dogma of personality, destroyed the external reality of nature. In spite of Nazzam's theory of "Atomic objectification"(1), the atom of the Rationalist possesses an independent objective reality; that of the Ash`arite is a fleeting moment of Divine Will. The one saves nature, and tends to do away with the God of Theology; the other sacrifices nature to save God as conceived by the orthodox. 1 Ibn Hazm, Vol. V, pp. 63, 64, where the author states criticises this theory
لطفا منتظر باشید ...
