al-Juwayni

In his Ghiyathi al-Juwayni (d. 478/1085) discusses the organization of power in the Islamic community. Proceeding by way of hypothesis, he imagines an Islamic world which is no longer ruled by a caliph or a sultan, where independent jurists have died out and sharia has been eroded to the point that only worship rituals and family law remain in place.

1000 years later, the hypotheses set out by Juwayni have largely come true and he leads the reader all the way down to the crisis of authority in contemporary Sunni world, coming very close to theorizing the legitimate autonomy of worldly realities.

A major thinker obscured by his convoluted style.

In an exchange preserved in al-Subkī's (d. 771/1370) Ṭabaqāt al-shāfiʿiyya, the jurists al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) and al-Shīrāzī (d. 476/1083) debate equating prayer time to prayer direction in regard to the validity of prayer, and the adult virgin to the adult nonvirgin in regard to consent. While the dispute between the two scholars is on seemingly innocuous legal issues, it reveals that despite adherence to the same Shāfiʿī legal school, the two hold contrasting positions on the specifics of analogical reasoning (qiyās). By examining the differences in their doctrines on qiyās and their approaches to dialectics (jadal), this article demonstrates that al-Juwaynī is more willing to use qiyās, especially its weaker forms, and make nontextual legal arguments, while al-Shīrāzī is more wary in his use of qiyās, leading him to reject its weaker forms and nontextual arguments. By tracing the differences in their qiyās doctrines through their works on jadal and exploring the differing dialectics used in the two debates, this article examines the connection between qiyās and jadal, intra-school jadal, and the various approaches to qiyās in the fifth/eleventh century.

The theory of the states (ahwāl) under the theological system of Imām al-Haramayn Abū al-Maālī al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) and that of the early Ash'arites can be construed as the understanding of universals as well as the common truths of that system. In that period, however, two different conceptions of truth stand out: those who championed the theory in question and those who rejected it. While the rejecters of the states analyzed truths from a nominal perspective, those who defended this theory referred realistically to a common state and truth the existents (al-mawjūdāt) possess. Consequently, even though they gained closeness to the Aristotelian understanding of universals by adopting a realistic method using the theory of the ahwāl, they have fundamental differences between them. Although the Aristotelian understanding of universals is about objects, theologians' states are confined to the substance-accident binary as the building blocks of objects in the temporal (hādith) universe. In other words, as far as al-Juwaynī was concerned, theologians are realists with regard to the building blocks of objects and nominalists when considering the entirety of objects. Moreover, unlike the Aristotelian universals, states are never accepted as a subject in propositions. Because of this aspect the states have, secondary substances were not included in the Ash'arite theology of that early period. Ultimately, accidents (a'rād) and divine meanings (ma'ānī) were removed from the category of attributes and replaced by the states. In so doing, accidents and divine meanings have also been included in the category of essences (dhāt) along with proper substances and the divine essence (al-Dhāt al-İlāhī). Hence, a new theological language emerged in the context of the substanceattribute binary, and an ontological position was assigned to the states. However, this position is not the word, mind, object, or space beyond the object. With this framework in mind, the discussion of the theory of the states throughout this article will revolve around three main points: form, scope, and place.

The theory of al-ahwal (states), which is an effort to find a solution to a major problem in Kalam, that of the relationship between the essence of God and His attributes, in general accepts the existence of the attributes of God’s essence as a state that cannot be qualified by existence or non-existence. This theory
was put forward by Abu Hashim al-Jubbaý from the Mu‘tazila and accepted by leaders of the Ahl al-Sunnah, like al-Bakıllaný and al-Juwayni. In various
sources it is stated that al-Bakıllani first rejected this theory, but later accepted it, while al-Juwayni accepted it, only later to reject it. In al-Shamil al-Juwayni
examined the matter, making it the most important feature of his system. al-Juwayni also claimed that it was not possible to establish causality without
defending the al-ahwal. Yet it is interesting that al-Juwayni rejects causality in nature, yet at the same time he accepts the relationship between the essence and
the attributes. In addition, this theory led to discussions about the possibility of a third state and therefore, the supporters of this theory were accused of contradicting one of the basic principles of reason. This article discusses the theory of the al-ahwal in al-Juwayni and deals with the place that this idea occupies in the history of Islamic thought, using the problems mentioned above
as a point of departure.

İmâmü'l-Haremeyn Ebü'l-Meâlî el-Cüveynî (ö. 478/1085) ve öncesi Eş'arî kelâm sisteminde yer alan hâller teorisi, bu sistemin tümeller anlayışı şeklinde değerlendirilebileceği gibi ortak hakikatler şeklinde de değerlendirilebilir. Ancak bu dönemde söz konusu teoriyi savunanlar ve savunmayanlar olmak üzere iki farklı hakikat anlayışı göze çarpar. Hâlleri reddedenler hakikatleri nominal çerçevede değerlendirirken, bu teoriyi savunanlar ise realist bir tavırla mevcutlar için ortak hâl ve hakikatten bahseder. Bu doğrultuda onlar her ne kadar hâller teorisi üzerinden realist bir yöntem takınarak Aristotelesçi tümel anlayışına yaklaşmış olsalar da aralarında temel farklar bulunur. Aristotelesçi tümel anlayışı nesnelere dair olmasına karşın kelâmcıların hâlleri, hâdis âlemde nesnelerin bütününe değil, onların yapıtaşları olan cevher-araz ikilisinin kapsamıyla sınırlıdır. Yani Cüveynî özelinde kelâmcılar nesnelerin yapıtaşlarında realist ancak nesneler bütünü dikkate alındığında nominalisttirler. Ayrıca hâller, Aristotelesçi tümellerden farklı olarak önermelerde asla konu kabul edilmemektedir. Hâllerde gözlemlenen bu durum nedeniyle söz konusu dönemin Eş'arî kelâmında ikinci cevherler yer bulamamıştır. Son olarak da arazlar ve ilâhî mânâlar sıfat kategorisinden çıkartılıp yerine hâller yerleştirilmiştir. Böylece hakikî anlamda cevherler ve Zât-i ilâhînin yanında arazlar ve ilâhî mânâlar da zât kategorisine dâhil edilmiştir. Dolayısıyla zât-sıfat bağlamında yeni bir kelâm dili ortaya çıkmış ve hâllere ontik bir "yer" biçilmiştir. Ancak bu yer; kelime, zihin, nesne veya nesnenin ötesi değildir. Bu çerçeveyle hâller teorisi "şekil", "kapsam" ve "yer" olmak üzere bu makalede üç noktada değerlendirilmeye tabi tutulacaktır.

This paper examines an unpublished and apparently unique manuscript copy of a lengthy kalām summa attributed to Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) (MS Beirut, American University of Beirut Library, 297:R27kA). I establish that the text was written in the first three quarters of the sixth/twelfth century and exhibits extensive influence from al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) and minor elements from Abū l-Qāsim al-Qushayrī (d. 465/1072), and I argue that it is most likely the earliest extant theological work by al-Rāzī. As such, the text sheds new light on the Juwaynian influence on eastern Ashʿarism, in which al-Rāzī was brought up and educated before he became engaged in the study of philosophy.

Al-Ansarī, Abū l-Qāsim Salmān b. Nāsir b. 'Imrān al-Arghiyānī al-Nīsābūrī al-Sūfī al-Shāfi 'ī (d. 512/1118). Al-Ansārī was above all an Ash'arī theologian, a jurist, and an exegete with a Sūfī orientation
He became a student of Imām al-Haramayn Abū l-Ma'ālī al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) and was a schoolmate of al-Juwaynī’s student al-Ghazālī (d. 505/111)