{"id":5832,"date":"2025-05-18T10:29:52","date_gmt":"2025-05-18T07:29:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/?page_id=5832"},"modified":"2025-05-18T10:29:52","modified_gmt":"2025-05-18T07:29:52","slug":"esref-altas-razi-okumalari-muhassal-17-seminer-ozeti","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/esref-altas-razi-okumalari-muhassal-17-seminer-ozeti\/","title":{"rendered":"E\u015eREF ALTA\u015e, R\u00c2Z\u0130 OKUMALARI: MUHASSAL 17. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130"},"content":{"rendered":"

E\u015eREF ALTA\u015e, R\u00c2Z\u0130 OKUMALARI: MUHASSAL 17. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n

Dersin Amac\u0131 ve \u0130\u00e7eri\u011fi<\/strong><\/p>\n

Bu seminer, R\u00e2z\u00ee\u2019nin el-Mu\u1e25a\u1e63\u1e63al adl\u0131 eserinde yer alan \u201cma\u2018d\u00fbm\u201d (yok olan) ve \u201cmahiyet\u201d kavramlar\u0131n\u0131 felsef\u00ee ve kel\u00e2m\u00ee gelenekler ba\u011flam\u0131nda kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rmal\u0131 olarak ele al\u0131r. Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin ma\u2018d\u00fbmun sabitli\u011fi anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 ile \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2\u2019n\u0131n mutlak mahiyet teorisi, sabitlik, mevc\u00fbdiyet, mahiyet-varl\u0131k ayr\u0131m\u0131 ve yarat\u0131lm\u0131\u015fl\u0131k (me\u00e7\u00fbliyet) kavramlar\u0131 \u00fczerinden detayl\u0131 bi\u00e7imde tart\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131r. Seminerin amac\u0131, \u0130slam d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde ontolojik \u00f6nc\u00fcllerin bilgi ve varl\u0131k anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etkisini a\u00e7\u0131klamakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin Ma\u2018d\u00fbm Anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 ve Sabitlik Teorisi<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Basra Mu\u2018tezilesi’ne g\u00f6re ma\u2018d\u00fbmlar, zatlar\u0131, aynlar\u0131 ve hakikatleri itibar\u0131yla sabittir. Allah\u2019\u0131n kudreti, bu sabit zatlar\u0131 varl\u0131\u011fa getirmekle ili\u015fkilidir; yoktan zat yaratmaz. Bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fte, sub\u00fbt kavram\u0131 mevc\u00fbd ve m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ma\u2018d\u00fbmu kapsar; menf\u00ee kavram\u0131 ise imk\u00e2ns\u0131z olanlar\u0131 i\u00e7erir. Bu yakla\u015f\u0131mda ma\u2018d\u00fbm, bir varl\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mamakla birlikte belirli bir konuma ve ayr\u0131\u015fabilirli\u011fe sahiptir.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2\u2019n\u0131n Mahiyet G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc ve Me\u00e7\u00fbliye<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2\u2019ya g\u00f6re mahiyet, haric\u00ee ve zihn\u00ee varl\u0131ktan soyutland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, mutlak mahiyet haline gelir. Ancak bu mutlak mahiyet bir \u201c\u015fey\u201d de\u011fildir ve bir mahalli yoktur; sadece zihinsel bir itibard\u0131r. Mahiyet ne mevcuttur ne de yarat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (me\u00e7\u00fbl de\u011fildir). Bu yakla\u015f\u0131m, Mu\u2018tezile’nin sabit ma\u2018d\u00fbmlar\u0131na k\u0131yasla daha s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 bir metafizik \u00e7er\u00e7eve \u00f6nerir.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rmal\u0131 Tart\u0131\u015fma ve Farkl\u0131l\u0131k Noktalar\u0131<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        \u0130ki gelenek aras\u0131nda benzerlik olsa da farklar belirgindir: (1) Mu\u2018tezile m\u00fcmk\u00fcn ma\u2018d\u00fbmlara \u201c\u015fey\u201d derken, \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2 mutlak mahiyeti \u015fey saymaz. (2) Mu\u2018tezile, bu sabitlerin ayr\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve hatta sonsuz olduklar\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylerken, \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2 itibar\u00ee d\u00fczeyi vurgular. (3) Varl\u0131k, birlik, \u00e7okluk gibi s\u0131fatlar \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2\u2019da d\u0131\u015fsal y\u00fcklerken; Mu\u2018tezile\u2019de sabitlere i\u00e7kin olabilir.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Mec\u00fbliyet Tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 ve Tul\u00fbs\u00ee Yorumu<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          \u201cMe\u00e7\u00fbliyet\u201d, bir mahiyetin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n faile ba\u011fl\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sorusunu g\u00fcndeme getirir. Tul\u00fbs\u00ee, filozoflar\u0131n mahiyetlerin yarat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 (gayr-i me\u00e7\u00fbl) s\u00f6ylemesini, mahiyetin sadece zihinsel itibariyle var olmas\u0131na ba\u011flar. Mu\u2018tezile ise sabit zatlar\u0131n ezelden beri mevc\u00fbt oldu\u011funu savunur ve Allah\u2019\u0131n kudretini sadece varl\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131nda i\u015flevli k\u0131lar.<\/p>\n

          Sonu\u00e7<\/strong><\/p>\n

          Seminer, Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin sabit ma\u2018d\u00fbm anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131 ile \u0130bn S\u00een\u00e2\u2019n\u0131n mutlak mahiyet teorisini kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rarak, \u0130slam metafizi\u011findeki varl\u0131k, yokluk, bilgi ve yaratma sorunlar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ok boyutlu bi\u00e7imde tart\u0131\u015f\u0131r. Bu iki yakla\u015f\u0131m, sub\u00fbtun mahiyeti, Tanr\u0131-kudret ili\u015fkisi ve \u015feylik kavram\u0131 etraf\u0131nda farkl\u0131 ontolojiler in\u015fa eder.<\/p>\n

           <\/p>\n

          Purpose and Content of the Seminar<\/strong><\/p>\n

          This seminar presents a comparative analysis of the concepts of ma\u2018d\u016bm (nonexistent) and m\u0101hiyya (quiddity or essence) as treated in Fakhr al-D\u012bn al-R\u0101z\u012b\u2019s al-Mu\u1e25a\u1e63\u1e63al. It contrasts the Mu\u2018tazilite position that affirms the fixity of the nonexistent with Avicenna\u2019s theory of quiddity, focusing on issues such as fixity (thub\u016bt), existence, the distinction between essence and existence, and the notion of createdness (majl\u016bliyya). The seminar seeks to clarify how ontological premises shape epistemological and metaphysical thought in classical Islamic philosophy and theology.<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. The Mu\u2018tazilite Theory of the Ma\u2018d\u016bm and Fixity<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            According to the Basran Mu\u2018tazilites, nonexistents possess fixed essences (a\u2018y\u0101n) and real natures (\u1e25aq\u0101\u2019iq). Divine power relates not to creating their essences ex nihilo, but to bringing already fixed entities into existence. Thus, thub\u016bt includes actual existents and possible nonexistents, while nafy applies only to the impossible. This view attributes a kind of pre-existential ontological status to the ma\u2018d\u016bm.<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. Avicenna\u2019s View of Quiddity and the Notion of Non-Createdness<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Avicenna holds that when quiddity is abstracted from both extramental and mental existence, it becomes a “pure quiddity,” which is not a thing (shay\u2019) in any real sense. It does not exist and is not considered created (maj\u2018l\u016bl). It exists only as a mental consideration without any real instantiation. This view sets strict limits on the metaphysical status of nonexistents, in contrast to the Mu\u2018tazilite approach.<\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Comparative Analysis: Key Differences<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Despite surface similarities, major differences emerge: (1) The Mu\u2018tazilites affirm that possible nonexistents are real “things,” whereas Avicenna denies thingness to pure quiddities. (2) Mu\u2018tazilites see nonexistents as ontologically distinct and potentially infinite in number, while Avicenna treats quiddity as a mental construct. (3) Attributes like existence, unity, and multiplicity are external in Avicenna\u2019s view, but may be internal to fixed nonexistents in Mu\u2018tazilite theology.<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. The Problem of Createdness and <\/strong>\u1e6c<\/strong>\u016bs\u012b\u2019s Interpretation<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  The discussion of majl\u016bliyya (createdness) questions whether essences depend on a cause. \u1e6c\u016bs\u012b interprets the philosophers\u2019 claim that quiddities are “uncreated” as referring only to their mental, abstract existence. In contrast, Mu\u2018tazilites argue that these fixed essences have always existed and divine power only acts upon their existence, not their essence.<\/p>\n

                  Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  This seminar highlights the contrasting ontologies of the Mu\u2018tazilite theologians and Avicennian philosophers through the lens of ma\u2018d\u016bm and m\u0101hiyya. It demonstrates how each tradition constructs a different metaphysical system around the nature of things, existence, and divine power. Ultimately, the seminar underscores the significance of these debates in shaping Islamic metaphysics, epistemology, and theology.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                  E\u015eREF ALTA\u015e, R\u00c2Z\u0130 OKUMALARI: MUHASSAL 17. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130 Dersin Amac\u0131 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-5832","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5832","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5832"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5832\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5833,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5832\/revisions\/5833"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5832"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}