{"id":5893,"date":"2025-05-20T11:39:53","date_gmt":"2025-05-20T08:39:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/?page_id=5893"},"modified":"2025-05-20T11:39:53","modified_gmt":"2025-05-20T08:39:53","slug":"esref-altas-razi-okumalari-muhassal-48-seminer-ozeti","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/esref-altas-razi-okumalari-muhassal-48-seminer-ozeti\/","title":{"rendered":"E\u015eREF ALTA\u015e, R\u00c2Z\u0130 OKUMALARI: MUHASSAL 48. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130"},"content":{"rendered":"

E\u015eREF ALTA\u015e, R\u00c2Z\u0130 OKUMALARI: MUHASSAL 48<\/strong>. SEM\u0130NER \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n

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

Bu seminer, Fahreddin er-R\u00e2z\u00ee\u2019nin el-Mu\u1e25a\u1e63\u1e63al adl\u0131 eserinde ele al\u0131nan kullar\u0131n fiilleri meselesini kapsaml\u0131 bi\u00e7imde tart\u0131\u015f\u0131r. R\u00e2z\u00ee, E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee ve Mu\u2018tezil\u00ee gelenekler aras\u0131ndaki temel farklar\u0131 kesb teorisi, cebr, ihtiyar, kudret ve sorumluluk ba\u011flamlar\u0131nda analiz eder. Kullar\u0131n fiilleri Allah\u2019\u0131n kudretine mi aittir, yoksa insan iradesiyle mi meydana gelir? Bu soru etraf\u0131nda geli\u015fen tart\u0131\u015fmalar hem metafizik hem de ahl\u00e2k\u00ee bir d\u00fczlemde i\u015flenir.<\/p>\n

Ana Temalar<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Be\u015f Temel Yakla\u015f\u0131m ve R\u00e2z\u00ee\u2019nin Konumland\u0131rmas\u0131<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    R\u00e2z\u00ee, E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee gelenekten Mu\u2018tezile\u2019ye kadar uzanan be\u015f yakla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u0131ralar: Ebu\u2019l-Hasan el-E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee\u2019nin cebr\u00ee g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, B\u00e2k\u0131ll\u00e2n\u00ee\u2019nin kudret\u2013s\u0131fat ayr\u0131m\u0131, \u0130sfer\u00e2y\u00een\u00ee\u2019nin \u00e7ift kudret teorisi, C\u00fcveyn\u00ee\u2019nin irade zinciri ve Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin ihtiyar teorisi. R\u00e2z\u00ee, bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerin \u00e7o\u011funun fiili zorunlulukla a\u00e7\u0131klad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, yaln\u0131zca Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin ihtiyar\u0131 esas ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtir.<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Fiil ve Terk Aras\u0131ndaki Tercih Problemi<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      R\u00e2z\u00ee, bir fiilin yap\u0131labilir olmas\u0131 kadar terk edilebilir olmas\u0131 da gerekiyorsa, tercih sebebi olmadan birini se\u00e7menin \u201c\u015fans\u201d anlam\u0131na gelece\u011fini belirtir. Bu ba\u011flamda Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck teorisinin \u015fansa dayal\u0131 oldu\u011funu, bunun ise sorumlulu\u011fu ortadan kald\u0131raca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunur.<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. Bilgi ve Kudret Temelli Deliller<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        \u0130kinci delilde, kulun fiilinin t\u00fcm ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 bilmemesi, onun o fiilin yarat\u0131c\u0131s\u0131 olamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir. \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc delil ise Tanr\u0131 ve kul iradesinin \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 halinde Tanr\u0131\u2019n\u0131n iradesinin \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc vurgular ve Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck teorisinin Tanr\u0131\u2019y\u0131 acizle\u015ftirdi\u011fini ima eder.<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin Akli ve Nakli Delilleri<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Mu\u2018tezile, fiilin Allah taraf\u0131ndan yarat\u0131lmas\u0131 durumunda kulun sorumlulu\u011funun ortadan kalkaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 savunur. Kur\u2019an\u2019daki emir, nehiy ve cezaland\u0131rma ayetlerini delil getirerek fiilin kula ait oldu\u011funu \u00f6ne s\u00fcrer. R\u00e2z\u00ee ise bu ayetlerin yaratmay\u0131 de\u011fil, fiilin nispetini g\u00f6sterdi\u011fini belirtir.<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee Kesb Teorisinin Yorumlar\u0131<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            R\u00e2z\u00ee, E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee\u2019nin kesin kararl\u0131l\u0131kla birlikte gelen yaratma s\u00fcrecinin sorumluluk i\u00e7in yeterli oldu\u011funu savunur. B\u00e2k\u0131ll\u00e2n\u00ee\u2019nin yorumuna g\u00f6re fiilin zat\u0131 Allah\u2019a, s\u0131fatlar\u0131 kula aittir. Bu ayr\u0131m, sorumluluk ile fiil aras\u0131nda arac\u0131l\u0131 bir ba\u011f kurar.<\/p>\n

              \n
            1. R\u00e2z\u00ee\u2019nin Nihai Pozisyonu: Cebre Yak\u0131nl\u0131k<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              R\u00e2z\u00ee, kendi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a kesb teorisine dayand\u0131rmaz. Ancak \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn ya determinizm ya da \u015fansa dayanaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131; her iki durumda da sorumlulu\u011fun temellendirilemeyece\u011fini \u00f6ne s\u00fcrerek E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee cebirci pozisyona yakla\u015f\u0131r. Fiil\u2013sorumluluk ili\u015fkisinde yaratma ile m\u00fcktesebiyetin ayr\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini savunur.<\/p>\n

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

              Seminer, kel\u00e2m gelene\u011findeki insan fiillerine dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerin kapsaml\u0131 bir ele\u015ftirisini sunar. R\u00e2z\u00ee, Mu\u2018tezile\u2019nin \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck anlay\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131 \u201c\u015fans\u201d olarak de\u011ferlendirerek reddeder; E\u015f\u2018ar\u00ee gelenek i\u00e7indeki farkl\u0131 kesb yorumlar\u0131n\u0131 analiz ederek insan\u0131n karar verici olmas\u0131yla sorumlulu\u011fun temellendirilebilece\u011fini savunur. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede, klasik irade teorileri metafizik, epistemoloji ve ahl\u00e2k kesi\u015fiminde yeniden yorumlan\u0131r.<\/p>\n

               <\/p>\n

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

              This seminar offers a comprehensive analysis of the issue of human acts (af\u02bf\u0101l al-\u02bfib\u0101d) as discussed by Fakhr al-D\u012bn al-R\u0101z\u012b in al-Mu\u1e25a\u1e63\u1e63al. The focus is on the metaphysical and theological foundations of attributing actions to human beings, examining the theory of acquisition (kasb), determinism, free will, divine power, and moral responsibility. R\u0101z\u012b explores five major positions on human acts from Ash\u02bfar\u012b to Mu\u02bftazil\u012b thought, ultimately challenging the coherence of libertarian free will theories.<\/p>\n

              Key Themes<\/strong><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. Five Theological Approaches to Human Acts<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                R\u0101z\u012b outlines five major views: al-Ash\u02bfar\u012b\u2019s strict determinism, B\u0101qill\u0101n\u012b\u2019s attribution of divine power to the act and human power to its properties, Isfar\u0101y\u012bn\u012b\u2019s dual power theory, Juwayn\u012b\u2019s mediated causation, and the Mu\u02bftazilite claim that humans act by genuine choice (\u02bfal\u0101 sab\u012bl al-ikhtiy\u0101r). He concludes that all views except the Mu\u02bftazilite position ultimately affirm some form of necessity in the occurrence of acts.<\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. The Problem of Choice Between Action and Omission<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  If a person can either perform or omit an act, the question arises: what determines the choice? R\u0101z\u012b argues that a preference without a reason (tarj\u012b\u1e25 bi-l\u0101 murajji\u1e25) leads to chance, not real agency. He critiques Mu\u02bftazilite voluntarism as collapsing into a theory of randomness, thus invalidating moral responsibility.<\/p>\n

                    \n
                  1. Epistemic and Volitional Arguments Against Human Creation of Acts<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                    R\u0101z\u012b asserts that if humans truly created their acts, they would possess detailed knowledge of all components involved. Since people act without such knowledge\u2014especially evident in involuntary acts or sleepwalking\u2014they cannot be the creators of their actions.<\/p>\n

                      \n
                    1. Conflict of Wills and Divine Supremacy<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                      Using a logical argument about the impossibility of two conflicting wills being equally actualized, R\u0101z\u012b shows that God’s will must prevail over the human will. Therefore, human volition cannot override divine determination, reinforcing the Ash\u02bfarite position of divine omnipotence.<\/p>\n

                        \n
                      1. Mu<\/strong>\u02bf<\/strong>tazilite Rational and Scriptural Proofs<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                        The Mu\u02bftazilites claim that God\u2019s commands, prohibitions, and human accountability prove autonomy. They cite numerous Qur\u2019anic verses that attribute actions, rewards, and punishments to humans. R\u0101z\u012b counters by differentiating between attribution (isn\u0101d) and actual creation (\u012bj\u0101d), affirming that God creates acts while humans acquire them.<\/p>\n

                          \n
                        1. The Kasb Theory and Evolving Interpretations<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                          R\u0101z\u012b reviews versions of the kasb theory: al-Ash\u02bfar\u012b\u2019s view that divine creation follows human resolve, and B\u0101qill\u0101n\u012b\u2019s idea that the essence of the act is from God while its moral qualification (obedience or disobedience) comes from human volition. Both versions attempt to preserve divine omnipotence while grounding responsibility in human decisiveness.<\/p>\n

                            \n
                          1. R\u0101z\u012b\u2019s Position: Leaning Toward Theological Determinism<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                            R\u0101z\u012b critiques the Mu\u02bftazilite account for reducing agency to either determinism or randomness. He stops short of fully endorsing any kasb theory, instead implying that moral accountability does not require creative agency. He emphasizes that divine will encompasses all occurrences, including human acts.<\/p>\n

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

                            This seminar demonstrates the depth and complexity of Islamic theological discourse on free will and moral agency. R\u0101z\u012b questions the philosophical integrity of libertarian models and affirms that responsibility can be grounded in decisional capacity, not creative power. The analysis highlights internal diversity within Ash\u02bfarism and revisits the enduring tension between divine sovereignty and human accountability.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                            E\u015eREF ALTA\u015e, R\u00c2Z\u0130 OKUMALARI: MUHASSAL 48. 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-5893","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5893","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=5893"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5893\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5894,"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/5893\/revisions\/5894"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/klasikdusunceokulu.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5893"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}