When the Greek philosophers came across the Muslims a dialogue had started that put the Muslim Ummah into a lot of fitnah. It was only after certain Muslims in history started to learn and use the tools developed by the Greeks to rebut some of the arguments being made did it begin.
'Ilm-ul-Kalam … is underpinned by the rules of logical discourse, (which is not to be confused with pure logic) - The idea is to reach consistency in argumentation rather than arriving at some previous unknown fact. Logical deduction can determine what the conclusion should be, given the premises but it does assist us in recognising the truth of the premises themselves. For that purpose we resort to 3rd person testimony and scripture, which may or may not be accepted.
The biggest fitnah was in the presentation of religious concepts that were in “tension” with other concepts - and the great scholars of the past helped us manage these tensions to form a well calibrated system of beliefs. This is known as the 'aqeedah.
The language of theology is now used extensively - but people are still unaware of the meaning of some terms because they have not studied the philosophical rules and established ideas, including the latest concepts that have been put together.
Certain concepts such as how to name physical phenomena and dimensions and how to make our ideas consistent is paramount in this science.
Regarding Allah (SWT) we need to understand the fundamental predicates we can draw from our scriptures and then we need to understand them all in balance with another. The Arabic language proves itself to be a very powerful media for these thoughts - far better than English.
The main idea that we entertain as believers is the idea of “Oneness” - Wahdaniya … Let’s begin by this and let’s pay special attention to the formulaic belief “La ilaha ilAllah” and discuss why this might be better than we would say it in English.
Re: Precursory Knowledge Necessary in Order to Understand Theological Language
well, most of rhetorics or real challenges are new and coming from west. as a lot of what greek philosophers said is considered dead wrong by disbelievers themselves today. so Muslim scholars of past are not supposed to have answer of new or real challengees. for example, they use neuro-linguistic knowledge as argument to prove the subjective view of everything including religious Scripture. they have developed tools to argu that everything is really determined so test and reward makes no sense. a machine has been invented that talks to human being and they somehow prove that that conversation between machine and human is determined so free will does not exist.
No disrespect to scholars but I doubt that any aqeedah of current school of throught would answer the questions that are leaving new generation with fluctuating faith and confused.
Re: Precursory Knowledge Necessary in Order to Understand Theological Language
Peace ajazali
Yes, what you mention is more pertinent today and it is a good topic to discuss. I was actually talking more about “the language of theology” and in order to understand it in its fuller meaning we should all take time out to learn what certain phrases meant in their truer contexts. I was talking about why the mu’tazilites came about and what was done to destroy their arguments. And in turn how we are supposed to understand the formulas in our 'aqaid texts, because they were written in the same “theological language” as that used by the philosophers.
Re: Precursory Knowledge Necessary in Order to Understand Theological Language
Yes psyah, but my response was to your following text
“The biggest fitnah was in the presentation of religious concepts that were in “tension” with other concepts - and the great scholars of the past helped us manage these tensions to form a well calibrated system of beliefs. This is known as the 'aqeedah.”
I would like to know how aqeedah would help solving the Euthyphro dilemma for example?
Re: Precursory Knowledge Necessary in Order to Understand Theological Language
Not to derail the thread but just want to add my input.
I believe that plato was able to come up with Euthyphro dilemma because of Christianity’s worldview which is everything is good.
All