Talk:Mu'tazili
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Islam on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page so as to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Muslim scholars task force. (with unknown importance) | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] Miscellaneous
A truly dinky article on what is possibly the most influential group of scholars in human history.
It's always hard to know whether to slant an article for beginners, as this one is, or get into the depth. I believe with history it's always best to write for beginners, and with science it's always best to write for experts. Other ideas?
The articles Muslim philosophy and early Muslim medicine should cover the growth of ideas more exactly, but still historically. They should be linked to from philosophy and medicine wherever a detailed explanation of the Muslim influence is required. That's often, since they were so influential.
I have rewritten the article from scratch, and provided the historical context for this school's development, as well as why they started and why they failed. The original article was inaccurate. It confused philosophers with Mutazilis. They are two different things altogether. Ibn Rushd was never ever a Mutazili, but the last great philosopher of Islam. Al Kindi, Farabi, Avicenna, Ibn Rushd, are all philosophers and were never Mutazilis. The same error is made in Ashari articles as well. When I have time I will correct that too.
As for Muslim philosophy and Muslim medicine, they have nothing to do with Mutazilis, but with Philosophy. -- KB 03:26, 2004 Apr 19 (UTC)
Too amusing! that Muslims so casually refer to this school of thought as "the deserters"— Mu'tazili— without even the least whisper of a suggestion that this pejorative denigration is a biased insult that violates NPOV, etc etc! One can only imagine the reaction to an educated Westerner referring to these philosophers as "the deserters." Howls of dismay!
Not a word of this in the entry, needless to say. The justifications might be enlightening too! Otherwise excellent! excellent! but carry on... --Wetman 02:05, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- It is unfortunate that this article does not cover the etymology of the term in more detail - if it had, you would have been aware that the name "Mu'tazila" (those who withdraw) was sometimes used by the Mu'tazila themselves, in reference to the anecdote later mentioned involving their founder and Hasan al-Basri - although they more frequently called themselves by the somewhat POV term "people of unity and justice". Your speculation is duly noted, however. For fuller details, you could resort to the rather more detailed article at muslimphilosophy.com, according to which it originally designated "a position of neutrality in the face of opposing factions" - justifying the frequently found translation "Isolationists". - Mustafaa 18:45, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
moatazilla.com is a very odd site to say the least. I suggest we remove the reference to it. I also suggest we work together to add information on how the movement affected Aquinas and Europe. On the flip side, I am troubled by the fact that I find nothing bizarre about their position. There has to be something that accounts for their demise, other than their intellectualism and rigour. Perfect length for the article though. User:Mohan_ravichandran.
[edit] Arabic transliteration
Could someone add transliterations to المعتزلة and اعتزل along the lines of the transliterations found in the article Qur'an? Also, is it most correct for the article to say "Mu'tazili theology originated in the 8th century in al-Basrah when...", or should the name of the city be changed to the modern "Basra" (which is where the article actually resides)? --Quuxplusone 20:33, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Basra (the English name) and al-Basrah (the Arabic name) are interchangeable; this is purely a matter of taste. - Mustafaa 18:29, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
- To clarify: AlBasra is still the name of the city in Arabic to this day. It is only shortened to Basra by English news reporters. --Alif 18:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning
seeing the etymology section, would it be correct to translate mu'tazili as "apostates"? dab (ᛏ) 06:56, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Title in singular
The title of the article adopts the singualr Arabic form of the word, but isn't it more likely that an English reader will encounter the name in the plural as the collective name of the school/group as a whole?
also, somewhere it reads:
thus he and his followers were labelled Mu'tazili
If the writer means that "..he (Wasel) and each of his followeres were called Mu'tazili" then this would be correct, but again isn't it more obvious to speak about them as a group and call them Mu'tazila?
The article then proceeds to speak of the group using the English plural (+s) which is made from the singular Arabic form. What is the custom here? --Alif 18:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Famous Figures
Surely it is POV to call someone "a literary genius"? Ackie00 09:42, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Al nazar?
"al nazar" is mentioned but without explanation as to what it is. What is it? --Ephilei 21:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Meaning of nazar
It is speculative reasoning. "Speculative" because the issue is not self-evident enough to induce knowledge by way of necessity.
As a Mutazili Muslim from Turkey who abandoned the foolish dogmas and barbaric absurdities of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaah, who is fed up with secularist state-control toward Islam, and who perhaps is the last of the adherents of a revolutionary 'dead sect' that made such notable contributions to a logical and consistent monotheistic creed based on Quranic revelation, I must confess, I was overjoyed to discover the great theological and philosophical reasoning of Mutazilah the first time I encountered it early this year. Never before in any Islamic text or school had I seen such clarity and sophistication in thinking regarding ontological matters. The question of free will and existence of evil in the world were elucidated to such a level that no question or doubt remained. Even now, to my astonishment, I read to explore how Mutazilah has successfully answered all issues of faith, law, justice, morality, etc... in Islam more than a thousand years ago.
Equally, I am baffled as to how a rational, intellectual, meritorious, virtuous, well-principled school of Islamic thought as Mutazilah could fade away. Is it because of Asharite slanders against the magnanimously upright tenets of Mutazilah for centuries? Or the hatred caused by the Mihna unfairly attributed to Mutazilah? Was it Al-Gazali who delivered the final blow with his inconsistence and irrationalism? The downfall and demise of this sect is shrouded in mystery. Whatever the cause, Mutazilah is too precious a phenomenon to neglect in Islamic history. This article is most lacking, given the importance of Mutazilah in the development of methodologic inquiry and application of scripture.
I must say, the relationship between Islamic philosphers and Mutazilah is negatively portrayed. I have already read in Muhammad Ammara's work: "Mutazilah and the Question of Human Free Will", that Avicenna (or was it Ibn Rushd?) says Mutazilah is the only sect in conformity with the philosophers on the matter of predestination and free will. Surely, the fact that Islamic philosophy and sciences declined at the same time as Mutazilah cannot be a haphazard occurence.
Ozan Yarman
[edit] Origin section
In the origin section, the final sentence of the first paragraph, it says: It was the latter, not the Muslim theologians in general, who took Greek philosophy as the starting point and the master conceptual framework for analyzing and investigating reality.
Who is the "latter" in the article? I find the sentence confusing. __earth (Talk) 06:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How do other muslims view it?
I think this article could really use a section on its relationships with other segments/traditions/groups within Islam. How does it look at them? how do they look at it? zafiroblue05 | Talk 05:01, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
