114. The science of speculative theology. This is a science that involves arguing with logical proofs in defense of the articles of faith and refuting innovators who deviate in their dogmas from the early Muslims and Muslim orthodoxy. The real core of the articles of faith is the oneness of God. Therefore, we shall present here, first, a nice specimen of logical argumentation that will show us the oneness of God in the most direct method and manner. We shall then go bac and give a correct description of speculative theology and the !sub"ects# it studies. We shall also indicate the reason why it developed in $slam and what it was that called for its invention. We %&' say( $t should be nown that the things that come into being in the world of existing things, whether they belong to essences or to either human or animal actions, re)uire appropriate causes which are prior to !their coming into being#. They introduce the things that come into being into the realm dominated by custom, and effect their coming into being. *ach one of these causes, in turn, comes into being and, thus, re)uires other causes. +auses continue to follow upon causes in an ascending order, until they reach the +auser of causes, ,im who brings them into existence and creates them, -raised be ,e, there is no God but ,im. $n the process, the causes multiply and widen in extent vertically and hori.ontally. The intellect becomes confused in the attempt to perceive and enumerate them. /nly a comprehensive nowledge can encompass them all, especially !all# human and animal actions. 0mong the causes of !action#, there evidently belong the various inds of intention and volition, since no action can materiali.e except through volition and intention( The various inds of intention and volition are matters pertaining to the soul. 0s a rule, they originate from previous consecutive perceptions !tasawwurat#. These perceptions cause the intention to act. The causes of such perceptions are, again, other perceptions. 1ow, the cause of all the perceptions ta ing place in the soul is un nown, since no one is able to now the beginnings or order of matters pertaining to the soul. They are consecutive notions that God puts into the mind of man, who is unable to understand their beginnings and ends. 0s a rule, man is able only to comprehend the causes that are natural and obvious and that present themselves to our perception in an orderly and well2arranged manner, because nature is encompassed by the soul and on a lower level than it. The range of perceptions, however, is too large for the soul, because they belong to the intellect, which is on a higher level than the soul. The soul, therefore, can scarcely perceive very many of them, let alone all of them. This shows the wisdom of the 3awgiver !Muhammad# when he forbade !us# to speculate about causes and to stop with them. 4uch speculation is a field in which the mind becomes lost and gets nowhere, nor gains any real insight. %&% 54ay( 6God,6 and then let them amuse themselves with their idle tal .5 %&4 Man often stops !to speculate about causes# and thereby is prevented from ascending to the next higher stage. ,is feet slip. ,e becomes one of those who go astray and perish. We as God for protection against disappointment and obvious perdition. /ne should not thin that iman has the power, or can choose at will, to stop or to retrace his steps. 1o7 Tal ing about causes results in giving the soul a fast coloring. We do not now how !this comes about#, for if we new it, we could be on guard against it. Therefore, one must be on guard against it by completely abandoning any speculation about the !causes#. 8urthermore, the way in which the causes exercise their influence upon the ma"ority of the things caused is un nown.%&9 They are only nown through customary !experience# and through conclusions %&: which attest to !the existence of an# apparent !causal# relationship. %&; What that 5 %&< Therefore. God is the samad. it might be assumed that there exists another ind of perception different from ours. That would mean to desire the impossible. . but !the admission# is not in their natural disposition nor in the nature of their sense perception. the truth of prophecy. and wants to weigh mountains in it. enters -aradise. and .e was not born. This does not spea against the intellect and intellectual perceptions. $f !people with such defects# were not set right by their adherence to information they receive from their fathers and teachers who are their contemporaries. 50nd you were given but little nowledge.owever. deficient in understanding. or anything else that lies beyond the level of the intellect. 4uch a suggestion of the mind should be dismissed as stupid. . the real character of the divine attributes. they would not admit !the existence of audible things. Thus. the other world. the intellect should not be used to weigh such matters as the oneness of God.e did not give birth. 5God has comprehension beyond theirs. who made them and brought them into existence.is attributes. $f dumb animals were as ed and could spea . /ne nows that a deaf person feels that the !whole of# existence is comprised in the perceptions of his four senses and his intellect.%1' The matter is different in fact.5 %&= 0 man who stops at the causes is frustrated. The territory he covers !in his mind# is wider than that of human intelligence.is level !of perception# is higher than that of human perception. since our sense perceptions are created and brought into existence.2 influence really is and how it ta es place is not nown. and to now all the details of existence. +omplete nowledge does not exist !in man#. . The truth lies beyond that. The !fact that this is impossible# does not prove that the indications of the scale are not true !when it is used for its proper purpose#. . The whole group of audible things constitutes no part of existence for him.#. !see ing# each one of the causes that cause them and the influence they exercise. so that the soul will be firmly colored with the oneness of God. we would find that they would ignore the whole group of intelligibilia.e is one. The world of existence is too vast for him.e is rightly !said to be# an unbeliever. The same applies to a blind person. that it is able to comprehend all existing things and their causes. $t is but one of the atoms of the world of existence which results from !God#.. we have been commanded completely to abandon and suppress any speculation about them and to direct ourselves to the +auser of all causes. /ne might compare it with a man who sees a scale in which gold is being weighed.5 %1%Therefore. we were forbidden by the 3awgiver!Muhammad# to study causes. They follow the ma"ority in admitting the existence of these groups !of sensibilia#. $ts indications are completely certain and in no way wrong. We were commanded to recogni. and should follow what the 3awgiver !Muhammad# commanded him to believe and to do. etc. $t should be nown that every person with perception has the superficial impression that the !whole of# existence is comprised by his perceptions. God6s creation extends beyond the creation of man. .e said( 5Whoever dies confessing that there is no God but God. . The intellect. everyone should be suspicious of the comprehensiveness of his perceptions and the results of his perception. . $t cannot go beyond its own level. 54ay( 6God. This shows that those who give the intellect preference over !traditional# information in such matters are wrong.e is more desirous of his happiness !than man himself# and he nows better what is good for him.6 5 %1& Man %11 should not trust the suggestion that his mind ma es.im. . and from the ma"ority of people in general. $ can guarantee him that he will return unsuccessful. 1ow.e the absolute oneness of God. there is a limit at which the intellect must stop. The whole group of visible things constitutes no part of existence for him.e has no one li e .owever. because he saw that which is beyond sensual perception. Therefore. $f he ventures to swim in the ocean of speculation and of research into !causes#. $t would simply not exist for them. and faulty in . indeed. is a correct scale. things visible. 4o were we taught by the 3awgiver !Muhammad# who nows better !than we do# the things that are to the interest of our religion and the ways that lead us to happiness. it cannot comprehend God and . and that it does not extend beyond !the realm of his perceptions#. . perfection with regard to any of the obligations he has imposed !upon Muslims# re)uires this !distinction#. ?nowledge results by necessity from possession of an attribute.is power. there are people who.5 and it originates from divine worship. confused. 0ll !causes# lead up to . in addition to the station of nowledge and the reali. The intellect would here become lost. on real ! nowledge# of them. $t belongs to the tal of the soul. -erfection in matters of divine worship depends on ac)uisition of !these matters# as an attribute. $t is the ind that is useful in the other world. They wish to receive the !heavenly# reward for the compassion they show him. >ut if they were to see an orphan or a poor person of the destitute classes. in the ac)uisition of the attribute and real ! nowledge#.im. There must be an action. -erfection in matters of belief depends on the other nowledge. The relationship of man6s nowledge of the oneness of God to his possession of it as an attribute. until the novice on the path to God becomes a holy person. !recognition of the# oneness of God is identical with inability to perceive the causes and the ways in which they exercise their influence.3 reasoning. !/nly# this results in a firmly rooted habit. affection. The difference between 5state5 %1: and nowledge in )uestions of dogma is the same as that between tal ing !about attributes# and having them. $f this is clear. have attained another. When they see an orphan or a poor person. $t is a ind of nowledge that exists on a more solid basis than nowledge attained previous to the possession of the attribute.im. The original nowledge which was devoid of being an attribute is of little advantage or use. it is possible that the ascending se)uence of causes reaches the point where it transcends the realm of human perception and existence and thus ceases to be perceivable. and it must be repeated innumerable times. then. They are hardly able to refrain from !showing compassion#. which is affirmation based upon "udgment. 1ow. even if they are repulsed.%19 $ts perfection lies in its ac)uisition in a form that becomes an attribute of the soul.5 %14 4uch !declaration of the# oneness of God does not merely refer to faith. $t was not the result of the station of 5state5 nor of an attribute of theirs. They )uote the sources for it from the religious law. This. There is no ma er but . they would run away from him and disdain to touch him.ation of the fact that mercy to the poor brings !a human being# close to God. 0n attribute !on the other hand# is not obtained from nowledge alone. >ut the !real# ob"ect is nowledge as a 5state. Their mercy for the orphan was the result of having reached the station of nowledge. is of the same character. and cut off in the wilderness of con"ectures. $t should be nown that. that which results from the possession of !these matters# as an attribute. explains the true situation in this respect. This is the meaning of the statement transmitted on the authority of a certain truthful !person#( 5The inability to perceive is perception. and with reliance in this respect upon the +reator of the causes who comprises them. Thus. they approach him and show him !mercy#.im and go bac to . This may be explained as follows( Many people now that mercy to the orphans and the poor brings !a human being# close to God and is recommendable. the ob"ect of !all human# actions and divine worship is ac)uisition of the habit of obedience and submissiveness and the freeing of the heart from all preoccupations save the worshiped Master. $n the same way. in the opinion of the 3awgiver !Muhammad#.%1. 0nother ind of nowledge thus ma es its appearance. . higher 5station5( they have attained the attribute and habit of mercy. $t is the ! ind of# nowledge that the ma"ority of thin ers !possesses#. They say so and ac nowledge the fact. and charity. We now about . They give as charity whatever they have available from their own property.im only in as much as we have issued from . let alone show mercy to him or any of the higher 5stations5 %1< of sympathy. 0nything less would not be sufficient. and this is the highest degree of faith. $t absolves !the person who has it# from the responsibility of unbelief and is the distinguishing element between unbeliever and believer. once it has been firmly established.4 @ivine worship and its continuous practice leads to this noble result. as a result of their actions and of their affirmation. and not of those who go astray. The believer who has it will commit neither a great nor a small sin.5 %'& / God. since affirmation exists in all degrees of !faith#. the first degree of perfect faith. do show differences !in the intensity of their faith#. . $t comes second after infallibility. admits of no differences !in intensity#. is of that type and has several degrees. eventually.arb about the -rophet and his position. by definition. . This is the highest degree of faith. $t commands the actions of the limbs. for Muhammad. -erfect faith is something connected with action. as we have stated. 50nd guide us on the straight path. This does not spea against the unity of the primary reality of !perfect faith#. @ifferences appear only in the 5state5 that is the result of action. $t is perfect faith. as is the case with all other habits. out of displeasure with his religion. There is no difference whether the obligations of the heart or those of the body are concerned in this respect. give us success. .5 %'9 This means that it is as difficult for the soul to oppose the habit of faith. $t is the !recognition of the# oneness of God. %'4The reply was( 51o. Muhammad says( 50n adulterer does not commit adultery. all actions. The !varying# firmness of this habit causes differences in faith.eraclius. . *very activity ta es place in submissiveness to it. 8or they become a ind of natural disposition. not of those with whom you are angry.5 %': 0ll these statements envisage perfect faith. Thus.eraclius# remar ed( 5The same applies to faith when its cheerfulness has penetrated the hearts.5 !. 0ffirmation. as the leading speculative theologians have stated. from the belief of the heart and the resulting actions. of a )uality that has complete control over the heart. was an attribute and 5state5 in which he found his ultimate pleasure and consolation. Those who consider the first !meanings# of terms and thus thin of !faith# as affirmation cannot show any differences !in the intensity of their affirmation#. This should be understood. $t %'' is clear from all the statements we have made that the ob"ect of all !religious# obligations is the ac)uisition of a habit firmly rooted in the soul. which is the !principal# article of faith and the thing through which happiness is attained. The first degree is the affirmation by the heart of what the tongue says.ow different is the prayer of the people7 Who could bring them to pray in that way7 5Woe unto those who pray. while this !degree of faith# comes to the believers secondarily. 8or instance( 58aith consists of words and actions5A 5it may be more or less5A 5prayer and fasting are part of faith5A 5supererogatory !prayer# in Bamadan is part of faith5A and 5bashfulness is part of the faith. there is the tradition of . it is a reality that is uniform and admits of no differences. Thus. which is the basis and source of all the !religious# obligations.e as ed whether any of the men around Muhammad would become an apostate. We have referred to it and to how the habit of it can be attained. The highest degree is the ac)uisition. become subservient to this affirmation by faith.5 %'% Then. because infallibility is a primary necessity of prophets. if he commits adultery while he is a believer. who as ed 0bu 4ufyan b. The ac)uisition of the firmly rooted habit !of faith# prevents even the briefest deviation from its ways. Muhammad says concerning the principal act of divine worship( 5My consolation lies in prayer. as is nown from the statements of the early Muslims. Much of it can be found in the chapter headings of al>u hari6s chapter on faith. Thus. from which a necessary nowledge results for the soul. once they have become firmly established. which is affirmation.5 %'1 0men. who are careless with regard to their prayer. the path of those to whom you have shown indness.5 %1=-rayer. This shows that faith. after he had become a Muslim. >ut those who consider the final !meanings# of terms and thus thin of !faith# as the habit that is perfect faith. $t is the lowest degree for which the term 5faith5 may be used. is indness toward us by informing us about this situation and explaining to us the two possibilities and that -aradise means bliss and . /therwise. while at the same time ac nowledging them with our tongues.e would be similar to created beings. volition would be something that comes into being. if we have it when we die. the 3ast @ay. /therwise.is messengers. /therwise.ell punishment. 3ogical argumentation was used in addition to the traditional !material#. there occurred differences of opinion concerning details of these articles of faith. .is 4criptures. Then.is concern with the first %%% creation. When Muhammad was as ed about faith. the creation !of the world# could not have materiali. he !made it our obligation to believe in# . with reference to . 4tatements of the 3awgiver !Muhammad# and the men around him and the men of the second generation have explained them in accordance with their plain meaning.ed.e wanted to complete . $n this way. because !that @ay# may mean either trouble or happiness !for us#. /therwise.e made it our first obligation to believe that . %%1 to the perfection of the act of creation. They are clear on the sub"ect. the science of speculative theology originated. . *vidence for them from Cur6an and 4unnah !also# is ample. We say( $t should be nown that the 3awgiver !Muhammad# commanded us to believe in the +reator whom he considered as the sole source of all actions.is essence cannot be compared with created beings. .is# messengers in order to save !us# from trouble on the !@ay of# Besurrection. $f !created things# were destined to disappear completely. Most of the differences concerned ambiguous %%: verses.e was their creator.owever. . 0ll those verses are negative !in their statements#. no created thing would be differentiated from the other. .%%& Then. Then.e in . he did not inform us about the real being of this worshiped +reator. They are the established articles of the Muslim faith.e informed us that this belief means our salvation. because it is something too difficult for our perception and above our level.%'= /therwise. $n this way.%%9 8urther articles of faith are( God sent !. . The scholars showed the way to them and the religious leaders verified them. These are articles of faith as established in the science of speculative theology.e specified particular matters he charged us to affirm with our hearts and to believe in our souls.5 $t should be nown that the 3awgiver !Muhammad# described to us this first degree of faith which is affirmation. . This constitutes the final touch to .e as witness!es#. . . 3et us describe them in summary fashion. We shall now explain the !preceding# summary statement in detail.e causes our resurrection %%' after death. later on. . be it good or bad.e cannot be described in any way as deficient. These main articles of faith are proven by the logical evidence that exists for them. The early Muslims derived them from that evidence.%'< as we have mentioned before.e has volition.im and them#. and the belief in predestination. !all# actions materiali.owever. . This led to hostility and disputation. it would not be correct that . . so that the real character of speculative theology and the way in which it originated may become clear. on account of mutual antagonism. he said( 5!8aith is# the belief in God. . $n many verses of the Cur6an.%%4 their creation would have been frivolous. They are destined for eternal existence after death. and we would not now about it. there are the following articles of faith( God is nowing and powerful. he !made it our obligation to believe that# . by syllogism.5 %'. the worshiped Master is described as being absolutely devoid !of human attributes# in obvious terms re)uiring no interpretation.e determines the fate of each created thing.is oneness as divine being. Then.is angels. since in this way there would be no distinction !between . $t is necessary to believe them. there are a few other verses in the Cur6an suggesting anthropomorphism. than to cling to the plain meaning of the !anthropomorphic# verses with which we can dispense.e has hands. believe that they are from God. if both !negation and assertion# are used here for one and the same concept of body. $t is. because it was ample and clear. letter !sound#. /ne must believe in the !statements# as they stand. in addition to !denying# their conse)uences. they too refuge in statements such as( 50 voice unli e voices5A 5a direction unli e directions5A 5descending unli e descending. voice. Their use !in connection with God# would imply. %4: This !assumption# is refuted by the !assumption# that the attributes are neither identical with the !divine# essence nor different from it. 3ater on. and do not try to interpret or change themA they may be a temptation. They decided that !those# verses were the word of God. which are very numerous and clear. those !people# rather agree with us that God is devoid !of human attributes#. They consider the word 5body5 to be merely one of . and to try to combine the two indications with the help of interpretation of !the anthropomorphic verses#. %41 0nother group turned to anthropomorphism with regard to the attributes of God. They assumed anthropomorphism for God6s essence. >ut there were a few innovators in their time who occupied themselves with the ambiguous verses and %%= delved into anthropomorphism. and. Their stated opinions imply anthropomorphism. >ut if the two differ among themselves %4& and !thus# disavow the commonly accepted concept of body. The idea of body entails deficiency and imperfection.ilah extended the sub"ect to the negative verses and decided to deny !God6s possession of# the ideal attributes %49 of nowledge. they adopted a clear anthropomorphism and were in opposition to the verses stating that God is devoid !of human attributes#. therefore.5 >y that. They new that anthropomorphism is absurd. and life. That is what is behind the statements found in the creed of the Risalah of $bn 0bi Dayd %4% and in his Mukhtasar and in the boo s of the hadith expert $bn 60bd2al2>arr. and a face. $t is more proper to give preference to the negative verses indicating that God is absolutely devoid !of human attributes#.6 either the essence or the attributes !of God#. one disavows them as such. sitting. The speculative theologians wrote on God6s freedom !from human attributes#.5 The refutation here is the same as in the former case. Thus. 3i e the former group. feet. they meant( 5!not as those things are used# in connection with !human# bodies. thus. believed in them and did not try to investigate or interpret their meaning. They assumed direction. They try to convey the idea mentioned.5 This is no defense for them. power.ilah# opinion.%4' descending. because it is a statement contradictory in itself and a combination of negation and assertion. This is what is meant by the statement made by most early Muslims( 53et them pass on as they have come. and similar things !for God#.5 %%. /ne group operated with the plain meaning of the relevant verses.%44and others. in !Mu6ta. The early Muslims gave preference to the evidence for God6s freedom !from human attributes#. The Mu6ta. in that they believed that . although they are a sound and established part of the Cur6an. The only thing that remains to be done with the plain !seemingly anthropomorphic# statements is !to follow# the beliefs and theories expressed by the early Muslims. necessary to stop %%< and submit to !God#. That is. a manifoldness of things primeval. volition. Things li e that depend on permission. the sciences and crafts increased. -eople were eager to write systematic wor s and to do research in all fields.is names !used in a peculiar sense in connection with . /ne should not close one6s eyes to the propositions in their discussion that prove it. so that it cannot happen that by disavowing their meaning.im#. 0t that "uncture.ilah innovation came into being. . the Mu6ta. The !people who gave consideration to the anthropomorphic verses# then tried to escape from the anthropomorphic abomination by stating that !God has# 5a body unli e !ordinary human# bodies. 0bul2. literally.e discussed with them !their# stated opinions with regard to !God6s concern for human# welfare and with what is best !for man#. it was considered permissible to flog %4= and ill many of them. !and proved his position# with the help of logical and traditional methods. the circumstances of the Besurrection. for instance.e restricted God6s freedom !from human attributes# to the extent to which it had been restricted by the early Muslims. and the people were forced to adopt it. . .e made statements such as 50n accident cannot sustain another accident. The Muslim religious leaders opposed them.7 The %4. Thus.e attac ed the problem of the imamate in accordance with the way they had approached it. the reason may have been that the discipline was invented and cultivated as a conse)uence of dissension concerning the existence of essential speech. +ertain leading Mu6ta. the )uestion of the imamate# was added to the problems of this discipline. . because both hearing and vision are corporeal accidents. because the $mamiyah !4hi6ah# at that time suggested the novel idea that the imamate was one of the articles of faith and that it was the duty of the -rophet as well as the Muslim nation %9' to fix !the succession to# the !imamate# and free the person who would become the imam from any responsibility in this respect. $t is not an article of faith.ell. !>ut.e affirmed.5 The reason why this name !which. This forced them to deny predestination. means 5science of speech. the Mu6ta.e laid down the logical premises on which arguments and speculation on the sub"ect depend. the existence of the atom ! al jawhar al fard# and of the vacuum. and their definition of good and evil.e considered the basic premises as secondary only to the articles of faith. The leader of the speculative theologians. The damage done by this innovation was great. !. The whole was called 5the science of speculative theology.e recogni. may have been that it included the disputation of innovations.%91 .ilah indoctrinated certain caliphs with it.is approach was later on followed by his pupils. . and speech as an essential function. . Mu6ta. . in fact. . such as $bn Mu"ahid %94 and others. -aradise. This !assumption# is refuted by the !assumption# that the meaning of the words !hearing and vision# does not re)uire !the existence of# corporeal shape.owever. as well as hearing.# the imamate is at best a matter of public interest and social organi.e disavowed anthropomorphism and recogni.ed by the proofs stating the general applicability !of the principle# to special cases. . /r. .ation.5 and 50n accident does not persist two moments. Eudge 0bu >a r al>a)illani %99 learned from them. vision.%9% The followers of 0bul2.5 or 5tal 5# was chosen.e mediated between the different approaches. .5 %9: There are similar !premises# on which the arguments of !the 0sh6arites# depend.ed the four ideal attributes. >ecause of their opposition.asan al20sh6ari became numerous. because of the 4hi6ah attitude. . which they had invented as the basis for their innovation. because predestination re)uires the existence of volition prior to the created things.%4< They further decided to deny God speech for reasons similar to those !they used# in connection with hearing and vision. and reward and punishment.e perfected the dogmas concerning the rising of the dead. This was an innovation.ilah decided that the Cur6an was created. They did not understand the attribute of speech as an essential function. . This caused orthodox people to rise in defense of the articles of faith with logical evidence and to push bac the innovations. They also decided to deny God hearing and vision. . as far as the .e added a discussion of the imamate.e refuted the innovators in all these respects. That is merely tal and implies no action.asan al20sh6ari.ed the ideal attributes. %9& too care of that. The early Muslims had openly expressed the contrary view.ilah further decided to deny !God6s possession# of the attribute of volition. and improved on it. and . but merely the perception of audible or visible things. and which had been recogni. as had been the opinion of the Eudge !al2>a)illani#. was followed by the $mam al2. studied the basic premises the earlier theologians had established.e was followed by the imam $bn al2?hatib.%9= 0 large number of scholars followed in their steps and adhered to their tradition. because it was so closely related to the philosophical sciences. Many of these !arguments# were derived from philosophical discussions of physics and metaphysics. -eople studied it. . .aramayn 0bul2 Ma6ali.8 necessity of believing in them was concerned. the sub"ect of theology is !to find out# how the articles of faith which the religious law has laid down as correct.%:& $t should be nown that the theologians most often deduced the existence and attributes of the +reator from the existing things and their conditions. They thought that there was one and the same !sub"ect# in both disciplines. !al20sh6ari6s# approach was perfected and became one of the best speculative disciplines and religious sciences. at times. the science of logic spread in $slam. the forms of its arguments are. The 0sh6arite leader. it showed that they were applicable !only# to those !other disciplines and not to theology. the theologians would not have used it. but# they did not believe that if the arguments were wrong. not technically perfect#. the philosophical study of them differs from the theological. there is a relationship between the opinions of the innovators and the opinions of the philosophers. The arguments depend on them. and if the arguments are wrong. and they are the sub"ect of the philosophical study of physics.%9< . study them in so far as they serve as an argument for the Ma er. . which are altogether different from the beliefs of the religious law and were. The philosophers study bodies in so far as they move or are stationary. . the thing proven !by the arguments# was also wrong. therefore. $t was called 5the school of recent scholars. on the other hand. This approach differed in its technical terminology from the older one. it is possible to conclude that the thing proven !by them# is also wrong. The physical bodies form part of the existing things. the philosophical study of metaphysics studies existence as such and what it re)uires for its essence. 0s a rule.owever. because the scholars !of al20sh6ari6s time# were simple and the science of logic which probes arguments and examines syllogisms had not yet made its appearance in $slam.owever. The first !scholar# to write in accordance with the !new# theological approach was al2Gha.%9. to the theologians. When they probed them with the yardstic of logic. because the problems of each discipline were similar. -eople use the !Irshad# as their guide in matters of !dogmatic# belief. in that !they stated that# logic was merely a norm and yardstic for arguments and served to probe the arguments of the !philosophical sciences# as well as !those of# all other !disciplines#. Thus.. The theological study !of metaphysics#.e dictated a comprehensive wor on the 0sh6arite approach. 0fter that. !4cholars. so that innovations may be repulsed and doubts and misgivings concerning the articles of faith be removed.im who causes existence.e was very explicit in it.e then abridged the wor in the Kitab al-Irshad. Eudge 0bu >a r !al2>a)illani#.ali. The theologians. $n general. They considered the !philosophers# enemies of the articles of faith. They refuted most of them with the help of arguments leading them to !a different opinion#. this was their line of argument. can be proven with the help of logical arguments. on the other hand. The later scholars were very intent upon meddling with philosophical wor s. is concerned with the e istentia! in so far as they serve as argument for .# then.5 Their approach often included refutation of the philosophers where the !opinions of the# latter differed from the articles of faith. in most respects. The sub"ects of the two disciplines !theology and philosophy# were thus confused by them. . $n the same way. because. They made a distinction between it and the philosophical sciences. *ven if some of it had existed. . avoided by them. owever.e that the character of the sub"ect of this discipline is as we established it.eretics and innovators have been destroyed. from most of whose ambiguities and inferences the +reator can be considered to be free.e was told that they were people who.%:1 and how.owever.ali and the imam %:' $bn al2?hatib. This has go far that the one discipline is no longer distinguishable from the other. the usefulness of !speculative theology# for certain individuals and students is considerable. and the same situation also confronts the student of philosophy#. some students have occupied themselves with the !mixed# approach !in spite of its uselessness for the stu theology#. . in the Tawali"! and by later.5 %:< .9 $f one considers how this discipline originated and how scholarly discussion was incorporated within it st step. .e that !the discipline# cannot go beyond it. /rthodox Muslims should not be ignorant of speculative argumentation in defense of the articles of orthodox faith. in order to learn the different school opinions and to become versed in the nowledge of argumen which is amply represented in !the wor s which follow the mixed approach#. The basic wor here is the Kitab al-Irshad! as well as wor s that follow its example. but do not ma e such a confusion of problems and sub"ects as is found in the approach of the recent scholars who have come after them. 3ogical arguments were needed only when they %:% defended and supported !their own views with them#. The problems of theology have been confused with those of philosophy. in all their w . and one will reali. 4uch !mix theology and philosophy# was done by al2>aydawi. 5God is the friend of the believers. The approach of the early Muslims can be reconciled with the beliefs of the science of speculative theology only if one follows the old approach of the theologians !and not the mixed approach of recent scholars#.. Whereupon alEunayd said( 5The denial of a fault where !the existence of# a fault is impossible is !in itself# a fault. one will reali. all that remains of them %:4 is a certain amount of discussion. . $n general. scholars always assumed the correctness of the articles of faith and paraded 5and arguments !in their defense#.5 %:. non20rab scholars. 1ow.owever. The orthodox religious leaders have given us protection against heretics and innovators in their systematic wor s and treatments. Those who want to in"ect a refutation of the philosophers into their dogmatic beliefs must use the boo s of al2Gha. %:9 0l2Eunayd %:: was once passing a group of theologians discussing the !problem of the freedom of the +reator from human attributes#. . The student !of theology# cannot learn !theo from the boo s of !the recent scholars. by the aid of arguments. They do show some divergence from the old techni)ue. it must be nown that this science 2 the science of speculative theology 2is not something that is necessary to the contemporary student. . the two approaches have mixed up by recent scholars. during that process. were trying to free God from the attributes of createdness and from the )ualities that indicate deficiency.e as ed who they were.