Views
771
Downloands
33
İtikadî mezhepler arasında tartışılan va‘d-vaîd konusu temelde büyük günah problemiyle ilgili önemli bir konudur. Büyük günah sorunu çerçevesinde iman-amel ilişkisi bağlamında ele alınan bu önemli konu, ortaya çıkan fırkaların iman tanımlarına bağlı olarak şekillenmiştir. Va‘d ve vaîd ayetleri, kapsamı açısından ele alınarak umum veya husus ifade edip etmediği, ilâhî va‘d ve vaîdin değişip değişmeyeceği gibi soruların cevapları aranmıştır. Başlangıçta Mürcie ile Mu‘tezile arasında meydana gelen tartışmalar daha sonraki süreçte Mâtürîdîler’le Mu‘tezile kelâmcıları arasında önemli tartışma konularından birisi olmuştur. İmam Mâtürîdî, konu hakkında Hâricîler ve Mu‘tezile’ye ortak eleştiriler getirmekle birlikte daha ziyade Mu‘tezilî düşünceyi eleştirmektedir. Mu‘tezile, bu ilkeyi ilâhî adaletin bir gereği olarak mü’minleri ödüllendirip isyankârları cezalandırmanın Allah’a vacip olduğu düşüncesi üzerinden ele almaktadır. Onlara göre tövbe edilmeyen büyük günah ebedî olarak cehennemde kalmayı gerektirdiği için o kişiye şefaat edilmesi de mümkün değildir. Ancak Mâtürîdî, sürekli bir tasdik hali olan imanın ebedî cezaya engel olduğunu vurgulayarak adalet noktasında böyle bir iddianın geçerli olmayacağını savunmaktadır. Bu makalede Mâtürîdî’nin eleştirileri, konuyla doğrudan ilişkili olan ilâhî adalet, büyük günah ve şefaat açısından ele alınmıştır.
The subject of the va'd-vaîd discussed among the religious disciples is basically an important issue related to the big problem of sin. This important issue, which is addressed in the context of the faith-acts relationship in the framework of the great problem of sin, is formed according to the definitions of the faith of the emerging flags. The word and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an and the word of the Qur’an. In the beginning, the discussions between Mürcie and Mu'tezile were one of the important discussions between the Mâtürîdians and Mu'tezile speakers in the subsequent process. I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely to say that I am more likely. This principle is addressed by Mu'tezile by the thought that rewarding the believers as a reason of divine justice and punishment of the rebels is a promise to Allah. The great sin which they do not repent is not possible for the person to be shaped, because it requires to stay forever in hell. But the Maturidi says that the faith, which is constantly confirmed, is an obstacle to the eternal punishment, and that such claim is not valid at the point of justice. In this article, the criticism of Maturidi has been discussed in terms of divine justice, great sin and shaped, which is directly related to the subject.
The promise and the threat (al-wa’d wa al-wa‘īd) issue, which has been debated among theological sects, is primarily related to the problem of grave sin. This critical issue discussed in the framework of the problem of grave sin and in the context of the faith-action relationship has been shaped based on the definitions of faith of the emerging sects. Through examining the Qur’ān verses about al-wa’d and al-wa‘īd, answers to such questions whether the Qur’ān verses about to indicate generality (‘umūm) or specification (khusūs) and whether divine promise and threat can change have been sought. In the beginning, the disputations occurring between Murji’ah and Mu‘tazilah, afterward, have become one of the essential matters of debate among Māturīdīs and the Mu‘tazilī scholars. Even though Imām Māturīdī expresses common criticisms against Khawārij and Mu‘tazilah, he mainly condemns the Mu‘tazilī doctrine. Mu‘tazilah treats the principle in question based on the idea that, by force of divine justice, it is necessary for God to reward the faithful and punish the disobedient. According to them, because a grave sin that is not repented requires to stay permanently in the hell, intercession (shafā‘ah) is not possible for such a person. However, Māturīdī argues that a claim of this kind cannot be valid from the point of justice by emphasizing that faith, which is a state of constant assent, prevents the punishment. In this essay, Māturīdī’s criticisms have been discussed with regard to directly related issues such as justice, grave sin, and intercession.
Field : İlahiyat
Journal Type : Uluslararası
Article Detail 
Similar Articles
Download PDF
Journal Information
Listen Paper
Cite
Print This Page
Share
Mendeley
