# Were the Mu'tazila really defined by their use of reason? *What defined the Mu'tazila, the Sunni turn against reason, and Ibn Taymiyya's labelling* - URL: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/--pntsar8ck/s/15/ - Date: 2021-02-16 · Kind: lesson · Transcript tier: machine · Recording: Monday Nights with Mufti #202| Q&A Unscripted & Unrestricted! 😉 | Mufti Abu Layth (51:46–58:48) - Status: general teaching - Watch from the start of the segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--PntsaR8ck&t=3106s - Recording page: https://muftiabulayth.org/r/--pntsar8ck/ **Topics:** Creed and the schools of theology; Reason and revelation; Scholars and imams of the past **Summary (not a quotation; machine-made, unchecked):** Mufti Abu Layth says the Mu'tazila were defined by doctrines like a sinner leaving Islam and God being duty-bound, not by reason; the Sunni rejection of reason came later as a reaction. **Checked position (checked by two independent reviews, not by the channel):** Mufti Abu Layth says what split the Mu'tazila off was nothing to do with reason, but doctrines such as a sinner no longer being a Muslim and God being duty-bound to reward good. **Evidence, his words at 53:01:** “therefore there has to be that god is duty bound to recompense and so these issues are what split them off it was nothing to do with reason nothing to do with oh they were rationalists” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--PntsaR8ck&t=3181s) ## Longer summary Continuing, Mufti Abu Layth says what defined the Mu'tazila was holding that one who commits a sin is no longer a Muslim, that God does not dictate the evil in the world, and that God is duty-bound to do what is good and reward good deeds, whereas mainstream Sunnis held that God is omnipotent and not duty-bound. He says this had nothing to do with reason: because many Mu'tazila were grammarians and philosophers they won debates, and in the fourth and fifth centuries Sunnis reacted by mocking the use of 'aql and claiming the deen is not built on intellect, a narrative later generations inherited. He says the earliest Sunnis owned reason, that al-Kindi, al-Farabi and the Maliki Ibn Rushd, who inspires him, were not Mu'tazila, and that Ibn Taymiyya labelled reason-users Mu'tazila long after they had died out, as people today call anyone who supports the NHS a communist. He calls this a dirty tactic for disowning opponents, says the Quran instructs us to use reason, and says Ibn Taymiyya was not God or the Prophet and suffered from mental health issues. ## Sources and names cited - Mu'tazila - 'aql (reason) - salaf - al-Kindi - al-Farabi - Ibn Rushd - Ibn Taymiyya ## Transcript (machine tier, 51:46–58:48) [51:09] how you practice islam so for example ibn abbas the companion was a clear proponent of mutha he he argued was halal many of the people after him argue this then it falls out of flavor with many of the people but the shia continue it so they're just getting targeted as as part of this theological turf war that hey look at them look at them prostitution blah blah blah blah blah you know temporary marriages so in a similar way the material [51:46] that what defined the material was the fact that they said that if a person commits a sin he is no longer a muslim this was what defined them they also said that god has no real control uh or does not dictate any um you see they they said that god is not in control of the kind of um evil that happens in this world and also what ties into that [52:24] is that god is duty bound to serve what is always good so these few points which are a bit intricate so for example let's say you did a good deed uh god is not all powerful enough to i mean he is all-powerful but god is now duty-bound to make sure that you find a blissful afterlife whereas sunnis mainstream sunnis always held that god is omnipotent and he's not duty-bound he does what he does but he's not duty-bound [53:01] if god wants there will be no afterlife for example now according to the marta that's impossible because god because you've done the good deed you have to be rewarded so therefore there has to be that god is duty bound to recompense and so these issues are what split them off it was nothing to do with reason nothing to do with oh they were rationalists but what happens is as islam progresses and muslims progress in the next two hundred years or so because a lot of mahathir [53:41] happen to be gramerians and also philosophers they did argue some points with the sunnis so what they did do is gain the upper hand from a point of reasoning like they made some of the sunnis feel dumb on some points so what the sunni reaction was haha oh but you're using your aqua and this was a dumb point so obviously when they said this to the maatazilla the matazilla just owned it and said well yeah because islam tells us to but sunnis used to also own it prior to this point [54:18] but when around the 4th century of islam sunni started to fourth and fifth century sunni started to say well oh because they were taking a little beating in some debates so they started to say oh but oh wait you know you're trying to use your aqua your intellect and they said okay here sunnis tried to say oh but the deen isn't built on intellect and they started to pump this narrative just to get back at them it was all a reaction that's all it was and later subsequent generations just inherited this [54:58] but if you go back before that debate so let's say you go back to the time of the salaf you go back to the first 200 maybe under 300 years of islam you will see that in the early times many sunni muslims in fact some of the earliest people to claim reason and to own it were sunni was sunni islam so these this difference of reason was not a mata silly point hence all the great philosophers of islam were not mata zillia [55:36] were not mata you know obviously before his thing but hindi farabi these people were not i mean i suppose some people could say well some of them were from the shia ibn arush who was maliki who's you know somebody who i'm inspired by take a lot of my roon he was never you see it does not mean to follow your reason you are this is later on people like ibn tamir he really spewed this on steroids it's like he injected himself and he would just bash on anyone using [56:16] reason saying oh my attack had long died before ibn sami i mean this they didn't even they didn't even exist in his day and age but this retrospect it's like i give an example it's like today if somebody says something you start calling them a communist ah you're a communist you're a communist i mean communism isn't really around today and by saying something you're not actually a communist you know it's not like if you say look i think they should be let's say like like in the uk this should be a national health service [56:54] as the nhs exists and it's great now oh you're a kami you're a kami why why do you believe that the government should provide this that's communism communism you see this is what ibn taymiyyah was doing he was just like any person that was using his akal oh you're haven't existed for centuries that in our and he's from the six hundreds he says that the mata have long died out but this is what they used to believe so i hope that helps and the reason i [57:33] kind of went on the explaining that is because on many occasions you will get this kind of uh dirty tactic by muslims who can't handle your debate so what they say is oh just call yourself a different sect and therefore we can disown you and we don't need to deal with you because if you say why would i say i'm a mata when i'm not that's like me saying i'm a roman catholic why would i say i'm a roman catholic so you say oh but you use reason [58:10] well what don't you use reason you know you know what's that even supposed to mean the quran instructs you to use reason so they say oh yeah but uh you know but do you say akalizov so you say well is this in the quran sunnah no oh who told you which one to take then oh our dada ibn taymiyah well last time i checked ibna taimiya wasn't god and he wasn't the prophet he was however somebody who suffered from mental health issues [58:47] and albeit you know still performed on on many uh rulings greatly but he was someone who obviously suffered throughout his life you know for god's sake why why should we be taking him to be so supreme yeah uh all right so let's move on i see saracen says shukran for the super chat much love much love uh what are your thoughts on turkish gulen he has been designated a terrorist by the turkish president where jamaa promotes peace and dialogue ## Cite Mufti Abu Layth Archive, segment --PntsaR8ck/s/15. https://muftiabulayth.org/r/--pntsar8ck/s/15/ Not a fatwa: these answers were given to specific people at specific times. Ask a qualified scholar about your own situation.