Many think that the Islamic world is not a place for rationalistic metaphysics and that the rationalism came only from Arabic philosophy, and there has since been a shift into mysticism and a sole interest in Islamic law. However, there has been much work on the Qur’an concerning both the philosophical nature of the work (Falsafa) and issues concerning revelation and the nature of God (Kalam). There is also work that analyzes the ethics, rituals, and law of the Qur’an, and often relies on metaphysical issues (Fiqh). Many Islamic thinkers, Ibn Qudāma included, believe that rationalism cannot be substituted for the mystical illumination of the Qur’an. One of the main issues of Islam is the recognition of how to synthesize reason (‘aql) and revelation (naql). It is genreally thought that certain issues of metaphysics belong to reason, while issues of prophetic authority and other issues in metaphysics such as the features of the afterlife and the nature of Jinn belong to revelation. Personally, I believe much of the Qu’ran can turned into reason or transcendentalized, since for example the features of the afterlife such as Heaven and Hell, the extremity of these places, and so forth, can be seen as the optimal ways of inducing moral completeness in this life and be tied to other issues such as the existence of the soul and self, and the mathematical structures of the Qu’ran, which seem to be central to metaphysics. This is indeed the approach Indians use to transcendentalize their conceptions of the afterlife. However, the specific features might be left to revelation. Ghazālī initiated an approach that synthesized law, scripture, Sufism, and Kalam. There eventually was a decline in Falsafa in the 12th century due the works Avicenna and Ghazālī, and a shift into the negative theology of Kalam.
I now give a brief introduction to the analysis of revelation and God in Kalam. The issue of the essence and attributes of God takes a central role in Kalam, with the two extremist positions being the anthropomorphists (mushabbiha) and the corporealists (mujassima). Anthropomorphism means that the qualities of God in the Qur’an are simply a fictitious representation of the true God, and coporealism means that God truly is a corporeal being. In between these positions, there are the positions of the Mu’tazilites, the Anabalites, and the Ash’arites. The Mu’talizites place an emphasis on transcendence while retaining some of the qualities and avoiding anthro-pomorphism, which leads them to believe that the Qu’ran is created. Various qualities are retained or refuted, for instance most Mu’taliza believe that power, omniscience, life, will, sight, and hearing, and speech are true qualities of God. Other qualities such as face and hands are anthropomorphic. The Anabalites believe that the qualities of God ultimately remain hidden and the words are there to be recited. In this sense they are against rationalistic speculation about the qualities of God, as this can lead to errors in your understanding of the Qur’an. These words are meant to be recited but not speculated about. The Ash’arites view places less of an emphasis on transcendence than the Mu’tazilites. The qualities of the Mu’tazilites as well as his actions are attributable to him. When it comes to face and hands, at times they take a neutral stance and regard them as neither corporeal or anthropomorphic, and at other times they ascribe face and hands to God and believe he will be seen in the afterlife.
. . . Although the Qur’an is one revelation among many throughout history, it is probably an epistemological fact that all revelations are not equally valid. There are several factors that lead to believing the Qur’an was a revelation of importance. According to the Sunnis, the speech of the Qur’an seems to be of divine origin and is written in a particular style that suggests divine speech. From the people that observed Muhammad, there was obviously something extraordinary going on. Often, when he was getting a revelation, we would become stiff and shake his head and sweat would drip from his forehead. Often he would enter a trance. As mentioned earlier, the Qur’anm was initially said to be created by the Mu’talizites, and later the role of Muhammad was downgraded and the rights were given to their God. . . . A person also should judge something revealed in the ways they would judge any metaphysical theory, such as whether it is internally consistent and whether it leads to proper ethical behavior. . .
That being said, I have developed a number of arguments that would more appropriately be entitled Falsafa than Kalam. Firstly, I believe Hegel’s argument where he gives the precise relationship between how the physical world interacts with the absolute spirit can be generalized to account for the Islamic God. As the argument as to how this God creates natural disasters would need this argument to translate how this God’s actions interacts with the physical world. Additionally, I believe the Qur’an mentions a fictional ontological viewpoint in which the God’s the individuals worship are subjective creations and they are told not to worship them. This can be generalized to account for a generalized fictional ontological viewpoint. Thirdly, I believe Hegel’s argument can be extended to include the two structures of the Qur’an with both self-reference and unresolvable contradiction as the two fundamental structures of the Universe with one self-referential pole placed in the Unitred States and one self-referential pole placed in the Middle-East. We must remember, however, that this is simply metaphyisi9cs and none of this is provable. It must be remembered that most Muslims view their God as transcendent and not immanent, but there is certainly an immanent component. These results rely on the interplay of German idealism and the Qur’an.
Idealism Studies 