Kader

Abstract

One of the most important problems that Birgivī Mehmed Efendi (d. 981/1573), one of the prominent Māturīdī scholars of the later period, attempted to solve in his eṭ-Ṭarīḳat al-Muḥammadiyya is how to justify human freedom and moral responsibility. Birgivī argued that the fact that God is the creator of all things and that he knows, wills, and determines human actions in eternity and writes them down on the preserved tablet does not mean that human beings are obligated to do these actions. This is because human beings have a voluntary choice and a heart’s will, which are the customary causes of their actions and do not have an external existence, that is, they are not subject to creation. On the one hand, Birgivī argued that human beings play an active role in their actions thanks to their voluntary choice and heart’s will; on the other hand, he argued that Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī (d. 324/935-36) defended the view of jabr al-mutawassīt, which is expressed as “We are muztar in our will and mukhtār in our actions.” However, he argued that this is not different from jabr al-maḥż. These views expressed by Birgivī in the context of the problem of human actions had a great influence on the scholars after him. However, Birgivī’s influence did not manifest itself in the same way in all scholars. On the one hand, many scholars such as Dāwūd al-Kārsī (d. 1169/1756), Akkirmānī (d. 1174/1760), and Abū Saīd al-Khādimī (d. 1176/1762) endeavored to ground and explain the problem of human actions within the framework of the scholarly heritage they inherited from Birgivī, while on the other hand, Ibrāhīm al-Kūrānī (d. 1101/1690), Saçaḳlīzāde Mehmed Efendi (d. 1145/1732), and Mehmed Amīn al-Üsküdārī (d. 1149/1736), who criticized his views. In the preliminary study, it was determined that the views of the aforementioned scholars on human actions were discussed in various studies, but Üsküdârî’s views were not the subject of any study. This study examines Mehmed Emîn al-Üsküdârî’s criticisms directed at Birgivî from a broad perspective, based on his treatise dealing with the issues of jabr and qadar, employing the method of content analysis. In this way, it is aimed to determine both Üsküdârî’s general view of the issue of human actions and his criticisms of Birgivî. In the aforementioned treatise, Usūdārī aimed to respond to Birgivī’s criticisms of al-Ashʿarī rather than explaining his views on the acts of the servants, but in doing so, he did not approach his views from a totalizing perspective; on the contrary, he clearly expressed the points that he found acceptable. On the other hand, he provides explanations in accordance with the Ashʿarite tradition on issues such as the ontic structure of juzī volition, the meaning of creation, the relationship between custom and action, the connection between divine knowledge, predestination, and writing on the preserved tablet and voluntary action, and whether al-Ashʿarī’s views on human actions can be characterized as mere algebra.