KALĀM


KALĀM, meaning ʿilm al-kalām (the science of Kalām), is one of the branches of Islamic religious science. The common use of the word kalām is word, words, or speech. The *Koran is called kalām Allāh, i.e., the speech of God, and so, it was suggested, ʿilm al-kalām is "the science of the word [of God]." The exponent of Kalām is called mutakallim (lit. speaker, pl. mutakallimūn). The Hebrew designation ha-medabberīm and the Latin loquentes are equivalent to mutakallimūn.

The term Kalām, which represents the use of dialectics in theology, probably has antecedents in Greek (as derived from logos or dialexis) and Syriac (as derived from both mamlā, i.e. dialexis and mamlūt allāhūtā, i.e., theology). Kalām is usually translated as "theology," although this rendering is inaccurate, and it is best to use "speculative theology." The theological arena in Sunnite *Islam consisted not only of the Muʿtazilite mutakallimūn, who used logical argumentation, in order to prove some of the principles of religion (= ʾuṣūl al-dīn), but mainly of traditionalist theologians, who were, and still are, the central trend of Islam. While Kalām gives precedence to human reason (= ʿaḳl) in the process of perceiving God and the world, Islamic traditional theology declares to draw its authority solely from divine revelation and tradition (= naḳl) and the teachings of the ancestors (= salaf) of the Muslim community. It should be noted, that even the Muʿtazilite mutakallimūn could not be considered pure rationalists, because they rely to some extent upon divine revelation.

Kalām is commonly identified with two rival schools in Sunnite Islam: the Muʿtazila, flourished as two separate schools in *Baṣra and *Baghdād from the first half of the 8th century until the middle of the 11th century, and the Ashʿariyya, founded in Baṣra in the first half of the 10th century. The eponym of the Ashʿariyya, Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī (d. 935) was a former Muʿtazilite, who used the rationalistic tools of the Muʿtazila in order to defend the doctrines of traditional Islam and to defeat the Muʿtazila. Another important theological school is the Māturīdiyya-Ḥanafiyya, probably founded in central Asia in the 11th century.

The beginning of Kalām is by all means connected to the Arab conquests of *Iraq and *Persia in the 7th century, when the relatively young Muslim community came into contact with Hellenistic philosophical thought, both Christian and non-Christian, and with other religious doctrines, mainly Mazdaean and Manichaean. Public debates with holders of well-established faiths increased the need to use various rationalistic tools in order to defend Islamic doctrines and articles of faith (ʿaḳīda pl. ʿaḳāʾid), whose origins are to be found in the Koran and Ḥadīth (= prophetic traditions), and to uproot what was perceived as heretical concepts (= zandaḳa), infiltrated into Islamic thought. According to al-Tahānawī (d. circa 1745): "[ʿilm al-kalām] is the science, which enables one to assert the authenticity of religious beliefs and [discredit] others by giving proofs and dispelling doubts" (al-Kashshāf, vol. 1, p. 22).

The mutakallimūn comprehended their occupation as two-fold: on the one hand, Kalām is a process of a pure intellectual speculation in search of the ultimate truth, that is "to grasp the unity of God, and study the essence of God and His attributes" (al-Ghazālī, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, vol. 1, p. 25); on the other hand, Kalām is a system of defense and attack. Defeating the adversary by using various dialectical instruments is the main feature of Kalām. Alongside the use of analogy (= ḳiyās), one of the prominent methods of Kalām is ilzām, which means forcing the adversary to admit heretical or absurd views, drawn from his own set of arguments.

Most of the activity of the mutakallimūn was in the inner circles of Islam, mainly against Sunnite traditionalist theologians. Nevertheless, the boundaries between the two groups were never definite. Although traditionalist scholars prohibited practicing Kalām and debating with mutakallimūn, Kalām's methods had a huge impact upon them. For example, Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328), who belonged to the ultra-traditionalist Ḥanbalite movement, used Muʿtazilite theses and argumentations in his dispute with the Ashʿarites about predestination and free will.

Another group challenged by Kalām and labeled as heretics were the Muslim philosophers, in spite of the resemblance between Kalām's areas of interest and that of falsafa (= Muslim philosophy). The most elaborate endeavor in that direction is Tahāfut al-Falāsifa (= The Incoherence of the Philosophers) by the Ashʿarite theologian *al-Ghazālī (d. 1111). The philosophers, on their part, attacked ʿilm al-kalām and refuted its tenets and methods, as reflected in Ibn Rushd's (= Averroes, d. 1198) Tahāfut al-Tahāfut (= The Incoherence of the Incoherence).

Main Themes in Kalām

All Kalām manuals, after introducing the sources of knowledge of God and the world, viz. human reason and divine revelation, prove the existence of God and the creation of the world by using the proof from accidents, which is based on the doctrine of atoms. According to this doctrine, reality is made up of indivisible atoms with concomitant accidents, which exist only for an instant. Therefore, in every instant God is creating the world anew; there are no intermediate causes. This Islamic occasionalism allows for creation from nothing.

A point of dispute between the Muʿtazila and the Ashʿariyya is the denial of anthropomorphism (= tashbīh). This theme is derived from numerous Qurʾānic verses, which ascribe human properties to God. The Muʿtazila denied the figurative interpretation and applied allegorical interpretation to these verses. The Ashʿariyya for their part used the doctrine of bi-lā kayfa, which means believing the Qurʾānic formulae without trying to explain them.

The question of the unity of God (= tawḥīd), which is actually a cluster of problems, such as proving the existence of God, proving the creation of the world and explaining divine attributes, set out numerous points of dispute between the Muʿtazila and the Ashʿariyya. In the question of divine attributes (= ṣifāt), for example, the Muʿtazila denied their real existence, while the Ashʿariyya stressed their independent status.

The Muʿtazila asserted man's free will, while stating that man creates his own good and bad actions, due to the power God grants him beforehand, and therefore he is liable to reward and punishment. The Ashʿariyya, on the other hand, emphasized that God, as a creator of all things, creates all human actions. Man's responsibility over his actions is maintained by using the doctrine of kasb (lit. acquisition), according to which, when God creates man's acts he also creates in him the ability to "acquire" them. Designed to provide for man's responsibility for his actions, this doctrine is not far removed, if at all, from complete determinism.

The Kalām manuals discuss in length various topics regarding theodicy, eschatology and the status of prophecy. A major issue concerns the created or uncreated character of the Koran, and whether it exists as a divine attribute from all eternity.

Shiʿite Islam embraced Muʿtazilite theses as part of its doctrine from the 9th century, so in a sense they are current to some extent even nowadays. The Ashʿarite manuals are being studied in Sunnite madrasas (= religious boarding schools) alongside the works of the traditionalists.

[Livnat Holtzman (2nd ed.)]

Influence on Jewish Philosophy

The influence of Kalām, in its Muʿtazilite version only, on Jewish thinkers, both *Karaite and Rabbanite, during the Middle Ages was considerable. The earliest Jewish philosopher who was also influenced by Kalām was David ibn Marwan al-*Mukammis (first half of ninth century), who may have received it from his Christian teachers. It also had a great impact on *Saadiah Gaon. Muʿtazilite influence is visible from the very opening of Saadiah's Book of Doctrines and Beliefs, which begins with a demonstration of the createdness of the world and proceeds to deduce from this the existence of a creator. The very structure of Saadiah's theological masterpiece follows the order of the five Muʿtazilite theses previously mentioned. Most of his proofs of the noneternity of the world are derived from the Kalām, except that Saadiah did not hold the theory of atomism. Saadiah uses Kalām arguments, as well, in proving the unity of God, and his doctrine of attributes is similar to that of the Muʿtazilah. In treating the commandments, Saadiah distinguishes between rational and revealed commandments, thus sharing the Muʿtazilite distinction. In positing a future world in which children and animals will find reward for suffering in this world, Saadiah merely repeats a doctrine based on the Muʿtazilite sense of justice. In general, one may say that through Saadiah the Muʿtazilite Kalām exercised enormous influence on Jewish thought throughout the Middle Ages. *Samuel b. Hophni (d. 1013) followed closely the Muʿtazilite system in its Basran version. His son in law *Hai Gaon, did so to a lesser extent. Traces of the speculation of the Kalām are to be found in *Baḥya ibn Paquda and Joseph ibn Zaddik's proofs of creation. *Maimonides expounded and refuted kalamic doctrine in detail in the Guide of the Perplexed (1:73–76), although he did mention that his own point of view resembles the Kalām in certain respects (ibid., 2: 19). The influence of Kalām on Karaite thinkers was very pronounced. Its earliest attestations are found in the formulation of normative beliefs by al-*Qumisi (late 9th century). It had become accepted by most medieval Karaite thinkers. Joseph b. Abraham ha-Kohen *al-Baṣīr wrote theological works that follow closely the Basran Muʿtazilah both in structure and in contents, and so did his disciple *Jeshua ben Judah. They even accepted the doctrine of atoms. As late as the 14th century, *Aaron ben Elijah the Younger of Nicomedia defended the Kalām outlook in his Eẓ Ḥayyim, which was intended to be the Karaite counterpart of Maimonides' Guide.

[Lawrence V. Berman /

Haggai Ben-Shammai (2nd ed.)]

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

H. Corbin, Histoire de la philosophie islamique (1964), 152–78; M. Fakhry, Islamic Occasionalism… (1958); L. Gardet and G.C. Anawati, Introduction à la théologie musulmane (1948), 21–93; G. Vajda, Introduction à la pensée juive du moyen âge (1947), 23–37, 45–65; Guttmann, Philosophies, 61–84, index. ADD. BIBLIOGRAPHY: PRIMARY SOURCES: ʿAbd al-Jabbār ibn Aḥmad al-Asadabādī, Al-Mughnī fi abwāb al-tawḥīd wa `l-ʿadl (1960–69); Al-Ashʿarī, Abū al-Ḥasan, Al-Ibāna ʿan uṣūl al-diyāna (n.d.); Al-Baghdādī, Abū Manṣūr, Uṣūl al-dīn (1928); Al-Bāḳillānī, Abū Bakr, Kitāb altamhīd (1957); Al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad b. Aḥmad, Iḥyāʿʿulūm al-dīn (1998); Ibn Taymiyya, Abū al-ʿAbbās Aḥmad, Minhājal-sunna al-nabawiyya fi naḳḍ kalām al-shiʾa al-ḳadariyya (1986) Al-Jurjānī, ʿAli b. Muḥammad, Kitāb al-taʿrīfāt (1978); Al-Māturīdī, Abū Manṣūr, Kitāb al-tawḥīd (1970); al-Tahānawī, Muḥammad Aʿlā ibn ʿAlī, Mawsūʿat kashshāf iṣṭilaḥāt al-funūn (1996). SECONDARY SOURCES: B. Abrahamov, "Ibn Taymiyya on the Agreement of Reason with Tradition," in: The Muslim World, 82:3–4 (1992), 256–72; idem, Islamic TheologyTraditionalism and Rationalism (1998); idem, "Necessary Knowledge in Islamic Theology," in: British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies, 20 (1988), 20–32; G.C. Anawati, "Kalām," in: The Encyclopaedia of Religion, vol. 8, 231–42; R. Arnaldez "Apories sur le prédestination et le libre arbitre dans le Commentaire de Rāzī," in: Melanges de l'Institut dominicain d'études orientales du Caire, 6 (1959–60), 123–36; R. Brunschvig "Devoir et pouvoir," in Studia Islamica, 20 (1964), 5–46; M.A. Cook, "The Origins of Kalām,"in: Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 43 (1980), 32–43; J. van Ess, Theologie und Gesellschaft im 2. und 3. Jahrhundert Hidschra: eine Geschichte des religioesen Denkens im fruehen Islam (1990); idem, Zwischen Hadith und Theologie. Studien zur Entstehung praedestinatianischer Ueberlieferung (1975); idem, "The Logical Structure of Islamic Theology," in: G.E. von Grunebaum (ed.), Logic in Classical Islamic Culture (1970), 21–50; R.M. Frank, "Kalām and Philosophy, A Perspective from One Problem," in: P. Morewedge (ed.), Islamic Philosophical Theology (1979), 71–95; L. Gardet, "'Ilm al-Kalām," in: Encyclopaedia of Islam2, vol. 3, 1141–50; L. Gardet and G.C. Anawati, Introduction à la théologie musulmane (1948), 21–93; L. Gardet, Les grands problèmes de la théologie musulmane: Dieu et la destinée de l`homme (1967); D. Gimaret, Théories de l`acte humain en théologie musulmane (1980); G.F. Hourani, Reason and Tradition in Islamic Ethics (1985); D.B. Macdonald, "Kalām," in: H.A.R. Gibb and J.H. Kramers (eds.), Shorter Encyclopaedia of Islam (1995), 210–14; W. Madelung, "The Late Muʿtazila and Determinism: the Philosophers' Trap," in: Yad-nama in memoria di Alessandro Bausani, vol. 1 (1991), 245–57; idem, "The Origins of the Controversy Concerning the Creation of the Koran," in: Orientalia Hispanica, 1 (1974), 504–25; M.E. Marmura. (ed.), Islamic Theology and Philosophy: Studies in Honor of G.F. Hourani (1984); S.H. Nasr and O.Leaman (eds.), History of Islamic Philosophy (1996); E.L. Ormsby, Theodicy in Islamic Thought (1984); M.S. Seale, Muslim Theology (1964); J.M. Pessagno, "Irāda, ikhtiyār, qudra, kasb: The View of Abū Manṣūr Al-Māturīdī," in: Journal of the American Oriental Society, 104:1 (1984), 177–99; J.R.T.M. Peters, God's Created Speech (1976); Sh. Pines, "A Note on an Early Meaning of the Term Mutakallim," in: Israel Oriental Studies, 1 (1971), 224–40; idem, Studies in Islamic Atomism (1997); G. Vajda, Introduction à la pensée juive du moyen âge (1947), 23–37, 45–65; W.M. Watt, The Formative Period of Islamic Thought (1973); idem, Free Will and Predestination in Early Islam (1948); idem, Islamic CreedsA Selection (1994); A.J. Wensinck, The Muslim Creed (1965); H.A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Kalam (1976). INFLUENCE ON JEWISH PHILOSOPHY: H. Ben-Shammai, in: D.H. Frank and O. Leaman (eds.), History of Jewish Philosophy (1997), 114–15; idem, in: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 6 (1985), 243–98; H. Davidson, Proofs for Eternity, Creation and the Existence of God in Medieval Islamic and Jewish Philosophy (1987); M. Schwarz, in: Maimonidean Studies, 2 (1991), 159–209; C. Sirat, A History of Jewish Philosophy in the Middle Ages (1985); G. Vajda (ed. and tr.), Al Kitāb al-Muḥtawī par Yūsuf al-Baṣīr (1985); H.A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Kalam (1976); idem, Repercussions of the Kalam in Jewish Philosophy (1979).


Source: Encyclopaedia Judaica. © 2008 The Gale Group. All Rights Reserved.