The fallacy of appealing to Mutazilite theology while simultaneously upholding secularism | 🧵
Syed Muzammil is a known proponent of the separation of faith and state, in fact in this very session he mentions it for the success of the nation. What's interesting however is...
Syed Muzammil is a known proponent of the separation of faith and state, in fact in this very session he mentions it for the success of the nation. What's interesting however is...
him glorifying the mutazilah 'rationalist' theology as a secularist - believing for some reason that the mutazilah theology due to its reason based methodology supports/is coherent with his own worldview. This however could not be further from the truth and is...
just one of the many instances that highlight muzammil's ignorance of the islamic thought.
Here's the actual makeup of the mutazilite theology which was completely political and in some aspects 'radical' (as the liberals would concieve it) -
Here's the actual makeup of the mutazilite theology which was completely political and in some aspects 'radical' (as the liberals would concieve it) -
The Mutazilah were one of the only groups in Islamic history that believed in rebellion through 'sword' against the ruler. Every 'religiously impious ruler' could be deposed by force if necessary.
Any ruler that transgressed their own definition and idea of justice, i.e. any creedal or legal action taken by the ruler against the mutazilah theology, would have to be rebelled against.
Mutazilah were one of the first groups whose creedal principles were 'enforced' by the state on the muslim community (mihna). Quite difficult to understand how the activities of this school fit well with the framework of a secularist + a freedom of speech activist like muzammil.
He literally mocks the idea of totalitarianism of religious groups through state, and discouragement of indifference.
Al-Jahiz, one of the most prominent figures of mutazilism was clear on the principle of political activism in their 'rationalist' theology. The last time I checked, secularism by definition opposed political activism at state level based on religious beliefs.
Amr bi'l maruf... is from the usul-e-khamsa (the 5 foundational principles) of the Mutazilah - where forbidding wrong is an obligation which includes, coercion against all the heretical doctrines (that oppose the mutazilite theology) as much as required.
I hope the contradiction is more than evident here. Before advising others to study the Mutazilah thought i would advise syed muzammil to himself first get well versed in the ideas he's lecturing others about and instead of reading overviews on the internet - read actual books.
As for the claim that the mutazilah 'rationalist' theology was destroyed by 'tyrannical force' of the mongols - this claim smartly skips a piece of information. The mutazilah were destroyed on equal rational/logical grounds by the likes of Al-Ghazali and the islamic orthodoxy -
but since that doesn't suit his overall narrative, there's no need to mention it.
جاري تحميل الاقتراحات...