Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth — Page 24
ISLAMIC SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT whenever the two appeared to clash, rationalistic understanding must prevail, not as an alternative to revelation, but as a genuine clarification of the revealed message. They held the view that it becomes very difficult to get to the truth of the Holy Quran and the Sunnah without rationally deciphering the various similes, metaphors and symbols that are extensively used therein. . For example they pointed out that expressions such as. God's hand and face must be interpreted to mean His power and grace and so on. Ál- Áshárī in turn stressed that such references in the Quran represented real attributes of God whose precise nature was not known, albeit he agreed that no physical features were meant by such terms. . Although the Mu'tazilah movement appears to resemble in character the European schools of thought from the ninth to the seventeenth centuries, it did not take the. Ilḥādī (innovative) turn which European rationalism had taken during its progressive decline. The Mu‘tazilah always drew upon the original Islamic sources of the Holy Quran and the Sunnah to support their arguments, always remaining comfortably close to them never permitting themselves to drift far apart. . Today there is very little apparent difference between. Mu'tazilah and Ásháriyyah viewpoints. Although the historical perspective portrayed above has left its mark on the scholarly pursuits of the contemporary generation of. Muslim scholars, the sharp divisions of the past are no longer clearly defined. The scholars of today seem to advocate their personal views more than the views of any previous sectarian schools of thought. However, the remnants of past conclusions are still discernible. They are the product of a gradual compromise that developed between the different schools over the ages. Among them are those who are decidedly medieval in their attitudes but 24