Islamskaya_mysl_1_2016

оригинального текста ал-Му║аддимы показывается, какую роль она игра- ет в жизни внегородских и городских сообществ, и каким образом она об- условливает их системные трансформации. Вне города спаянность выра- жается во внутренней сплоченности и направленной вовне агрессивности членов племени, благодаря которым оно способно завоевать город исоздать свое государство. В городе, под влиянием иного образа жизни и ряда эко- номических и психологических факторов спаянность начинает постепенно разлагаться. Племенные коллегиальность и эгалитаризм сменяются деспо- тизмом единоличного правителя, аскетизм и воинственность — склонно​ - стью к наслаждениям и развлечениям. Пережив короткий период расцве- та, государство деградирует иразлагается, чтобы вконце концов погибнуть под ударами нового пришедшего извне племени. История начинается сна- чала. Схема, выработанная Ибн Хальдуном, хорошо иллюстрирует сред- невековые североафриканские политические реалии и является одним из важнейших достижений арабо-мусульманской мысли.

Д. Рубин

Мусульманство в русском и британском философско-религиозном пространстве:

от инаковости к конвергенции

Встатье исследуется роль, которую играли ислам и иудаизм в русской

ианглийской христианско-философской мысли XIX иXX веков. Христиане, принадлежащие этим культурам, использовали ислам ииудаизм и как Иное,

впротивовес которому они самоопределялись, но также и как Иное, кото- рое могло обогатить их собственную самоидентификацию и внести вклад

вмодернистскую критику родной христианской культуры. Также это мог- ло помочь расширить эту культуру и превратить ее в более универсальное мировоззрение. Евреи и мусульмане, в свою очередь, отзывались на ана- лиз их собственных религий, осуществляемый доминирующей культурой. Они использовали христианские исследования ислама и иудаизма в каче- стве дополнительного инструмента вхождения в доминирующую христи- анскую культуру, вбирая в свою идентичность положительное восприятие самих себя и подвергая критике другие аспекты. Результатом является кон- вергенция между аспектами христианских и нехристианских философий, обогащающая обе стороны и создающая широкий пласт общей погранич- ной культуры.

Автор также рассматривает, почему определенные межрелигиозные аналогии избираются для конвергенции мыслителями разных традиций,

идемонстрирует, что социально-политическое положение разных сооб- ществ оказывало влияние на то, что считалось привлекательным и полез- ным в Иной культуре. Существует синхронная конвергенция, в которой христианские и нехристианские мыслители оказывают прямое, непосред- ственное воздействие друг на друга, а также асинхронная конвергенция, при которой общие интересы только ретроспективно сходятся в степени, достаточной для того, чтобы осуществился взаимный обмен.

Рассматриваемые в этой статье ученые дореволюционной эпохи, уча- ствовавшие в конвергенции, включают христианских мыслителей, или мыслителей «христианской культуры», — ​В. С. Соловьева, В. В. Розанова

иЛ. Н. Толстого; мыслителей мусульман — ​Х. Фаизханова и И. Гасприн- ского, а также еврейских мыслителей — ​А. З. Штейнберга и М. О. Гершен- зона. Часть статьи посвящена сочинениям Д. В. Мухетдинова, российского мусульманского ученого, который, с точки зрения основного тезиса статьи, вступает в отношения асинхронной конвергенции с его собственным джа- дидским наследием и философией Серебряного века.

Взаключительной части автор исследует конвергенцию в британском контексте. Британско-мусульманский ученый Абдул Хаким Мурад (Тимо- ти Уинтер) говорит о том, как для британского ислама может быть найде- но место в родном спектре британских форм христианства, а именно в ана- логии с низкоцерковным англиканством унитаристского толка XVII века. Этот британский случай исламо-христианской конвергенции поднимает вопрос о типологии европейских исламо-христианских конвергенций, ко- торая может быть разработана для других стран и контекстов. Автор пред- полагает, что поиск путей конвергенции — ​это одновременно и цель ака- демического процесса, и исторический моральный императив, который может способствовать интеграции мусульманских меньшинств и обога- тить их самосознание.

Д. Рубин

Российское мусульманство в условиях идеологических трансформаций

Доминик Рубин — британско​ -российский филолог, религиовед; специа­ лист в области иудейско-христианских отношений, русской религиозной философии, ислама в России. Публикуемое интервью было подготовле- но в декабре 2015 года. Интервьюером выступил С. Ю. Бородай. Во вре- мя разговора обсуждались следующие темы: ислам в России, кораниче- ский гуманизм, межрелигиозный диалог, евразийство и его мусульманская

интерпретация, точки пересечения между русской религиозной филосо- фией и исламской философией, перспективы исламской философии и др. Центральная тема интервью — положение​ российских мусульман в усло- виях идеологических трансформаций, происходящих в современной Рос- сии и за ее пределами.

А. Корбен

От Хайдеггера к Сухраварди

Анри Корбен (1903–1978)—французский​ философ иисламовед, специа­ лист по шиизму, исмаилизму и суфизму; один из крупнейших исламоведов XX века, основатель целого направления исследований, посвященных ис- ламу в Иране и арабо-мусульманской мысли в целом. Публикуемая работа состоит из интервью, которое было записано для радио «Франция — Куль​ - тура» в июне 1976 года, и «Биографического посткриптума», подготовлен- ного Корбеном в 1978 году.

Работа Корбена представляет интерес, прежде всего, как попытка от- кровенного ретроспективного взгляда на свой творческий путь. Француз- ский философ рассказывает о первых этапах своего пути, овдохновлявших его мыслителях, об обращении к исламоведческой проблематике и о мно- голетних исследованиях в области арабо-мусульманской мысли. Отдель- ное внимание уделено тем духовным импульсам, которые побуждали его к поиску единого «эзотерического» ядра авраамических традиций. Рабо- та является прекрасным образцом философской саморефлексии и, благо- даря этому, мы узнаем не только об исламоведческой стороне деятельно- сти Корбена, но и о его особом мистическом мировидении.

Перевод с английского и примечания М. В. Медоварова.

Abstracts

A. N. Yuzeev

Musa Bigi’s religious reformatory views

The article presents an analysis of the religious reformatory views of Musa Bigi (Bigiev). It addresses such aspects of the Islamic thinker’s works as the issue of the comprehensiveness of divine mercy, the reformation of Fiqh, the views on Ijtihad, Kalam and the admissibility of translating the Quran.

The issue of the comprehensiveness of divine mercy was addressed by Bigi in 1901–1911. He puts on a modern footing the topic that had been already con- sidered by such thinkers as Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, IbnArabi, al-Afghani, etc. Talking about the comprehensiveness of divine mercy, Bigi im- plied the possibility of the final salvation for all people (apocatastasis) and the admissibility of various religious paths to God. He proposed several arguments in favor of this point of view, drawing on the Quran, sunnah, sayings of the sa- haba and general philosophic considerations. His interpretations received sup- port among Tatar reformers.

Bigi, among other reformers, believed that it is necessary to get rid of every- thing that had been introduced by the post-Golden age Islamic theology. He rec- ognized four theoretic lawmaking fundamentals ‘Uṣūl al-Fiqh’: the Quran, sun- nah, ijmāʽ and qiyās; at the same time, Bigi was not prioritizing any of the legal schools in particular (though considered himself a Hanafi). According to him, every Muslim could perform ijtihad, express his judgment on this or that social and legal matter, but, at the same time, one had to know the Qur’an, sunnah and Arabic. Bigi believed that due to the changes in living conditions, a through ref- ormation of Fiqh was required.

The translation of the Qur’an was an important component of Bigi’s reli- gious reformatory views. Wishing to make the Qur’an available for the major- ity of Tatars, in 1911 Bigiev prepared for publication his translation into Tatar, which caused a heavy controversy among the Tatar intelligentsia. As a result, Bigi was unable to publish it.

Thus, Musa Bigi continued the glorious traditions of the Tatar reformism of 18th –19th century laid by A. Kursawi, A. Utyz-Imani and S. Marjani. He devel- oped the main ideas of that trend and adapted them to the Russian reality of the early 20th century.

R. I. Gaynutdin, D. V. Mukhetdinov

Al-Ghazali’s views on the problem of orthodoxy and salvation

The article focuses on the reconstruction ofAbu Hamid al-Ghazali’s (1058– 1111) ideas on the problem of orthodoxy and salvation. The authors show that al-Ghazali can be placed among the proponents of moderate and pluralistic un- derstanding of Islam, although his views are not always expressed explicitly.

According to al-Ghazali, every man deep down his heart is faithful, and this na- ture (fiṭrah) of his is permanent and unchangeable. Nevertheless, layers of dirt and dust can be accumulated on his orthodox nature as the result of education and up- bringing.This prevents the Light of God from entering man’s soul and entails disbe- lief(kufr).ItisimportantthattheIslamicthinkerdifferentiatesbetweenthelegaland ontologicalunderstandingofdisbelief.Hislegal(legalistic)viewincludeseverything thatcharacterizesIslamasasocialdoctrine;however,hisontologicalviewfocuseson thetruestatusofman,i.e .hisstatusatadeepunderlyinglevel.Legalmembershipin the Ummah is not a guarantee that manis truly a Muslim and that he is submissive toGod.TheabsenceoflegalmembershipintheUmmah,inturn,doesnotmeanthat one is deprived of an opportunity of approaching God and salvation.

Al-Ghazali believes that from a legal point, anyone, who recognizes the prophethood of Muhammad and the truthfulness of all religious regulations con- veyed through him, including monotheism and the inevitability of Doomsday, should be considered a Muslim. When al-Ghazali talks about faith in ‘the truth- fulness of the words’of the Prophet, he implies ‘truthfulness’as a whole, as the recognition of the reality of the things in question at least at one of the levels of existence: on selfhood level (ontological), sensual, imaginary, intelligible or analogous (analogical) levels. In these terms, representatives of very different schools can be incorporated in the legal field of Islam, including anthropomor- phists, Hanbalis, and Mu’tazilites,Ash’arites, Shiites, and others.

The ontological understanding of orthodoxy can be found in al-Ghazali’s Sufi writings. The Islamic thinker suggests that faith(imān) in its essence is the light that God sends to man’s heart.This essential faith has absolutely nothing to do with formal faith, which is no more than repetition of a number of phrases. Formal faith does not guarantee the acquisition of essential faith, while the depth of essential faith is measured by the degree of closeness to God; here people can be divided into three categories: covered in pure darkness; covered half in light and half in dark- ness and covered in pure light. Beyond the ontological hierarchy, there are those, who have reached the fullness of faith.Those are prophets and Sufis, before whom all the veils that separate man from contemplating God are removed.

In a number of his works, al-Ghazalitouches upon the problem of salvation, but his considerations here are rather contradictory. Cumulative evidence suggests that

al-Ghazali leans towards the recognition of the universality of salvation (apocatasta- sis), although he does not say so openly. Otherwise, one cannot explain numerous hints and problematic points in his works.Among them, in the first place, is a tele- ological idea according, to which everything is not only due to God, butfor God, to returntoGod;secondly,itishisbeliefthattheepithet‘theMerciful’deservesonlyby the one who does evil for the sake of good, and not evil for the sake of evil; thirdly, these are his references to the mystery, the disclosure of which is prohibited by the law (the same law that itself thrusts the legal definition of ‘eternal hell’).

T. K. Ibrahim

«My mercy encompasses all things»

This essay is a revised version of the second chapter of the author’s book ‘Quranic humanism’ (Moscow, 2015). Proceeding from the Quranic annuncia- tion of the comprehensiveness of divine mercy (7:156; 40:7), the author sub- stantiates the idea of the universality of salvation (finiteness of hell), which can be met at a number of sahaba and which was developed by a number of Mus- lim thinkers, including such prominent representatives of the Russian Ummah of 19th–20th centuries as Musa Bigiev and Rida Fakhretdinov.

Analyzing traditional arguments of the proponents of the concept of hell’s eternity, the author seeks to prove the inconsistency of the references to the Qu- ran and sunnah, to the consensus, to the embeddedness of evil in the souls of in- fidels or to the analogy with Paradise.

The arguments in favor of the universality of salvation can be classified in three category:

1. Traditional evidences (ayahs 6:128, 11:107, 78:21–23 and so forth; had- iths; the sayings of sahaba and their apprentices);

2.The proofs of the substantiality of good and the accidentiality of evil (the universality of God’s mercy and its primacy over His anger; the essential gen- tleness/purity of human nature — fiṭra​ );

3.Proofs from God’s ultimate wisdom (meaninglessness of eternal punish- ment) and His fairness (inconsistency of the eternity of the punishment and the finiteness of sin).

R. K. Adygamov

The problem of ijtihad in works of Tatar theologians (late 18th – ​early 19th centuries)

The article deals with the views ofTatar theologians onijtihād. By ijtihad the author understands an attempt to comprehend the true principles of the sacred

canonical law though argumentation; Ijtihad is seen as a less arbitrary method of judgment, than paradise, as it is substantially based on the Qur’an and sun- nah. The author analyzes the views of G. Utyz-Imyani, G. Kursawi, S. Marjani, G. Bubi and R. Fakhretdin.

It is demonstrated that G. Utyz-Imyani held the viewpoint that the gate of ijtihad was close, thus, he advocated the patterning of an authority (taqlīd), the authority ofAbu Hanifa in the first place.

In his turn, G. Kursawi recognized the necessity of ijtihad, but only for a nar- row circle of scholars and on the basis of a specific group of texts; according to Kursawi, ijtihad should be performed by a scholar as far as he could, and if one has no ability in ijtihad, then he should prefer taqlid. The author shows that in general Kursawi had a bent towards the Hanafi legal school.

S. Mardjani expanded the view of Kursawi: he considered that the asser- tion that the time of ijtihad had passed was groundless. Besides, in ijtihad Mar- jani saw a duty entrusted to a Muslim scholar. The Tatar theologian allowed of taqlid, but conceived of it creatively: it should not be a blind imitation, but suc- cession based reason; therefore, taqlid is acceptable for several mujtahids simul- taneously. Marjani preached freedom of ijtihad and taqlid, whereas he himself had a bent towards the Hanafi legal school.

G. Bubi criticized the idea of the closure of the gate of ijtihad. He saw the reason of economic and intellectual backwardness of the Muslim Ummah pre- cisely in taqlid and the rejection of an in-depth study and understanding of the Qur’an. Bubi saw Islam as complete, full, divinely inspired religion and the Qur’an — ​as a perfect divine scripture, embracing all the essential aspects of humankind’s life. Therefore, he did not think it was obligatory to use any theo- logian’s works.According to Bubi, each succeeding generation of Muslims shall deduce for itself the laws of Sharia, which would suit most their age and the re- gion they inhabit.

R. Fakhretdin believed that the idea of the closure of the gate of ijtihad and the need to follow one of the four madhhabs is a complexification of religion. He criticized the view that modern Muslims were unable to immediately un- derstand the Qur’an and Sunnah and this was the reason why mujtahids cannot emerge among them.

The article also shows that the ideas of the Tatar theologians have had a sig- nificant influence on the formation of modern social and religious thinking of Russia’s Muslims, in which one can single out three trends: a trend to revive Hanafism; a trend to abandon the madhhabs; the trend to turn away medieval understanding of the Quranic text.

M. Bigiev

Evidence of divine mercy

Musa Bigiev (1875–1949) is a Russian theologian, writer, and public figure. The work ‘The evidence of divine mercy’consists of a series of lectures read by Bigiev in the ‘Husainiya’madrasah. These lectures were published in the 1909– 1910 in the ‘Shura’ magazine before they were published in book form by the ‘Waqyt’publishing house in Orenburg. Their publication stirred up a heated de- bate, involving Russian, Turkish and Egyptian theologians.

Bigiev focuses on the problem of divine mercy; in particular, he considers the question of whether people, who are not Muslims from a legal point of view, are foredoomed to eternal torments in hell, or they too will someday be saved (apoca- tastasis). The interest of the Russian scholar to this problem is due to a number of reasons. Firstly, Bigiev was not satisfied with the view prevailed among mu- takallims that all non-Muslims are doomed to eternal torment; in his opinion, it contradicts the Quranic assertions of the infinity and comprehensiveness of divine mercy. Secondly, the belief in the eternity of the pains of hell makes human life devoid of sense, the life, which is itself full of suffering, and yet it is only a brief moment as compared to eternity. Thirdly, the deconstruction of the topic, accord- ing to Bigiyev, would restore the true pluralistic image of Islam, buried under a pile of jurisprudential and theological speculation. Fourth, consideration of the issue of divine mercy can show the insignificance of scholastic theology,Kalām, the prevalence of which, according to the scholar, is one of the reasons behind the crisis of the Islamic world in general. Finally, this issue is particularly relevant for Russian Muslims who need to build relations with other faiths.

Bigiev puts forward eight arguments in favor of the comprehensiveness of divine mercy and the inevitability of the ultimate salvation of all people. He finds his arguments in the Qur’an, Sunnah and sayings of the sahabah and sub- stantiates them with Sufi ideas and general philosophical considerations.An im- portant feature of Bigiev’s approach is the contextualization of Quranic verses: he believes that the language of the Revelation allows for all the peculiarities of Arab national life and customs, thus the promises and threats regarding the tor- ments of hell should be assessed only in an actual context.

Translated from Old Tatar by A. G. Khairutdinov.

Riza Fakhraddin

The issue of divine mercy

This is the Russian translation of the work by R. Fakhraddin ‘Rahmat ilahi- ya meselese’ (The issue of divine mercy), which was published in 1911 by the

‘Waqit’publishing house in Orenburg. In his work, Fakhraddin protects Bigiyev from attacks by critics, who, in his opinion, have little knowledge of their own spiritual tradition. The Russian thinker points out that the opinion on both the eternity and finiteness of hell (apocatastasis) had been expressed by prominent Islamic theologians, thus the issue raised by Bigiev is anything but new; rath- er, those are introducing innovation who consider this matter resolved for good, claiming the eternity of hell. Fakhraddin shows the true diversity of opinions by citing the excerpts from the book Ḥādi al-arwāḥ ilā bilād al-afrāḥ (Spurring souls on to the realms of joys) by a medieval Hanbali thinker Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (1292–1350), whom Fakhraddin considers to be at the stage of ab- solute mujtahid. In his work, Ibn Qayyim considers different views on the fate of sinners after death, examines the arguments of the adherents of the eternity of hell and suggests his counter-evidence, leaning thus to the opinion of hell’s fi- niteness. Fakhraddin does not dispute the view of Ibn Qayyim and Bigiyev, nor does he explicitly agree with them; he only emphasizes the pluralistic nature of Islamic tradition in this matter. Fakhraddin also focuses on the importance of the problem of the comprehensiveness of divine mercy for modernity and en- courages Russian Muslims to consider it more thoroughly, preparing thereby the way for the rest of the Islamic world.

Translated from Old Tatar by I. Gimadeev.

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali

The Decisive Criterion for Distinguishing Islam from Masked Infidelity

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (1058–1111) is a prominent Islamic scholar, special- ist in Fiqh, Kalam, Falsafe, who is also renowned for the systematization of Sufi knowledge. He wrote his work ‘The Decisive Criterion for Distinguishing Is- lam from Masked Infidelity’(Fayṣal al-tafriqah bayn al-islām wa al-zandaqah) in 1104. The preparation of this work was going on against the background of heated debate among Islamic scholars on what constitutes orthodoxy. Some representatives of Ash’arites, as Abd al-Qahir al-Baghdadi (d. 1037), believed that the true faith requires an adequate rationalization; thus, an infidel is anyone who rejects an elaborated theological system of Ash’arism. In answering this statement, al-Ghazali examines in detail all the particularities of the definition of orthodoxy (imān) and at the same time pays particular attention to the ques- tion of how to recognize clandestine apostasy (kufr), hidden behind external ad- herence to Islam. He uses the word ‘zandaqah’ to denote this ‘implicit disbe- lief’typical for falāsifa and some batiniyyas. One should keep in mind that he wrote his Fayṣal al-tafriqah for the general public, thus al-Ghazali speaks from