RATIONAL NECESSITY AND EPISTEMIC PROOFS IN ISLAMIC THOUGHT: A COMPARATIVE ANALYTICAL STUDY OF THE MUʿTAZILITE AND ASHʿARITE SCHOOLS

الضرورة العقلية وأدلة المعرفة في الفكر الإسلامي دراسة تحليلية مقارنة بين المعتزلة والأشاعرة

Abstract

This study examines the concept of rational necessity and its role in epistemic reasoning within Islamic theology, through a comparative analysis of the Muʿtazilite and Ashʿarite schools. It addresses the epistemological problem of defining the scope and limits of necessary rational knowledge and its impact on theological methodology. The study argues that the Muʿtazila expanded rational necessity, granting reason an independent and binding role in recognizing moral and theological principles, particularly in issues of divine justice. In contrast, the Ashʿarites restricted rational necessity to universal rational principles and subordinated its function to revelation in order to preserve scriptural authority. The study concludes that the disagreement between the two schools does not concern the legitimacy of reason itself, but rather its epistemic scope and function. This methodological divergence significantly shaped their theological systems and approaches to scriptural interpretation.