e-Makalat Mezhep Araştırmaları Dergisi

Öz

Karrâmiyya,
which intensified its activities in the region of Khorasan, from hijrî third
century to sixth century affected the region for almost three centuries in the
religious, political, and social sense. Karrâmiyya, which gained a lot of
supporters via the ascetic lives of Karrâmiyyan scholars rather than its
theological views at the beginning, got a new dimension with Mohammad b.
al-Haytham’s (the end of the IV/X. century and the beginning of the V/XI.
century) interpretations about the views of Karrâmiyya. When the fact that
Kerrâmiyya had lacked the theological depth that could cause it to be treated
as a separate sect before Ibn al-Haytham is considered, whether the changes
occurring in time have reflections on firaq literature or not is important for
this study. Because of its interpretation of Allah and His divine attributions
and its understanding of faith, Karrâmiyya is usually regarded in the category
of Mucassimah-Mushabbihah or as a branch of Murji’ah in the works of
Maqâlât. The question of what kind of effect the sectarian belonging and views
of maqâlât authors as well as Karrâmiyya’s own views have on this kind
classification is another point we mind. In this study, under which category
Karrâmiyya has been handled by different religious-social groups during the
periods comprising the phases of its appearance, rise and losing its efficiency
and the reasons fostering this categorization will be tried to be
examined by following the historical process.  

        Summary

A sect active in the regions of Khorasan and Transoxania from h. 4^th
to 6^th century, Karrâmiyya got supporters due to the ascetic living
of certain Karrâmî figures rather than its theological views. Karrâmiyya got a
different dimension with Mohammad b. Hayṣam’s (towards the end of IV/X
centuries and at the beginning of V/XI centuries) interpretations about the
views of Karrâmiyya. Except for Abu al-Mûtî‘ Makhul al-Nasafi’s el-Lu’lu’iyyât
fi’l-Mewâ‘ız, Ibn Karrâm and Karrâmiyya
are first mentioned through the mid IV/X century. This period coincides with
the time when Ibn Haysam forms the theological basis of the sect. Besides, it
is not possible to find a common attitude about the categorization of
Karrâmiyya within maqâlât tradition. The views of Karrâmiyya on
Anthropomorphism and Anthropopathism are brought into question by the
supporters of Hadith; and Karrâmiyya is referred as a Murciah sect because of
its approach to the problem of faith, which is the determinant of the opposition
between the two groups. When we consider the fact that the supporters of the
Hadith are referred as Hashawiyya within Islamic thought because of their
literal approach to nass, and that they are sometimes put under the title of Mucassimah-
Mushabbihah, the reason why the supporters of Hadith do
not bring forward the views of Karrâmiyya on Anthropomorphism and
Anthropopathism finds meaning. When the ongoing struggles between the
supporters of Hadith and Murji’ah are considered, Karrâmiyya seems to get its
share from the struggle between the two sects due to its being from Murji’ah
origin. Karrâmiyya has been explicitly and latently accused of invalidating the
deeds and accepting the Christians and Jews as deserving the heaven by the
supporters of Hadith because of their understanding of faith. In addition to
these accusations, the Karramîs have been accused of making up hadith and have
been described as an un-Islamic element. Their being defined as a heretic
element having appeared within Islam has led to some certain limitations with
the social relations with the Karramîs. The fact that the literature of the
supporters of Hadith includes examples that question even the legitimacy of
greeting the Karramîs and performing salaat behind them is crucial to show the
dimensions of the opposition between the two sects.     

While the supporters of Hadith study the Karramîs within Murji’ah as
they take the Karramîs’ understanding of faith to the centre, the Mâturîdîs
base their criticism on the views of the Karramîs on Allah and His attributes
and usually study Karrâmiyya within Mucessim-Musebbih. The criticism of
Karrâmiyya in Hanafi circles seems to shape around either within the frame of
kesb and faith, as it is with Hakîm es-Semerkandî, or within the frame of  anthropomorphism and faith, as it is with
Abu’l- Mu‘în an-Nasafi. Even though Karrâmiyya has been criticized due to its
understanding of faith, these criticisms have been overshadowed by the
criticisms directed about the attributes of Allah. Thus, Karrâmiyya has been a
sect which is evaluated independently from Murji’ah and rather associated with
Mucassimah- Mushabbihah. The information given about Karrâmiyya in
Hanafi-Mâturîdî tradition during the period when Karrâmiyya was weak is
limited. Yet, the information about it increased when it became strong.
Besides, the amount of criticism about Karrâmiyya has increased with its losing
the political support behind it and its dominance in the region; and the
information given in Hanafi-Mâturîdî tradition has decreased as it inclined to
fade.

As to the dimension of the opposition between the Ash‘arîs and Karramîs,
it has been different from other traditions. The opposition between the two
sects has reflected to the sources within the frame of the debates between Ibn
Fûrak, Abdulḳâhir al-Baghdâdî, Abu’l-Muzaffar al-Isfarâyînî and Fakhr
al-Dîn al-Râzî and the leading Karramî
personalities. When the criticism of Ibn Fûrek and Isfarâyînî, who were the
contemporaries of the leading Karramî personalities, about Karrâmiyya is considered, it is seen that
Ibn Fûrak focuses on the issue of faith and does not mention the views referred
to Karrâmiyya about Allah and His attributes. The fact that Ibn Hayṣam, a
Karramî theologian, absolutely rejects the views that cause Karrâmiyya to be
mentioned among the Tashbih groups can be said to be determinant on the
subject. The criticism of Karrâmiyya in the Ash‘arî  tradition seems to gain a different dimension
with Baghdâdâ. Baghdâdî practised his criticism of Karrâmiyya over Ibn Karrâm’s
Aẕâbu’l-Ḳabr and seriously affected theauthors after him on the issue.
We can say that the criticism of Karrâmiyya about Allah and His attributes in
Ash‘arî  tradition begins with Baghdâdî.
The fact that Karrâmiyya had lost the political support in this period was a
factor for the increasing dose of criticism. Beginning with h. 5^th
century, there has been a blackening operation about Karrâmiyya within
Ash‘arî  tradition. Karrâmiyya’s views on
Allah’s actual attributes, which had not become an issue before Baghdâdî, began
to come to the fore in the criticisms directed to Karrâmiyya by the leading
Ash‘arî figures with Karrâmiyya’s losing its political and social power.

In this study, we have tried to present the categorization of Karrâmiyya
by each opposing group with their own internal dynamics and by subjecting it to
a multi-directional evaluation, considering the fact that the actuality of
Karrâmiyya and the perception of Karrâmiyya have not been seriously
distinguished from each other in the studies carried out about the subject thus
far. In this context, we can say that Karrâmiyya has been able to maintain an
approach, which is different from that of takfiri discourse, together with the
interpretation it brings to the issue of faith despite the fact that its
understanding of faith has been mispresented and distorted by the opposing
groups. Furthermore, Karrâmiyya has taken its place within the Islamic thought
by providing an analytic interpretation within the frame of the conditions of
the time to the issue of imamate, which has not usually been mentioned by the
opposing groups and which has caused separation among the Muslims due to its
idea of accepting the imamates of two different imams in the same period as
legitimate.