Jadal

Jadal ( Arabic جدل, DMG ǧadal  'dispute, dispute, word dispute') is a term in Islamic theology and legal theory that is used to designate regulated verbal disputes about religious issues. Although the term is already in the Koran before, but it has its specific terminology will receive until the end of the 8th century meaning than the Topik of Aristotle was translated into Arabic.

Since there were religious reservations about the Jadal among Muslims, its proponents endeavored to provide evidence that the Koran already urges believers to engage in verbal disputes. One of the most important pieces of text cited to prove the admissibility and necessity of the Jadal was sura 16 : 125: "Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and with a beautiful sermon and argue with them in a good way ( wa-ǧādilhum bi- llatī hiya aḥsanu ) ". In addition, reference was also made to the argumentative structure of Koranic speech that can be seen in many places .

From the 9th century onwards, various Muslim scholars wrote works in which they formulated rules and requirements for the jadal with recourse to the Koran and the Greek dialectic . Instead of Jadal, the word form Jidāl (ǧidāl) is sometimes used, which is even closer to the Koranic expression.

Definition and linguistic derivation

Ibn Wahb al-Kātib, the author of a 10th-century Arabic rhetorical handbook for civil servants, defined jadal as the purpose of providing evidence on a matter where the disputants disagree. It is used in disputes between different disciplines and religions, in legal disputes and trials and in defending against accusations.

The Arabic noun Ǧadal is the verbal noun derived from the Arabic verb ǧadala, yaǧdu / ilu , which has the basic meaning "(to tighten a rope), to tighten, to weave (a plait)". For the semantic development of the term, however, the third stem ǧādala, yuǧādilu with the verbal noun ǧidāl or muǧādala is even more important. It means "argue, argue, debate", occurs in numerous places in the Koran, and semantically rubbed off on the term ǧadal , so that this has become the designation of various types of verbal confrontations such as debates , disputes , discussions , controversies and quarrels .

The Ashʿarite scholar Ibn Fūrak (d. 1015) explained the semantic connection between the basic meaning “tighten” of the verb ǧadala and the established meaning of ǧadal with the fact that the disputant in the dispute on the “consolidation of his method” ( iḥkām ṭarīqati-hī ) and pursue the purpose of dissuading one's opponent from his opinion and drawing them to one's side. He also considers that the word could also be derived from the Arabic term ǧadāla ("ground"), because the disputant tries to wrestle his opponent like a wrestler throws his opponent to the ground. The Hanbali scholar Ibn ʿAqīl (d. 1119), on the other hand, emphasized the aspect of turning more when deriving the word. Jadal is said to be "turning the opponent away from his teaching direction to another teaching direction using the means of argument" ( al-fatl li-ḫiṣm ʿan maḏhab ilā maḏhab bi-ṭarīq al-ḥuǧǧa ), just like twisting a rope.

History of the Jadal literature

The impulse of Greek philosophy

The Arabic term ǧadal appears twice in the Koran ( Sura 43 : 58 and Sura 18 : 54), but it was not until the end of the 8th century that the Abbasid caliph al-Mahdī (r. 775 -785) the Topik of Aristotle was translated into Arabic. In Arabic this text was given the title Kitāb al-Ǧadal ("Book of Disputes"). Jadal thus became the technical term for dialectics . Several Muslim philosophers, including al-Fārābī and Avicenna , later wrote their own works on the jadal in the sense of dialectic.

The theologian Abū l-Hasan al-Ashʿarī saw a close proximity between Jadal and speculation ( naẓar ). They agreed with his view that the disputant ( al-muǧādil ) is a speculator ( munāẓir ) and thinker ( mufakkir ) and applies wherever his thinking leads him. One difference, however, is that Jadal can only take place if at least two people are involved, while speculation can take place in a single person, because his thinking can be based on consideration ( iʿtibār ), deliberation ( taʾammul ) and reasoning ( istidlāl ) .

Jadal in the service of religion

The Ottoman scholar Tashköprüzāde (d. 1529) explained in his encyclopedia of the sciences Miftāḥ as-saʿāda that "the science of the Jadal" ( ʿilm al-ǧadal ) is a sub-discipline of logic ( manṭiq ), but specifically on the religious sciences ( al -ʿUlūm ad-dīnīya ). The fact is that Jadal in the sense of dialectic was placed in the service of religion from the beginning. Al-Mahdī, who had Aristotle's Topik translated into Arabic, commissioned theologians ( ǧadalīyūn ) trained in dialectical disputation to write books against heretics and unbelievers.

In the 9th century, the Muʿtazilite theologian Ibn ar-Rāwandī wrote a first book on the "Rules of Jadal" ( ādāb al-ǧadal ), which was very well received in his time, but is lost today. The Muʿtazilit Abū l-Qāsim al-Balchī and the philosopher al-Fārābī wrote refutations for this work . Abū l-Qāsim al-Balchī's work again gave rise to a refutation by Abū l-Hasan al-Ashʿarī (d. 931). This is preserved as an excerpt in the work Muradarrad Maqālāt aš-šaiḫ Abī l-Ḥasan al-Ašʿarī from the Ashʿarite theologian Ibn Fūrak (d. 1015), which at the end deals in great detail with Jadal and there the various forms of speech in the dispute (question , Answer, objection, etc.).

The concept of the jadal was also received by theologians outside of Islam, in particular by the Karaite Jew Abū Yaʿqūb al-Qirqisānī (d. Approx. 950), who dealt with it in his Kitāb al-Anwār wa-l-marāqib , and also Ibn ar-Rāwandī's book was well received. In addition, the jadal was discussed in detail around the middle of the 10th century in books that were not designed as contributions to theology, for example in the introduction to the World Chronicle Kitāb al-Badʾ wa-t-tārīḫ ("Book of the Beginning and the History ") of the Muʿtazilite al-Mutahhar ibn Tāhir al-Maqdisī, who wrote his work in 966 in Bust , and in the rhetorical manual al-Burhān fī wuǧūh al-bayān by the Shiite state official Ishāq ibn Ibrāhīm Ibn Wahb al-Ktib.

Ibn Wahb al-Kātib in his work delimited the Jadal from the discussion ( baḥṯ ). While one chooses the premises in the jadal in such a way that the opponent can agree to them, even if these are not evident to the intellect ( al-ʿaql ), this is different in the discussion because the person discussing is based on those premises which his opinion are most evident and clear to the mind. With the jadal one strives for the approval of the opponent, with the discussion on the other hand one strives for the proof. As a Koranic example of Jadal in this sense, Ibn Wahb al-Kātib points out that in Sura 3 : 93-94 the Jews are asked to bring the Torah so that their own text can be used to refute their statements about the prohibitions on eating.

Adoption of the jadal into law

At the same time, the Jadal method was adopted into law . One of the first legal scholars who wrote an independent work on the Jadal was the transoxan Shafiit Abū Bakr al-Qaffāl al-Shāschī (d. 976), but this work has not survived. The Shafiit Abū Ishāq asch-Schīrāzī (d. 1083) and the Hanbalit Ibn ʿAqīl (d. 1119) were among the legal scholars from later times who wrote their own Jadal works . Ash-Shīrāzī first wrote a longer compendium on the Jadal in legal theory ( al-Mulaḫḫaṣ fī l-ǧadal fī uṣūl al-fiqh ), which he then summarized in a short introduction for beginners with the title al-Maʿūna fī l-ǧadal . Ibn ʿAqīl first dedicated the second part of his magnum opus on Islamic legal theory al-Wāḍiḥ fī uṣūl al-fiqh to the Jadal and dealt with al-Qirqisānī's work in great detail. But then he also wrote an independent Kitāb al-Ǧadal . Ibn ʿAqīl considered the Jadal to be an essential part of the training of Usūl scholars. The well-known scholar al-Juwainī (d. 1085) is ascribed a Jadal work with the title Kāfiya fī l-ǧadal , but Daniel Gimaret has cast doubt that this work actually goes back to him.

How strongly Jadal was later understood as a part of the Usūl al-fiqh can be seen from the fact that Ibn Chaldūn (d. 1406) treated it in his well-known Muqaddima in the associated chapter. Ibn Chaldūn defined Jadal as the knowledge of the rules of discussion ( ādāb al-munāẓara ) that takes place between the followers of the various schools of law and others. He was also aware, however, that Jadal extends beyond legal theory. He notes that there are basically two methods in the Jadal, that of Abū l-Yusr al-Bazdawī (d. 1100), which refers to the religious legal evidence from the text, the Idschmāʿ and Qiyās , and that of Rukn ad- Dīn al-ʿAmīdī (d. 1218), which is generally applicable to argumentation in all sciences. The Jadal works of al-ʿAmīdī have not survived, but they were apparently still known to Tashköprüzāde. In his view, al-ʿAmīdī had shown the best way in the Jadal.

The Jadal tract by Nadschm ad-Dīn at-Tūfī

The prevailing uncertainty about the scientific assignment of the Jadal is also reflected in the treatise ʿAlam al-ǧaḏal fī ʿilm al-ǧadal ("The banner of happiness over the Jadal science") by the Hanbali scholar Nadschm ad-Dīn at-Tūfī (d. 1316), written between November 1309 and January 1310. Nadschm ad-Dīn at-Tūfī states in his work that the Usūl scholars do not agree on whether the Jadal is part of the Usūl al-Fiqh or a separate discipline form. While some scholars like al-Ghazālī would have accepted the latter, there are others who counted the Jadal among the supplements of the Qiyā and thus made them part of the Usūl al-Fiqh. At-Tūfī himself says in his introduction that the material of Jadal science is the Usūl al-Fiqh, and adds that Jadal relates to Usūl al-Fiqh like poetry to language. However, he repeatedly breaks out of this thematic limitation in his work. In explaining the forms of argumentation, for example, he uses several examples from the Kalām.

The final part of the work contains a list of 27 examples of disputes from the time after the Prophet's death. Ten examples are disputes between Sahāba and Tābiʿūn over the question of the caliphate . The purpose of this collection of examples is to "raise awareness of the general need for this art" and to practice ingenuity "by studying people's ability to have answers quickly." Seven cases are examples of quick-wittedness, which in the technical sense have no relation to the jadal. At-Tūfī thus placed the Jadal within the larger framework of general human behavior. In this way he wanted to show that Jadal is an almost natural ability of humans, so that the restriction to the Usūl al-Fiqh must appear artificial.

The religious dispute over the Jadal

Jadal rejection

Even in the early Abbasid period, Jadal met with criticism in pious circles. Maʿrūf al-Karchī (d. 815) is quoted as saying: "If God wants a person good, He opens the door to action ( al-ʿamal ) for him. If God wants a person bad, He opens the door to him Jadal ". One of the first acts of the caliph al-Muʿtadid after he came to power in 892 was a decree with which he forbade books on the jadal as well as books on philosophy and kalām ; the booksellers had to take an oath not to sell such books anymore. With this decree, the caliph met Hanbali circles in Baghdad.

Even the Ottoman scholar Taschköprüzāde (d. 1529) was still aware of the reservations about the Jadal. In his encyclopedia Miftāḥ as-saʿāda wa-miṣbāḥ as-siyāda he quotes an nameless scholar with the statement: "Beware of preoccupation with this jadal, which arose after the death of the great scholars. It removes people from Fiqh, leaves Losing him of his time brings alienation and enmity. And he is one of the omens of the end times and the abolition of science and fiqh. "

The rejection of the jadal in pious circles was also related to the fact that adal and related words in the Koran are rated negatively in most places. Those who emphasized the dangers of the Jadal relied primarily on the following Koranic statements:

• "When the son of Mary was given as an example, behold, your people began to cry over him, and they said, 'Are our gods better or he?' They cited this only to quarrel ( ǧadalan ). No, they are a quarrelsome people ( qaum ḫaṣimūn ) ”(Sura 43: 57-58). Here the Meccans, who follow the old Arabic polytheism , are accused of debating with Mohammed when he cites a parable about Jesus .
• "We have modified the human being in this Qur'an in all sorts of examples. However, most of the time, the human being is out for arguments ( wa-kāna l-insānu akṯara šaiʾin ǧadalan )" ( Sura 18 : 54). Here the charge of arguing is presented in a somewhat more abstract form.
• " Let those who argue about our signs ( allaḏīna yuǧādilūna fī āyāti-nā ) know: there is nothing for them to flee to" ( Sura 42 : 35).
• "If they argue with you, say:" I have given myself completely to God, I and those who follow me "( Sura 3 : 20).

Defending the Jadal with the Koran

The followers of the Jadal reacted to these attacks by distinguishing between laudable ( maḥmūd ) and blameworthy ( maḏmūm ) jadal. Ibn Wahb al-Kātib said that the praiseworthy Jadal is the one with whom one strives for truth ( ḥaqq ) and serves sincerity ( ṣidq ), while in the blameworthy Jadal one only pursues quarrel ( mumārāt ) and superiority ( ġalaba ), after eye service ( Riyā ' ) and reputation ( sumʿa ) strive. As proof that there is a praiseworthy Jadal, he referred to various statements in the Koran in which verbal disputes are praised or treated with neutral values, for example Sura 29 : 46: "Only argue with book owners in a beautiful way" ( wa- lā tuǧādil ahla l-kitābi illā billatī hiya aḥsanu ), sura 16 : 125: "Call to the way of your Lord with wisdom and with a beautiful preaching and argue with them in a good way ( wa-ǧādilhum bi-llatī hiya aḥsanu )" and sura 16: 111: "a day when every soul fights for itself" ( yaumu taʾtī kullu nafsin tuǧādilu ʿan nafsihā ). Ibn Wahb believes that there was a consensus among the ancient scholars that those who could clearly explain their arguments and their rights deserve to be admired, while those who are unable to do so and cannot provide evidence are viewed as inferior will. The Koran itself compares in sura 43:18 people who cannot express themselves clearly in a dispute with women and children.

The Ashʿarite theologian Ibn Fūrak (d. 1015) also referred in his defense of the Jadal to the positive statements about the dispute in the Koran ( Sura 6 : 125; 29:46). In his view, these statements showed that Jadal was a legitimate method of truth-finding in theology. God instructed his prophet in this and urged all other people to follow his example. A difference from Ibn Wahb al-Kātib was that Ibn Fūrak, like Abū l-Hasan al-Ashʿarī, understood Jadal as philosophical speculation ( naẓar ). He believed that speculation in this sense was at times compulsory ( wāǧib ) and at times it had the status of recommendation ( nadb ) or voluntary action ( taṭauwuʿ ).

The derivation of the necessity of a well-understood Jadal application from the Koran was also the concern of Nadschm ad-Dīn at-Tūfī. In the first part of his work, he tries to prove that Jadal is a collective duty ( farḍ kifāya ), again based on Sura 16: 125 and 29:46. In the fifth part of his work, which he says is the most important, he goes through the entire Koran in the manner of a thematic Tafsīr work and presents disputes ( munāẓarāt ) from the various suras, which he then interprets with the technical vocabulary of the Jadal science. Sura 86 : 5-8 can serve as an example of his approach , where it says: "Let man see what he was created out of: He was created out of water that flows out, that comes out between the spine and ribs. See, he has it Power to bring him back. " At-Tūfī explains about this passage that God here demonstrates his ability to resuscitate people on the day of resurrection by reminding him of his ability to first create man from the seed of man and woman. Hence, the Qur'anic argument here has the form of deductive conclusion ( istidlāl ).

Dealing with the specifically Koranic forms of disputation and argumentation ( ǧadal al-qurʾān ) later became a separate discipline within the Koranic studies ( ʿulūm al-qurʾān ). Badr ad-Dīn al-Zarkaschī (d. 1391) and Jalāl ad-Dīn al-Suyūtī (d. 1505), who both compiled encyclopedias on Koranic science, each included a chapter on the Jadal of the Koran.

The distinction between laudable and blameworthy jadal also became a commonplace . It can also be found with the Ottoman scholar Taschköprüzāde (d. 1529). In his encyclopedia of the sciences he comments on the negative judgment he cites on the jadal with the words: "The balanced judgment is that against the jadal to show what is right, according to the Koran, 'argue with them in a good way!' there is nothing wrong with it because it can help to sharpen mental capacities and refine one's thoughts. What the scholars have forbidden is the jadal, with which one loses time and from which one derives no benefit, and which is mostly mutual Envy and rivalry, two things that are prohibited by Sharia law. "

Rules and requirements for the Jadal

Several scholars mention rules for the jadal in their works. In the opinion of Ibn Wahb al-Kātib, for example, it is up to the disputant to

• that he makes the truth his goal and does not allow himself to be misled by his own strength of argument into making or rejecting laws himself, because otherwise he runs the risk of engaging in heresy ( ilḥād ) and it might happen to him like Ibn ar-Rāwandī .
• that he does not make himself dependent on how many or few followers a particular discipline has, that he does not practice a Taqlīd with a majority and that he does not try to achieve a top position in it by following this majority, because, as Ibn Wahb argues, in the Koran the majority is rebuked and the minority praised, as in sura 38 : 24: "One does the other injustice - only not those who believe and do good works, but how few there are!"
• that he does not agree with the judgment of the educated arbitrator ( al-ḥakam al-fāḍil ) in everything he does, because he is not safe from mistakes, for the discerning can err and the ignorant can do the right thing.
• that he banishes zeal ( taʿaṣṣub ) for his own forefathers from his heart, because in the Koran ( sura 31 : 21) those who follow what they found in their fathers are rebuked.
• that he does not accept everything from someone who takes a correct doctrine and, conversely, from someone who takes a wrong doctrine, rejects everything in general; rather, he may only accept or reject each individual doctrine on the basis of a valid argument.
• that he does not dispute in times when his own mood ( mizāǧ ) changes and leaves the state of equilibrium, because too much heat leads to haste, lack of restraint, impatience and quick annoyance, and vice versa, too cold leads to inattention ( sahw ), apathy, a lack of acumen and a slowdown in comprehension.
• that he avoids hurry and proceeds carefully, because haste brings mistakes and is not impatient.

Ibn Fūrak derived the following rules for the Jadal from the writings of his teacher Abū l-Hasan al-Ashʿarī:

• the disputant must behave in such a way that he observes what God has instructed people to do in the course of al-amr bi-l-maʿrūf wa-n-nahy ʿan al-munkar .
• the disputant must avoid anger, anger, speaking too loudly and wild gesticulating and be as calm and relaxed as possible.
• He must be careful not to scorn the opponent or ridicule whoever he is.
• If the disputant is asked a question, he must not interrupt the questioner, regardless of whether the question is correct or contradicting itself ( muḥāl ). He must also let the respondent speak, even if his answer is incomprehensible. If the opponent interrupts his own speech, he should admonish him, but let him get away with it.
• The disputing person must face his opponent. If the opponent turns his face away from him, he should admonish him once or twice. If he does not change his behavior then, he should end the argument with him.

Ibn ʿAqīl mentions various other rules in his Kitāb al-Ǧadal , for example the precision of questions and answers, letting the opponent excuse not to jump from one topic to the next at random, that one should remember the words that were spoken, notices in the right way, so that one does not assume anything wrong with the opponent, and that one does not gossip while the opponent is busy, because otherwise one behaves like the unbelievers in sura 41:26: "And those who disbelieve speak: ' Don't listen to this lecture, just chat! Maybe you will win. '"

A peculiarity of Ibn ʿAqīl's work is that he also mentions prerequisites for a dispute to be called a jadal. This includes that both parties who take part in the disputation must be of equal rank, because a person who is not of equal rank is otherwise to be classified as a person seeking advice ( mustaršid ) or a questioner ( sāʾil ). In his opinion, the equality of the two disputants must also extend to their safety and health. If one interlocutor is constrained by fear or awe, while the other can let himself go because of his situation, it is not Jadal.

literature

Arabic sources

• al-Ǧuwainī : al-Kāfiya fī l-Ǧadal . Ed. Fauqīya Ḥusain Maḥmūd. Maṭbaʿat ʿĪsā al-Ḥalabī, 1979.
• Abū l-Wafāʾ ʿAlī Ibn-ʿAqīl : Kitāb al-Ǧadal . Ed. George Makdisi. in Bulletin d'études orientales 20 (1967) 119-206.
• Ibn ʿAqīl: al- Wāḍiḥ fī uṣūl al-fiqh . Second part: Kitāb ǧadal al-uṣūl Das Arab. Book, Berlin, 1999.
• Ibn Fūrak: Muǧarrad Maqālāt aš-šaiḫ Abī l-Ḥasan al-Ašʿarī . Ed. Daniel Gimaret. Dār al-Mašriq, Beirut, 1987. pp. 292-321.
• Ibn aldūn : al-Muqaddima . 5 volumes Ed. ʿAbd as-Salām aš-Šaddādī. Casablanca 2005. Volume V, p. 210 f. ( Textarchiv - Internet Archive ) - Engl. Translator Franz Rosenthal . Routledge & Paul Kegan, London, 1958. Volume III, pp. 32-34 ( muslimphilosophy.com see section Dialectics ).
• Ibn Wahb al-Kātib: al-Burhān fī wuǧūh al-bayān . Ed. Ḥifnī Muḥammad Sharaf. Maktabat aš-Šabāb, Kairo, 1969. pp. 176-192. See also the more readable edition Dār al-Kutub al-ʿilmīya, Beirut, 1980. pp. 117–137. ( Text archive - Internet Archive wrongly published here under the title Naqd an-naṯr and ascribed to Qudāma ibn Ǧaʿfar).
• Abū Iṣhāq aš-Šīrāzī: Kitāb al-Maʿūna fi 'l-ǧadal. Ed. ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-ʿUmairīnī. Markaz al-Maḫṭūṭāt wa-t-Tūrāṯ, Kuwait, 1987. ( archive.org ).
• Aḥmad ibn Muṣṭafā Ṭāškubrīzādah: Miftāḥ as-saʿāda wa-miṣbāḥ as-siyāda 3 volumes Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-ʿilmīya od Volume I, pp. 281-283.
• Naǧm ad-Dīn aṭ-Ṭūfī : ʿAlam al-ǧaḏal fī ʿilm al-Jadal. Ed. Wolfhart Heinrichs. Steiner, Wiesbaden, 1987. Digitized

Secondary literature

• M. Abū Zahra : Taʾrīḫ al-ǧadal. Cairo 1980 ( archive.org ).
• Gholāmrezā Aʿwānī: Ǧadal. In: Dāʾirat-i maʿārif-i buzurg-i islāmī. Markaz-i Dāʾirat al-Maʿārif-i Buzurg-i Islāmī, Tehran, 1988 ff. Volume XVII, pp. 620b-627b. Digitized
• Josef van Ess : Disputation Practice in Islamic Theology. A preliminary sketch. In: Revue des Etudes Islamiques. 44, 1976, pp. 23-60.
• Wolfhart Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī, an interpretation of his collection of examples. In: Journal of the German Oriental Society. Supplement III, 1. Wiesbaden 1977. pp. 463-473. Digitized
• G. Makdisi: Dialectic and disputation. The relation between the texts of Qirqisani and Ibn ʿAqil. In: P. Salmon (Ed.): Mélanges d'islamologie. Volume dédié à la mémoire de Armand Abel. 3 volumes, Leiden 1974–1978. Volume I, pp. 201-206.
• Jane Dammen McAuliffe: Debate with them in the better way. The construction of a qurʾānic commonplace. In: B. Embaló et al. (Ed.): Myths, historical archetypes and symbolic figures in Arabic literature . Beirut, 1999, 163-88.
• Jane Dammen McAuliffe: Debate and Disputation. In: JD McAuliffe (ed.): Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an. 6 volumes Leiden 2001-2006. Volume I, pp. 511-514.
• LB Miller: Islamic disputation theory. A study of the development of dialectic in Islam from the tenth through fourteenth centuries . Ph.D. diss. Princeton 1984, unpublished.
• LB Miller: Al-Farâbî's dispute about the adab al-jadal. In: Acts of the International Symposium on Ibn Turk, Khwârezmî, Fârâbî, Beyrûnî and Ibn Sînâ: (Ankara, 9-12 September 1985). Ataturk Culture Center, Ankara, 1990. pp. 185-188.
• H. aš-Šarqāwī: al-Ǧadal fī l-Qurʾān. Alexandria 1986.
• G. Vajda: Etudes sur Qirqisānī V: Les règles de la controverse dialectique. In: Revue des Etudes Juives 122 (1963) 7-74.
• Yusuf Şevki Yavuz: Cedel. In: Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslâm ansiklopedisi Volume VII, pp. 208c – 210b, first published in 1993 ( PDF ).

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Ibn Wahb al-Kātib: al-Burhān . 1969, p. 176.
2. ↑ ^{a b} Ibn Fūrak: Muǧarrad. 1987, p. 294.
3. ↑ Ibn-ʿAqīl: Kitāb al-Ǧadal . 1967, p. 204.
4. ↑ Dimitri Gutas: Greek Thought, Arabic Culture. The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ʿAbbāsid Society (2nd-4th / 8th-10th centuries). Routledge, London 1998. p. 62.
5. ^ Yavuz: "Cedel", Volume VII, p. 209b.
6. ↑ Aḥmad ibn Muṣṭafā Ṭāškubrīzādah: Miftāḥ as-saʿāda . Volume I, p. 281.
7. ↑ Dimitri Gutas: Greek Thought, Arabic Culture. The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ʿAbbāsid Society (2nd-4th / 8th-10th centuries). Routledge, London 1998. pp. 62, 65.
8. ↑ Miller: Al-Farâbî's dispute . 1990, p. 185.
9. ↑ Ibn Fūrak: Muǧarrad . 1987, pp. 292-321. For the excerpt from al-Ashʿarī's work cf. Pp. 310-315.
10. ↑ Vajda: Etudes sur Qirqisānī V. 1963, pp. 7-74.
11. ↑ van Ess: Disputation practice. 1976, p. 32.
12. ↑ Ibn Wahb al-Kātib: al-Burhān. 1969, p. 179.
13. ↑ Aḥmad ibn Muṣṭafā Ṭāškubrīzādah: Miftāḥ as-saʿāda . Volume I, p. 282.
14. ^ McAuliffe: "Debate with them in the better way." 1999, pp. 174, 176.
15. ^ Makdisi: Dialectic and disputation. 1974, p. 202.
16. ^ Makdisi: Dialectic and disputation. 1974, p. 201.
17. ^ McAuliffe: Debate with them in the better way. 1999, p. 174.
18. ↑ Ibn aldūn: al-Muqaddima . 2005, Volume V, p. 210 f.
19. ↑ Ibn aldūn: al-Muqaddima . 2005, Volume V, p. 210 f.
20. ↑ Ṭāškubrīzādah: Miftāḥ as-saʿāda . Volume I, p. 281.
21. ↑ Quotation from Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, p. 465.
22. ↑ Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, pp. 463, 470.
23. ↑ Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, p. 468.
24. ↑ Quotation from Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, p. 464.
25. ↑ Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, p. 468.
26. ↑ Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, p. 469.
27. ↑ Quoted in Richard Frank: Al-Ghazālī and the Ashʿarite school . Duke University Press, Durham, 1994. p. 15.
28. ^ Makdisi: Dialectic and disputation. 1974, pp. 203f.
29. ↑ van Ess: Disputation practice . 1976, p. 49.
30. ↑ Aḥmad ibn Muṣṭafā Ṭāškubrīzādah: Miftāḥ as-saʿāda . Volume I, p. 282.
31. ^ McAuliffe: "Debate with them in the better way." 1999, p. 180f.
32. ^ McAuliffe: "Debate with them in the better way." 1999, pp. 174, 176.
33. ↑ Ibn Wahb al-Kātib: al-Burhān . 1969, p. 177.
34. ↑ Ibn Wahb al-Kātib: al-Burhān . 1969, p. 178.
35. ↑ Ibn Fūrak: Muǧarrad . 1987, p. 293.
36. ^ McAuliffe: "Debate with them in the better way." 1999, p. 182.
37. ↑ Heinrichs: Ǧadal bei aṭ-Ṭūfī . 1977, p. 468.
38. ^ McAuliffe: "Debate with them in the better way." 1999, p. 183.
39. ^ McAuliffe: "Debate with them in the better way." 1999, p. 184.
40. ↑ Aḥmad ibn Muṣṭafā Ṭāškubrīzādah: Miftāḥ as-saʿāda . Volume I, p. 283.
41. ↑ Ibn Wahb al-Kātib: al-Burhān . 1969, pp. 189-191.
42. ↑ Ibn Fūrak: Muǧarrad . 1987, p. 317.
43. ↑ Ibn-ʿAqīl: Kitāb al-Ǧadal . 1967, p. 203.
44. ↑ Ibn-ʿAqīl: Kitāb al-Ǧadal. 1967, p. 203.