İbn Rüşd ve İbn Teymiyye'ye göre akıl ve vahiy arasındaki uzlaşma teorisi

This study deals with the dialectic of the relationship between reason and the legal text in Islamic thought, by comparing the approaches of two Muslim scholars: Ibn Rushd, the philosopher of Córdoba, who called for correcting intellectual approaches in the Muslim faith, and Ibn Taymiyyah, the Sheikh of Islam, who defended the explicit agreement of reason with the correct transmission. The nature of the study required following the descriptive comparative approach when examining the approach of both Ibn Rushd and Ibn Taymiyyah, and shedding light on the points of difference and agreement between them. The study concluded with a set of results, the most important of which are: Emphasizing the status of reason in Islam, as it is the basis of obligation and a source of knowledge, as Islam combines reason and transmission in determining beliefs and rulings. The study also emphasizes the necessity of adhering to revelation without neglecting the role of reason, as there is complete agreement between sound reason and correct transmission. As for Ibn Rushd and Ibn Taymiyyah, their methodologies differed in reconciling reason and transmission; Ibn Rushd's approach is characterized by presenting reason and interpreting the text when there is an apparent conflict between reason and transmission, relying on Aristotelian logic, while Ibn Taymiyyah sees the priority of the text, relying on the innate reason as a tool for understanding texts, taking into account the context and evidence of speech, without philosophical or theological interpretation that is not based on conclusive evidence. The study pointed out the necessity of understanding the Arabic language to contemplate the religious texts, and the necessity of following the correct approach in the process of rational measurement, by benefiting from the methods of previous scholars in achieving a balance between reason and transmission.