The study of the evolution of Ilm al-Kalam (Islamic Theology), its methods of reasoning, and its impacts highlights the fact that its foundation was not solely based on internal issues of Islamic texts but was also deeply influenced by Greek philosophy.
According to Allama Iqbal, Shibli Nomani, and Javed Ahmed Ghamidi, the influences of Greek philosophy transformed Ilm al-Kalam away from the simple and intuitive teachings of the Quran into a complex intellectual framework. This transformation imparted a rational dimension to the mode of thought in Ilm al-Kalam, which was conspicuously different from the natural methodology of religious texts.
Shibli, in his research, clarifies that when Islamic theologians (mutakallimun) began to adopt the principles of Greek philosophy, their discussions gradually drifted away from the simple and intuitive teachings of the Quran, and became dominated by abstract rational and logical terms. According to him, the theologians resorted to Greek argumentative principles to defend their beliefs, thereby transforming religious debates from natural reasoning to philosophical intricacies.
Allama Iqbal was also an advocate of this perspective and stated that Ilm al-Kalam had caused Islamic thought to become stagnant and confined it within a framework of reasoning where logic and philosophy became the primary references. According to him, by constraining Islamic beliefs within the bounds of logic and philosophy, the true spirit of the religion was overlooked, and the complexities of Ilm al-Kalam entangled simple religious truths in unnecessary debates. Thus, it failed to keep the religion alive on a natural, intuitive, and spiritual level because it
became trapped in a mold of reason and logic that was not in harmony with the internal movement of human consciousness.
Javed Ahmed Ghamidi also supports the stance that when Muslims faced ideological challenges from Greek philosophy, Christian theology, and Zoroastrian thought, they began to adopt their argumentative principles. As a result, logical and abstract discussions were included in Islamic beliefs, which shifted the evidence and reasoning of the original message of religion away from its intellectual structure.
In contrast, the critics of this position claim that the roots of Kalam are purely Islamic and its evolution occurred internally as a result of intellectual and doctrinal challenges arising within Muslim society, rather than being influenced by any external philosophy.
These critics argue that the debates of the theologians, such as the attributes of God, predestination and free will, and the relationship between faith and deeds, were questions that were already present in the Islamic texts themselves. They also do not accept the position that Islamic theologians adopted Greek philosophy. According to them, if this were true, then how could the ideas of theologians like Imam Ash’ari and Imam Maturidi have appeared before the formal introduction of Greek philosophy?
Critics also argue that the intellectual efforts of theologians like Abu Hashim al-Jubba’i were not influenced by Greek philosophy but were instead the result of internal debates based purely on Islamic texts. In their view, the discipline of Ilm al-Kalam actually emerged in defense of faith, and its primary impetus was not Greek philosophy but the teachings of the Quran and the ideological disputes of early Muslim sects.
However, historical evidence does not seem to support this claim. The establishment of Bayt al-Hikmah (House of Wisdom) during the reign of the Abbasid Caliph Harun al-Rashid (170 AH– 193 AH) and the translation of Greek philosophical and scientific texts into Arabic was a significant milestone, which introduced Islamic thought to new intellectual influences. These translations not only changed the methodology of argumentation in Islamic theology but also affected its ideological directions. As a result of this process, theologians began to adopt Greek philosophical principles in their debates, and abstract and logical discussions became increasingly dominant in the Islamic scholarly tradition.
Al-Kindi (185-256 AH) is counted among the earliest thinkers of Islamic philosophy. He endeavored to harmonize the principles of Aristotelian and Neoplatonic philosophy with Islamic beliefs. His works, such as Al-Falsafa al-Ula, present arguments for the existence of God that appear influenced by Neoplatonism’s concept of the ‘Absolute One.’ This tendency became more pronounced later in the works of philosophers like Al-Farabi (339 AH) and Ibn Sina (429 AH), who continued the endeavor of presenting Islamic beliefs under philosophical principles.
During the Abbasid Caliphate, particularly during the reign of Al-Ma’mun (198–218 AH), a comprehensive series of translations of Greek philosophy and science was initiated at Bayt al-Hikmah (House of Wisdom). Under this translation movement, the intellectual works of Greek thinkers such as Aristotle, Plato, Galen, Ptolemy, and others were translated into Arabic. Translators like Hunayn ibn Ishaq (260 AH), Yahya ibn ‘Adi (363 AH), and Abu Bishr Matta ibn Yunus (329 AH) integrated Greek philosophy into the Islamic intellectual tradition, which later reformed the discussions of Ilm al-Kalam into a new intellectual framework.
Nestorian Christian thinkers, who were well-versed in Greek philosophy, joined the Islamic Caliphate and translated Greek philosophy into the Arabic language. The Jacobites also promoted Neo-Platonic ideas, whereas Zoroastrian scholars presented the principle of ‘Light and Darkness’ in contrast to the Islamic doctrine of fate.
In response to these ideological challenges, scholars of Ilm al-Kalam felt the need to adopt principles of Greek philosophy because presenting traditional arguments alone was proving insufficient in debates with Christian and Zoroastrian philosophers. The logical and rational approach of Greek philosophy provided theologians with a strong academic foundation through which they could better defend their beliefs. Thus, the influence of Greek philosophy can be prominently seen in the theories of major schools of thought in Islamic theology, such as the Mu’tazila, Ash’arites, and Maturidis.
For example, the Mu’tazilah emphasized human autonomy and responsibility for actions, which is closer to Aristotle’s principle of the causal chain. Their stance was that a person is the creator of their actions and is responsible for the consequences of those actions. This theory not only responded to Christian and Zoroastrian challenges but also attempted to provide rational and logical support to the Islamic philosophical tradition. Consequently, the principles of Greek philosophy became an integral part of the theological reasoning of scholars, serving as an intellectual foundation and a means of philosophical defense for them.
Similarly, in their concept of the oneness of God, the influence of Neoplatonism’s ‘Absolute One’ is prominently visible. According to the Ash’arites, God’s attributes are not separate from His essence; rather, they exist ‘without modality,’ similar to Aristotle’s philosophy of Substance and Accidents. The Maturidites attempted to maintain a balance between predestination and free will, which resembles the Neoplatonic principle of Emanation.
The critics’ argument that Imam Ash’ari, Imam Maturidi, and Abu Hashim al-Jubba’i were engaged in the discussions of Islamic theology before the introduction of Greek philosophy is not historically accurate. These theologians actually became active in the intellectual field during the period when the translations of Greek philosophy had been completed and fully integrated into the Islamic intellectual tradition. Their use of argumentative methods, logical frameworks, and abstract expressions indicates that their thought was directly or indirectly influenced by Greek logic and philosophy. Therefore, it is more plausible that although initially these issues arose from Islamic texts and internal sectarian debates, their interpretation and explanation prominently reflected external philosophical influences.
Abu Hashim al-Jubba’i (321 AH), associated with the Mu’tazilite school of thought, lived during the phase of the Abbasid Caliphate when the translation movement of Bayt al-Hikmah was at its peak, that is, from the end of the second century Hijri to the middle of the third century. During this time, significant Greek texts on philosophy, logic, medicine, and science had been translated into Arabic, and their impact was intensely felt in scholarly gatherings. Abu Hashim’s father, Abu Ali al-Jubba’i (303 AH), also thrived in this intellectual environment where efforts were ongoing to harmonize Greek philosophy with Islamic theological thought.
Similarly, Imam Abu al-Hasan al-Ash’ari (260–324 AH), who was initially associated with the Mu’tazilite school of thought, later introduced a unique theological approach in defense of the Sunni beliefs. However, his intellectual background, scholarly training, and deductive reasoning style are proof that he was not free from Greek influences. Although he diverged from some of the conclusions of the Mu’tazilites, his argumentative methodology, which relied on rational and logical principles, remained consistent with the foundation that had entered Islamic thought through Greek philosophy.
Imam Maturidi (333 AH) was also a contemporary of Ash’ari, and although he was not a philosopher himself, his theological efforts prominently display a predominance of rational and logical reasoning. The abstract concepts, complex discussions, and intricate logical debates found in his system of reasoning indicate that his scholarly environment was not devoid of the influence of Greek logic and philosophy.
It is indeed true that issues such as the attributes of Allah, determinism and free will, and faith and deeds arose internally during the interpretation of Islamic texts, and questions concerning these were raised even during the period of the early Companions and Followers. However, the way these questions were later discussed by theologians using a logical, abstract, and analogical methodology was not possible until Greek logic and philosophy had entered the intellectual domain. Particularly, Aristotle’s logic, in which syllogism holds a central place, has had profound effects on the intellectual structure of Ilm al-Kalam, transforming religious thought from its intuitive, natural, and textual methodology into an abstract and philosophical mold.
Thus, considering any theologian to be free from Greek influences merely on the basis of chronological sequence is a logically flawed reading of history. Intellectual influences do not manifest in a strictly chronological order; rather, they appear in the deeper layers of thought and in modes of reasoning. And in the very days when these theologians were actively engaged in intellectual debates, Greek philosophy had already deeply permeated the temperament, language, and methodology of the Islamic theological tradition.
Although the theologians often criticized Greek philosophy, the reality is that their methods of reasoning, their philosophical discussions, and the foundations of their arguments were frequently based on Greek philosophical principles. Imam Ghazali (505 AH) strongly criticized philosophy in Tahafut al-Falasifah, but the influence of Greek logic was evident in his own methods of reasoning. Imam Razi (606 AH) also attempted to prove Islamic beliefs under philosophical principles.
All these facts support the stance of Allama Iqbal, Shibli Nomani, and Javed Ahmed Ghamidi that Ilm al-Kalam was not merely an internal Islamic scholarly movement; rather, the principles and influences of Greek philosophy played a significant role in its formation and development. The theologians adopted philosophical discussions and terminology, giving religious thought an academic methodology that mostly consisted of abstract and logical debates instead of simple, natural, and intuitive understanding, thereby obscuring the original message of the religion.