Wakati masuala ya kifalsafa yanayohusiana na elimu ya itikadi yalipoingia katika fikra za Waislamu, mwishoni mwa utawala wa Bani Umayya na mwanzoni mwa utawala wa Abbasi, baadhi ya wanazuoni kama al-Hasan al-Basri, Ghaylan al-Dimashqi na Jahm ibn Safwan walianza kujadili masuala mbalimbali ya kielimu. Kisha, baada yao walikuja wanazuoni waliojua mantiki ya Aristotle, nao wakajifunza baadhi ya vitabu vya falsafa ya Kigiriki baada ya kutafsiriwa. Utafiti wa masuala ya kielimu ulipanuka, nao wakaanza kujifunza elimu iitwayo Kalam. Miongoni mwao walikuwa wanazuoni kama Wasil ibn 'Ata, 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd, Abu Hudhayl al-'Allaf na an-Nazzaam. Hata hivyo, tafiti zao hazikuwa tafiti kamili za kifalsafa, bali ilikuwa ni kupanuka kwa utafiti wa mawazo ya kifalsafa mpaka wakawa wamebobea katika mitazamo mbalimbali ya kifalsafa, na mtazamo wa kila kundi la wanafalsafa katika baadhi ya masuala, kwa kuyafuatilia baadhi tu na si masuala yote. Pamoja na kujizuia katika baadhi ya tafiti za kifalsafa, walijiwekea mipaka kwa imani yao katika Qur'ani. Ndiyo maana hawakutoka nje ya Uislamu, bali walipanua mbinu za kufikiri, na wakajipa uhuru katika kutoa hoja, lakini ilikuwa ni kwa lengo la kuthibitisha yale yatakayoimarisha imani na kuondoa vipengele vya kumfananisha Allah na viumbe katika imani kwake. Matokeo yake, hakuna upotofu uliotokea katika itikadi zao licha ya tofauti za mafundisho yao, hivyo wote walibaki kuwa Waislamu wanaolitetea Uislamu.

When philosophical issues relating to theology infiltrated the minds of the Muslims, during the end of the Ummayad reign and the beginning of Abbasid rule, certain scholars like al-Hasan al Basri, Ghaylan al-Dimashqi and Jahm ibn Safwan began to address various scholastic issues. Then, after them came scholars who were acquainted with Aristotelian logic and they familiarised themselves with some of the books of Greek philosophy after they had been translated. The study of scholastic issues expanded and they began to study the science known as Kalam. They were scholars such as Wasil ibn 'Ata, 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd, Abu Hudhayl al-'Allaf and an-Nazzaam. However, their studies were not complete philosophical studies but the expanding study of philosophical thoughts until they became well-versed with different philosophical views, and that of the view of each group of philosophers in some issues by pursuing them and not all issues. In addition to confining themselves to some philosophical studies they restricted themselves to their belief in the Qur’ān. That is why they did not leave the fold of Islam, rather they expanded in reasoning, and they gave themselves free reign in the proofs, but only to establish that which will strengthen imān and a desire to eliminate anthropomorphic elements from the belief in Allah . As a result, no deviation occurred in the beliefs despite their differing dogmas, so all of them remained Muslims who were defending Islam.

Baada ya Mutakallimūn walikuja watu binafsi ambao hawakufikia kiwango cha kuwa makundi na madhehebu, na hata Waislamu hawakuwafuata kwa wingi ingawa watu binafsi walipendelea masomo yao. Hao ni wale waliokuja baada ya Mutakallimūn miongoni mwa Waislamu katika nchi za Kiislamu, ndio wanafalsafa wa Kiislamu. Inaonekana kilichowawezesha kuwepo miongoni mwa Waislamu ni ujuzi wa mawazo ya kifalsafa na vitabu vya falsafa ambavyo vilifanya masomo haya kuwavutia watu katika zama hizo. Inaonekana kilichowawezesha watu hawa kuwepo miongoni mwa Waislamu ni kwamba katika zama hizo masomo ya mawazo ya kifalsafa na vitabu vya falsafa yalipata umaarufu miongoni mwa watu. Hivyo baadhi ya watu walijitwika jukumu la kupanua masomo ya mawazo hayo. Kwa hiyo, walisoma mawazo haya kwa kina na kwa upana, somo lililokuwa pana na lisilo na mipaka. Walifuata kila mstari (wa fikra) kikamilifu. Walisoma falsafa kiasi kinachofaa ili kujiwezesha kufikiri kifalsafa na kutoa matokeo ya kifalsafa. Ni kutokana na masomo haya ya kina na mapana katika falsafa, hasa aina maalum ya falsafa ya Kigiriki, ndiko kulikosababisha kuwepo kwa wanafalsafa miongoni mwa Waislamu. Mwanafalsafa wa kwanza wa Kiislamu anayejulikana alikuwa Ya'qub al Kindi (aliyefariki mwaka 260 H). Baada yake wanafalsafa wa Kiislamu walijitokeza mmoja baada ya mwingine. Hivyo, wanafalsafa hawakujitokeza isipokuwa baada ya kuwepo kwa Mutakallimūn na baada ya mbinu za wanafalsafa hao kuenea na kuwa mada ya masomo, mijadala na mabishano. Machoni mwa Mutakallimūn na Ulama wengi, falsafa ikawa haikubaliki. Kabla ya hapo, hakukuwa na wanafalsafa miongoni mwa Waislamu. Hivyo, kulikuwa na mutakallamin na wanafalsafa miongoni mwa Ulama katika ardhi za Kiislamu. Hata hivyo, kuna tofauti kati ya Mutakallimūn na wanafalsafa. Mutakallimūn walikuwa wamebobea katika baadhi ya mawazo ya kifalsafa. Kuhusu wanafalsafa, walikuwa wasomi wa falsafa. Ndiyo sababu wanafalsafa walikuwa wakiwaona Mutakallimūn kuwa ni wajinga. Wanafalsafa walidhani kwamba Mutakallimūn walikuwa watu wa hoja za udanganyifu na ubishi. Na wao, yaani wanafalsafa, ndio waliokuwa wakisoma kwa akili masuala ya kifalsafa yaliyo sahihi.

Then after the Mutakallimūn came the individuals who did not reach to the stage of becoming groups and mazhabs, and even the Muslims did not follow them in mass although individuals preferred their studies. They are the ones who came after the Mutakallimūn from amongst the Muslims in the Muslims countries, they are the Muslim philosophers. It seems that what allowed them to exist amongst Muslims is that knowledge of philosophical thoughts and the books of philosophy which made these studies attractive to the people in that age. It seems what allowed these people to exist amongst the Muslims is that during that age the study of the philosophical thoughts and books of philosophy gained interest among the people. So some people took on the responsibility of widening the study of such thoughts. Thus, they studied these thoughts in a deep and extensive way, a study that was comprehensive and unrestricted. They followed every line (of thought) in its entirety. They studied an appropriate amount of philosophy to qualify themselves to think philosophically and produce philosophical output. It was due to these deep and extensive studies in philosophy, especially a specific type of Greek philosophy that led to the presence of philosophers amongst Muslim. The first known Muslim philosopher was Ya'qub al Kindi (d.260 H). After him the Muslim philosophers emerged one after another. Thus, the philosophers did not emerge except after the presence of the Mutakallimūn and after the methodology of those philosophers had become prevalent and had become the subject of study, debate and polemics. In the eyes of many Mutakallimūn and Ulama, philosophy became intolerable. Before that, there were no philosophers amongst Muslims. Hence, there were mutakallamin and philosophers amongst the Ulama in the Muslim lands. However, there is a difference between Mutakallimūn and the philosophers. The Mutakallimūn were well versed with some philosophical thoughts. As for the philosophers, they were scholars of philosophy. That is why the philosophers used to look upon the Mutakalimun as ignorant. The philosophers thought the Mutakallimūn were people of sophistry and polemics. And they, that is, the philosophers were the one who rationally studied the sound philosophical issues.

Wanazuoni wote wa Mutakallimūn na wanafalsafa walisoma elimu ya itikadi (theolojia), ingawa kuna tofauti kati ya mbinu ya Mutakallimūn na ile ya wanafalsafa. Tofauti hiyo inaweza kufupishwa kama ifuatavyo:

All the Mutakallimūn and philosophers studied theology, although there is a difference between the method of the Mutakallimūn and that of the philosophers. The difference can be summarised as follows:

1. Wanatheolojia wa Kiislamu (Mutakallimūn) walikuwa na imani thabiti katika misingi ya imani, walikiri kuwa ni ukweli na waliiamini. Kisha walitumia ushahidi wao wa kiakili kuithibitisha. Hivyo waliithibitisha kiakili kwa hoja za kimantiki. Walitumia utafiti wa kiakili kupitia mtindo wa mantiki kama njia ya kuthibitisha imani zao, kwa sababu tayari walikuwa wanaamini misingi ya msingi ya Uislamu, na wakaja kutengeneza hoja na ushahidi ili kuweka imara kile walichokiamini.

1. The Mutakallimūn had conviction in the principles of imān and they acknowledged them to be the truth and believed in them. Then they used their rational evidences to prove them. So they proved them rationally with logical proofs. They used the rational study through the style of logic as a means to prove their beliefs, because they already believed in the basic principles of Islam and they came to form arguments and proofs to establish what they believed in.

2. Masomo ya Mutakallimūn yalikuwa yamejikita tu katika masuala yanayohusiana na kutetea itikadi yao na kupinga hoja za wapinzani wao, iwe walikuwa Waislamu – ambao walitofautiana na ufahamu wa Mu'tazila, Murji'a, Shi'a, Khawarij na wengineo – au walikuwa wasio Waislamu kama Wakristo, Mayahudi, Wamajusi na wengineo. Ingawa jambo lililojitokeza zaidi katika mijadala yao lilikuwa ni kujibu hoja za Mutakallimūn na wanafalsafa miongoni mwa Waislamu. 3. Masomo ya Mutakallimūn yalikuwa ya Kiislamu, na wao, licha ya tofauti zao na mikinzano yao, wanachukuliwa kuwa ni maoni ya Kiislamu. Muislamu yeyote ambaye ameridhika na mojawapo ya maoni yao anachukuliwa kuwa amekuwa na imani juu ya maoni ya Kiislamu. Na kile alichokiamini kilichukuliwa kuwa ni itikadi ya Kiislamu.

2. The studies of the Mutakallimūn were restricted to issues relating to the defence of their creed and refutation of the arguments of their opponents whether they were Muslims - they disagreed with the understanding of the Mu'tazila, murji'a, Shi'a, khawarij and others - or whether they were non-muslims such as the Christians, Jews, Magians and others, although the most prominent aspect of their discussions was for the purpose of responding to the Mutakallimūn and philosophers amongst the Muslims. 3. The studies of the Mutakallimūn were Islamic and they, despite their differences and contradiction, are considered as Islamic opinions. Any Muslim who is convinced of one of their opinions is considered to have had conviction in an Islamic opinion. And whatever he was convinced of was considered as the Islamic creed.

Hii ndiyo mbinu ya Mutakallimūn na ndivyo inavyochukuliwa. Kuhusu mbinu ya wanafalsafa, inaweza kufupishwa kama ifuatavyo:

This is the methodology of the Mutakallimūn and this is how it is considered. As for the methodology of the philosophers, it can be summarised as follows:

1. Wanafalsafa walisoma masuala kwa ajili ya utafiti. Mbinu yao ya kusoma na misingi yake ni kusoma masuala kama yanavyoelekezwa na hoja inayoweza kuthibitishwa kwa ushahidi. Mtazamo wao kuhusu theolojia ulikuwa ni mtazamo kuhusu Kiumbe Kamili (al-wujud al-mutlaq) na yale ambayo Dhati yake inayahitaji. Wanaanza utafiti wao kwa kutafuta yale yatakayowaongoza kwenye hoja inayoweza kuthibitishwa, wakiendelea hatua kwa hatua hadi wafikie matokeo yoyote yawe yakuwa, na wawe na imani nayo. Hili ndilo lengo na msingi wa falsafa. Majadiliano yao ni ya kifalsafa tupu, yasiyo na uhusiano na Uislamu kwa upande wa mada, ingawa mtu anaweza kuona kuwa lina uhusiano na baadhi ya mambo. Mara nyingi walikubali katika majadiliano yao mambo ya kimaandiko ambayo hoja ya kiakili haiwezi kuthibitisha usahihi wake au ubatili wake, kama vile mambo ya Ufufuo na Ufufuo wa mwili. Mara nyingi pia walichukua baadhi ya mawazo kutoka falsafa ya Kigiriki na kutoa hukumu juu ya mambo kwa kuyategemea, ingawa itikadi yao ya Kiislamu (‘aqīdah) ilikuwa na athari ndani yake. Mara nyingi walijaribu kupatanisha baadhi ya masuala ya falsafa na masuala ya Kiislamu; hata hivyo, hili lilikuwa nyongeza na matokeo ya kuwa kwao Waislamu walioathiriwa na Uislamu. Lakini athari hiyo haikuwa ya kiakili ambapo waliufanya Uislamu kuwa msingi kama ilivyokuwa kwa Mutakallimūn. Badala yake, athari hiyo inafanana kwa kiasi kikubwa na athari ya Ukristo kwa wanafalsafa Wakristo, na athari ya Uyahudi kwa wanafalsafa Wayahudi, kwani dhana zilizokita mizizi kwa kina huathiri sana utafiti au huwa na athari fulani juu yake. Kuhusu msingi waliouendea, ni kuhusu Kiumbe Kamili (al-wujud al-mutlaq) na yale ambayo kiliyahitaji kwa Dhati yake. Athari yao ya kweli ilikuwa falsafa ya Kigiriki. Mfumo wao wa kufikiri ulikuwa umeundwa kwa mujibu wa falsafa ya Kigiriki. Hivyo waliandika kuhusu mawazo ya falsafa baada ya kukomaa katika falsafa ya Kigiriki. Hakukuwa na uhusiano wowote kati ya Uislamu na falsafa yao.

1. The philosophers studied the issues for the sake of research. Their method of study and its fundamentals are the study of issues as indicated by the demonstrable proof. And their view of theology was the view concerning the Absolute Being and whatever it’s Essence necessitated. They begin their study by searching for what would lead to demonstratable proof; proceeding step by step until they arrive at the result whatever it may be and have conviction in it. This is the aim and the basis of philosophy. Their discussions are purely philosophical having no relationship to Islam in terms of the discussion even though one may witness that it has a connection to some subjects. They would frequently admit textual things in their discussions for which a rational proof cannot be established to prove it correctness or invalidity, subjects such as the Resurrection and the bodily Ressurection. And often they would take up certain ideas from the Greek philosophy issuing judgments on matters based on them albeit with the influence of their Islamic ‘aqīdah (creed) in them. And often they would attempt to reconcile certain issues of philosophy with Islamic issues; however this was an addition to, and a result of them being Muslims effected by Islam. But the effect was not an intellectual one where they made Islam as the basis as was the case with the Mutakallimūn. Rather, the effect is akin to a great extent to the effect of Christianity on the Christian philosophers, and the effect of Judaism on the Jewish philosophers, since the deep rooted concepts will greatly affect the study or have some effect on it. As for the basis on which they proceeded, it is around the Absolute Being (al-wujud al-mutlaq) and what it necessitated for its Essence. Their true influence was the Greek philosophy. Their mentality had been formulated according to Greek philosophy. So they wrote about the thoughts of philosopy after gaining maturity in the Greek philosophy. There was no relationship between Islam and their pholoshophy.

2. Wanafalsafa Waislamu hawakusimama kuitetea Uislamu. Walisimama tu kubainisha ukweli na kutoa ushahidi wake. Wala hawakujihusisha na kuripoti maoni yanayopingana na kuyakanusha kwa ajili ya kuutetea Uislamu, ingawa huenda waliathiriwa na Uislamu. Kwa hiyo, utafiti wa kiakili ndio ulikuwa msingi na mada yao, na hakuna kingine chochote kilichokuwepo katika utafiti wao zaidi ya hayo.

2. The Muslim philosophers did not stand in defence of Islam. They only stood to determine facts and furnish proofs for them. Nor did they enter into reporting opposing views and refuting them in Islam's defence even though they may have been influenced by Islam. Therefore, rational study was the basis and the subject matter and nothing apart from these was present in their study.

3. Tafiti za wanafalsafa wa Kiislamu si masomo ya Kiislamu. Badala yake ni mijadala ya kifalsafa tu, wala haina uhusiano wowote na Uislamu. Haina nafasi ya Uislamu katika mjadala wake. Hazichukuliwi kuwa maoni ya Kiislamu, wala si sehemu ya utamaduni wa Kiislamu.

3. The studies of the Muslim philosophers are non-islamic studies. Rather they are purely philosophical discussions and have no relationship to Islam. It has no place for Islam in its discussion. They are not considered Islamic opinions and they are not part of the Islamic culture.

Hii ni tofauti kati ya mbinu ya wanafalsafa wa Kiislamu na mbinu ya wanatheolojia wa Kiislamu (al-mutakallimun). Na hii ndiyo hali halisi ya wanafalsafa wa Kiislamu. Ni dhulma, kupingana na hali halisi, na kuizulia Uislamu uongo, kuiita falsafa ambayo walikuwa wakiijishughulisha nayo watu kama al-Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina na wengine kutoka miongoni mwa wanafalsafa wa Kiislamu kuwa ni "falsafa ya Kiislamu". Hii ni kwa sababu haina uhusiano wowote na Uislamu; badala yake inapingana kabisa na Uislamu, iwe kwa upande wa msingi au kwa upande wa maelezo yake mengi. Kuhusu kupingana kwake kwa upande wa msingi, falsafa hii inajadili yaliyo nje ya ulimwengu, yaani kuhusu uwepo kamili (al-wujud al-mutlaq), jambo linalopingana na Uislamu, ambao unajadili yaliyomo ndani ya ulimwengu na mambo yanayoweza kuhisiwa tu. Uislamu unakataza kujadili kiini cha Allah (SWT) na yaliyo nje ya ulimwengu. Unamwamuru Mwislamu kujisalimisha kwake kikamilifu, na kusimama kwenye mpaka wa yale ambayo imani inayaamuru bila kwenda mbele zaidi na bila kuruhusu akili kujaribu kuyajadili. Kuhusu maelezo, kuna mijadala mingi katika falsafa hii ambayo Uislamu unaiona kuwa ni kufuru (kufuru). Kuna mijadala inayoshikilia kuwa dunia ni ya kale milele (qadm al-'alam) na kwamba ni ya milele (azali). Na kuna mijadala inayothibitisha kuwa starehe ya Peponi ni ya kiroho na si ya kimwili. Na mijadala inayoshikilia kuwa Allah (SWT) hajui mambo ya kina, na dhana nyinginezo kama hizo ambazo kwa hakika zinadhihirisha kufuru katika mtazamo wa Uislamu.

This is the difference betwen the methodology of the mutakallimun and the methodology of the Muslim philosophers. And this is the reality of the Muslim philosophers. It is injustice, contradiction of the reality and fabrication of Islam to call the philosophy which the likes of al- Kindi, al-Farabi, Ibn Sina and others from the Muslim philosophers were preoccupied with, as Islamic philosophy. This is because it has no connection to Islam; rather it totally contradicts Islam whether in terms of the basis or in terms of many of its details. As for the contradiction it terms of the basis, this philosophy discusses that which is beyond the universe, that is, regarding the Absolute existence (al-wujud al-mutlaq) which is contrary to Islam which discusses what is in the universe and things that can be sensed only. It prohibits discussion about the essence of Allah  and that which is beyond the universe. It orders the Muslim to submit to it totally and stop at the limit of what imān enjoins without going further and without allowing the mind to attempt to discuss it. As for the details, there are many discussions in this philosophy which Islam considers as disbelief (kufr). Ther are discussions which hold the world to be eternally pre existent (qadm al-'alam) and that it is eternal (azali). And there are discussions which assert that the pleasure of Paradise is spiritual and not corporeal. And discussions which mantain that Allah  is ignorant of detailed aspects and other such notions which definitely manifest kufr in the view of Islam.

Ujumbe huu unaonekana kuwa na maneno ya kutafsiri tu, kwa hiyo hapa ni tafsiri yake kwa Kiswahili: Je, inawezaje kudaiwa kwamba falsafa hii ni ya Kiislamu, ikizingatiwa mkanganyiko huu wazi? Zaidi ya hayo, hakuna falsafa yoyote katika Uislamu kabisa, kwa sababu unaweka mipaka ya mjadala wa kiakili katika vitu vinavyoonekana kwa hisi na unazuia akili kujadili kile kilicho nje ya ulimwengu. Hilo linafanya mijadala yake yote iwe mbali na falsafa, kwa kuwa inafuata mbinu tofauti nayo. Hakuna nafasi yoyote inayotolewa ndani yake kwa masomo ya kifalsafa kuwepo. Ndiyo maana hakuna kitu kinachoitwa falsafa ya Kiislamu. Katika Uislamu kuna somo la Qur'an na Sunnah ya Nabii ﷺ. Hizo ndizo msingi pekee wa Uislamu kwa upande wa 'aqīdah (imani) na hukmu za kisheria [ahkam], iwe ni kwa upande wa amri [amr], katazo [nahi] au habari. [ikhbar]

How can it be claimed that this philosophy is Islamic given this clear contradiction? In adition to the fact that there is abolutely no philosophy in Islam because it restricts the rational discussion to the sensible objects and prohibits the mind from discussing that what is beyond the universe, which makes all its discussions remote from philosophy, following a method different to it. There is no possibility given in it that there should be any philosophical studies. That is why there is nothing called as Islamic philosophy. In Islam there is the study of the Qur’ān and the prophetic Sunnah. They are the only basis of Islam in terms of the ‘aqīdah (creed) and rules [ahkam], whether in terms of an order [amr], prohibition [nahi] or information [ikhbar]