عنوان مقاله [English]
As two Muslim thinkers, Qāżī ʿAbd-Al-Jabbār B. Aḥmad and Abu Bakr Muḥammad ibn al-Ṭayyib al-Bāqillānī agree on the possibility and necessity of the knowledge of Allah and the necessity of thinking and reasoning for knowing God. But they disagree over some epistemological and methodological principles. In this article, we will investigate some of these disagreements. The main differences between the two theologians in the epistemological foundations are focused on answers to questions such as whether reason or religion prove the necessity of the knowledge of God or whether the relationship between thought and knowledge is productive or implicative. Qāżī ʿAbd-Al-Jabbār defends the "rational necessity" of the knowledge of God as well as the 'productive relation' between thought and knowledge. He also believes the thought, as a human free action, to be the root of knowledge. However, Abu Bakr al-Bāqillānī defends the "religious necessity" of the knowledge of God and the "implicative relation" between thought and knowledge. Besides, based on the Ash’arite theory of acquisition, he believes that creation of knowledge is based on the power of creator. So, although two theologians are agreed on the validity of empirical, rational and religious methods in theology, they disagree over the degree of validity and priority of each of these methods.