Ashari School

Historical Formation and Context

The Ashari school (also spelled Ashʿarī or Asharism) is one of the principal schools of Sunni Islamic theology (ʿilm al-kalām). It emerged in the 10th century CE through the work of Abu al-Hasan al-Ashʿari (d. 936), who initially studied with the rationalist Muʿtazilite theologian al-Jubbāʾī before repudiating Muʿtazilism and articulating a new form of Sunni creed.

Asharism developed in conversation and conflict with several currents:

• Muʿtazilism, which emphasized divine justice, human free will, and strong rationalism
• Traditionalist (Hanbali) theology, which stressed strict textualism and suspicion of speculative reasoning
• Various Shiʿi and non-Muslim (Jewish, Christian, philosophical) intellectual traditions present in Abbasid Iraq

Al-Ashʿari’s project was to defend Sunni doctrine using rational argument, while rejecting what he saw as Muʿtazilite excesses and preserving the authority of Qur’an and hadith. Over the following centuries, major theologians such as al-Baqillani (d. 1013), al-Juwayni (d. 1085), al-Ghazali (d. 1111), Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (d. 1210), and others elaborated and diversified the school.

By the high medieval period, the Ashari school, alongside the closely related Maturidi school, came to be regarded as a mainstream articulation of Sunni orthodoxy in many regions, including parts of the Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia, and later the Ottoman domains.

Core Doctrines and Method

Asharism is both methodological and substantive. It offers a particular way of doing theology and a set of doctrinal positions.

Reason and Revelation

Asharites affirm the validity of reason but subordinate it to revelation:

• Reason can prove the existence of God, the createdness of the world, and the possibility of prophecy.
• Revelation (Qur’an and hadith) ultimately determines what is to be believed, especially on matters beyond unaided human understanding, such as the details of the afterlife or the exact nature of divine attributes.

In contrast to Muʿtazilites, who often used rational principles to reinterpret or limit scriptural claims, Asharites insist that where reason and authentic revelation appear to conflict, revelation has priority, and reason must be re-examined or used more cautiously.

Divine Attributes

A central Ashari concern is how to affirm Qur’anic and hadith descriptions of God—such as knowledge, will, speech, face, hand, ascending the throne—without anthropomorphism.

Asharites:

• Affirm that God has eternal attributes (e.g., knowledge, power, will, life, speech, hearing, sight), distinct from but not separable from the divine essence.
• Often employ the formula “bilā kayf” (“without [asking] how”), meaning that such attributes are affirmed without specifying their modality or likening them to created things.
• Sometimes use figurative interpretation (taʾwīl) for anthropomorphic texts, especially among later Asharites influenced by philosophy, while earlier or more conservative Asharites prefer non-speculative affirmation.

This approach mediates between Muʿtazilite tendencies to reduce attributes to mere descriptions of the essence and Hanbali resistance to any interpretive elaboration.

Free Will, Power, and “Acquisition” (Kasb)

On the question of human freedom and divine omnipotence, Asharism advances the doctrine of “acquisition” (kasb):

• All power and creation belong to God; every event and act is created by God.
• Humans possess a created capacity and “acquire” their acts at the moment God creates them.
• Thus, human actions are both created by God and attributed to humans in a way sufficient for moral responsibility and accountability.

Supporters view kasb as preserving both divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Critics, including some Muʿtazilites and later philosophers, argue that it either collapses into determinism or is conceptually unclear.

Causality and Occasionalism

Many Asharites, especially later figures such as al-Ghazali and al-Razi, articulate an occasionalist understanding of causation:

• There are no necessary causal powers in created things; what are called “causes” (fire, medicine, etc.) do not independently produce effects.
• Instead, God directly creates each event on the “occasion” of another event, following a customary order (ʿāda).
• The regularity of nature is a habit of God, not a metaphysical necessity.

This view challenges Aristotelian and Avicennian natural philosophy, which posited intrinsic causal powers. Proponents hold that occasionalism safeguards divine omnipotence and the possibility of miracles, while critics contend that it undermines scientific explanation or meaningful secondary causes.

Ethics and Good and Evil

In ethics, Asharism tends toward a divine command view:

• Good and evil are not fully knowable by reason alone in the sense of obligating God.
• Acts are good or evil because God commands or forbids them, not because of an independent moral standard binding even on God.
• Reason can recognize some values (e.g., benefit, harm) but cannot, by itself, impose obligations on God.

This differs from the Muʿtazilite claim that reason can know that some acts are inherently just or unjust, and that God must act justly in accordance with such rational standards.

Influence, Variants, and Critiques

Over time, the Ashari school developed internal variations and interacted with other intellectual currents.

Engagement with Philosophy and Sufism

Later Asharites, especially after al-Ghazali, engaged deeply with falsafa (Islamic philosophy) and Sufism:

• Some, like al-Ghazali, adopted philosophical tools (logic, certain metaphysical distinctions) while rejecting key Avicennian doctrines such as the eternity of the world or the denial of bodily resurrection.
• Others integrated Ashari kalam with mystical insights, contributing to syntheses in which theological doctrines were understood through spiritual practice and experience.

This produced a spectrum within Asharism, from more strictly kalam-focused theologians to those closely allied with Sufi orders and philosophical traditions.

Relationship to Other Sunni Theologies

The Maturidi school, associated with Abu Mansur al-Maturidi (d. c. 944), is often seen as a sister tradition to Asharism. Both are widely recognized as orthodox Sunni, but they differ on points such as:

• The extent of rational knowledge of ethics
• Details of human agency and divine guidance
• Nuances of divine attributes and speech

Hanbali/Athari traditionalists have at times opposed Asharism, particularly over:

• The use of speculative reasoning in matters of creed
• Figurative interpretation of scriptural texts about God
• The status of kalam itself, which some Atharis view as a blameworthy innovation

In later centuries, some Salafi critics portrayed Asharism as a departure from early Sunni creed, while Ashari scholars defended their approach as a legitimate and necessary development in the face of intellectual challenges.

Historical and Contemporary Role

Historically, Ashari theology became influential in:

• Madrasas and intellectual centers across the Islamic world
• Major institutions such as al-Azhar in Cairo (traditionally Ashari in creed)
• The formation of creeds and commentaries studied in many Shafiʿi and Maliki circles, among others

In the modern period, Asharism has:

• Continued as a reference point for Sunni theological identity
• Been revisited in light of modern science, philosophy, and interfaith dialogue
• Been both defended and critiqued in contemporary debates about reason, reform, and tradition in Islam

Proponents portray Asharism as a balanced path between uncritical literalism and radical rationalism, while critics—whether rationalist, Salafi, or secular—question its epistemology, its stance on causality, or its compatibility with some modern intellectual currents. The Ashari school remains a central subject of study for understanding classical Islamic thought, Sunni orthodoxy, and the historical interplay of faith and reason in Muslim intellectual history.