چکیده:
The four temperaments consist of warmth and coldness, wetness and dryness, which, according to those who believe in them, all objects in the universe, including the human body, are composed of. Changes in their composition affect the condition of the body and its functions. Dreaming is one of these functions, the nature of which varies with changes in the body's temperament. Muslim theologians have had various encounters with the concept of the four temperaments. The strongest opposition to the concept of temperament and the influence of the four temperaments on dreams is found in the Ash'ari theology. In contrast, a diverse range of theologians (including some Mu'tazilites, Sheikh Mufid from the Shia sect, Maturidi, and Ibn Hazm) have accepted the four temperaments, and some have explicitly stated the influence of temperaments on dreams. In this article, after presenting an overview of the views of opponents and proponents of temperaments among theologians, the main reasons for the opposition and acceptance of theologians with the four temperaments are examined, and then, in connection with these approaches, a report and analysis of the discussions of theologians regarding the influence of temperaments on dreams is presented.
خلاصه ماشینی:
In contrast, a diverse range of theologians (including some Mu'tazilites, Sheikh Mufid from the Shia school, al-Maturidi, and Ibn Hazm) have accepted the four temperaments, and some have explicitly stated the influence of temperaments on dreams.
In addition, from the very beginning, there was a group called the “People of Temperaments” against whom theologians wrote books (see: Ibn Nadim, vol.
It was also said that dreaming resulted from constitution and was under the influence of temperament, as stated by the philosopher Aristotle and the physician Galen (for example, see: the text attributed to Aristotle and the quotation from Galen in Gätje, 2, p.
In the expressions of some theologians “al-khalqa” and “al-khaliqa” have been used synonymously with “al-tabi'a,” see: Ibn Hazm, vol.
The main opponent of the concept of temperament and nature in Kalam was Abu al-Hasan al-Ash'ari (d.
In opposition to the concepts of nature and causality, he justified all phenomena with the theory of habit and considered direct agency as the only way for the Creator to affect the world (see: Ibn Furak, p.
456 AH) also, although he considered the concept of nature according to some Mu'tazilites to be the same as the view of the materialists, considered the existence of temperaments to be self-evident and considered opposition to it unreasonable, and said that the Ash'arites have no valid reason to deny temperaments (Ibn Hazm, vol.
We mentioned Ibn Hazm and Sheikh al-Mufid as defenders of temperament.
(
, 
, 
)
