ANALYSIS OF ABU MANSUR MOTURIDI’S LIFE AND ACTIVITY

https://doi.org/10.57033/mijournals-2026-9-0158 Jurabek SODIKOV a

a International Islamic Academy of Uzbekistan, PhD, associate professor of the Islamic Studies and Study of Islamic Civilization ICESCO chair 11, A.Kadiri, Tashkent, 100011, Uzbekistan E-mail: jurabeksodiq@gmail.com ANALYSIS OF ABU MANSUR MOTURIDI’S LIFE AND ACTIVITY Abstract. This article compares the available information about the life and work of Abu Mansur Moturidi, the founder of the doctrine of Moturidi, the great scholar of Ahl as-Sunnah, and clarifies many contradictions in this regard. In particular, various information about the birth and death of the scholar, his teacher and students, as well as his works were compared, and on the basis of evidence, an attempt was made to reveal the real truth.

The sources do not specify the date of Abu Mansur Moturidi’s birth. Other information about scholar does not allow to determine this. That is why there are only assumptions in this regard. Information about other aspects of a scientist’s life and work also differs in the sources. This is because most of the information about the scientist’s identity dates back to a long time after the scientist’s death.

Although it is not mentioned that Moturidi traveled in search of knowledge like most other scholars, he became a mature scholar of his time.This can be explained by the fact that at that time Samarkand was one of the centers of Islamic science, which gathered many mature scholars of their time. For this reason, there was no need for Moturidi to travel in search of knowledge.

Abu Mansur Moturidi based his doctrine on the works narrated from Abu Hanifa and developed new issues based on them. During his research on these issues, the scientist sought to prove them with convincing evidence beyond doubt. The disciples and followers of the scholar played a major role in the development of the teachings of Moturidi. They brought the scholar’s works into book form, commented on them, and wrote new works based on Moturidi’s teachings. Keywords: Moturidi, Samarkand, Ahl al-Sunnah, kalam, aqeedah, tafsir, moturidi, hanafi.

Vol. 9, (Issue 2/2026) INTRODUCTION Respect and attention to the rich scientific and spiritual heritage of scholars in Uzbekistan is growing day by day. In particular, in recent years, the personality and scientific heritage of Abu Mansur Maturidi has begun to be treated with great attention. In particular, the establishment of the “Imam Maturidi International Scientific and Research Center” in 2020 was an important step in this regard.

Abu Mansur Maturidi, the founder of Maturidiyyah, one of the two recognized schools of thought in the Islamic world, is considered one of the most influential scholars not only in our country but also in the entire history of Islam. There is no exact information in the sources about the date of birth of Abu Mansur Muhammad ibn Muhammad Maturidi Samarkandi. Most authors who wrote about him did not dwell on the personal life of the scholar. That is, there is very little information about the scholar’s family, parents and children. Various conjectures have also been expressed about the kunya “Abu Mansur” There is also a variety of information and analytical views about the scholar’s teachers and students, the number and names of his works. Therefore, a comparative study of the available information in this regard and a more complete reflection of Moturidi’s personality and scientific activities is one of the important tasks facing today’s Moturidi scholars.

MAIN PART The life and activities of Imam Moturidi and the teachings of Moturidi were studied by a number of Western orientalists, including Karl Brockelman, Fuad Sezgin, I.P. Petrushevsky, and later researchers such as U. Rudolf, Adil Bebek, Tolip Ozdes, Bakr Topal Ogly, Sonmes Kutlu, and Rejeb Onal. There are relatively few Arab scholars who have studied the scientific legacy of Maturidi, because the teachings of Ash’ariyya are widespread in the Arab world. Fatima Yusuf Haymi, Majdi Basallum, Ahmad ibn Awadullah Harbi, and Ahmad Sa’d Damanhuri are among the few Arab scholars who have conducted research on Maturidi.

During the years of independence, Uzbekistan also had the opportunity to study the scientific and spiritual heritage of Abu Mansur Maturidi on a large scale. In particular, the widespread celebration of the scholar’s 1130th anniversary in 2000 led to a new stage in research on Abu Mansur Maturidi and his scientific heritage. Scientific articles,

speeches, and research on this topic began to increase. In particular, the scholarly research of A.Mansurov, Shaykh Muhammad Sadiq Muhammad Yusuf, Sh. Ziyodov, S.Oqilov, A. Abdullayev, and U.Palvanov explores key issues such as the introduction of the Hanafi school of thought into Transoxiana, the life of Abu Mansur Maturidi, the spread of Maturidi teachings, the scholar’s academic work and writings, his distinctive methodology and sources, the nature of the era in which he lived, and significant reflections and scholarly conclusions regarding the doctrinal views of Ahl al-Sunnah wa-l-Jamaah. Sources indicate that Maturidi’s full name was Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Mahmud, and he was commonly known as Abu Mansur Maturidi. (Ibn Abil-Wafa, 1993:360) The scholar was born in the village of “Maturid” in Samarkand. There is no disagreement about the date of his death, which is 333 AH, 944-945 AD. However, the Western scholar W. Rudolph casts doubt on this date as well. (Rudolf, 2001:115) Because, according to him, Abul Muin Nasafi, who is the first source of information on this matter, did not specify this date, but only said that his teacher died shortly after Ash’ari (d. 324/935). (Nasafi, 2011:557) It should also be noted that there is no exact information on the date of Ash’ari’s death. Abu’l-Qasim ibn Asakir Dimashqi (d. 571/1176) in his work “Tabyin al-kizb al-muftaro fi ma nusiba ilal-imam Abil-Hasan al-Ash’ari” cites various information on this subject with the chains of narrators. In particular, there is information regarding the date of Ash’ari’s death, stating that it was after 330/942, after 320/932, in 324/936, between 320-330/932-942, and before 330/942, and that most scholars agree that it was in 320/932. (Ibn Asakir, 1979:146–147) Therefore, it is not entirely reasonable to determine the date of Maturidi’s death in relation to the year of Abul-Hasan Ash’ari’s death. That is, we can only have approximate dates.

All scholars and researchers who have written about Maturidi in their works determine his birth date based on the date of death of his greatest teachers. However, opinions about his teachers also differ.

Notably, Ulrich Rudolph’s research in this area is of particular significance. He compares and critically analyzes information about Maturidi and his teachers found in the works of scholars such as Abu al-Mu’in al-Nasafi, Ibn Abil-Wafa, Ibn Qutlubugha, Taşköprüzade, Kamalpashazade, al-Bayadi, Murtaza al-Zubaidi, and Abdulhayy al-

Vol. 9, (Issue 2/2026) Laknawi. Based on this analysis, he concludes that the birth year of the great scholar was around 870 or slightly earlier. (Rudolf, 2001:116–119) Rudolph arrives at this conclusion because he recognizes only Abu Nasr al-‘Iyadi and Abu Bakr al-Juzjani as Maturidi’s teachers. Among the two, he considers the information regarding the death of al-‘Iyadi (around the year 890) to be more historically reliable. Although the German researcher compares numerous sources, the primary influence on his conclusion was Abu al-Mu’in al-Nasafi, who was among the first to provide valuable information about Maturidi in his works.

Arab scientist Abu Zahra’s views on this matter are also appropriate: “The scholar was educated in the last third of the third century, when the Mu’tazilites were the object of public anger and hatred… There is no exact information about his date of birth. However, he was probably born in the middle of the third century. Because the sources clearly state that he studied Hanafi jurisprudence and theology from Nasr ibn Yahya Balkhi (d. 268/881). (Abu Zahra, n.d.:164) Abu Zahra adds another figure, Nasr ibn Yahya al-Balkhi, to the list of Maturidi’s teachers. According to his estimation, if Abu Mansur al-Maturidi lived for more than eighty years, he would have been around 18 to 20 years old at the time of al-Balkhi’s death. However, this remains a hypothesis, as there is no reliable information about the exact lifespan of Maturidi. If such data were available, determining his birth year based on the date of his death would have been relatively straightforward. The research of the Uzbek Moturidi scholar S.Okilov on this subject is also noteworthy. Having familiarized himself with the above information, he states the following in his monograph:

“There have also been various disagreements regarding the birth date of the great scholar. Most sources indicate the year 256 AH / 870 CE. However, the Arab researcher Muhammad Ayyub asserts that Maturidi was born around 238 AH / 853 CE. He notes that Maturidi’s teachers, Muhammad ibn Muqotil al-Razi and Nusayr ibn Yahya al- Balkhi, died in 248 AH / 862 CE and 268 AH / 881 CE, respectively. If we assume that Maturidi was born in 256 AH / 870 CE, it would mean that he had not yet been born when Muhammad ibn Muqotil passed away and would have been only an eleven-yearold child when Nusayr ibn Yahya died. This, according to Muhammad Ayyub, is far from likely”. (Okilov, 2012:57–58)

S.Okilov, supporting the opinion of Muhammad Ayyub, adds Muhammad ibn Mykotil Razi (248/862) to the list of Maturidi’s main teachers, bringing their number to four. On this basis, he seeks to determine the year of his birth: “In our view, it is more logical to assume that Maturidi was born around 238 AH / 853 CE. This is also supported by the statistical data mentioned above. Furthermore, if we consider the death date of another key teacher of Maturidi, Abu Nasr al-‘Iyadi (d. 275 AH / 889 CE), and accept 870 CE as Maturidi’s birth year based on other sources, then Maturidi would have been only a nineteen-year-old youth at the time of his teacher’s death. It is difficult to imagine that at this age he would have had time to receive a full course in theology from Iyadi”. (Okilov, 2012:58) However, in this case, Maturidi must have lived to be about 100 years old, and there is no reliable information about this. Moreover, Ulrich Rudolf says that Muhammad ibn Muqotil Razi was not in Samarkand. (Rudolf, 2001:117) Most sources state that Moturidi never left Samarkand. Furthermore, it is far from logical for a nine- or ten-year-old boy to travel in pursuit of knowledge and reach the level of learning from such a great scholar. Comparing the above opinions and conclusions, it can be said that without finding a new and reliable source, it is impossible to specify the date of the scientist’s life. None of the existing views has sufficient basis. Therefore, it is better to be satisfied with the period that is consistent with all studies, that is, the third quarter of the 9th century AD. There is no reliable information about the scholar’s family, parents, and children. It is known that his father’s name was Muhammad and his grandfather’s name was Mahmud, but no other information about them is found in the sources. There are also various assumptions about the nickname “Abu Mansur”.

In particular, S.Okilov in his monograph cites the conclusions of a number of researchers in this regard:

“However, there is no information in any source that he had a son. In our opinion, if Maturidi had a son named Mansur, Abul Mu’in Nasafi would have first reported this in his work “Tabsirat al-Adilla”. Based on this, we can conclude that Maturidi did not have a son. Modern orientalists who have studied the scientific heritage of Maturidi have also emphasized that he did not have a son. For example, Western orientalists such as U.Rudolf, V.Madelung, and our compatriot A.Muminov did not mention in their research that he had a son. Turkish scholar Shukru Ozen notes that if Maturidi had a son, the sources would certainly have provided information about him”. (Okilov, 2012:58–59)

Vol. 9, (Issue 2/2026) At this point, the information provided by another Turkish scholar, Dr. Ahmed AK, sheds full light on the matter. S.Okilov also briefly alluded to his thoughts. However, due to necessity, it was found necessary to quote in full what the scholar said about the kunya “Abu Mansur” from his own work:

“When looking at the sources, one can see that Maturidi is mainly mentioned by the surname Abu Mansur. Although this indicates that the scholar had a son named Mansur, (research) shows that he did not have a son.” Because Moturidi personally said that the surname “Abu Mansur” is given to a man who does not have a son, according to tradition, in the hope of having a son named Mansur. However, this does not mean that she had a son”. (Ak, 2008:36) Ahmed AK, while saying these words, refers to Maturidi’s “Ta’wilat Ahl al-Sunnah” as an explanation. The page he refers to contains the following sentences (Maturidi cited these words in his commentary on Surah Masad as an explanation of why “Abu Lahab” was given this kunya):

“Because, kunya is used in the sense of optimism (encouragement) in mutual acquaintances. Just as it is said: “Abu Mansur” (“Father of Mansur”) with the intention of having a son named Mansur”. (Moturidi, 2004:535) Although the scholar does not explicitly state this, it seems as if he is explaining why he chose the kunya “Abu Mansur”. In conclusion to the above-mentioned opinions on whether or not Maturidi had a son, it can be said that these words he said at the end of his commentary can put an end to various debates on this subject. Abdullah Murai in his book “Fath al-mubiyn fiy-tabaqat al-usuliyyin” says the following: “Abu Mansur was a person with strong documents, refrained from enmity, defended the faith of Muslims and refuted the doubts of non-believers”. (Juhani, 1997:96– 97) Such praise and recognition of the scholar can be found in many of the tabakas. Over time, as Maturidi’s fame grew, they also increased.

Abu Mansur Maturidi was known for several honorable titles that reflected his high knowledge, services to religion, and unparalleled devotion to defending the Islamic faith. He was honored with such great titles as “Imam al-Huda” (Imam of Guidance) (Ibn Abil-Wafa, 1993:359), “Imam al-Mutakallimin” (Leader of the Mutakallimin) (Hajavi, 1340h:93), “Al-Imam az-Zahid” (God-seeking Imam) (Pazdavi, 2003:14), “Musahhihi ‘aqeed al-Muslimin” (The Reformer of the Creeds of Muslims) (Laknaviy, 1324h:195),

“Nasir al-Sunnah wa qami’ul-bid’ah” (The Helper of the Sunnah and the Destroyer of Bid’ah) (Zubaydi, 1993:5), and many others.

These honorable names and accolades were given later, when the religious sect of the Allama became popular and was recognized by the scholars of the Sunnah. Of course, Maturidi deserves these titles and praises in every respect due to his scientific heritage and his services to the people of Sunnah. Nevertheless, the personality of Abu Mansur Maturidi and his teachings remained largely ignored by the authors of popular medieval books on sects, history, and aqeedah. The Maturidi scholar Ahmad ibn Avdullah Harbi suggests the following possible reasons for the omission of Maturidi’s personality and legacy from many important sources such as the above:

1- The fact that Maturidi was far from the centers of the caliphate, where many scholars from various parts of the Islamic world gathered; 2- The fact that Maturidiism was not strengthened by the political power that Mu’tazilites and Ash’aris relied on in previous centuries; 3- The scholar did not travel to the scientific centers of the Islamic world such as Mecca, Medina, Damascus, and Baghdad. If he had visited these lands, he would have met with scholars and debated with them. As a result, Maturidi would have gained fame, recognition, and been mentioned in the history of these cities; 4- The delay in the publication of works on the Tabaqat, which are part of the scholarly heritage of the scholars of the Hanafi school. For example: The first work on the Tabaqat genre related to Hanafiism was written by Abdulqadir Qurashi, the author of “Al-Jawahir al-Mudiyya”, who died in 775/1373-1374. (Harbiy, 1992:83–84) The scholar of Maturidi, Ahmad Sa’d Damanhuri, also addresses this issue and objects to the above views of Ahmad ibn Awdullah Harbi. He himself cites two factors as the causes of this problem. Their content is briefly as follows: - The lack of information about Maturidi’s life written down by scholars who lived directly during his time was a serious problem for later scholars, namely Pazdavi and Nasafis, who provided the first information about Maturidi in their works. - It is not far-fetched that the frequent wars and plundering in Transoxiana also contributed to the disappearance of written sources and information about Maturidi and many Hanafi scholars. (Damanhuri, 2018:85–87) In addition to these, it can be said that there may be another factor that caused the above situation - uncertainty and disagreements about Moturidi’s personality and works.

Vol. 9, (Issue 2/2026) It is known that most of the Islamic scholars avoided unreliable and unproven information in order not to get involved in falsehood.

As in jurisprudence, Maturidi followed Abu Hanifa in his doctrine. For this reason, in some works, Maturidi is also called Hanafis.

When discussing Abu Hanifa’s works such as “Al-Fiqh al-Absat”, “The Treatise Written to al-Batti”, “Al-‘Alim wa al-Muta‘allim”, and “The Testament to Yusuf ibn Khalid”, al-Maturidi himself states that he narrated these books from his teachers Abu Nasr Ahmad ibn Abbas, Ahmad ibn Abbas Juzjani, and Nasr ibn Yahya Balkhi, who, in turn, narrated them from Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani’s student known as Abu Sulayman Musa Jurjani. (Abu Zahra, n.d.:165–166) When compiling various sources, it can be seen that the following scholars are mentioned as Maturidi’s teachers:

1. Aby Nasr Ahmad ibn Abbas Iyodi (d. 275/889); 2. Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Is’hoq Juzjani (d. III Hijri, 2nd half of IX century AD); 3. Nusayr ibn Yahya Balkhi (d. 268/881); 4. Muhammad ibn Muqotil Razi (d. 248/862); 5. Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Raja Juzhani (d. 285/898). However, some works mention only one of Maturidi’s teachers. For example, in Al-Jawahir al-Mudiyah, only Abu Nasr Iyadi is mentioned as the scholar’s teacher. (Ibn Abil-Wafa, 1993:360) Other authors influenced by Abul Mu’in Nasafi also cite this information.

Ibn Abilwafa may have meant by this the main teacher from whom Maturidi received most of his lessons, since many other sources that mention two or more teachers also mention Abu Nasr Iyadi as Maturidi’s main teacher.

W.Rudolph, however, recognizes only two of them: Abu Nasr Iyodiy and Abu Bakr Ahmad Juzjani. He rejects Nusayr ibn Yahya Balkhi and Muhammad ibn Muqotil Razi as not having lived in Samarkand. Moreover, he says that the great difference in the time period between Razi (d. 862) and Maturidi does not allow this. Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Raja Juzjani is not mentioned at all. (Rudolf, 2001:117–118) Although these ideas of Rudolph seem logically correct, they give rise to some speculation. Because there is no information that indicates even approximately how many years Maturidi lived. Perhaps he lived a long life and reached the age where he could learn from Razi before his death. In addition, there is information about the main

places of activity of Balkhy and Razi, but this does not mean that they did not visit Samarkand at all.

The Arab scholar Ahmad Harbi lists four scholars as Maturidi’s teachers, in addition to Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Raja Juzjani (d. 285/898). (Harbiy, 1992:100–103) The Turkish Maturidi scholar Adil Bebek does the same. (Bebek, 1998:21–22) This is the most widely accepted account of Maturidi’s teachers, and is relatively common in later studies.

Dr. Ahmed AK and S. Okilov believe that the scholar received training from all five of the above-mentioned teachers. These two scholars have compiled in their works various speculative views of scholars and researchers regarding the chain of transmission of Abu Mansur Maturidi up to Abu Hanifa. (Ak, 2008:44) Summarizing them, the following conclusions can be drawn:

– Ahmad Juzjani, Iyadi and Balkhi were students of Abu Sulayman Musa Juzjani (d. 200/816). He himself studied under Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad, the prominent followers of Imam Abu Hanifa.

Muhammad ibn Muqotil al-Razi is linked directly to Abu Hanifa in some chains of transmission through Muhammad Shaybani or Abu Muti’ al-Balkhi (d. 199/814). According to the chain of transmission developed by Rudolf, al-Razi is linked to Abu Hanifa through Isam ibn Yusuf al-Balkhi (d. 215/830) and Abu Muqotil al-Samarkand, and to Maturidi through Abu Bakr al-Juzjani.

– Muhammad ibn Muqotil al-Razi is directly linked to Abu Hanifa in some chains of transmission through Muhammad Shaybani or Abu Muti’ al-Balkhi (d. 199/814). According to the chain of transmission developed by Rudolf, al-Razi is linked to Abu Hanifa through Isam ibn Yusuf al-Balkhi (d. 215/830) and Abu Muqotil al-Samarkand, and to Maturidi through Abu Bakr al-Juzjani.

– Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Raja Juzjani (d. 285/898) is not mentioned in the isnads. However, sources state that he was a disciple of Abu Sulayman Musa Juzjani, like Ahmad Juzjani, Iyadi, and Balkhi.

Therefore, no matter which information is considered valid, in any case, all of Maturidi’s teachers were followers of Abu Hanifa. This, of course, played a major role in shaping the scholar’s scientific views in the spirit of Hanafiism. The disciples and subsequent followers of Abu Mansur Maturidi played a significant role in the widespread spread and recognition of the Maturidi doctrine. If we combine

Vol. 9, (Issue 2/2026) the various sources that mention the direct disciples of the scholar and compare them with recent research on this topic, the following information emerges: 1. Abul Kasim Is’haq ibn Muhammad Hakim Samarkandi (died 342/953); 2. Abul Hasan Ali ibn Said Rustughfani (died 345/956); 3. Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Abu Nasr Iyadi (died 361/971); 4. Abu Ahmad ibn Abu Nasr Iyadi; 5. Abu Muhammad ibn Abdulkarim ibn Musa Pazdawi (died 370/980). 6. Abu Salama Samarkandi.

7. Abu Abdurrahman ibn Abullays Bukhari.

Some sources mention three, others four or five of his disciples. Among them, Abulhasan Rustughfani, Abu Muhammad Pazdawi, and Abu Ahmad Iyadi are mentioned in all sources. (Harbiy, 1992:104–108; Ak, 2008:47–48; Okilov, 2012:82–85; Rudolf, 2001:138) Abu Mansur Maturidi wrote many works in the sciences of theology, mazhabs, tafsir, Qur’anic sciences, usul al-fiqh and furu’ al-fiqh, which are in line with the fundamentals of Islam. In the introduction to Kamal al-Din Bayazi’s work “Isharat al-maram min ibarat al-imam”, Zahid Kawsari says the following:

“The cities of Transoxiana were under the rule of the Sunnah without any disagreement, safe from bid’ah and superstition. This aqeedah heritage was passed down from generation to generation in Transoxiana until the birth of Abu Mansur Maturidi, known as “Imam al-Huda”. He devoted himself to studying the issues in this legacy and the evidence on which they are based, and with his works he satisfied both reason and the law”. (Bayozi, 1949:6) There are different data and analytical views about the number and names of Alloma’s works. Including:

Abul Mu’in Nasafi (died 508/1115), who gave detailed information on Maturidi’s works for the first time, listed the names of 12 works. (Nasafi, 2011:556) Abu Muhammad ibn Abil Wafa in his work “Al-Jawahir al-mudiyya fi tabaqat al-Hanafiyya” lists the following works by Maturidi: “Kitab at-Tawheed”, “Kitab al-Maqalot”, “Refutation of Kaabi’s book “Awa’il al-Adillah”, “Kitab Bayani wahm al-Mu’tazila”, “Ta’wilat al- Qur’an”. After citing these names, he states that the scholar also has various other works. (Ibn Abil-Wafa, 1993:360)

Carl Brockelman cited seven works of the scholar in “Tarikh al-turas al-arabi” and stated that the attribution of Kitab sharh al-fiqh al-akbar to Moturidi is a mistake. (Brokkelman, 1959:42–43) Fuad Sezgin, on the other hand, spoke about five of Maturidi’s works: “Ta’wilat al- Qur’an”, “Kitab at-Tawhid”, “Al-Aqeedah”, “Al-Wasaya wal-Munajat” and “Risala fi ma la yajuzu al-waqf alayhi fil-Qur’an”, and provided valuable information about their manuscript copies. (Sezgin, 1967:605–606) Scientist Sh. Ziyadov showed in his research that two of these five works: “Al-Aqeedah” and “Risola fi ma la yajuzu al-waqf alayhi fil-Qur’an” are “fake”, i.e. attributed to Moturidiy, but actually works of other authors. (Ziyodov, 2003:49–53) Abu Zahra lists the names of eleven of Maturidi’s works and says: “Some scholars say that he wrote a commentary on the book “Al-Fiqh al-Akbar” attributed to Abu Hanifa. However, subsequent scientific research has proven that this commentary belongs to the famous Hanafi jurist Abu al-Lays Samarkandi”. (Abu Zahra, n.d.:166) Ahmad ibn Abdullah Harbi also listed fifteen of his works and divided them into three groups according to their topics: works on tafsir, the science of the word, and usulul-fiqh. (Harbiy, 1992:109–114) Dr. Ahmed AK said that there are fourteen works of the scientist. (Ak, 2008:53) W. Rudolf emphasizes that only two works by Maturidi have survived to our time: “Ta’wilat ahl-us-sunna” and “Kitab at-tawhid,” and cites nine works as missing works. (Rudolf, 2001:139–142) However, many researchers ignore the work “Kitab ar-radd alal-qaromita” that they cite in their works. In this work, Maturidi refuted the Qarmatian sect, which was widespread in his time and committed many destructive acts. Having studied the above information and taking into account the opinions of scientists and researchers, it can be concluded that Moturidi had the following works: 1. “Kitab at-ta’wilat”, ‘Ta’wilat al-Qur’an” or “Ta’wilat Ahl as-Sunnah”, 2. “Kitab al-Tawhid”, 3. “Kitab al-maqalat”, 4. “Kitab al-jadal fiy usul al-fiqh”, 5. “Kitab rad tahzib al-jadal lil-Ka’bi”, 6. “Kitab radd al-avail al-adilla lil-Ka’bi”, 7. “Kitab bayani wahm al-mu’tazila”, 8. “Kitab ar-radd ala-l-qaromita”,

Vol. 9, (Issue 2/2026) 9. “Kitab radd al-imama li ba’z ar-rawafiz”, 10. “Ma’akhiz ash-Shari’a”, 11. “Radd vaid al-fussaq lil-Ka’bi”, 12. “Radd al-usul al-khamsa li Abi Umar al-Bahili”.

The titles of the works listed by Nasafi also fit almost perfectly into this list. He did not mention the work entitled “Kitab al-jadal fi’ usul al-fiqh.” Instead, he stated that the work entitled “Kitab ar-radd ala-l-qaramita” listed in the list actually consisted of two independent books, namely “Kitab ar-radd ala-l-qaramita fi-l-usul” and “Kitab ar-radd ala-l-qaramita fi-l-furu’ ” (Nasafi, 2011:556). Therefore, it can be concluded that the works “Kitab al-jadal fi usul al-fiqh” and “Kitab ar-radd ala-l-qaramita fi-l-usul” are actually two names for one book. Since this work has not survived to this day, it is not possible to get acquainted with the content of the work. However, the meaning understood from their names does not negate each other.

CONCLUSIONS:

The above analysis shows that information about the biography of Abu Mansur Maturidi is rather scarce and vague. This is due to the large time gap between the scholar’s life and the first authors who mentioned information about him in their works and treatises. For example: Abul Yusr Pazdawi died in 493 AH (1099 AD), Abul Mu’in Nasafi died in 508 AH (1114-1115 AD). Furthermore, there is no scientific benefit in specifying the exact date of a scholar’s birth, as this approximate period is sufficient to clarify the relationship between a teacher and a student and to get a sense of the environment in which the scholar lived.

All of Maturidi’s teachers, up to Imam Abu Hanifa, are connected by an unbroken chain of transmission. Therefore, the beliefs of Maturidi and Hanafi, or the doctrinal views of Abu Hanifa and Maturidi, are consistent and complementary. During his research, Maturidi wrote many works of great scientific value on various topics. Although most of the scholar’s works have not survived, the works that have survived to this day, “Ta’wilat Ahl as-Sunnah” and “Kitab at-Tawhid”, due to their comprehensiveness, can provide a complete picture of Abu Mansur Maturidi’s religious teachings.

REFERENCES:

1. Abdulhay Laknaviy. Al-Favoid al-bahiyya fiy tarojim al-hanafiyya. – Egypt: Matba’a assa’ada, 1324 h. – P. 262. 2. Abul Mu’in Nasafi. Tabsirat al-adilla. – Cairo: Al-Maktaba al-azhariyya lit-turos, 2011. – Vol. I-II. – P. 1306.

3. Abulqasim ibn Asakir Damasci. Tabyiyn al-kizb al-muftaro fiy ma nusiba ilal-imam Abilhasan al-Ash’ariy. – Damascus: Dor al-fikr, 1979. – P. 470. 4. Abul Yusr Pazdavi. Usul ad-din. – Cairo: al-Maktaba al-azhariyya li-t-turos, 2003. – P. 272. 5. Adil Bebek. Matürldîde sin problem. – Istanbul: Bayrak, 1998. – P. 217. 6. Ahmad ibn Awadullah Harbiy. Al-Moturidiyya. – Riyadh: Dor al-asima, 1992. – P. 576. 7. Ahmad Sa’d Damanhuri. Sadd as-sugur bi siyrati alam al-huda Abi Mansur al-Maturidi. – Ammon: Dor an-nur al-mubiyn, 2018. – P. 242.

8. Ahmed Ak. The great Turkish scholar Maturidi and Maturidism. – Istanbul: Bayrak, 2008. – P. 216.

9. Fuad Sezgin. Geschichte des arabischen schrifttums. – Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1967. – P. 936. 10. Kamoliddin Bayazi. Ishorot al-marom min ibarot al-imam. – Egypt: Mustafa as-Soniy, 1949. – P. 356.

11. Karl Brokkelman. Tarix at-turas al-arabi. – Cairo: Dor al-maorif, 1959. – Vol. IV. – P. 378. 12. Mani’ ibn Hammad Juhani. Mavsuot al-muyassara. – Riyadh: Dorun-nadva, 1997. – Vol. I. – P. 559.

13. Moturidi. Ta’wilat аhl as-sunnah. Edited by Fatima Yusuf Khaymi. – Beirut: Muassasat ar-Risala an-Nashirun, 2004. – Vol. V. – P. 565.

14. Muhammad Abu Zahra. Tarix al-mazahib al-islamiyya. – Cairo: Dor al-fikr. – P. 688. 15. Muhammad ibn Hasan Hajavi. Al-Fikr as-somiy. – Rabat: Matba’a al-maorif, 1340 h. – Vol. III. – P. 170.

16. Muhammad ibn Muhammad Zubaydi. Ithof as-sa’ada al-muttaqin. – Beirut: Muassasat at- Tarikh al-Arabi, 1993. – Vol. II. – P. 432.

17. Muhiddin Abu Muhammad ibn Abilvafo. Al-Jawahir al-mudiyya fi tabaqoti al-hanafiyya. – Madina: Dor al-hijr, 1993. – Vol. III. – P. 688.

18. Rudolf U. Al-Moturidi and Samarkand Sunni theology. – Tashkent: Imam al-Bukhari International Foundation, 2001. – P. 203.

19. S.Okilov. History of the formation of the doctrine of Moturudiyya in Movarounnahr / Monograph. – Tashkent: Movarounnahr, 2012. – P. 185.

20. Ziyodov Sh. The written legacy of Abu Mansur al-Moturidi and his work “Kitab at-Ta’wilat” / Candidate’s dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Historical Sciences. – Tashkent: Uz.R.FASHI, 2003. – P. 154.