Fatimids, bound up the Shiite/Ismaili sect, have pursued a policy of expansion towards the east since they were established in Ifrîkiye. Within the framework of this political goal, the Turkish dynasty made various attempts to seize the Egyptian lands owned by the Ikhshidids. The relations between the two sides, which lasted for more than thirty years, ended with the Fatimids seizing Egypt and then Syria. In this process, various political and military encounters took place between the Fatimids and the Ikhshidids. (...) In this article, the relations of the Fatimids with the Ikhshidids are discussed. The relations between the two sides included remarkable events in a medium where the Fatimids in the east of the Islamic world and the Ikhshidid in the west increased their political power. The fact that these developments were closely related to the Islamic world of that period increases the importance of this research. Therefore, it would be beneficial to reveal the panorama of the thirty-five-year period by examining the sources that shed light on the relevant period. Ourstudy, which deals with the Fatimid-Ikhshidid relations, consists of three parts. In the first part, the beginning of the Fatimid-Ikhshidid relations will be examined. In the second part, the subject of the Fatimids taking Egypt from the Ikhshidids will be discussed. Finally, in the third chapter, the issue of the Fatimids capturing Syria and putting an end to the Ikhshidids will be discussed. The primary goal of the study in question will be to try to give a clear idea about the subject by addressing the reflections and effects of Fatimid-Ikhshidid relations in the Islamic world. (shrink)

One of the processes that Zaydism, as a sect that has survived to the present day, went through in the Yemen region is the period that began with Mansûr-Billâh Qasim b. Muhammad, who declared his imamate in the 16th century and continued by the descendants of the ruling class until the declaration of the Republic. However, there is not enough information in the literature about this period, which is known as the Kasimi’s era. Mansûr-Billâh Qasim b. Muhammad has many works (...) on akaid, tafsir, method, islamic law, and in addition, there is a small pamphlet (risalah) written by him. This study aims to introduce the translation of the will written by Mansûr-Billâh Qasim b. Muhammad, who is known as the founder of the Kasimi dynasty, for his son Muayyad-Billâh Muhammad b. Kasım into the literature. (shrink)

Fatimid history is considered one of the main periods of Islamic history in Egypt, so we cannot talk about the cultural metropolis of Egypt, the city of Cairo, without mentioning its founder, Jawhar al-Siqilli, the leader of the Fatimid Caliph al-Muizz Li-Din Allah al-Fatimid. The same is true of the Al-Azhar Mosque, which since its establishment until now has gained international fame in the Islamic world, throughout the historical stages, in addition to many of the Fatimid monuments scattered in Old (...) Cairo such as mosques, schools and alleys, all of this appears when talking about Egypt in general and Islamic Egyptin particular. The Fatimids sought to seize the Egyptian country a lot, as two military campaigns from North Africa to Egypt were launched, each of them failed. Then, the third campaign succeeded, led by Jawhar al-Siqilli, after the Fatimid Caliph al-Muizz prepared the equipment this time and arranged the army well, and had previously sent missionaries to this geography through the city of Alexandria and others, to herald the demise of the Ikhshidid state and the coming of the savior from this injustice and economic stagnation under which Egypt has fallen. He took several measures to try to declare Fatimid control over the Egyptian country. A delegation of the Egyptians sought to obtain a covenant from the Fatimid leader Jawhar al-Siqilli, to reassure them and remove their fears, especially with regard to their beliefs and religious matters. Indeed, the Fatimid leader issued this covenant, which included many things to reassure the Egyptians, among them that the Companions of the prophet are the most honorable people contrary to the famous Shiite belief- and that each will leave his belief, but it was not long before this covenant until many things were sealed. Our research here focuses on these matters.The research is divided into three main ponits: the first is the sectarian history of Egypt before the Fatimid occupation, and the second is the attempts to impose the Shiite sect on the Egyptians. The last point is the resistance or what hinders this imposition, and it is this last part that limited these influences to the Fatimid monuments such as buildings, mosques and schools. (shrink)

Millers Living Systems Theory (LST) is known to be very comprehensive. It comprises eight nested hierarchical levels. It also includes twenty critical subsystems. While Millers approach has been analyzed and applied in great detail, some problematic features remain, requiring further explication. One of these is the relationship between reduction and emergence in LST. There are at least four relevant possibilities. One is that LST exhibits neither clear reductionism nor emergence, but is essentially neutral in this regard. Another is that the (...) apparent comprehensiveness of LST is illusory, as the approach remains vulnerable to reduction that could ultimately reduce it to a shadow of its present self. The charge of reductionism has been made by critics leading Miller to defend this theory vehemently as nonreductionist in nature. A third possibility is that LST is not reductionist, but is in fact an emergent theory. Miller makes this claim quite strongly. A fourth possibility, and in some ways the most analytically problematic, is that LST exhibits evidence of both reductionism and emergence simultaneously. Some critics might see this fourth situation as evidence of a troubling paradox or anomaly that must be resolved before further progress can be made in the explication and application of LST. The purpose of the paper is to remove this apparent anomaly. The paper removes this anomaly by differentiating between new-variable emergence and transformational emergence. No concrete evidence is found to contradict Milers claim of emergence in LST, and thus no true anomaly exists. (shrink)

Adalah hal yang lumrah bila dalam tiga dasa warsa terakhir ini muncul minat yang semakin tinggi terhadap kajian dan seluk-beluk korupsi mengingat berbagai kerusakan yang ditimbulkannya. Bahkan, topik korupsi menjadi agenda internasional para ahli politik dan pembuat kebijakan. Kendati demikian, literatur kajian mengenai korupsi dalam tradisi filsafat masih dapat dikatakan minim. Oleh karena itu, kajian filsafat terapan mengenai korupsi yang dilakukan oleh Seumas Miller, Peter Roberts, dan Edward Spence layak diapresiasi. Dalam buku ini, para penulis (selanjutnya akan disingkat menjadi Miller, (...) dkk.) menegaskan bahwa korupsi merupakan suatu spesies imoralitas (hlm. xvi). Melalui titik pijak tersebut, Miler dkk. memperlihatkan perbedaan kerangka konseptual yang halus antara korupsi dan tindakan imoralitas lainnya. Dengan kata lain, tindakan korupsi sudah pasti merupakan perbuatan imoral, tetapi tidak semua perbuatan imoral adalah tindakan korupsi. Dengan menempatkan persoalan korupsi pada ranah moralitas, Miler dkk. seakan menegaskan bahwa korupsi adalah suatu gejala khas manusiawi dan dilakukan secara sadar. Hal ini diungkapkan secara eksplisit oleh Miller dkk. Mereka mengstakan bahwa tindakan korupsi adalah laku kebiasaan yang salah secara moral, dan karenanya tidak didorong oleh keyakinan sejati yang benar secara moral (hlm. 13)................... Berdasarkan uraian-uraian yang cermat dan halus mengenai korupsi, Miller dkk. juga memaparkan lokus tanggung jawab moral untuk memerangi korupsi. Secara detail, paparan tersebut diuraikan dalam bab ke-6 hingga ke-10 yang memuat berbagai alternatif untuk menghadapi korupsi, seperti pengembangan sistem-sistem antikorupsi, peran “peniup peluit” (whistleblower), pranata yuridis, serta mekanisme hukuman yang sesuai dengan teori keadilan yang bersifat memulihkan (restorative theory of justice). Bagi Miller dkk., berbagai pertimbangan tindakan antikorupsi yang ditawarkannya harus dilandaskan pada tanggung jawab moral. Pendasaran ini konsisten dengan kerangka konseptual yang diajukan pada bagian awal buku ini: bahwa korupsi merupakan persoalan moral. Mereka juga menegaskan bahwa tanggung jawab moral tersebut bersifat kolektif (hlm. 211). Tidak hanya itu, sistem antikorupsi yang digagas juga perlu bersifat menyeluruh: berupa pengembangan unsur-unsur reaktif maupun preventif sekaligus (hlm. 156). Miller dkk. juga berharap bahwa pranata yuridis dan mekanisme hukuman seharusnya dapat menentukan inti dari sistem keadilan dengan mengambil inspirasi pemikiran politik yang dikembangkan dari tradisi filosofis Aristoteles, John Locke, David Hume, Imanuel Kant, dan John Stuart Mill. Selain itu, baik pranata yuridis mapun mekanisme hukuman diharapkan dapat berperan untuk memulihkan (mengintegrasikan) kembali hal-hal yang korup (rusak) pada masyarakat dan sekaligus menghalau korupsi dari masyarakat. Melalui rangkaian paparan buku tersebut, kajian Miller dkk. mengenai korupsi dan antikorupsi merupakan masukan yang berharga dari tradisi filsafat, khususnya filsafat moral. Hal ini sangat berguna untuk mengembangkan kajian korupsi serta antikorupsi secara mendalam dan serius dalam konteks kekinian. (Yulius Tandyanto, Mahasiswa Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)