Horasan bölgesinde faaliyetlerini yoğunlaştırmış olan Kerrâmiyye, hicrî üçüncü asırdan altıncı asra kadar yaklaşık üç asır boyunca dinî, siyasî ve sosyal anlamda bölgeyi etkilemiştir. Başlangıçta kelamî görüşlerinden ziyade önde gelen Kerrâmî âlimlerin zâhidâne yaşayışları ile pek çok taraftar edinen Kerrâmiyye, Muhammed b. Heyṣem’in (IV/X. asrın sonları ile V/XI. asrın başları)  Kerrâmiyye’nin görüşlerine getirmiş olduğu yorumlar ile farklı bir boyut kazanmıştır. İbn Heyṣem’den önce Kerrâmiyye’nin müstakil bir fırka muamelesi görmesine neden olabilecek teolojik derinlikten mahrum olduğu gerçeği dikkate alındığında süreçle beraber yaşanan dönüşümlerin fırak edebiyatına yansımalarının olup olmadığı çalışmamız açısından önem arz etmektedir. Kerrâmiyye, Allah ve sıfatlarına getirmiş olduğu yorum ve iman anlayışı sebebiyle, Maḳālât eserlerinde çoğunlukla Müşebbihe-Mücessime kategorisinde veya Mürcie’nin bir alt kolu olarak ele alınmıştır. Bu sınıflandırma biçimi üzerinde Kerrâmiyye’nin kendi görüşlerinin yanı sıra maḳālât müelliflerinin mezhebi aidiyetleri ve görüşlerinin nasıl bir etki yaratmış olduğu sorusu da önemsediğimiz bir husustur. Bu çalışmada, doğuş, yükseliş ve etkinliğini kaybediş evrelerini kapsayan dönemlerde, Kerrâmiyye’nin farklı dinî-toplumsal gruplar tarafından hangi kategoride ele alındığı ve bu kategorizasyonu besleyen sebepler tarihi süreç takip edilerek irdelenmeye çalışılacaktır.

Karrâmiyya, which intensified its activities in the region of Khorasan, from hijrî third century to sixth century affected the region for almost three centuries in the religious, political, and social sense. Karrâmiyya, which gained a lot of supporters via the ascetic lives of Karrâmiyyan scholars rather than its theological views at the beginning, got a new dimension with Mohammad b. al-Haytham’s (the end of the IV/X. century and the beginning of the V/XI. century) interpretations about the views of Karrâmiyya. When the fact that Kerrâmiyya had lacked the theological depth that could cause it to be treated as a separate sect before Ibn al-Haytham is considered, whether the changes occurring in time have reflections on firaq literature or not is important for this study. Because of its interpretation of Allah and His divine attributions and its understanding of faith, Karrâmiyya is usually regarded in the category of Mucassimah-Mushabbihah or as a branch of Murji’ah in the works of Maqâlât. The question of what kind of effect the sectarian belonging and views of maqâlât authors as well as Karrâmiyya’s own views have on this kind classification is another point we mind. In this study, under which category Karrâmiyya has been handled by different religious-social groups during the periods comprising the phases of its appearance, rise and losing its efficiency and the reasons fostering this categorization will be tried to be examined by following the historical process.          SummaryA sect active in the regions of Khorasan and Transoxania from h. 4th to 6th century, Karrâmiyya got supporters due to the ascetic living of certain Karrâmî figures rather than its theological views. Karrâmiyya got a different dimension with Mohammad b. Hayṣam’s (towards the end of IV/X centuries and at the beginning of V/XI centuries) interpretations about the views of Karrâmiyya. Except for Abu al-Mûtî‘ Makhul al-Nasafi’s el-Lu’lu’iyyât fi’l-Mewâ‘ız, Ibn Karrâm and Karrâmiyya are first mentioned through the mid IV/X century. This period coincides with the time when Ibn Haysam forms the theological basis of the sect. Besides, it is not possible to find a common attitude about the categorization of Karrâmiyya within maqâlât tradition. The views of Karrâmiyya on Anthropomorphism and Anthropopathism are brought into question by the supporters of Hadith; and Karrâmiyya is referred as a Murciah sect because of its approach to the problem of faith, which is the determinant of the opposition between the two groups. When we consider the fact that the supporters of the Hadith are referred as Hashawiyya within Islamic thought because of their literal approach to nass, and that they are sometimes put under the title of Mucassimah- Mushabbihah, the reason why the supporters of Hadith do not bring forward the views of Karrâmiyya on Anthropomorphism and Anthropopathism finds meaning. When the ongoing struggles between the supporters of Hadith and Murji’ah are considered, Karrâmiyya seems to get its share from the struggle between the two sects due to its being from Murji’ah origin. Karrâmiyya has been explicitly and latently accused of invalidating the deeds and accepting the Christians and Jews as deserving the heaven by the supporters of Hadith because of their understanding of faith. In addition to these accusations, the Karramîs have been accused of making up hadith and have been described as an un-Islamic element. Their being defined as a heretic element having appeared within Islam has led to some certain limitations with the social relations with the Karramîs. The fact that the literature of the supporters of Hadith includes examples that question even the legitimacy of greeting the Karramîs and performing salaat behind them is crucial to show the dimensions of the opposition between the two sects.      While the supporters of Hadith study the Karramîs within Murji’ah as they take the Karramîs’ understanding of faith to the centre, the Mâturîdîs base their criticism on the views of the Karramîs on Allah and His attributes and usually study Karrâmiyya within Mucessim-Musebbih. The criticism of Karrâmiyya in Hanafi circles seems to shape around either within the frame of kesb and faith, as it is with Hakîm es-Semerkandî, or within the frame of  anthropomorphism and faith, as it is with Abu’l- Mu‘în an-Nasafi. Even though Karrâmiyya has been criticized due to its understanding of faith, these criticisms have been overshadowed by the criticisms directed about the attributes of Allah. Thus, Karrâmiyya has been a sect which is evaluated independently from Murji’ah and rather associated with Mucassimah- Mushabbihah. The information given about Karrâmiyya in Hanafi-Mâturîdî tradition during the period when Karrâmiyya was weak is limited. Yet, the information about it increased when it became strong. Besides, the amount of criticism about Karrâmiyya has increased with its losing the political support behind it and its dominance in the region; and the information given in Hanafi-Mâturîdî tradition has decreased as it inclined to fade.As to the dimension of the opposition between the Ash‘arîs and Karramîs, it has been different from other traditions. The opposition between the two sects has reflected to the sources within the frame of the debates between Ibn Fûrak, Abdulḳâhir al-Baghdâdî, Abu’l-Muzaffar al-Isfarâyînî and Fakhr al-Dîn al-Râzî and the leading Karramî personalities. When the criticism of Ibn Fûrek and Isfarâyînî, who were the contemporaries of the leading Karramî personalities, about Karrâmiyya is considered, it is seen that Ibn Fûrak focuses on the issue of faith and does not mention the views referred to Karrâmiyya about Allah and His attributes. The fact that Ibn Hayṣam, a Karramî theologian, absolutely rejects the views that cause Karrâmiyya to be mentioned among the Tashbih groups can be said to be determinant on the subject. The criticism of Karrâmiyya in the Ash‘arî  tradition seems to gain a different dimension with Baghdâdâ. Baghdâdî practised his criticism of Karrâmiyya over Ibn Karrâm’s Aẕâbu’l-Ḳabr and seriously affected theauthors after him on the issue. We can say that the criticism of Karrâmiyya about Allah and His attributes in Ash‘arî  tradition begins with Baghdâdî. The fact that Karrâmiyya had lost the political support in this period was a factor for the increasing dose of criticism. Beginning with h. 5th century, there has been a blackening operation about Karrâmiyya within Ash‘arî  tradition. Karrâmiyya’s views on Allah’s actual attributes, which had not become an issue before Baghdâdî, began to come to the fore in the criticisms directed to Karrâmiyya by the leading Ash‘arî figures with Karrâmiyya’s losing its political and social power.In this study, we have tried to present the categorization of Karrâmiyya by each opposing group with their own internal dynamics and by subjecting it to a multi-directional evaluation, considering the fact that the actuality of Karrâmiyya and the perception of Karrâmiyya have not been seriously distinguished from each other in the studies carried out about the subject thus far. In this context, we can say that Karrâmiyya has been able to maintain an approach, which is different from that of takfiri discourse, together with the interpretation it brings to the issue of faith despite the fact that its understanding of faith has been mispresented and distorted by the opposing groups. Furthermore, Karrâmiyya has taken its place within the Islamic thought by providing an analytic interpretation within the frame of the conditions of the time to the issue of imamate, which has not usually been mentioned by the opposing groups and which has caused separation among the Muslims due to its idea of accepting the imamates of two different imams in the same period as legitimate.