• Start
  • Previous
  • 7 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 3827 / Download: 3244
Size Size Size
Jesus on Ethics: Forty Ahadith

Jesus on Ethics: Forty Ahadith

Publisher: The Islamic Education Board of the World Federation of Khoja Shia Ithna-Asheri Muslim Communities
English

Jesus on Ethics: Forty Ahadith

Guidance From The Word of God as Recorded in the Islamic Traditions

40 hadith from Prophet Isa- Jesus, his dialogue with Allah and a collection of verses from the Quran about this great Prophet. Demonstrates the reverence Muslims have for Jesus and the opportunity for inter-faith dialogue.

Publisher(s): The World Federation of Khoja Shia Ithna-Asheri Muslim Communities

Table of Contents

Introduction 3

Jesus on Ethics - Forty Pieces of Advice from the ‘Word of God’ 5

The Wealthiest of People 5

The Greatest of Trials 5

The Praise of God 5

The Pitfall of Hypocrisy 5

Kindness to all Creations 5

Humility to Others 5

The Trial of the Believer 6

Providing for Yourself 6

The Best of People 6

The Greatest Action 6

Self-Training 6

Having a Good Regard for Others 7

Whom to Associate With 7

Knowing the Prophet 7

Moral Traits 7

The Life of the World 7

Conduct with Others 8

Lowering the Gaze 9

Entering into Paradise 9

A Prayer of Jesus 9

Be Critics of Speech 9

Divine Retribution 9

Life to the Dead 10

The Closest Ones to God 10

Note 11

Guidance from God Revealed to Jesus, the son of Mary  12

Notes 19

Jesus, the Son of Mary in the Noble Qur’an  20

Sources for this Work 26

Notes 28

Introduction

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful

“I am a hole in a flute by which blows the breath of Christ, listen to this music.”

Hafiz, the Persian Poet

Today we increasingly read that Christianity and Islam ‘share’ Jesus - that he belongs to both religions. More than ever before, the notion of the ‘Abrahamic civilization’ where once people spoke of ‘Judeo-Christian civilization’ includes Islam too. The Qur’an refers to Prophet Abraham as a monotheist [see Ale ‘Imran (3), Verse 67]. According to the Qur’an, [Al-An’am (6), Verses 85-87] the other prophets sent to mankind, in addition to Prophet Ibrahim (Abraham) include (but are not limited to): Ishaq (Isaac), Ya’qub (Jacob), Nuh (Noah), Dawud (David), Sulaiman (Solomon), Ayyub (Job), Yusuf (Joseph), Musa (Moses), Harun (Aaron), Zakariyya (Zachariah), Ilyas, Isma’il (Ishmael), Al-Yash’a (Elisha), Yunus (Jonah), Lut (Lot), and ‘Isa (Jesus) - God’s blessings be upon all of them.

The notion of one God, sharing prominent prophets, and the belief in the afterlife are common between Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. The similarities between Islamic and Christian thinking about Jesus are equally important: both accept the virgin birth and among the numerous miracles attributed to Jesus in the Glorious Qur’an are the revival of the dead and the creation of a bird from clay.

There are two main sources in Islam for knowing Jesus. The Qur’an gives us a history of his life, while the hadith (the traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) and his Divinely appointed successors) collections establish his revered place in the Muslim understanding. As with previous prophets, Jesus’s revelation verified previous prophets’ revelations [see Ale ‘Imran (3), Verses 49 and 84; Al-Ma’idah (5), Verse 46; As-Saff (61), Verse 6]. Furthermore, Prophet Muhammad (blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) also verified the previous revelations, including the revelation to Jesus (see An-Nisa’ (4), Verse 47), such that Muslims also believe in the revelation which Jesus received (Al-Baqarah (2), Verse 136).

Given the commonality of the scriptures and the fact that Muslims and Christians have shared history of some 1,400 years, having lived side by side, one would have thought that they might know each other better. Unfortunately much of that 1,400-year history has been marked by mutual hostility. Whilst there have been periods of mutual respect and peace, the Muslim-Christian relationship has gone through major phases of conflict (the Crusades, colonization and the decline of Muslim civilization). The current phase that began with the tragedy of 9/11, has been a period of searching for real understanding, however, it has been marked by ignorance and stereotyping.

The way forward between the faiths is to begin the process of understanding each other. At this critical point in history where information technology has shrunk the boundaries of the global village even further, creating friendships and beginning the process of the rediscovery of the meaning of one’s faith through dialogue is more important then ever.

One must, however, make the distinction that inter-religious dialogues are not like other dialogues. For example, negotiations between nations, bargaining between labor and management, or any attempt to find middle ground between disputing parties are common forms of dialogue which involve compromise. Compromise often makes a society run better. Labor and management have to compromise or factories don’t operate. However, when people of faith have dialogue, they are not attempting any compromise.

The primary objective of inter-religious dialogue is not to build one faith for the whole planet, but to share and learn from one another. Inter-religious dialogue can be a process of spiritual growth that can have a transforming effect on those engaged in it, especially when such exchanges are done in the spirit of seeking clarity with humility, kindness, patience, generosity, and trust with a genuine desire to grow in our understanding of the greatness, abundance and mercy of God.

Dr. David Thomas of Selly Oak Colleges, Birmingham, UK who often speaks of the past relations as being “…something of a nightmare, which encumbers Christians and Muslims today with a heavy baggage of memories of war, oppression and conquests” advocates that we go beyond “… the baggage to try to see each other as the other is.” He goes even further and states, “…we try to take off our shoes and walk on the holy ground of the other faith … in order to come back to our own faith as bigger … more enriched people ready for the encounter to which God calls us.”

In the glorious Qur’an, Jesus is described thus: “O Mary! Verily Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word from Him; his name is the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, prominent in this world and in the Hereafter of those near [to God].” (Suratul Ale ‘Imran (3), Verse 44) It is in this light that we present this selection of narrations of Prophet Jesus.

The collection in this publication is essentially concerned with ethics and morals. These are as much Christian morals as they are Islamic morals. In this day and age of relative morality, the concepts of right and wrong have been muddled by the modern understanding of ethics. The simple yet sublime words of Jesus provide a refreshing insight into unchanging moral values and ethics for all times and for all faiths.

We hope that this publication which offers some reflections on the ‘Muslim Jesus’ will further enhance understanding between the two great faiths and their inter-religious dialogue. With the portrait of Jesus presented in the Islamic sources, we demonstrate the reverence Muslims have for Jesus and hope that it will inspire better relations between Muslims and Christians.

Hasnain Walji

Plano, Texas

Muharram 1st 1426 A.H.

February 10th 2005 C.E.

Jesus on Ethics - Forty Pieces of Advice from the ‘Word of God’

The Wealthiest of People

“I entered into the morning among you while my stew has been hunger, my food has been something that grows from the earth for the wild animals and beasts, my lamp has been the moon, my carpet has been the earth, and my pillow has been stone. There is no house for me that may be ruined, no property which may be destroyed, no child who may die, and no wife who may become sad. I enter into the morning while there is nothing for me and enter into the night while there is nothing for me, and I am the wealthiest person among the children of Adam.”

The Greatest of Trials

Jesus once asked a person, “What trial remains which has not been visited upon you?” The person replied, “He protected me from a trial which is the greatest of trials, and that is disbelief.” Then Jesus touched the man, and God cured him from his illnesses and beautified his face. Then he became a companion of Jesus and worshipped with him.

The Praise of God

It is reported that Jesus passed by a man who was blind, leprous and paralytic, and Jesus heard him giving thanks and saying, “Praise be to God who has protected me from the trials with which He afflicts the majority of men.”

The Pitfall of Hypocrisy

“I saw a stone upon which was written, ‘Turn me over,’ then I turned it over, then I saw written on it, ‘He who does not act according to what he knows will not be blessed in his search for what he does not know and what he knows will come back against him.’”

Kindness to all Creations

Verily, when Jesus the son of Mary, passed along the shore of a sea, he threw a piece of his bread into the water. Then some of the disciples said: “O Spirit of God and His Word! Why did you do this when that was your food?” He said, “I did this in order that some animal among the animals of the sea may eat it, and the reward of God for this is great.”

Humility to Others

Jesus served a meal to the Apostles, and when they had eaten it, he himself washed them. They said, “O Spirit of God! It would have been more proper for us to wash you!” He said, “I did this only that you would do this for those whom you teach.”

“O assembly of Apostles! I have a request of you. Fulfill it for me.” They said, “Your request is fulfilled, O Spirit of God!” Then he stood up and washed their feet. They said, “It would have been more proper for us to have done this, O Spirit of God!” Then he said, “Verily, it is more fitting for one with knowledge to serve the people. Indeed, I humbled myself only so that you may humble yourselves among the people after me, even as I have humbled myself among you.” Then Jesus said, “Wisdom is developed by humility, not by pride, and likewise plants only grow in soft soil, not in stone.”

The Trial of the Believer

The disciples complained to Jesus, the son of Mary about the disrespect of the people for them and their hating them. He said, “Be patient. Likewise, the believers are hated among the people. The example of them is like the example of wheat. How sweet is its taste and how numerous are its enemies.”

Providing for Yourself

It is reported that the disciples were the followers of Jesus. Whenever they were hungry they said, “O Spirit of God! We are hungry.” Then Jesus would hit his hands on the ground, whether smooth or hilly, and he would bring out two loaves of bread for each of them. Whenever they were thirsty they said, “O Spirit of God! We are thirsty.” Then Jesus would hit his hands on the ground, and brought out water and they drank from it. They asked, “O Spirit of God! Who is better than we are? Whenever we want, we are given food, and whenever we want water is given to us. We have faith in you and follow you.” Jesus said, “Better than you are those who work with their hands and eat from what they earn.” After that the disciples washed clothes by the stream and ate from their wages for it.”

The Best of People

Jesus was asked about the best of people and he said, “One whose speech is the mention of God, whose silence is contemplation, and whose vision is admonition.” [That is, he takes a lesson from what he sees.]

The Greatest Action

The disciples asked Jesus, “Indicate to us a work by which we may enter the Garden.” He said, “Do not speak at all.” They said, “We cannot do that.” He said, “So, do not speak except what is good.”

A man said to Jesus the son of Mary, “O good teacher, indicate to me a work by which I may enter the Garden.” Then he said to him, “Beware of God secretly and openly, and do good to your parents.”

Jesus, the son of Mary, passed by a group of people who were crying. He asked why they were crying. It was said to him that they were crying for their sins. He said, “You should pray about them and you will be forgiven.”

Self-Training

It was said to Jesus, “Who trained you?” He said, “No one trained me. I saw the ugliness of ignorance and, so, I avoided it.”

The Apostles met with Jesus and said to him, “O teacher of the good! Guide us!” He said to them, “Verily Moses the interlocutor of God, commanded you not to swear by God, the Blessed and Exalted, falsely, and I command you not to swear by God falsely or truly.” They said, “O Spirit of God! Guide us more!” Then he said, “Verily Moses, the prophet of God, commanded you not to commit adultery, and I command you not to talk to yourselves about adultery, let alone to commit adultery. Verily, one who talks to himself about adultery, is like one who sets fire to a room that is decorated so the smoke damages the decor, even though the room is not burnt.”

Having a Good Regard for Others

It is reported that Jesus passed by a carcass with his disciples. Then the disciples said, “How putrid the smell of this dog is!” Then Jesus said, “How intense is the whiteness of his teeth!”

Whom to Associate With

The Apostles said to Jesus, “O Spirit of God! With whom should we keep company?” He said, “He the sight of whom reminds you of God, the speech of whom increases your knowledge, and the works of whom make you desirous of the other world.”

Knowing the Prophet

Jesus the son of Mary used to spend some time with the disciples and advise them, and he used to say, “He does not know me, who knows not his soul, and he who does not know the soul between his two sides, does not know the soul between my two sides. And he who knows his soul which is between his sides, he knows me. And he who knows me, knows He who sent me.”

Moral Traits

“He who often becomes upset, his body becomes sick; he whose character is bad, his self becomes his torment; he who often talks, often stumbles; he who often lies, loses his worth; he who quarrels with men, loses his manliness.”

“That which is not loved by you for someone to do to you, do not do that to others; if someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him your left cheek also.”

“O Children of Israel! Do not be excessive in eating, for those who are excessive in eating are excessive in sleeping; those who are excessive in sleeping are deficient in praying; of those who are deficient in praying, it is written that they are negligent.”

“Mind your tongue to reform your heart, be satisfied with your house, beware of pretentiousness and excess, be ashamed before your Lord, cry over your mistakes, and escape from people as you would run from the lion or viper, [for] they were medicine but today, they have become illness. Then, encounter God when you will.”

The Life of the World

“Who would build a house on the waves of the sea? This world is that house, so you should not take it as a dwelling.”

“The love of this world and the next cannot be aligned in the heart of a believer, like water and fire in a single vessel.”

“When one of you sits in his house, he should have clothes on. Verily, God has allotted modesty for you, just as He has allotted your sustenance.”

“If you are my lovers and my brothers, you must accustom yourself to the enmity and hatred of the people, otherwise you will not be my brothers. I teach you this that you may learn it; I do not teach you so that you may become proud. Verily, you will not achieve that which you desire unless you give up that which you desire, and by enduring patiently that which you detest, and guard your gaze, for it plants lust in the heart, and it is sufficient to tempt him. Happy are they who see that which they desire with their eyes, but who commit no disobedience in their hearts. How far is that which is in the past, and how near is that which is to come. Woe to those who have been deluded when what they loathe approaches them, and what they love abandons them, and there comes that which they were promised. Woe to those whose efforts are for the sake of this world, and whose works are mistaken. How he will be disgraced before his Lord! Moreover, do not speak much for aught but the remembrance of God. Those who speak much about aught but God harden their hearts, but they do not know it. Do not look at the faults of others over much [the phrase used here indicates spying], but look after the purity of your own selves, for you are enslaved servants. How much water flows in a mountain without its becoming soft? And how much wisdom are you taught without your hearts becoming soft? You are bad servants, and you are not pious servants. You are not nobly free. Indeed, you are like unto the oleander, all who see it wonder at its flower, but when they eat from it they die. So, peace be unto you.”

“This world and the next are rivals. When you satisfy one of them you irritate the other; when you irritate one of them you satisfy the other.”

“In truth I say to you, just as one who is sick looks at food and finds no pleasure in it due to the severity of the pain, the masters of this world find no pleasure in worship and do not find the sweetness of it, for what they find is the sweetness of this world. In truth I say to you, just as an animal which is not captured and tamed becomes hardened and its character is changed, so too when hearts are not softened by the remembrance of death and the effort of worship they become hard and tough, and in truth I say to you, if a skin is not torn, it may become a vessel for honey, just as hearts, if they are not torn by desires, or fouled by greed, or hardened by blessings, may become vessels for wisdom.”

“Do not take the world as a master, for it will take you as its servants. Keep your treasure with One who will not squander it. The owners of the treasures of this world fear for its ruin, but he who owns the treasure of God does not fear for its ruin.”

Jesus said to the disciples, “Be satisfied with a little of the world, while your religion is safe, likewise the people of this world are satisfied with a little of the religion, while their world is safe; love God by being far from them, and make God satisfied by being angry with them.” The disciples said, “O spirit of God, so with whom should we keep company?” He said, “He the sight of whom reminds you of God, his speech increases your knowledge and his action makes you desirous of the other world.”

Conduct with Others

“O Children of Israel! Do not speak with the ignorant of wisdom, for otherwise you do injustice with it, and do not keep it from its folk, for otherwise you do injustice to them, and do not help the unjust with his injustice, for otherwise your virtue becomes void. Affairs are three: the affair whose righteousness is clear to you, so follow it; the affair whose error is clear to you, so avoid it; and the affair about which there are differences, so return it to God, the Almighty and Glorious.”

A man said to Jesus the son of Mary, “O good teacher, indicate to me a work by which I may enter the Garden.” Then he said to him, “Beware of God secretly and openly, and do good to your parents.”

Lowering the Gaze

“Beware of looking at what is prohibited, for it is the seed of lust and plant of depravity.”

Entering into Paradise

“In truth I say to you, the folds of heaven are empty of the rich; the entering of a camel through the eye of a needle is easier than the entering of a rich man into heaven.”

A Prayer of Jesus

Among the supplications narrated from Jesus, the son of Mary, is: “O God! You are the Deity of all who are in heaven and the Deity of all on the earth. There is no Deity in them other than You, and You are the All-wise for all in heaven and the All-wise for all on the earth. There is no All-wise in them other than You. And you are the King of all in heaven and all on the earth. There is no King in them other than You. Your power in heaven is like Your power on the earth. And Your sovereignty in heaven is like Your sovereignty on the earth. I ask you by Your All-generous Name and Your radiant face and Your eternal kingdom, do such and such for me.”

It is reported that a man complained to Jesus about his debts. Jesus said to him, “Say: ‘O God, Who takes away grief, removes sadness, disposes of sorrow, and answers the prayers of the needy! O Merciful of this world and the other world and the Compassionate of them! You are Merciful to me and Merciful to all things! So, be Merciful to me, with a mercy that will make me needless of the mercy of others than You, and by that mercy let my debts be paid.’”

Be Critics of Speech

“Take the truth from the folk of falsehood, but do not take the false from the folk of truth. Be critics of speech. How much aberration is adorned by a verse of the Book of God, like the adornment of a copper dirham with silver plating. Looking at it is the same, but those who have vision are aware.”

Divine Retribution

It is said that a man accompanied Jesus the son of Mary and said that he would go with him. They continued along until they came to a river. They sat and started to eat. They had three loaves of bread. They ate two of them and one remained. Jesus went to the river, drank some water and returned. He did not find the third loaf. He asked the man who had taken that loaf. He said that he did not know. They continued until they came to a doe followed by two fawns. Jesus beckoned one of the fawns, killed it, roasted it and they ate it. Then Jesus addressed the fawn [that had been eaten,] saying, “Live!” It came to life and went away. Then Jesus said to the other man, ‘By the God Who has shown you this miracle, who took that loaf of bread?’ He said that he did not know.

They continued until they reached a lake. Jesus took the hand of the man and led him over the water. When they reached the other side, Jesus said, ‘By the One who has shown you this miracle, who took that loaf of bread?’ He said that he did not know. They continued until they reached a desert and sat down. Jesus gathered some sand or dust and said, “By the permission of God, be gold!” and it became gold. He divided it into three portions and said, “One third is for me, one third for you, and one third for whoever took that loaf of bread.” The man said, “Alright, I took that loaf of bread.” Jesus said, “Then all of this gold is yours’ and he left him.

The man encountered two other men in the desert who wanted to take his gold and kill him. He said, “Let us divide the gold into three portions.” They sent one of them to the village to buy food. The one who went said to himself, “Why should I let them have portions of this wealth? I shall put some poison into the food, and kill them.” So, he poisoned the food. The other two said, “Why should we give a third of this wealth to him. When he comes back, let us kill him, and divide the rest of the wealth between us.” When he returned, they attacked him and killed him. Then they ate the food and died. The wealth remained in the desert with the three dead men beside it. Jesus passed them and saw the situation. He said to his disciples, “This is the world, so beware of it!”

Life to the Dead

Imam As-Sadiq1 (peace be upon him) was asked, “Did Jesus the son of Mary enliven someone after his death, so that he was eating and had a daily living, continued his life for a term and had a child?” He said, “Yes, he had a friend who was a brother in God to him. And when Jesus passed by he would go down to him. And Jesus would spend a while with him. Then he would leave with salutations of peace unto him. Then his mother came out to him [Jesus]. Then she said to him, ‘He died, O Apostle of God!’ He said to her, ‘Would you like to see him?’ She said, ‘Yes.’ He said to her, ‘I will come to you tomorrow to enliven him, with the permission of God.’

When the morrow arrived he came and said to her, ‘Accompany me to his grave.’ So they went to his grave. Jesus stopped, then called on God. Then the grave opened and her son came out alive. Then when his mother saw him and he saw her, they cried. Jesus had mercy on them and said to him, ‘Would you like to remain with your mother in the world?’ He said, ‘O Apostle of God! With eating and a daily living and a term, or without a term and no daily living and no eating?’

Then Jesus said to him, ‘But with a daily living and eating and a term you will live for twenty years, marry and father a child.’ He said, ‘Yes, in that case.’” [Imam As-Sadiq] said, “Then Jesus returned him to his mother and he lived for twenty years, married and fathered a child.”

The Closest Ones to God

Verily, Jesus passed by three people. Their bodies had become thin and their colors had changed. Then he said, “What has brought you to what I see?” They said, “Fear of the Fire.” He said, “It is the duty of God to give security to those who fear Him.” Then he passed from them to three other men. He was surprised to find them even thinner and more changed. Then he said, “What has brought you to what I see?”

They said, “Yearning for the Garden.” He said, “It is the duty of God to give to him who has hope in Him.” Then he passed to three others. He was surprised to find them even thinner and their faces were shining like mirrors. Then he said, “What has brought you to what I see?” They said, “Love of God, the Mighty, and Magnificent.” Three times, he said, “You are those who are close to God.”

Note

1. The 6th Divinely appointed successor to the Prophet Muhammad (blessings of Allah be upon him and his family) - Ja’far ibne Muhammad.

MU'TAZILAH:

We shall begin our discussion - and we shall explain later why - with theMu'tazilah . The emergence of this sect took place during the latter part of the first century or at the beginning of the second. Obviously'ilm al-kalam , like any other field of study, developed gradually and slowly attained maturity.

First we shall enumerate the principal Mu'tazilite beliefs, or what is better to say, the basic and salient points of their school of thought. Second, we shall point out the well-known Mu'tazilite figures and speak of their fate in history. Then we shall give an account of the main outlines of the transitions and changes in their thought and beliefs.

The opinions held by theMu'tazilah are many, and are not confined to the religious matters, or which according to them form an essential part of the faith. They cover a number of physical, social, anthropological and philosophical issues, which are not directly related with the faith. However, there is a certain relevance of these problems to religion, and, in the belief of theMu'tazilah , any inquiry about the matters of religion is not possible without studying them.

There are five principal doctrines which, according to theMu'tazilah themselves, constitute their basic tenets:

(i) Tawhid, i.e. absence of plurality and attributes.

(ii) Justice ('adl ), i.e. God is just and that He does not oppress His creatures.

(iii) Divine retribution (at-wa'd wa al-wa'id ), i.e. God has determined a reward for the obedient and a punishment for the disobedient, and there can be no uncertainty about it. Therefore, Divine pardon is only possible if the sinner repents, for forgiveness without repentance( tawbah ) is not possible.

(iv)Manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn (a position between the two positions). This means that a fasiq (i.e. one who commits one of the "greater sins," such as a wine imbiber, adulterer, or a liar etc.) is neither a believer (mu'min) nor an infidel( kafir ) ; fisq is an intermediary state between belief and infidelity.

(v)al-'amr bil ma'ruf wa al-nahy 'an al-munkar [bidding to do what is right and lawful, and forbidding what is wrong and unlawful]. The opinion of theMu'tazilah about this Islamic duty is, firstly, that the Shari'ah is not the exclusive means of identifying the ma'ruf and the munkar; human reason can, at least partially, independently identify the various kinds of ma'ruf and munkar. Secondly, the implementation of this duty does not necessitate the presence of the Imam, and is a universal obligation of all Muslims, whether the Imam or leader is present or not. Only some categories of it are the obligation of the Imam or ruler of Muslims, such as, implementation of the punishments (hudud ) prescribed by the Shari'ah, guarding of the frontiers of Islamic countries, and other such matters relating to the Islamic government.

Occasionally, the Mu'tazilite mutakallmun have devoted independent volumes to discussion of their five doctrines, such as the famousal-'Usul al-khamsah of al-Qadi 'Abd al-Jabbar al-'Astarabadi (d. 415/ 1025), a Mu'tazilite contemporary of al-Sayyid al-Murtada 'Alam al-Huda and al-Sahib ibn 'Abbad (d. 385/995).

As can be noticed, only the principles of tawhid and Justice can be considered as parts of the essential doctrine. The other three principles are only significant because they characterize theMu'tazilah . Even Divine Justice - although its notion is definitely supported by the Qur'an, and belief in it is a necessary part of the Islamic faith and doctrine - has been made one of the five major doctrines because it characterizes theMu'tazilah . Or otherwise belief in Divine Knowledge and Power is as much an essential part of the Islamic faith and principal doctrine.

Also in the Shi'ite faith the principle of Divine Justice is considered one of the five essential doctrines. It is natural that the question should arise: what is particular about Divine Justice that it should be counted.among the essential doctrines, though justice is only one of the Divine Attributes? Is not God Just in the same manner as He is the Omniscient, the Mighty, the Living, the Perceiver, the Hearer and the Seer? All those Divine Attributes are essential to the faith. Then why justice is given so much prominence among the Divine Attributes?

The answer is that Justice has no advantage over other Attributes. The Shi'itemutakallimun have specially mentioned justice among the principal Shi'ite doctrines because the Ash'arites - who form the majority of the Ahl al-Sunnah - implicitly deny that it is an Attribute, whereas they do not reject the Attributes of Knowledge, Life, Will, etc. Accordingly, justice is counted among the specific doctrines of the Shi'ah, as also of theMu'tazilah . The above-mentioned five doctrines constitute the basic position of theMu'tazilah from the viewpoint of kalam, otherwise, as said before, the Mu'tazilite beliefs are not confined to these five and cover a broad scope ranging from theology, physics and sociology to anthropology, in all of which they hold specific beliefs, a discussion of which lies outside the scope of these lectures.

The Doctrine of al-Tawhid:

Beginning with tawhid it has various kinds and levels:al-tawhid al-dhati (Unity of the Essence),al-tawhid al-sifati (Unity of the Attributes, i.e., with the Essence),al-tawhid al-'af'ali (Unity of the Acts),al-tawhid al-'ibadi (monotheism in worship).

Al-Tawhid al-dhati

It means that the Divine Essence is one and unique; it does not have a like or match. All other beings are God's creations and inferior to Him in station and in degree of perfection. In fact, they cannot be compared with Him. The idea ofal-tawhid al-dhati is made clear by the following two [Qur'anic] verses:

Nothing is like Him. (42:11)

He does not have a match [whatsoever]. (112:4)

AI-Tawhid al-sifati

It means that the Divine Attributes such as Knowledge, Power, Life, Will, Perception, Hearing, Vision, etc. are not realities separate from God's Essence. They are identical with the Essence, in the sense that the Divine Essence is such that the Attributes are true of It, or is such that It manifests these Attributes.

Al-Tawhid al-'af'ali

It means that all beings, or rather all acts [even human acts] exist by the Will of God, and are in some way willed by His sacred Essence.

Al-Tawhid al-'ibadi: It means that except God no other being deserves worship and devotion. Worship of anything besides God is shirk and puts the worshipper outside the limits of Islamic tawhid or monotheism.

In a senseal-tawhid al-'ibadi (tawhid in worship) is different from other kinds of tawhidi, because the first three relate to God and this kind relates to the creatures. In other words, the Unity of Divine Essence, His Uniqueness and the identity of the Essence and Attributes, the unity of the origin of everything - all of them are matters which relate to God. But tawhid in worship, i.e. the necessity of worshipping the One God, relates to the behaviour of the creatures. But in reality, tawhid in worship is also related to God, because it means Uniqueness of God as the only deserving object of worship, and that He is in truth the One Deity Worthy of Worship. The statement "la ilaha illallah" encompasses all aspects of tawhid, although its first signification is monotheism in worship.

Al-tawhid al-dhati andal-tawhid al-'ibadi are part of the basic doctrines of Islam. It means that if there is a shortcoming in one's belief in these two principles, it would put one outside the pale of Islam. No Muslim has opposed these two basic beliefs.

Lately, the Wahhabis, who are the followers of Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, who was a follower of Ibn Taymiyyah, a Hanbali from Syria, have claimed that some common beliefs of the Muslims such as one in intercession (shafa'ah ) and some of their practices such as invoking the assistance of the prophets (A) and holy saints (R) are opposed to the doctrine of al-tawhid al-'ibadi. But these are not considered by other Muslims to conflict with al-tawhid al-'ibadi. The point of difference between the Wahhabis and other Muslims is not whether any one besides God - such as the prophets or saints - is worthy of worship. There is no debate that anyone except God cannot be worshipped. The debate is about whether invoking of intercession and assistance can be considered a form of worship or not. Therefore, the difference is only secondary, not a primary one. Islamic scholars have rejected the viewpoint of the Wahhabis in elaborate, well-reasoned answers.

Al-tawhid al-sifati (the Unity of Divine Essence and Attributes) is a point of debate between theMu'tazilah and theAsha'irah . The latter deny it while the former affirm it.Al-tawhid al-'af'ali is also another point of difference between them, with the difference, however, that the matter is reverse; i.e. theAsha'irah affirm it and theMu'tazilah deny it.

When theMu'tazilah call themselves "ahl al-tawhid", and count it among their doctrines, thereby they mean by ital-tawhid al-sifati , notal-tawhid al-dhati , noral-tawhid al-'ibadi (which are not disputed), noral-tawhid al-'af'ali . Because, firstly,al-tawhid al-'af'ali is negated by them, and, secondly, they expound their own viewpoint about it under the doctrine of justice, their second article.

TheAsha'irah and theMu'tazilah formed two radically opposed camps on the issues ofal-tawhid al-sifati andal-tawhid al-'af'ali . To repeat, the

Mu'tazilah affirmal-tawhid al-sifati and rejectal-tawhid al-'af'ali , while the Ash'arite position is the reverse. Each of them have advanced arguments in support of their positions. We shall discuss the Shi'ite position regarding these two aspects of tawhid in the related chapter.

The Doctrine of Divine Justice:

In the preceding lecture I have mentioned the five fundamental Mu'tazilite principles, and explained the first issue, i.e. their doctrine of tawhid. Here we shall take up their doctrine of Divine Justice.

Of course, it is evident that none of the Islamic sects denied justice as one of the Divine Attributes. No one has ever claimed that God is not just. The difference between theMu'tazilah and their opponents is about the interpretation of Justice. TheAsha'irah interpret it in such a way that it is equivalent, in the view of theMu'tazilah , to a denial of the Attribute of Justice. Otherwise, theAsha'irah are not at all willing to be considered the opponents of justice.

TheMu'tazilah believe that some acts are essentially 'just' and some intrinsically 'unjust.' For instance, rewarding the obedient and punishing the sinners is justice; and that God is Just, i.e. He rewards the obedient and punishes the sinners, and it is impossible for Him to act otherwise. Rewarding the sinners and punishing the obedient is essentially and intrinsically unjust, and it is impossible for God to do such a thing. Similarly, compelling His creatures to commit sin, or creating them without any power of free will, then creating the sinful acts at their hands, and then punishing them on account of those sins - this is injustice, an ugly thing for God to do; it is unjustifiable and unGodly. But theAsha'irah believe that no act is intrinsically or essentially just or unjust. Justice is essentially whatever God does. If, supposedly, God were to punish the obedient and reward the sinners, it would be as just. Similarly, if God creates His creatures without any will, power or freedom of action, then if He causes them to commit sins and then punishes them for that - it is not essential injustice. If we suppose that God acts in this manner, it is justice:

Whatever that Khusrow does is sweet( shirin ) .

For the same reason that theMu'tazilah emphasize justice, they denyal-tawhid al-'af'ali . They say thatal-tawhid al-'af'ali implies that God, not the human beings, is the maker of human deeds. Since it is known that man attains reward and punishment in the Hereafter, if God is the creator of human actions and yet punishes them for their evil deeds - which not they, but God Himself has brought about - that would be injustice( zulm ) and contrary to Divine Justice. Accordingly, theMu'tazilah consideral-tawhid al-'af'ali to be contrary to the doctrine of justice.

Also, thereby, theMu'tazilah believe in human freedom and free will and are its staunch defenders, contrary to theAsha'irah who deny human freedom and free will.

Under the doctrine of justice - in the sense that some deeds are inherently just and some inherently unjust, and that human reason dictates that justice is good and must be practised, whereas injustice is evil and must be abstained from - they advance another general doctrine, which is more comprehensive, that is the principle that "beauty"( husn ) and "ugliness"

( qubh ) , (good and evil), are inherent properties of acts. For instance, truthfulness, trustworthiness, chastity and God-fearing are intrinsically good qualities, and falsehood, treachery, indecency, neglectfulness, etc. are intrinsically evil. Therefore, deeds in essence, before God may judge them, possess inherent goodness or evil (husn or qubh).

Hereupon, they arrive at another doctrine about reason: human reason can independently judge (or perceive) the good or evil in things. It means that the good or evil of some deeds can be judged by human reason independently of the commands of the Shari'ah. TheAsha'irah are against this view too.

The belief in the inherent good or evil of acts and the capacity of reason to judge them, upheld by theMu'tazilah and rejected by theAsha'irah , brought many other problems in its wake, some of which are related to theology, some to human predicament; such as, whether the Divine Acts, or rather, the creation of things is with a purpose or not. TheMu'tazilah claimed that absence of a purpose in the creation is "qabih" (an ugly thing) and so rationally impossible. How about a duty which is beyond one's power to fulfil? Is it possible that God may saddle someone with a duty which is over and above his capacity? TheMu'tazilah consideied this, too, as "qabih", and so impossible.

Is it within the power of a believer (mu'min) to turn apostate? Does the infidel( kafir ) have any power over his own infidelity (kufr )? The answer of theMu'tazilah is in the affirmative; for if the believer and the infidel had no power over their belief and infidelity, it would be wrong( qabih ) to award and punish them. TheAsha'irah rejected all these Mu'tazilite doctrines and held opposite views.

Retribution (al-wa'd wa al-wa'id):

"Wa'd" means promising award and "wa'id" means threat of punishment. TheMu'tazilah believe that God does not break His own promises (all Muslims unanimously accept this) or forego His threats, as stated by the Qur'anic verse regarding Divine promise:

Indeed God does not break the promise. (13:31)

Accordingly (theMu'tazilah say), all threats addressed to the sinners and the wicked such as the punishments declared for an oppressor, a liar or a wine imbiber, will all be carried out without fail, except when the sinner repents before death. Therefore, pardon without repentance is not possible.

From the viewpoint of theMu'tazilah , pardon without repentance implies failure to carry out the threats (wa'id), and such an act, like breaking of promise (khulf al-wa'd),is "qabih", and so impossible. Thus the Mu'tazilite beliefs regarding Divine retribution and Divine forgiveness are interrelated, and both arise from their belief in inherent good and evil of deeds determinable by reason.

Manzilah Bayna al-Manzilatayn:

The Mu'tazilite belief in this matter emerged in the wake of two opposite beliefs in the Muslim world about the faith ('iman ) or infidelity (kufr ) of the fasiq. For the first time the Khawarij maintained that committing of any of

the capital sins (kaba'ir ) was contrary to faith ('iman ) and equal to infidelity. Therefore, the perpetrator of a major sin is a kafir.

As we know, the Khawarij emerged after the incident of arbitration( tahkim ) during the Battle of Siffin about the year 37/657-58 during the caliphate of Amir al-Mu'minin 'Ali (A). As the Nahj al-Balaghah tells us, Amir al-Mu'minin (A) argued with them on this issue and refuted their viewpoint by numerous arguments. The Khawarij, even after 'Ali (A), were against the caliphs of the period, and staunchly espoused the cause of al-'amr bi al-ma'ruf wa al-nahy 'an al-munkar, denouncing others for their evil and calling them apostates and infidels. Since most of the caliphs indulged in the capital sins, they were naturally regarded as infidels by the Khawarij. Accordingly, they were adversaries of the current politics.

Another group which emerged (or was produced by the hands of vested political interests) was that of the Murji'ah, whose position with regard to the effect of capital sins was precisely opposite to that of the Khawarij. They held that faith and belief is a matter of the heart. One should remain a Muslim if one's faith - which is an inner affair of the heart - were intact, evil deeds cannot do any harm. Faith compensates all wickedness.

The opinions of the Murji'ah were to the benefit of the rulers, and tended to cause the people to regard their wickedness and indecencies as unimportant, or to consider them, despite their destructive character, as men worthy of paradise. The Murji'ah stated in unequivocal terms, "The respectability of the station of the ruler is secure, no matter how much he may sin. Obedience to him is obligatory and prayers performed in his leadership are correct." The tyrannical caliphs, therefore, backed them. For the Murji'ah, sin and wickedness, no matter how serious, do not harm one's faith; the perpetrator of the major sins is a mu'min, not a kafir.

TheMu'tazilah took a middle path in this matter. They maintained that the perpetrator of a major sin is neither a mu'min, nor he is a kafir, but occupies a position between those two extremes. This middle state was termed by theMu'tazilah "manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn."

It is said that the first to express this belief was Wasil ibn 'Ata', a pupil of al-Hasan al-Basri. One day Wasil was sitting with his teacher, who was asked his opinion about the difference between the Khawarij and the Murji'ah on this issue. Before al-Hasan could say anything, Wasil declared: "In my opinion the perpetrator of the major sins is a fasiq, not a kafir." After this, he left the company, or as is also said, was expelled by al-Hasan al-Basri - and parting his way started propagating his own views. His pupil and brother-in-law 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd also joined him. At this point Hasan declared, "'I'tazala 'anna", i.e. "He [Wasil] has departed from us." According to another version, the people began to say of Wasil and 'Amr "'I'tazala qawl al-'ummah", i.e. "they have departed from the doctrines held by the ummah," inventing a third path.

Al-'Amr bi al-Ma'ruf wa al-Nahy 'an al-Munkar:

Al-'amr bi al-ma'ruf wa al-nahy 'an al-munkar is an essential Islamic duty, unanimously accepted by all Muslims. The difference occurs only in the limits and conditions related to it.

For instance, the Khawarij believed in it without any limits and conditions whatsoever. They believed that this twofold duty must be performed in all circumstances. For example, when others believed in the conditions of probability of effectiveness (of al-ma'ruf) and absence of any dangerous consequences as necessary for this obligation to be applicable, the Khawarij did not believe in any such restrictions. Some believed that it is sufficient to fulfil the duty of al-'amr wa al-nahy by the heart and the tongue i e one should support al-ma'ruf and oppose al-munkar in his heart and use his tongue to speak out for al-ma'ruf and against al-munkar. But the Khawarij considered it incumbent to take up arms and to unsheathe one's sword for the sake of fulfilling this duty.

As against them there was a group which considered al-'amr wa al-nahy to be subject to the above conditions, and, moreover, did not go beyond the confines of the heart and the tongue for its sake. Ahmad ibn Hanbal is counted among them. According to this group,a bloody uprising for the sake of struggling against unlawful activities is not permissible.

TheMu'tazilah accepted the conditions for al-'amr wa al-nahy, but, not limiting it to the heart and the tongue, maintained that if the unlawful practices become common, or if the state is oppressive and unjust, it is obligatory for Muslims to rise in armed revolt.

Thus the belief special to theMu'tazilah in regard to al-'amr bi al-ma'ruf wa al-nahy 'an al-munkar - contrary to the stand of the Ahl al-Hadith and the Ahl al-Sunnah - is belief in the necessity to rise up in arms to confront corruption. The Khawarij too shared this view, with the difference pointed out above.

Other Mu’tazilite Notions and Beliefs:

Whatever we said in the last two lectures was related to the basic doctrines of theMu'tazilah . But as we mentioned before, theMu'tazilah raised many an issue and defended their opinions about them. Some of them were related with theology some with physics, some with sociology, and some with the human situation. Of the theological issues, some are related to general metaphysics (umur 'ammah) and some with theology proper (ilahiyyat bi al-ma'na al-'akhass).[8] Like all othermutakallimun , the intended purpose of theMu'tazilah by raising metaphysical questions is to use them as preparatory ground for the discussion of theological issues, which are their ultimate objectives. So also the discussions in the natural sciences, too, serve an introductory purpose for them. That is, the discussions in the natural sciences are used to prove some religious doctrines, or to find an answer to some objections. Here we shall enumerate some of these beliefs, beginning with theology:

Theology:

(i) Al-tawhid al-sifati (i.e. unity of the Divine Attributes)

(ii)'Adl (Divine Justice).

(iii) The Holy Qur'an (Kalam Allah ) is created (kalam , or speech, is an attribute of Act, not of the Essence).

(iv) The Divine Acts are caused and controlled by purposes (i.e. every Divine Act is for the sake of some beneficial outcome).

(v) Forgiveness without repentance is not possible (the doctrine of retribution -wa'd wa wa'id ).

(vi) Pre-eternity( qidam ) is limited to God (in this belief, they are challenged only by the philosophers).

(vii) Delegation of a duty beyond the powers of the mukallaf (al-taklif bima la yutaq ) is impossible.

(viii) The acts of the creatures are not created by God for five reasons;[9] the exercise of Divine Will does not apply to the acts of men.

(ix) The world is created, and is not pre-eternal (only the philosophers are against this view).

(x) God cannot be seen with the eyes, either in this world or in the Hereafter.

Physics:

(i) Physical bodies are made up of indivisible particles.

(ii) Smell relates to particles scattered in air.

(iii) Taste is nothing but the effect of particles.

(iv) Light is made up of particles scattered in space.

(v) Interpenetration of bodies is not impossible (this belief is attributed to someMu'tazilah ).

(vi) Leap (of particles) (i.e. tafrah)[10] is not impossible (this belief, too, is attributed to someMu'tazilah ).

Human Problems:

(i) Man is free, endowed with free will; not predetermined (this problem, the problem of the nature of human acts whether [created by God or man], and the problem of Divine Justice, all the three are interrelated).

(ii) Ability (istita'ah); that is, man has power over his own acts, before he performs them or desists from them.

(iii) The believer (mu'min) has the power to become an infidel and the infidel( kafir ) is able to become a believer.

(iv) A fasiq is neither a mu'min, nor a kafir.

(v) Human reason can understand and judge some matters independently (without the prior need of guidance from theShari'ah ).

(vi) In case of conflict between reason andHadith , reason is to be preferred.

(vii) It is possible to interpret the Qur'an with the help of reason.

Political and Social Problems:

(i) The obligatory nature of al-'amr bi al-ma'ruf wa al-nahy 'an al-munkar, even if it necessitates taking up of arms.

(ii) The leadership (imamah ) of the Rashidun Caliphs, was correct in the order it occurred.

(iii) 'Ali (A) was superior to the Caliphs who preceded him (this is the view of some of theMu'tazilah , not of all. The earlierMu'tazilah - with the exception of Wasil ibn 'Ata' considered Abu Bakr as the best, but the majority of the latterMu'tazilah considered 'Ali (A) as superior).

(iv) Evaluation and criticism of the Companions of the Prophet (S) and their deeds is permissible.

(v) A comparative study and analysis of the state policies of 'Umar and 'Ali (A).

These represent a sample of the issues touched by theMu'tazilah , which are far more numerous than what we have referred to. In some of these problems, they were contradicted by theAsha'irah , in some by the philosophers, in some by the Khawarij, and in some by the Murji'ah.

TheMu'tazilah never submitted to Greek thought and did not accept Greek philosophy indiscriminately, which entered the Islamic world contemporaneous with the emergence and rise of theMu'tazilah . On the other hand, with great courage, they wrote books against philosophy and philosophers, boldly expressing their own opinions. The controversy between themutakallimun and the philosophers benefited both kalam and philosophy. Both of them made progress, and in the course of time came so close to each other that there did not remain any disagreement except on few issues. An elaborate discussion of the reciprocal services of kalam and philosophy, and an exposition of the essential differences between the two, are outside the scope of these lectures.

Trasitions in the History of the Mu’tazilah:

Obviously, all the above-mentioned problems were not posed at one time and by any single individual. Rather, they were raised gradually by several individuals, expanding the scope of'ilm al-kalam .

Among these mentioned, apparently the oldest problem was that of free will and determinism, in which theMu'tazilah , of course, sided with free will. This is a problem which is posed in the Qur'an. That is, the Qur'an refers to this issue in a manner which stimulates thought on the subject. Because some verses clearly indicate that man is free, not coerced in any of his acts. On the other hand, there are verses which, with equal clarity, indicate that all things depend on the Divine Will.

Here the doubt arises that these two types of verses contradict each other. Accordingly, some explained away the verses upholding free will and supported determinism and predestination, while others explained away the verses which refer to the role of Divine Will and Intention, and sided with human freedom and free will. Of course, there is a third group which sees no contradiction between those two sets of verses.[11]

Moreover, this controversy between freedom and fate is frequently taken up in the utterances of 'Ali (A). Therefore, it is almost contemporaneous with Islam itself. However, the division of Muslims into two opposite camps, one siding with free will and the other with fate, took place in the second half of the lst/7th century.

It is said that the idea of free will was first put into circulation by Ghaylan al-Dimashqi and Ma'bad al-Juhani. The Banu Umayyah were inclined to propagate the belief in fate and predestination among the people, because it served their political interests. Under the cover of this belief that "everything is by the Will of God" - "amanna bi al-qadri khayrihi wa sharrihi" - "We believe in fate, bring as it may good or evil" - they justified their oppressive and illegitimate rule. As a result, they repressed any notions

of free will or human freedom, and Ghaylan al-Dimashqi and Ma'bad al-Juhani were both killed. During that period the supporters of the belief in free will were called "Qadariyyah".

However, the problem of the infidelity or otherwise of the evildoer (kufr al-fasiq) had become a subject of controversy even before the issue of freedom and fate, because it was raised by the Khawarij during the first half of the first century about the time of the caliphate of 'Ali (A). But the Khawarij did not defend this view in the fashion of themutakallimun . Only when the problem was raised among theMu'tazilah , with the emergence of their doctrine of manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn, it took on the colour of a problem of kalam.

The problem of fate and freedom (jabr wa ikhtiyar ) automatically brought in its wake such other problems as these: the problem of Divine Justice; the rational and essential goodness or badness (husn aw qubh dhati wa'aqli ) of things and acts; dependence of Divine Acts on purposes; impossibility of saddling a person with a duty exceeding his capacities, and the like.

During the first half of the 2nd/8th century one Jahm ibn Sakfwan (d. 128/745) voiced certain beliefs regarding the Divine Attributes. The writers of intellectual and religious history of Islam (milal wa nihal ), claim that the problem ofal-tawhid al-sifati (that the Divine Attributes are not separate from the Divine Essence - which theMu'tazilah call their "doctrine of tawhid") and the problem of nafy al-tashbih, also called asl al-tanzih, (which means that nothing can be likened to God) was expressed for the first time by Jahm ibn Safwan, whose followers came to be called the "Jahmiyyah." TheMu'tazilah followed the Jahmiyyah in their doctrines of tawhid and tanzih, in the same way as they followed the Qadariyyah on the issue of free will. Jahm ibn Safwan himself was a Jabrite (i.e. a supporter of fate or predestination). TheMu'tazilah rejected his view of fate but accepted his view of tawhid.

The foremost among theMu'tazilah , who established Mu'tazilism (al-'i'tizal) as a school of thought is Wasil ibn 'Ata', who, as mentioned earlier, was a pupil of al-Hasan al-Basri, and who parted company with his teacher in the course of a difference, to establish his own school. Two different versions of the cause why theMu'tazilah came to be called by this name were mentioned earlier. Some others say that, in the beginning the term "mu'tazilah" was used to refer to a group of persons who remained neutral during the events of the Battle of al-Jamal and the Battle of Siffin, such as Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas, Zayd ibn Thabit, and 'Abd Allah ibn 'Umar.

Later when the issue of the faith or infidelity of fasiq was raised by the Khawarij, Muslims divided into two camps. One group of them took the third path, dissociating itself from the rest, being indifferent to their debates. They adopted the same kind of neutral attitude with regard to a theoretical problem as those like Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas had adopted in the midst of the heated social political climate of their time. This attitude caused them to be called "mu'tazilah" the "indifferent," a name which permanently stuck to them.

Wasil was born in the year 80/699 and died in 141/758-59. His views were limited to those on the negation of the Attributes [as distinct from the Essence of God], free will, manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn, al-wa'd wa al-wa'id, and opinions on some differences among the Companions.

After Wasil came 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd, who extended and gave final shape to the views of Wasil. After him came 'Amr ibn Abi al-Hudhayl al-'Allaf and Ibrahim ibn Sayyar al-Nazzam. Abu al-Hudhayl and al-Nazzim, both, are considered eminent Mu'tazilites. Kalam got its philosophical colour at their hands. Abu al-Hudhayl studied philosophical works and wrote books in their refutation. Al-Nazzam presented certain views in the sphere of physics, and it was he who offered the view that bodies are constituted of atoms. Abu al-Hudhayl died, most probably, in the year 255/869, and al-Nazzim in 231/845-46.

Al-Jahiz (159/775-254/868), the famous author of the al-Bayan wa al-tabyin, is another eminent Mu'tazilite of the 3rd/9th century.

During the rule of the Banu Umayyah, theMu'tazilah did not have good relations with the ruling authorities. During the early days of the Banu al-'Abbas, they took on a neutral stand.[12] But during the rule of al-Ma'mun, who was himself learned in literature, sciences and philosophy, they attracted the ruler's patronage. Al-Ma'mun, and after him al-Mu'tasim and al-Wathiq, were staunch patrons of theMu'tazilah . All the three caliphs called themselves Mu'tazilites.

It was during this period that a heated controversy began extending to all corners of the vast Islamic dominions of the period. The issue under debate was whether Speech is an attribute of the Divine Act or an attribute of the Essence. Whether it is created and temporal (hadith ) or uncreated and eternal( qadim ) like Divine Knowledge, Power, and Life. TheMu'tazilah believed that the Qur'an is created (in time) and, therefore, is a creation of God (makhluq ) and so temporal. They also maintained that belief in the pre-eternity of the Qur'an amounted to infidelity (kufr ).

The opponents of theMu'tazilah , on the contrary, believed in the pre-eternity and uncreatedness of the Qur'an. Al-Ma'mun (r. 198/813 to 218/833) sent out a circular that any believer in the pre-eternity of the Qur'an would be liable to punishment. Many persons were thrown into prison and subjected to torture.

Al-Mu'tasim (r. 218/833 to 227/842) and al-Withiq (r. 227/842 to 232/847) also followed al-Ma'mun's practice. Of those who went to the prison during that time was Ahmad ibn Hanbal. This policy remained in force until al-Mutawakkil assumed power (r. 232/847 to 247/861). Al-Mutawakkil was not inclined in favour of theMu'tazilah , and also most of the people were opposed to them. As a result theMu'tazilah and their admirers suffered a reverse, nay, a reprisal. In the purges that followed, much blood was shed and homes were ruined. The period is remembered by Muslims as the times of "mihnah " - times of adversity and trial.

TheMu'tazilah never recuperated after this, and the field was left open forever for their opponents: the Ahl al-Sunnah and the Ahl al-Hadith . Nevertheless, there appeared some prominent personalities even during the following periods of their decline, like, 'Abd Allah ibn Ahmad Abu al-

Qasim al-Balkhi, well-known as al-Ka'bi (d. 319/ 931); Abu 'Ali al-Jubba'i (d. 303/915-6); Abu al-Hashim al-Jubba'i (d. 321/933) the son of Abu 'Ali al-Jubba'i; Qadi 'Abd al-Jabbar (d. 415/1024); Abu al-Hasan al-Khayyat; al-Sahib ibn 'Abbad, al-Zamakhshari (d. 538/1144); and Abu Ja'far al-'Iskafi.