Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

ASHA'IRAH:

From the preceding lecture it became clear that the ideas and notions which led to the emergence of the Mu'tazilite school took birth during the latter half of the first century of Hijrah. The approach of theMu'tazilah , in fact, consisted of the use of a kind of logical and rational method for understanding the basic doctrines of the Islamic faith. Obviously, the first condition for such an approach is belief in the freedom, independence, and validity of reason. It is also evident that the common people at large are not used to ratiocination and intellectual analysis, and always tend to equate "religiosity" with "credulity" and intellectual submission to the apparent meanings of the Qur'anic verses and in particular of the ahadith . They tend to consider every attempt at independent and original interpretation as a kind of rebellion against religion, specially if the dominant politics deem it in their interests to support this attitude, and more specially if some religious scholars propagate such an outlook, and particularly so when such scholars really believe in their literalist outlook and are inflexible and fanatical in practice. The attacks of the Akhbaris on the Usuliyyun and the mujtahidun, and the attacks of some fuqaha' and muhaddithun against philosophers in the Islamic world had their roots in such an approach.[13]

TheMu'tazilah had a deep-rooted interest in understanding Islam and its propagation and defence against the atheists, the Jews, the Christians, the Magians, the Sabaeans, the Manichaeans, and others. They even trained missionaries and dispatched them to various regions. Nevertheless, their existence was threatened by the literalists, who called themselves "Ahl al-Hadith " or "Ahl al-Sunnah ." They were ultimately stabbed in the back, weakened and gradually became extinct.

Despite it all, in the beginning, that is until the end of the 3rd/9th century and the beginning of the 4th/l0th, there existed no rival school of kalam - as was later to emerge - that could challenge theMu'tazilah . All opposition occurred under the claim that the views of theMu'tazilah were against the externals of thehadith and theSunnah . The leaders of the Ahl al-Hadith , such as Malik ibn Anas and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, basically considered any debate, inquiry or argument connected with the matters of faith as unlawful( haram ) . Therefore, the Ahl al-Sunnah not only did not have any system of kalam challenging theMu'tazilah , but also they were opposed to kalam itself.

About the late 3rd/9th century and the early 4th/l0th, a new phenomenon took place. That was the appearance of a distinguished thinker who had received instruction in Mu'tazilite teachings under Qadi 'Abd al-Jabbar, and had mastered them. He rejected Mu'tazilite tenets and inclined towards the doctrines of the Ahl al-Sunnah . Since, on the one hand, he was not a man devoid of genius, and on the other was equipped with the tools used by theMu'tazilah , he established all the doctrines of the Ahl al-Sunnah on a rational basis, and gave them the form of a relatively closely-knit intellectual system. That distinguished person was Abu al-Hasan al-'Ash'ari (d. circa 330/941-42). Al-'Ash'ari - as against the view of his predecessors among Ahl al-Hadith , like Abmad ibn Hanbal - considered debate and argument, and use of the tools of logic in the matter of the doctrines of the

faith as permissible, citing evidence from the Qur'an and theSunnah to support his claim. He wrote a treatise entitled "Risalah fi istihsan al-khawd fi'ilm al-kalam " ("A Treatise on Appropriateness of Inquiry in 'Ilm al-Kalam).[14]

It was at this point that the Ahl al-Hadith were divided into two groups: theAsha'irah , or the followers of Abu al-Hasan al-'Ash'ari, who considered kalam as permissible; and the Hanbalis, or the followers of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, who considered it unlawful. In our lectures on logic we have already mentioned that Ibn Taymiyyah, a Hanbali, wrote a book on unlawfulness of logic and kalam.[15] There was another reason why theMu'tazilah became detestable in the eyes of the people. It was the period of calamity or "mihnah ," and theMu'tazilah under the patronage of the caliph al-Ma'mun, wanted to coerce the people into accepting their belief in the createdness of the Qur'an. This regimentation brought in its wake bloodshed, imprisonment, torture and exile, which shook the Muslim society. The common people considered theMu'tazilah responsible for that havoc, and this earned them greater disfavour with the public.

These two causes contributed to the public welcome at the emergence of the school of Ash'arism. After Abu al-Hasan al-'Ash'ari, other distinguished personalities appeared in this school, who strengthened its foundations. Among them following can be mentioned: Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani (a contemporary of al-Shaykh al-Mufid), who died in the year 403/1012-13 Abu Ishaq al-'Asfara'ini (who is considered as belonging to the generation after al-Baqillani and al-Sayyid al-Murtada 'Alam al-Huda); Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni, the teacher of al-Ghazali; Imam Muhammad al-Ghazali, the author of Ihya' 'ulum al-Din himself (d. 505/1111-12); and Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi.

Of course, the Ash'arite school underwent gradual changes, and particularly in the hands of al-Ghazali kalam somewhat lost its characteristic colour and took on the hue of'irfan (Sufism). Imam al-Razi brought it close to philosophy. After Khwajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi wrote his book Tajrid al-'i'tiqad more than ninety per cent of kalam assumed the colour of philosophy. After the publication of the Tajrid, allmutakallimun - including theMu'tazilah and theAsha'irah - followed the same road which was trodden by that great philosopher and Shi'ah mutakallim.

For instance, the latter works of kalam such as al-Mawaqif and Maqasid and the commentaries written upon them - all took on the colour of the Tajrid. It may be said that, in fact, the more time has elapsed since Abu al-Hasan al-'Ash'ari, the more the leading Ash'arites have moved away from him, bringing his doctrines closer to the views of theMu'tazilah or those of the philosophers.

Now we shall list the main doctrines of al-Ash'ari, which are aimed at defending the basic principles of the Ahl al-Sunnah , or attempting a rational justification of their beliefs.

(i) The Divine Attributes, contrary to the belief of theMu'tazilah and the philosophers, are not identical with the Divine Essence.

(ii) The Divine Will is all-embracing. The Divine providence and predestination encompass all events (this belief, too, is contrary to the view held by theMu'tazilah , though in agreement with those of the philosophers).

(iii) All evil, like good, is from God (of course, this view is a logical corollary, in al-Ash'ari's view of the above belief).

(iv) Man is not free in his acts, which are created by God (this belief, too, in al-Ash'ari's view, necessarily follows from the doctrine of all-embracing nature of the Divine Will).

(v) Acts are not intrinsically good or evil, i.e. husn or qubh of deeds is not intrinsic, but determined by the Shari'ah. The same is true of justice. What is 'just', is determined by the Shari'ah not by reason (contrary to the belief of theMu'tazilah ).

(vi) Grace( lutf ) and selection of the best for creation (al-'aslah) are not incumbent upon God (contrary to the belief of theMu'tazilah ).

(vii) Man's power over his actions does not precede them [there is no istita'ah qabl al-fi'l], but is commensurate and concurrent with the acts themselves (contrary to the belief of the Muslim philosophers and theMu'tazilah ).

(viii) Absolute deanthropomorphism (tanzih mutlaq), or absolute absence of similarity between God and others, does not hold (contrary to the Mu'tazilite view).

(ix) Doctrine of acquisition: Man does not 'create' his own acts; rather he 'acquires' or 'earns' them (this is in justification of the Ahl al-Sunnah 's belief in the creation of human acts by God).

(x) Possibility of the beatific vision: God shall be visible to the eyes on the Day of Resurrection (contrary to the view of theMu'tazilah and the philosophers).

(xi) The fasiq is a believer (mu'min) (contrary to the view of the Khawarij, who consider him kafir, and contrary to the Mu'tazilite doctrine of manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn).

(xii) There is nothing wrong about God's pardoning someone without repentance. Similarly, nothing is wrong about God's subjecting a believer to chastisement (contrary to the Mu'tazilite position).

(xiii) Intercession (shafa'ah ) is justifiable (contrary to the Mu'tazilite position).

(xiv) To tell a lie or break a promise is not possible for God.

(xv) The world is created in time (hadith ) (contrary to the view of the philosophers).

(xvi) The Qur'an is pre-eternal( qadim ) ; however, this is true of al-kalam al-nafsi (meaning of the Qur'an), not al-kalam al-lafzi - the spoken word (this is in justification of the Ahl al-Sunnah 's belief in the pre-eternity of the Qur'an).

(xvii) The Divine Acts do not follow any purpose or aim (contrary to the view of the philosophers and theMu'tazilah )

(xviii) It is possible that God may saddle a person with a duty beyond his power (contrary to the belief of the philosophers and theMu'tazilah ).

Abu al-Hasan al-'Ash'ari was a prolific writer, and as reported had compiled more than two hundred books. As many as a hundred are

mentioned in his biographical accounts, though, apparently, most of those works have perished. The most famous of his works is Maqalat al-'Islamiyyin, which has been published. It is a very disorderly and confused work. Another one printed is al-Luma', and perhaps other of his works may have also appeared in print.

Abu al-Hasan al-'Ash'ari is one of those individuals whose ideas, regrettably, exercised a great influence on the Islamic world. Nevertheless, later, his works have been put to severe criticism by philosophers and theMu'tazilah . Ibn Sina, in al-Shifa; has refuted many of his ideas without mentioning his name. Even some of his followers, such as Qadi Abu Bakr al-Baqillani and Imam al-Haramayn al-Juwayni revised and modified his views about predestination and createdness of( human ) acts.

Imam Muhammad al-Ghazali, although an Ash'arite who has to a great extent established and strengthened the Ash'arite doctrines, has put them on a different foundation. Through al-Ghazali, kalam was brought closer to'irfan and Sufism. Mawlana Muhammad al-Rumi, the author of the Mathnawi, is, in his own way, an Ash'arite; but his deep Sufi inclinations gave a different colour to all the issues of kalam. Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, who was familiar with philosophic thought, transformed al-'Ash'ari's kalam, further strengthening it.

The triumph of the Ash'arite school cost the Muslim world dearly. Its triumph was the victory of the forces of stagnation over freedom of thought. Despite the fact that the battle between Ash'arism and Mu'tazilism is related to the Sunni world, even the Shi'ite world could not remain unaffected from some of the stultifying effects of Ash'arism. This triumph has particular historical and social reasons behind it, and certain political events effectively contributed to it.

As mentioned earlier, during the 3rd/9th century, the caliph al-Ma'mun, himself an intellectual and a man of learning, rose to the support of theMu'tazilah . After him al-Mu'tasim and al-Wathiq also followed him - until al-Mutawakkil assumed caliphate. Al-Mutawakkil played a basic role in the victory of the Ahl al-Sunnah 's doctrines, which acquired dialectic foundations after one hundred years at the hands of al-'Ash'ari. To be sure, had al-Mutawakkil's way of thinking been similar to that of his predecessors, Mu'tazilism would have had a different fate.

The rise of the Seljuq Turks to power in Iran was another effective factor in the triumph and propagation of the Ash'arite ideas. The Seljuqs did not believe in the freedom of thought. They were the antithesis of the Buyids, some of whom were men of scholarship and literary merit. Shi'ism and Mu'tazilism flourished in the Buyid court. Ibn al-'Amid and al-Sahib ibn 'Abbad, the two learned ministers of the Buyids, were both anti-Ash'arites.

Here we do not intend to support Mu'tazilite doctrines, and later we shall expose the feebleness of many of their beliefs. However, that which deserves appreciation in theMu'tazilah is their rational approach - something which also became extinct with them. As we know, a religion so rich and resourceful as Islam needs a kalam which has an unshakeable faith in the freedom of reason.

THE SHI'ITE KALAM:

Now it is time to take up Shi'ite kalam, if only briefly. Kalam, in the sense of logical and rational argument about the principal doctrines of Islam, has a special and distinguished place in the Shi'ah tradition. The Shi'ite kalam, on the one hand, emerges from the core of Shi'itehadith , and, on the other, is mixed with Shi'ite philosophy. We have seen how, in the early centuries, kalam was considered to be inimical to theSunnah and thehadith by the Ahl al-Sunnah . But the Shi'ite kalam not only does not come into conflict with theSunnah and thehadith , it is firmly rooted in theSunnah and thehadith . The reason is that the Shi'itehadith , contrary to the Sunni corpus onhadith , consists of numerous traditions in which profound metaphysical or social problems have been dealt with logically and analysed rationally. But in the Sunni corpus such analytic treatment of these subjects is missing. For instance, if there is any mention of such problems as that of Divine providence and preordination, the all-embracing Will of the Almighty, the Divine Names, Attributes, or such topics as the soul, the life after death, the final reckoning, the Sirat, the Balance, or such issues asImamah ,khilafah , and the like, there is no argument or rational explanation of the topics mentioned. But in the Shi'ah corpus onhadith , all such issues have been dealt with in a rational and discursive manner. A comparison between the list of the chapters of the six Sihah and that of al-Kulayni's al-Kafi will make this quite clear.

Accordingly, "kalam", in the sense of rational and analytical treatment of problems, is found in the Shi'ahhadith . This is the reason why the Shi'ah were not divided into two groups like the Sunnis were into "Ahl al-Hadith " and "Ahl al-Kalam."

It was on the basis of the Sunni textual sources that we stated, in the former lectures, that the first doctrinal issue to become a subject of controversy was the issue of thekufr of a fasiq, brought up by the Khawarij during the first half of the first century. Then emerged the problem of freedom and fate, which was raised and argued by two individuals by the names of Ma'bad al-Juhani and Ghaylan al-Dimashqi. The belief they professed in this matter was contrary to the one held and propagated by the Umayyad rulers. Thereafter, during the first half of the second century, the notion of the unity of Divine Attributes and Essence was posed by Jahm ibn Safwan. Thereupon, Wasil ibn 'Ata' and 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd, the founders of the Mu'tazilite school, adopting the belief in free will from Ma'bad and Ghaylan and the doctrine of the unity of Divine Essence and Attributes from Jahm ibn Safwan, and themselves innovating the doctrine of manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn in the issue of the faith or infidelity of fasiq, initiated debates in some other issues, thus founding the first school in Islamic kalam.

This is how the Orientalists and the scholars of Islamic studies in the West and the East explain and interpret the origins of rational speculation and debates in the Islamic world. This group, advertently or mistakenly, ignores the profound rational and demonstrative arguments advanced for the first time by Amir al-Muminin 'Ali (A). The truth is that the rational approach in Islamic teachings was first initiated by 'Ali (A) in his sermons and discussions. It was he who for the first time initiated profound

discussion on the subjects of Divine Essence and Attributes, temporality( huduth ) and pre-eternity( qidam ) , simplicity (basatah) and compositeness( tarkib ) , unity( wahdah ) and plurality (kathrah), etc. These are recorded in the Nahj al-balaghah and other authentic texts of Shi'ahhadith . These discussions have a colour, perfume and spirit which are totally distinct from the approaches of theMu'tazilah and theAsha'irah to the controversies of kalam, or even from that of the Shi'ah scholars, who were influenced by their contemporary kalam.

In our Sayr dar Nahj al-balaghah ("A Journey Through the Nahj al-balaghah "), and in our preface to the Vol. V ofUsul-e falsafeh wa rawish-e riyalism , we have discussed this matter.

Sunni historians confess that from the earliest days the Shi'ite thinking was philosophical in approach. The Shi'ite intellectual and theoretical approach is opposed not only to the Hanbali thinking - which fundamentally rejects the idea of using discursive reasoning in religious belief - and the Ash'arite approach - which denies the independence of reason and subordinates it to literalist appearance - but also to the Mu'tazilite thinking with all its predilection for reason. Because, although the Mu'tazilite thought is rational, it is dialectical or polemical (jadali ), not discursive or demonstrative (burhani ).

In our lectures on the basics of Islamic philosophy, where we have clarified the difference between peripatetic (hikmat al-mashsha') and illuminationist (hikmat al-'ishraq) philosophies, we have also explained the difference between dialectical (Mu'tazilite and Ash'arite) kalam and mystical or intuitive approaches to philosophical issues.[16] That is the reason why the majority of Islamic philosophers have been Shi'ah. Only the Shi'ah have preserved and kept Islamic philosophy alive, since they acquired this spirit from their Imams (A), particularly from the first Imam, Amir al-Mu'minin 'Ali (A).

The Shi'ah philosophers, without having to mould philosophy into kalam and without transforming rational philosophy into dialectical philosophization, consolidated the doctrinal basis of Islam under the inspiration of the Qur'anic Revelation and the guiding principles of their spiritual leaders. If we wish to enumerate the Shi'ahmutakallimun , that is those who have applied rational thought to the doctrines of the Faith, we shall have to include a group of muhaddithun as well as a group of Shi'ah philosophers among them. Because, as said earlier, both the Shi'itehadith and the Shi'ite philosophy have accomplished the function of'ilm al-kalam to a greater extent than kalam itself.

But if by "mutakallimun " we mean only that group which under the Mu'tazilite or Ash'arite influence had resorted to the tools of dialectical reasoning, we are forced to select only a particular group of them. However, we see no reason to concentrate our attention on this particular group only.

If we leave the utterances of the infallible Imams (A) about doctrines, delivered in the forms of sermons, narratives, or prayers, the first Shi'ah writer to compile a book on doctrines of faith was 'Ali ibn Isma'il ibn Mitham al-Tammar. Mitham al-Tammar himself was an orator, expert in debating, and was one of the closest companions ofAmir al-Mu'minin 'Ali

(A). 'Ali ibn Isma'il was his grandson. He was a contemporary of 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd and Abu al-Hudhayl al-'Allaf, the famous figures of kalam during the first half of the second century, who were from the first generation of the founders of Mu'tazilite kalam.

Among the companions of al-Imam al-Sadiq (A), there is a group of individuals, referred to as "mutakallim" by the Imam (A) himself, such as Hisham ibn al-Hakam, Hisham ibn Salim, Humran ibn A'yan, Abu Ja'far al-'Ahwal - known as "Mu'min al-Taq" - Qays ibn Masar, and others.

Al-Kafi relates the story of a debate between this group and an opponent in the presence of al-Imam al-Sadiq (A), which pleased him. This group lived during the first half of the second century, and was trained in the school of al-Imam al-Sadiq (A). This shows that the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt (A), not only themselves engaged in discussion and analysis of the problems of kalam, they also trained a group of their pupils for the sake of conducting such debates and arguments. Among them Hisham ibn al-Hakam distinguished himself only in'ilm al-kalam , not in tafsir,fiqh , orhadith . Al-Imam al-Sadiq (A) used to treat him with more respect than others even when he was a raw youth, and used to offer him a preferred seat. All are in agreement that the Imam paid him so much respect just because of his expertise in kalam.

By showing preference for Hisham the mutakallim over other pupils, experts inhadith andfiqh , al-Imam al-Sadiq (A), in fact, wanted to raise the status of kalam as againsthadith andfiqh . Obviously, such an attitude of the Imams (A) played a decisive role in the promotion of'ilm al-kalam , and as a result, gave the Shi'i thought a dialectical and philosophical character.

Al-Imam al-Rida (A) personally participated in debates in which al-Ma'mun invitedmutakallimun of various schools to take part. The records of such meetings are preserved in the Shi'i texts.

It is indeed very amazing that the Orientalists should be completely silent about all such events pertaining to the efforts of Amir al-Mu'minin 'Ali (A) and ignore the role of the Infallible Imams (A) in the revival of rational inquiry in matters of religious doctrine.

Fadl ibn Shadhan al-Nishaburi, a companion of al-Imam al-Rida (A), al-Imam al-Jawad (A), and al-Imam al-Hadi (A), whose tomb is in Nishabur, apart from being a faqih and a muhaddith, was also a mutakallim. He is reported to have written a large number of books.

The Nawbakht family produced many illustrious personalities, most of whom weremutakallimun . Fadl ibn Abi Sahl ibn al-Nawbakht, a contemporary of Harun, was attached with the famous Bayt al-Hikmah library, and well-known as a translator from Persian into Arabic; Ishaq ibn Abi Sahl ibn al-Nawbakht; his son, Isma'il ibn Ishaq ibn Sahl ibn al-Nawbakht; his another son, 'Ali ibn Ishaq; his grandson, Abu Sahl Isma'il ibn 'Ali ibn Ishaq ibn Abi Sahl ibn al-Nawbakht, (called "shaykh al-mutakallimin" of the Shi'ah), Hasan ibn Musa al-Nawbakht, a nephew of Isma'il ibn 'Ali, and several others of this family - all are Shi'imutakallimun .

Ibn Qubbah al-Razi in the 3rd/9th century, and Abu 'Ali ibn Miskawayh, the famous doctor of medicine and the author ofTahdhib al-'akhlaq wa

tathir al-'a'raq , during the early 5th/11th century, are also Shi'imutakallimun .

The Shi'imutakallimun are many. Khwajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, the famous philosopher, mathematician, and the author of the Tajrid al-'I'tiqad, and al-'Allamah al-Hilli, the well-known faqih and commentator of the Tajrid al-'I'tiqad, are well-knownmutakallimun of the 7th/13th century.

Khwajah Nasir al-Din al-Tusi, himself a learned philosopher, created the most solid work of kalam through his writing of the Tajrid al-'I'tiqad. Since its compilation, the Tajrid has attracted the attention of allmutakallimun , whether Shi'ah or Sunni. Al-Tusi has, to a great extent, brought kalam out of dialectical labyrinth and made it closer to discursive (rational) philosphy. During the latter ages, kalam almost completely lost its dialectical form. All thinkers became followers of discursive (rational) philosophy, and, in fact, left the camp of dialectical philosophy to join philosophy proper.

The Shi'ite philosophers after al-Tusi brought the essential problems of kalam into philosophy, and applied the philosophical methods of enquiry to the study and analysis of these problems with greater success than attained by themutakallimun who employed the older methods. For example, Mulla Sadra or Mulla Hadi Sabzawari, though they are not usually counted amongmutakallimun , have been far more influential in Islamic thought than any of themutakallimun .

It is a fact that if we compare their approach to that of the basic Islamic texts, such as the Qur'an, the Nahj al-balaghah, and the prayers and traditions transmitted from the Ahl al-Bayt (A), we shall find this approach and style of reasoning to be closer to that of the original teachers of the faith. Here we are compelled to be content with these brief references only.

THE SHI'I STANDPOINT:

In this lecture it is necessary to briefly explain the Shi'ite views on the issues current among the Muslimmutakallimun . Earlier, while explaining the Mu'tazilite viewpoint, we stated that theMu'tazilah considered their five doctrines, viz., tawhid,'adl , al-wa'd wa al-wa'id, manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn, and al-'amr bi al-ma'ruf wa al-nahy 'an al-munkar, as being fundamental to their school of thought. We have also said that the reason for giving prominence to these doctrines above all other Mu'tazilite beliefs lies in the fact that they characterize their school and distinguish it from the schools of their opponents. It should not be construed that these five principles constitute the basic doctrines of the faith (usul al-Din ) in the eyes of theMu'tazilah , and that all the remaining beliefs are regarded as subsidiary.

The Shi'ite scholars - not the Shi'ite Imams (A) - from the earliest days, have also introduced five doctrines as being characteristic of Shi'ism. They are: tawhid,'adl , nubuwwah,imamah , andma'ad (Resurrection). It is generally said that these five are the basic tenets of the faith (usul al-Din ) and the rest have a subordinate significance, or are "furu' al-Din". Here, inevitably, the question arises that if by "usul al-Din " we mean the doctrines belief in which is essential for being a Muslim, they are not more than two: tawhid and nubuwwah. Only these are the two beliefs contained in the Shahadatayn ("'ashhadu 'an la ilaha illallahu wa 'ashhadu 'anna Muhammadan rasulullah") Moreover, the second testimony is related in particular to the prophethood of Muhammad (S), not to prophethood in general, and the prophethood of other prophets is not covered by it. However, belief in the prophethood of all the other prophets (A) is a part of theusul al-Din , and faith in it is compulsory for all believers.

If byusul al-Din we mean the doctrines faith in which is an essential part of the faith from the Islamic viewpoint, then belief in other matters, such as the existence of the angels - as explicitly stated by the Qur'an - is also essential for faith.[17] Furthermore, what is special about the Attribute of'adl (justice) that only this Divine Attribute should be included in the essential doctrine, to the exclusion of all other attributes, such as Knowledge, Life, Power, Hearing or Vision? If the belief in the Divine Attributes is necessary, all of them should be believed in; if not, none ought to be made the basis of the faith.

Actually, the fivefold principles were selected in such a manner so as, on the one hand, to determine certain tenets essential to the Islamic faith,and on the other to specify the particular identity of the school. The doctrines of tawhid, nubuwwah, andma'ad are the three which are essential for every Muslim to believe in. That is, these three are part of the objectives of Islam; the doctrine of'adl being the specific mark of the Shi'ite school.

The doctrine of'adl , although it is not a part of the main objectives of the Islamic faith - in the sense that it does not differ from the other articles of faith pertaining to Knowledge, Life, Power, etc -, but is one of those doctrines which represent the specific Shi'i outlook with regard to Islam.

The article onimamah , from the Shi'ite viewpoint, covers both these aspects, i.e. it is both a part of the essential doctrines and also characterizes the identity of the Shi'ite school.

If faith in the existence of the angels is also, on the authority of the Qur'an, essential and obligatory, then why was it not stated as a sixth article of the faith? The answer is that the above-mentioned articles are part of the objectives of Islam. That is, the Holy Prophet (S) called the people to believe in them. This means that the mission of the Prophet (S) prepared the ground for the establishment of these beliefs. But the belief in the angels or in the obligatory duties, such as prayer and fasting, is not a part of the objectives of the prophethood; it rather forms an essential accessory of it. In other words, such beliefs are essential accessories of faith in prophethood, but are not the objectives of prophethood.

The issue ofimamah , if viewed from a socio-political standpoint or from the viewpoint of government and leadership, is similar to that of'adl . That is, in that case, it is not an essential part of the faith. However, if viewed from a spiritual viewpoint - that is from the viewpoint that the Imam, to use the terminology ofhadith , is thehujjah (proof) of God and His khalifah (vicegerent), who in all periods of time serves as a spiritual link between every individual Muslim and the perfect human being - then it is to be considered as one of the articles of faith.

Now we shall take separately each of the particular doctrines of Shi'ite kalam, including the above-mentioned fivefold doctrines:

(i) Tawhid:

Tawhid is also one of the fivefold doctrines of theMu'tazilah , as it is also one of theAsha'irah 's, with the difference that in the case of theMu'tazilah it specifically meansal-tawhid al-sifati , which is denied by theAsha'irah . On the other hand, the specific sense of this term as affirmed by theAsha'irah isal-tawhid al-'af'ali , which is rejected by theMu'tazilah .

As mentioned above,al-tawhid al-dhati and al-tawhid al-'ibadi, since they are admitted by all, are outside the scope of our discussion. The conception of tawhid upheld by the Shi'ah, in addition toal-tawhid al-dhati and al-tawhid al-'ibadi, also includesal-tawhid al-sifati andal-tawhid al-'af'ali . That is, in the controversy regarding the Attributes, the Shi'ah are on the side ofal-tawhid al-sifati , and in the debate on human acts, are on the side ofal-tawhid al-'af'ali . Nevertheless, the conception ofal-tawhid al-sifati held by the Shi'ah is different from the same held by theMu'tazilah . Also, their notion ofal-tawhid al-'af'ali differs from the notion of the same held by theAsha'irah .

The conception ofal-tawhid al-sifati of theMu'tazilah is synonymous with the idea of the absence of all Attributes from the Divine Essence, or is equivalent to the conception of the Divine Essence being devoid of all qualities. But the Shi'i notion ofal-tawhid al-sifati means identity of the Attributes with the Divine Essence.[18] For an elaborate discussion of this issue one should study works on Shi'ite kalam and philosophy.

The Shi'i conception ofal-tawhid al-'af'ali differs from the one held by theAsha'irah . The Ash'arite notion ofal-tawhid al-'af'ali means that no creature is of any consequence in the scheme of things, and everything is

directly ordained by God. Accordingly, He is also the direct creator of the deeds of the human beings, and they are not creators of their own acts. Such a belief is similar to the idea of absolute predestination and has been refuted through many an argument. However, the notion ofal-tawhid al-'af'ali upheld by the Shi'ah means that the system of causes and effects is real, and every effect, while being dependent on its proximate cause, is also dependent on God. These two modes of dependence do not operate in parallel but in series. For further clarification of this subject see my book Insan wa sarnewisht ("Man and Destiny").

(ii) 'Adl:

The doctrine of'adl is common between the Shi'ah and theMu'tazilah .'Adl means that God bestows His mercy and blessings and so also His trials and chastisement according to prior and intrinsic deservedness of beings, and that Divine mercy and trial, reward and punishment are determined in accordance with a particular order or law (which is also of Divine origin).

TheAsha'irah deny this notion of'adl and such an order. In their view, the belief in'adl in the sense of a just order, as outlined above, necessitates God's subjection and subordination to something else and thus contradicts His Absolute Power.'Adl in itself implies several corollaries which shall be referred to while explaining other doctrines.

(iii) Free Will and Freedom:

The Shi'ah doctrine of free will is to some extent similar to that ofMu'tazilah . But the two differ with regard to its meaning. Human freedom or free will for theMu'tazilah is equivalent to Divine resignation( tafwid ) , i.e. leaving man to himself and suspension of the Divine Will from any effective role. Of course, this, as proved in its proper place, is impossible.

Freedom and free will, as believed by the Shi'ah, mean that men are created as free beings. But they, like any other creature, are entirely dependent on the Divine Essence for their existence and all its multifarious modes, including the mode of action, all of which are derived from and are dependent on God's merciful care, and seek help from His Will.

Accordingly, free will and freedom in Shi'ism occupy an intermediate position between theAsh'arite (absolute) predestination (jabr ) and the Mu'tazilite doctrine of freedom( tafwid ) . This is the meaning of the famous dictum of the Infallible Imams (A:): "lajabr a wa la tafwida bal 'amrun bayna 'amrayn":

Neither Jabr nor tafwid; but something intermediate between the two (extreme) alternatives.

The doctrine of free will is a corollary to the doctrine of Divine Justice.

(iv) Inherent Morality or Immorality of Deeds (Husn wa Qubh Dhati ):

TheMu'tazilah believe that all deeds are inherently and intrinsically either good or evil. For example, justice is intrinsically good and oppression is inherently evil. The wise man selects the good works and abstains from bad deeds. And since God the Almighty is Wise His Wisdom necessitates that He should do good and abstain from 'evil. Thus the inherent goodness or badness of acts on the one hand, and the Wisdom of God on the other, necessitate that some acts are "obligatory" for God and some "undesirable."

TheAsha'irah are severely opposed to this belief. They deny both the inherent goodness or badness of acts and the applicability of such judgements as "obligatory" or "undesirable" to God.

Some Shi'ah thinkers, under the influence of the Mu'tazilite kalam, accepted the Mu'tazilite view in its above-mentioned form, but others, with greater insight, while accepting the doctrine of inherent morality or immorality of acts, rejected the view that the judgements of permissibility or undesirability are applicable to the Divine realm.[19]

(v) Grace( lutf ) and Choice of the Best (intikhab al-'aslah ):

There is a controversy between theAsha'irah and theMu'tazilah whether or not Grace or 'choice of the best' for the good of human beings is a principle which governs the universe. TheMu'tazilah considered grace as a duty and obligation incumbent upon God. TheAsha'irah denied Grace and 'Choice of the best.'

However, the principle of grace is a corollary to the doctrine of justice and the doctrine of the innate goodness or badness of deeds. Some Shi'itemutakallimun have accepted the doctrine of grace in its Mu'tazilite form, but others who consider it absolutely wrong to apply the notion of "duty" and "obligation" to God, advance another version of the doctrine of the "choice of the best," which it is not possible to elaborate here.

(vi) Independence and Validity of Reason:

Shi'ism affirms a greater independence, authority and validity for reason than theMu'tazilah .

According to certain indisputable traditions of the Ma'sumun (A), reason is the internalized prophetic voice in the same way as a prophet is reason externalized. In the Shi'itefiqh , reason ('aql ) is considered as one of the four valid primary sources of the Law.

(v) 'Aim' and 'Purpose' of Divine Acts:

TheAsha'irah reject the notion that the Divine Acts may be for one or several purposes or aims. They state that possession of a purpose or goal is solely applicable to man and other similar creatures. But God is above such matters, since having a purpose and aim implies subjection of a doer to that purpose or aim. God is free from and above every kind of limit, restriction, and subordination be as it may the limit imposed by a purpose.

The Shi'ah affirm the Mu'tazilite belief with regard to purposiveness of Divine Acts. They believe that there is a difference between the purpose of the act and the purpose of the doer. That which is impossible is that God may seek to satisfy some purpose of His own through His Acts; however, a purpose or aim which is directed to the benefit of a creature is not at all incompatible with Divine perfection and the supremacy of His self-sufficing Essence.

(vi) The Possibility of Bada' (Divine abrogation of predestiny):

Bada' is possible in Divine Acts, in the same way as it occurs in the abrogation of the Divinely decreed laws. An elaborate and satisfactory study

of the issue of bada' may be found in such profound philosophical books as al-'Asfar.

(ix) Vision (ru'yah) of God:

TheMu'tazilah vehemently deny the possibility of seeing God with the eyes. They believe that one may only have faith in God, a faith which is rooted in the mind and the intellect. That is, one can acquire a firm conviction in the depth of one's soul and mind in the existence of God, and this is the highest kind of faith one may attain. God can by no means be seen or observed. This is testified by the Qur'an when it says:

The sights do not perceive Him, and He perceives the sights, and He is All-subtle (incapable of being perceived) and All-knowing (i.e. perceives the eyes and the rest of things). (6:103).

TheAsha'irah , with equal vehemence, assert that God can be seen with the eyes, but only on the Day of Resurrection. They also cite as evidence certain Qur'anic verses and prophetic traditions to support their claim. One of the verses they cite is:

(Some) faces on that Day shall be bright, looking towards their Lord. (75:22-23)

The Shi'ah believe that God can never be seen with the eyes, neither in this life nor in the Hereafter. Nevertheless, the highest kind of faith is not an intellectual one. The intellectual faith is 'ilm al-yaqin. A higher level of faith than that of the intellect is 'ayn al-yaqin - certitude of the heart. 'Ayn al-yaqin (lit. certitude by sight) means witnessing God with the heart, not with the eyes. Thus, though God cannot be seen with the eyes, He is 'visible' to the heart. 'Ali (A) was once asked, "Have you seen God?" He replied, "I have not worshipped a god whom I have not seen. But He is visible to the hearts, not to the eyes." The Imams (A) were asked whether the Prophet (S) saw God during his Ascension (mi'raj). Their reply was: "With the eyes? No. With the heart? Yes." In this matter only the Sufis have a viewpoint resembling the Shi'ah position.

(x) The Faith or Infidelity of the Fasiq:

On this issue, which has often been referred to earlier, the Shi'ah position is in agreement with that of theAsha'irah , but is different from the views of the Khawarij (who believe that a fasiq is kafir) and theMu'tazilah (who believe in manzilah bayna al-manzilatayn).

(xi) The Infallibility ('ismah) of the Prophets and the Imams:

This belief is characteristic of the Shi'ah who hold that the prophets (A) and the Imams (A) are infallible and do not commit any major or minor sin whatsoever.

(xii) Forgiveness (maghfirah) and Intercession (shafa'ah):

On this issue, also, the Shi'ah differ from the cut-and-dry Mu'tazilite position that anybody who dies without repentance cannot possibly get the benefit of Divine forgiveness or (the Prophet's) intercession. Similarly, their position is also at variance with the indulgent and extravagant notion ofshafa'ah held by theAsha'irah .[20]

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.