CHAPTER ONE: ISLAM
FAITH
AND PRACTICE
1.1
Khârijism
When the Khârijites
protested 'Alî’s agreeing to negotiate with Mu'âwiya, they shouted “No
judgement but God’s!” This meant that grave
sinners (Mu'âwiya for rebelling, and 'Alî for compromising with him) are
apostates from the Islamic community; so it is the duty of Muslims to fight
them. This Khârijite action raised a
theological question: What is the definition of faith? Does it include practice, or obedience to
Islamic law, or is practice something additional to faith?
The Khârijites were
influenced in their position by the assumption that faith is not simply a
matter of personal belief but is first of all membership in a believing
community. Anyone who is unfaithful to
that community cannot be a believer and cannot enter Paradise.
The Khârijites laid
great stress on the Qur’ân. This led
them to two conclusions: 1) Membership in the community depends upon following
the laws of the Qur’ân, and anyone who violates these laws forfeits his
membership. 2) An imâm, or caliph, is
not necessary from a theoretical standpoint.
If one is chosen out of practical necessity he can be from any tribe or
nation, “even an Ethiopian slave”. This
second conclusion touches issue of authority, and will be dealt with in chapter
3.
Like any of the
movements under consideration in Islamic theology, Khârijism is a wide label
applied to many individuals and sub-sects whose views differed greatly from one
another. At least three groups went by
the name of Khârijites. Only the first
consistently follows the logic of Khârijism; the others are compromises or
diluted versions. So, while we mention
the three groups, only the first is important.
1.1.1 Azraqites
The first group is
the Azraqites, names after Nâfi' ibn-al-Azraq, its leader, who was active in
Basra at the time of Yazîd’s death and the rebellion of Ibn-az-Zubayr in
Mecca. This group pointed to Qur’ân
9:81 ff. that those able people who “sit still” and do not “go out” (kharaj)
to fight for the sake of God are unbelievers.
They interpreted this to mean that anyone who did not join the
Khârijites was an unbeliever.
Furthermore they pointed to Qur’ân 2:117 which teaches that such
apostates are destined to hell fire for eternity, and concluded, according to
the injunction of Qur’ân 9:29 to fight unbelievers, that they should attack
non-members of their group, except Christians and Jews, whom the Qur’ân has
declared protected.
Azraqite teaching
reflected Arab nomadic custom whereby members of other tribes were all
potential enemies and, unless there was an alliance, could be attacked whenever
the chance came. The Azraqites not only
maintained themselves by raiding, but reinforced their group solidarity by a
test (mihna) of those who would join their group. The candidate was given a prisoner go kill,
preferably one of his own tribe. This
act would make the new member a target for the revenge of the victim’s family,
and he would have to depend more solidly upon the Azraqites for
protection. Thus religion became the
sole bond uniting the members, and family ties and the authority of elders or
chiefs meant nothing.
In 683 Ibn-al-Azraq
went to Mecca to support Ibn-az-Zubayr, but the latter was interested in
becoming caliph over a stable state and was not comfortable with Ibn-al-Azraq’s
anarchical outlook. Ibn-al-Azraq
returned to Iraq and was pursued by Ibn-az-Zubayr’s army and killed in 685, but
the Azraqites continued as a terrorist band, robbing and killing whenever they
saw the opportunity, until they were wiped out by the Umayyad governor
al-Hajjâj in 698.
1.1.2 The Najdites
The Najdites, a
less important group of Khârijites, are called after their leader Najda
ibn-'Âmir who was also a supporter of Ibn-az-Zubayr’s rebellion in 683. Najda did not stay with Ibn-az-Zubayr, but
gained control of al-Yamâma in central Arabia and eventually most of eastern
and southern Arabia, a more extensive area than the territory controlled by
Ibn-az-Zubayr. Najda was deposed by his
followers and died in 693, yet his party continued to rule until they were
defeated by al-Hajjâj in 693.
Because the
Najdites held political power, they were forced to modify the strict Khârijite
teaching that any Muslim who commits a serious sin is an apostate and should be
killed. Najda, therefore, distinguished
between fundamentals and non-fundamentals in religion. People who sin by ignorance could be
excused, as the leaders of one expedition who appropriated to themselves some
captured women without following the rules for the distribution of booty, but
in fundamental matters of faith and respect for the life and property of other
Muslims there no excuse was accepted.
Another distinction
was made between occasional sin and persistence in sin; thus God would punish
those who sometimes commit theft or adultery or lesser sins, but only those who
persist in such acts would be excluded from the community and destined to
eternal punishment in hell.
Najda also held
that Muslims who did not join his group by “going out” to fight had the status
of hypocrites (munâfiqűn), not unbelievers, as the Azraqites said. Furthermore, Najda seems to have permitted
his followers the practice of taqiyya (cf. Q 16:106), that is, they may
conceal their beliefs if their lives are in danger because of their beliefs,
for instance from non-Khârijite Muslims or from Azraqites.
1.1.3 Other Basra Khârijites
Besides the
Azraqites and Najdites there were other Khârijites in Basra who held even more
mitigated views. Forced to make a
pragmatic adaptation to non-Khârijite rule, their theorists defended abstention
from revolution, or “sitting still”, saying that this did not make someone an
unbeliever; likewise sins such as theft or adultery were not regarded as making
someone an unbeliever. The test of
accepting non-Khârijites as Muslims came when there was a question of giving
them Khârijite women in marriage or selling them slave girls. There is the story of one Ibrâhîm who was
annoyed with his slave girl and threatened to sell her to a bedouin. Some people challenged the legality of his
action, but the majority supported him.
One group which defended such dealings with non-Khârijites was the
Wâqifites, whose name means to “stop” or “suspend” judgement regarding the
ultimate fate of non-Khârijites or of sinners.
The Wâqifites did advocate punishing sinners, but not excluding them
from the community.
As Khârijism
gradually disappeared from the heartlands of the caliphate, moderate Khârijites
continued to govern some outlying states, as 'Umân, while a revolutionary form
of Khârijism took root for a time among the Persians and among the Berbers of
the Maghrib. Khârijism gave them
justification for rebelling against the central government and also for
protesting against the superior status of the Arabs. After the fall of the Umayyads in 750 Khârijism was insignificant
for the development of Islamic theology; yet it is important for having been
the first formulated theological movement in Islam and for having initiated future
discussion of two major theological issues: that of faith and works, and that
of the authority of the Qur’ân.
Khârijite thinking,
however, has always resurfaced in the Islamic world as a rallying point for the
oppressed and politically disaffected, because it justifies revolution against
Muslim authority. We see this in
Hanbalism, Ibn-Taymiyya, Wahhâbism of Saudi Arabia, al-Mawdűdî, and the Muslim
Brothers of Egypt and the movements they spawned. The assassins of President Sadat of Egypt were inspired by
Khârijite principles, since they held that because he did not establish Sharî'a
in full he forfeited his claim to be a Muslim.
In Nigeria the Maitatsine movement acted in a similar way, although they
never were able to articulate their principles. The Izala and other such movements which do not recognize a
secular government in Nigeria all have a touch of Khârijism, even though they
may not go as far as the Azraqites.
1.2 Murji’ism
The word
“Murji’ism” comes from an Arabic word meaning to “postpone” or “defer”, and was
used to mean that the community should postpone judgement on whether a sinner
is a Muslim or not until the next life when God will judge him. The word was adopted because of its use in
Qur’ân 9:106, where the status of three men who stayed away from the battle of
Tabűk was questioned: “[These] others are deferred (postponed) to the command
of God; he will either punish them or forgive them.” Later, verse 118 says they were forgiven.
The history of
Murji’ism, like that of Qadarism, is complicated because later Sunnite writers
listed it among the heresies; so ho respectable man could be included among the
Murji’ites. For example, al-Ash'arî,
writing first as a Mu'tazilite and then as a Hanbalite, condemned Abű-Hanîfa as
a Murji’ite heretic because he was a member of a rival legal school; this was
at a time when the various schools had not yet come together under the banner
of Sunnism. Later al-Baghdâdî (d. 1037)
and ash-Shahrastânî (d. 1153) could not longer regard the founder of the Hanafite
school as a heretic, yet they continued to list Murji’ism as a heresy in order
to complete the list of seventy-two heresies foretold by Muhammad in the
hadîth: “The Jews are divided into seventy-one sects and the Christians into
seventy-two, but my community will be divided into seventy-three sects, only
one of which will be saved.” In fact,
no heretical sect of Murji’ites ever existed; on the contrary, men from the
mainstream of Islam, led by Abű-Hanîfa, applied the term irjâ’ (to
postpone) to several teachings which became part of later Sunnism.
1.2.1 Irjâ’ 1: Sinners are accepted as Muslims
The first
application of irjâ’ was to judgement of the case of 'Uthmân and
'Alî. Judgement should be “postponed”
whether they (and other sinners) are believers or unbelievers, and in this life
both men should be accepted as believers and as rightful rulers.
This position was
directed against the Khârijites’ placing of 'Uthmân, as well as Mu'âwiya and
'Alî, among the unbelievers. It was
also against the proto-Shî'ites who judged that 'Alî was superior. Politically, therefore, the Murji’ites
pragmatically accepted the Umayyads while they were in power, and the right of
Hâshimite superiority. Murji’ism had an
anti-Khârijite tone in Basra, where Khârijites were numerous, whereas in Kűfa,
a stronghold of pro-'Alid sympathies, it was used to oppose Shî'ite attempts to
revolt or condemn the 'Uthmân (Umayyad) party.
Murji’ism may even have been primarily directed against proto-Shî'ites,
since a preponderant number of the Murji’ites listed by Ibn-Sa'd (d. 845) and
Ibn-Qutayba (d. 889) are from Kűfa. By
opposing the divisive tendencies of the Khârijites and Shî'ites and upholding
the unity of the Islamic community, the Murji’ites are forerunners of the
Sunnites.
1.2.2 Irjâ’ 2: Faith does not include works
The second
application of irjâ’ was with regard to faith and practice; practice was
postponed, or placed after, faith. This
application of irjâ’ was demanded by the first. If judgement is to be deferred whether a grave
sinner is a believer or not, he is really accepted as a believer, although
lacking in the practice of faith. That
is because the Arabs’ communal way of thinking made them look upon a believer
primarily as a “member of a believing community” rather than simply “one who
has faith”. If a grave sinner is
accepted as a member of the Muslim community, then he must have faith, and
faith (îmân) must be defined accordingly.
In the Qur’ân and
the Hadîth a distinction is sometimes drawn between îmân and islâm
(and sometimes ihsân, doing good).
Îmân is the profession of faith from the heart and mouth, while islâm
is serving God, especially through salât and zakât. Islamic theological literature gives various ways of
distinguishing the two, mainly by saying that îmân is of a higher or
lesser value than islâm.
Murji’ite theologians, as will be seen, gave îmân a meaning
equivalent to “accepting the official religion”.
Abű-Hanîfa, if we
accept W. Montgomery Watt’s historical investigation, was the chief theologian
of Murji’ism and was not a heretic, but initiated the ideas that were to
prevail in later Sunnism. The problem
he faced was to find an intermediate position between rigorism and laxism. The Khârijite and Mu'tazilite rigorist
position caused moral anxiety, because by sin a person would be deprived of îmân
and membership in the community.
Anxiety was
furthered by the Hanbalite practice of applying the phrase “in shâ’ Allâh”
(If God wills) even to one’s own belief by saying, “I am a believer, if God
wills”. They said this because they
considered obedience to the laws of the Qur’ân part of faith, and they were not
so self-confident to assert that they had fulfilled all the requirements of the
law.
To correct the
rigorist trend some people turned to a laxist position; for example Muqâtil
ibn-Sulaymân (d. 767) said, “Where there is îmân, sin does no
harm”. This statement of Muqâtil (
member of the Zaydite sect) is what later Sunnite writers wrongly considered
central in Murji’ism, and is the reason why they considered Murji’ism a heresy.
Abű-Hanîfa’s
solution was to define îmân as “confession (iqrâr) with the
tongue and counting true (tasdîq) with the heart”.[1] Îmân is thus an intellectual
acceptance of the basic tenets of Islam, and does not include fulfilling the
Law. It is moreover the distinguishing
factor between belonging to the Muslim community or not; someone either has îmân
or he does not. Therefore, Abű-Hanîfa
concluded, it is equal among all Muslims and does not increase or decrease in
degree. Faith stays the same, and only
practice can increase or decrease.
The Hanbalites,
including al-Ash'arî, opposed this definition of îmân, and asserted that
faith includes practice and does increase or decrease. They cited in favour of their view Qur’ân
verses such as 8:2: “Believers are only those whose hearts shake when God is
mentioned; and when his signs are recited to them, it increases their
faith.” The Hanafite view, however,
prevailed in later Sunnite orthodoxy.
The Hanafite
position fostered the belief that every Muslim is assured of ultimately
entering Paradise, provided he does not sin against faith by shirk
(worshipping other beings in association with God), according to Qur’ân 4:48
(& 116): “God does not forgive the associating [of any being] with him, but
he forgives what is less than that to whom he wishes.” Even al-Hasan al-Basrî held that anyone who
affirms the shahâda at his death will enter Paradise. The Hanafites evolved the teaching that a
sinner who has not denied the faith will suffer Hell fire temporarily. According to at-Tahâwî, “If God wills, in
his justice he punishes them in Hell to the measure of their offense, then in
his mercy, at the intercession of intercessors from among the people obeying him,
he removes them from Hell and raises them to his Paradise.” There are many Qur’ânic references to God’s
forgiveness (e.g. 2:284; 3:129; 4:48,116; 5:18,40) and to intercession (e.g.
10:3; 19:87; 20:109; 34:23; 43:86). The
Qur’ân does not explicitly mention Muhammad as an intercessor, yet the idea
became strongly rooted in Islam. The Wasiyya
of Abű-Hanîfa seems to contain the earliest mention of it.
1.2.3 Irjâ’ 3: 'Alî is last in merit
Finally, two other
applications of the word irjâ’ can be mentioned to complete the
discussion of Murji’ism. One of them
was al-Ash'arî’s transformation of the first application of the word to the
case of 'Uthmân and 'Alî. For
al-Ash'arî there was to be no deferment of judgement, but 'Alî himself was to
be deferred to the fourth place, so that the chronological order of the first
four caliphs was also that of merit.
This view (initiated, as we will see, by the 'Uthmânites of the first
'Abbâsid century) became the standard Sunnite view.
1.2.4 Irjâ’4: Paradise is assured
The other
application of irjâ’ was a later transformation of the second
application to the question of faith and practice. Since the word irjâ’ can also mean “to give hope”,
ash-Shahrastânî gave the interpretation that anyone who preserves his faith,
even without practice, is assured of entering Paradise.
1.3 The Mu'tazilite “intermediate position”
of a sinner
Mu'tazilism as a
movement will be discussed in chapter 3.
Yet the fourth of their five principles, that of the “intermediate
position” of a sinner, belongs to this chapter.
Politically, the
Mu'tazilites tried to reduce tension between the constitutionalist and
absolutist factions in the empire, represented by the proto-Sunnites and the
proto-Shî'ites respectively. They did
this by their compromise of recognizing the elections of all the first four
caliphs, although the Basra and Baghdad schools differed concerning the
superiority of 'Alî. Abű-l-Hudhayl and
most of his Basra followers held that the imâm must be chosen by election and should
always be the best man (afdal).
He also maintained that the first four caliphs were each the best men at
the time of their election, yet he refused to pronounce whether 'Uthmân was
right or wrong during his last six years, and whether 'Alî was right or wrong
at the Battle of the Camel. Only
al-Asamm varied from the general Basra view by holding that 'Alî was never
imâm.
Bishr and the
Baghdad school held that an inferior or less qualified man (mafdűl) may
become imâm if there is some ground ('illa) for choosing him. although Bishr recognized the election of
all the first four caliphs, he had a definite preference for 'Alî, and judged
that he was in the right in his disputes; this is because the Baghdad school
favoured the tendency of the proto-Shî'ites and the 'Abbâsids towards
absolutism.
The meaning of the
“intermediate position (al-manzila bayn al-manzilatayn) is that a sinner
is neither a believer nor an unbeliever.
In this life criminals should be punished, but nevertheless accepted as
Muslims. This position is
anti-Khârijite and differs from Murji’ism only by the fact that the
Mu'tazilites taught that the sinner will be eternally in Hell in the next life
if he dies unrepentant, whereas the Murji’ites held that for all Muslims
eventual entrance to Paradise is assured.
1.4 Later developments
The influential
al-Ash'arî, who broke away from Mu'tazilism, maintained the Khârijite position
that faith includes practice and therefore admits of degrees. He thought that the intercession of Muhammad
may gain the release of some Muslims from Hell, but that God may decide to
punish some Muslim sinners eternally in Hell.
Nevertheless he did not go the whole way of the Khârijites regarding the
treatment of sinners in this life.
Although Ash'arî is
the father of Sunnî theology, he was not followed on these points by most Sunnî
theologians. The view of al-Mâturîdî
(d. 944) overruled al-Ash'arî, so that pure Murji’ism is the common teaching:
Faith does not include practice, and no Muslim will stay eternally in Hell.