Anda di halaman 1dari 9

Mu'tazilah: the rise of Islamic rationalism

he Mu'tazilah was the first Sunni during the Umayyads and the Trationalist theological school, distinguished academic, received Abbasids, which created a general founded in Basrah and later devel- his PhD in Philosophy in Pakistan. feeling of bitterness and frustration He conducted post-doctoral among Muslims. They wanted to oped in Baghdad, in particular during beings al-Ma'mun's caliphate from 813 to research in Philosophy, including know whether God or h~unan 833 CE. The main figures behind the Islamic philosophy and theology, were responsible for this bloodshed. inGermany. has published and, if human beings were responestablishment of the school in Basrah extensively inthe area of sible for such corruption, what their were Wasil b. Atta (d. 748)' 'Amr b. , m a ~ a (d. d 762)~Abu-I-Hudha~lal- phi~osophy,includinglslamic punishment would be. The traditionalist Muslims, represented by Allaf (d. 841), hrahim al-Nazzam (d. 845)' Mu'anmar b. Abbad al.-Jubay Philosophy and theology His b a d b. Hanbal (780-855), relied (d. 915), and Abu Hashim b. al-Jubai research interests include: Modern on the literal interpretation of the and (d. 933).The founder of the school of Islamic Thought, hermenuetics and Qu,,hn, Khariiis ecturer in the Baghdad was Bishr b. al-Mu'tamir (d. Heidegger He is a l that the committer of a grave sin 825)' and thinkers such as al-Askafi, Islamic Studies department of the would not possibly be considered a Melbourne Institute of Asian Ahmad b. Daud and al-Ka'bi conbeliever (a Muslim). Another group, Languages and Societies at the tributed to the development of the namely the Maji'is, claimed that the case should be left to God to decide.l school. Al-Ma'mun, the Abbasid University of Melbourne. It is reported that one day in the caliph, encouraged the development secoi-tdcentury of hijra in the city of of rational thinking and philosophy in Baghdad. He also patronised the ~u'tazilahschool, Basrah a person came to the mosque of Hassan aland during his time several Mu'tazilah scholars Basri (642-728)and requested h s views on this issue. reached positions in government administrations. Al-Basri began to think about a proper answer, but Under the influence of the Mu'tazilah theology, before he could give his opinion either Wasil b. 'Atta al-Ma'mun also began an 'Inquisition' on the concept or ' A m b. 'Ubayad (both pupils of al-Basri) broke whch led to the out with the answel; saying: 'The committer of the of the createdness of the ~ k r ' n n , irnprisoi~mentof Ahmad b. Hanbal., who he1.d the grave sin is neither a believer nor a non-believer, but opposite view, and the persecution of his follonrers is in the state between the states of belief and unbein Baghd.ad. But after the death of al-Ma'mun, the lief." It is al.so reported that Hassan al-Basri did not political. situation gradually turned against the like the attitude of his pupil and asked him to leave. Mu'tazilah and the traditionalist theology represented Wasil b. 'Atta and 'Amr b. 'Ubayad left the circle of by the views of Ahmad b. Hanbal was revived during Hassan al-Basri and began to teach their own views al-Mutawakkil i n 847. on different theological problems; they nrere called The Mu'tazilah school emerged as the result of the the Mu'tazilah." ethical and political turmoil of its own time and then hTatt states that there are numerous versions of this ventured into t l ~ realm e of speculative theol.ogy.After storv. The student who withdrew froin Hassan the assassination of 'Uthman b. 'Affan,the third suc- al-~asri'sschool is often assumed to be 'Amr b. cessor to the Prophet M u h m n a d j n 35/656, Muslin~s 'Lbavad I-athe]. than Wasil b. 'Atta, but some sources were divided into various political groups which \\.ere say that 'Aim b. 'Ubawd was a student of Qatada, fighting each other. This political division conti~~ued al-Basrirs successor4 ~ c c o r d i n to ~ Goldzihel; the

DR MUHAMMAD KAMAL Dr Muhammad Kamal~ a

name of the Mu'tazilah school derives from the meaning there would be no prediction of events, and Mestyle of its founders, who renounced the world and human actions would be free. Cicero's argument is abstained from all sorts of material possession and quite simple to understand., as it asserts that if prep l e a ~ u r eOn . ~ the other hand, Ahmed Amin tries to destination prevails, then there can be no free will. connect the name of the school with a Hebrew term, Against Cicero, Sajnt Augustine argues that God, as 'pharisses', which was given to a group of Jewish theo- the Creator of a l l beings, has bestowed power in them logians who advocated ideas similar to those of the to will, but that all wills, ie wicked wills, are human Mu'tazilah; the Hebrew term also means 'to ~ecede'.~ products because wickedness cannot be ascribed to The Mu'tazilah are accused of being d.ualistsand God; that it is not then the case that since God. foreof having their origin in Zoroastrianism because, jn knows what will happen to an individual there is terms of their interpretation of goodness and therefore nothing in the power of our wills; and that: badness, they believe that God is absolutely good and 'Prayers, also, are of avail to procure those things therefore cannot be the source of evil, and that there ~vhich He foreknew that He would grant to those shall be a source for evil, which i.s other than God.7 sv110 offered them; and with justice have rewards Mu'tazilah is the first rational.istic school in the been appointed for good deeds, and punishments history of Islamic thought. It interprets the dogmas for sins. For a man does not therefore sin because of religion i nthe light of human reason. The followers God foreknew that he would sin. Nay, it cannot be doubted but that it is the mcmhimself who sins when of this school are also known as 'Ahl al-'Ad1 wa he does sin, because He, whose o f foreknowledge al-Tawhid', or 'the people of Divine Justice and Divine is infallible, foreknew not that fate, or fortune, or Unity', because they advocated the ideas of the Unity something else would sin, but that the man himself of God and Divine Justice.The theologcal issues diswould sin, who, if he wills not, sins not. But if he cussed by the Mu'tazil.ah, such as free will and preshall not will to sin, even this did God foreknow.'12 destination, the relationship between the Divine , also debated The problem as to whether human beings were free attributes and the essence o f ~ o dwere by some Muslim thinkers during the Umayyad period to determine their own destiny or whether their being before the rise of Mu'tazilah. These thinkers can be was determined by the Creator was also one of the divided into two groups. The first group included al- central disputes in a rift within the Kharijis moveJaad b. Dirhams, al-Maghira b. Saeed. al-Ajali9, and ment. For the first time the Ajaridi-Kharijis split into Jahan b. Safwanlo,who rejected the reality and eter- two sub-groups, the Maimuniyah and the nity of the divine attributes and also believed in the Shu'aibi~ah.~~ The reason for t h s &vision originated createdness of the Qur'an. The second group included in an argument between Maimun and Shu'aib (the 'Umar al-Mqsus, who was accused by the Umayvads leaders of the groups). Shu'aib had some money of corrupting the mind of young Muawiyah b. kid, belonpg to Majmun, and when Majmun demanded his pupil, and executed in 699; Ma'bad al-Jahani,who repavment Shu'aib said to hm: 'I shall g v e it to you, was crucified by Hajaj b. Yousif al-Saqafi,in Iraq; and it ~ d wills.' d Maimun replied: 'God has willed that Ghailan al-Dimashqi, who was crucified on the gate you should give it to me now,' and Shu'aib said: 'If of Damascus on the orders Hisham b. Abdul Malik God has willed it, 1 could not 11ave done otherwise (r. 724-743) .l1 than give it to you.' Maimun continued by saying: These thinkers believed in al-qadnriyyah and 'Verily, God has willed what he commanded; what rejected the doctrine of al-jabriyyah predestination in He did not command, He did not will; and what He Islam. The term 'al-qadariyyalz' is used in the converse did not will, He did not command.' They wrote about sense by Muslim thinkers when describing a doctrine their dispute to their leader Abdul Karim b. Ajarrad, of free will or al-ikhtiyar. 'AI-qadar' stands for some- who was 1 1 1 prison. Abdul Karim responded with: h g quite the opposite of free will in the literal sense. 'What God willed came about, and what He did not But at the same time the term is associated with a ~vlll did not come about; and we do not fix evll upon cluster of Muslim thinkers advocating a doctrine Hirn.'14 Maimun and Shu'aib both believed that their whose phil.osophica1trend is distinct from the literal leader had approved their vjew and they therefore meaning of the term. separated, forming two different groups. The folof Maimun, the Maimuniyah, mTere known for It is worth mentioning that the problem of free will lo~vers was even discussed by Saint Augustine (354-430 CE) their bellef in free will and claimed that although God i.n The City of God before the rise of Islam, and it is was omnipotent, no evil should be attributed to Him. possible that the ideas of tlzis Christian thinker later Therefore, the Shu'aibiyah, followers of Shu'aib, influenced Islamic theology. Saint Augustine's idea became the forerunners of the adherents to fatalism was developed in response to Cicero (106-143 BCE), in Islamic theology. who rejected God's foreknowledge of the future, The theological doctrine of the Mu'tazilah,

however, is crystallised in five major theses, such as Orthodox Clwistians, believing in the reality and eterthe Unity of God, or the relationshp between the nity of the divine attributes. To the traditionalist Divine attributes and the essence of God; al-qadar or Muslims, the unity of God is a relative term; they human free will; the createdness of the Qur'an; the accept the eternity of the attributes, recognising the intermediate position of the grave sinner; and com- ontological status of each attribute as somethmg that manding the right and forbidding the wrong. One really exists eternally and is in the essence of God. of the major theological issues discussed by the Subsequently, tlie essence of God becomes a container Mu'tazilah was the reality and eternity of the divine for many eternal, real entities apart from Him; this view accepts the plurality of attributes and their relationship eternals. Against h s view, the with the essence of God. Before Mu'tazilah explain a new relawe begin to explain the views of tionship between the essence of the Mu'tazilah, it is necessary to S ; the first God and the attributes by saying understand the roots and the rUti0naliSti~ school in t~ at God does not possess the background of this issue in Judeoattributes and they are not in His Christian theology. The belief in the iStOry of Islamic essence, but rather that the divine the reality of the divine attributes essence and the attributes are is generated by the Christian thought. It interprets identical and the same. For doctrine of the Trinity and was discussed by Christian theoexample, we cannot say that the dogmas ofreligion God'sknowledgeissomething logians before the rise of other than God and is eternal, or Mu'tazilah. Yahya b. Adi, one of the Christian theologians, else knowledge will become another independent, eternal remarked that the triad of the being. In this way, the Mu'tazilah Trinity -the Father, the Son and believe in the unity of God. This the Holy Spirit-corresponds to concept of unity is used for bcCo three attributes of God, namely purposes: life, wisdom and power; however, unity or absolute there are different opinions on the nature of the last i) It is used in the sense of i~merical unity, which is the denial of the existence of more two attributes.15Some Chistian thinkers believe that they are mere names or qualities of God and not real than one God. This meaning of the mity is in agreement with the Qur'anic notion of monotl~eism. things as such, whereas the orthodox Christians accept these two attributes as real things, distinct from ii) It is used in the sense of internal unity and simplicity, as that God's essence is free from essential God but not independent of Him. The problem that arises is the question of whether these attributes are and composition. created by God or CO-eternal with Him. The orthoIf we go back to the history of Judeo-Christian dox Christians admit that, as God is eternally living, theology, we find that the argument for the unity of eternally omniscient and eternally omnipotent, there Go d W as p r o p o u n d e d by J U d a eu S P hi1o is no reason for the denial of the eterruty of the second (20 BCE4O CE), and then restated by Spinoza and third attributes. On the other hand, other Chris- (1632-1677 CE) in h s pantheistic philosophy, for the tians reject this claim on the grounds that anything same purposes. For Philo, eternity is an essential eternal is to be called God, therefore the three attrib- quality of God; no other kind of being except Him utes shall be called three gods, which is polytheism. is eternal. This view represents the established Judeo(14) Hence we conclude that the Christians are Christian and Islamic principle of monotheism. Its divided into two groups: the first group believes ~ I I denial is the rejechon of these three Semitic religions. the reality and eternity of the three attributes, and the Spinoza supported the Phxlonic principle by putting second rejects this belief and argues for the unity of the argument into a better logical form, saying that God. l6 if there are two substances like immaterial God and The claim that the Mu'tazilah was inspired by the world, either they should be absolutely different Christian theology comes from this simxlarity or absolutelv same. If there are two absolutely difbetwcen the views of their school and some Christ- ferent substances with nothing in common, one ian theologians, but this is unjust, because a similar cannot become the cause of the other." If the exisinfluence is traceable even on the theological views tence of hvo different suibstances is not possible, then of the traditionalist Muslims. It may be trie that the we must consider the case of the existence of two subMu'tazilah followed the heretic Christians in their stances that are absolutely alike. But such substances views, but the traditionalist Muslims followed the cannot be called two unless, in addition to their

'Mu'~uz~~u~

common qualities, they possess some oth.er quality First, they claim that the eternity of the Qur'an is a in which they differ, 'and then two substances would logical consequence of the acceptance of the divine be granted as having the same attribute, which is attributes as something real and eternal. The speech absurd.'18 of God is an attribute, which is real and eternal and The arguments of the Mu'tazilah and Spinoza are subsists in the essence of God and for this reason we no different from the Philonic principle. All of them need to pronounce the co-eternal characteristic of God emphasise the eternity of God and reject the attri- and His speech. Ahmad b. Hanbal, representing the bution of tlus quality to another kind of being. The views of the traditionahst hfuslirns, states that: 'WhatMu'tazilah have developed another argument in ever is between the covers of the Qtrr'an is the speech support of their conception of divine unity, based on of God, and whatever we hear, read and write is the the nature of each positive predicate or proposition speech of God. Since the speech of God is eternal, then It is also which involves negation. When we describe God and the words are uncreated and eternal mention one of His attributes we implicitly negate reported by al-Shahrastani that the Hanbalis do not another attribute. For exam.pl.e, the proposition say that the Qur'an in this physical form as a printed 'God is merciful' means 'God is not revengeful', and book read by Muslims is eternal and uncreated: 'We then that negation signifies that God is limited.to that should not assert the eternity of the letters and attribute, which is not possible with regard to the sounds, which subsist in our tongues.'25The position unlimited nature of God. l9 Hamdan b. al-Hazil of Ahmad b. Hanbal, however, requires further clarial-Alaat, one of the Mu'tazilah, states: 'If you say God fication, because he asserts the eternity of the is all-knowing then you negate ignorance to be pred- Qu~'alz, and at t l ~ same e time, as it seems, he does not icated of God, and in this way whenever you talk attribute eternitt- to the copy of the Qur'an, which we 1 1 this regard one can about one of His qualities you negate some other read in the present book form. 1 quality in Him.'20According to al-Shahrastani, this conclude that Ahmad b. Hanbal distinguishes of the same kind. The first argument has been borrowed from Greek philosophy between two QZLT'LZ~ZS Al-Nazzam, QZLT'OIT, revealed to the Prophet Muhammad, is and is not founded by the Mu'ta~ilah.'~ a Mu'tazili thinker, has provided. another argument eternal, having its own existence and reality before for the rejection of God's will as a separate entity, by the creation of the world, and the Qur'an comes into giving an equivalent meaning to 'will', like 'need', existence whenever we recite it. I shall explain this which results in action. He says that need is the state view in more detail later, in my discussion on of imperfection and lack and it should not be ascribed Ash'arism. The second argument developed by the tradito God. 22 Mu'amnar b. Abbad al-Sulami, another Mu'tazili thinker, believes that God knows neither tionalist Muslims for the reality and the eternity of 1 1 the verses in the Qur'an itself. the world in which we live, nor Himself, because if the Qur'an is based 0 He has knowledge then that knowledge is either It is written that: within or without God. In the first case there will be 'Lndeed this is a glorious Qur'nli, in a preserved no distinction between the knowing subject and the table known object; both of them become one and the same, and that is not possible; the subject and object must 'I sivear b ~the - shelters of the stars a mighty oath, be different.And if we accept that knowledge is not if you but knew it that this is glorious Qur'an in a within God - that the known object is something dishidden book which none Inay touc11 except the purified; a revelation from the lord of all creatures.'" tinct from the knowing subject - it simply means that the subject is dependent upon the object for 'Ha iiziiii. By the Book urllich makes plain [right and acquiring knowledge. On the other hand, there 1vil.l ~'vrong], We ha\^ re~.ealed the Q Z L T 1 1 1 '~ the ~ Arabic be two different things in the essence of God. For this tongue that you may understand. It is in the not be predicated to God.23 reason, knowledge sl~ould Mother Book with Us, sublime and f ~ dof l ~isdorn.')~ The denial or-t11e acceptance of the divine attributes has led to another problem jn Muslim theology These verses, which contain expressions such as wit11 regard to the nature of the Qi~r'nn - whether 'in a preserved tablet', 'a hidden book', and 'in the it is eternal or created. The traditionalist Muslims Mother Book with Us', for the orthodox Muslims, existed in heaven prior to its argued that the Qza'nn is the Word of God and ex~sted signify that the Q1~1-'aiz before its revelation and even before the creat~on of redation. There is nothing contradictory in such a the world -t h s is a belief in the pre-existent Qz~l.'an, view according to the Mu'tazilal~, because the which is prior in time to the creation of the ~vorld and Qtl1.'i711 describes itself as the Word of God: 'If ~ J idolI l~uman life. There are two arguments developed by ater. seeks asvlurn with you, give him protection so the traditionalist Muslims in support of this i-ie~;~.that he -m hear tlle Word of God, and the11convey

him to safety.'29 Still, this does not assert the eternity of the Qur'an, simply because eternity belongs to God only, and notlung else can be eternal or uncreated. If we accept the eternity of anything except God then we approve polytheism and negate monotl~eism. In our discussion of the problem of the divine attributes, we said that the ~u'tazilah reject the eternity as well as the reality of the attributes. The issue of the uncreatedness of the Qur'an seems to be different. No doubt, the Mu'tazilah do not agree with the traditionalist Muslims on the eternity of the Word of God, but they do not deny the reality of the Qur'an and admit that there was a real Qur'an, which existed before its revelation in a preserved tablet. They also insist that God eyen created it before it w a s revealed, and hence there was no room for the belief in its eternity. It was also inferred from the Qur'anic verse 'thus we narrate to you. the accounts of what has gone before', in order to prove that ' produced ~ after the events mentioned the ~ u rwas in this text.30Inaddition to t h s view, al-Nazzam and al-Mu'ammar have gone further by advocating the idea that God's word is not communicable. Al-Nazzam also denies the preservation of the Qur'an on a tablet, saying that the word is created in a i r in the form of a combination of articulate sounds at the time of its revelation. Al-Mu'ammar believes that the Qur'an is neither the Word of God nor His work, but the production of nature, because God creates only substances and not accidents, and the substances are capable of producing accidents." If the Qur'an is an accident, it is not created by God but produced by a natural body, wluch is located in space and time. Al-Baghdadai also reports that al-Mu'ammar does not ascribe to God the eternal attributes, nor can he believe that God's word is His work, because God does not create accidents. 32 In this way for al-Mu'arnmar, God created bodies, and the accidents are the products of the bodies, as fire produccs burning, and the sun heat, and the moon coloration of things; things are produced by thjs, or by choice, like animals produce motion and rest, aggregation

and segregation. To reiterate, the act of producing a word or the speech of God is either mediated by nature (for example the sound came from the bush to Moses), or bv choice, as in the case of other prophets, who have been given power by God to express the divine law, Relying on al-Mu'ammar's view, the Qur'an belongs to the second category, a human production but divine in its characteristics as it reveals the will of God. Another theologcal problem to be discussed here is free will: whether human beings are free or their actions determined by God; whether Islam is compatible wi.ththe doctrine of free will or not. Majid Fakhri sta'tes that most Muslim historj.ans believe that this problem is the first abstract issue on which the theologians began to argue. 33 The confusion regarding h u m a n freedom arose because the Muslim theologians found verses in the Qur'an for as well as against vredestination. It also happened that in the lustory of political Islam, in particular during the Umayyad period, the predestinarian verses were given preference over the 1 1 favour of free will, for political.reasons. The verses 1 predestination theory does not hold human beings responsible for their actions and consequently the doctrine, with its political implication, provides a. ground for the justification of any kind of oppressive measures and actions taken by the rulers agai.nstthe people. Many Mus1j.m rulers were able to suppress the voices of the intellectuals and the movements against social injustice with the help of some Musl.im scholars by putting emphasis on the verses in support of predestination; In the Qtir'a~zthere are verses that affirm predestination, for example:
V

'Those who disbelieve, whether you forewarn them or not, they ~vill not have faith. God has set a seal upon their hearts and ears; tl~ejr sight is dimmed and grievous punishment awaits them.'3"

'Say: "I possess no pov7er [to give]benefit for myself, nor power to hurt save by God's leave. Had I tlne

and the events that take place as the result of rational choices made by human beings, for both are considered to be predetermined by God..Ths argument also suggests that human essence j.s something fixed and created in its completed form, and that human 'Say: " N o t l ~ g will befall us except that God has beings are not capable of changing their own nature: ordained. He is our Guardian. In God, let the faithif a person is created strong and ruthless, he/she ful put their remains as he/she is, without having the choice and 'And had your Lord willed, whoever is in the earth ability to change that. For example, it is reported by would have believed all together. Will you then Muslim in Sahih that the Prophet Muharnrnad said, coerce the people to become believers? No one is to 'As for any one of you, his generation in the womb believe save by God's leave. And He shall lay His of lus mother is affected in the course of forty days, scourge on those who have no acumen.'37 afterwards an angel is commissioned to breathe the living spirit into him.'The angel is said to ask God, 'No misfortune befalls but by God's leave; ~zrhoever concerning the destiny of the seed, '0 my Lord, misbelieves in God, He shall guide lus heart; God is erable or blessed?' Whereupon one or the other is Knowing of everything.'38 written down. Then, '0 my Lord, male or female?' Again, one or the other is written down. He also 'It is He who has created you from clay. He has writes down the child's manner of conduct, deeds, decreed a term for you and another one set with Him. term of life and sustenance. Then it is said to the angel, Yet you are still in doubt.'39 'Roll up the leaves, for 110 addition shall be made 'AU that is in the heavens and,the earth glorifies God, thereto, nor anything taken there from.'" Although for He is the Mighty, the Wise. To Hun belongs the the traditionalist Muslims, in advocating the doctrine sovereignty of the heavens and earth. He b;ings to of predestination, base their views on the Qur'an, tlus life and causes to die; He is Omnipotent over everydoes not mean that the Qur'alz has left no grounds thing. He is the First and the Last; the Manifest, and for the belief in free will. This is a source of confuthe Unseen; He is Omniscient of e ~ e r y t h i n g . ' ~ ~ sion among Muslims, and the Mu'tazilah attempt to provide logical ground for the doctrine of free will 'There is not a creature on the earth whose sustenance witho~~t relying completely on the Qur'anic verses. is not provided by God. He knows its resting-place However, there is no dsficulty in understanding and its rep~sitory.'~~ predestination as far as it implies that God, who is There are also certain verses that emphasise free will: the Creator of the universe, controls everything, including human actions. The problem arises when 'When we give a man a taste of our mercy, he rejoices we believe in free will as well as the existence of God. in it; but when through his own fault evil befalls him This issue brings to mind the attitude of the Western he is ~ n g r a t e f u l . ' ~ ~ philosophers, such as Friedrich Nietzsche (18441900) and Tean-Paul Sartre (1 905-1 980), towards theism. For 'And say: "(It is) the truth from your Lord. Hence whoever wjll, let hun then believe; and whoever will, these philosophers, theism is incompatible with the let lum disbelieve. Surely we have prepared for the doctrine of free will. As Sartre remarks: 'Everything iniquitous a fire whose pavilion enwraps them.'.i3 is perm~ssible if God does not exist, and as a result man is forlorn, because neither w~thinhim nor 'Momentous signs have come to you from your Lord. without does he find anything to cling to. He cannot He that sees then shall himself have much to gain, start making excuses for himself.'"1n Sartre's view, but he who.is blind to them shall lose much. I am freedom is possible only when one accepts atheism. not your keeper.j4 In this case atheism becomes a philosophical conviction and a practical attitude, for. whoever accepts 'Say: "Men! The truth has come to you from your the existence of an omnipotent bemg above his/he~. Lord. He that follows the right path follows it to his oMTn power wxll nor remain free and cannot become own advantage, and he that goes astray does so at the author of lus/her own life. It is also written in lus own peril. X am not your keeper."45 tl-IatGod has left the non-believers to themthe Qz~r'ali The argument for predestination propounded by selves and does not guide Human freedom, the trad.itionalist Musl.ims j.s based on the notion of for Nietzsche and Sartre, presupposes the denial of causal determination by God of physical events and the existence of God, but how does a Muslim thxnker human activities. These theologians draw no di,s- argue for 11umai-1freedom? How can human beings tinction between natural events in the physical world be free ~ r h e they i ~ believe in the existence of an

knowledge of the unknown, I would have acquired much good, and evil wou1.d not have touched me. I am but a warner and a bea.rer of good tidings for people who believe."'35

omnipotent Being, who is capable of controlling say that God has no power to do evil then it would human actions? mean His power is limited. In opposition to the doctrine of predestjnation, the b) Divine Tustice postulates human freedom, for if ~u'tazilah, perhaps under the influence of Ma'bad human beings are not the authors of their lives then al-Jahani and Ghail.an al-Dimashqi, who advocated they should not be held responsible for their deeds. the doctrine of free will before the rise of the God promises to punish the sinners and this sigMu'tazilah,school, try to discuss the possibil.ityof free nifies that human beings are free. Otherwise, it will under the umbrella of theism. They believe that would be unfair for God to punish human beings predestination is a mere absurdity for sins not created by them, or because it implies imperfection in that they were compelled to the essence of God, and describes con~t If.we were to believe that God as being uniust. Also, it conhuman action is determined bv tradicts the hotion of ~ix7ine retNietzsche and Sartre, GO^, human beings would ribution. Before we begin this deserve no blame and no punishrnent. Human freedom iithen argument, let's examine Low the presupposes the a logical requirement of Divine Mu'tazilah explain the causal relationship between God and the Tustice. Human beings are denial of the existence capable of acting freely and world. This is analysed in two ways: some of the Mu'tazilah hence they are morally responof God, but how does sible. In Kitab al-Usul a2-Khamsn, agree on the direct causal relationship between God and the 'Abd al-Jabbar states that: 'It is a Muslim thinker world, whereas al-Nazzarn and the knowledge that God is al-Mu'ammar believe in the exisremoved from all that is morally argue for human tence of a chain of intermediaries wrong (qabih) and that aU His acts between God and the events that good (hasana).This is are n~orally freedom?, take place in the world. But both explaii~ed by the fact that you goups exclude human action 1 1 knbw all human acts of injustice from this causal relationship, (zulin), transgression (jawr) and the Like cannot be of His creation (min khalqilzi). applying the law of causation only to the pl~ysical phenomena and events in the world. Unlike the traWl~oeverattributes that to Him has ascribed to ditionalist Muslims, they have made a distinction Him injustice and insolence (safah) and thus stravs from the doctrjne of j~stice.'~" between human actions and the events in the Thesecond argument, which is originally given by natural world, and kept the latter only under the l l actions made Wasil b. 'Atta, emphasises the ability of human beings domain of the causal determination. A by human beings, for the Mu'tazilah, flow out of to think and to choose: 'Man knows that he possesses human will and an awareness of the situation. Human capacity and actions within himself and whoever beings, unlike animals and physical objects, know denies that, he denies necessity.' Human capacity is themselves and know what they are doing. On the interpreted as will and knowledge, which are the only basis of this description, human beings will be held distinctions between man and the other living responsible for their bad deeds. In brief, the argu- beings and non-living entities in the world. Then, as ments for free will made by the Mu'tazilah can be Wasil says, 'It is possible for a man who is seated to summarised as follows: stand up, for the man in motion to come to rest, and The first argument deals with the conception of for the man who is speaking to remain silent.'51 Divine Justice, which can be subdivided into two Thirdly; human bejngs are conscious, can choose, parts: but other kkds of beings are deprived of this priva) The Mu'tazilah maintain that God is good and just, ilege. The natural objects and events are determined and that evil and injustice should not be refereed by transient causatioi~. For example the chair is moved to Him. If God creates evil He should be evil, and by my hand, which is moved by me. The movements if He creates justice, then He would be just. But of the chair and my hand belong to two different as God is absolutely good and just, evil and injus- kinds of causation, and the latter can be called immatice cannot be attributed to Him." The moral per- nent because it is by me as an agent. Wasil's idea is fection of God, however, does not sigmfy that God similar to Aristotle's concept of the Prime Mover, has no power to do evil, but consi2s i ; this, that which describes God to be & a position, as an agent, He has power to do everything, and exerts this to make the events happen; the agent is not deterpower only in doing what is good; if we were to nined by a transient cause.

The fourth thesis concerns the position in Islam of the grave sinner and was raised due to the eruption of civil war and political unrest in the Muslim world. The Kharijis believed that the committer of tlne grave sin was an unbeliever and the Maxji'is preferred the case stating that no judgement should be m.ade by human beings. The Mu'tazilah held the view that tlne committer 07 the grave sin is neither a believer nor an unbeliever, but that he/she is in the intermediate position, in a state between belief and disbelief. The fifth thesis, 6ommand.ing the right and forbidding the wrong, has moral and political. significance as it considers obligatory measures to prevent social injustice in society and elevate morality. As 'Abd al.-Jabbarremarks, 'It is necessary, if possible, to reach a point where evil (al-munkar)does not occur in the easiest of circumstances or lead to something worse, for the goal is for evil simply not to Although the Mu'tazilahs discussed these five theses, they disagreed with each other on some points in their analysis of the theses' meanings. Some members of the school of Baghdad, such as al-Ka'bi and Abu al-Qasim al-Balkhi, also incorporated the theory of atomism into their theol.ogica1doctrine.
Rekrences
Al-Shahrastani, op. cit., p139. Tbld, pp48-49. bid. Watt, Montgomery, \V Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, 1997, p47. 5 Zuhdi, Hassan Jarallah AI-hlutazila, Matbaah Misr, al-Qahirah, 1947, p3. 6 Amin, Ahmed. Fajir nl-Islam, Vol. l , Mektab al-Nehza al-Missriah, al-Qahir*, 1950, pp3M-345. 7 Zuhdi, Hassan Jarallah, op. cit., p8. 8 AI-Jaad b. Dirham was from Damascus. He was arrested and sent to Iraq by Hisham b. Abdul Malik, the Umayyad caliph (r. 105/724-125/743). He was beheaded by the Iraqi ruler Khalid b. Abdullah al-Kisri, who was the uncle of Hisham in 125/742. 9 Al-Maghira b. Saeed al-Ajali was killed by the ruler of Iraq, Khalid b. Abdullah al-Kisri, in 119/737. 10 lahan b. Safwan was killed in 128/745 (See al-Tabari, Vol. 9, ~69).

1 2 3 4

11 Al-Dainuri, op. cit., p166. 12 St. Augustine The City of God, translated by Marcus Dods, London, p169. 13 Watt, M Free Will and Predestinatioiz i r ~ Early Islaii~,Luzac Co., London, 1948, p49. 1.4 Ibid.. 15 Wolfson, Harry Ausfxyl~ The Philosophy ofthe Kalain, Haward University Press, Harvard, 1976, p121, 16 Ibid, pp128-131. 17 Ibid. 18 Spinoza, Etlzics, TM Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1934, Prop.111, Prop. V. 19 Al-Shahrastanj, @p. cit., p50. 20 Ibid. 21 b i d . 22 Ibid, p54. 23 b i d , p68. 24 Al-Shahrastani Nihayat ~ 1 - M a i n n z filin i a[-Kalni~l. Oxford University Press, London, 1934, p313. 25 b i d , p314. 26 Qur'an, 85:22. 27 b i d , 56:78. 2s h i d , 43:1-3. 29 Ibid, 9:5. 30 Al-Tabari, Vol. 10, pp285-287. 31 hl-Baghdadai, op. cit., p152. 32 AI-Shahrastani, al-Milal w al-Nihal, Vol. 1, p72. 33 Fakkri, hlajid, op. cit., p57. 34 Qur'an, l:5-6. 35 b i d , 7:18P. 36 bid., 9:51. 37 Ibid, 10:100. 3S Ibid, 64:11. 39 Ibid, 6:2. 40 Ibid, 57:2-3. 31 Ibid,, 1.1:7. 42 .bid, 41.:48. 43 h i d , 18:29. 4 Ibid, 6:104. 45 Ibid, 10:108. 46 Muslim Snhilr, W, p2036, I1 6-8. 47 Sartre, Jean-Paul Existentialisln as Hurnnizism, The Wisdom Library, New York, 1957, p22. 48 Qul'a~z, 16:103. 49 'Abd al Jabbar 'Kitab al-Usul al-Khamsa' in Defenders of Xeasoi~in Islani., Richard C Martin and others, Uneword, Oxford, 1997, p92. 50 Al-Shahrastani, op. cit., Vol. 1, p47. 51 b i d . 52 'Xbd al-Jabbar, op-cit., p93.

Australian Rationalist
. .. .
., .
' '

Editor Elise Jones

Editorial
. ,, . " . .

2 5

'
,

. ...

,
',

. . .' . . ., . . .

Assistant~ditoi ,.'. Don Hurnphrey .., : .. Editorial Consultant Ion Robinson

On the ground in Iraq: an eyewitness account Scilla Elworthy's Baghdad diaries


Priscilla E I w o r t h y

, , . . , .

.,,:

Ten things to know about the Middle East

14

Stephen Zunes
Business Manager Dovid McKenzie

"

THE IMPACT OF ISLAM IN 'THE MODERN WORLD


Islam, its origins and impact on western thought
R o d n e y Blackhirst

19

Contributions in the form of articles, letters, etc, ore welcome and should be sent to: The Editor Australian Rationalist c/- 277 Punt Road Richmond Victoria 3121 email: misselise@unlimitedinternet.com.au Subscriptions and other business matters should be sent to: 1 h i s Sweet RSA Secretary 42 Ruskin Avenue Croydon Victoria 31 36 Tel: (03) 9723 2792 Fax: (03) 9725 8577 email: rationalisi@bigpond.com Membership application form is enclosed. Copyright restrictions apply unless otherwise stated. Views expressed by contributors are not necessarily those of the RSA. Publication details: Australian Rationalist (ISSN 1036-8 1 91) is published by the Rationalist Association of Australia Ltd on behalf of the Rationalist Society of Australia. ACN 004 1 21 1 1'7 Registered office: 42 Ruskin Avenue, Croydon Victoria 3 136 Australia Printed by I P P 8(03) 9428 2958. Distributed by Gordon & Gotch. Print Post approved 349069/00042.

Mu'tazilah: the rise of Islamic rationalism


Muhammad Kamal

27

De-demonising Islam
Phoebe A h m e d

OPINION
Don't panic! A soldier's viewpoint on surviving chemical, nuclear and biological attacks
Red T h o m a s

A just war in Iraq?


lan M c H u g h
DOCUMENT The US and Iraq: an alternative view from America
Dennis , I Kucinich

45

Cover by Simon Kneebone. Illustrations by Waldemar Buczynski. Cartoons by John Kolm and Simon Kneebone.
.. . .. . .

The Rationalist Society of Australia prefers reason to prejudice, science to superstition, evidence to faith; promotes secular ethics and education; holds lectures, conferences and social activities.