Ml II I 1920 A Divisiofi P \q Section MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS SALES AGENTS NEW YORK LEMCKE & BUECHNER 30-32 East 2oth Street LONDON HUMPHREY MILFORD Amen Corner, E.C. SHANGHAI EDWARD EVANS & SONS, Ltd. 30 North Szechuen Road ttu COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY ORIENTAL STUDIES VOL. XV. MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS (Al-Fark Bain al-Firak) BEING THE HISTORY OF THE VARIOUS PHILOSOPHIC SYSTEMS DEVELOPED IN ISLAM BY abu-Mansur 'abd-al-Kahir ibn-Tahir ai-Baghdadi (d. 1037) PART I TRANSLATED FROM THE ARABIC BY KATE CHAMBERS SEELYE, Ph.D. ma N*ro fork COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS 1920 All rights reserved Copyright, 1920 By Columbia University Press Printed from type, January, 1920 NOTE The translation of a work from one language into an- other is always a job more or less thankless. It is difficult to satisfy the masters at each end of the line. This is the case particularly when the languages are as distant philo- logically one from the other as is English and Arabic. The translator desires to reach lucidity of statement; at the same time he wishes to reproduce his author's words with as felicitous precision as is possible. Between these two ideals he may fail to adjust himself with that nicety that reveals the master hand. It is not for me to judge in how far Mrs. Seelye has steered clear of the rocks in her path ; yet I venture to say that her translation gives a very fair picture of the original. The subject which was the theme of al-Baghdadi — the Con- formity or the non-Conformity of Mohammedan religious and philosophic sectaries — is an abstruse one at best. But it has its especial interest. The history of Mohammedan thought, as the theories of the Greek metaphysicians are embroidered on to the dogmas of Islam — is of sufficient in- terest to the general student of the world's intellectual effort to warrant the attempt to do for al-Baghdadi what has already been done for the two other scholars of his age, Ibn Hazm and al-Sharastani and to render his work acces- sible to the student who cannot read him in his Arabic original. In putting out this first part of al-Baghdadi's Compen- dium, it ought to be remembered that the text as published in 1 910 by Muhammad Badr is not in prime condition. It NOTE is based upon one single manuscript; and, even with the corrections suggested by the master-hand of Ignaz Gold- ziher, it does not always inspire in the reader a robust con- fidence. In her Introduction, Mrs. Seelye has endeavored to point out the difference in the form of presentation that distin- guishes al-Baghdadi from Ibn Hazm and al-Sharastani. We may not care to believe that our author has achieved a won- derful performance; but he has, at least, given us some in- teresting material. He was learned and a much-read man ; and though his point of view is strictly conservative, it is one that has to be taken into account, if we wish to under- stand the various influences that have moulded the great Mohammedan world. I wish to join Mrs. Seelye in ac- knowledging the assistance she has received from both Dr. Philip Hitti and Professor Talcott Williams in helping her over many a difficult problem. Richard Gottheil. Columbia University, May 31, 1919. VI CONTENTS Note v Introduction i Translation 19 Part I 21 Chapter I. The Divisions of the Moslem Community 21 Part II 25 Chapter I. Explanation of the Idea 27 Chapter II. The Division into Sects 31 Part III 41 Chapter I. The Sects of the Rawafid 43 Chapter II. The Sects of the Kharijlyah 74 Chapter III. The Doctrines of the Erring Sects among the Mu'tazilite Kadarlyah 116 Bibliography 211 Index 215 vii INTRODUCTION Of Islamic Sects in General To the student who first looks into the tenets of the .Moslem religion, the simplicity of the creed accepted by all who profess Islam, would imply a remarkable unity in this religion. He might at first be tempted to compare it, with favorable results for Islam, to Christianity with its many sects and denominations. Even, when, after a little fur- ther study, he found that there was one great schism in Islam, the one which divides the Shiites and the Sunnites, he could still marvel at a religion of but two sects. But once face to face with the tradition, ' k The Jews are divided into 71 sects, and the Christians are divided into 72 sects, and my people will be divided into 73 sects," his marveling would cease, and his first impulse would naturally be to condemn a religion which justified its schisms by a tradi- tion said to come down from the prophets. The fact of the matter is, that instead of the tradition being invented to justify the sect, the sects have been invented to justify the tradition. In other words, claiming that Mohammed had said that Islam would be divided into 73 sects, many of the theologians of Islam felt it incumbent upon them to bring about the fulfilment of this prophecy, and therefore set to work to make a more or less arbitrary division of the re- ligious system. We must not, however, conclude from this that all but the two sects, the Shiites and the Sunnites, owe their origins to the imaginings of the theologians. Many sects exist which represent important philosophical schools MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS and widely differing trends of thought. It is when these are subdivided, to bring up their number to 73, that the arbitrariness appears, In his article entitled Le denombrement des sectes Ma- hometanes, which appeared in the Revue de VHistoire de la Religion, vol. 26, Goldziher offers an explanation for the origin of this rather extraordinary saying attributed to Mohammed. He tells how allusions to this division by European authors are to be found as early as the sixteenth century. Martinus Crucius in his Turco-Graeciae libri octo, Bale, 1587, p. 66, says: " Superstitio Mohametana est in LXXII principales sectas divisa, quarum una sola in Para- disum dux est, reliquae vero in inferos." Some traditions give the number as 72 instead of 73. Ibn Maja (d. 283) gives 1 three versions of this saying of the prophet : In one it is only the Jews who, with their 71 sects, are opposed to the future division of Islam into 72 sects, the Christians not even being mentioned; in another, in opposition to the 73 sects of Islam, the Jews are mentioned with 71, and the Christians with 72 sects, of which one shall go to heaven, while the rest are condemned to hell; in the third version, the 71 Jewish sects alone are opposed to Islam. Palgrave suggested that the idea of the 72 sects came from the New Testament account of Our Lord's 72 disciples. Goldziher's suggestion is that this tradition is an erroneous interpreta- tion of a word which originally meant something quite dif- ferent, this wrong interpretation having changed the primi- tive form. In other words, " Shu'ab," branches, a term applied very generally to the various ramifications of an idea, came to mean " Firkah," division, and thus sect. The tradition which has become thus misinterpreted is, accord- 1 Abu-'Abdallah Muhammad ibn-Yazld ibn-Maja al-Kazwini. Cf. Brockelmann, Arabische Litteratur, vol. i, p. 163. De Slane, ibn-Khalli- kan, Biographical Dictionary, vol. ii, p. 680. 2 INTRODUCTION ing to Goldziher, the one quoted by the great traditionalist Bukhari 1 (194-256/810-870), " Faith has 60 and some branches, and modesty is one branch of faith " (Le rec. des trad. Mah., ed. Lud. Krehl, vol. i, p. 2). This same tradi- tion appears a little later, as follows : " Faith has 70 and more branches, of which the highest is the belief that there is no God but Allah, and of which the lowest is the taking- out of the oath what is to be rejected; and modesty is a branch of faith" (Muslim, Sahih, ed. Cairo 1288 A. H., vol. i, p. 126) . 2 This use of the word branch gradually came to have the meaning of branching off, dividing; and finally firkah having been substituted for " Shu'ab," we have the tradition of the y2 or 73 sects. Other rather interesting explanations of this arbitrary division are to be found in Steinschneider's article in Z. D. M. G., vol. iv, p. 147. Here the suggestion is made that it can be traced back to the Jewish tradition about Moses and the 70 elders ; that Moses chose six elders from each tribe, except Levi, which being a model tribe would not take offense if slighted, and was therefore asked for only four representatives, Moses himself constituting the seventy-first elder. This number the Mohammedans must increase ; and they therefore claim 73 sects. Another view is that the origin is astronomical, while a third derives it from the 70 languages of the Tower of Babel; and a fourth from the J2 letters in Allah's name, a tradition drawn from the Jew- ish legend of the y2 letters with which Yahweh will free the children of Israel. Disagreements over this hadlth have not, however, been limited to the question of the number. One of the greatest points of difference was the question of how many of these 1 Ibid., vol. ii, p. 594. 2 One of three great traditionalists of the ninth century. Cf. ibid., vol. iv, p. 391. MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS sects would be saved. Some held (among them our author, Baghdad!) that all would be damned except one, the ortho- dox Sunnite sect ; others held that all would be saved except one ; while still others, and among them leading men, denied the tradition altogether. Of this group, one of the greatest was Fakhr al-DIn al-Razi the great preacher 1 (d. 1209) . In his commentary on the Koran (Surah 21, v. 93) he says: " The authenticity of this tradition has been attacked, and it has been observed that if by the 72 sects are meant as many divergencies of the fundamental dogmas of religion, there are not as many existing; but if, on the contrary, it is a question of secondary teachings (derived from these fun- damental doctrines), there are more than twice as many. Besides, some are to be found giving quite the opposite of the text which is generally admitted : that all the sects will go to paradise, one only to hell." Maf&tlh al-ghaib [Keys of the mysterious world], vol. vi, p. 193. Some others who disregard the tradition go to the other extreme. Mak- rizi, 2 for instance, claims that the Rafidfyah are divided into 300 sects. Ibn-Hazm holds that many of these sects arose as followers of false prophets, clever politicians and mystics. As an example of the cleverness of some of the leaders, he mentions abu-Mughith al-Husain al-Hallaj, 8 who appeared to his companions as God, to the princes as a Shiite, and to the people as a pious Sufi. In this connection it is interesting to note how often the leader of a new sect is a mania or freed slave. Shahrasta.nl, Baghdad!, and ibn-Tahir, as orthodox Sun- nites cling to the hadith, and strive to whip the various sects into line, cutting, inserting, and combining, till they reach 1 Clement Huart, Littcrature Arabe, p. 317. 3 Ibid., p. 355. 3 Mystic who was executed in 921 (ibid., p. 269). 4 INTRODUCTION the number of 73. Ibn-Hazm, on the other hand, disre- gards the hadtth altogether. The various Aral) writers who take up the matter of the sects within the " Ummat al-Islam" (the community of Islam) naturally differ in their manner of grouping the sects. Of these writers, the three whom we are going to consider, Baghdad!, Shahrastani and ibn-Hazm, although differing in details, agree more or less in the main divisions. Being orthodox Sunnites themselves, they cannot disagree about that sect. The unorthodox they divide as follows: Shahrastani groups them under the four main headings: Kadariyah, Sifatiyah, Khawarij, and Shiite. Ibn-Hazm: Mu'tazilah (much the same as the Kadariyah), Murji'ah, Kharijiyah and Shiite. Baghdad! : Kadariyah, Kharijryah, Murji'ah, Shiite. In the subdivision of the Shiites, which is the next most important sect to the Sunnites. Shahrastani gives the following divisions: Kaisanlyah, (4), Zaidlyah (3), Imamlyah (1), Ghulat (10), Isma'iliyah (1); total 19. Ibn-Hazm gives only two subdivisions, the Zaidiyah and the Imamlyah (or Rafidiyah). Baghdad!: Zaid!yah ? «' < (|), Kaisanlyah (?), Imamlyah (15) ; total 20. The Ghu- lat he excludes entirely from the Ummat al-Islam. This gives a little idea of the differences abounding over this subject, and the more or less arbitrary character of the whole proceeding. A carefully tabulated list of Baghdadi's divisions will be found at the end of this introduction. As we have already noted, the reasons given for the branching off of the numerous sects vary greatly. Some of the sects are of political origin, others have really to do with some of the fundamental beliefs of Islam, while still others are based merely on quibbling. An example of the greatest political division is to be found in the separation of the Shiites, which was due to the disagreement over 'AH. The Shiites claim that 'All was martyred by Mu'awiyah and 5 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS that his descendants alone are to be regarded as legitimate Imams. By some 'All was even regarded as divine. We read of one sect whose leader having addressed 'AH as a God, was put to death by the latter and his following perse- cuted. Till lately the opinion has been held that the attitude taken by the Shiites with regard to 'AH was greatly influ- enced by Persian mysticism, and the Persian conception of a ruler as more or less divine. This opinion has, however, been questioned by Goldziher. The tendency to regard 'AH as a God naturally increased after his death. To the orthodox Sunnite, clinging to the creed., " There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is the prophet of Allah," such a view is little short of blasphemy. Once divided on this point, these two, the Sunnite and the Shiite, developed apart from each other, and include in the ramifications of their numerous sects almost every conceivable view. The main divisions of the Shiites have already been given ; the Sunnites recognize no sects within the orthodox fold, but are divided into the four great schools, each of which recog- nizes the other. These are the Hanifite, the Malikite, the Shafiite, and the Hanbalite. With such an array of sects as the above statements in- dicate, we are led to wonder what were some of the causes for disagreement. The average student of Islam is likely to imagine that every Moslem must accept the Koran as infallible. After a glance at some of the Islamic works on sects, however, it is apparent that the only thing upon which all Moslems agree is the creed : " There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is the prophet of Allah." Every- thing aside from this has, at some time or other, been attacked by some scholar or leader. If these men limited themselves to attacking or arguing over questions really vital to Islam, such as the necessity for daily prayers, the pilgrimage, the giving of alms, etc., a Mohammedan work 6 INTRODUCTION on sects might prove most interesting reading. As a mat- ter of fact, these subjects seem to occupy them far less than their hair-splitting quibbles over the question of whether Allah touches his throne or not, whether a man is a believer, an unbeliever or a heretic, whether an interrupted prayer is acceptable, etc. These discussions strongly re- semble in pettiness the scholastic debates of the mediaeval Christian Church, regarding the number of angels able to stand on a pin-point at one time, or the consequences at- tending a mouse's eating the consecrated host. The result is rather dull reading, and at times appears not only dull but exceedingly childish. Al-Baghdadi Accounts of Baghdadi's life are to be found in the fol- lowing works : De Slane, Ibn-Khallik&n, vol. ii, p. 149. Subki,Tabakat al-Shafi'lyah, vol. iii, p. 238. Wiistenfeld, Die Shafiiten, no. 345 ; Abhandlung. der Ges. der Wiss. Gottingen, vol. 37, p. 345. Brockelmann, Geschichte der Arab. Lit., vol. i, p. 385. Friedlander, /. A. O. S., vol. 28, p. 26. Goldziher, Vorlesimgen iiber den Islam, p. 160; Z. D. M. G., vol. 65, p. 349. Encyclopedia of Islam, under Baghdad!. Abu Mansur 'Abd al-Kahir ibn-Tahir ibn-Muhammad al-Baghdadl (d. ^29/1037), was, according to ibn-al-Salah, the son of Tahir ibn-Muhammad al-Baghdadl (d. 283). Subki, who quotes ibn-al-Salah, however, is not sure of this statement, he merely gives it for what it is worth (Subki, Tabakat al-Shafi'lyah, vol. ii, p. 228). 'Abd al-Kahir was a native of Baghdad, but while still young went with his father to Nisapur where he studied 7 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS numerous sciences. Subki, in his long account of him {Tabakat al-Shafi'lyah, vol. iii, p. 238), says he was versed in 17 sciences. He became especially famous for his skill in arithmetic, although theology attracted him most. He was a pupil of abu-Ishak al-Isfara'ini, whom he succeeded after the latter's death in 418 (1027) as teacher and leader. The revolt of the Turkomans, however, forced him to leave the town in 429 (1037) and take refuge in Isfarain. But the joy of the natives of this town at having such an emi- nent scholar in their midst was short-lived, for he died there that same year and was buried by the grave of his former teacher abu-Ishak. Ibn-Khallikan tells us that the haHz, k Abd-al-Ghaffar al- Faris, mentions him in the Siyak, or continuation of the History of Nisapur, and says : " He came to Nisapur with his father, and possessed great riches, which he spent on the learned (in the law) and on the Traditionalists. He never made his information a source of profit. He com- posed treatises on different sciences and surpassed his con- temporaries in every branch of learning, seventeen of which he taught publicly." The longest account of him is to be found in Subki's Tabakat, where almost a page is devoted to a list of his many virtues and accomplishments. His generosity is especially noted; and a rather amusing poem of his, on his poverty-stricken condition due to this gener- osity is quoted. Subki divided the followers of the great leader al-Ash'ari (vol. ii, p. 25) into seven ranks, placing Baghdad! in the third rank. Fakhr al-Din al-RazT 1 also mentions him in his "Al-Rvyad al-Mii c allakah" {Hanging Gardens) . According to Subki's account he was a voluminous writer. In fact, he devotes an entire half-page to a list of his writ- 1 Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. ii, p. 652. 8 INTRODUCTION ings, which number nineteen. And even in as long a list as this he omits some which Baghdad! himself mentions in his Fark. The following are the most important : Al-Fark bain al-Firak (the work under considera- tion). Kitab al-Milal wafl-Nihal (book on religions and re- ligious sects). Kitab Imad H MawaYith al-Ibad (the laws regard- ing inheritance of the worshippers). al-Takmilah ft I hisab (on mathematics). To these may be added : Kitab al harb 'ala ibn-Harb (against the Mu'tazilite Ja'far ibn-Harb). The Ruyat Allah, a dogmatic argument over Surah 75, v. 23. In his work entitled Milal wafl-Nihal, now in the Con- stantinople library, 'Asir EfYendi no. 555, he treats in much more detail of some of the sects on which he therefore merely touches in his Fark. The manuscript of this work, number 2800 of the Berlin library, is described in Ahlwardt's Verzeichniss der ara- bischen Handschriften, vol. ii, p. 681. He reports the manuscript as untidy, with loose quires and leaves, and a little worm-eaten. Some of the pages in the main part of the book are missing, as well as the end of the fifth chapter of the fifth part. 'Abd al-Kahir al-Baghdadfs work, Al-Fark bain al-Firak, is based on the tradition we have already mentioned: " There shall be 73 sects in Islam, of which one only shall be saved." Being thoroughly orthodox, he begins by stress- ing this last point, that one sect alone shall be saved. This sect, the orthodox Sunnites, he treats at the very end of his book. 9 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS He divides his work into five parts : Part one deals with the tradition already mentioned. Part two, in two chapters, gives a brief treatment of the manner in which the community came to be divided into 72 sects, and a very brief statement of the views of the most important sects. Part three takes up in eight chapters the opinions of the unorthodox sects, and gives an explanation of the heresy of each. Part four deals in seventeen short chapters with the sects originating in Islam, but not now found in it. Part five takes up in five chapters the one orthodox sect. The beginning of his book, which gives a clear summary of the various sects, short historical sketches, and a certain amount of traditional instances, is quite acceptable reading. When, however, he comes to treat of the philosophical quib- blings of many of the sects, he becomes rather hopelessly involved. We cannot, however, give Baghdad! all the blame, for doubtless the apparent senselessness of these quibblings arose with the men whose views he is vainly trying to give us. Whatever the cause, there are undoubt- edly times when we are tempted to quote the Arab poet, who, when asked to explain the meaning of some of his poetry, answered : " When those verses were written, two persons understood them, Allah and I; now only one per- son understands them, Allah." In conclusion, it may be rather interesting to compare the different attitudes and methods of the three men who have given us the fullest accounts of the 73 Mohammedan sects. We do not include Shuhfur ibn-Tahir, because his work so closely resembles that of Baghdad! that it is thought by some to be a resume of the latter's. 10 INTRODUCTION 'All ibn-Ahmad ibn-Sa'id ibn-Hazm ibn-Ghalib ibn-Salih Abu-Muhhammad was born in Cordova in 384/994. Hav- ing been forced out of political life by a change in govern- ment, he was compelled to turn from political matters to scholarly ones. And as one of the results we have his great work, Kitab al-Milal wa'l-Nihal, a part of which Fried- lander has translated in his article in the Journal of the American Oriental Society, vols. 28, 29. Although an orthodox Moslem himself, he was exceedingly fair and started out by stating that he would never charge an oppo- nent with heresy unless he could justify his charge by a verbal quotation from the opponent's own writing, "be he an unbeliever, a heretic, or a mere sinner, since lying is not permissible against any." Unfettered by the tradition of the 73 sects, he is able to make logical division of the sects. Friedlander says : " We may safely assume that each name recorded in the Milal wal-Nihal represents an historical fact, and not as in the case of all other writers, a mere product of the imagination." What this author is especially remarkable for is his " breadth of outlook, power of ob- servation, and fairness of judgment." Shahrastani was born in 467 or 479, and died in 548/ 1 153. His work entitled Kitab al-Milal wa'l-Nihal " has systematic roundness and scientific classification," but, al- though he attempts to be fair, and succeeds far better than Baghdad!, there are times when the views of the heretics are too much for even him, and he is forced to give vent to his feelings. We thus have the three points of view : our author Bagh- dad!, who starts out by saying that all but the one sect, the orthodox, are condemned to hell fire, and goes on to enu- merate all those condemned sects, discussing and opposing their views, and periodically breaking forth in an excla- mation of gratitude that " we are not as they " ; Shahras- 11 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS tan!, more scholarly, his work more carefully arranged, fairer, trying to he neutral, but at times failing; and Ibn- Hazm, absolutely neutral and bound by no hampering tra- ditions. Since Shahrastam and Baghdad! represent the more sim- ilar treatment, let us consider the two* for a moment. The first important thing to note is that Shahrastam devotes two-thirds of his book to sects outside of Islam. In the first volume one part deals with the 73 sects of Islam, and the second part with some of the religions outside of Islam. The religions treated in the second part are those which possess a Book, and those which have something resem- bling a revealed book. Under the former he takes up the Jews and Christians, and under the latter the Magians and the Thanawiyah, those who accept two principles. In the second volume he treats of the various philosophies, the Greek, the peripatetic, the Hindu. Some space is given to Buddhism, and many discussions are recounted between Moslem and other teachers and leaders. Baghdad!, on the other hand, merely mentions these other religions in passing, devoting practically the whole of this work to the sects within the Ummat al-Islam. It is likely that he treated these other religions in detail in his Milal wa'l- Nihal, and naturally avoided repetition here. As we have already seen, in the matter of treatment, Shahrastam merely gives the account of the various sects, and only once in a while expresses his own opinion. Baghdad!, on the contrary, cannot refrain from challenging and criticizing these heretical views, so that at times his history of the sects becomes a polemical discussion. He opens the book with a statement of what he considers constitutes an ortho- dox Moslem, and although those outside of this pale may have some of the privileges of the faithful, such as being buried in a Moslem graveyard, praying in the mosque, shar- 12 INTRODUCTION ing in the booties of Jihad ; nevertheless, they may not have prayers said over their bodies, animals slaughtered by them are unclean, and they may not marry an orthodox Moslem. Having thus shown us clearly where he himself stands, he does not hesitate to condemn the heretics — some with rather amusing humor, some with rather biting sarcasm, and others by quick dismissal as not even worth discussing. In fact, the note which runs through the whole part dealing with the orthodox is: " Thank God we are not as they." Unfortunately, Muhammad Badr of Cairo, who edited this work, has let pass many errors, many of which Gold- ziher has corrected in an article in the Z. D. M. G., 191 1, vol. 65. Others we have corrected. Many of the Koran references are wrongly numbered, and some of the proper names and sects are incorrect. We should, however, be grateful to him for making this work available to us, even in such an incomplete form. As will be seen, there are several places where the editor himself states that the manu- script was not clear, and in one or two cases there are whole pages missing. A rather amusing error is the one in the table of contents on page 21, where it is stated that the section will be divided into eight chapters. Six only are then enumerated, but in the section eight headings are given. Unfortunately, the manuscript being unavailable at this moment, we cannot say whether this was a slip of the author or of the editor. It is more likely to be the latter. As to the poem on page 40, it is a long, uninteresting one which has nothing to do with the subject in hand ex- cept at the beginning and the end ; in the translation, there- fore, we have given only the first and last verses. 13 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Table of Sects I. Rafidiyah (20) A. Zaidiyah (3) 1. Jarudiyah 2. Sulaimamyah or Jarlriyah 3. Butriyah B. Kaisanlyah (2) 1. Followers of ibn-al-Hanafiyah 2. Muhammadlyah C. Imamiyah (15) 1. Kamiliyah 2. Bakiriyah 3. The Ghulat 4. Mubarrakiyah 5. Kat'iyah or Twelvers 6. Hishamiyah 7. Zarariyah 8. Yunusiyah 9. Shaitaniyah 10. Muhammadlyah * 1 1 . Nawawiyah * 12. Shumaitiyah * 13. Mu'ammariyah * 14. Isma/iliyah 15. Musawiyah Starred sects are mentioned in the list by BaghdadT but apparently not considered important enough to treat. II. Al-Khawarij (20) 1. The first Muhakkamah 2. Azarikah 3. Najadah 4. Sifnyah 14 INTRODUCTION 5. 'Ajaridah * (mentions ten in heading, treats eight) a. Khazimiyah Ma'lumiyah Majhuliyah b. Shu'aibiyah c. The People of Obedience d. Saltiyah e. Akhnasiyah f. Shaibaniyah g. Ma'badiyah 6. Rashidiyah 7. Mukarramiyah a. Hamziyah * b. Shamrakiyah * c. Ibrahimlyah * d. Wakifiyah* e. Ibacliyah Hafsiyah Harithiyah Khalaf lyah and Tha'allbah are not given in the list but are treated in the chapter. The starred sects are not treated in the chapter. III. Mn'tazilites or Kadariyah (20) 1. Wasiliyah 2. 'Amriyah 3. Hudhailiyah 4. Nazzamlyah 5. Aswariyah 6. Mu'ammariyah 7. Iskafiyah 8. Ja'fariyah 9. Bishriyah MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS IO. Murdariyah II. Hishamiyah 12. ThamamTyah 13- Jahiziyah 14- Hayitiyah 15- Himariyah 1 6. Khaiyatlyah 17- Followers of Salih Kubbah * 18. Musaislyah * 19. Shahhamiyah 20. Ka'biyah 21. Jubba'iyah 22. Bahshamiyah Starred sects not treated in chapter, although mentioned in list. 14 and 15, although in list, are treated under the Ghulat, that is, those sects which started in Islam but are too heretical to be included in the 73. IV. Murji'ah (5) 1. Yunusiyah 2. Ghassaniyah 3. Thaubaniyah 4. Tumanlyah 5. Marisiyah V. Najjariyah (2) 1. Barghuthiyah 2. Za'faraniyah Mustadrikah VI. Jahmiyah Bakriyah Darariyah VII. Karramiyah (3) 1. Hakakiyah 2. Tara'ikiyah 16 INTRODUCTION 3. Ishakiyah Total seventy-three. LIST OF SECTS OUTSIDE OF THE PALE OF ISLAM Sababiyah Ghulat Mughiriyah Bayamyah Harbiyah Mansuriyah Janahiyah Ghurabiyah Mufauwadah Dhimmiyah Sharriyah Numainyah Haluliyah Ashab al-Ibahah xAshab al-Tanasukh Hayitiyah (of the Kadariyah) Himariyah Yazidiyah (of the Khawarij) Maimuniyah Batiniyah (of the Rafidiyah) Kate Chambers Seelye. 17 AL-FARK BAIN AL-FIRAK In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful! Praise be to Allah, the maker and originator of all Creation, the manifestator and sustainer of truth! Ke it is who maketh of truth an armor for him who believeth in it, and a source of life to him who relieth upon it. He maketh wrong a stumbling-block to the one who seeketh after it, and a cause of humiliation to him who pursueth it. Prayer and Praise be to the Purest of the Pure, and the Model Guide, Muhammad, as well as to his kin, the choicest among mortals, the lighthouse of guidance. You have asked me for an explanation of the well-known tradition attributed to the Prophet with regard to the divi- sion of the Moslim Community into seventy-three sects, of which one has saving grace and is destined for Paradise on High, whilst the rest are in the wrong, leading to the Deep Pit and the Ever-flaming fire. You requested me to draw the distinction between the sect that saves, the step of which does not stumble and from which grace does not depart, and the misguided sects which regard the darkness of idol- atry as light and the belief in truth as leading to perdition — which sects are condemned to everlasting fire and shall find no aid in Allah. Therefore, I feel it incumbent upon me to help you along the line of your request with regard to the orthodox faith and the path that is straight — how to distinguish it from the perverted heresies and the distorted views, so that he who does perish shall know that he is perishing and he that is saved that he is so saved through clear evidence. 19 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS The answer to your request I have included in this book, the contents of which I have divided into five parts, to wit : A chapter in explanation of the tradition transmitted to us concerning the division of the Moslem community into 73 sects. A chapter dealing with the shame that attaches to each one of the sects belonging to the erring heresies. A chapter on the sects that are akin to Islam, but do not belong to it. A chapter on the saving sect, the confirmation of its sacredness and a statement concerning the beauty of its faith. These are the chapters of the book; in each one of which we shall mention the conclusions that are necessary. So may it please Allah. PART I An Explanation of the Well-Known Traditions in Regard to the Divisions of the (Moslem) Community The tradition has come down to us through the follow- ing chain of authorities : abu-Sahl Bishr ibn- Ahmad ibn- Bashshar al-Isfara'mi, 'Abdallah ibn-Najiyah, Wahb ibn- Bakiyyah, Khalid ibn-'Abdallah, Muhammad ibn-'Amr, abu- Salmah, abii-Hurairah that the last said, the prophet of Allah — peace be unto him 1 — said : " The Jews are divided into 71 sects, and the Christians are divided into 72 sects, and my people will be divided into 73 sects.'' And we are told by abu-Muhammad 'Abdallah ibn-' AH ibn- Ziyad al-Sumaidhi, who is considered of interest and authoritative, that he heard through the following chain of authorities : Ahmad ibn-al-Hasan ibn-'Abd al-Jabbar, al- Haitham ibn-Kharijah, Isma'Il ibn-' Abbas, 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn-Ziyad ibn-An'am, 'Abdallah ibn-Yazid, 'Abdallah ibn- 4 Amr, that the prophet of Allah said : " Verily there will happen to my people what happened to the Banu Isra'il. The Banu Isra'il are divided into 72 religious bodies, and my people will be divided into 73 religious bodies, exceed- ing them by one. All of them are destined to hell fire ex- cept one." They said : " O, prophet of Allah, which is the one religious body that will escape the fire?" He said: 1 The expression of blessing and peace always follows the name of the Prophet, as well as that of the leading- Companions and sheikhs, and the words ' mighty and powerful ' the name of Allah. After the first time we will not repeat these devout expressions. 11 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS " That to which I belong, and my companions." The Kadi abu-Muhammad 'Abdallah ibn-'Umar, the Malikite, says: " We have it from my father, who had it from his father, that Walid ibn-Maslamah said that al-Auza'i said that we are told by Katadah, who had it from Anas, who had it from the Prophet : ' Lo, the Banii Isra'il are divided into 71 sects, and lo my people will be divided into 72. sects, all of them destined to hell fire except one, and these are the true believers/ " 'Abd al-Kahir says that there are many Isnads (chains of traditions) for the tradition dealing with the division of the community. A number of the following Companions have handed it down as coming from the Prophet: Anas ibn-Malik, abu-Hurairah, abu-1-Darda, Jabir, abu-Sa'id al-Khidri, Ubai ibn-Ka'b, 'Abdallah ibn- ( Amr ibn-al-'As, abu-Imamah, Wathilah ibn-al-Aska' and others. It is also handed down that the pious caliphs men- tioned that the community would be divided after them, that one sect only would save itself, and that the rest of them would be given to error in this world, and to destruction in the next. Moreover, it is reported of the Prophet that he condemned the Kadarites, calling them the Magians of this people. It is also reported that he condemned the Murjiites together with the Kadarites. To this is added the report that he condemned the heretics, i. e. the Kharijites. While it is handed down from the leading Companions that he condemned the Kadarites and the Murjiites and the heret- ical Kharijites. 'All, Allah have mercy on him, mentions these sects in his Khutbah (sermon) which is known as the Zahra' ; in it he declared himself not responsible for the people of Adimawat. 1 Every man of intelligence among the authors of the treatises ascribed to . . . (text not clear) has known that the Prophet in speaking of the divisions that 1 We have been unable to find any explanation for this word. 22 EXPLANATION OF TRADITIONS were to be condemned and the members of which were des- tined for hell-fire, did not mean the various legal schools, who, though they disagreed as to the derivative Institutes of law, agreed concerning the fundamentals of religion. Now the Mohammedans held two opinions as regards the deductions drawn from the fundamental principles of right and wrong. The first looks with approval upon all those who promoted the Science of derivative Institutes, For it, all the legal schools are right. The second approves, in con- nection with each derivative Institute, one of the parties contending about it and disapproves all the others — with- out, however, attributing error to the one who goes astray in the matter. And verily the Prophet, in mentioning the sects condemned, had in mind only those holders of erring opinions who differ from the one sect which will be saved, in such matters as ethics and the unity (of God), promises and threats (regarding future life), predestination and free- will, the determination of good and evil, right guidance and error, the will and wish of God, prophetic vision and understanding, the attributes of Allah, his names and qualities, any question concerning what is ordered and what is permitted, [signs for] prophecy and its condi- tions, and similar questions in which the Sunnites and the (Moslem) community from among the followers of ana- logical deduction and tradition agree upon the fundamen- tals, and in which they are opposed by the holders of erring opinions, namely the Kadariyah, the Khawarij, the Rawafid, the Najjariyah, the Jahmiyah, the Mujassimah, the Mus- habbihah, and those who follow them * among the erring sects. And, verily, those who differ in regard to ethics and the unity (of God), the worship of graves and of ancestors, are agreed in regard to such matters as celestial vision, 1 Not clear in the original. 23 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS divine attributes, what is ordained and what is permitted. But in regard to the conditions of true prophecy and the Imamship, some of them accuse each other of unbelief. So that the tradition handed down in regard to the breaking-up of the community into 73 sects must be understood to refer to differences such as these — not to those on which the lead- ing jurists differed in the matter of Institutes drawn from the fundamental principles of right and wrong. Is it not that in those things in which they differ as regards Insti- tutes, it is not at all a question of unbelief or of error? I shall mention in the following chapter the various sects to which the tradition refers concerning the subdividing of the Islamic world, so it please Allah. 24 PART i This part treats of the manner in which this community has been divided into 73. It also contains an explanation of the sects which are collected under the general name of the Millat al-Islam. There are two chapters in this part : one deals with the explanation of the idea underlying the different sects included under the general name of Millat al-Islam; the second concerns the explanation of how the community has become divided, and the enumeration of its 73 sects. I shall mention in each one of these chapters what is necessary, so it please Allah. 25 CHAPTER I Explanation of the Idea This chapter explains the idea underlying the expression Millat al-Islam as a general designation of the various sects. Before going into details it is necessary to say that those who belong to Islam are divided in opinion in regard to those to whom the general name of Millat al-Islam is given. Abu-1-Kasim al-Ka'bi 1 claims in his treatises, " When one uses the expression Ummat al-Islam, it refers to everyone who affirms the prophetic character of Muhammad, and the truth of all that he preached, no matter what he asserted after this declaration." Others claim that Ummat al-Islam comprises all who acknowledge the necessity of turning in the direction of the Ka'bah in prayer. The Karramiyah, the Mujassimah (corporealists) of Khurasan, say that the expression Ummat al-Islam comprises all those who enun- ciate the two parts of the creed. They say everyone who says, " There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah," is verily a true believer, and belongs to the Millat al-Islam, no matter whether he is sincere or in- sincere, hiding unbelief and heresy under this assertion. Thus they claimed that those who were insincere in the time of the prophet Allah were really believers, and that their faith was like the faith of Gabriel and Michael and the prophets and the angels, in spite of their joining treachery to their profession of the two parts of the creed. This 1 Haarbrucker's Translation of ShahrastanI, vol. ii, p. 400. 2 Surah 49, v. 14. Cf. Haarbriicker, ShahrastanI, vol. i, pp. 37-38. 27 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS opinion, together with the opinion of al-Ka'bi in his expla- nations of the name of Islam, is refuted by the saying of the 'Isawiah among the Jews of Ispahan. For verily they accept the prophetic character of our prophet Muhammad, and the truth of all his teachings. But they claim that he was sent to the Arabs, not to the Banu Israel. They say also that Muhammad is the prophet of Allah. Nevertheless, they are not numbered among the sects of Islam. And some of the Sharikaniyah 2 among the jews relate concerning their leader known as Sharikan that he said : " Indeed Muhammad was a prophet of Allah to the Arabs, and to the rest of mankind, with the exception of the Jews." And also that he said : " The Koran is true and the Adhan [the announcement of prayer], the Ikamah, the performance of io the five prayers, the fast of Ramadan, and the pilgrimage of the Ka'bah, all these are truths, but they are prescribed for the Moslems, not for the Jews." Often some of the Sharikaniyah have kept some of these observances. They have professed the two parts of the creed : " There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is the prophet of Allah." They have also asserted that his religion is true. Yet, in spite of this, they are not of the Ummat al-Islam, because of their profession that the law of Islam has no binding force upon them. And as regards the saying of one who uses the expression Ummat ul-Islam as a term to be applied to all who see the necessity of turning in prayer to the Ka'bah situated in Mecca, it must be remembered that some of the legalists of al-Hijaz have favored this view, but the theoretical reasoners (ashab cd-ra'i) rejected it, according to what Abu Hanifah reports, to the effect that he who be- lieves in turning to the Ka'bah in prayer, even if he is in doubt as to its location, is in the right. But the traditional- 1 Poznanski in Revue des Etudes Juives, LX : 311. 28 EXPLANATION OF THE IDEA ists (ashab al-Hadlth) do not hold the belief that he is orthodox who doubts the location of the Ka'bah, just as they do not accept one who doubts the necessity of turning to the Ka'bah in prayer. The true view, according to us, is that the Ummat al- Islam comprises those who profess the view that the world is created, the unity of its maker, his preexistence, his attri- butes, his equity, his wisdom, the denial of his anthropo- morphic character, the prophetic character of Muhammad, and his universal Apostolate, the acknowledgment of the con- stant validity of his law, that all that he enjoined was truth, that the Koran is the source of all legal regulations, and that the Ka'bah is the direction in which all prayers should be turned. Everyone who professes all this and does not follow a heresy that might lead him to unbelief, he is an orthodox Sunnite, believing in the unity of Allah. If, to the accepted beliefs which we have mentioned he adds a hateful heresy, his case must be considered. And if he in- n cline to the heresy of the Batimyah, or the Bayamyah, or the Mughirah, or the Khattabiyah. who believe in the divine character of all the Imams, or of some of them at least, or if he follows the schools which believe in the incarnation of God, or one of the schools of the people believing in the transmigration of souls, or the school of the Maimuniyah of the Khawarij who allow marriage with one's daughter's daughter or one's son's daughter, or follow the school of the Yazidiyah from among the Ibadiyah with their teaching that the law of Islam will be abrogated at the end of time, or if he permits as lawful what the text of the Koran for- bids, or forbids that which the text of the Koran allows as lawful, and which does not admit of differing interpretation, such an one does not belong to the Ummat al-Islam, nor should he be esteemed. But if his heresy is like the heresy of the Mu'tazilites, or the Khawarij, or the Randah of the 29 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Imamiyah, or the Zaidiyah heresies, or of the heresy of the Najjariyah, or the Jahmiyah, or the Darariyah, or the Mu- jassimah, then he would be of the Ummat al-Islam in some respects, namely : he would be entitled to be buried in the graveyard of the Moslems, and to have a share in the tribute and booty which is procured by the true believers in war with the idolators provided he fights with the true believers. Nor should he be prevented from praying in the mosques. But he is not of the Ummat in other respects, namely that no prayer should be allowed over his dead body, nor behind him (to the grave) ; moreover any animal slaughtered by him is not lawful food, nor may he marry an orthodox Moslem woman. It is also not lawful for an orthodox man to marry one of their women if she partake of their belief. 'AH ibn abi-Talib said to the Khawarij : " There are three things binding upon us, that we should not start fighting with you, that we should not forbid you the mosques of Allah so that you may mention the name of Allah in them, and that we should not hinder you from sharing the booty as long as your allegiance is with us. Moreover, Allah knows best." 30 CHAPTER II The Division into Sects 12 Contains an explanation of the manner in which the Ummat differed, together with an enumeration of the num- ber of its 73 sects. At the death of the prophet, the Moslems followed one path in the fundamental principles of religion and its de- duced corollaries, except in the case of those who agreed in public but in private were hypocrites. The first disagree- ment came when the people disagreed over the death of the prophet. Some among them asserted that he had not died, and that Allah had only wished to raise him to himself as he had raised 'Isa ibn-Maryam to himself. This difference ceased, and all were agreed upon his death, when abu-Bakr al-Siddik brought to them the words of Allah to his Prophet : " Verily thou shalt die, and they shall die." He said to them : " Whoever worshipped Muhammad, verily Muhammad is dead ; whoever worshipped the Lord of Mu- hammad, lo verily he is living and dieth not." Then they differed over the Prophet's place of burial, the people of Mecca wishing the body to be taken to Mecca because that was his birthplace, the place of his calling, the place to which he turned in prayer, the place of his family, and there is the grave of his ancestor Ishmael; while the people 13 of al-Madmah wished him to be buried in that city because that was the home of his flight and the home of his Helpers. Others desired the body to be taken to the Holy Land and be buried in Jerusalem by the grave of his ancestor, Abraham the beloved. This difference, however, ceased when abu-Bakr al-Siddik related to them on the authority 31 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS of the Prophet : " Verily the prophets are buried where they die." They therefore buried him in his chamber in al-Madinah. After this they differed over the Imamate. The Helpers (Ansar) agreed to acknowledge Sa'd ibn- 'Ubadah al-Khazraji. But the Kuraish said : " The Ima- mate must not be, save among the Kuraish." Then the Ansars agreed with the Kuraish because of the saying of the Prophet relating to them : " The Imams are of the Kuraish." But this point of difference has lasted till this day, for the Darar or the Khawarij held that the Imam could come from others than the Kuraish. The next differ- ence arose over the affair of Fadak, 1 and over the inheri- tance of property left by prophets. The decision of Abu- Bakr settled this matter by the tradition coming from the prophet, " Verily the prophets do not bequeath anything." They then differed over the view as to what cancels the ob- ligation of alms. But they finally agreed to the judgment of Abu-Bakr concerning the duty of their warfare. After this they busied themselves making war upon T ulaihah 2 when he declared himself a prophet and rebelled, until he was driven to Syria. In the days of 'Umar he returned to Islam and was present with Sa'd ibn Abi-Wakkas at the battle of al-Kadisiyah, and after that at the battle of Naha- wand, where he was killed as a martyr. After this they made war on Musailamah, the false prophet, until Allah 14 put an end to his affair and to the affair of Sajah the false prophetess, and also to the affair of al-Aswad ibn-Zaid al- 'Anasi. This over, they turned to the killing of the rest of the apostates, until Allah ended that affair. After this they made war on the Greeks and Persians. And Allah granted them victory. During all this time they were agreed upon 1 Jewish village conquered by Muhammad. - Ibrt-Hajar, Biographical Dictionary of Persons who knew Mohammed, vol. ii, p. 596. 32 THE DIVISION INTO SECTS such questions as ethics, the unity of God, promises and threats, and other fundamental principles of religion. They differed only over the application of the Fikh [religious canon], in the cases such as inheritance of the grandfather with brothers, and sisters with fathers and mothers or with the father alone; over questions concerning justice, consan- guinity and partnership returns, and whether sisters can be residuary legatees of the father and the mother, or the father with his daughter, or the daughter of a son. They also differed as to the line of relationship and the question of what is forbidden, and such similar questions, differ- ences which do not lead to doctrinal error or immoral acts. They were in this concord in the days of Abu Bakr and 'Umar and during six years of the caliphate of 'Uthman. After this they differed over 'Uthman for certain things which he did, for which some blamed him, this blame cul- minating in his punishment by death. And after his murder they differed over his assassins and those who abandoned him, a divergence of opinion that has lasted until this day. Their next point of difference was over the affair of 'All and the Followers of the Camel, over the affair of Mu'awiyah and the people of Siffin, over the judgment of the two judges, abu-Musa al-'Ash'ari, and 'Amr ibn-al-'Asi; these differences also have endured down to our time. In the time of the later Companions there arose the divergent views of the Kadariyah as to predestination and free will, from the views of Ma'bad al-Juhani and of Ghailan al- 15 Dimashki and of Ja'd ibn-Dirham. Among the later Com- panions who differed from them was 'Abdallah ibn-'Umar, Jabir ibn-'Abdallah and abu-Hurairah, and ibn-' Abbas, and Anas ibn-Malik and 'Abdallah ibn-abi-Aufi and 'Ukbah ibn-' Amir al-Juhani and their contemporaries. These en- joined their successors not to greet the Kadariyah, nor to pray over their bodies, and not to visit their sick. After 33 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS this the Khawarij differed over some things among them- selves, and they separated into as many as twenty divisions, each of them condemning the rest as unbelievers. Then it came to pass in the days of al-Hasan al-Basri that Wasil x ibn-'Ata al-Ghazzal seceded over the matter of predestina- tion, and also in regard to a middle position between two extremes, and 'Arnr ibn-'Ubaid ibn-Bab went over to him with his heresy. Al-Hasan drove them both from his im- mediate community, and they separated from the rest, tak- ing their place beyond the columns of the mosque of al- Basrah. They and their followers were called Mu'tazilah because of their turning from the words of the Ummah in their assertions that a transgressor can be of the Ummat al- Islam and yet neither a believer nor an unbeliever. Now as to the Rawand (or Shia) : The Sabbabiyah 2 among them started their heresy in the time of 'All. One of them said to 'AH, " Thou art a God," and 'AH destroyed some of them by fire, and banished ibn-Saba to Sabat al- Madain. This sect is not one of the divisions of the Ummat al-Islam, because it calls 'All a god. Then the Rawafid, after the time of 'AH separated into four classes, the Zaid- J 6 lyah, the Imamiyah, the Kaisaniyah and the Ghulat. These in turn further subdivided, each sect condemning the rest. All of the subdivisions of the Ghulat are outside of the pale of Islam. But the subdivisions of the Zaidlyah and of the ImamTyah are still considered among the sects of the Um- mah. The Najjariyah in the neighborhood of al-Rai sep- arated after the time of al-Za'farani into sects which con- 1 Shahrastani incorrectly has Wafzil. 2 Saba lyah — became Sabbabiyah (denouncers) because of their attitude toward 'All. Ibn-Saba was said to be a Jew, "outwardly confessing Islam in order to beguile its adherents." Ibn-I-Iazm, Kitdb al-Milal wa'l-Nihal, tr. in part by I. Friedlander, J. A. O. S., vol. xxviii, p. 37- Treated more fully by Shahrastani, Haarbriicker, vol. i, p. 200. 34 THE DIVISION INTO SECTS demned each other. The secession of the Bakiriyah was due to Bakr, the nephew of 'Abd al- Wahid ibn-Ziyad; the secession of the Darariyah to Darar ibn-'Amr; and that of the Jahmiyah to Jahm ibn-Safwan. Jahm and Bakr and Darar declared their views when Wasil ibn-'Ata brought forth his errors, and the propaganda of the Batiniyah ap- peared in the days of the (Caliph) al-Ma'mun at the hands of Hamdan Karmat and 'Abdallah ibn-Maimun al-Kadah. The Batiniyah, however, do not belong to the sects of Islam, but rather to the sects of the Magians, as we shall show later. They appeared in the days of Muhammad ibn-Tahir ibn-'Abdallah ibn-Tahir in Khurasan, in contrast to the Karramiyah, the corporealists. The Zaidiyah from among the Rawafid were divided into three sects, the Jarudiyah and the Sulaimaniyah, and some add the Hurairiyah and the Butriyah; these three sects being held together by their doctrine of the Imamship of Zaid ibn-'AH ibn-al-Husain ibn-'AK ibn-abi-Talib when he revolted. This was at the time of Hisham ibn-'Abd al- Malik. One part of them, the Kaisamyah, represent nu- merous divisions, but they all can be included in two sects, one of which claimed that Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah was still alive, that he had not died, that they awaited his 17 coming, claiming that he was the expected Mahdi. While the second of these sects agreed with them as to his Imamate while he was alive, and at the time of his death, after his death they transferred the Imamate to someone else. After this, further, they differed over the one to whom the Imam- ate is transferred. The Imamiyah who [at first] had separated into the Zaid- iyah, the Kaisamyah J and the Ghulat, later formed fifteen sects, viz., al-Muhammadiyah, al-Bakinyah, al-Nawisiyah, 1 Text : " Kisa lyah " ; but see ShahrastanI, p. 165. 35 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS al-Shumaitiyah, al-'Ammariyah, al-Isma/iliyah, al-Mubarak- lyah, al-Musawiyah, al-Kita'iyah, the Ithna 'Asahriyah (the Twelvers), al-Hishamlyah, the followers of Hisham ibn-al- Hakam, or of Hisham ibn-Salim al-Jawaliki, al-Zarariyah, followers of Zararah ibn-A'yun, al-Yunusiyah followers of Yunus al-Kummi, al-Shaitaniyah followers of Shaitan al- Tak, al-Kamiliyah followers of abu-Kamil, who was the most severe in condemning 'AH and the rest of the Com- panions. These are the twenty sects springing from the Rawafid; of these, three are Zaidiyah and two Kaisamyah, with fifteen sects of the Imamiyah. The Ghulat among them, however, who hold to the divine character of the Imams and sanction those things forbidden of the Canon law and reject its obligatory character, as for example the Bayaniyah, the Mughiriyah, the Janahiyah, the Mansuriyah, the Khattabiyah, the Haluliyah, and those who hold similar views, are not of the sects of Islam although they claim adherence to it. These we shall mention in a separate part following this one. Now when differences arose among the Khawarij they split up into the twenty following sects : The first Muhak- 18 kimah, the Azarikah, the Najadat, the Sifriyah, the 'Aja- ridah, the latter splitting up into numerous sects, namely: the Khazimiyah, the Shu'aibiyah, the Ma'lumiyah, the Maj- huliyah, the Ma'badlyah, the Rashidiyah, the Mukarram- lyah, the Hamziyah, the Ibrahimlyah, the Wakifah, and the Abacliyah who in turn split into the Hafsiyah, the Harith- lyah, the Yazldiyah, and the Followers of Obedience which is not intended for Allah; of these the Yazldiyah are the followers of ibn-Yazid ibn-Unais, and are not of the sects of Islam because they say that the law of Islam will be- come annulled at the end of time by a prophet sent from Persia. The same is the case of the 'Ajaridah, of whom there is a sect called the Maimuniyah, which was not of the 36 THE DIVISION INTO SECTS sects of Islam because it sanctioned the marriage with daughters of daughters and with daughters of sons just as the Magians sanction it. We will mention the Yazidiyah and the Maimumyah among those who are derived from Islam, but are not of it, nor of its sects. The Kadariyah, the departers from truth, split up into twenty sects, each one condemning the rest. These are their names : the Wasiliyah, the 'Amriyah, the Hudhailiyah, the Nizamiyah, the Amwariyah, the 'Umariyah, the Thu- mamiyah, the Jahiziyah, the Hayitiyah, the Himariyah, the Khaiyatiyah, 1 the Sahamiyah, the followers of Salih Kub- bah, the Muwaisiyah, the Ka'biyah, the Jubba'ryah, the Bahshamiyah, who were founded by abu-Hashim ibn-al- Jubba'i. These are the twenty-two sects; two of them do not belong to the sects of Islam, i. e. the Hayitiyah and the Himariyah. We shall mention them among the sects which are derived from Islam but do not belong to it. Three classes are to be distinguished among the Mur- 19 ji'ah : one of these classes believes in disobedience in mat- ters of faith and in predestination, according to the belief of the Kadariyah. They are therefore counted among the Kadariyah and the Mur ji'ah like abu-Shimr al-Murjf, Muhammad ibn-Shabib al-Basri and al-Khalidi. The sec- ond of these classes believes in disobedience in matters of faith, but are inclined toward the view of Jahm as to deeds and works. These are all Jahmiyah and Murji'ah. The third class accepted the view in regard to disobedience, but did not accept the doctrine of predestination. It formed five sects : the Yunusiyah, the Ghassaniyah, the Thauban- lyah, the Taumamyah, and the Marisiyah. The Najjar- lyah comprise to-day in the city of al-Rai more than ten sects, although they are originally no more than three sects : 1 Haarbrucker's Shahrastanl, vol. i, p. 79. MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS the Burghunlyah, the Za'faranlyah, and the Mustadrikah. The Bakrlyah and the Dirariyah each form one sect; They do not have numerous followings. The Jahmiyah also form one sect. The Karamiyah in Khurasan form three sects, the Hakakiyah, the Taraikiyah, and the Ishakiyah. These three sects, however, do not condemn each other. We therefore regard them all as a single sect. All these that we have mentioned make up the seventy-two sects ; of them twenty are Rawafid, twenty Khawarij, twenty Ka- dariyah and ten Murji'ah; three of them are Najjariyah, including the Bakrlyah and the Dirariyah, the Jahmiyah and the Karramiyah; and these are the 72 sects. The 73d sect, the orthodox, is composed of the two classes of the theorists and the traditionalists, except those who deal lightly with tradition. The legalists of these two groups and the Koran readers, traditionalists, and the philosophers among the followers of tradition, all are united in the one opinion as to the unity of the creator and his attributes, his justice and his wisdom, his names and his qualities; also in regard to prophecy and Imamate, and the doctrines of retri- bution, and the rest of the fundamentals of religion. They differ only over that which is permitted and that which is forbidden in the deductions from the fundamental doctrines. In the things in which they differ there is nothing that can cause them to err, or lead them astray. They form the [great] body of those who will be saved. They are united by the firm belief in the unity of the creator and in his eternity, the eternity of his unending attributes, the possi- bility of having visions of Him, without falling into the error of anthropomorphism or atheism, and in acknowledg- ing the books of Allah and his prophets, the authority of the law of Islam, the permitting of that which the Koran per- mits and the forbidding of that which the Koran forbids, as well as the holding of those traditions of the prophets of 38 THE DIVISION INTO SECTS Allah which are trustworthy, the belief in the last day and the resurrection, the questioning of the two angels in the grave, and the belief in the pool (al-haud) and the balance. 1 He who holds the above-mentioned doctrines, not mixing with his beliefs any of the heresies of the Khawarij, and the Raiidiyah and the Kadariyah and the rest of the un- orthodox ; such a one belongs to those who are to be saved ; may Allah preserve him in his belief. The majority of the Mohammedans are of this character, the greater number of whom are of the followers of Malik and Shaii'i, and abu- Hanlfah and al-Auza'i and al-Thauri and the Ahl al-Zahir. This then explains what we desired to explain in this part. In the part which follows we shall mention the divisions of the opinion of each sect of the heretical sects which we have mentioned, so it please Allah. 1 Surah 108, 1-3; Surah 42, 6; 21, 47. : 39 PART III An explanation of the various opinions of the heretical sects and a detailed explanation of the heresies of each sect. This chapter contains eight sections, of which the following are the titles : I. An explanation of the opinions of the sects of the Randan. II. An explanation of the opinions of the sects of the Khawarij. III. An explanation of the opinions of the sects of the Mu'tazilah and the Kadariyah. IV. An explanation of the opinions of the sects of the Dirariyah, Bakriyah and Jahmlyah. V. An explanation of the opinions of the sect of the Karamiyah. VI. An explanation of the opinions of the anthropomor- phists, found among the numerous sects which we have mentioned. 1 In each of these chapters we shall mention what it is necessary to note, so it please Allah. 1 Two left out . . . IV. Murji'ah and V. Najjariyah. 4i 21 CHAPTER I 22 The Sects of the Rawafid This chapter explains the opinions of the sects of the Rawafid. 1 As we have already noted, the sect of the Zaidiyah was divided into three sects, the Kaisaniyah into two, and the Imamlyah into fifteen. We shall begin by treating of the Zaidiyah, then take up the Imamlyah and then the Kaisan- iyah in regular order, so it please Allah. i. Concerning the Jarudiyah from among the Zaidiyah. These are the followers of a man known as abu'l-Jarud. 2 They claim that the Prophet designated 'All as Imam by his characteristics, 3 but not by name. They also claim that by ceasing to recognize 'AIT, the Companions became un- believers. Moreover, they say that al-Hasan ibn-'Ali was Imam after 'AH, and was followed by his brother al-Husain. Over this matter the Jarudiyah split into two sects. One sect said : " Verily 'AH designated as Imam his son al- Hasan, then al-Hasan designated as Imam after him his brother al-Husain. After al-Hasan and al-Husain, the Imamate became a matter of conference among the children of al-Hasan and al-Husain " ; the one of them who went forth from them (by their decision), unsheathing his sword and summoning to his faith, and at the same time was wise and godly, he was to be the Imam. The other sect asserted 1 For term Rafidiyah cf. J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 137 ■ 2 His full name is abu-'l-Jartid Ziyad ibn-al-Mundhir al-'Abdi. Mas'udi, Let Prairies d'Or, vol. v, p. 474; Friedlander, J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 22. 3 Shahrastanl gives description: Ibn-IIazm omits question of Imftm- 43 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS that the Prophet was the one who designated al-Hasan as 23 Imam after 'AH, and al-Husain after al-Hasan. After this, the Jarudiyah split over the question of the expected Imam. One of their sects refrained from specifying any definite Imam, holding that everyone among the children of al- Hasan and al-Husain who " unsheathes his sword and summons to his faith, he is the Imam." Others awaited Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-'Ali ibn-abi- Talib. They would not believe that he had been slain, or that he had died, but claimed that he was the expected Mahdl who would come to reign over the world. This group joined with the Muhammadiyah from the Imamiyah in looking for Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn- 'Ali as the expected Imam. Others awaited Muhammad ibn-al-Kasim, the master of Talakan, 1 and did not believe in his death. Still others looked for Muhammad ibn-'Umar, the one who appeared in al-Kufah, refusing to believe that he was slain or had died. This is the doctrine of the Jarudiyah. Their own heresy is proven by the fact that they declared the Companions of the Prophet of Allah to be heretics. 2. Concerning the Sulaimaniyah 2 or the Jaririyah from among them. These followed Sulaiman ibn-Jarir al-Zaidi, who said that the Imamate was a matter of conference and could be confirmed by an agreement between two of the best men in Islam. He went so far as to claim as lawful the Imamate of a person even when possibly excelled by the other. He, however, sanctioned the Imamate of abu-Bakr and 'Umar, although he claimed that Islam forsook the right path when it invested them [with the caliphate], because 'All was 1 Shahrastanl, Haarbrucker's translation, vol. i, p. 179. 3 Longer account in ibid., vol. i, p. 180. 44 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID more eligible to the Imamate than they. The sin of their recognition, however, did not, according to him, constitute heresy or apostacy. Sulaiman ibn-Jarir declared unortho- dox those who reproved him, while the orthodox in turn called Sulaiman ibn-Jarir unorthodox because he consid- ered 'Uthman unorthodox. Allah have mercy on him. 2 4 3. Concerning the Butriyah. These followed two men, 1 one of whom was al-Hasan ibn-Salih ibn-Hai, and the other Kathir al-Munauwa, who is called al-Abtar. They agreed with Sulaiman ibn-Jarir of this group, differing from him only in that they did not commit themselves about 'Uthman, neither attacking his faults nor praising his virtues. Of the followers of Sulai- man ibn-Jarir, this sect is the best thought of by the ortho- dox. Muslim ibn-al-Hajjaj 2 has cited the tradition of al- Hasan ibn-Salih ibn-Hai in his collection called al-Sakih. Muhammad ibn-Isma'il al-Bukhari, 3 although not citing him in his al-Sahih, does say in his work entitled al-Tafrlkh cd-Kabir that al-Hasan ibn-Salih ibn-Hai al-Kufi was the pupil of Sammak ibn-Harb and died in the year 167. He was from the border-line of Hamadhan and his surname was abii-'Abdallah. 'Abd-al-Kahir says: These Butriyah and Sulaimamyah from among the Zaidiyah, all of them called the Jarudiyah, of the Zaidiyah, unorthodox, because they affirmed the heresy of abu-Bakr and 'Umar. The Jarudiyah affirmed the Sulaimamyah and Butriyah heretics because they left uncon- demned the heresy of abu-Bakr and 'Umar. Our sheikh, abu-1-Hasan al-Ash'ari, 4 in one of his treatises tells of a section of the Zaidiyah called the Ya'kubiyah, followers of 1 ShahrastanI makes these two sects. 2 De Slane, Ibn-Khallikan, vol. iii, p. 34& 3 Ibid., vol. ii, p. 594. * Ibid., vol. ii, p. 227. 45 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS a man called Ya'kub, and states that they had accepted abu- 25 Bakr and 'Umar, but they did not reject those who rejected the caliphate of the two latter. 'Abd-al-Kahir says that three of the sects of the Zaidlyah that we have mentioned agreed on the view that those who commit major sins within Islam would be forever in hell fire. In regard to this they re- semble the Khawarij, who give no hope of Allah's grace to prisoners of sin even though they be believers, whereas none but the unbelievers need really despair of the spirit 1 of Allah. These three sects and their followers are called Zaidlyah because of their acceptance of the Imamate of Zaid ibn-'Ali ibn-al-Hasan ibn-'Ali ibn-abi-Talib, in his time and the Imamate of his son, Yahya ibn-Zaid, after him. Zaid ibn-'AH was recognized as Imam by fifteen thousand men of the people of al-Kufah who went with him against the governor of al-Trak, Yusuf ibn-'Umar al- Thakafi, governor over the two Traks under Hisham ibn- 'Abd-al-Malik. And when the war between him and Yusuf ibn-'Umar al-Thakafi had lasted some time, they said unto him : " We will help thee against thine enemies after thou hast told us thy views regarding abu-Bakr and 'Umar who were unjust to thine ancestor 'AH ibn-abi-Talib." Zaid said : " I say naught against them except good, and I have never heard my father say anything except good of them, and I have set out against the Banu Umaiyah only because they fought against my ancestor al-Husain and attacked al-Madmah on the day of al-Harrah. They then demolished the Beit Allah with ballista and fire." Where- upon they deserted him [Zaid], who said to them: "Do you desert me also?" And from this day on they were called the Rafidah [Deserters]. There then remained with him Nasr ibn-Harimah al-'Ansi and Mu'awiyah ibn- 1 The Arabic word used, denotes wind which brings relief. 46 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID Ishak ibn-Yazid ibn-Harithah with about two hundred men, and they fought the army of Yusuf ibn-'Umar al-Thakafi 2 6 until they were all killed, including Zaid. He was after- wards exhumed, crucified, and burned. His son Yahya ibn- Zaid fled to Khurasan, and rebelled in the district of Juza- jan against Nasr ibn-Bashshar, the governor of Khurasan, who sent against him Muslim ibn-Ahwaz al-Mazini with three thousand men, and they killed Yahya ibn-Zaid. His shrine in Juzajan is famous. 'Abd-al-Kahir says that the Rawafid of al-Kiifah are remarkable for perfidy and stingi- ness, so that a proverb has become current in regard to these qualities among them and the saying has grown up : " More stingy than a Kufite and more perfidious." Three instances of their perfidy have become widely known. First, after the slaying of 'AIT, they recognized al-Hasan his son, but when he went to fight against Mu'awlyah, they seized him by treachery in Sabat al-Mada'in and Sanan al-Ju'fi, one of their number, pierced his side and threw him from his horse; and this was one of the reasons for the peace made with Mu'awiyah. The second instance of their perfidy was that they wrote to al-Husain ibn-'Ali and invited him to come to al-Kufa so that they should help him against Yazld ibn-Mu'awiyah. He allowed himself to be deceived by them, and accepted their invitation, but when he reached Karbela', they seized him by treachery and made common cause with 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ziyad so that al-Husain was killed in Karbila', together with many of his family. Their third perfidy was against Yazid ibn-'Ali ibn-al-Husain ibn-'Ali ibn-abi-Talib, for after going out with him against Yusuf ibn-'Umar they broke their word to him [Yazid], which resulted in his being killed, and there befell what befell. 4. Concerning the Kaisaniyah from among the Rawafkl. ^ These are the followers of al-Mukhtar ibn-abl-'Ubaid 47 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS al-Thakaf 1 * who undertook to avenge the death of al- Husain ibn-'AH ibn-abi-Talib. He killed most of those who had killed al-Husain at Karbila'. He was al-Mukhtar, but he was called Kaisan. It is reported that he took his opin- ions from a freedman who belonged to 'All, whose name was Kaisan. 2 The Kaisaniyah split up into sects, to which two opinions are common; one of them is the Imamate of Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah, whom al-Mukhtar ibn-abi- 'Ubaid was accustomed to champion. The second [upon which they agreed] was that Allah might have had a be- ginning. Because of this heresy everyone who does not accept this doctrine about Allah, accuses them of being un- orthodox. These Kaisaniyah split over the Imamate of Muhammad ibn-al-Hanaf lyah. Some of them claimed that he became Imam after his father 'AH ibn-abi-Talib, prov- ing this by the fact that 'All, at the battle of the Camels, gave over the banner to him, 1 and said: "[Carrying this, attack] as thy father would attack, then thou wilt be praised. There is no good in war which does not rage." Others held that the Imamate after 'All went to his son al-Hasan, then to al-Husain, after al-Hasan, and then passed over to Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah after his brother al-Husain, by the last will of his brother al-Husain, at the time when he fled from al-Madinah to Mecca, when his allegiance was sought for Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah. This resulted in the splitting off of those who hold to the Imamate of Muham- mad ibn-al-Hanaf lyah. Some of those who are called al- Karibiyah are followers of abu-Karib al-Darir and claim that Muhammad ibn-al-Hanaf lyah is living and did not die, 2 & that he is in Mt. Radwa, and near him is a fount of water *J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 33. Shahrastani gives two sects, Kaisaniyah and Mukhtariyah. This sect is sometimes even classed under the Imamiyah. Cf. Ibn-Hazm's division. 2 Ibn-Khallikan, De Slane, vol. ii, p. 577- 48 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID and a fount of honey, from which he derives his sustenance, while at his right, a lion, and at his left a panther guard him from his enemies until the time of his appearance. 1 He is the expected Mahdi. The rest of the Kaisamyah be- lieve in the death of Muhammad ibn-al-Hanaf lyah but dis- agree about the Imam who should succeed him. There were some of them who claimed that the Imamate after him re- verted to the son of his brother, 'All ibn-al-Husain Zain al-'Abidin, while others hold that after him it should revert to abu-Hashim 'Abdallah ibn-Muhammad ibn-al-Hanaf lyah, so these split over the Imam to succeed abu-Hashim. Some transfer the Imamate to abu-Muhammad ibn-'Ali ibn- 'Abdallah ibn-' Abbas ibn-'Abd-al-Muttalib, because abu- Hashim willed it to him. This latter is the view of the Rawandiyah. Others claimed the Imamate after abu- Hashim went to Bayan ibn-Sim'an, and they hold that the spirit of Allah was in abu-Hashim, and passed over from him to Bayan. While some claimed that this spirit passed from abu-Hashim to 'Abdallah ibn-'Amr ibn-Harb. This sect claims the divine character of the latter. As to the Bayamyah and the Harbiyah, both of them belonging to the Ghulat sects, we shall mention them in the section in which we mention the sects of the Ghulat. Kuthaiyir, the poet, was of the school of the Kaisamyah who hold that Mu- hammad ibn-al-Hanaf lyah is alive, and do not believe in his death. He says in his poem : 2 " Indeed, the Imams of the Kuraish, the masters of truth, are four alike. 20 'All and his three sons, they are the sires about whom there is naught hid. One sire is the sire of faith and piety, and the other sire Karbela reft from sight. 3 1 On the part of animals in Messianic ideals see Friedlander, J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 37 ff. 2 Kitdb al-Aghani 8, 32. Mas'udi, Les Prairies d'Or, vol. v, p. 182. Ibn-Kutaibah ed. De Goeje, p. 329. 3 Mas'idi gives it " Hidden from all sight/' 49 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Ajid a third does not taste death until he leads the horsemen, the banner preceding, He disappeared and was not seen among them for a season, hidden in Radwa, near him are honey and water." x 'Abd-al-Kahir answers these verses with the words : " The masters of truth are four, but as to the second of the two, his fame has preceded him, And Faruk, of the world, appeared as Imam, following him Dhul Nunain who met his death. 'Ali appeared after them as Imam, in the order in which I have given them. The decree came from above, and hateful are they whom we mention as accursed. To the fire of hell have they been relegated, and the sectaries are a people like unto the Christians, Confused ones, for their confusion there is no healing." And Kuthaiyir also said about sectaries : 2 "lam free to go to Allah, and free from connection with ibn Arwi, and free from the religion of the Khawarij. And free from 'Umar and Abu-Bakr, at the time when he was declared emir of the faithful" These verses we have answered with the following : "Thou art indeed free, but from Allah, through the hatred of the people, through whom Allah has kept alive the faithful. And hatred of thine harms not ibn-Arwa, the hatred of piety is the religion of the unbelievers. Abw-Bakr, I rejoice in him as Imam, despite all the anger of the Rawafid. 30 'Umar, the Faruk of the world, is rightly called the emir of the faithful" [Saiyid says : 3 ] " Say to al Wasy : ' I would give my life for thee, thou hast stayed in this mount a long time, They persecute in the community those of us who follow thee, and who proclaim thee caliph and Imam. 1 De Slane, Ibn-Khallikan, vol. II, p. 577. 3 Ibn-Kutaibah, ibid., p. 316. Ibn Arwa = Uthman. 3 Mas'udi, Les Prairies d'Or, vol. v, p. 182. 50 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID And all the people of the earth were inimical to thee during thy stay with them for sixty years. The son of Khawla [name of the Haniflte mother of Muhammad] has not tasted of death, and the earth does not hold his bones. 1 And verily he has the sustenance of an Imam, and drink is provided and with it food.' " This po€m we answered with the words : " Lo thy life has passed in waiting, for the one whose bones the ground holds. And there is no Imam in the valley of Radwa, around whom the angels bandy words. And there are no streams of honey and water beside him, nor is drink provided, and with it food. And ibn Khawla has tasted of death, just as his father tasted of decease. If any man could have lived for ever on account of his greatness. verily the chosen one [Muhammad] would have lived for ever." The poet known by the name of Saiyid al-Himyari was also of the school of the Kaisaniyah who looked for the coming of Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah, and claimed that he is imprisoned at Mt. Radwa until he is called to appear. And about this he says in a poem of his : " But everyone who is on the earth disappears — This is the decree of him who created the Imam." The first who arose to preach the doctrine of the Kaisan- iyah in regard to the Imamate of Muhammad ibn-al- Hanafiyah was al-Mukhtar ibn-abi-'Ubaid al-Thakafl. The *- reason for this was that 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ziyad* when he had killed Muslim ibn-'Akil, and al-Husain ibn-'AH, was 1 Not in Mas'udi. 8 For Messianic ideals in Islam cf. Van Vloten, Chiitisme, p. 54 ff.; Friedlander, "Die Messias Idee im Islam" (in Festschrift zum joten Geburtstage A. Berliner's, Frankfurt A. M. 1903, pp. 1 16-130, especially pp. 121 ff. and p. 127.) 3 Tabarl, Chronique; ed. Zotenberg, vol. iv, p. 18 et seq. 4 Ibid., vol. iv, p. 34. 51 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS told that al-Mukhtar ibn-abi-'Ubaid was one of those who had rebelled with Muslim ibn-'Aldl. He had then disap- peared, and when, having been ordered to return, he came to ibn-Ziyad, the latter threw a club which was in his hand and cut his eye. He then imprisoned him. Some of the people, however, plead with him in favor of al-Mukhtar, so that he brought him out of prison and said to him : " I give thee three days, and lo during that time thou shalt go away from al-Kufah, else I will behead thee." Al-Mukhtar then fled from al-Kufah to Mecca, where he swore allegiance to 'Abdallah ibn-al-Zubair, 1 remaining with him until ibn-al- Zubair fought the army of Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah, which was under the command of al-Husain ibn-Numair al-Sukuti. Al-Mukhtar distinguished himself in these wars against the people of Syria. Then Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah died, and the Syrian army returned to Syria while the command of al- Hijaz. al-Yaman, al-Trak and Persia remained with ibn-al- Zubair. Al-Mukhtar having suffered evil treatment from ibn-al-Zubair, fled to al-Kufah. The governor of this city was at that time 'Abdallah ibn- Yazid al-Ansari, 2 under 'Abdallah ibn-al-Zubair. When he [al-Mukhtar] entered al-Kufah he sent his messengers to the sectaries of al- Kufah and its districts up to al-Mada'in demanding their allegiance to him and promising them that he was coming to claim their revenge for al-Husain ibn-' AH. He invited them to recognize Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah, claiming that al-Hanaf lyah had chosen him as caliph, and that it was he [al-Hanafiyah] who had commanded them to obey him 32 [al-Mukhtar]. It was at this time that ibn-al-Zubair re- moved 'Abdallah ibn- Yazid al-Ansari from the governor- ship of al-Kufah and put in his place 'Abdallah ibn-Mutr al-'Adawi. The number of those who recognized al-Mukh- 1 Ibid., vol. iii, p. 610 et seq. *Ibi4., vol. iv, pp. 58, 66, 69, 81. THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID tar * and gathered around him amounted to seventeen thou- sand. Among them was 'Ubaidallah ibn-al-Hirr, who en- tered into allegiance with him. There was no braver than al-Hirr in his day. Ibrahim ibn-Malik al-Ashtar also joined 2 al-Mukhtar. Among the secretaries of al-Kufah there was not a finer one than he, nor one who had more followers. Al-Mukhtar set out with these men against the governor of al-Kufah, 'Abdallah ibn-Muti', who on that day was at the head of twenty thousand. 3 The strife between them lasted for several days. At the end of this time the Zaidiyah were defeated and fled, and al-Mukh- tar made himself governor over al-Kufah and its surround- ings. He also killed all those in al-Kufah who had fought against al-Husain ibn-'AH at Karbila'. Then he delivered the khutbah before the people and said : " Praise be to Allah who promised his friend victory and his enemy harm, and definitely put both of them in this condition, a final dis- position of them and a decisive settlement. O men, we have heard the invitation of the preacher and we have received the view of the preacher how many tyrants, male and female, and how many murderers do we recall ?" 4 Bring hither the servants of Allah to swear allegiance to the proper leader and to fight the enemy, and lo, I am the leader of those who mourn, and the investigator of the murder of the son of the daughter of the seal of the prophets." He then descended from his pulpit and sent a message by the head of his body-guard to the house of 'Umar ibn-Sa'd, 5 to cut off his head. He then cut off the 1 Wellhausen, Religios-P otitis chen Oppositionsparteien im Alten Islam, pp. 28 et seq. 2 Tabari, Chronique ed. Zotenberg, vol. iv, pp. 81 et seq. 3 Ibid., vol. iv, pp. 81 et seq. 4 Ibid., vol. ii, p. 632. 5 Ibid., vol. iv, p. 75 et seq. 53 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS head of his son Ja'far ibn-'Umar who was the son of the sister of al-Mukhtar, and he said : " That is for the head of al-Husain; and this is for the head of the son of al-Husain 33 the great." After this he sent Ibrahim ibn-Malik al-Ashtar with six thousand men for the battle against 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ziyad, who was at that time in al-Mausil with eighty thousand of the Syrian army, over whom 'Abd-al-Malik ibn- Marwan 1 had placed him as governor. When the two armies met at the gate of al-Mausil, the Syrian army was put to flight and seventy thousand of them were killed on the field of battle, including 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ziyad and al- Husain ibn-Numair al-Sukuti. Ibrahim ibn-al-Ashtar sent their heads to al-Mukhtar, who, when he had succeeded in becoming governor of al-Kufah, al-Jazirah and of al-Mahin [Persia] as far as the border of Armenia, claimed that he was a kahin, who wrote rhymed prose like the rhymed prose of the kahins. It is also said that he claimed an inspira- tion had come to him ; and a specimen of his rhymed prose is as follows : " By him who has sent down the Koran; and revealed the Book; and given the laws for religion; and who disapproves of disobedience; I will kill al-Nu'at 2 of al-Azd and 'Uman, and of Madhhij and Hamadhan, and of Nahd and Khaulan, and of Bakr and of Hazzan, and of Thu'al and of Nabhan, and of 'Abs and of Dhubyan, and of Kais and of 'Allan." Then he said : " By the All-hearing onej the Knowing, the Mighty, the Lofty, the Powerful, the Wise, the Merciful, the Compassionate, verily I will crush completely the leaders of the Bani Tahim [Tamim?]." Then the news of al-Mukhtar reached ibn-al-Hanafiyah and he was afraid of a religious strife, and desired to go against al-'Irak so that those who believed in his Imamate should gather around him. Al-Mukhtar, hearing this, was 1 Ibid., vol. iv, p. 75 et seq. s I. Goldziher, Abhandhmgen zur Arabischen Philologie, p. 65. 54 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID afraid of his arrival in al-Trak, for fear he would rob him of his leaders and governors. So he said to his army : " I swear allegiance to the Mahdi, but the Mahdi has a sign, c. g., that he shall be struck by a blow of a sword, and the sword shall not cut his skin; such a man is the Mahdi." 34 This speech of his was reported to ibn-al-Hanafiyah, and he remained in Mecca fearing that al-Mukhtar might kill him if he went to al-Kufah. Then the Sabbabiyah of the Ghulat of the Randan tricked al-Mukhtar, and said to him : " Thou art the ultimate authority of this age." * And they persuaded him to claim that he was a prophet. This he did, asserting among his intimates that a revelation had come down to him, whereupon he said in rhymed prose : " By the hurrying of the clouds, and by the heavy punishment, and by the swift reckoning, and by the rich giver, and by the powerful conqueror, verily I shall open the grave of ibn-Shihab, the betrayer, the liar, the unbelieving sinner. Again, by the Lord of the two worlds, and by the Lord of the faithful land, verily I will kill the hateful poet, the rajiz [ra/<2£-metre] poet of the heretics, and the friends of the heretics, and the supporters of the unrighteous, and the brothers of satans, who gathered together for worthless objects, and forged tales against me. Hail to those of praiseworthy character; and of good deeds and of ready thought, and fortunate soul." After this he preached and said in his khutbah: " Praise be unto Allah, who has made me a knowing one, and has enlightened my heart. By Allah, verily I will burn the dwelling places in this region. And verily I will open the graves there. And verily I will save some of them. And Allah is sufficient as a leader and helper." Then he swore and said: " By the 1 Lord of the sacred enclosure, and by the sacred house, and by the hon- 1 De Slane, Ibn-Khallikan, vol. i, p. 229 ; ii, p. 12. 55 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ored comer of the Ka'bah, and by the esteemed mosque, and by the possessor of the pen; verily a standard will be raised for me from here to Adam/ and then to the borders of Dhi Salam." Then he said : " Verily, by the lord of heaven, fire shall be sent down from heaven; and verily it 35 will burn the house of Asma'." These words reached Asma' ibn-Kharijah and he said : " Abu-Ishak has attacked me in rhymed prose and now he will burn my house." So he fled from his house, and al-Mukhtar sent someone to burn his house during the night, pretending to those around him that fire from heaven was sent down to burn it. It was after this that the people of al-Kufah went out against al-Mukh- tar for posing as a kahin. 2 The Sabbabiyah gathered around him, together with the slaves of the people of al- Kufah, because he had promised to give them the possessions of their masters. And he fought with them against those who had gone out against him, conquering them and killing most of them: the rest he took prisoner, and among these was a man called Surakah ibn-Mirdas al-Bariki; he was brought to al-Mukhtar, and fearing that the latter would order his death, he said to those who imprisoned him and brought him to al-Mukhtar : " Ye are not the ones who have taken us prisoners, nor are ye the ones that have de- feated us with your force ; on the contrary, it is the angels who have defeated us, the angels whom we saw on mottled horses above your soldiers." Al-Mukhtar admired his words, and freed him, whereupon he went to Mus'ab ibn- al-Zubair in al-Basrah, and from there he wrote these verses to al-Mukhtar : 3 1 Wide valley in al-Hijaz. Cf. Mitller, al-Hamadani : Geographic der Arabischen Halbinsel, p. 171. 3 Abu'l-Mahasin, vol. i, p. 198, ed. Juynboll. 3 Variants in Kitdb al-Aghdnl vol. vii, p. 32. Cf. Dinawari, Kitdb al- Akhbdr al-Tiwdl, p. 309. Pub. by Vladimir Giurgass. 56 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID " Lo, tell abi-Ishak that I have seen silent the mottled black [horses] I show my eyes what neither of them sees, and what they both believe to be an invention. I denounce your revelation, and take a vow to fight you until death." In what we have here recounted is to be found the reason of al-Mukhtar' s posing as a kahin, and claiming a revelation for himself. xA.s to the reason for his words claiming that Allah may have had a beginning, the following incident ex- plains it. When Ibrahim ibn-al-Ashtar heard that al-Mukh- tar was posing as a kahin and claiming inspiration for him- self, he ceased his help and governed the territory of Meso- 3^ potamia for himself. When Mus'ab ibn-al-Zubair learned that Ibrahim ibn-al-Ashtar had deserted al-Mukhtar, he longed to subdue al-Mukhtar. In this, he was joined by 'Ubaidallah ibn-al-Hirr al-Ju'afi and Muhammad ibn-al- Ash'ath al-Kindi, 1 as well as most of the leaders of al- Kufah, who were irritated against al-Mukhtar for having seized their possessions and slaves ; the latter inciting Mus'ab to covet the seizure of al-Kufah by force. Mus'ab set forth from al-Basrah with seven thousand men of his own, in ad- dition to those leaders of al-Kufah who had made common cause with him. As commander over the van of his army he set al-Muhallab ibn-abu-Sufrah 2 with his following of the Azd. The command of the cavalry he gave to 'Ubai- dallah ibn-Ma'mar 3 al-Taiml. Over the Tamimite cavalry he placed al-Ahnaf ibn-Kais. 4 When news of them reached al-Mukhtar, he sent out his commander Ahmad ibn-Shumait to fight Mus'ab with three thousand picked soldiers, telling them that the victory would be theirs. He claimed that a revelation had come to him concerning this. The two 1 Tabarl, ibid., vol. v, p. 97. 2 Ibid., vol. iv, p. 97. 5 Ibid., vol. iii, pp. 513, 563. * Ibid., vol. iii, p. 449 et seq. 57 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS armies met at al-Mada'in, and the followers of al-Mukhtar were put to flight, and their emir, ibn-Shumait, was killed, together with most of al-Mukhtar's leaders. And the rem- nant returned to al-Mukhtar and said to him : " Why didst thou promise us victory over our enemies?" And he said: " Indeed, Allah has promised this to me, but he suddenly changed his mind." He went on to prove this regarding Allah with the words of the Koran : " What he pleaseth will God abrogate or confirm." x And this is how the Kaisaniyah came to believe that Allah may have had a be- ginning. 37 Al-Mukhtar then took upon himself the killing of Mus'ab ibn al-Zubair in al-Madhar 2 in the region of al-Kuf ah. And in this engagement Muhammad ibn-al-Ash'ath al-Kindi was killed. Al-Mukhtar said : " His death pleases me because he is the only one remaining of those who killed al-Husain, and now I am not afraid of death." After this al-Mukhtar and his allies were put to flight, and they fled to the resi- dence of the Imam in al-Kufah, and fortified themselves in it with four hundred followers. And Mus'ab besieged them three days until their food gave out, and on the fourth day they made a sally, seeking death, and were slaughtered, and al-Mukhtar was killed with them. Two brothers called Tarif and Tarif killed him; they were the sons of 'Abdallah ibn-Dajajah of the Banu Hanifah. A'sha Hamdan * says about them : "I have prophesied, and the prophets have gained renown, Through the evil things that happened in al-Madhar, And I am naturally not pleased with the destruction of my people Even if it happened, for they were in an evil strait. But I rejoice over that which abu-Ishak suffers, through mortification and shame." 1 Surah, 13, v. 39. 2 Yakut, vol. iv, p. 468. s Kitdb al-Aghdni, vol. v, pp. 146-161. 58 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID This is an explanation of the view of the Kaisaniyah that Allah may have a beginning. But some of the Kaisaniyah who looked for Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah differed over this latter question, claiming that he was alive, imprisoned at Mt. Radwa, till the time of his summoning. Over the reason of his imprisonment there, they disagreed; some saying that " Allah is secret in his affairs, no one knows them except he, and he gives no explanation for the reason of his imprisonment." While others said : " Verily Allah punished him by this imprisonment, because after the death of al-Husain ibn-'AH he went over to Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah, 38 and because he demanded peace of him, and accepted lar- gesses from him.' , Moreover because he fled from ibn-al- Zubair in Mecca to 'Abd al-Malik ibn-Marwan. And they claimed that his companion 'Amir ibn-Wathilah al-Kinam x came before him, and spoke to his followers about this de- parture of his in the following words :"Omy brothers, O my helpers, do not depart, but stand by the Mahdi, so that ye may be led. O Muhammad, the generous one, O Mu- hammad, thou art the Imam, the pure, the right leader, not ibn-al-Zubair al-Samiri, the heretic, nor is he the one whom we set up as a goal." But it was said that he should have fought ibn-al-Zubair, and not have fled. By refusing to fight him he disobeyed his master, and further disobeyed him by seeking out 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan. But even before this he had been disobedient by seeking out Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah. It was after this that he mended his ways, and joined ibn-Marwan in al-Ta'if. And ibn-' Abbas died there, and was buried there by ibn-al-Hanafiyah. From there the latter went to al-Dhar [in Khurasan, near Buk- hara] . But as to what occurred when he reached the pass of Radwa, they differ. Those believing in his death, hold that he died there; while those expecting his return say that 1 Tabarl, ibid., vol. iv, p. 130. 59 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Allah imprisoned him there, and hid him from the eyes of men, as a punishment for the sins which they attributed to him, until he is bidden to come forth. And he is the ex- pected Mahdi. 5. Concerning the Imamiyah of the Rafidah. These are the Imamiyah who divided off from the Zaid- lyah, the Kaisaniyah, and the Ghulat into fifteen sects : 1 the Kamiliyah, the Muhammadiyah, the Bakiriyah, the 39 Nawisiyah, the Shamitiyah, the 'Amariyah, the Isma'iliyah, the Mubarakiyah, the Musawiyah, the Kati'iyah, the Twelv- ers (Ithna 'Ashariyah), the Hishamiyah, the Zarariyah, the Yunusiyah, and the Shaitaniyah. a. Concerning the Kamiliyah from among them : These are the followers of a man from the Rafidah who was known as abu-Kamil. 2 He claimed that the Compan- ions were unorthodox because they forsook their allegiance to 'All, and he condemned k Ali for ceasing to fight them, as he was bound to fight the people of Siffin. Bashshar ibn- Burd, 3 the blind poet, belonged to this school. The report is that someone said to him : " What is thy opinion regard- ing the Companions?" And he replied that they were un- orthodox. He was then asked : " And what is thy opinion of 'All?" And he quoted the words of the poet: i " What is the evil of the three caliphs O Umm 'Umar Against thy friend who does not accompany us ? " 1 Ibn-FIazm is vague as to divisions. Shahrastanl gives the Imamiyak alone; under the Bakiriyah, and Ja'farlyah, he gives the Nawisiyah, Aftahlyah, Shamitiyah, Musawiyah, Isma'iliyah and Twelvers. 2 Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i, p. 201. 3 Brockelmann, Arabische Literatur, vol i, p. 73. Von Kremer, Kuliur- geschichtliche Streifzuge, pp. 37 et seq. Goldziher, Muhammedonische Studien, p. 162. Ibn-Kutaibah, Kitdb al-Shi'r, ed. Cairo, p. 188. 4 Kitdb al-Aghdni, vol. iii, pp. 19-72; vol. vi, pp. 47-52. 6b THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID It is also reported that to this sin of condemning the Com- panions and 'AH among them, Bashshar added two other sins : one the belief that the dead would return to the world before the day of resurrection, as the partisans of the Re- turn 1 hold among the Rafidah, and the other, that Satan is right in preferring fire to earth. As a proof of this they gave the views of Bashshar in one of his poems : " The earth is dark and fire is light, And fire has been worshipped since it existed." To this Saf wan al-Ansari replied in the following poem : "Thou didst think that fire was the finest thing as to its origin And upon the earth it is lighted by means of stone and fire-stick And wonderful things were formed in its innermost parts which can 4" not be counted in line or in number. And in the very depths of the seas there are useful things. You blame the moons, even though you are deformed, and nearest 4 2 among the creations of Allah, to the genus ape." Hammad u 'Ajrad satarized Bashshar and said: " O, thou who art viler than an ape, even when the ape is blind." It is reported, however, that Bashshar was untroubled by the satire in this verse, and merely replied : " Let him see me and describe me, Only may I not see and describe him." •Abd al-Kahir says: "I declare these Kamiliyah unortho- dox for two reasons. First because they condemn all of the Companions without specification, and secondly because they preferred fire to earth. Some of the disgraceful here- sies of Bashshar ibn-Burd we have mentioned; and we feel that Allah has done to him what he deserves, for he satir- iRaj'ah=: return as same person. Tandsukh = return as a different being. 2 Ibn-Kutaibah ed. De Goeje, p. 49°- 6i MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ized the Mahdi, who therefore commanded him to be thrown into the Tigris, which is a disgrace to him in this world, and to his followers, a painful punishment in the next." b. Concerning the Muhammadiyah. 1 These expect Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn- al-Husain ibn-'Ali ibn-abi-Talib ; nor do they believe that he was murdered, nor that he died ; they claim that he is in Mt. Hajir, in the district of Najd, until he shall be com- 43 manded to return. In the error of his anthropomorphistic ideas al-Mughirah ibn-Sa'id al-Tjli 2 said to his compan- ions : " Verily the expected Mahdi is Muhammad ibn-'Ab- dallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al-Husain ibn-'AH." As the proof of this he claimed that his name was the same as that of Muhammad the Prophet of Allah; and his father's name was 'Abdallah like the name of the father of the Prophet of Allah. And in a hadlth dating from the time of the Prophet, he quotes these words about the Mahdi : 3 " His name will correspond to my name, and his father's name to the name of my father." And when Muhammad ibn-' Abdallah ibn- al-Hasan ibn-al-Husain ibn-'AH began his preaching in al- Madinah, he made himself master of Mecca and al-Madi- nah, while his brother 4 Ibrahim ibn-' Abdallah made himself governor of al-Basrah and their third brother Idrls ibn- ' Abdallah took possession of several of the districts of the Maghrib. 5 That was in the time of the caliph abu-Ja'far al-Mansur, Avho sent 'Isa ibn-Musa with a large army 1 J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 30. Not to be confused with the Mukasa- madiyah who believe in the divinity of Muhammad the Prophet. 2 Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, pp. 203, 218. 3 Friedlander, J. A. O. S., vol. xxix., pp. 43 e t seq. 4 7abarl, ibid., vol. iv, p. 326. 9 Ibid., voL iv, p. 458. 62 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID against Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al- Husain. They fought and killed Muhammad in a battle at al-Madmah. He then sent 'Isa ibn-Musa to make war on Ibrahim ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al-Husain ibn-'AH. They killed Ibrahim at the gate of Himrin, sixteen para- sangs from al-Kufah. It was in this sedition that Idris ibn- 'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al-Husain died in al-Maghrib. They say he was poisoned there. The father of these three brothers, 'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al-Husain, died in the jail of al-Mansur. His tomb is in al-Kadisiyah and is well 44 known and frequented by pilgrims. When Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al-Husain was killed in al- Madinah, the Mughiriyah divided into two sects, one of which acknowledged his death and denounced al-Mughirah ibn-Sa'Id al-Tjli. This sect said : " Indeed, he lied when he said that Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan ibn-al- Husain was the Mahdi who should rule the earth, for he has been killed and does not rule the earth." The other sect persisted in its adherence to al-Mughirah ibn-Sa'id al- Ijli. saying: "Indeed, he is right in saying that the Mahdi is Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ; verily he was not killed, but has merely disappeared from the sight of men, and is on Mt. Hajir in the region of Najd, remaining there until he is commanded to return. He will return and rule the earth, and allegiance will be paid him in Mecca between the comer of the Ka'bah and the Makam. 1 At that time, seventeen men will be brought to life, each one of whom will be given one of the letters from the name of the most Holy, and they will put the armies to flight." These claim that the one whom the army of 'Isa ibn-Musa killed in al-Madinah was not Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan. This sect is called al-Muhammadiyah, because they look for the coming 1 Halting place for prayer. 63 45 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS of Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan. Jabir ibn-Yazid al-Ju'afi belonged to this sect. He was wont to speak of the return of the dead to this world before the resurrection. On this subject, a poet of this sect has said in one of his poems : " Up to the day in which men return To their world before their day of reckoning." Those who hold our views say to this sect : " If you assert that he who was killed in al-Madinah was other than Mu- hammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan, and you assert that the one killed there was Satan transformed into man in the person of Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan, then believe also that those killed at Karbila were other than al-Husain and his companions, that they were only devils having put on the form of men in the person of al- Husain and his companions ; then look for al-Husain as ye look for Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al-Hasan, or then look for 'All as the Sabbabiyah among you look for him. They claim that he is among the clouds, and that the one whom 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn-Muljim killed was Satan trans- formed into a man in the person of 'AH." This shows there is no difference between them and him. May Allah be praised for this. c. Concerning the Bakiriyah among them. This people transfer the Imamate from 'All ibn-abi- Talib, through his children to Muhammad ibn-'AH, the one who was known as al-Bakir. They say : " Verily, 'AH designated his son al-Hasan for the Imamate; al-Hasan designated his brother al-Husain ; al-Husain designated his son 'AH ibn-al-Husain Zain-al-'Abidin and Zain-al-'Abidin called to the Imamate Muhammad ibn-'AH known as al- Bakir: they claim that he is the expected Mahdi, concern- 64 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID ing whom it is related that the prophet said to Jabir ibn- 'Abdallah al-Ansari : * " Verily, thou wilt see him and greet him from me." Jabir was the last of the Compan- ions to die in al-Madinah. It happened that he was blind at the end of his life, and was wont to go around in al- Madinah exclaiming, " O Bakir, O Bakir, when shall I meet thee?" On a certain day he passed through one of the streets of al-Madinah .... [page wanting in the original ms.]. Ja'far designated his son Isma'il to the 46 Imamate after him; when Isma'il died during the life of his father, we learned that he had designated his son merely to guide the people to choose as Imam his son Muhammad ibn-Isma'il. It is to this view that the Isma'Iliyah of the Batimyah inclined. We will mention them later among the sects of the Ghulat. d. Concerning the sect of the Musawiyah from among them. These are the ones who transferred the Imamate to Ja'far. 2 Then they claimed that the Imam after Ja'far was his son Musa ibn- Ja'far, and they claimed that Musa. ibn- Ja'far 3 was alive, and not dead, and that he was the expected Mahdi. They said that he went into the house of al-Rashid and has not come forth from it; [adding] we are sure of his Imamate ; but we have doubts of his death and we would not decide on it without proof." And it was said to this sect which was called the Musawiyah : " If you doubt his being alive and his death, then doubt his Imam- ate, and do not assert definitely that he is in existence and that he is the expected Mahdi; all the more so since you know that the burial-place of Musa ibn- Ja'far is well known 1 Ibn-IJajar, Biographical Dictionary, vol. i, p. 432. ' 2 De Slane, Ibn-Khallikan, vol. i, p. 300. 3 Ibid., vol. iii, p. 463- 65 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS in the western part of Baghdad, and is visited." And this sect is called the Musawiyah because it looks for Musa ibn- Ja'far; and it is also called the Mamturah because Yunus ibn- k Abd-al-Rahman al-Kummi was among the al-Kati'Iyah, in a debate with a member of the sect he said the f ollowin°- : " You are of less account in my eyes than the Mamturah dogs [dogs rained upon]." 47 e . Concerning the Mubarakiyah. They desired the Imamate to go to the son of Muham- mad ibn-Isma/il ibn-Ja'far x as the Batiniyah claim; but the genealogists say in their books that Muhammad ibn-Isma'il ibn-Ja'far died and left no offspring. f. Concerning the branch called the al-KatiTyah from among them. These transferred the Imamate from Ja'far al-Sadik to his son Musa, and believe in the cTeath of Musa, and claim that the Imam who succeeded him was the grandson of Muhammad ibn-al-Hasan, who was a grandson of 'All ibn- Musa al-Rida. They were also called Twelvers, 2 because of their assertion that this expected Mahdi would be the twelfth in line from 'AH ibn-abl-Talib. And they differed over the age of this twelfth Imam at the death of his father. Some said that he was four years old, and some that he was eight years old. They also differed over his right to rule at that time; some claiming that even then he was really Imam, knowing all that an Imam should know, obe- dience to him being obligatory; while others claimed that although under age, he was theoretically Imam, for no other could be Imam, decisions meanwhile being in the hands of the learned men of the school until his coming of 1 Friedlander, J. A. O. S., vol. xxviii, pp. 58-69. The Seveners be- lieved him to be the last Imam. 2 Ibid., vol. xxix, p. 171, cf. Ithna'ashariyah. 66 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID age, at which time this Imamate was definitely recognized - and to whom obedience was due ; and that he is now the Imam to whom obedience is due, although he is absent. 1 g. Concerning those called the Hishamiyah among them. 2 Of these two sects, one owes its origin to Hisham ibn-al- Hakam al-Rafid 3 and the other to Hisham ibn-Salim 4 al- Jawaliki. To their true doctrines in regard to the Imamate 48 these two sects added the error of predicating a body to Allah, as well as their heresy as regards anthropomorphisms. Concerning the views of Hisham ibn-al-Hakam : Hisham ibn-al-Hakam claimed that that which he worshipped was a body possessing dimensions, height, breadth and thickness, its height being equal to its breadth and to its depth, while its length and breadth are specified only as long and broad. He held, moreover, that its extension upward is no greater than its breadth. In addition, he claimed that the object that he worshipped was a diffusing light, shining as a pure chain of silver, and as a pearl perfectly rounded. This object also possessed, according to him, color, taste, smell, touch. 5 He also claims that its color is its taste, its taste its smell, its smell its touch. He does not say that color and taste are its essence, but he claims that the object itself is color and taste. He went on to say that Allah was, when space was not, and it was by his own motion that he created space, space thus appearing for the first time, and it is in this space that Allah is, and this space is his throne. 1 Ibid., vol. xxviii, p. 53. 2 Not to be confused with the Hishamiyah of the Mu'tazilites. 3 Ibid., vol. xxvii, p. 65. ShahrastanI, ibid., vol. i, p. 212. Mas'udi, ibid., vol. v, pp. 443 et seq., vol. vi, pp. 370 et seq., vol. vii, p. 232 et seq. 4 Ai-Fihrist, p. 17/. 5 Cf. M. Horten, Philosophischen Systeme der spekulativcn Thcologen im Islam, p. 170. ^ShahrastanI, ibid., vol. i. p. 87. 67 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Some report of Hisham that he described the object which he worshipped as seven spans [measured] by his own span, as if he had measured him according to human measure- ment, since in the majority of cases man is seven spans by his own span. Abu-al-Hudhail in one of his books says that he met Hisham ibn-al-Hakam in Mecca near the mount of abu- Kubais ' and asked him which of the two was greater, the being he worshipped or this mountain. He answered, pointing to it : " The mountain towers above him, the ex- alted, i. e. verily the mountain is greater than he." 2 aq Ibn-al-Rawandi relates in one of his books about Hisham that he said : " There is a likeness between Allah and bodies that can be felt in some way; if this were not so, they would not point to Him." Al-Jahiz, in one of his books, says about Hisham : that he said that Allah knows what is under the earth only by means of the rays that come from him and penetrate to the depths of the earth. And they said, unless his rays touched what was behind the moving bodies, he would not have seen what is behind it, nor would he have known about it. Abu-'Isa al-Warrak said in his book that some of Hisham's compan- ions answered him that Allah touches his throne, but is not separate from it; nor is the throne separate from him. It is also reported that Hisham, in addition to his error con- cerning the Tauhid [unity], erred concerning the attributes of Allah. He changed the opinion that Allah does not cease knowing things, claiming that he knows things after not having known them, through knowledge, and that knowl- edge is one of his attributes, not identical with him, nor is it anything other than he, nor is it a part of him. He said, 1 The highest in the range around Mecca. De Goeje, Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum, vol. vii, p. 314. 2 Friedlander, ibid., vol. xxix, p. 27. 68 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID moreover, that his knowledge cannot be said to be eternal, nor created, for it is an attribute, and according to him an attribute cannot be predicated. About the power of Allah, and his hearing, and his seeing, and his life, and his will, he said, verily they are not eternal nor created, because an attribute cannot be predicated. And he said in regard to them that they are he and no other. He also said that Allah, had he never ceased knowing things that are knowable, the latter would be eternal, because one cannot be a knower without an object already existing to be known, as if Hisham had impugned the possibility of knowing the non-existent. Hisham said, moreover, that if Allah was the knower of 50 that which his servants did for him before their deeds actually occurred, the free will of his servants would not be possible, nor could they impose duties upon themselves. In regard to the Koran, he was wont to say that it was neither creator nor created. It could, nevertheless, not be said that it 'was not created, because such a statement would be an attribute and, according to him, an attribute cannot be predicated. As to the deeds of Allah's servants, the tradi- tions about them, according to him, are divergent. One tradition says they were created of Allah, another that they are ideas, and neither things nor bodies, for according to Hisham a thing can only be a body. Regarding the proph- ets, Hisham considered it lawful to say that they were dis- obedient, although the Imams he considered sinless. In connection with this he claimed that the prophet disobeyed his Lord in taking ransom from the prisoners of Badr, but Allah forgave him. Applied to this are the words of Allah : " May Allah forgive thee that which thou hast done early by thy fault and that in which thou didst delay." * Thus he distinguished between prophet and Imam, since to the 1 Surah 48, v. 2. 69 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Prophet when he disobeyed there came a revelation calling attention to his sins, while to the Imam no such revelation came; he must therefore be free from disobedience. As regards the Imamate, Hisham belonged to the school of the Imamlyah, although the rest of the Imamlyah condemned him because he thought the Prophet capable of disobedience. Furthermore, he denied that any of the parts of a body were limited, and it was from him that al-Nazzam 1 took the doctrine that what could be no further divided was non- existent. Zurkan 2 says of him in his treatise that he held 51 that it was possible for one body to pass into another, just as al-Nazzam held that two thin bodies could be in the same place [at the same time]. Zurkan reports further that he said : " Man consists of two things, a body and a soul. The body is dead, the soul, however, is sentient and intelligent, and acts on the outside world. It is a light like the bodies in the universe that give light." As regards earthquake, Hisham said : " The earth is made up of different elements each closely attached to the other. Thus when one of these elements becomes weak the other becomes stronger, and an earthquake takes place; if the element further increases in weakness, there is an eclipse.'' Zurkan also reported of him that he considered it possible for someone who was not a prophet to walk on water, although he did say that mir- acles could not be performed by one who was not a prophet. Concerning Hisham ibn-Salim al-Jawaliki: This Jawa- liki while belonging in his heresies to the school of the Imamlyah went to the extreme as regards the doctrine of corporeality and anthropomorphism. He claimed that the object which he worshipped was in the image of man, but was not flesh and blood, being a diffused white light. He claimed also that he possesses five senses, like the senses of 1 Friedlander, ibid., vol. xxix, p. 58. 2 According to punctuation in Dhahabi, al Mushtabih, p. 240. 70 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID man, and has hands and feet and eyes and ears and nose and mouth, and he hears by a different means from that by which he sees, and the rest of the senses being different in the same way. He goes on to say that the upper half of this being is hollow and the lower is solid. Abu-'Isa al-Warrak * reports that he claims that his ob- ject of worship had black hair, it being a black light, but the rest of the person is white light. Our Sheikh abu'l-Hasan al-'Ash'ari reports in his treat- ise that Hisham ibn-Salim held the same views as Hisham ibn-al-Hakam as regards the will of Allah. They maintain 52 that his will is an act, a mental image which is not Allah nor anyone besides him. Thus if Allah wishes anything, he moves, and that which he wishes is. In this abu-Malik al-Hadraml agrees, as well as 'All ibn-Maitham, who were of the sheikhs of the Randiyah, i. e., that the will of Allah is a separate act; but they hold further that the will of Allah is outside of him. It is also said of al-Jawaliki that he said that the acts of the servants of Allah are substances, for there is nothing in the world but substances. He thus granted that the servants of Allah could create substances. A similar view is re- ported of Shaitan al-Tak. h. Concerning the Zarariyah 2 from among them. These are the followers of 'AH Zararah ibn-A'yan, who belonged to the sect al-Kahdiyah, those who believed in the Imamate of 'Abdallah ibn-Ja'far. From this sect he went over to that of the Musawiyah. The heresy which is laid at his door is that Allah did not live, nor have power, nor hear, nor see, nor know, nor wish, until he created for himself life, and power, and knowledge, and will, and hearing, and see- 1 Mentioned in Fihrist, p. 33%- 2 Not included by Ibn-Hazm. 7i MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ing. It was after he had created these attributes for him- self that he became living, powerful, wise, wishing, hearing, and seeing. The Basrah Kadariyah inferred frcm this form of heresy the finiteness of Allah's will and of Allah's word. It was from this principle that the Karamiyah inferred their doctrine that the word of Allah and his will and his apper- ceptions were finite. i. Concerning the Yunuslyah * from among them. They are the followers of Yunus ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman al- Kummi. 2 AJthough of the Imamiyah, he belonged to the 53 school of the Katfiyah, who firmly maintained that Musa ibn-Ja'far had died. And it was he who gave to those who would not commit themselves to a decision on the death of Musa the name of Mamturah dogs. Yunus, however, ex- ceeded the limits of anthropomorphism. He claimed that Allah is borne by the bearers of his throne, though he is stronger than they; just as the legs of the throne bear the throne, although the throne is stronger than they. As a proof of the fact that Allah is borne, he quoted : " And on that day eight will bear the throne of your lord above them." 3 Whereas the people of our doctrine maintain that this verse proves that the throne is borne, and not the lord. j. Concerning the Shaitamyah from among them. These are the followers of Muhammad ibn-al-Nu'man al- Rafidi, called Shaitan al-Tak 4 up to his son Musa. This sect maintains that Musa died, and they look for a successor 1 Not to be confused with the Yunuslyah of the Murji'ah. Not a sect in Ibn-Hazm, J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 50. 2 Fihrist, p. 220. 3 Surah 69, v. 17. 4 Ibn-Hazm calls him the son of Ja'far, J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 59; ShahrastanI calls the sect Nu'manlyah (cf. Z. D. M. G., 61, 75, n. 2). Mentioned in Fihrist, p. 308, also as abu-Ja'far. 72 THE SECTS OF THE RAWAFID for him and agree with Hisham ibn-Salim al-Jawaliki in the view that the deeds of the servants of Allah are substances; and that a servant of Allah can really produce a substance. They also agree with Hisham ibn-al-Hakam in the claim that Allah knows all things only after having determined them, and willed them, and that he does not know the things before determining them. 'Abd al-Kahir says that we have mentioned the sects of the Rafidah among the Zaidiyah and the Kaisamyah and the Imamiyah. Today the Kaisamyah are undistinguish- able, having mingled with the Zaidiyah and the Imamiyah among the Zaidiyah. When quarrels arose among the Imamiyah, some causing the others to err, one of the Imam- iyah poets satirized the Zaidiyah as follows : " O ye useless Zaidiyah, your Imam is an unfortunate one, and cast off. -^ ye vultures of the air, 1 go to Hell, ye have dived down and brought up stones against us." A poet of the Zaidiyah answered him as follows : " Our Imam is set up and stands upright, not like the one who has to be sought by sifting. Any Imam who is not seen publicly, he is not worth unto us a mustard seed." 'Abd al-Kahir says we have answered these two sects as regards their verses as follows : " O, ye worthless Rafidah, your claims are worthless throughout. Your Imam — if he is hidden in darkness, try to reach the hidden one by means of a light Or if he is covered up by your rancors, then bring forth by means of a sieve the one who is covered up. But the true Imam, according to us, is revealed by the Sunn. 75 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS or threat given in the Koran, the person committing such a sin cannot be designated only by an appellation men- tioned in the Koran, such as adulterer, thief, and the like. The Najadat, on the contrary, hold that the one of their number who commits a major sin is excluded from Allah's grace, but is not necessarily a heretic in faith. This shows al-Ka'bfs error in saying that all of the Khawarij agree in declaring the authors of major sins heretics, whether they belong to the Kharijite body or another. The only correct view in regard to the beliefs held in common by all the Khawarij is that which our sheikh abu-1-Hasan claims, namely : the condemning of 'AH and 'Uthman, the Follow- ers of the Camel, the two judges, and all those who justified the decision of the two judges, or the decision of one of them, or accepted their arbitration. We will now take up all these divisions in detail, please God. i. Concerning the first Muhakkimah: The Khawarij were either Muhakkimah or Shurah. 1 Scholars differ in regard to the first person who became a Shurah. Some say it was 'Urwah ibn-Hudair, 2 the brother of Maradis al-Kha- riji; and others that the first to secede was Yazid ibn-'Asim al-Muhadhi ; 3 while others hold that a man of the Rabi'ah of the Banu Yashkur who was with 'All at Siffin, when he saw that the two parties had agreed upon the tzvo judges. mounted his horse and attacked the followers of Mu'awiyah, killing one of their men, following this with an attack on the followers of 'All, killing one of their men. He then cried at the top of his voice : " Verily have I given up alle- giance to 'All and Mu'awiyah, and am therefore not bound 1 Mentioned in ShahrastanI, Haarbriicker, vol. i, p. 21, i. e. heretics. On the term, see Lane, S. V. and Z. D. M. G., Ixi, p. 432. 2 Tabarl, Chronique ed. Zotenberg, vol. iii, p. 683. 3 ShahrastanI, ibid., vol. i, p. 130, calls him Yazid ibn 'Asim al- Muharibl. 75 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH by their decision." It was while fighting the followers of 'All that he was killed by some men from Hamadhan. As for the Khawarij, who then numbered twelve thousand, after the return of 'All from Siffin to al-Kfifah, they broke 57 up camp and went to Hartira. This is why the Khawarij are called Haruriyah. Their leaders at the time were 'Ab- dallah ibn-Kauwa and Shibt ibn-Rab'i. 'AH came against them and plead with them, and his arguments prevailed so that ibn-al-Kauwa put himself under 'All's protection with ten horsemen while the rest of them went to al-Nahrawan, and made two men commanders over them : 'Abdallah ibn- Wahab al-Rasibi, 1 and Hurkus ibn-Zuhair al-Bajali al- 'Urani known as dhu-1-Thudaiah. 2 On their way through Nahrawan they discovered a man who was fleeing from them and having surrounded him, they said, " Who art thou?" He answered, " I am 'Abdallah ibn-Hubab ibn-al- 'Aratt." 3 " Tell us," said they, " a tradition which thou didst hear from thy father and which he heard from the prophet of Allah." He said, " I have heard my father say that the prophet of Allah said, ' There will be a civil war during which he who sits will be better than he who stands, and he who stands than he who walks, and he who walks better than he who runs, and whoever is able to be killed, let him not be a slayer.' " Then a man of the Khawarij, called Masma' ibn-Kadali, fell upon him with his sword and killed him, and his blood flowed in a streak over the water of the river to the other side. They then entered his house which was in the village, before the gate of which 1 Wellhausen, ibid., p. 17 ct seq. Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 130. 2 Ibid., p. 130. For further account see Tabarl-Zotenberg, vol. iii, p. 683. 3 Wellhausen: Das Arabischc Reich und sein Sturs, p. 54- Briinnow : Die Charidschiten, p. 20. 77 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS they had killed him, and put his child to death, as well as his slave (concubine), the mother of his child. They then encamped in Nahrawan. When news of them reached 'All he started against them with forty thousand of his follow- 58 ers, accompanied by 'Adi ibn-Hatim al-Ta'I, 1 who said: " When people fall back and slink away, we come with banners of truth fluttering like eagles, Against the worst of Schismatics, who have gathered together to make war on the God of men, the Lord of the East, Against the erring and the blind and the forsakers of true guidance, all of whom reject his word, and are unrighteous. And among us is 'All, of excellent virtue, who leads us against them openly with shining swords." On arriving, 'All sent word to them saying, " Hand over the slayer of 'Abdallah ibn-Hubbab." The answer came back, " Lo, all of us killed him, and verily if we had won the victory over thee, we should have killed thee." Where- upon 'AH attacked them with his army, and they appeared before him en masse. But before fighting he said to them, "What makes you seek revenge from me?" They an- swered, " We seek revenge from thee, first of all, because we fought for thee in the Battle of the Camel, and when the Followers of the Camel were put to flight thou didst permit us [to keep] what we had won [in the way] of booty from their soldiers, but thou didst forbid our taking possession of their women and their children. Why didst thou permit us their goods and exclude their women and children ?" 'AH answered : " I allowed their possessions to be seized only in exchange for what they had robbed from the treasury in al-Basrah before I came to them. But as to the women and the children, they were not fighting us. And therefore the regulations of Islam, made within the territory of Islam, 2 lr raban, ibid., vol. iii, p. 171 et seq., 245, 326, 342, 653 et seq., 658, 675. 2 Dar al-Islam. 78 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH should be applied to them. None of them had apostatized from Islam, and it is not permitted to make slaves of those who are not unbelievers. Moreover, if I had allowed you to take the women, which one of you would have taken 'A'ishah as his share?" The people being shamefully silenced by this, said to him, " Secondly, we seek revenge from thee for not using the Commander of the Faithful in connection with thy name, in the correspondence between thee and Mu'awiyah, when the latter disputed with thee in 59 regard to such power." He answered, " I followed the ex- ample of the prophet of Allah on the day of al-Hudaibiyah, when Suhail ibn-'Amr said to him, ' Had I known that thou art the prophet of Allah, I would not have disputed with thee, but write down thy name and the name of thy father !' l Accordingly the Prophet wrote, ' It is this upon which we, Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah and Suhail ibn-'Amr, have agreed.' The prophet of Allah told me that the same would happen to me, in connection with them; so my ex- perience with the sons is the same as that of the prophet of Allah with the fathers." They then went on to say to 'All, " Why didst thou say to the two judges, ' If I am worthy of the caliphate, then confirm me in it?' for if thou showest doubt concerning thy caliphate, then others (than thou) will have even more right to be in doubt concerning thee." To this 'Ali replied : " On that occasion I desired only jus- tice to Mu'awiyah, for if I had said to the too judges, 'Choose me for caliph,' Mu'awiyah would not have been satisfied. Verily the prophet of Allah challenged the Chris- tians of Najran to invoke the curse of God on the lying faction, saying, " Come, let us summon our sons and your sons, our wives and your wives, and ourselves and your- selves. Then we will invoke and lay the malison of Allah 1 Tabarl, ibid., vol. iii, p. 89. 79 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS on those who lie.' (Surah 3, v. 54.) In doing this he showed justice to them even at his own expense, for if he had said, ' I curse and ask the curse of Allah upon you,' the Christians would not have been satisfied. It is for this reason that I, in turn, was just with Mu'awiyah. Nor do I understand the treachery of 'Amr ibn-al-'Asi." They then said, " Why didst thou entrust the arbitration to the two judges when the right was on thy side?" And he said, " I found that the Prophet of Allah had once entrusted to Sa'd ibn-Mu'adh the arbitration of the case of the banu- Kuraizah, 1 although had he wished he need not have done it. In like manner I chose a judge, but the judge of the 60 Prophet judged justly, whereas my judge was cheated — which led to evil results. Have you any complaints beside this?" The people were silent. Most of them said, "By Allah, he speaketh the truth." And they said, " We re- pent." So on that day eight thousand put themselves under his control while four thousand withdrew to take part in the fight against him headed by 'Abdallah ibn-Wahb al- Rasibi and Hurkus ibn-Zuhair al-Bajali. Then 'AH said to those who had put themselves under his control, " With- draw from me for this one day." And he fought the Khawarij with those who had come with him from al- Kufah. He commanded his followers to fight them, say- ing, " By him in whose hand is my soul not ten of us will be killed, and not ten of them will escape." As a matter of fact, nine of the followers of 'AH were killed on that day. These were Duwaibiyah ibn-Wabrah al-Bajali, Sa'd ibn- Mujalid al-Saiba'I, 'Abdallah ibn-Hammad al-Juhairi, Rukanah ibn-Wa'il al-Arji, al-Faiyad ibn-Khalll al-Azdi, Kaisum ibn-Salamah al-Juhani, 'Utbah ibn-'Ubaid al- Khaulani, Jami' ibn-Jusham al-Kindi, and Habib ibn- 1 Ibn-Hisham, p. 674. Tabarl, ibid., vol. iii, p. 70. 80 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH 'Aslni al-'Audi. These nine were killed under the flag of 'All — and no more. In the course of the conflict, Hurkus ibn-Zuhair presented himself before 'All and said, "Oson of abu-Talib, by Allah, we do not wish to fight with thee except for the sake of Allah and the other world." And 'All said to him, " Verily to you applies the word of Allah, ' Shall we tell you who they are that have lost their labor most; whose aim in the present life hath been mistaken, and who deem that what they do is right?' (Surah 18, v. 103-104.) By the Lord of the Ka'hah, you are among those referred to in the text." 'All then attacked them with his followers, and 'Abdallah ibn-Wahb was killed in a duel, and Dhu-1- 61 Thudyah was thrown from his horse. Most of the Khawarij were killed that day, only nine of them escaping. Two of these went to Sijistan where the present Khawarij are their followers. And two went to al-Yaman. The Ibadiyah of al-Yaman are their followers. Two went to 'Uman and founded the sect of Khawarij there. Two went to the region of al-Jazirah (Mesopotamia), and the Kha- warij of al-Jazirah are their followers. And one went to Tell Mauzan. 1 On that day 'All said to his followers, " Seek Dhu-1-Thudyah." They found him under a vine- tree, and they saw under his arm, near the armpit, some- thing like the breast of a woman. Whereupon 'AH said, "The word of Allah and his Prophet have come true;" and in accordance with 'All's desire he was put to death. This is the story of the First Muhakkimah. Then the First Muhakkimah declared as unorthodox 'AH and 'Uthman, the Followers of the Camel, Mu'awiyah and his followers, the two judges, and whoever agrees with their decision ; as well as all sinful and disobedient men. Shortly after this, there rebelled against 'AH certain 1 De Goeje, La fin de V empire des Carmathes du Bahrein, Journ. As. 1895, ser. ix, vol. v, pp. n, 171. 81 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Khawarij who were of the same view as the First Muhak- kimah. Among them was 'Ashras ibn-'Auf, who arose against him in al-Anbar, Ghalafah al-Taimi, of Taim 'Adi, arose against him in Masidhan ; 1 al-Ashhab ibn-Bishr al- 'Uranl, in Harjaraya; 2 Sa'd ibn-Kufl in al-Mada'in, 3 and abu-Maryam al-Sa'di in Sawad al-Kufah. 'All sent an army with a leader against each one of these Khawarij until all were killed. It was in that same year, in the month of Ramadan, in the thirty-eighth year of the Hijra, that 'All was killed. When the rule passed over to Mu'awiyah, there rebelled 62 against him and his followers down to the time of the Azarikah, all who held the same views as the First Muhak- kimah. Among these was 'Abdallah ibn-Jausha al-Ta'I, who arose against Mu'awiyah in al-Nukhailah, in Sawad al-Kufah. Mu'awiyah sent men from al-Kufah against him, and killed these Khawarij. Next there arose against him [Mu'awiyah] Hautharah ibn-Wada' al-'Asadi. He was among those who sought the protection of 'AH at the battle of al-Nahrawan, in the forty-first year. Then Far- wah ibn-Naufal al-Ashja'I, 4 and al-Mustaurid ibn-'Alkamah al-Tamimi rose against al-Mughirah ibn-Shu'bah, 5 who was then the governor of al-Kufah under Mu'awiyah. Both of these were killed in fighting him. Mu'adh ibn-Jarir next rose against al-Mughirah and was killed in the battle. Then Ziyad ibn-Kharrash al-'Ijli arose against Ziyad ibn-Abihi, 1 De Goeje gives Masabadhan, Bibliotheca Geographorum Arabicorum, vol. vi, p. 20; vol. vii, p. 25. See also Yakut, vol. iii, p. 393- As the former is a well-known place, we conclude that in the text it should be Masabadhan. 2 Ibid., vol. vi, p. 7; one of the provinces of the territory watered by the Euphrates and Dujail, west of the Tigris. 3 Ibid., vol. vi, p. 5. *TabarI, ibid., vol. iii, p. 600; vol. iv, p. 6. 5 Ibid., vol. iv, p. 6. o2 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH and was killed during the fight. Kuraib ibn-Murrah with Zahaf ibn-Rahar al-Ta'i arose against 'Ubaid-Allah ibn- Ziyad. These two put to the sword everyone they met on their way, without distinction. Ibn-Ziyad sent 'Ubad ibn- al-Husain al-Haiti against them with an army which de- feated them. These are the Khawarij who stood by the First Muhakkimah before the time of the strife of the Azarikah, and Allah knows best. 2. Concerning the Azarikak. 1 These are the followers of Nan' ibn-al-Azrak al-Hanafi, surnamed abu-Rashid. 2 The Khawarij never had a sect which surpassed this in number, nor one that exceeded it in power. In creed they agreed on many points, among which were the following: the assertion that the opponents of this sect, within the Moslem community, were polytheists. The First Muhak- kimah had said that such opponents were unbelievers, but 63 not polytheists. Secondly, this sect asserted that those fol- lowers who abstained from fighting with them, although agreeing in other respects, were polytheists. The First Muhakkimah did not condemn such abstainers, if they agreed with them in other respects. The third point on which this sect agreed was that when a soldier appears, claiming that he is one of the sect, the truth of his claim should be proved by bringing to him a captive from the opposing side whom he be commanded to kill. If he kills this captive, his claim that he is one of the sect is con- firmed; if he refuses to kill the captive, he should be con- sidered a hypocrite and a heretic, and should be put to death. Fourthly, this sect permits the killing of their opponents' wives, as well as the killing of their children. 1 Dinawari, al-Akhbdr al-Tiwdl, p. 278. Tabari— De Goeje, vol. ii, p. 581. 3 Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i, p. 133 ** se Q- Tabari— Zotenberg, vol. iv, p. 76. 83 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Moreover, they claim that the children of those who oppose them are polytheists and will therefore be in hell- fire forever. What they differ about is the question as to who was the first to put forward the doctrine which is peculiar to the Azarikah, namely, the declaring the Abstain- ers from war, as unorthodox. They also disagree as re- gards the originator of the trial of a soldier claiming to be of their army. Some of them claim that the first to orig- inate these views was 'Abd-Rabbihi al-Kabir [the elder], 1 while others say it was 'Abd-Rabbihi al-Saghir [the younger], and still others that the first was one of their men called 'Abdallah ibn-al-Wadm. Nafi' ibn-al-Azrak differed from ibn-al-Wadm and asked him to change his heretical view, but when ibn-al-Wadm died, Nafi' and his followers adopted his view, saying, " He was in the right." Nafi* did not consider that he had been unorthodox when he differed from ibn-al-Wadm, but he declared that person unorthodox who disagreed after he himself had seen the light. Nor did he separate himself from the First Muhak- kimah in their refusing to condemn the Abstainers as un- orthodox. He said, " In regard to this point, we are in- ferior to them [the Muhakkimah]." He therefore con- demned as unorthodox those who, after this, opposed him in the matter of condemning the Abstainers as unorthodox. Nafi' and his followers claimed that the home of their opponents, within the Moslem community, was the home 64 of unbelief; and that it is permissible in this home to kill children and women. The Azarikah, however, rejected the stoning of the adulterer, while considering it permissible to deny a trust, the paying of which had been commanded by Allah; the explanation they gave being, " If our opponents are polytheists, then we do not need to give back a deposit 1 Author of al-Ikd dl-Farid. 84 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH made by them." Nor do they apply the legal punishment to him who brings a false charge of adultery against a pious man, although they do in the case of a man who accuses pious women. They also cut off the hand of a thief, whether the amount stolen be big or little, thus ignoring the law in regard to the minimum amount of the stolen goods. 1 The community has condemned them for this innovation, which they introduced in connection with an unbelief in which the First Muhakkimah shared. In this way one heresy led to another, just as anger incites anger. Unbe- lievers are doomed to great torture. After the Azarikah had agreed on the innovations which we have mentioned they paid allegiance to NarY ibn-al- Azrak, who was called the Commander of the Faithful. They were joined by the Khawarij of 'Uman and al-Yaman, their number amounting to more than twenty thousand. They took possession of al-Ahwaz 2 and what is beyond it of the land of Persia and Kirman, collecting its land-tax. The governor of al-Basrah at that time was 'Abdallah ibn- al-Harith al-Khuza'i 3 under 'Abdallah ibn-al-Zubair. 'Ab- dallah ibn-al-Harith despatched an army with Muslim ibn- 'Abs ibn-Kuraiz ibn-Habib ibn-'Abd- Shams to fight the Azarikah. The two parties met in Dulab al-Ahwaz. In this battle Muslim ibn-'Abs was killed, together with most of his followers. After this there came against them from al-Basrah 'Uthman ibn-'Ubaidallah ibn-Ma'mar al-Tamimi with two thousand horsemen, whom the Azarikah put to flight. Then there came against them Harithah ibn-Badr al-Fadani at the head of three thousand from the army of 1 According to law, the seizing of anything under this minimum amount is not considered a theft; therefore it is not punishable. 2 Meynard, Dictionnaire de la Perse, p. 57- Northwestern province of Persia. 8 For an account of this governor and the successive battles, cf. Tabari, ibid., vol. iv, p. 76 et seq. Briinnow, ibid., p. 42 ^ seq., 52 et seq. 85 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS 5 c al-Basrah, but the Azarikah put them also to flight. 'Ab- dallah ibn-al-Zubair then wrote from Mecca to al-Muhal- lab ibn-abi-Suf rah, who was at that time in Khurasan, com- manding him to fight the Azarikah, and making him com- mander of this affair. So al-Muhallab returned to al- Basrah and chose from its army ten thousand men, and his people of the tribe of al-Azd joined him, making a total of twenty thousand men. This army proceeded to fight the Azarikah and drove them from Dulab al-Ahwaz to al- Ahwaz. It was in this flight that Nan' ibn-al-Azrak died. After his death the Azarikah paid allegiance to 'Ubai- dallah ibn-Ma'mun al-Tamimi. Al-Muhallab then fought them in al-Ahwaz, on which occasion 'Ubaidallah ibn- Ma'mun was killed, as well as his brother 'Uthman ibn- Ma'mun, together with three hundred of the strongest of the Azarikah. Those who remained were driven to 'Idhaj, 1 where they paid allegiance to Katari ibn-al-Fuja'ah, to whom they gave the title of the Commander of the Faithful. After this, al-Muhallab fought them in battles in which each party won alternate victories, at the end of which the Azarikah were driven to Sabur, 2 in the land of Persia, which they made the land of their flight. Al-Muhallab, his sons and his followers, kept up the fight for nineteen years. Part of this period was in the days of 'Abdallah ibn-al-Zubair, and the rest in the time of the caliph 'Abd-al-Malik ibn- Marwan, during the governorship of al-Hajjaj over al- Trak. 3 The latter confirmed al-Muhallab in his position as leader of the army against the Azarikah. This war between 1 'Idhaj is a town in al-Ahwaz. See De Goeje, Bibliotheca Geogra- phorum Arabicorum, index, s. v.; Yakut, Geographisches Worterbuch, vol. i, p. 4 J 6 s. v. 2 Meynard, ibid., p. 293. One of the principal districts of Fars, not far from Shiraz. s Tabari, ibid., vol. iv, p. 117 et seq. 86 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH al-Muhallab and the Azarikah kept on raging for years in different forms between Persia and al-Ahwaz, until a differ- ence arose among the Azarikah which resulted in 'Abd- Rabbihi the elder forsaking the Katari and going to a valley in Jiraft Kirmin * with seven thousand men. 'Abd-Rabbihi 66 the younger left him and with four thousand men went to another district of Kirman, Katari remaining with about ten thousand men in the land of Persia. There al-Muhallab fought with him, and drove him to the land of Kirman, where he pursued and fought him, driving him from there to al-Rai. 2 He then attacked and killed 'Abd-Rabbihi the elder, while he sent his son Yazld ibn-al-Muhallab with his followers against 'Abd-Rabbihi the younger. At the same time al-Hajjaj sent Sufyan ibn-al-Abrad al-Kalbi with a great army against Katari after he had departed from al- Rai to Tabaristan, where they killed him and sent his head to al-Hajjaj. 'Ubaidah ibn-Hilal al-Yashkuri had forsaken Katari and gone to Kumis. So Sufyan ibn-al-Abrad fol- lowed and besieged him in the fortress of Kumis until he succeeded in killing him and his followers. Allah thus cleared the earth of the Azarikah — praise Allah for that! 3. Concerning the Najadat. These were the followers of Najdah ibn-'Amir al-Hanafi. 3 The cause of his leader- ship and authority was that when Nan' ibn-al-Azrak de- clared unorthodox those who abstained from fighting, though they agreed with him in belief, he called them poly- theists, and sanctioned the killing of the children of his opponents and their women. Abu-Kudail, 4 'Ativan al- 1 Meynard, ibid., p. 185, town in Kirman. 2 De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, pp. 20 and 22, town in Persia. 3 For Najdah and the other leaders of this sect see ShahrastanI, ibid., vol. i, p. 136. Briinnow, ibid., p. 46 et seq. Tabarl, ibid., vol. iv, p. 102. * Probably a mistake for abu-Fudaik, he being the other great schismatic in this sect. ShahrastanI, vol. i, p. 136. 87 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Hanafi, Rashid al-Tawil, Miklas and 'Aiyub al-Azrak for- sook Naf? with all their followers, departing for al-Yama- mah, where Najdah received them with an army of those Khawarij who desired to follow the army of Nafi'. They told them of NafV's latest theories and sent them back to 6y al-Yamamah, where they swore allegiance to Najdah ibn- 'Amir. These men condemned as unbelievers those who had in turn condemned the Abstainers as unbelievers. They also condemned whoever admitted the Imamate of Nafi', making Najdah the Imam. About him, however, they soon differed,, complaining of various things. These disagree- ments led to their division into three sects. One of these sects went with 'Ativan ibn-al-Aswad al-Hanaf I to Sijistan, 1 where the Khawarij of Sijistan joined them; and it is be- cause of this that the Khawarij of Sijistan are called 'Ata- wiyah. The second sect joined abu-Kudail [Fudaik] in battle against Najdah. They are the ones who killed Naj- dah. The third sect broke with Najdah in regard to his theories but accepted his Imamate. Among the deeds of Najdah for which his followers blamed him was the fact that he sent an army to attack by mainland and one to attack by sea, and to the one which he sent by land he assigned higher stipends than to the one which he sent by sea. They complained, moreover, that he had sent an army to attack the city of the Prophet of Allah and had seized there a daughter of 'Uthman ibn-'Affan. 'Abd-al-Malik having written to him about her, he had bought her back from the one in whose possession she was, and had given her back to 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan. They therefore said to him, :i Verily thou hast returned to our enemies a maiden who belongs to us." They further complained because he par- doned those who committed faults in misdirected zeal, ex- 1 De Goeje: ibid., vol. vi, p. 35. 88 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH cusing them on the ground of ignorance. The explanation of this was that his son al-Muttarih was sent with an army to al-Katif, 1 which they attacked, taking the women and children prisoners. They then took possession of the women for themselves, and married them before the fifth of the booty had been taken out for the state. Concerning this they said : " The women fell to our share, which is our desire. If their price surpasses our share of the booty, we will make up for it from our own property." When they returned to Najdah, they asked him about what they had done in seizing the women, and in eating food from the booty before the fifth had been taken out, and before the four-fifths had been divided among the soldiers. Najdah said to them, " You should not have done this." They an- swered, " We did not know that this was not permitted us." Whereupon he forgave them because of their ignorance. Then he said, " There are two things in religion. One is the recognition of Allah, and the recognition of his proph- ets, the interdiction of the shedding of the blood of a Mos- lem, the interdiction of robbing the wealth of a Moslem, and the recognition of all that comes from Allah. This recognition is incumbent on everyone who has attained the age of puberty. And the second includes all other require- ments of religion. Man is forgiven for ignorance in regard to the latter, until there dawns upon him the distinction between that which is permissible and that which is for- bidden. Now, whoever in his (misdirected) zeal considers a thing which is forbidden permissible, he shall be forgiven. And he who, before the evidence is established, assumes punishment for the zealot who commits a fault, is an unbe- liever." Another innovation of Najdah was that he took under his protection those of his followers who held to the punishments fixed by law, and he said, " Perhaps Allah will 1 De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, p. 152, town in Bahrain. 39 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS punish them for their sins in some place other than hell-fire, and then have them enter paradise." Moreover, he claimed that anyone disagreeing with his religious views would enter hell-fire. Another of his errors was that he annulled the punish- ment [hadd] for drinking wine. He also said, " Whoever commits a minor sin or tells a small lie, and persists in it, he is a polytheist; while he who commits adultery and steals, and takes a drink without making a habit of it, he is a Moslem," provided such a man agreed with him [Najdah] in the principles of his faith. When he had originated these innovations, and had forgiven his followers because they had acted in ignorance, most of his followers asked him to renounce his innovations, saying, " Go into the mosque and 69 repent of your innovations." This he did, and it resulted in having some regret his repentance, and join those who had sided with him and said to him, " Thou art the Imam, and to thee belongs the right to explain the law, and it would not be seemly for us to ask thee to renounce anything. Therefore repent for having repented and let them recant who made thee recant; if not we will desert thee." And he did so. His followers, therefore, were divided concern- ing him, the majority deposing him and saying, " Choose us an Imam." So he chose abu-Fudaik; Rashid al-Tawil was hand in glove with abu-Fudaik. And when abu-Fudaik became governor of al-Yamamah, he learned that the fol- lowers of Najdah, on returning from fighting the infidels, would reinstate Najdah as head. Naj dan's slave, however, sought to kill him, so he hid himself in the dwelling of one of his followers, looking for the return of his soldiers whom he had sent to the seacoast of Syria and the districts of al- Yaman. Meanwhile a proclamation was given by abu- Fudaik: " Whoever shows us the way to Najdah, he shall be rewarded with ten thousand dirhems. And the slave 90 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH who brings us to him, he shall be free." Thereupon a maid of those with whom Najdah was hiding pointed out the way to him, and abu-Fudaik sent Rashid al-Tawil to him with an army. They surprised him, and brought his head to abu-Fudaik. After Najdah was killed, the Najadat were divided into three sects. One sect condemned him and went over to abu-Fudaik. This sect included Rashid al- Tawil, abu-Baihas, and abu-1-Shamrakh, and their follow- ers. Another sect pardoned him for what he had done, these being the present Najadat; while the third sect de- parted from al-Yamamah, and settled near al-Basrah, where 70 they doubted the story of the innovations of Najdah, and were undecided concerning him, saying, " We do not know whether he made these innovations or not, and we will not desert him without sure knowledge." Abii-Fudaik lived after the death of Najdah until 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan sent Ya'mur ibn-'Ubaidallah ibn-Ma mar al-Taimi against him with an army. They killed abu-Fudaik and sent his head to 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan. This ends the story of the Najadat. 4. Concerning the Sufriyah. These are the followers of Ziyad ibn-al-Asfar. 1 Their views are in the main like those of the Azarikah, namely, that those who commit sins are polytheists; except that the Sufriyah do not sanction the killing of the women and the children of those who differ in belief from them, while the Azarikah do sanction it. One division of the Sufriyah claims that when a deed for which there is definite punishment is committed, the author of that deed should be called only by the name connected with the nature of the deed, e. g. adulterer, thief, calumniator or in- tentional murderer. He is not an unbeliever or a poly- theist. In all sins, however, for which there is no definite 1 Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 154. ail MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS punishment, such as the omitting of the prayer or of the fast, such deeds being heretical, their authors are unbe- lievers ( Manuscript is not clear at this point. ) The third sect of the Sufriyah asserted the same thing as the Baihasiyah, *. e. that the sinner should not be judged as an unbeliever until he has been brought before the governor and punished. Thus the Sufriyah were divided into three sects. One sect which claimed, as did the Azarikah, that the authors of any sin were all polytheists. The second claimed that the title of unbeliever should be given to the author of deeds which deserved no definite punishment, punishable sins being a j i departing from belief, but not an entrance into unbelief. The third claimed that the title of unbeliever should be given to the authors of all sins which were punished by the governor. These three sects of the Sufriyah differ from the Azarikah as regards children and women, as has been explained above. All the Sufriyah consider themselves to be under the patronage of 'Abdallah ibn-Wahb al-Rasibi, and Hurkus ibn-Zuhair and their followers from among the First Mu- hakkimah. They claim, moreover, that after the death of the men already mentioned, they are under the Imamate of abu-Bilal Mirdas al-Khariji, and after him of Tmran ibn- Hittan al-Sadwisi. As to abu-Bilal Mirdas, 1 in the days of Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah, he rose in al-Basrah against 'Ubai- dallah ibn-Ziyad. 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ziyad sent against him Zur'ah ibn-Muslim al-'Amiri, with two thousand cavalry. As it happened, Zur'ah sympathized with the views of the Khawarij, and when both sides stood in battle array, Zur'ah said to abu-Bilal, " You are on the side of truth, but we ^abarl-De Goeje, vol. ii, pp. 186, 390. Briinnow, ibid., p. 35. 92 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH fear ibn-Ziyad lest he cancel our stipends, so there is noth- ing for us but to fight you." Abu-Bilal answered, "I should have liked to adopt toward you the view of my brother 'Urwah who advised me to slay you indiscriminately, as Kuraib and Zahaf * slew indiscriminately certain men with the sword, but I disagree with both them and my brother." Thereupon abu-Bilal and his followers attacked and de- feated Zur'ah and his army. Then 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ziyad sent against him Tbad ibn-Akhdar al-Tamiml, who fought abu-Bilal in Tauwaj 2 and killed him, together with his fol- lowers. When the news of the death of abu-Bilal reached ibn-Ziyad, he killed those of the Sufriyah whom he found in al-Basrah, and having seized 'Urwah, the brother of 72 Mirdas, he said to him, " O enemy of Allah, thou didst ad- vise thy brother Mirdas to slay men indiscriminately. Allah has avenged these men on thee and thy brother." By his orders 'Urwah' s hands and feet were cut off, and he was crucified. When Mirdas was killed, the Sufriyah made Tmran ibn-Hittan, Imam. He is the man who wrote elegies in verse on Mirdas, in one of which he said : 3 " After thee, I know not what I thought I knew before, After thee, O Mirdas, men are no longer men." This Imran ibn-Hittan was a hermit poet, believing strongly in the school of the Sufriyah. An instance, however, of his ignominy in an attack on 'All is that he wrote an elegy on 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn-Muljim 4 who stabbed 'AH, and said : l Tabari, ibid., vol. i, pp. 90, 91. 2 De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, p. 242, town in Persia. 3 Noeldeke, Delectus veterum carminum Arabiconim, p. 90. Tabarl, Annates, vol. i, p. 3064. Shahrastani, vol. i, p. 134- Abu-1-Mahasin ; Annates, p. 24. Kitdb al-Aghdnl, vol. xvi, p. 152 et seq., this poem not quoted. 4 Tabari-Zotenberg, vol. iii, p. 706, 'All's murderer. Kitdb al-Aghdni (reads Karim instead of Munib. Karim means nobleman), vol. xvi, p. 153. 93 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS " O blow from a penitent, who, in giving it, only desired to bring down favor from the possessor of the Throne, I will mention him now, and I will consider him the richest of crea- tures before Allah, when it comes to the final weighing of deeds." 'Abd-al-Kahir says he answered that poem with the follow- ing verse : " O blow from an unbeliever who did not profit by it, except by the fact that it makes him burn in hell fire. Verily I curse him for his religion and I curse also anyone who hopes for him at any time, forgiveness and pardon. This ibn-Muljim is the worst of men, he is the lightest in the scales of the Lord of men." 5. Concerning the 'Ajaridah of the Khawarij. All of them are the followers of 'Abd-al-Karim ibn-'Ajrad, 1 who 73 was a follower of 'Ativan ibn-al-Aswad al-Hanafi. The 'Ajaridah were divided into ten sects which agreed on the view that a child is to be called to Islam when it has attained maturity, having been left in freedom before this until it is called to Islam, or speaks of it itself. Another matter in which they differed from the Azarikah is that the latter considered it permissible to seize the possessions of their op- ponents under all conditions. The 'Ajaridah, on the other hand, do not consider it lawful to seize the possessions of the opponent as booty until after killing the owner. All the 'Ajaridah agreed on this at first, but later sects divided off from them, of whom we will speak below. 6. Concerning the Khazimiyah. 2 These include most of the 'Ajaridah of Sijistan. This sect agrees with the Sun- nites as regards predestination, freedom of choice and will. In other words, they hold that there is no creator but Allah, 1 Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i, p. 143. 2 Ibid. Charimlyah — cf. footnote, vol. i, p. 146. 94 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH and nothing is done unless Allah desires it. Moreover, they hold that freedom of choice comes with the deed. As a re- sult, they condemn as unbelievers the Maimumyah who, in regard to predestination and freedom of choice, agree with the view of the Kadariyah, who have strayed from the truth. Furthermore, the Khazimiyah differed from the rest of the Khawarij over the question of friendship and hatred. They said, " Verily both of these are predicates of Allah." They hold that Allah loves a man for whatever faith he exhibits, even if he has been an unbeliever for most of his life. But, on the other hand, if a man be- comes an unbeliever at the end of his life, Allah keeps aloof from him, even though he has been a believer all the rest of his life. They also claim that Allah does not cease loving his friends or hating his enemies; agreeing with the Sun- nites concerning the perfection of man, except that these differed from the Khazimiyah in this, holding that 'Ali, Talhah, al-Zubair and 'Uthman were in Paradise, because they were of those who took the Oath of Allegiance, about 74 whom Allah said, "Allah has had mercy upon the faithful, lo they made an oath of allegiance to thee under the tree." (Surah 48, v. 18.) And they said unto them, " since the mercy of Allah is visited upon one who God knows will die in faith, it must follow that those who took the oath under the tree should be among those to whom mercy is shown. 'AH and Talhah and al-Zubair were among them, but 'Uth- man was a prisoner on that day, and the prophet promised allegiance to them, putting his own hand in the place of 'Uthman's. By this means is proven the falsity of those who consider these four to be unbelievers." 7. Concerning the Shu'aibiyah. In their views about pre- destination, freedom of choice, and will they agree with the view of the Khazimiyah. Any possible account of the 95 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Shu'aibiyah appears first when their leader, Shu'aib, 1 dif- fered with a man of the Khawarij whose name was Mai- mun. Their cause of difference was that Shu'aib owed Maimun money, over which they had a law suit, and Shu'aib said to him, " I will pay thee, if Allah desires." Maimun answered, " Allah has already desired it this minute." So Shu'aib replied, " If he has really desired it, I can have done nothing but paid it." And Maimun said, " Allah has commanded thee to do this, and he commands only what he desires, while that which he does not desire he does not command." It was after this that the 'Ajaridah were divided, some of them following Shu'aib and the rest Maimun. Regarding this point they wrote to 'Abd-al-Karim ibn- 'Ajrad who was then imprisoned by the Sultan, and in an- swer to them he wrote, " We say that what Allah desires happens, and what he does not desire does not happen, and we do not impute evil to Allah." This answer arrived after the death of ibn-'Ajrad. Maimun claimed that 'Ajrad had 75 decided according to his [Maimun's] opinion because he said, " We do not impute evil to Allah." Shu'aib, however, said, " No, he agreed with me because he said, we hold the opinion that what Allah desires happens, and what he does not desire does not happen." The Khazimiyah, and most of the 'Ajaridah, sympathized with Shu'aib, while the Ham- ziyah and the Kadariyah sympathized with Maimun. The Maimuniyah then added to their unbeliefs in regard to predestination a kind of Magianism. They permitted marriage with granddaughters on both sides ; and they be- lieved it was a divine command to fight a tyrannical ruler, and whoever was satisfied with his rule. As to anyone who refused their view, they do not believe in killing him except 1 Ibid., vol. i, p. 146. 96 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH when he is opposed to them, attacks their religion, or acts as guide to the undesirable ruler. In the next chapter, if Allah pleases, we shall mention the Maimuniyah among the sects of the Ghulat who deserted the true faith. Now there was a man among the Maimuniyah called Khalaf who dif- fered from the Maimuniyah as to predestination as well as freedom of choice, and will. In these three things he agreed with the view of the Sunnites; he was followed by the Khawarij of Karman and Mukran. They were, therefore, called Khalaf lyah and are the ones who fought Hamzah ibn-Akrak al-KharijI x in the land of Karman. 8. Concerning the Khalaf lyah. These are the followers of Khalaf, 2 who fought Hamzah al-Khariji. The Khala- f lyah do not believe in fighting except under an Imam. This forced them to withhold from fighting because of the lack of anyone among them suited to be an Imam. These Khala- fiyah tended to agree with the Azarikah in one thing, namely, they believed that the children of their opponents are in hell. 9. Concerning the Ma'lumlyah and the Majhuliyah* These sects are branches of the main Khazimiyah. The Ma'lumiyah differed from their predecessors the Khazi- miyah in two things, namely, they claimed that whoever did not recognize Allah by all his names, that man was ignorant of him (Allah), and anyone ignorant of him was an unbe- liever. Secondly, they said that the acts of men are not 4 created by Allah. They agreed, however, concerning free- dom of choice, and will, with the Sunnites, holding that freedom of choice goes with the deed, and that it cannot be carried out unless Allah wishes. This sect claimed the right 1 ShahrastanI gives Adrak, vol. i, p. 144. 2 Ibid., vol. i, p. 145. * Ibid., vol. i, p. 151. 4 ShahrastanI has " are created," without the negative. 97 76 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS of the Imamate for someone in its own group, who goes out with the sword against his enemies ; they did not, how- ever, excommunicate those among them who were Ab- stainers. As to the Majhuliyah, their views are like those of the Ma'lumlyah except that they hold that he who recognizes Allah by some of his names (if not all) really knows him, and in this matter they condemned the Ma'lumlyah as unbe- lievers. 10. Concerning the Saltlyah. 1 These take their name from Salt ibn-'Uthman, who is also called ibn-abi-al-Salt. He belonged to the 'Ajaridah, except that he said : " When a man agrees with us and becomes a Moslem, we accept him, but not his children, for they are not real Moslems until they are of age, when they are invited into Islam and accept it." Side by side with this sect was another sect, the ninth sect of the 'Ajaridah, who claimed that neither the children of believers nor the children of polytheists were friends or foes until they had attained maturity, when they were invited to Islam and received or refused it. ii. Concerning the Hamziyak. These are the followers j j of Hamzah ibn-Akrak (see above) who laid waste Sijistan, Khurasan, Mukran, 2 Kuhistan, 3 and Karman, and de- feated their big armies. He at first belonged to the 'Aja- ridah of the Khazimiyah, but came to differ from them over predestination and freedom of choice, agreeing in these matters with the Kadariyah. The Khazimiyah, therefore, condemned him as unbelieving in this respect. Moreover, he claimed that the children of polytheists are condemned to 2 Not given by Shahrastani. M. Horten, Die Philosophischen System e der speculativen Theologen im Islam, p. 62. 2 De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, p. 242, country next to Karman. 3 Ibid., p. 49- 98 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH hell, for which view the Kadariyah condemned him as an unbeliever. He then made a covenant with the Abstainers among the Khawarij, in consonance with his views on the abjuration of whoever does not agree with him on the sub- ject of fighting those within the sects of this religion who disagree with his view, calling them polytheists. Wherever he fought and defeated some enemy he commanded their possessions to be burned and their animals slaughtered, and at the same time killed the prisoners taken from those who disagreed with him. His appearance was in the days of Harun al-Rashid, in the year 179. His uprising lasted until the early part of the caliphate of al-Ma'mun. When he took possession of some provinces, he installed as his Kadi over them abu-Yahya Yusuf ibn-Bashshar, as leader of his army a man by the name of Jiwaih ibn-Ma'bad, and as leader of his bodyguard 'Amr ibn-Sa'id. Many of the poets of the Khawarij joined him, such as Talhah ibn-Fahd, abu-1-Julandi and others. He started hostilities against the Baihaslyah of the Khawarij, most of whom he killed, so that it was after this that he was called the Commander of the Faithful The poet Talhah ibn-Fahd said about this : " The Commander of the Faithful is on the right way and under the best of guidance, What a marvelous commander, surpassing the other commanders just as the shining moon surpasses the small star." It was after this that Hamzah made a raid against the 7% Khazimiyah among the Khawarij in a part of the country known as Faljard, 1 killing great numbers of them. Then he himself went to Hirat, 2 whose people prevented him from entering it, but he fought those outside of the city and put them to the sword. Then 'Amr ibn-Yazid al-Azdi, who at 1 Ibid., vols, iii-iv, index. 2 Ibid., vol. vi, p. 18, province of Khurasan. 99 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS this time was governor of Hirat, came against him with an army. The battle between them lasted for months. A great many from the land of Hirat were killed, including the Schismatics, the followers of Haisam al-Shari. 1 The mis- sionaries of Hamzah urged the people to join in his error. Hamzah then attacked Karukh in the vicinity of Hirat, burning the possessions of the people and laying waste their trees. After this he fought 'Amr ibn-Yazid al-Azdi in the neighborhood of Btishanj (or kh?), 2 in a battle in which 'Amr was killed. 'All ibn-'Isa ibn-Hadiyan, who was then governor of Khurasan, now took part in the war against Hamzah, who was forced to flee from him into the land of Sijistan after he had killed sixty men of his leaders, not to mention his followers. When he reached Sijistan, the people of Zaranj 3 prevented his entering their town, so he slaughtered some of them with the sword in the wastes near the town. He then disguised himself from them (the people of Zaranj) by putting his followers into black, which gave them the appearance of being the followers of the Sultan. 4 They were warned of this, however, and succeeded in pre- venting his entrance into their city. He therefore laid waste the palms in their forests and killed those passing through their wastes. He then went in the direction of the river Sha'bah and there killed most of the Khalafiyah from among the Khawarij, cutting down their trees, burning their possessions, and driving away their leader called Mas'ud ibn-Kais, who in his flight fell into the river he was crossing. His followers are in doubt about his death, and 79 still look for his appearance. Hamzah thereupon returned 1 Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 119. a De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, p. 18, province of Khurasan. 5 Ibid., vol. vi, p. 50, town in Sijistan. 4 The 'Abbaside party wore black. Banning, Muhammed ibn al- Hanafija, p. 72. Melanges de la Faculte Orientale, vol. v, p. 439. 100 THE SECTS OE THE KHARIJIYAH from Karman, and on his way fell upon the district of Bust, one of the districts of Nisabur, where he killed some of the Tha'alibah Khawarij who were there. This uprising in Khurasan, Karman, Kahistan and Sijistan lasted till the end of the days of al-Rashid, and the beginning of the caliphate of al-Ma'mun, because the greater part of the army of Khurasan was busy fighting Rafi' ibn-Laith ibn- Nasr ibn-Saiyar x at the gate of Samarkand. When al-Ma'mun came into the caliphate he wrote Ham- zah a letter in which he demanded his adherence, which merely increased Hamzah's pride. Al-Ma'mun, therefore, sent Tahir ibn-al-Husain 2 to fight Hamzah, and a war fol- lowed between Tahir and Hamzah. About thirty thousand were killed on both sides, most of them being followers of Hamzah. In this battle Hamzah was driven to Karman. Then Tahir attacked the Abstainers who agreed with Ham- zah in theory, and captured three hundred of them. He then commanded that all the men be bound together with ropes between two trees whose tops had been made to touch one another ; the man between the two trees was then cut in half, and each one of the two trees bounded back with half cf the body bound to it. After this al-Ma'mun recalled Tahir ibn-al-Husain from Khurasan, and sent him to his headquarters. Hamzah now became very covetous of Khu- rasan and proceeded from Karman with an army. He was met by 'Abd-al-Rahman al-Nisaburi, with twenty thou- sand strong from Nisabur and vicinity. With the help of Allah, Hamzah was put to flight and thousands of his fol- lowers killed. Hamzah ran away while wounded, and died during the flight. By his death Allah gave the world relief ^ from him and from his followers. This battle, after which Hamzah the Kharijite and Kadarite perished, was one of 1 Tabari-Zotenberg, vol. iv, p. 471 et seq. 2 Ibid., p. 484 et seq. 101 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS the events of which the people of Nisabiir boasted, praise Allah for this. 12. Concerning the Tha'alibah. These are the followers of Tha'labah ibn-Mashkan. 1 The Tha'alibah claim his Imamate as a successor to 'Abd-al-Karim ibn-'Ajrad. It is claimed that 'Abd-al-Karim ibn-'Ajrad was Imam until Tha'labah differed from him over the judgment of chil- dren. When the two differed over this ibn-'Ajrad was con- demned and Tha'labah became Imam. The reason for their difference was that a man of the 'Ajaridah asked Tha'labah for his daughter's hand, whereupon Tha'labah said to him : " Show her dowry." The suitor then sent a woman to the mother of the daughter to ask her if the daughter was of age, for if she was of age and had embraced Islam, according to the stipulations which the 'Ajaridah require, it did not matter what her dowry was. Her mother said : " Whether she be of age or not, since her guardian is a Moslem, she is one." 'Abd-al-Karim ibn-'Ajrad was notified of this, as well as Tha'labah ibn-Mashkan. 'Abd-al-Karim preferred to maintain the independence of children before maturity, while Tha'labah said : " We remain their guardians whether they be young or mature until they make clear to us that they are going to turn away from the truth." When they differed over this, each one of them threw off the respon- sibility of the sin of the other, and their respective followers were divided into two sects. The sects of the 'Ajaridah we have already mentioned. The Tha'alibah subdivided into six sects. One of them held to the Imamate of Tha'labah and accepted no other Imam after him, unmoved by the fact that there arose among them different opinions held by the 'Akhnasiyah and the Ma'badlyah. 1 Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 147 gives Tha'labah ibn-'Amir instead of ibn-Mashkan. 102 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH 13. Concerning the Ma'badlyah. The second sect was 81 the Ma'badiyah, who claimed that the Imam succeeding the Tha'alibah was one of their people by the name of Ma'bad. 1 This man disagreed with all of the Tha'alibah over the question of taking alms from, and giving alms to slaves. He condemned as unbelievers those who did not accept this view, while the rest of the Tha'alibah condemned him as unbelieving because he held this view. 14. Concerning the Akhnasiyah. The third sect was the Akhnasiyah, followers of one of their people who was known as al-Akhnas. At the beginning of his career he agreed with the views of the Tha'alibah concerning the guardianship of children. But later he withdrew from them, saying: " We must oppose all those living in a land where dissembling is sanctioned. 2 Only when the faith of the man in question is known to us should we definitely accept him. And likewise only when his heresy is definitely known to us should we rid ourselves of him." He forbade murder and theft in secret, and also claimed that none of the people of the Kiblah should begin a fight without being specially called for it, unless the enemy is personally known. In this view he had many followers. Indeed he was rejected by the rest of the Tha'alibah, but he in turn rejected them. 15. Concerning the Shaibcimyah. The fourth sect of the Tha'alibah is the Shaibaniyah, followers of Shaiban ibn- Salamah al-Khariji, who separated from the rest in the days of abu-Muslim, the founder of the dynasty of the banu-al-' Abbas. He helped abu-Muslim in his wars against his enemies, and in addition held the doctrine of the likeness of Allah to his creatures. The rest of the Tha'alibah, to- gether with the Sunnites, condemned his view as anthropo- 1 Ibid., p. 148. 2 See note 1, p. no. 103 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS morphia In addition all of the Khawarij condemned him for upholding abu-Muslim. Those of the Tha'alibah who condemned him were called the Ziyadiyah, the followers of Ziyad ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman. 1 The Shaibaniyah claim that 82 Shaiban repented of his sins, while the Ziyadiyah said that among his sins was that of doing violence to the worship- pers of Allah, a crime for which repentance could not atone. However, he went on aiding abu-Muslim in fighting the Tha'alibah, just as he had aided him in fighting the banu- 'Umaiyah. 16. Concerning the RashTdiyah. The fifth sect of the Tha'alibah is called Rashidiyah after a man by the name of Rashid. Its peculiar belief is that land which is watered by springs and flowing rivers should pay half the tithe, the complete tithe being paid on land watered by rain only. Ziyad ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman differed from them, saying that land watered by springs and flowing rivers should also pay full tithe. 17. Concerning the Mukarramlyah. The sixth division of the Tha'alibah is called the Mukarramlyah, followers of abu-Mukarram. 2 They claim that he who neglects prayer is an unbeliever, not because of the fact of his neglect of prayer, but because of his ignorance of Allah. They claimed, more- over, that all sinners were ignorant of Allah, and that ignor- ance constitutes unbelief. They also held to the doctrine that Allah's enmity and friendship depend on a man's relig- ious attitude at death. Such are the sects of the Tha'alibah and their views. 18. Concerning the Ibadlyah and their sects. The Iba- dlyah, although divided over many things, agreed in ac- knowledging the Imamate of 'Abdallah ibn-Ibad. 3 An- 104 1 Ibid., P- 149. 2 but.. P- 150. 'Ibid., P- 151. THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH other point in which they agreed was the view that the un- believers of this community, i. e. those of their community who differed from them, were both free from polytheism, and at the same time wanting in faith, thus being neither believers nor polytheists, but unbelievers. They accepted the testimony of such however, and secretly forbade the shed- ding of their blood, although publicly claimed it was lawful. 83 They also countenanced intermarriage with them, as well as inheritance from them. In this they claimed that such persons are fighting for Allah and his Prophet, although they are not true confessors of Islam. In addition, they consid- ered some kinds of property owned by those who disagree with them as permissible to seize, while other kinds, for ex- ample horses and arms, are forbidden. As for their gold and silver, they considered it best to return it to its owners, when it is seized. There were four definite differences which split up the Ibadiyah. The names of the groups adhering to the differ- ent views were: the Hafsiyah, the Harithiyah, the Yazl- diyah, and the " Ashab Ta'ah " (i e. those who do pious deeds without the intention of pleasing Allah). Among these the Yazidiyah belong to the Ghulat, because they be- lieve in the abrogation of the divine law of Islam at the end of time. This we will mention later in the chapter on the Ghulat sects connected with Islam. In this chapter, how- ever, we will mention only the Hafsiyah, the Harithiyah, and the Ashab Ta'ah (those who do pious deeds without the intention of pleasing Allah). 19. Concerning the Hafsiyah. This sect acknowledges the Imamate of Hafs ibn-abi-1-Mikdam, 1 who was the one who held that there was but one thing that lay between polytheism and belief, namely, the knowledge of Allah alone. Ibid., p. 153. 105 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Accordingly, the man who knew Allah, but later came to disbelieve in other matters, such as his Prophet, paradise, hell, forbidden deeds, killing oneself, or the permission of adultery and the rest of the forbidden sins, that man is an unbeliever, but is nevertheless free from polytheism. He, on the other hand, who is ignorant of Allah, and denies him, is a polytheist. Their explanation of the case of 'Uthman ibn-'Affan was similar to that of al-Rafidah in regard to abu-Bakr and 'Umar. They also claim that 'AH was the one to whom Allah referred when he revealed the following: "A man there is who surpriseth thee by his dis- course concerning this present life. He taketh God to wit- ness what is in his heart; yet is he the most zealous in 84 opposing thee " (Surah 2, v. 200) ; while 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn-Muljim was the one to whom Allah referred when he said, " A man too there is who sells his very self out of desire to please God." (Surah 2, v. 203.) In addition to all this they went on to say that belief in the books and the prophets is connected with belief in the unity of Allah. And any man disagreeing with this was a polytheist. This last view is contradictory to their first view that the differ- ence between polytheism and unbelief lies in the knowledge of Allah alone, and that he who knew Allah is free from polytheism even if he rejects the rest of the beliefs, i. e. the Prophet, paradise and hell. Their views thus became con- tradictory in this matter. 20. Concerning the Harithlyah, These are the followers of Harith ibn-Mazid al-Ibadi. 1 It was they who agreed with the Mu'tazilah in regard to fate. They claimed also that ability precedes any deed, a view for which the rest of the Ibadiyah condemned them, because it was contrary to the views of the Sunnites to the effect that Allah creates the 1 Ibid., p. 153. 106 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH deeds of his servants, and that ability comes only in con- junction with the deed. The Harithiyah claimed that the only Imams they had had since the first Muhakkimah were 'Abdallah ibn-Ibadi and that after him came Harith ibn- Mazld al-Ibadi. 21. Concerning the Ashab Ta'ah who do pious deeds without the intention of pleasing Allah. This sect claims that it is true that there exist many acts of obedience [vir- tues] that are not meant to please Allah. Abu-al-Hudhail (see below) and his followers among the Kadanyah also asserted this; but our followers said that this is true only in one case, that is, during the first intuition of man. When a man is guided * by such intuition, he is obedient to Allah 85 in his deed, even though he had not intended to draw near to Allah by performing it, because it is impossible for him to draw near to Allah before he really knows him. But when he has once learned to know Allah, then, after this knowledge, any obedience on his part to Allah is not ac- counted to him as righteousness, unless he intended thereby to draw near to Allah. All the Ibadiyah, however, claim that the houses of their opponents among the people of Meccah are places where the unity of Allah is proclaimed, with the exception of the camp of the sultan, for his is the abode of a tyrant. Over hypocrisy they differed in three ways, one sect saying that hypocrisy is not included either in polytheism or in faith. As their reason they gave the words of Allah on hypocrites : " Wavering between the one and the other, belonging neither to these nor to those." (Surah 4? v. 142.) Another sect said: "All hypocrisy is polytheism, because it is opposed to unity." The third sect said : " We do not separate the word ' hypocrisy ' from its proper usage, nor do we call any people hypocrites, except those whom 1 Read istadall and not istadhall. 107 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Allah has called hypocrites." Those of them who said that the hypocrite is not a polytheist, claimed that those who were hypocrites in the time of the prophet of Allah were unitarians, and at the same time major sinners; thus being unbelievers, even though they did not come within the category of polytheists, 'Abd-al-Kahir states: " After all we have related about them, (we see that) the peculiarity of their views sets them apart from the rest. Among these peculiarities are those held by the party which claims that there was no proof for mankind of the unity of Allah and his divine and other attributes, except through information, or that which takes its place along the line of signs and suggestions." An- other party said that the law and the commands of Islam are binding on whomever enters the religion of Islam, whether or not he has heard or known them. The rest of 86 this sect say a man does not sin in doing something about which he knows nothing, except when the proof [of its sin- fulness] has been given him. Still others say it is possible for Allah to send to his creatures a prophet with no sign to prove his veracity. Others, however, contend that who- ever attains the knowledge that Allah has forbidden wine, or that he has caused the Kiblah to be changed, must be certain whether the one who informs him of this is a be- liever or an unbeliever. Moreover, it is incumbent upon him to know this through information, 1 although he need not necessarily know that this has come to him through in- formation. The view of still others is that going on foot to prayer, or riding or traveling to the Hajj or any of the means which help to fulfil that which is required, are of no account. What is incumbent is the doing of the deed, re- gardless of the means used in its attainment. All parties 1 For definition of information in this sense see Lane on khabar as contrasted with Hadith. 108 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH agree that it is right to ask anyone who differs from them with regard to the text of the Koran or its interpretation, to return to their way of thinking. And if such a person does recant, it is well; if not, he must be killed— it being immaterial whether this difference related to something about which he was ignorant, or to something about which he was not ignorant. They also said that he who commits adultery or steals should be assigned the legal punishment and then given a chance to repent. If he repents, it is all right; if not, he must be put to death. They said also that the world will pass away when Allah has caused the people who have observed the law to disappear, this being possible because he created it only for them. The Ibadlyah accepted the possibility of conflicting ordinances existing over one and the same thing. For example, in the case of a man who goes into a sown field without the permission of the owner, this would be breaking a commandment; but accord- ing to another command, Allah has forbidden his going out of the field, because that would be harmful to the seed, which he has been commanded to plant. They said, more- over, the fleer in war is not (to be) pursued, if he is one of 87 the people of the Kiblah, and is a believer in the unity of Allah. On the other hand, we receive no women and slaves from them. They consider it permissible to kill anthropo- morphists and to pursue those who flee, as well as to seize their women and children as prisoners. They held that this was what abu-Bakr did to apostates. There was a man of the Ibadlyah known as Ibrahim, who invited some of the members of his sect to his dwelling, and gave one of his slaves, who belonged to the same sect, an order. When she delayed over it, he swore he would sell her to the Arabs, but one of the men whose name was Maimun, not the leader of the Maimumyah among the 'Ajaridah, said to him : " How wilt thou sell a believing 109 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS slave to an unbeliever?" And Ibrahim said to him : "Allah has permitted such a sale, and the followers of our sect who passed before us have also always permitted it." Maimun left the sect, but the rest were uncertain about it, so they wrote to their 'Ulamas, who answered that such a sale was permissible, and that Maimun should be brought to repent- ance, as well as those who were in doubt concerning the action of Ibrahim. The result of all this was that three sects arose, the Ibrahimiyah, the Maimuniyah, and the Wakifah. Owing to the question of the legality of this sale, Ibrahim gathered quite a following, who came to be known as the Dahhakiyah. This group permitted the mar- riage of a Moslem woman to an unbeliever in a country where dissembling is sanctioned. 1 But in the case of those who are in a country where their own sect is in the ascend- ance, this is not permitted. Some were uncertain over this question, saying about the wife : "If she dies we will not say prayers over her, nor will we accept her inheritance, because we do not know what her legal condition is." After the Ibrahimiyah, there arose a party called the Baihasiyah, followers of abu-Baihas Haisam ibn-'Amir. 2 88 These say that Maimun was an unbeliever, because he for- bade the sale of a woman in a region where dissembling is sanctioned, and which is inhabited by the unbelievers of our people. The Wakifah were heretics because they did not recognize Maimun's heresy and Ibrahim's orthodoxy. Ibrahim, on the other hand, was a heretic because he did not disclaim the Wakifah. They said : " The reason for this is because uncertainty exists only in connection with bodies ; the uncertainty with regard to a judgment can occur only where no one agrees with it, for if one Moslem agrees with it, he who is present cannot help knowing him who 1 Goldziher, Das Prinsip der takijja im Islam, Z. D. M. G., vol. lx, p. 213. 2 Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i, p. 139 ; vol. ii, p. 405. no THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH knows the truth and acts on it, and him who knows the un- truth and acts on it." Then the Baihasiyah said : " We do not call him who commits a sin a heretic until he is brought to the governor and punished, so that before he is brought to the governor, we call him neither a believer nor a here- tic." Some of the Baihasiyah said : " When the Imam be- comes an unbeliever, his followers also become unbeliev- ers." Others said : "All drinks are originally permissible. He, therefore, who drinks is forgiven everything which he does when drunk, such as neglecting prayer and scorning Allah. He can neither be punished nor considered a heretic as long as he is drunk." Still others of the Baihasiyah, called the 'Aufiyah, said : " Drunkenness is heresy if dur- ing drunkenness prayer is neglected, or a similar offense is committed." The 'Aufiyah divided off from the Baihasiyah and separated into two sects. One sect said: " We repu- diate those who desert us after having left home and joined us, fighting in our ranks." The other sect said : " No, we would keep such an one, because he would then be return- ing to a state that was legal for him before he came to us." Both sects say that if the Imam is heretical, his followers, whether present or absent, are also heretical. Besides the Ibadiyah, the Baihasiyah formed the subsects which we have mentioned in the Kitab al-Milal wa'l-Nihal. This, 89 therefore, is all we have to say of them in this book. 21. Concerning the Sliabibiyah. They are known as al- Shablblyah because they owe their origin to Shabib ibn- Yazid al-Shaibani, known as abu-1-Sahara. They were also known as the Salihiyah after Salih ibn-Mishrah al- Khariji. Shabib ibn-Yazid, the Kharijite, was one of the companions of Salih, and after him he took over the com- mand of his army. The reason for this was that Salih ibn- Mishrah al-Tamimi differed from the Azarikah by claim- ing that he was one of the Sifriyah, while others said that he MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS had been neither a Sifri nor one of the Azarikah. In the days when Bishr ibn-Marwan was governor of al-Irak under his brother 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan, Salih rebelled against him. Bishr sent al-Harith ibn-'Umair to fight him. Al-Mawayini says that Salih rebelled against al-Hajjaj ibn-Yusuf, 1 and that it was al-Hajjaj who sent al-Harith ibn-'Umair to fight him, and that the battle between the two came to a head before the gate of Fort Halula. Salih, having been defeated and wounded, took to flight, and being near to death he said to his companions : " I name Shabib my successor over you. I know there are among you some who are more learned than he, but he is a brave man in the opinion of your enemies, and feared by them. He among you who is learned, let him help him with his knowledge." Therefore, as soon as he died, his followers paid allegiance to Shabib, until he came to differ with Salih about a certain thing, i. e. he and some of his followers countenanced the Imamate of one of their women, when she took a prominent place in their affairs, and led them out against their opponents. They claimed, moreover, that 90 Ghazalah, the mother of Shabib, held the Imamate after the murder of Shabib, until she was killed. This they proved by the fact that when Shabib entered al-Kufah, he made his mother mount the pulpit of al-Kufah, in order to preach. The historians report that at the beginning of these affairs, Shabib went to Syria and came to Riih ibn-Zinba' 2 and said to him : "Ask the Amir of the Faithful to assign a stipend for me, as one on the honor-roll ; for I have a large following among the banu-Shaiban." So Ruh ibn-Zinba' asked this of 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan. But the latter replied : " I do not know this man, and I fear that he is a 1 Tabarl, ibid., vol. iv, pp. 7, 114 et seq. 2 Tabarl-De Goeje, vol. ii, pp. 424, 460, 461. 112 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH Harurl." l So Ruh told Shabib that 'Abd-al-Malik ibn- Marwan denied any knowledge of him. Shabib replied : " He will know me after this." He then returned to the banu-Shaiban, and collected about a thousand men from among the Salihiyah-Khawarij, with whom he took possession of the district which lay between Kaskar 2 and al-Mada'in. Al-Hajjaj sent 'Ubaid ibn-abi-1- Mukharik al-Mutannabi against him with a thousand horse- men, whom Shabib defeated. He then sent against him 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn-Muhammad ibn-al-Ash'ath, whom Sha- bib also defeated. Then he sent out 'Attab ibn-Warka' al- Tamimi, whom Shabib killed. This went on for two years, Shabib putting to flight twenty of the armies of al-Hajjaj. He then fell upon al-Kufah in the night, having a thousand of the Khawarij with him, as well as his mother Ghazalah » and his wife Jahziyah with two hundred Kharijite women, who were armed with lances and girded with swords. When he surprised al-Kufah in the night, he attacked the main mosque, killing the guard of the mosque and those praying in it, and he then made his mother Ghazalah mount the pulpit to preach. Khuraim ibn-Fatik al-Asadi says about 9 1 this : l " Ghazalah used the sword to strike The people of al-'Irakain for one whole year; She went as high as al-'Irakain with an army, She therefore caused al-'Irakain suffering." His army being scattered, al-Hajjaj waited in his house 1 Qarurah is a place near al-Kufah where the Khawarij opposing Ali lived. Tabarl-Zotenberg, vol. iii, p. 683. 2 De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, p. 5, territory watered by the Tigris and Euphrates. 3 Tabarl, ibid., vol. ii, p. 892. 4 Kitab al-Agh&ni, vol. xxi, pp. 13, 5. In vol. x, p. 85, Khuraim is read Khusaim. "3 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS until he had gathered his troops around him in the morn- ing. In the meantime, Shabib led his companions in prayer in the mosque, and at the morning prayer he read the Surah of the Cow (Surah 2), and the Surah of the Family of 'Imran (Surah 3). It was just at that point that al-Hajjaj came upon him with four thousand of his army, and the two parties fought in the market place of al-Kufah, until the companions of Shabib were killed, and Shabib forced to flee to al-Anbar, with those who remained with him. Al- Hajjaj sent an army in pursuit, and drove Shabib out of al-Anbar, 1 into al-Ahwaz. Al-Hajjaj sent Sufain ibn-al- Abrad al-Kalbi with three thousand men in pursuit of Sha- bib. Sufain encamped on the banks of al-Dujail [Little Tigris], while Shabib went to the bridge of Dujail to cross over to him. Sufain, however, commanded his followers to cut down the ropes of the bridge. The bridge, therefore, gave way and Shabib fell into the water with his horse. This happened while he was repeating Surah 6, v. 96: " This is predestined (by Allah), the mighty, the knowing." The followers of Shabib on the other side of al-Dujail then paid allegiance to Ghazalah, the mother of Shabib. But Sufain ibn-Abrad mended the bridge and crossed with his army into the district of the Khawari j , killing most of them, including Ghazalah, the mother of Shabib, and his wife Jahizah, 2 and taking prisoner the rest of the followers of Shabib. He also commanded the divers to bring the body of Shabib out of the water, and he took his head and sent it 92 with the prisoners to al-Hajjaj. When the prisoners were brought before al-Hajjaj, he commanded that a certain man of them should be killed. That man had said to him: *De Goeje, ibid., vol. vi, p. 8. 2< Abd al-Kahir gives two readings. Jahizah and Jahstyah. 114 THE SECTS OF THE KHARIJIYAH " Hear from me the two verses with which I will end my work." Whereupon he began reciting : " I will take refuge with Allah from 'Amr and his followers, And from 'All and the Companions of Siffln And from Mu'awiyah, the tyrant, and his followers ; Bless not, O Allah, the accursed people ! " Not only this man's death, but the death of many others was commanded. The rest were set free. Says 'Abd-al-Kahir to the Shabibiyah of the Khawarij : " It might be said, you discountenanced the departure of the Mother of the Faithful, 'A'ishah, to al-Basrah with her army, of which each member was forbidden [in marriage], because in the Koran she is the mother of all the faithful; and you claimed that she became a heretic because of this; and you applied to her the words of Allah: 'And abide still in your houses.' (Surah 33, v. 3.) Why don't you apply this verse also to Ghazalah, the mother of Shabib, and so charge her, and the Kharijite women also, with heresy, who went to fight the armies of al-Hajjaj? Now, if you con- sider their action permissible, because their husbands, chil- dren or brothers were with them, then you should take into account that with 'A'ishah there were her brother 'Abd- al-Rahman, and her nephew 'Abdallah ibn-al-Zubair, each one of whom was forbidden to her [in marriage]. Besides, all Moslems are her children, and therefore all are forbidden to her. If, then, some of you accept the Imamate of Ghaza- lah, so that her Imamate seems proper, why do you not consider 'A'ishah's act permissible?" Praise be to Allah for guarding us from heresy. 115 CHAPTER III The Doctrines of the Erring Sects among the Mu'tazilite KadarIyah We have already mentioned the fact that the Mu'tazilah were divided into twenty sects, each one condemning the other as unorthodox. These twenty sects are : The Wasil- ryah, the 'Amrlyah, the Hudhaillyah, the Nazzamiyah, the Aswariyah, the Mu'ammarlyah, the Iskaflyah, the Ja'far- lyah, the Bishriyah, the Murdariyah, 1 the Hishamlyah, the Tamamlyah, the Jahizlyah, the Hayitiyah, the Himariyah, the Khaiyatlyah, and the followers of Salih Kubbah, the Muwaisiyah, the Shahhamlyah, the Ka'biyah, the Jubablyah, and the Bahshamiyah, who are named after abu-Hashim ibn-al-Jubba'I. This makes a total of twenty-two sects, two sects belonging to the heretical groups of the Ghulat Those we will mention in the chapter dealing with the sects of the Ghulat, they being the Hayitiyah and the Himariyah. The other twenty are pure KadarIyah, all agreeing in certain heretical doctrines, e. g. the common denial that Allah has eternal qualities; the affirmation that Allah has neither knowledge, nor power, nor life, nor hearing, nor seeing, nor any eternal attribute: together with their view that 94 Allah never had a name or an attribute. They claim, fur- thermore, that it is impossible for Allah to see with his eyes. They say that he himself does not see, nor does anyone see him. They differ, however, over the question as 1 ShahrastanI, ibid., gives Mazddriyah, but Murdariyah is correct. Cf. Goldziher's article in Z. D. M. G., vol. lxv, p. 363. 116 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH to whether Allah can see things better than himself or not, some saying yes, and others no. But they agree in the view that the Word of Allah is created as well as his "thou shalt" ; his "thou shalt not" and his revelation. All claim that the Word of Allah has a beginning, and most of them today call his Word created. They also agree that Allah is not a crea- tor of the paths of men, nor of any of the deeds of animals. They hold, on the other hand, however, that it is man who determines his own affairs, without any interference on the part of Allah, either in these affairs of men or of any of the deeds of animals. It is because of this view that the Moslems call them Kadarlyah. 1 Another thing in which they agree, is the claim that the sinner within the Islamic religion belongs to a class between the two recognized classes, i. e. that he is a sinner, but neither a believer, nor an unbeliever. Because of this the Moslems call them Mu'tazilah, 2 since they secede from the views of the com- munity as a whole. Furthermore, they agreed in the view that nothing in the acts of his servants, which Allah did not command or for- bid, was willed by him. In his treatise, al-Ka'bi 3 claimed that the Mu'tazilah agreed that Allah is a thing unlike ordi- nary things, that he is the creator of bodies and accidents, and everything which he created he created from nothing, and that all believers perform their acts according to what Allah preordains concerning them. He also says that they 95 agree that those who commit major sins are not forgiven unless they repent. In these last assertions of al-Ka'bi there are several mistakes with regard to his co-believers, He asserts, for example, that the Mu'tazilah agree that Allah is a thing unlike other things. As a matter of fact, accord- 1 Kadara means to determine. 2 I'tazala means to secede. 3 Cf. above (pp. 27). This is the same makalah mentioned later. 117 96 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ing to all the Mu'tazilah, the attribute of Allah does not belong to Allah alone. Al-Jubba'I and his son abu-Hashim 3 have said : " All creative power is a thing unlike other things." They therefore do not limit this praise to their lord alone. Secondly, he is mistaken in his report that all the Mu'tazilah agree that Allah is the creator of bodies and of accidents, for it is known that the most determined of the Mu'tazilah exclude all accidents. Mu'ammar, among them, claims that Allah created none of the accidents; that derived accidents have no creator. How, then, can his claim be true that the Mu'tazilah agree that Allah is the creator of bodies and of accidents, since some of them ignore the existence of accidents, others assert their exist- ence, claiming, however, that Allah did not create any of them, while others hold that derived accidents, which arise later [after creation] , are accidents which have no creator. Al-Ka'bi, with the rest of the Mu'tazilah, says that Allah did not create the deeds of his worshipers. According to those believing in accidents, such deeds are accidents. Al- Ka'bfs mistake in this matter, with regard to his compan- ions, for example, that the Mu'tazilah were agreed over the view that Allah created what he created from nothing, is therefore an accident. How could they have been agreed about this ? Al-Ka'bi and the rest of the Mu'tazilah, with the exception of al-Salihi, 2 claim that all occurrences were things before their occurrence. The Basri men among them claim that substances and accidents were substances and accidents and things in their state of non-existence. The correct conclusion in this matter is that Allah creates one thing from another ; the view that he creates a thing from nothing being true only according to the principle of the Sifatiyah, our co-believers, who deny the existence of un- 1 Cf. below under Bahshamlyah. 2 Horten, ibid., p. 305. 118 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH real things. As to the claim that the Mu'tazilah agree that the faithful perform their acts as Allah has preordained them, this is a mistake on his [al-Ka'bfs] part, beecause Mu'ammar, 1 who was one of them, claimed that power is the act of a substance that is powerful, and not an act of Allah. The Asamm, among them, however, deny the sub- stance of power because they deny all accidents. In the same way his claim that the Mu'tazilah agree that Allah does not forgive major sinners who have repented, is an error on his part concerning them, for three of their sheikhs who agreed with the Wakif lyah as to the punishments which threatened major sinners, Muhammad ibn-Shabib al-Basrl, al-Salihi, and al-Khalidi considered it sometimes permis- sible for Allah to forgive such sins, even without repent- ance. In regard to what we have mentioned about the Mu'tazilah, al-Ka'bi has made a mistake. The Mu'tazilah agree in the matters we referred to. As to the matters over which they differ among themselves, those we shall men- tion in the section on their sects, please Allah. i. Concerning the Wdsillyah from among them. These are the followers of Wasil ibn-'Ata al-Ghazza, 2 the head of the Mu'tazilah, and their leader in their heresy after Ma'bad al- Julian! and Ghailan al-Dimashki. 3 Wasil was gy one of those who paid frequent visits to al-Hasan al-Basri 4 at the time of the rebellion of the Azarikah. At that time the people were divided into sects over the question of sin- ners within the religion of Islam. One sect claimed that all who commit sin, major or minor, are polytheists. This 1 Cf. below under Mu'ammariyah. 2 Horten, ibid., p. 125. Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 44- Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. iii, p. 642. 'Leaders of less important sects, preceding the definite split by the Mu'tazilah. 4 Horten, ibid., p. 120. Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. i, p. 3/0- 119 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS was the view of the Azarikah among the Khawarij, who claimed that children of polytheists were polytheists. They therefore sanctioned the killing of the children of those who differed from them, as well as the killing of their women, whether they belonged to the religion of Islam or not. The Sifriyah among the Khawarij regarded sinners as unbelievers and polytheists, agreeing with the Azarikah in this, although they disagreed with them over the killing of the children. The Najadat among the Khawarij held that a sinner upon whose condemnation the community had agreed, is an unbeliever and a polytheist, but that the sinner over whom the community has differed should be judged according to the decision of the canonists in this matter. Furthermore, they forgave the sinner so long as he did not know that the sin is forbidden, being in ignorance of this fact, until the testimony is brought against him with respect to it. The Ibadiyah of the Khawarij claimed that the sinner who commits a sin against which he has been warned, know- ing of the existence of Allah and what has been revealed from him, is an unbeliever in that he does not recognize the blessings of Allah ; but his heresy is not the same as that of the polytheist. Some of the people of this age went so far as to claim that those who commited major sins in this com- munity were atheists, which is worse than being unbelievers who publicly profess their unbelief. The learned followers of that age held with the rest of the community, that he within the community who commits 98 a major sin is a believer owing to his knowledge of the prophets and the books revealed by Allah ; and also because of his knowledge of the fact that all that comes from Allah is truth. He commits a major sin, however, even though his error does not deprive him of the attributes of believer and Islam. To this fifth view conform the companions (of the Prophet) in the early community and their followers. 120 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH When the revolt of the Azarikah broke out in al-Basrah and al-Ahwaz, and the people came to differ over sinners in the five ways which we have mentioned, Wasil ibn -'Ata . seceded from the views of all of the preceding sects, claim- \ ing that the sinner in that community was neither a believer, • nor an unbeliever, giving to this error an intermediate rank between the ranks of belief and unbelief. When al-Hasan al-Basri heard of this heresy of Wasil, in which he differed from the sects preceding him, he drove him out of his audi- ence. Wasil, therefore, took his stand near one of the columns of the mosque of al-Basrah, having as a companion in his error his comrade 'Amr ibn-'Ubaid ibn-Bab, as a slave bleats for his mother (text not clear). So on that day it was said that these two men had seceded from the accepted view of the community, and they therefore called their fol- lowers Mu'tazilah [seceders]. The two then publicly pro- claimed their heresy about this intermediate rank of sin. They also added to it an invitation to join with them in the view of the Kadariyah concerning the doctrine of Ma'bad al-Juhani. It was that occasion which gave rise to the say- ing that Wasil, with his heresy, is a Kadarite. Thus the saying : " There is a Kadari in every unbeliever " was orig- inated. Wasil and 'Amr agreed with the Khawarij that he who commits a major sin should be punished in hell, but they added that he is nevertheless a believer in the unity of Allah, and therefore neither a polytheist nor an unbeliever. It is 99 owing to this fact that the Mu'tazilah are not regarded as fully Khawarij, because the Khawarij, condemning sinners to eternal punishment, call them unbelievers, and take up the sword against them, while the Mu'tazilah, although condemning them to eternal punishment in hell, do not dare to call them unbelievers, nor to fight the people of any of their sects, among those whom they fight for differing from 121 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS them. For this reason, Ishak ibn-Suwaid al-'Adawi x as- serted that Wasil and 'Amr ibn-'Ubaid belonged to the Khawarij, because they [the Khawarij] agreed regarding the punishment of sinners. Al-'Adawi said in one of his poems : " I am free of the Khawarij, nor am I one of them, [Free] from al-Ghazzal among them, and ibn-Bab And from a people who, when they mention 'All, Return the salute to the clouds." Then Wasil developed three more heresies in which he disagreed with his predecessors. One of these differences was owing to the fact that he found the people of his age differing about 'AH and his followers and Talhah and al- Zubair, and 'A'ishah and the rest of the Followers of the Camel The Khawarij claimed that Talhah and al-Zubair, and 'A'ishah and their followers in the Battle of the Camel proved their disbelief in 'AH by the very fact that they fought him. Moreover, they claimed that 'All was in the right when he fought the Followers of the Camel, and the followers of Mu'awiyah at Siffln, but erred when it came to the matter of the arbitration (by the two judges). The orthodox, however, hold that both sides in the Battle of the Camel were true Moslems. They say that 'All was on the right side when he fought the others, and that the Followers of the Camel were rebellious, and sinned in fighting 'All. Their sin, however, cannot be called heresy, nor transgres- sion, for this would render their testimony void, whereas, ioo as a matter of fact, judgment is possible on the testimony of two just witnesses from either side. Wasil differed from both of these sects over this matter, claiming that one of the two sides must have been unjust, though not of itself; and that the unjust side could not be ascertained. The others contend that the unjust of the two sides might have been 1 J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 43. Quoted in Mas'udi, vol. ii, p. 142. 122 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH 'All and his followers, i. e. al-Hasan, al-Husain, ibn-'Abbas, 'Ammar ibn-Yasir, abti-Aiyub al-Ansari and the rest who were with 'All at the Battle of the Camel. Wasil, however, contends that the unjust of the two sides were 'A'ishah, Talhah, al-Zubair, and the rest of the Followers of the Camel. To prove this he said : " If 'All and Talhah, or 'All and al-Zubair, or a man of the followers of 'AH and a man of the Followers of the Camel, should testify before me over a handful of parsley, I should not decide by the testimony of either of them, because of my knowledge of the fact that one of them is unjust, although not of himself. Likewise I would not decide on the testimony of two who were cursing each other, because of my knowledge of the fact that one of them was unjust, although not of himself. But if two men of one of the sides testified, his testimony would be accepted." And many are the tears shed by the eyes of the outspoken Rafidah over this sinful seceding of the Sheikh al-Mu'tazilah on the question of the just cause of 'AH and his followers, and the view of Wasil about the whole matter. As we have said in one of our poems : " A view which is not connected with Wasil 1 — May Allah split up their unity by this." And if Allah pleases, we will give the end of this poem later. 2. Concerning the 'Amriyah among them. These are the followers of 'Amr ibn-'Ubaid ibn-Bab, 2 the f reed-man of 101 the banu-Tamim. His grandfather was one of the captives of Kabul. The innovations and heresies in religion never appeared except from the children of captives, as is men- tioned in reports. The things in which 'Amr agreed with Wasil were the following: Predestination, the heresy of 1 Play on word wdsil which means connector. 1 Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i, p. 47. Horten, ibid., pp. 150-153. 123 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Kadar, the wrong view about having an intermediate rank for certain errors, and the rejection of the testimony of two men, one of whom came from the Followers of the Camel and the other from the followers of 'AH. To these heresies 'Amr added the following: that both the sides fighting in the Battle of the Camel were wrong. Therefore, while Wasil rejected the testimony of two men, one of whom was from the Followers of the Camel, and the other from the followers of 'AH, but accepted the testimony of two men from the same side; 'Amr claimed that such a testimony was to be rejected even if the witnesses came from the same side, because he considered both sides to< be wrong. After Wasil and 'Amr, the Kadariyah differed over the same point. Al-Nazzam [see below] , Mu'ammar and al-Jahiz 1 agreed with Wasil about the sides at the Battle of the Camel. But Haushab and Hashim al-x\ukas said that the leaders of the sect are safe, but the followers are condemned to hell. The Sunnites and the orthodox held that 'All and his fol- lowers were in the right in the Battle of the Camel, claim- ing, furthermore, that al-Zubair repented on that day and refrained from fighting. When he reached the Wadi al- Siba', 'Amr ibn-Harmuz, 2 taking him by surprise, killed him. 'All gave the murderer the good news that he was going to hell. Talhah was on the point of returning, when Marwan ibn-al-Hakam, who was among the Followers of the Camel, shot an arrow at him and killed him. 3 It was 'A'ishah who undertook the reconciliation between the two 102 parties. The banu-Azd and the banu-Dabbah, however, had the upper hand over her, so that she failed. Whoever calls 1 J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 56. Brockelmann, loc. cit., vol. i, p. 152. 2 Cf. Tabari, Zotenberg, vol. iii, p. 660. 3 Ibid. J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 66. 124 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH either both or one of the two sides unbelieving, he, rather than they, is the unbeliever. Such is the view of the sun- nites, praise be to Allah for this. 3. Concerning the Hudhaillyah from among them. These are the followers of abu-al-Hudhail Muhammad ibn-al- Hudhail, known as al-'Allaf. 1 He was a client of 'Abd-al- Kais, and followed the example of most children of cap- tives, among- whom the majority of heresies arose. The rest of the sects of Islam, even including his own followers, the Mu'tazilah, branded him as an unbeliever. The man known among the Mu'tazilah by the name of al-Mirdad wrote a long book called Concerning the Heresies of abu-al-Hudhail , and Concerning his Peculiar Forms of Unbelief. Al- Jubba'i also wrote a book refuting the belief of abu-al-Hud- hail concerning what is created, in which book al-Jubba I condemned him as an unbeliever. Ja'far ibn-Harb, 2 well known among the Mu'tazilah, also had a book entitled Re- buking abu-al-Hudhail. This book points out the unbelief of abu-al-Hudhail, and also mentions the fact that his views tended toward the views of the Dahriyah. Among the heresies of abu-al-Hudhail was his view that the preordination of Allah can cease, at which time Allah would be no longer omnipotent. As a conclusion from this view, he claimed that the bliss of the people of paradise and the torture of the people in hell will cease ; the people of paradise and hell remaining in a state of lethargy, unable to do anything. Under these circumstances Allah would not be able to raise a man from the dead, nor to cause the death of a living man, nor would he be able to cause the stationary to move, nor the thing in motion to be station- 1 Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 48 et seq. Horten calls him the client of the 'Abd-al-Kais of Basrah, (p. 246 et seq.) Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. ii, p. 667. 3 Horten. ibid., p. 251. 125 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ary, nor would he be able to form anything, nor to annihi- late anything; and this when people are supposedly sane! His views on this subject are worse than those of the man who believed that paradise and hell would cease, as did Jahm. Jahm, however, although believing that paradise and hell could cease, contended, nevertheless, that after they had ceased, Allah would be able to create their like. This abu-al-Hudhail denied, maintaining that after the cessation of his preordination, his God had no ability to do anything. Among the Mu'tazilah, al-Mirdad attacked abu- al-Hudhail, saying : " According to this, it would follow that if the friend of Allah in paradise happened to be offer- ing a cup to someone in one hand, and a precious gift in the other, when the time of perpetual stillness fell upon all he would forever have to remain in the position of a man being crucified." Abu-al-Husain al-Khaiyat * offered the following two pleas as an apology for abu-al-Hudhail . He claimed first that abu-al-Hudhail meant that when the preordination of Allah had ceased, he would gather together all enjoyment for the people of paradise and they would then remain thus in perpetual rest. Secondly, he claimed that abu-al-Hudhail had maintained these views for the sake of arguing with his opponents over their investigations of his answers. This first plea of abii-al-Husain, in defence of abu-al-Hu- dhail is, however, false from two points of view. First, he held that two opposite enjoyments can unite in one place at one time, a condition which is as impossible as the union of pleasure and pain in one place. Secondly, if this plea were I0 4 true, it would necessarily follow that the condition of the people of paradise after Allah's preordination had ceased would be better than their condition when Allah was omni- potent. As regards his claim that abu-al-Hudhail taught the 1 Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i, p. 79. 126 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH cessation of Allah's preordination only in order to encour- age argument, it is refuted by the fact that abu-al-Hudhail wrote down and pointed out this fact in his book called, Proofs of our Assertions. Besides, in his book known as The Book of the Moulds, he gives a chapter on the refuta- tion of the Dahriyah, in which he states their views about believers as follows : " If it is possible to have a motion after every motion, and so on to the end ; and an occur- rence after every occurrence, to the end; then is not the view right which contends that there is no motion unpre- ceded by a motion, nor an occurrence unpreceded by an occurrence?" He compromised between the two, however, saying: "Just as an occurrence must have a beginning which is not preceded by another occurrence, so there must be an occurrence at the end which is not followed by an occurrence." It is for this reason that he asserted that Allah's ability to preordain ceased. The rest of the theo- logians of Islam, however, distinguished between the pre- ceding occurrence and the following occurrence by charac- teristic distinctions which escaped abu-al-Hudhail. It was, therefore, because of his ignorance of this that he held his view on the cessation of Allah's preordination. These evi- dent distinctions we have mentioned in the chapter entitled. " Evidences on the fact that the world is created," a chap- ter which is to be found in our books treating of this subject. The second of abu-al-Hudhail's heresies is his view that the people of the next world are forced to remain as they are; the people of paradise being forced to eat and drink and intermarry, while the people of hell are forced to [stick to] their views. In the other world, no creature will be allowed to perform a deed, or acquire an opinion. Allah is the creator of their views and their actions, and all else that is ascribed to them. The Kadariyah then blamed Jahm be- 127 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS cause of his view that the servants of Allah in this world are forced to do what they do of themselves, thus opposing our sect in its view that Allah is the creator of that which his servants acquire. They say to our sect : " If he (Allah) is the creator of the oppression of men, then he must be an oppressor, and if he is the creator of the lies of men, then he must be a liar." They might as well say to abu-al-Hud- hail : " If you say that Allah, in the next world, creates the falsehood put in the mouth of the people of hell, as they say : ' By Allah, our Lord, we were not polytheists ' ( Surah 6, v. 23), then he must be a liar, according to the view that the liar is the one who creates the lie." But this conclusion against us does not hold good, because we do hot hold that the oppressors are the ones who created the oppression and the liar the lie. On the contrary, we hold that the oppressor is the one from whom oppression proceeds, and the liar the one from whom the lie proceeds, not the one who creates them. Al-Khaiyat offered as a plea for this innovation of abu-al-Hudhail the following : " The next world is a place of rewards and not a place of responsibility; therefore if the people of the other world were the performers of their acts, they would be responsible for them, and their reward 106 an d punishment would be in another world." To this view of al-Khaiyat it can be answered : " Do you agree with, or reject, this view of abu-al-Hudhail? If you agree, then you say about it the same thing that he says, which, as a matter of fact differs from what you say. But if you reject it, then there is no meaning to your apology for a thing which you yourself condemn." We, however, say to abu-al-Hudhail : " Why do you say that the condition of the people of the other world is such as to render them unable to perform deeds, and then say that they are commanded to thank Allah for their enjoyment, but not commanded to pray, nor to give alms, nor to fast, nor are they to cease from disobe- 128 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH dience ; and yet their reward for gratitude and for ceasing from disobedience was to be eternal beatitude for them? And why do you deny that those who are in the next world are to cease from disobedience, and yet are sinless; as we hold, together with most of the Shiites, that the prophets were forbidden sin in this world already, and were sinless ; just as the angels were forbidden sin, and were sinless. For this reason Allah says of them : ' They disobey not Allah in what he hath commanded them, but execute his behests ' " (Surah 66, v. 6). The third of his heresies was his view that there are those who are obedient without the intention of pleasing Allah. This is also the view of the Ibaclryah among the Khawarij. He claims that there is no Dahri in the world, nor any unbeliever, who is not obedient to Allah in many things, although disobeying him as far as his unbelief is concerned. The Sunnites and the orthodox, however, say : Obedience to Allah from one who does not know him, is possible only 107 in one case, i. e. where there is speculation and deduction, which are necessary before attaining a knowledge of Allah. If a man fulfils this, he becomes obedient (that is, accept- able) to Allah, because Allah has commanded him this. And this is true even if his aim in this act of speculation may not be to draw near to him by means of it. No other obedience to Allah is possible for him, unless its aim be to draw near to him through it, because it is possible for him to draw near to Allah if a knowledge of Allah is attained by this first speculation. Without this contemplation, how- ever, he cannot draw near to Allah, unless by some chance he knew Allah before this speculation and deduction. Abu- al-Hudhail supported this claim, namely that it is possible to obey Allah without knowing him, by saying that the com- mands of Allah are in opposition to that which he forbids, if, therefore, he who does not know Allah, neglected all his 129 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS commands, he must be doing everything which Allah for- bids, and in the same manner anyone who has neglected all obedience must be committing all sins. If this were the case a Dahrl would be a Jew, a Christian, a Magian, or an adher- ent of some other unbelief. If the Magian, however, rejects all his unbeliefs except his Magianism, he would still be dis- obeying by his Magianism, which we know was forbidden him, but he would be obeying Allah in the rejection of the rest of his unbeliefs, because Allah had commanded that they be rejected. Verily I say to him, that the commands of Allah and his prohibitions are not what you think them to I0 8 be, for there is not a quality of obedience without a quality in opposition to it and to each other; there are no qualities of belief which do not have some qualities opposed to them and at the same time to each other. This is similar to the matter of standing up and sitting down, bending down and lying down. A man may not be sitting, but he would not then necessarily be doing all its opposites ; he would not be sitting, however, if he were doing one of its opposites. In like manner, a man is outside of the realm of obedience to Allah by following one line that is opposed to all the lines of obedience, because that kind of unbelief is opposed to another kind of unbelief, just as it is opposed to the rest of the lines of disobedience. All this is self-evident, although abu-al-Hudhail was ignorant of it. The fourth of his heresies is his view that Allah is not only Allah himself, but his knowledge is himself, and his power is also himself. From this view he must conclude that Allah is knowledge and power. But if he is knowledge and power, it is not possible that he should be knowing and powerful ; because knowledge cannot be knowing, and power cannot be powerful. He would be forced to draw the same conclusion if he said that the knowledge of Allah is Allah, and his power is Allah. This amounts to saying that his 130 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH knowledge is his power. And if Allah's knowledge is his power, abu-al-Hudhail must conclude that all that is known to him is performed by his power ; the Being of Allah, there- fore, would be something performed by his power, because it is known by him. This is a form of unbelief, and what leads to it is like it. His fifth heresy was his division of the words of Allah into that which needs an object and that which does not need an object. 1 He claims that the creative word of Allah to things, " Be," is not uttered to an object. The rest of his words, however, had a beginning in some corporeal sub- stance. Yet all his words, according to abu-al-Hudhail, are accidents. Furthermore, he claimed that his creative word to things, " Be," is of the same kind as the word of man, " Be." He thus differentiated between two accidents which were of one kind, the difference [between them] being that one needs an object, while the other is able to do without an object. As to his view of the existence of a decree of Allah without an object, in this view the Basrah Mu'tazilah share, adding to it that this word [of Allah] is the same as a de- cree of ours which needs an object. Consequently, accord- ing to him, one of the speakers would be no better than the other. 2 Abu-al-Hudhail has no right to assert that the per- son saying the word is better in what he says than any other, because he had maintained that, in the other world, Allah creates the words of the people of paradise and the words of the people of hell, but he is not the one who speaks their words. Moreover, his theory of the existence of a word without an object has led him to hold it correct to have 1 Mahall is literally space. In this case it means the place of origin, therefore author or subject. Cf. Macdonald, Muslim Theology, Juris- prudence and Constitutional Theory, under mahal. 2 Horten, ibid., p. 265. This sentence is ambiguous in the Arabic. Horten translates it very freely. It probably means that where there is no subject there can be no difference. 131 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS words without a speaker, which is an impossibility; what leads to it is like it. His sixth heresy is his view that evidence along the line of reports [of individuals] concerning matters which are not present to the senses, such as the miracles of the proph- ets, or concerning other matters, cannot be accepted unless there are twenty witnesses, one or more of whom is from the people of paradise (Moslems). Nor would he neces- sarily accept as evidence the information of unbelievers and impious, even if their number should amount to the number required, for their agreement on a falsehood is inconceiv- able (mutawatir) , 2 unless one of them is a man of paradise He claimed, moreover, that information coming from less than four persons is not to be accepted. Information, how- ever, coming from any number over four up to twenty may be accepted, or may not. The attainment of knowledge, however, from this information is certain if one of the no twenty is a man of paradise. This fact about the twenty witnesses he proved by the word of Allah : " Twenty of you who persevere will conquer two hundred idolaters" (Surah 8, v. 66). To fight these two hundred idolaters, however, was not legal unless the twenty were evidence against them. Accordingly the information of one person must be sufficient for proof (that a thing is legal), because in this case one person had to fight ten unbelievers, and the fact that he was permitted to do this was a sign one was enough as evidence against them. 'Abd-al-Kahir says : what abu-al-Hudhail meant by his statement that twenty were necessary for establishing evidence, if one of them was a person from paradise, is intended for the abolition of the use of the information in the legal canons; because he 1 The mutaw&tir is the report of a people numerically indefinite, whose agreement upon a lie is inconceivable, in view of their large number. Cf. Aghnides, Mohammedan Theories of Finance, p. 40. 132 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH meant that there should necessarily be among them one of the people of paradise who would be, according to his heresy, a Mu'tazilah and a Kadarite, and therefore agree with him in his heresy about fate and the cessation of the power of Allah to preordain. He who does not hold this is not, from his point of view, a believer nor of the people of paradise. No one before abu-al-Hudhail held a heresy similar to his heretical view with regard to the necessity of having twenty witnesses. His seventh heresy was that he differentiated between the acts of the heart and the acts of the organs (of the body), by saying that it is not possible for the acts of the heart to come from their author, if he has no power over them, or is dead. On the other hand, it is possible for the acts of the organs (of the body) to come from their author even after his death, or after the cessation of his power, in case he is living. He went on to say that the dead and the incapaci- tated can be the authors of the acts of the organs, through in the power which existed before death or incapacitation. But al-Jubba I and his son abu-Hashim claim that the acts of the heart are in this case like the acts of the organs (of the body), in that it is possible for them to occur when the author is incapacitated, and even after the power to produce the act has ceased. Thus the view of al-Jubba'i and his son on this matter is worse than that of abu-al-Hudhail. Abu- al-Hudhail, however, was ahead of him in holding that it was possible for both the dead and the incapacitated to be authors of the acts of the organs. In this heresy, al-Jubba'i and his son followed abu-al-Hudhail's example; they went further, however, and concluded that it was possible for an incapacitated man to be the author of the acts of the heart. The founder of a heresy, however, is responsible for its sinfulness, and the sinfulness of those who follow it, up till the day of judgment, with no decrease in the sinfulness of those who choose to follow it. i33 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS His eighth heresy was as follows : When he discovered that men differed over the question as to whether knowledge is natural or acquired, he rejected both of these views, as well as the view that what is known through the senses and through intuition is natural knowledge, while what is known through induction is acquired knowledge. He then set up for himself a view that differed from all those of his prede- cessors, saying that knowledge is of two kinds, the one is compulsory knowledge, such as the knowledge of Allah, and knowledge of the evidence leading to a knowledge of him ; the second is elective and acquired, such as knowledge of an event gained through the sense, or through syllogisms. From this he drew his view of the belated character of knowledge, in which he differed from the rest of the be- 112 lievers. According to this view, he said that the child in the second stage of his knowledge of himself does not have to bring all his knowledge of unity and justice together with- out a break, but he must bring with the knowledge of the unity and justice of Allah the knowledge of all that Allah has commanded him to do. The result is that if he does not fulfil the requirement of this second stage of his knowledge of himself, and happens to die in the third stage, he dies an infidel and an enemy to Allah, worthy of eternal fire. As to the knowledge with regard to information which can be known only through hearing, such knowledge should be attained by the child in the second stage of hearing, which constitutes a good excuse for him. Bishr ibn-Mu'tamar, 1 however, said that it was in the third stage that the child must show his mental knowledge, when in the third stage of his knowledge of himself, because the second stage is a stage of speculation and of thought, so that if he does not fulfil this in the third stage, and happens to die in the fourth 1 Horten, ibid., p. 161. Shahrastanl, ibid., vol. i. p. 65. 134 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARlYAH stage, he will then be an enemy of Allah, worthy of eternal fire. Thus there are a few fatalists (Kadarites) who de- nied the view of the Azarikah that the children of their op- ponents were condemned to hell, and denied also the view of those who held that the children of unbelievers are con- demned to hell; these same men claimed that the children of believers who died in the third or fourth stage of their knowledge of themselves, were condemned to eternal fire, although they had committed no* unblief . His ninth heresy lay in the fact that he contended that it is possible for a body having parts to have its motion con- fined to certain of its parts. In the case of color, he held TI ^ that this was not possible. The rest of the philosophers said that it is only the part in which motion arises that is the thing moving, and that the motion does not apply to the combination of all parts, just as the part which is black, is the black part; blackness not extending to the combination of all the parts. If, however, the combination of all the parts moves, there is motion in every part, just as if the whole is black, every part is black. His tenth heresy is his view that the part of a body which cannot be divided, cannot have a color of itself, when it is alone, nor can it be seen when there is no color in it. This forces the conclusion that if Allah created the part by itself, he could not see it. Praise be to Allah who has preserved the Sunnites from the heresies which we have given in this chapter on abu-al-Hudhail. 4. Concerning the Nagzamlyah. These are the followers of abu-Ishak Ibrahim ibn-Saiyar, called al-Nazzam. 1 The Mu'tazilah try to deceive the common people when they assert that he was called al-Nazzam because he composed *J. A. O. S., vol. xxix, p. 58. Horten, ibid., p. 189. ShahrastanI, ibid., vol. i, p. 53. Macdonald, ibid., pp. 140, 141, 152. 135 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS prose and well-measured poetry. As a matter of fact, he composed only beads in the market of al-Basrah, and it was because of this that he was called al-Nazzam. 1 During his youth he mingled with the sect of the Dualists and the Sophists (Sumamyah), who assert that all proofs are equal. He later fell in with the heretic philosophers, after which he associated with Hisham ibn-al-Hakam al-Rafidi. From Hisham and the heretic philosophers he took the view on the non-existence of the atom that is indivisible. From this he drew his view of the leap which no one before had thought of. From the dualists he took his view that he 114 who performs justice can neither oppress nor lie. He fur- ther took from Hisham ibn-al-Hakam that colors, taste, smell and sound are bodies. It was from this heresy that he drew the conclusion that bodies penetrate each other in the same space. He agreed, 2 moreover, with the dualists, with the innovators among philosophers, and with the quasi- heathen in Islam. He also admired the view of the Brah- mans who disbelieved in prophecies. He did not, however, venture to profess this view, fearing the sword. Further- more, he denied the miraculous nature of the Koran as re- gards its composition, and he also denied the miracles which are reported of our Prophet — for example, "the splitting of the moon; that stones in his hand had praised Allah; that water had sprung forth between his fingers " — so that deny- ing the miracles of our Prophet he almost came to deny his prophecy. Moreover, he found the fulfilment of the regula- tions of Islamic law unbearable. He did not, however, dare to profess its abolition, although he denied evidences leading to it. It was on this ground that he denied " the evidence of the agreement of the community and the evidence of analogy," in developing the derivative institutes of the 1 Naszdm means a composer. 2 Text uncertain, wadalin? Horten, ibid., p. 170. 136 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH law. He also rejected proof drawn from witnesses whose evidence is not accepted, as well as the claim that knowl- edge is natural. He himself taught that the Companions had agreed in developing these institutes, and he reminded the people of what he had read in the pages written by his opponents. He criticized the juridical decisions of the Companions, however, and of all of the sects of Islam, which had split over doctrine or tradition, including the Khawarij and the Shi'ites and the Najjariyah. Most of the Mu'tazilah united in condemning al-Nazzam. Of the Kada- riyah, only a few followed him in his errors, e. g. al-Aswari 115 and ibn-Hayit, Fadl al-Hadathi and al-Jahiz; each one of them differing with him on some of his errors, and adding to others. The admiration of this minority which followed him was like the admiration of the scarab beetle when rolling its ball (of dung). Most of the sheikhs of the Mu'tazilah agreed that he was a heretic, including abu-al-Hudhail, who called him a heretic in his book entitled An Answer to al- Nazzam, also in his book directed against him on Accidents, Man and Indivisible Atoms. The view for which al-Jubba 1 condemned him, was the one which held that the deeds of Allah are brought forth by the affirmation of (their) crea- tion. In this case it is al-Jubba'i who is the heretic, and no one else. We would like to mention a few of some of the heresies of the Mu'tazilah. Al-Jubba'i also condemned al-Nazzam for rejecting that Allah could be tyrannical, as well as for his view about the four humours of the body. It was on this last subject that he wrote a book against him and against Mu'ammar. Among the Mu'tazilah there was also al-Iskaf 1 who wrote a book against al-Nazzam in which he condemned him for most of his doctrines. Ja'far ibn-Harb also wrote a book concerning al-Nazzam' s heresy in that he denied the in- divisible atom. As to the books written in condemnation i37 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS of him by the Sunnites and the orthodox, Allah alone can count them. Our sheikh abii-1-Hasan al-Ash'arl wrote three books on the heresies of al-Nazzam. Al-Kalanisi 1 also wrote books and dissertations against him. The Kadi abu-Bakr Muhammad ibn-abl-al-Taiyib al-Ash'arl wrote a big book on some of the fundamental doctrines of al-Nazzam. He has pointed out his errors in the book on the heresies of the expositors. In this book of ours we shall mention the most famous of al-Nazzam's heresies. First of all we will take up his theory that Allah has not 116 the power to do to his worshippers that which is not to their good. Nor does he consider Allah capable of taking away a jot from the enjoyment of the people of paradise, because their enjoyment is their just share, and the lessen- ing of this share would therefore be injustice. Nor can Allah increase the torment of those in hell a jot, nor take a jot away from it. He also claims that Allah has not the power to remove anyone from paradise, or to throw into hell anyone who does not belong to the people of hell. According to this view, he said that if a child stood at the edge of hell, Allah would have no power to throw him in, but the child could throw himself in, and the Zabaniyah 2 can throw him in. To this he added that Allah could not blind a person who has sight, nor give a disease to a healthy one, nor impoverish a rich person, if he knows that sight and health and wealth are for their good. In the same way he cannot enrich a poor person, nor heal a sick one, if he knows that disease and sickness and poverty are for their good. To this he then added the view that Allah could not create a snake or a scorpion, or a body of 1 An opponent of al-Ash'arl who died in 870. Horten, ibid., p. 375. 2 Certain angels, the tormentors of the damned in hell; so-called because of their thrusting the people of the fire thereinto. The angels mentioned in the Koran Surah 66, v. 6. 138 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH any kind, if he knows that the creation of something else would be better than their creation. The Basriyah among the Mu'tazilah condemned this view and said that he who has power over justice must have power over injustice, and he who has power over truth must have power over false- hood, though he may not commit oppression, nor lie, be- cause of the hideous nature of these acts or because he real- izes his ability to do without them, because ability to do a thing necessitates also the ability to do the opposite. Now, if al-Nazzam held that Allah had no power over injustice and falsehood, he would be forced to say that he had no 117 power over truth and justice either. Such a view as the latter is heresy, bringing in its train other heresies as bad. They also say that there is no difference between al-Naz- zam' s view that Allah had no> power to hinder nor to cause to act, and the view claiming that he is forced to perform deeds without his own choice. This also is a heresy, bring- ing in its train other heresies as bad. One of the remark- able acts of al-Nazzam in this connection is that he wrote a book on Dualism and in it expressed his surprise at the view of the Manicheans, that light orders its different kinds which are to be found in darkness to do good, although darkness can do only evil and can predicate naught but evil deeds. Al-Nazzam expressed his surprise that the Dualists blame darkness for doing evil when they claim that it has no power to do good, but can do evil only. One might say to him, " If, according to you, Allah is to be praised for per- forming justice and truth, and has not the power to per- form injustice and falsehood, why then do you deny the view of the Dualists in blaming darkness for doing evil, even though it can do nothing else?" His second heresy was his view that man is a soul, which, in the form of a rarified body enters the compact body. This was in addition to his other view that this soul is life 139 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS in union with the body. He claimed further that in the body it became a compact union, and therefore one sub- stance without difference or opposition. From this view results the heresy that it is not man who can be seen, but the body in which he is. This would force the conclusion 118 that the Companions did not see the Prophet of Allah, but saw only the mould in which the Prophet was. According to this no one sees his father and his mother, but only their moulds. Furthermore, if he says of man that he is not an external body, but only a soul within a body, he must then say the same of the ass, that he too is not his body and is only a soul in his body, and that he is the life in union with the body. This would be true also of the horse and the rest of the four-footed animals, and all the birds and reptiles and the rest of animal kind. It would apply also to angels and jinn, man and devils. It would, there- fore, follow that no one ever sees an ass or a horse or a bird, or any kind of animal. Furthermore, the Prophet did not see an angel, nor do the angels see each other. In fact, anyone looking must see only the moulds of the things which we have enumerated. Still further, when he says that the soul in the body is the man, and that it is the doer rather than the body which is its mould, he must then conclude that it is the soul which is the adulterer or the thief or the murderer. Accordingly, if the body is lashed, or the hand cut off, the amputated member is not after all the real thief, nor the body lashed the real adulterer . . . this is sufficient; for Allah has said : " The whore and the whore-monger . . . scourge each one of them with an hundred stripes " (Surah 24, v. 2). And he has also said : "As to the thief, whether man or woman, cut ye off their hands in recom- pense for their doings" (Surah 5, v. 42). This is sufficient proof from the Koran of his error. 1 J 9 His third heresy was his view that the soul which is man. 140 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH has the power (to act) of itself, lives through itself, and becomes incapacitated because of a calamity which befalls it, this incapacity itself being a body. This view forces him to say that the incapacitated and the dead are the soul of the man who is living and able, or else that the incapacitated dead is the man's body. If he says that man is the thing which becomes incapacitated and dies, he must give up his view that man lives by himself, and has the power to act of himself ; for in that case his soul exists even in the case of his death, while he himself is dead or incapacitated. If, on the other hand, he claims that it is the soul which has strength of itself, and that it is the body that dies and becomes in- capacitated, then it must be different from that which lives and has power. From this it follows that Allah has no power to resuscitate the dead, nor cause the living to die, nor to give power to an incapacitated person, nor to in- capacitate an able one. For the living cannot die, nor the strong become incapacitated. But Allah has attributed to himself the ability to resuscitate the dead. If al-Nazzam claims that the soul lives and has power of itself, and dies and becomes incapacitated only because harm comes to it, then he does not differ from those who claim that the soul is dead and becomes incapacitated of itself, and lives and has strength only through the life and strength that enter into it. His fourth heresy is the view that the soul is of one kind, and its deeds of another kind; that bodies are of two kinds, living and dead; and that it is impossible for the living body to die, or for the dead to become alive. This view he took from the Burhanite Dualists, who claim that light is an imponderable living body whose property is to be always 120 ascending, and that darkness is a heavy dead body whose property is to be always descending, and that the heavy dead body is unable to become light [as opposed to heavy], 141 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS and the light living body is unable to become a heavy dead body. In his fifth heresy he contended that all animals were of one species, because they all agree in having the same per- ceptive powers. Thus he claimed that when acts agree, it is a proof that what caused them are in agreement. He claimed also that two different things would not come from one and the same species ; just as fire does not give out both heat and cold, nor snow give out both heat and cold. This in truth is the view of the Dualists, that light does good and not harm, and darkness does evil and no good comes from it; because one author cannot perform two different acts, just as heat and cold do not both come forth from fire, nor from snow. The strange thing is that he compiled a book against the Dualists in which he pointed out to them the impossi- bility of mingling light and darkness if they belong to dif- ferent species and actions and had movements in different directions. In spite of this view, he claimed that light and heavy bodies (soul and body), though different in species and in the direction of their motion, penetrate each other in the same space. But the penetration which he asserts is worse than mingling, which the Dualists hold, and which he disputed. His sixth heresy is his view that it is the nature of fire to surmount everything. If, therefore, it is released from the 121 filth that holds it in this world, it rises until it goes beyond heaven and the Throne, unless some other of its species unites with it, in which case it does not rise. Of the soul he said the same thing, that when it is separated from the body, it rises, and a change takes place in it. This is similar to the view of the Dualists that the parts of light which mingle with the parts of darkness, when they separate from the latter, rise to the world of light, and when the light be- comes permanent above the heavens, the souls unite with it. 142 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH He is, therefore, a Dualist. If he affirms the existence of lire above the atmosphere, with which the rising fires in the atmosphere combine, he is one of the Naturalists, who claim that air in rising, is at a distance from the earth of sixteen miles, above which is fire which reaches the sphere of the moon, and with which the rising flames of fire unite. Al- Nazzam is therefore either a Dualist or a Naturalist, con- cealing himself among the mass of the Moslems. His seventh heresy is his view that the actions of animals are all of one species, and are composed of motion and quiescence. Quiescence, according to him, is limited motion. Moreover, he considers knowledge and will motion, and hence accidentals. All accidentals, according to him, are of one species — all motion. As to color, taste, sound, and senses, these, according to him, are different permeating material things. The result of this view of his, that the acts of animals are of one species, is necessarily that belief is like unbelief and knowledge like ignorance, and love like hatred. Furthermore, it follows that the acts of the prophet toward believers are like the acts of Satan toward unbeliev- ers, and that the invitation of the prophet to the people to 122 join the religion of Allah is like the invitation of Satan to go astray. In some of the books he has gone so far as to say that all these acts are of one species, differing only in their name, because of the differences of their order, they being of one species because they are all acts of animals. Accord- ing to him, one animal cannot perform two different acts, just as fire can not make cold and hot. According to this, al-Naz- zam cannot get angry with anyone who scolds or courses him, because the sentiment of the author who said, " May Allah curse al-Nazzam," according to al-Nazzam, is just the same as if he had said, " May Allah bless al-Nazzam." Further- more, a child born of adultery is the same as a legal child. If he himself is satisfied with such a doctrine he is worthy of it, and of the views that necessarily follow. 143 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS His eighth heresy is the view that color, taste, smell, sound and sense are bodies, and that many bodies can per- meate one and the same space. He refuses the view of Hisham ibn-al-Hakam that knowledge and will and motion are bodies, saying that if these three were objects they could not unite in one thing, nor in one body. And yet he holds that color, taste and sound are bodies permeating each other in the same space ; in answering his opponent he con- futes himself. He who maintains that bodies permeate each other in the same space must admit the possibility of a camel passing through the eye of a needle ! 123 His ninth heresy is his view concerning sound. He claims that there are not two men on the earth who have heard the same sound, except in the sense that it (the sound) is of the same species of sounds, just as two men eat one species of food, even if that which one of them eats is not what the other eats. This view developed from his claim that a sound is heard only as it follows into the spirit on the path of hearing. It is not possible, however, to flow from the same object into two different organs of hearing. He compared this with water which is sprinkled on a crowd of people, each one being sprinkled with different water. According to this assumption it must necessarily follow that no one has heard the same word from Allah, nor from his prophet, because what each one of all the hearers hears is a part of the sound of the word of the speaker. The word as a whole may perhaps consist of two letters, so that accord- ing to him one of them is not the word. If he then claims that the sound is not a word nor is it heard except when it consists of several letters, it follows that a group of people cannot hear just one letter, for one letter cannot divide itself into several letters according to the number of hearers ! His tenth heresy is his view concerning the divisibility of every particle ad infinitum. This idea implies the absurd 144 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH view that Allah does not include the whole of the world by knowing- about it, yet the following is the word of Allah : "And taketh count of all things by number" (Surah 72, v. 28 ) . One of his peculiarities is that he denies the view of the Manicheans to the effect that Ahriman, who is the spirit of darkness, passed through the abodes of darkness, 124 carrying out the worst possible evil until he saw light. In connection with this al-Nazzam said to them : " If the abodes of darkness stretch downward without limit, then how can Ahriman pass through them? For to pass through what has no end is impossible." Although denying this, he nevertheless claimed that when the soul separated f rom the body, it passed through the upper world, in spite of the fact that he maintained that the space in the upper worlds through which the spirit passes is infinite in its parts, while each part in its turn is infinite in its part. If this is the case, how can the spirit traverse them in limited time ? It was to make this possible that he adopted the doctrine of the leap, a doctrine which had never been held by any phil- osophers before him. Stranger than that, he drew from the Dualists the conclusion that light and darkness are finite in everyone of the six directions. What led him to this way of thinking was that they held that both light and dark- ness were finite in the direction in which they met. Accord- ing to this, was he trying to show that everybody has finite parts in the center because it is finite on all sides ? If, how- ever, the finiteness of the body in its six directions does not incur finiteness in its center (according to him), he is then not disagreeing with the Dualists in their view that all light and darkness are finite on the side at which they meet. One must not, however, conclude that they are finite on all other sides. Al-Nazzam's eleventh heresy is the doctrine of the leap. He says that a body which is in a given place, may pass from 145 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS that place to a third place or a tenth without necessarily traversing the places which separate the first and the tenth, nor by being annihilated in the first to be resuscitated in the tenth. If al-Nazzam is just, we will refer this case to him to declare its fallacy, although we believe that after the (famous) arbitration of abu-Musa al-Ash'ari and 'Amr ibn-al-Asi any arbitration is nonsense. His twelfth heresy was so horrible that the heavens were almost rent asunder by it. It is the view that no informa- tion about Allah, or his prophet, or his worshippers, can be accepted as true. Furthermore, that bodies and colors can not be known simply by information about them. What drove him to this accursed view was his other belief that there are two kinds of known things, that which is percep- tible and that which is not perceptible. The perceptible are bodies about which knowledge can be acquired only through the senses. According to him, the senses can perceive only that which is body; color, taste, smell and sound being, ac- cording to him, bodies. It is because of this that they are reached by the senses. As to the imperceptible, it also is of two kinds, the eternal and the accidental. They way to know the two is not through information, but only through syllo- gism and intuition, and therefore neither through the senses nor information. He was asked in this connection how he knew that Muhammad, as well as the rest of the prophets and the kings, were on the earth, since nothing can be known through information. His answer was that those who actu- ally saw the prophet, in the act of seeing him took from him a particle which they divided among themselves, and united with their souls. When later they reported his existence to their descendants, some of this particle left them and joined the souls of the descendants. The descendants, therefore, know the prophet because a particle from the prophet has 126 joined with their soul. This continues as each report is 146 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH passed on to the succeeding generation down to our own time. The objection made to this was that Jews, Christians, Magians and heretics know that our prophet was on earth. Does al-Nazzam then think that a particle has passed from him into the spirit of the unbelievers ? This is a necessary conclusion. He claimed, furthermore, that when the people of paradise have intercourse with the people of hell, and the people of hell see them, and the two converse with each other, particles of each become exchanged. In this way particles of the bodies and spirits of the people of hell enter paradise, while particles of the bodies and spirits of the people of paradise enter hell. And there is enough shame on him for having dealt with this heresy. Al-Nazzam's thirteenth heresy is reported by al-Jahiz, and is to the effect that forms and bodies renew themselves as they pass from one condition to another, and moreover that Allah creates this world and that which is in it without first annihilating it and then resuscitating it. Abu-al-Husain al-Khaiyat says in his book against abu-al-Ruwandi that al-Jahiz made a mistake in his report about this view of al-Nazzam. Now it might be said to al-Khaiyat, " If al-Jahiz were right in his report, you should accept it as a sign of al-Nazzam's foolishness and mental aberration ; but if he lied about him, then you should accept it as a sign of the shamelessness of al-Jahiz and his idiocy." And this was the sheikh of the Mu'tazilah and their philosopher ! Since the Mu'tazilah lied about their Lord and their Prophet, we cannot deny that they lied about their ancestors. His fourteenth heresy is his view that Allah created man l2 7 and four-footed beasts and the rest of the animals, and all kinds of plants, and the forms of minerals all at once; and that he did not create Adam before creating his children, nor did he create the mothers before creating their children. He claimed that Allah created all these at one time, but that i47' MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS certain things are more numerous than others. So that the question of priority and sequence is merely one of appear- ance and place. By this view he condemns as a lie every- thing that has been agreed upon by the ancestors of the Believers, as well as the people of the Book, whether Jews, Christians or Samaritans. The view of all these being that Allah created the tablet and the pen before the creation of the heavens and the earth. As to the Moslems, the only thing over which they differ is whether heaven or the earth was created first. Al-Nazzam differs from the Moslems and the people of the Book, as well as from most of the Mu'ta- zilah, because the Basrah Mu'tazilah claimed that Allah created his will before creating the thing willed ; while the rest of them assert that some bodies in the world were created before others. Abu-al-Hudhail claimed that he created his word to the thing " but not in a place " before he created bodies and accidents. Al-Nazzam's view about what is manifest in bodies and what is hidden, as well as their permeation, is worse than the view of the Zahiriyah who claimed that all accidents are hidden in bodies. The char- acteristics of the bodies, however, are ascribed to them by the manifestation of certain accidents, and the hiding of I2 ^ others. In both doctrines, there is a turning away from the Duhnyah (Dahrite?) view to the denial of the finite char- acter of bodies and accidents ; for they assert that all these exist in every condition, provided some are hidden and others manifest, although nothing may have appeared in the condition of manifestation. All this is heresy and unbelief; and in fact everything that leads to error is like it. His fifteenth heresy is that the composition of the Koran, and the beauty of the literary arrangement of its words, do not show the miraculous character of its Prophet; nor are they a proof of the reliability of his claim to prophecy. The basis for the proof of his reliability lies only in what the 148 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH Koran contains regarding the manifestation of unknown things. As to the composition of the Koran, and the beauty of the literary arrangements of its verses, verily the wor- shippers are capable of the same, and even of what is more beautiful than this, in composition and literary arrangement. But this view is in opposition to the words of Allah : "Were men and jinn assembled to produce the like of this Koran, they could not produce its like, though the one should help the other " (Surah 17, v. 90). In denying the miraculous character of the Koran, he is denying the prophecy of the man who defied the Arabs to produce anything like it. His sixteenth heresy is his view that a report may be a lie, even though the number of the transmitters may surpass the prescribed limits, and even though the aims of those who transmit it and their motives may differ. He asserts this, together with the view, that a report may, on the other hand, be true, even though only a few may have handed it down. Our followers haye condemned him, as well as 129 those of the Mu'tazilah who agree with him in this doctrine which he adopted. His seventeenth heresy is as follows : the agreement of the Moslem community of each century, as well as that of all centuries combined (as regards opinion and inference) may be an error. From this fact he was bound to conclude that nothing upon which the community have agreed can be trusted, because, according to him, there is always a possi- bility of their agreeing on an error. Since some of the reg- ulations of the law have been taken by Moslems from re- ports that had been handed down, others from single re- ports, others from things upon which the community had agreed, deducing them by analogy and inference; and since al-Nazzam disbelieves in the evidence drawn from what has been handed down, as well as from agreement and analogy, and also rejects a single report, unless the knowl- 149 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS edge it gives is unmistakable, he is putting himself in a position to reject the divine regulations of the law, by re- jecting its methods. His eighteenth heresy comes under the head of threats. He claims that the man who takes by force, or steals one hun- dred and ninety-nine dirhams only, did not commit a crime. In fact, he is not to blame, until what he has taken by force or stolen, and about which he has acted treacherously, amounts to two hundred dirhams and over. If he has based this view on the amount of a theft for which the penalty is the amputation of the hand, he is wrong, for there is no one who would limit that punishment to two hundred dirhams. On the contrary, such a punishment is considered by most people to be necessary for the theft of even a quarter of a dinar, or its value. With this view al-Shafi'i and his follow- ers agree. Malik said it should be inflicted for a quarter of a dinar or three dirhams. Abu-Hanlfah said amputation should be inflicted for ten dirhams and more, while others said it should be inflicted for forty dirhams, or their value. 130 The Ibadiyah considered amputation necessary for small as well as big thefts, no one limiting the punishment to two hundred dirhams. If the fact of guilt, deserving of ampu- tation, is authenticated by the thief himself, even the rob- bery of thousands of dinars will not be a transgression, be- cause amputation is not inflicted on one who takes by force, and then confesses. It follows, moreover, that he who steals the thousands that are not guarded or that belong to his own son, is not guilty, because no decision is to be found about these two cases [the case of one who confesses, and one who steals unguarded thousands]. If, however, al-Nazzam has based his limitation of the punishment to two hundred on the fact that the two hundred is the amount given for alms, he must then condemn the man who steals forty sheep, the number necessary for the offering to be 150 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH considered alms, even if its value was below two hundred dirhams. If analogy has no place in this definition of his and there is no reference to it in the Koran, or the true tradition, then his definition comes only as the whisper of Satan who invites him to error. His nineteenth heresy is his view that faith is the avoid- ing of major sins. The result of this view was that he re- garded words and deeds as in no way faith. Furthermore, prayer, as regards its performance, is neither faith nor drawn from faith; for faith is the forsaking of major sins. At the same time he held that both the acts and their for- saking are virtue. As to this, men before him were divided, some saying that all prayer was faith, and others that noth- ing in prayer was faith. Al-Nazzam differed from both of these groups, however, claiming that whereas prayer is not faith, the forsaking of major sins is. His twentieth heresy comes under the head of the future 131 life. It was his view that scorpions, snakes, beetles, bees, flies, scarabs, dogs and swine, as well as the rest of the ani- mals and insects, enter heaven. He claimed also that every- one and everything that Allah judges worthy of heaven is not necessarily of a different grade of precedence. Accord- ingly he claimed that Abraham the son of the prophet of Allah could not in heaven have precedence over the children of the faithful. Nor do the children of the faithful in heaven differ in degree, pleasure or grade from the snakes, scorpions and beetles, because there is no work for the latter just as there is no work for the former. Thus he limits the Lord of the worlds from making a difference for the chil- dren of the prophets, by giving them more pleasure than he bestows on the insects. Al-Nazzam did not even stop here, but went on to say that the Lord of the worlds did not even have the power to do this. Moreover, he claimed that Allah bestowed on the prophets only that which he bestowed on 151 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS the animals, because, according to his view of precedence, there is no difference made between those who are wise and those who are not, for these differ only as to reward and punishment, according to the worth of their works. Hold- ing such a view as this, al-Nazzam cannot get angry at any one who says to him : " May Allah resuscitate you with dogs and swine and snakes and scorpions in their quarters." And our wish for him is that he may remain in the condi- tion to which this prayer consigns him. His twenty-first heresy appeared when he brought for- ward his view about mental sciences. He introduced these 132 same errors, which had never been heard of before, into the dominion of religious law. His view was that divorce en- forced by any of the following formulae was not legal ; e. g. the word of the husband to his wife : " Thou art free, or liberated, or thou art free to go thy way, or follow thy people, or depart," or any other divorce formulae accepted by the Canonists, whether he intends divorce or not. The Canonists agree that such formulae constitute a divorce, pro- vided there is intention of divorce. The lawyers of al-Trak hold that even if used only in anger, the formula for divorce is equivalent to the declaration of divorce even if no inten- tion is present. Another of al-Nazzam's errors is about separation, for he says that to have a husband say, " You are to me like the back of my mother," means divorce ; whereas if he uses the word belly or generative organs, instead of back, it is not a divorce. This differs entirely from the customary view of the community. He also condemned abu-Musa al-Ash'ari for his decision. Furthermore, al-Nazzam brought forward his view that sleep does not destroy the purity of ablutions, unless there is excrement. This is contrary to the view of the majority of the leaders, who believed that sleep lying flat destroys 152 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH purification, and who differ only about sleep taken in a sit- ting, kneeling, or bent position. Abu-Hamfah held that it is permissible, while most of the followers of al-Shafi'i de- nied it by the process of analogy. Another of his errors was that he claimed that he who intentionally neglects a prescribed prayer, will receive no merit for fulfilling it, nor is its fulfilment obligatory for him. To the rest of the community, this was a heresy similar to the one which claimed that the five prayers are not prescribed. Some of the religious lawyers of the com- munity say that if a man neglects a prescribed prayer, he must perform the prayers of one night and one day. Sa'id ibn-al-Musaiyab said: " He who forsakes a prescribed 133 prayer so that the time for it is passed, must perform a thousand prayers (to make tip)." The place of prayer has been so dignified by some religious lawyers, e. g. Ahmad ibn-Hanbal, that they condemn as an infidel any man who forsakes it intentionally, though he may not consider its negligence lawful. Al-ShafYi held that a man who neglected prayer intentionally should be executed; although he did not condemn as a heretic the man who neglected it out of laziness but not if he considered it illegal. Abu-Hamfah, on the other hand, decreed imprisonment for the neglect of prayer, accompanied by torture, until the man prayed. Al- Nazzam's disagreement with the community over the obli- gation of performing neglected prescribed prayers, is sim- ilar to the disagreement of the infidels (zanadikah) over the obligation of any prayer. Both disagreements are not to have consideration. In addition to the heresies which we have recounted, al- Nazzam has attacked the reports of the Companions and the Disciples because of their interpretation of the Koran. Al-Jahiz alluded to him in his work entitled Knowledge (al-Maf&rif), and in his book known as Opinion (Futya), 153 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS saying that he blamed the traditionalists because they handed down traditions of abu-Hurairah. 1 He claimed that abu- Hurairah was the worst of liars, and he attacked 'Umar al- Faruk. 2 In fact, he claimed that Faruk was in doubt about his own faith at the battle of al-Hudaibiyah as well as on the day of the death of the Prophet. He was also with those who were angry with the Prophet on the night of the 'Aka- bah, 3 and he struck Fatimah and . . . (not clear in text). Furthermore, he criticized 'Umar for sending Nasr ibn-al- Hajjaj from al-Madmah to al-Basrah. And he claimed that 'Umar introduced genuflections in prayer, and forbade tem- porary marriage [mufah] during pilgrimage, and the mar- riage of a freedman to an Arab woman. He blamed 'Uthman for sending al-Hakam ibn-al-'Asi 4 to al-Madinah and for making al-Walid ibn-'Ukbah 5 his governor over al-Kufah. Al-Walid was the man who led the prayer when he was drunk. 134 He also blamed 'Uthman for helping Sa'id ibn-al-'Asi with forty thousand dirhams for his marriage contract. Moreover, he accused him of claiming for himself the pos- session of the land belonging to the Moslem community (hima). He then mentioned 'All, claiming that when asked about a cow that had killed a donkey, he said : " I judge this according to my opinion." In this he expressed his ignor- 1 Tabari ed. Zotenberg, vol. iii, pp. 466, 703 et scq. 2 By-name given to 'Umar the caliph. z 'Akabah. Ibn-Hisham, Biography, p. 288. The night on which alle- giance was sworn to the Prophet. Margoliouth, Mohammed, pp. 202, 204. 4 Mistake in Baghdadl. Instead of Hakam ibn-al-'Asi, it should be al-Hakam ibn-abi-al-'AsI. Cf. Ibn-Hajar, vol. i, p. 709 where this very- incident is mentioned. 5 Ibn-Hajar, vol. iii, p. 1312. Tabari, ibid., vol. iii, p. 566. 9 Ibid., p. 566 et seq. 154 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH ance, for who is he that he should judge according to his opinion ? He also attacked abu-Mas'ud * for his view about the tradition which relates to the marriage of the daughter of JVashtif. 2 [For he claimed] " I judge according to my own opinion, and if it is a correct judgment, then it is from Allah, but if it is a mistaken one, then it is from me." In addition he contended that abu-Mas'ud was lying when he stated that the Prophet had said : " He is happy who re- joices in the womb of his mother, and he is unhappy who is unhappy in the womb of his mother." Al-Nazzam also considered him a liar in his report of the " splitting of the moon," and in his report about the Jinns of the " night of the Jinn." Such was the view of al-Nazzam with regard to the report of the Companions and of the people of the abode of paradise, of whom Allah said : " Well pleased now hath God been with the believers when they plighted fealty to thee under the tree " (Surah 48, v. 18). He who gets angry with those whom Allah blesses, he incurs anger rather than they. He then said in his book that those of the Companions who believed in analogy either are of opin- ion that this is legal for them and ignore that it is forbidden to judge by analogy according to decisions directed against them, or else wish to be remembered as disagreeing, and thus be leaders of sects. Because of this [latter difficulty] they chose to accept analogy [as legal] . Al-Nazzam thus attrib- uted to them the preference of desire to religion. [For they deliberately chose the view that cast the least reflection on them.] The only crime of the followers, then, according to this hideous infidel, is that they were unitarians, who did not hold the heresy of the Kadariyah who reckoned numerous 135 1 Nawawi, p. 757, under 'Ukbah ibn-'Amr. Tabari, ibid., vol. ii, p. 439 ; vol. iii, p. 36. 2 None of the more important historians mention this man. 155 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS other creators with Allah. He rejects the tradition of abu- Mas'ud, that he is happy who is happy in his mother's womb, and he is unhappy who is unhappy in his mother's womb, only because this differs from the view of the Kadariyah who assert that neither happiness nor misery come from the decree of Allah or through his predestination. Al-Nazzam's denial of the " splitting of the moon " is due to his unwill- ingness to ascribe any miracle to our Prophet, just as he de- nies any miracle in connection with the composition of the Koran. If he considers the " splitting of the moon " im- possible, although it is mentioned by Allah in the Koran, then, according to what he says of the processes of the mind, he is forced to conclude that he who combined the parts of the moon is unable to separate them. If, however, he ac- cepted the " splitting of the moon" as lying within the range of ability and possibility, then what is it that made him accuse abu-Mas'ud of being a liar, in his report of the "split- ting of the moon," although Allah mentioned it in the Koran : " The hour hath approached and the Moon hath been cleft; But whenever they see a miracle they turn aside and say, ' This is well-devised magic ' " (Surah 54, v. 1 and 2 ) . Al-Nazzam's assertion that the "splitting of the moon " never took place, is worse than the view of the polytheists who hold that even when they saw it splitting, it took place by magic. He who denies the existence of prophetic mir- acles is worse than he who attempts to explain them in some other way. As to his denial of vision to the Jinn, he must verily conclude that the Jinn cannot see each other. If, how- ever, he accepts their ability to see, why does he say that abu-Mas'ud is lying when he claims that they can see. Ac- cording to all this, al-Nazzam in addition to what we have reported of his error was the most corrupt of the creations of Allah, the boldest in committing major sins, and the most 136 addicted to drinking spirits. 'Abdallah ibn-Muslim-ibn- 156 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE RADARIYAH Kutaibah x has mentioned in his book entitled " The Dif- ference of Tradition," that al-Nazzam drank spirits in the morning and the evening, singing the following verses about drink : « I do not cease taking the spirit of the flagon in gentleness And consider it legal to drink the blood of the unslain. Thus I was revived and felt two spirits in my body, While the flagon lay a body without a spirit." In his attack on his report of the Companions, in the heresy of his views, and in the errors of his acts, his case is like that of the man about whom the following proverb is told : He who has a bad faith and is mean in his descent, does not leave a shameful act without committing it, considering it praiseworthy and permissible though it be forbidden. But are the clouds harmed by the barking of the dogs ? Just as the clouds are not harmed by the barking of the dogs, so such a man does no harm. (Here the writing breaks off, at the end of the folio 58b, and from the following it appears that several pages are lost, and that the author is now talking of Mu'ammar.) 2 ...... the phenomena of the body came from the acts of the body according to its nature. According to him, sound is the act of bodies that are sonorous by nature. The annihilation of a body is the act of the body from its nature. \nd the healthy or unhealthy condition of seed is, accord- ing to him, due to the acts of the seed. He also claimed that the annihilation of a finite thing is due to its own act from its nature. He claims, moreover, that in the case of phenomena, Allah has neither action nor power. And 137 holding this view that Allah creates neither life nor death, he condemns as false Allah's describing himself as one who 1 Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. ii, p. 22. ■ Mu'ammar ibn-'Abbad al-Sulami. Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 67 ct seq. Horten, ibid., p. 274 et seq. Macdonald, tbid., p. H3- 157 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS gives life or causes death, for how can he who created neither life nor death give life or death? His second heresy is his idea that Allah created no phe- nomena whatever. He at the same time denied the eternal attributes of Allah, just as the rest of the Mu'tazilah de- nied them. This heresy forced him to the conclusion that Allah has no word, since he could not state that Allah's word was an eternal attribute, as the Sumiites and the com- munity did, for he did not ascribe to Allah any eternal attribute. Nor could he say that his word was his act, as the rest of the Mu'tazilah held, because Allah, according to him, had not created any phenomena. The Koran, accord- ing to him, was the act of a body upon which the words descended, but is not an act of Allah, nor an attribute. Thus it is not possible for him to actually have a word, either in the sense of an attribute, or in the sense of an act. If he then has no word, he has no power to command, to forbid, nor to impose obligation. This involves a denial of divine obligation, and of the provisions of the Canon Law and of what others have affirmed, because he held opinions leading thereto. His third heresy was his assertion that every kind of phenomena existing in the body is endless in number. So 138 he said if a thing moves through a motion arising in itself, this motion belongs to its bearer for the sake of (through) an idea outside of itself. This idea, again, belongs to its bearer for the sake of (through) an idea outside of itself. Thus he speaks of every idea belonging to its bearer for the sake of (through) an idea outside of it ad infinitum. Thus color, taste and smell — as well as any other phenom- ena — belongs to its bearer through an idea outside of itself. This idea again belongs to its bearer through an idea out- side of itself ad infinitum. Al-Ka'bi, in his treatises, relates how al-Mu'ammar claimed that motion is opposed to rest 158 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARlYAH only through an idea outside of it. In the same way rest is opposed to motion through an idea outside of it, and these two ideas are opposed to ideas other than they. This series, according to him, may be followed ad infinitum. Now such a view is heretical for two reasons. One is that he posits accidents that are unlimited, which neces- sitates the positing of accidents which Allah cannot count— which is directly opposed to Allah's saying, " And count- eth all things by number " (Surah 72, v. 28). The second reason is that his saying that an unlimited number of phenomena have been created leads him to hold that the body is more powerful than Allah. For, according to him, Allah has created nothing but bodies, which are finite, as both we and he hold. Now, when the body creates a phe- nomenon, it has in that connection created phenomena that are unlimited. And naturally that which creates what is unlimited must be more powerful than that which can only create what is limited in number. In his treatises al-Ka'bi tries to excuse al-Mu'ammar, asserting that he was accus- tomed to say that man has no power of action outside of his will, the rest of the phenomena being the work of the body acting according to its nature. If this report of his views is correct, it necessarily follows that the nature, to which is ascribed the creation of the phenomena, is more powerful than Allah, for Allah produces only bodies that are limited, 139 while the nature of man produces various kinds of phenom- ena, every one of which kind is endless in number. It ought further to be said that the view of al-Mu'ammar in regard to endless phenomena opens the way for those who held the doctrines of suhur (appearance) and kutnun (masking) against that of the [orthodox] Moslems in re- gard to the creation of phenomena. For the [orthodox] Moslems inferred the creation of the phenomena in bodies from the fact that opposing phenomena may succeed one 159 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS another in bodies. But the followers of zuhiir and kumun denied the creation of phenomena and believed that they were inherent in bodies, and that whenever one phenomenon appeared in a body, its opposite was masked there, and that when a phenomenon was masked there, its opposite appeared. The Mukassidun said to them : " If a phenomenon is masked once and appears once, its appearance after its masking and its masking after its appearance would be due to an idea outside of it; and if not, this idea in its appearing and its masking would need an endless idea outside of it. But since the combination of endless phenomena in one body is impos- sible, their succession in a body through being created is proved, and not through successive masking and appearing. If, now, Mu'ammar says that the combination of unlimited phenomena in a body is possible, he cannot refute the claim of the followers of appearance and masking, that it is pos- sible for endless phenomena of the kind called appearance and masking to be in one and the same place." This view carried to its legitimate conclusion leads to the assertion that phenomena are eternal — which is a heresy. And that which leads to such a theory must also be heresy. I 4° His fourth heresy is his theory that man is something beside this sensible body, that he is living, knowing, able to act and possesses free will. But he claims that it is not man himself who moves, or keeps quiet, or is colored, or sees, or touches, or changes from place to place, nor does one place contain him to the exclusion of another. If he were asked, " Do you say that man is in this body, or in the sky, or in the earth, or in paradise, or in hell?", he would answer, "I do not deny any of this, but I assert that he is in the body as something led, in paradise as something given delight, or in hell as something given punishment; he is, however, neither present nor contained in any one of these places, because he has neither length, breadth, depth, nor 160 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH weight." He thus ascribes attributes to man which are ascribed to Allah, in that he says that man is living and knowing and able to act and wise, attributes which must necessarily be applied to Allah. Then he denies that man can move, or be at rest, or be hot, or cold, or wet, or dry, that he possesses color, or weight, or taste, or smell. Allah also is free from such attributes. And just as he claims that man, when in the body, is its manager, but is not there in the sense of being present or contained, so, according to him, Allah is in every place, in the sense that he is managing it, and knowing what is happening in it, but not in the sense of being present or contained in it. It is almost as if by describing man as Allah is described, he wishes him to be worshipped. He did not, however, think it meet to express quite this opinion, so he merely said something that would naturally lead to it. Moreover, this view entails the idea that it is impossible for man to see man, and therefore it fol- 141 lows that the Companions did not see the Prophet of Allah, a view which is in itself sufficiently shameful. His fifth heresy was his view that it is not proper to say of Allah that he is ancient, and yet at the same time de- scribing him as existent and eternal. His sixth heresy was his refusal to say that Allah knows himself, because he considers it essential for the thing known to be separate from the thing knowing. This view of his, however, is proved false by the fact that a speaker may mention himself, because if it is possible for his own self to be mentioned by a speaker, it is also possible for a knower to know his own self. Al-Ka'bi boasted in his writings to the effect that Mu'ammar was one of his Mu'tazilah teach- ers. Now anyone who boasts of his likeness to the like of him can keep it, just as the poet has said : " Is there any buyer as long as Sa'id is the seller? Is there any seller as long as Sa'id is the buyer ? " 161 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS 6. Concerning the Bishriyah among them. These are the followers of Bishr ibn-al-Mu'tamir. 1 Some of his brother Kadarlyah condemned his views on certain points in which he is considered right by other Kadarlyah. For instance, they condemned his view that Allah was capable of so much kindness that if he showed it to an infidel, it would make that infidel involuntarily a believer. They also condemned his view that if Allah had first created the wise in paradise, thus favoring them, it would have been better for them. They also condemned his view that if Allah should know that by lengthening the life of a man, that slave would be- come a believer, then to lengthen his life would be better for him than to have him die a heretic. Moreover, they 142 condemned his view that Allah does not cease desiring; and also his view that if Allah knows that a certain act is to be committed by a man and does not forbid it, then he has de- sired its occurrence. In these five views which the Basrah Mu'tazilah condemned, Bishr was right while in reality those who condemned him were themselves worthy of con- demnation. All the other matters, however, are hateful heresies, and we condemn Bishr as an unbeliever. First of all, we condemn his view that Allah is not a friend to the believer in the state of his belief, nor an enemy to an un- believer in the state of his unbelief. It was necessary to condemn him for this, since it is contrary to the view of all Moslems as well as our immediate followers ; for we say that Allah does not cease being a friend to him whom he knows to have been his friend, while he was alive ; and an enemy to him whom he knows to have been an unbeliever during his life and to have died in his unbelief. He is therefore his enemy before his unbelief, in the state of his unbelief, and after his death. As to these main points, the Mu'tazilah, all except Bishr, held that Allah is not a friend to a man before 1 See note on page 134. 162 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH the existence of obedience in him was possible ; it is only in the state of obedience that he becomes his friend. In the same way he is an enemy to the unbeliever only in the state of his unbelief; moreover, if the believer returned to his un- belief, Allah becomes his enemy after having been his friend, according to them. Bishr, however, claimed that Allah is not the friend of the obedient in the state of the existence of his obedience, nor an enemy to the unbeliever in the state of the existence of his unbelief. He is only friendly to the obedient in the second state where obedience exists, 1 and he is the enemy of the unbeliever only in the second state where his unbelief exists. He gave as proof of this, that if it is right that Allah should be a friend to the obedient [only] 143 in the state of his obedience, and an enemy to him [only] in the state of his unbelief, then it is right to reward the obe- dient in the state of his obedience, and to punish the unbe- liever in the state of his unbelief. But our followers say : "If Allah does so, it is right." Bishr, however, said that if this [conclusion] is right, then it must follow that the unbeliever can be transformed in his state of unbelief. We say that if Allah does so, it is right. The second of Bishr's heresies is the fact that he exag- gerated his view about reproduction to such an extent that he claimed it possible for a man to create color and taste and smell and sight and hearing and the rest of the sensa- tions according to the method of reproduction, provided he is the author of that which causes them. The same is true of his view of heat and cold, wetness and dryness. Our own followers and the rest of the Mu'tazilah declared him a heretic, because of his assertion that man can create color, taste, smell and the sensations. His third heresy is his theory that Allah may forgive a 1 i. e. he is not his friend before he becomes obedient, nor his enemy before he becomes disobedient. 163 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS man his sins and then change his mind about such forgive- ness and punish him when the man is again disobedient. Bishr was questioned about this : " If an unbeliever had turned from his unbelief, and drank wine after having re- pented from his unbelief, without considering it legal to drink wine, and death should seize him before he had re- pented from his drinking of wine, would Allah punish him on the last day for his unbelief for which he repented ?" He said " yes." It was then said to him: ''According to this, then, the punishment for such a sin on the part of those who are of the Moslem community is like the punishment of the unbeliever." And Bishr had to accept this deduction. I44 His fourth heresy is his theory that if Allah punished a baby, he would be acting unjustly towards it in meting out such punishment, for if Allah does this, the baby would have to be grown up, sensible, and deserving of pun- ishment. This is the same as if he said that Allah has power to act unjustly, and if he acts unjustly, then, indeed through this injustice he becomes just ! Thus the beginning of this theory contradicts the conclusion. Our followers say that Allah has the power to punish babies; if he does so, his act must be a just one. Their views in this matter are not contradictory, but Bishr's view is. His fifth heresy is his view that [when a body moves from one place to another] motion exists, but not in the body, either as it is in the first or the second place ; but that the body moves through it from the first to the second place. This view is unreasonable in itself. Theologians before him disagreed as to whether motion is an " unsubstantial real- ity " (ma'na) or not. Those who do not believe in phe- nomena said no; while those who believed in phenomena differ over the time of the occurrence of motion, some of them claiming that it starts in the body when the body is in the first place, and the body then passes through it from the 164 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH first to the second place. To this agree al-Nazzam and abu- Shimr al-MurjiV Others said that motion exists in the body when the latter has reached the second place, because it is the first time the body exists in the second place. This is the view of abu-al-Hudhail and al-Jubba'i and his son abu-Hashim. Our sheikh abu-1-Hasan al-Ash'ari says about this : " Some of them say that motion is two sub- stances in two [separate] places. One of them occurs in the moving body while it is in the first place, the second occurs in the body when it is in the second place." This is the view of al-Ruwandi 2 and also of our sheikh abu-al-' Abbas al- Kalanisl. 3 The view of Bishr ibn-al-Mu'tamar differs from these views because he claims that motion takes place while the body is neither in the first nor the second place, although we know that there is no state between the first and the second. If this view is unreasonable even for him, how can it be reasonable for others ? 7. Concerning the Hishamlyah. These are the followers of Hisham ibn-'Amr al-Futi. 4 His heresies follow in succes- sion his [initial] heresy about predestnation. Among them is the fact that he borbids men to say (Surah 3, v. 167) : " Our Allah is our sufficiency, and he is our best guardian [wakil]" because he does not consider it right to call Allah a guardian. But the Koran gives this quality to Allah, and it is also mentioned in the Sunnah which has been handed 1 Muhammad Badr points this abu-Shimr, but no such man is men- tioned by the leading writers on these heresies, while ShahrastanI men- tions abu-Shdmir, a Murji', vol. i, p. 160 et seq., Horten mentions this same man on p. 304. As abu-Shamir was also a pupil of al-Nazzam it seems justifiable to conclude that this is the man to whom Baghdad! is referring. 1 Horten, ibid., p. 350 et seq. Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. i, p. 76. 3 Horten, ibid., p. 375- 4 ShahrastanI, ibid., vol. i, p. 74- 165 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS down concerning the ninety-nine names of Allah. If this name cannot be applied to Allah, in spite of the fact that it is written in the Koran, and handed down in the authentic Sunnah, then what other names should be applied to him? Our followers used to wonder at the Basrah Mu'tazilah who applied names to Allah that were not mentioned in the Koran and the Sunnah, even if there is analogy for them. Their wonder increased still more when al-Futi forbade them to apply to Allah those attributes which were mentioned of him in the Koran and the Sunnah. Al-Khaiyat defended al-Futi by saying that Hisham used to say : " Our sufficiency is in Allah, he is the best to depend upon [mntawakkal alaihi]" in place of "guardian/' He claimed that the word guardian implied someone above him (to make him guardian). This, however, is a sign of the ignorance of Hisham and of him who defended him by 146 resorting to the meanings of nouns in the language. The word guardian really means " the one who is sufficient," because he suffices the one under his guardianship in what is given him to guard. This is the meaning of his say- ing, " Our sufficiency is in Allah, and he is the best guar- dian." And also the meaning of " our sufficiency " is our adequacy. It is therefore necessary that what follows the word " best " should agree with the word that precedes it, as when we say "Allah is our supplier, and he is the best supplier," we do not say "Allah is our supplier, and he is the best forgiver." Besides, Allah said, " He who depends on Allah, Allah is his sufficiency, i. c. his satisfier." Guar- dian [wakll] may also mean in the Koran " one in charge of us," "Say I am not in charge of you" (Surah 6, v. 66), i. e. your protector; and the opposite of protector would be a stupid man. If guardian means protector, and if Allah is a satisfier and a protector, then we should not forbid the use of the word guardian among his actual names. 166 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH The remarkable thing is that Hisham permitted this name for Allah to be written and read in the Koran. But he did not permit its use outside of the Koran. The second of al-Futfs heresies is his prohibition of the use of many things uttered in the Koran. He also pro- hibited men from saying that Allah unites the hearts of be- lievers and causes the evil to err. This is in opposition to the words of Allah, "Hadst thou spent all the riches of the earth, thou couldst not have united their hearts; but Allah hath united them" (Surah 8, v. 64), and to his words, "But the wicked shall he cause to err" (Surah 14, v. 32), and to his words, " But none will he mislead thereby except the wicked " (Surah 2, v. 27). Moreover, he rejected the say- 147 ing in the Koran that Allah blinds the unbelievers. 'Ubad ibn-Sulaiman al-'Amri ('Umari?) agreed with this error, and forbade men to say that Allah created the unbelievers, because the word unbeliever is a name for two things, man and his unbelief, but according to him Allah is not the creator of his unbelief. On this analogy, it follows that one should not say that Allah created the believer, because the word believer is a name for two things, man and belief, but Allah, according to him, is not the creator of man's be- lief. Similarly one should never say, " one has killed an unbeliever or has struck him," because the word unbeliever refers to both man and his unbelief, and unbelief cannot be killed or struck. 'Ubad also rejected the saying that Allah " is the third to every two, and the fourth to every three," which contradicts the saying of Allah in the Koran : "Three persons speak not privately together but he is their fourth, nor five but he is their sixth" (Surah 58, v. 8). He also re- jected the saying that Allah increases the days of the unbe- liever, and this in spite of his word in the Koran : " We only give them length of days that they may increase their sins " {Surah 3, v. 179). If 'Ubad took this error from his pre- 167 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ceptor Hisham, it is like the case of 'Asa coming from 'Aslyah, 1 " the snake gives birth to naught but a snake." But if this assertion of his is original, then the student would have drawn this from his teacher by analogy, for the teacher rejected the word guardian and guarantor from among the names of Allah. 148 The third of al-Fiiti's heresies is his view concerning phenomena. He held that nothing in them predicates any- thing about Allah. His companion 'Ubad said the same, both claiming that the " separation of the sea," and the " changing of a stick into a snake," and the " splitting of the moon," and the " secret of the twilight," and the "walking on the waters" (see above, page 156) do not verify the Prophet's claim to prophecy. Al-Futi claims that the evidences supposed to come from Allah must be per- ceptible, just as bodies are perceptible, and are therefore evidences for Allah. They are phenomena which can be known through deductive proofs. But if Allah is to be made evident by this, these evidences must each have an- other evidence to prove them, and so on ad infinitum. It was objected that if he held to such an evidence, he would have to say that phenomena do not prove anything, nor do they even prove a basis for a legal decision ; because if they proved a thing or a decision, in proving it they would need to prove the truth of the evidence used in bringing such proof and each evidence must have another evidence to prove it, and so on ad infinitum. And if phenomena prove nothing, and give no decision, then the proof of the word of Allah and the word of the prophet of Allah about that which is legal and that which is illegal, and that which is promised and that which is threatened, is abrogated. Among phenomena, however, are some whose existence 1 Muhammad Badr in a footnote says that 'Asa is the name of a horse and 'Aslyah is the mother of that horse. 168 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARlYAH is known by necessity, such as colors, tastes, smells, motion and quiet; it necessarily follows that these known phe- nomena are evidence for Allah because they are percep- tible, just as bodies are evidence for Allah bcause they are perceptible. Now if al-Futi says that phenomena are not perceptible, because those who deny phenomena have 149 doubted their existence, one can say : " The Najjariyah and the Darariyah have doubted the existence of the body which was not a phenomenon, for they asserted that bodies are a conglomerate of phenomena." And arguing from analogy, it follows that bodies cannot be known of necessity, and if [break in text]. His fourth heresy is his view concerning " interruption and continuation." He maintained that if a man performs the ablutions for prayer and begins praying, thus drawing near to Allah with the determination to complete the prayer, and then recites and genuflects and prays to Allah in the proper manner, but interrupts it before the end, the begin- ning of the prayer as well as its end is sin, for Allah has forbidden him this, and has prohibited it. Nevertheless he has no way of knowing before the beginning that he is going to commit a sin and so avoiding it. The community before his time, however, agreed that the part of the prayer which has been performed is an act of obedience to Allah, even though the prayer is not completed, as for example, if he died during it, what he had already performed would be an act of obedience, even if the whole prayer was not com- pleted. His fifth heresy is his denial that 'Uthman was besieged and was murdered by conquest and force. He claims that a small band surprised and killed him without a regular siege. And he who rejects the view that 'Uthman was besieged, in spite of the successive traditions about it which have been handed down, is like him who rejects the battles of 169 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Badr and 'Uhud, in spite of the successive traditions which have been handed down about them. He is also like the man who rejects the miracles about which traditions have been handed down. His sixth heresy is the view which he expresses in the chapter on the " Community"; that when the community comes to a consensus of opinion, forsaking tyranny and cor- ruption, then it needs an Imam to manage it ; and that when it rebels and sins and kills its Imam, the Imamship should not be fixed upon anyone under these conditions. By that he meant to attack the Imamship of 'All, because the Imamship was given to him during a rebellion, and after the killing of the Imam preceding him. This agreed with the view of their al-Asamm, 1 that the Imamship should remain only with him upon whom the consensus of the community rested. By this view he only wished to attack the Imamship of 'All, because the community did not agree about him, for the Syrians were championing someone else until 'AH died. While rejecting the Imamship of 'AH he accepted that of Mu'awiyah, because after the killing of 'All the people were unanimous about him. The Rafidah, who inclined to the Mu'tazilah views, were thoroughly satisfied with the attack of the sheikhs of the Mu'tazilah on the Imamship of 'AH, after the doubt of their leader, Wasil, about the testimony of 'AH and his followers. His seventh heresy is his view that whoever says that paradise and hell are created, should be condemned as a heretic. His successors among the Mu'tazilah doubt the existence of paradise and hell to-day, but they do not con- demn the man who says that they are created. Those con- vinced of the creation of paradise and hell condemn those who deny their existence, and they swear by Allah that he 7 Horten, ibid., p. 298. 170 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH who denies them will not enter paradise and will not be freed from hell. His eighth heresy is his denial of the marriage of the virgins in paradise. He who denies this is not worthy to enter paradise, how much less to marry a virgin there! Besides the errors which we have recounted of him, al-Futi believes in killing those who differed from him with secret cunning, even if they belong to the Moslem community. The 151 Sunnites said of al-Futi and his followers that their blood and their possessions belonged to the Moslems, and that they had the usual right to a fifth of the spoils. Nor should retaliation be demanded of one who kills one of them nor blood-wit nor atonement. Indeed, a certain rank and sta- tion is to be awarded to the one killing him, for which praise be to Allah. 8. Concerning the Murddrlyah among them. These are the followers of Tsa ibn-Sabih, known as abii-Musa al- Murdar. 1 He was called the monk of the Mu'tazilah; the surname suited him, though the term was taken from the Christian monks. His surname al-Murdar was also well suited. In general, the verse may be applied to him: " Thine eyes seldom see a man whose appearance does not remind you of his surname." This Murdar claimed that men had the power to produce something similar to the Koran, and even something more eloquent, as al-Nazzam had said. But in this way they show stubborn opposition to the word of Allah : " Say, verily were men and Jinn assembled to produce the like of this Koran; they could not produce its like, though the one should help the other" (Surah 17, v. 90)- In addition to his various errors, al-Murdar condemned the person in close communication with a Sultan, claiming that he can » Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. jrc, musclar. Horten, ibid., index, p. 642. 171 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS neither inherit nor can he bequeath. His predecessors among the Mu'tazilah, who agreed with him as regards fate and secession, said of the person holding communication with a Sultan, that he was a shameful person, but could not be called either a believer or an unbeliever. Murdar, how- ever, held that such a person was an unbeliever. It is a 152 wonder that the Sultan of his time refrained from killing him, considering his condemnation of the Sultan himself and of those who associated with him. He also claimed that Allah could act tyrannically and lie; for if he really carried out what he was able to do in the way of tyranny and lying, Allah would become a tyrannous and lying God. Abu-Zufar reports of al-Murdar that he admitted that a deed could exist which was the result of two created doers, the deed being created in the way of generation. He held this view in spite of the fact that he rejected the opinion of the Sunnites that a deed could result from two doers, one of them being creator and the other acquirer. Al-Murdar also claimed that he who admitted that Allah could be seen by the eye though without form, is an unbeliever, while he who doubts that such a man is an unbeliever, is an unbe- liever himself ; and so is the man who has doubts of the man who doubts, and so on ad infinitum. The rest of the Mu'tazilah agreed to condemn only him who admitted that Allah could be seen when man confronted him, or when the rays of the sight of the seer reached the seen. Those who assert that there is sight, are united in condemning al-Murdar, as well as those who doubt his condemnation. The Mu'tazilah report that when death came to al-Murdar he gave the dying command that his goods should be given as alms and that none of his possessions were to be given to his heirs. Abu-al-Husain al-Khaiyat tried to excuse him for this, saying : "The right to some of his goods was ques- tionable, and the poor had a claim on them." By this excuse 172 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH he only proved that al-Murdar was a robber and a betrayer of the poor. And the robber, according to the Mu'tazilah is a shameless person, condemned to eternal hell. The rest of the Mu'tazilah condemned him because of his view about the generation of one deed by two creators. Al-Murdar himself condemned abu-al-Hudhail for his view about the annihilation of the powers of Allah. He wrote a book on this, and he condemned his own teacher Bishr ibn-al-Mu'ta- 153 mar for his view about the creation of colors, tastes, smells and perceptions. He also condemned al-Nazzam's view that created things are the deed of Allah. This, he said, would necessitate the acceptance of the views of the Christians, namely, that " the Messiah, the son of Allah, was a creation of Allah." This would make of him a Mu'tazilah in monk- ish dress ! He condemned his sheikhs, and his sheikhs con- demned him. Both parties are justified in condemning each other. 9. Concerning the Ja'fanyah. These are the followers of two Ja'fars among them, one is Ja'far ibn-Harb * and the other is Ja'far ibn-Mubashshir. Both of them attained the heights of error and the depths of ignorance. As to Ja'far ibn-Mubashshir, he claimed that among the corrupt of this community there are some who are worse than the Jews, Christians, Magians and Zindiks. 2 This was in spite of his view that these same corrupt persons were unitar- ians, and neither believers nor unbelievers. He thus made the unitarian who is not an unbeliever worse than the infidel dualist. The least we can oppose to this view of his is to say to him : "According to us, thou art worse than all un- believers on the face of the earth." He also claimed that 1 Only alluded to by Shahrastani. Both of the Ja'fars are to be found in Mas'udI, Les Prairies d'Or, vol. v, p. 443 and vol. vii, p. 231. Horten, ibid., pp. 200, 295. 2 A Thanawiyah or dualist, also applied to an unbeliever. 173 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS the consensus of the companions to the effect that he who drinks spirituous wine should be beaten, is wrong, because their agreement is reached through speculation (not given in the Koran or tradition). Ja'far shares this heresy of his with the Najadat among the Khawarij, who condemn pun- ishment for the use of liquor. The theologians of the com- munity unite in condemning him who rejects the punish- ment for drinking raw wine, they differ only about nabldh, 1 provided one does not get drunk from it. If one does, however, get drunk from it, then, according to the view of the followers of speculation and tradition, one deserves punishment in spite of those who disagree with this view. 154 Ibn-Mubashshir also claimed that he who steals a single grain, or even something less, is corrupt, and is condemned to hell. In this he differs from his predecessors who main- tained that minor sins may be forgiven, if their author avoids the major ones. He also claimed that the condem- nation of the guilty to hell-fire can be inferred by mental processes, thereby differing from his predecessors, that such a thing was known through the law and. not through reason. Moreover, he claims that if a man send to a Avoman, asking her to marry him, and she come to him, and he take and possess her without a contract, she is not to be punished, because she came to him with the idea of being married. But the punishment must fall upon the man, because he in- tended fornication. This ignorant man did not know that she who gives in to fornication is a fornicator unless she is forced. The legists differ only about a man who forces a woman to commit fornication, some holding that the woman should have a dowry and the man be punished. Al-ShafVl and the legists of al-Hijaz agree about this. Some with- hold the punishment of the man because they consider that the dowry is sufficient punishment for him. But not 1 Date-wine. 174 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH one of the early Moslems thought it right to withhold pun- ishment from a woman who gives in to fornication, which was ibn-Mubashshir's view. The opposition of the con- sensus is sufficient shame for him. As for Ja'far ibn-Harb, he shared in the errors of his preceptor, al-Murdar, and also added his view to the effect that a part of the whole is dif- ferent from the whole. This amounts to saying that the whole is different from itself, since all parts of it are dif- ferent from it. He also claimed that what is forbidden by the mind has power over (that) mind, but has no power over another thing. This is what al-Sha'bi 1 said of him in his treatises. On this basis it was necessary that he should hold that he who knows a thing does not know it! 155 'Abd-al-Kahir says : " Ibn-Harb wrote a book explaining his errors ; but we have refuted his book, by a book called Harb (war) against ibn-Harb, and in it, by the help of Allah and his gifts, we refute its bases and its principles. 10. Concerning the Iskaflyah among them. These are the followers of Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah al-Iskafi. 2 He took his errors about predestination from Ja'far ibn-Harb, but came to differ ever certain of his deductions. He claimed that to Allah can be attributed the power to oppress chil- dren and madmen, but not those who have their full senses. He disagreed with the view of al-Nazzam, according to which Allah had not the power to act unjustly or to lie. He likewise disagreed with the view of those of his prede- cessors who hold that Allah could practice injustice and lie, but does not do so because he knows that they are both abominations, and that he can do without them. Between these two views he took a middle course, according to which 1 Misprint in Baghdadl for al-Shafi'I. 2 Horten, ibid., p. 299 et seq. Mas'udi, ibid., vol. vi, p. 58; vol. vii, P- 231. 175 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS he claimed that Allah has the power to act unjustly only to those who have no mind, but not to those who have their senses. His predecessors condemned him for this, and he condemned them for differing from him. He became so abstruse in his heresy as to say that it could be said that Allah spoke to his subjects, but that it could not be said that he spoke with them. Moreover he calls Allah the addressor but not the conversor. He claimed that in using the word conversor it would mean that the word arises in him, which is not the case with the addressor. Just as the use of the word " who sets something in motion " implies that the motion commences in him, so does the expression " who converses " imply that the speaking commences with him. We believe this to be true; the word of Allah we believe originates with him. As to his predecessors among the Kadarivah, verily they would say to him : " This excuse of 156 yours forces you to conclude that that part of the body of man that 4 speaks ? is the tongue. This is enough because, according to you, the word dwells in the tongue. You must, indeed, accept this absurdity that applies the name of the speaker to a thing, because the word, according to you and the rest of the Mu'tazilah, is composed of letters, and it is not possible for one letter to be a word. The place of each letter among the letters of the word is different from the place of the rest of the letters. Your reasoning would, therefore, mean that man could not be a speaker, nor could any part of him be a speaker. And according to your asser- tion, ' Allah is not the speaker because the word does not arise within him '." Some of the Mu'tazilah glorified al-Iskafi, by claiming that when Muhammad ibn-al-Hasan saw him walking, he dismounted from his horse. Evidently this is a lie, because al-Iskafi did not live at the time of Muhammad ibn-al- Hasan. for ibn-al-Hasan died in al-Rai during the caliphate 176 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH of Karun al-Rashid, while al-Iskafi was not alive in the time of al-Rashid; and even if he had been alive in the time of Muhammad, Muhammad would not have dismounted from his horse for a man whom he considered a heretic. Hisham ibn-'Ubaidallah al-Razi reported as the word of Muhammad ibn-al-Hasan that whoever follows a Mu'ta- zilah in prayer, his prayers must be repeated. Hisham also reported of Yahya ibn-Aktham, 1 who had it from abu- Yusuf, that he was questioned about the Mu'tazilah and said, " They are Zindiks." Al-Shafi'i has pointed out in his book Al-Kiyas his refusal to accept the testimony of the wit- ness of the Mu'tazilah and the people led astray by their de- sires [AM al-Ahwa]. In this question Malik and the legal authorities of al-Madinah agree. If that is so, how could the Imams of Islam, who condemned the Kadariyah, honor them by dismounting for them ? ii. Concerning the ThmMmlyah among them. These are 157 the followers of Thamamah ibn-Ashras al-Numairi, 2 one of their freedmen. He was the leader of the Kadariyah in the time of al-Ma'mun, al-Mu'tasim and al-Wathik. It is said that he is the one who led al-Ma'mun astray by making him a Mu'tazilite. Two heresies distinguished him from the rest of the predecessors of the Mu'tazilah, and it was for these that the whole community condemned him. One of these heresies was that when he shared the opinions of the " companions of wisdom " in their assertion that knowledge is necessary, he claimed that he whom Allah does not compel to know him (Allah), is not compelled to know, nor is he prohibited from unbelief, but is created for unpaid work and slave labor, and is therefore to be classed with animals who are not responsible. As a result of this, he claimed 3 Mas'udi, ibid. General index. 2 Not in Shahrastani. 177 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS that the community of al-Dahriyah and the Christians, and the Zindiks, become dust in the end. He also claimed that the next world is only the abode of reward or punishment, so for the one who died as a child, or who knows Allah by necessity, there is no virtue for which they deserve a re- waid, nor sin for which they deserve punishment. Thus they become dust, since they have no share in reward or punishment. Thamamah's second heresy is his view that generated acts are acts without an author. This error leads to the de- nial of the creator of the world, because if it is true that one deed can exist without a doer, it is possible for every deed to exist without a doer, and then one could not prove the existence of the doer from the deeds, nor would the creation of the world be a proof of its creator. This would be similar to the assertion that there could be writing with- jcg out a writer, or erasing without one who erases, or a build- ing without a builder. It might be said to him : "According to you then, the word of man is a deed without a doer. Why do you then blame man for his lies and his words of unbelief, since, according to you, he is not the author of his act of lying, or his words of unbelief ?" Among his shameful heresies Thamamah used also to say that the abode of Islam was the abode of polytheism. Moreover, he forbade captivity because the captive, accord- ing to him, could not have disobeyed his Lord, not having known him. According to him, also, rebellion is possible only for him who knows his Lord by necessity and then denies him, or rebels against him. From this assertion, it follows that he confesses himself a son of adultery because he belonged to the freedmen, while his mother was a cap- tive, and to enter in to one who could not be a captive, ac- cording to the law governing capture, is adultery. His children are therefore children of adultery. Thamamah's heresy about this matter suited his pedigree. 178 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH The historians report wonderful things regarding the imbecility of Thamamah and his shamelessness. Among these is what 'Abdallah ibn-Muslim ibn-Kutaibah said in his book Mukhtalaf al-Hadith. He said in this that Thamamah ibn-Ashras saw men on a Friday hastening to the mosque for fear the hour of prayer would pass. Whereupon he said to a companion of his, " Look at these donkeys and cows." Then he said, " What has that Arab made out of men?", meaning the Prophet of Allah. Al-Jahiz said in his book of jests that al-Ma'mun was riding one day when he saw Thamamah drunk, and rolling in the mud, and he said, " Thamamah?" Thamamah re- plied, " Yes, by Allah." "Aren't you ashamed?" " No, by Allah." " Upon thee be the curse of Allah." kk Let it come." Al-Jahiz also said that a servant of Thamamah said to him one day, "Arise and pray," but he paid no atten- tion. And the servant said to him, " The time is short, arise and pray and rest," and Thamamah replied, k * T will rest if you will leave me." The author of Ta'rikh al-Mardtwimh says that Thama- mah ibn-Ashras accused Ahmad ibn-Nasr al-Marwazi to al- Wathik, 1 saying that the former condemned everyone who denies that Allah can be seen, and everyone who claims that the Koran was created, and is free from the heresy of al-Kadariyah. Wathik thereupon put him to death, but promptly repented of his death, and blamed Thamamah, ibn-abi-Da'ud 2 and ibn-al-Zaiyat 3 who advised his death. Ibn-al-Zaiyat said to him : "If his death does not have good results, may Allah slay me between fire and water." Ibn-abi-Da'ud said : " May Allah imprison me in my skin if his death was not the right thing." Thamamah said : " May 1 Tabarl ed. Zotenberg, vol. iv, p. 546. 2 Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. i, p. 61. 3 Fihrist, p. 122. 179 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS Allah cause swords to rule over me, if you were not right in killing him." Allah answered the prayers of each one in his own way. As to ibn-al-Zaiyat, verily he was killed in the hath, and fell into the fire with his clothes on, and thus died between fire and water. As to ibn-abi-Da ud, al- Mutawakkil imprisoned him, and he had a stroke of paral- ysis while in prison, thus remaining imprisoned in his skin by paralysis until he died. And as for Thamamah, he went to Mecca where the Khuza'ah saw him between al-Safa and al-Marwah, and one of the men called out and said: " O ye men of Khuza'ah, this is the man who conspired against your master, Ahmad ibn-Fihr, and it was he who caused his death." Whereupon the banu-Khuza'ah gath- ered against him with their swords and killed him. Then they brought his body out from the sacred enclosure, and the wild animals outside devoured it. Thus Allah's words 160 were fulfilled: "And they tasted the harmfulness of their own conduct: and the end of their conduct was ruin" (Surah 65, v. 9). 12. Concerning the Jahizlyah among them. These are the followers of 'Amr ibn-Bahr al-Jahiz. ] They are the people who were led away by the beauty of the language used by al-Jahiz in his books, about which we might say: "They are compositions which are clear, though they have no meaning, and contain words which terrify, though they have no sub- stance." Had they known the ignorance shown in his here- sies, far from ascribing beauties to him, they would have begged Allah's pardon for calling him a man. Among the errors ascribed to him, which al-Ka'bi, in spite of his pride in him, relates about him in his treatises, are the words: " All knowledge comes by nature, nevertheless it is an 1 Shahrastani, ibid., vol. i, p. 77- Mas'udi, ibid., vol. iii, pp. 22-25; vol. v, p. 80; vol. viii, pp. 33-36. Ibn-Khallikan, ibid., vol. ii, p. 4°5- 180 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH activity of man in which he has no choice." They add that al-Jahiz agreed with Thamamah that man has no other activity except the will, and that the rest of his acts are ascribed to man only in the sense that they occur by nature, and naturally arise from his will." He says that he also claimed that it is not possible to become an adult without knowing Allah. According to him, infidels are stubborn, though knowing, taken up with a love for their particular school, thankless for the knowledge he (Muhammad) has of his creator, and the truth preached by his messengers. If al-Jahiz agrees with al-Ka'bi that man does nothing without free-will, he is then obliged to maintain that man does not pray, nor fast, nor go on a pilgrimage, nor com- mit adultery, nor steal, nor calumniate, nor kill. Because, according to him, it is not he that performs prayer, nor fasts, nor makes a pilgrimage, nor commits adultery, nor steals, nor kills, nor calumniates, For these acts, according to him, are not done with his will. And if these acts which we have mentioned are, according to him, natural and not acquired, it must necessarily follow that man should in no sense have reward or punishment for them, because man 161 cannot be rewarded or punished for what he has not ac- quired himself ; just as he is not rewarded or punished for his color, or the mechanism of his members, since these are not of his own attaining. Among the heresies of al-Jahiz is also his view of the impossibility of the annihilation of the bodies after their creation. This results in the view that Allah is able to create a thing, but is unable to annihilate it; and that he cannot remain alone after he has created a creation, in the same way that he was alone before he created it. But we, even if we say that Allah does not annihilate paradise and its pleasures, and hell and its torments, do not mean it in the sense that Allah has not the power to annihilate all 181 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS this. We mean only that paradise and hell are everlasting in a general way. Among the heresies of al-Jahiz there is also his view that Allah does not cause anyone to enter hell, but that hell attracts its people of itself by its very nature, and then holds on to them of itself forever. This would also compel the view that paradise attracts people to itself by its nature, and that Allah does not cause anyone to enter paradise. If one were to hold this view, the desire for Allah's rewards would cease, and the use of prayer would be gone. On the other hand, if he said that Allah caused those who should go to paradise to enter paradise, he would also have to say that he caused the people of hell to enter hell. Al-Ka'bi boasts about al-Jahiz, claiming that he was one of the sheikhs of the Mu'tazilah. He also boasts of his many literary works, and claims that he was a Kinani of the banu-Kinanah, ibn- 162 Khuzaimah ibn-Mudrakah ibn-Ilyas ibn-Mudhar. It might be said to al-Ka'bi: " If he [al-Jahiz] was a Kinani as you claim, why did he write the book, The boasting of the Kah- t amy ah over the Kinanlyah and the rest of the ' Adnanlyah? Moreover, if he was an Arab, then why did he write the book, The Superiority of the Freedmen over the Arabs f Moreover, he mentioned in his book called, Concerning the Boasting of Kahtan over 'Adrian, a number of poems in which Kahtan satirizes 'Adnan. And in truth the man who delights in the satires against his fathers is like the man who himself satirizes his father. In satirizing ibn-Bassam x who satirized his own father, Jahzah 2 has rightly said : " Whoever satirizes his father — the mere fact of his satir- izing is sufficient (to show that he is not his son), for had he been his son he would not have satirized his father." 1 He composed many fantastic books. One of them tells of 1 Ibid., vol. ii, p. 301. The text seems uncertain. 2 Ibid., vol. i, p. 118. 182 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH the tricks of robbers; in this manner he taught evil people the methods of stealing. And among his books are those on the tithes of industry in which he depreciated the com- modities of merchants. Among them also in his book on laws, which shows how dishonest men get hold of the treasures and money of the people. There is also his book about the Fatwa (religious decision), which is full of attacks by his preceptor, al-Nazzam, on the teachings of the Companions; also his books about prostitutes and rabies, and sodomy, and about the tricks of the avaricious. The contents of these books suit him, his trade and his family. He also has a book about the habits of animals, the contents of which he drew from Aristotle's book on animals, and to it he added what is mentioned by al- Mada'im * regarding the knowledge of the Arabs, and their poems about the uses to which animals could be put. He rilled the book with dialogues between dogs and roosters. To be engaged in such dialogues wastes time on that which is loathsome. And to whomever boasts about al-Jahiz, we commend the saying of the orthodox about him in the l6 3 words of the poet concerning him : " If the ugliness of the swine is doubled His ugliness would still be inferior to that of al-Jahiz, A man who is himself a substitute for hell, And a mote in the eye of everyone who looks at him." 13. Concerning the Shahhamlyah among them. These are the followers of abu-Ya'kub al-Shahham, 2 who was the preceptor of al-Jubba 1. His heresies resemble the heresies of al-Jubba'i, except that he considers it possible that there is one thing determined by two determiners. Al-Jubba 1 and his son denied this. Some of the weak-minded imag- ined that the teaching of al-Shahham was similar to that of 1 Ibid., vol. i, p. 578. 2 Horten, ibid., p. 338. 183 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS the Sifatiyah on this point. But there is a wide difference between the two views. Al-Shahham allowed the possibility of there being one thing determined by two determiners — each one of which two could produce the thing determined interchangeably. Al-Ka'bi reports this in his book entitled f Uyun al-Masail' ala abi-al-Hudhail. But the Sifatiyah do not grant the possibility of two creators. When they do grant that there are two determiners for one thing deter- mined, they do so in the sense that one of the two is its creator and the other the acquirer, and the creator is not the acquirer, nor the acquirer the creator. This gives the ex- planation of the difference between the two parties in the difference of their two methods of exposition. 14. Concerning the Khaiyatlyah among them. These are the followers of abu-al-Husain al-Khaiyat, who was the preceptor of al-Ka'bi in his heresy. Al-Khaiyat agreed with the rest of the Kadanvah in most of their heresies, except that he differed from them in saying on the non- existent what none had said before. For the Mu'tazilah disagreed about calling the non-existent an object. Some 164 of them say it is not true that the non-existent can be known, or described, nor that it is an object, nor a substance, nor an essence, nor a phenomenon. This was the opinion of al-Salihi among them. 1 He agreed with the orthodox in not calling the non-existent an object. But others of the Mu'tazilah claimed that the non-existent is an object which can be known and described, but is not essence or phenom- enon. This was al-Ka'bf s opinion. Al-Jubba ? i and his son abu-Hashim claimed that ever}- attribute was rendered real, either for itself or for its genus, by the one that originated it, and that such attribute remained, existing even when (the object) is non-existent. He claimed further that an 1 Ibid., p. 305. 184 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH essence was an essence even when in a state of non-exist- ence, that a phenomenon was a phenomenon even when in a state of non-existence, and that black was black, and white was white even when non-existent. All of these men, how- ever, forbade calling the non-existent a body; the body, according to them, has become complex, and comes to be an agglomerate, having length and breadth and depth; it is impossible to- describe something non-existent by something to which a bodily reality is attributed. From all the Mu'ta- zilah, as well as from the rest of the sects of the faithful, al-Khaiyat differs on this subject. He claims that the body when non-existent is a body because it must be a body when it appears, but that it is not necessary for the non-existent to be in motion, because, according to him, a body when it appears is not necessarily in motion. He said : " Every attribute [or qualification] may become existent when [the thing described] makes its appearance " ; therefore he holds it to be existent even in its state of non-existence. Such reasoning demands that man be man before he appears as such. This were possible if Allah could have brought him into existence in the form of man in all his completeness without having formed him in the loins and in the womb, and without at all changing him from one form to another. 165 The most advanced of these Khaiyatiyah are called al- Ma'dumiyah because of their extreme views on ascribing to the non-existent most of the attributes of all existing things. This appellation stuck to them. In a separate book, al-Jubba'i broke with al-Khaiyat over his view that the body was a body before its appearance. He makes the point that this view leads to the view of the pre-existence of bodies (as opposed to their being created). But the fol- lowing conclusion is necessary on the part of al-Khaiyat, al-Jubba'i and his son — namely, that essences and phenom- ena are essences and phenomena even in a state of non- 185 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS existence. If they now say that they are still objects, essences, and phenomena, whose appearance is dependent upon their being objects, they are still forced to regard them as eternal, and in reality hold the same view as do those who believe that essences and phenomena are pre-existent. Be- sides his heresy about Kadar and non-existence, al-Khaiyat denied the value of traditions coming from a single author- ity. In doing this he practically denied most of the Shari'ah laws, because most of the legal ordinances are based upon traditions going back to a single authority. Al-Ka'bi wrote a book against him on the evidence coming from tradition going back to a single person. In this book he con- demns ( ?) * those who deny such evidence. We say to al- Ka'bl : " It is enough shame and disgrace for you to have been connected with a preceptor whose heresy you ac- knowledge/' 15. Concerning the Ka'blyah among them. These are the followers of abu-Kasim 'Abdallah ibn-Ahmad ibn-Mah- mud al-Banahi, known as al-Ka'bi. . . . (The text of the following sentence is not clear. ) He was a gatherer of wood ^ before he was introduced to various studies, both special and 166 general, and he did not acquire a deep knowledge of their secrets in any one department. In fact, he failed to grasp the superficial, — how much more, then, the kernel. He dif- fered from the Basriyun among the Mu'tazilah over many points, for the Basriyun held that Allah sees his people in the body, and with colors; but they denied that he sees himself, just as they deny that others see him. Al-Ka'bi. on the other hand, claimed that Allah does not see himself, nor anyone else, except in the sense that he knows himself and others. He followed al-Nazzam in his view that Allah does not liter- 1 The text at this point is clear, but the meaning is obviously con- tradictory. 186 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH ally see anything. Another thing over which he differed from the Basriyun and our followers is that they held that Allah literally hears word and sound, and not simply in the sense that he knows them. Al-Ka'bi and the Baghdadiyun among the Mu'tazilah claimed that Allah hears nothing in the sense of perception known as sound. Moreover, they de- fined Allah's attribute as the hearer and the seer, in the sense that he had knowledge of the hearable which others heard and the seeable which others saw. Furthermore, some of them claim that the Basriyun among them, together with our followers, hold that Allah exercises will in the true sense of the word. But our followers say that he does not cease willing through an eternal will, while the Basriyun, among the Mu'tazilah, claim that he wills through his temporal will, unlimited by space. Al-Ka'bi and al-Nazzam, however, and their followers do not agree with these two views, for they claim that Allah has no actual will, and that when one says that Allah wills a thing which he performs, one means that he did this thing, and when one says that he of himself willed a deed, one means that he commanded it. According to both of these explanations, ascribing will to him is merely figurative, just as in the words of Allah : " The wall wills 167 to fall " (Surah 18, v. 76), the ascribing of will to a wall is merely figurative. For this denial of the will of Allah they together with our followers were condemned as heretics by the Basriyun. Another thing over which they disagreed was that al-Ka'bi claimed that he who is killed is not dead. But this does not agree with the word of Allah : " Every spirit must taste of death " (Surah 3, v. 186). The rest of the people agreed that all killed are dead, although they admit that a dead person is not necessarily killed. Another point of disagreement is that al-Ka'bi held the same views as those who make it compulsory on Allah to do the best thing, as a matter of necessity. Still other points of disagree- 187 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS ment were that both the Basriyun and our followers held that ability does not necessarily mean soundness of body and safety from disease. Al-Ka'bi claims that it does. As for the Basriyun among the Mu'tazilah, they condemn the Baghdadiyun among them, while the latter in their turn condemn the former. As a matter of fact, each party is justified in condemning the other, as we explained in the book entitled, Heresies of the KadariyaJi. 1 6. Concerning the Jubbalyah among them. These are the followers of abu-'AH al-Jubba'I 1 who led astray the people of Khuzistan. The Mu'tazilah of Basrah at that time belonged to his school, but afterwards joined the school of his son abu-Hashim. Among the heresies of al-Jubba'i was the one in which he said that Allah is obedient to his servant if he does what his servant wills. The reason for this was that one day he said to our sheikh abii-1-Hasan al- Ash'ari, "According to you, what does obedience mean?" 168 The sheikh answered, "Agreement to a command," and then asked for his opinion in this matter. Al-Jubba'I said : "The essence of obedience, according to me, is agreement to the will. And whoever fulfils the will of another obeys him " [/. e. the other]. Our sheikh abu-1-Hasan answered: "Ac- cording to this, one must conclude that Allah is obedient to his servant if he [Allah] fulfils his will " [i. e. the servant's will]. He granted this. Then our sheikh said: "You differ from the community of Moslems and you blaspheme the Lord of the Worlds. For if Allah is obedient to his servant, then he must be subject to him. Allah is far and away above being this. Al-Jubba'i furthermore claimed that the names of Allah are subject to the regular rules of grammar; he therefore considered it possible to derive a name for him [Allah] from every deed which he performs. 1 Horten, ibid., p. 352. 188 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH Our sheikh abu-1-Hasan said, that according to this view Allah should be named " the producer of pregnancy among women," because he creates the pregnancy in them. Al- Jubba I could not escape this conclusion. Our sheikh said : " This heresy of yours is worse than the heresy of the Christians in calling Allah the father of Jesus, although even they do not hold that he produced pregnancy in Mary." Among the heresies of al-Jubba I was also the one, accord- ing to which he considered it possible for one phenomenon to be in many places even in more than a thousand thousand places. Thus he considered it possible for one word to be in a thousand thousand places, and he claimed that when a word written in one place is then written in another, it ex- ists in two places, without passing from the first place to the second, and without making its appearance in the second. It is thus the same whether it is written in a thousand places, or in a thousand thousand places. He and his son abu-al-Hashim claimed that Allah, when he desires to de- stroy the world, creates a spaceless phenomenon by means of which he destroys all bodies and essences. But it is not within the power of Allah to destroy some essences and to spare others. Though he created them separately, he l &9 is not able to destroy them separately. It is reported that our sheikh said to al-Jubba 1 : " If you say that Allah wishes all that he decrees, then what do you say of a man to whom a debt is owed, and the payment is constantly being put off, and the debtor says, ' Verily I will pay you the debt tomorrow, if Allah wishes,' and then does not pay his debt the next day?" He answered that such a man vio- lated his oath, because Allah desires him to pay the debt then. Our sheikh said to him : " You differ from the com- munity of the Moslems who preceded you, for they agreed before you that he who binds his oath to the will of Allah does not violate it if he does not keep his oath." 189 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS 17. Concerning the Bahshannyah. These are the follow- ers of abu-Hashim and of al-Jubba'I, and most of the Mu'- tazilah of our age hold the same view regarding the claims he made on ibn-'Abbad, the vizier of the Buwaihids. They were called al-Dhimmiyah because of their view concerning the deserving of blame, even though the deed is not per- formed. They shared in most of the heresies of the Mu ( - tazilah, though they also distinguished themselves from them in special heresies which they were the first to hold. Among others, was their view about the deserving of blame and punishment when a deed had not been performed. Thus verily they claimed that the one who is able to do a thing [desiring to do it], may not do it, and yet commit infidel- ity, in spite of the fact that there is no hindrance to the deed. This assertion of theirs is due to the fact that our followers said to the Mu'tazilah, if you declare it possible that ability precede the deed, it necessarily follows that two times and the many times are equal, because the one precedes the other. They came to differ over the answer to the conclusion, some saying that the occurrence of the deed 170 or its non-occurrence is possible, while ability is passing from the state of possibility to that of actuality. He had to conclude that the occurrence of the deed or its non-occur- rence is possible when no hindrance exists. In addition to this, it was claimed that ability does not mean ability to perform the deed at the moment of occurrence ; one of them granted that ability might be non-existent just as the occur- rence of the deed was non-existent at the very time when inability occurred, which is the very opposite of ability which has vanished after having existed. Abu-Hashim ibn-al-Jubba'I saw the necessity of accepting the conclusion forced on him by our companions, to wit : equality between the two times and the many, in that he held it possible that ability should precede the deed. It was impossible for the 190 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH Mu'tazilites to come to a real conclusion and he had to find some way out. He considered it possible for the man with ability to last forever together with the continuance of his power— the Koran verse fitting his case and all hindrances being removed with regard to it, in so far as concerns the doing of the deed and its abandonment. Concerning this it was said to him : "Can you see what is the condition of the man who possesses ability and has moral responsibility, but dies before he has performed an act of obedience or disobe- dience by his ability?" He answered : " He deserves blame and the punishment of eternity, not because of his deeds, but because he has not done that which he was commanded to do, although he had the ability and had no hindrances." It was said to him : " How does he deserve punishment for not doing what he was commanded, and not doing what he was forbidden to do, and not deserving a reward because he did not do what he was forbidden to do, even if he does not do what he was commanded ?" There were some of his predecessors among the Mu'ta- zilah who used to condemn him who says that Allah pun- ishes the disobedient because of the commission of a sin, which the sinner did not himself originate. They, however, now said : " It is preferable to condemn abu-Hashim for his views on the punishment of one who was not disobe- dient, either for his own deed or for that of some one else." Furthermore, he should be condemned for calling the per- son who did not do what he was commanded disobedient, even though that person did not commit a disobedience, thus applying the name of obedient only to him who actually obeys the command. If it is possible to have a disobedient person without having actual disobedience, then it is possible to have an obedient person without actual obedience, or an unbeliever without actual unbelief. More- over, besides these hateful heresies, he claimed that if IOI MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS this morally responsible man did a wrong thing, he would, in this case, deserve a double portion of the punishment. One part for the hateful thing which he did, and the other because he did not perform the beautiful thing which was commanded him. If he does the right thing and per- forms the deeds of the prophet, and Allah commands him to do a thing which he does not do, nor does he do the opposite, then indeed he becomes immortal. The rest of the Mu'tazilah condemned him for the three follow- ing propositions. First, his statement that punishment is deserved, even when not due to the actual deed. Secondly, his claim that a double portion of the punishment is de- erved, when a wrong thing is committed (for doing what is wrong, and for not doing what is right). And thirdly, his view that if he does the right thing, and is obedient just as were the prophets, and yet fails to do one thing which Allah commanded him, but at the same time does not do its opposite, in that case he does not deserve eternal fire in hell. About his view of the double portion of punishment, our companions said that there must, according to this, be two punishments; for example, in the case of adultery, one punishment is for adultery which is committed, and the second because he failed to do that which was incumbent on him, i. e. % avoiding adultery. The same view holds re- garding blasphemy, punishment, and drinking of wine. 172 They said that it also necessarily follows that two atone- ments are incumbent upon him who breaks the fast in the month of Ramadan, one for a breaking of the fast, which necessitates atonement, and the other because he did not do that which was incumbent on him, i. e., fasting and with- holding from food. When ibn-al-Jubbai saw the trend that his conclusion was taking against him, because of these heresies of his, he committed something still more hateful than these heresies, in order to escape the necessity of two 192 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH punishments and two atonements in connection with one deed. So he said : " He simply forbade adultery and drink- ing and blasphemy. But as for the avoiding of these deeds, it is not compulsory for man." Furthermore, they said that he must conclude that there are three punishments and more ad infinitum, because he asserted that there are two punish- ments for that which is committed by man, one because he did not commit the act, and one because he did not commit its cause. According to him, we may find causes produced by many preceding causes. For example, take the hitting of the target with an arrow, this is produced by many motions accomplished by the throwing of the arrow. Everyone of these motions is a cause for that which follows until the actual hitting of the target takes place. If there were a hundred motions, the hundredth of them would be the cause of the hitting. One should therefore conclude that if Allah commanded a man to hit, and he does not do so, he deserves a hundred punishments and one more, the latter because he did not make the hit, and the hundred be- cause he did not make the necessary motions. One must also conclude that if a man was commanded to speak, and did not do so, he deserves two punishments, one because he did not say the word, and one because he did not produce its cause; but if he performed something opposite to the cause of the word, he does not deserve both punishments, for this would take the place of the cause which he did not produce. We said to him : " Would one deserve three punishments, one because he does not say the word, another because he does not produce its cause, and a third because of the per- formance of the opposite of the cause of the word?" Some 173 of our companions report of him that he did not assert that there were two punishments except in the case of his not having produced the cause of speaking a word. But he had pointed out the opposite view in his book Istihkak al-Dhim- 193 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS mah (The Demanding of Protection). In this he said that every thing that could have a special neglect is in the same category as the cause of a spoken word. But those things which cannot have special neglect are in the same category as the neglecting of giving an obligatory gift, such as alms, and atonement, as the payment of a debt and the return of unlawful possessions. What he meant was that alms and atonement and the like are not performed by a special organ and that there is not a special organ of neglect in connection with each one. For if a man prays or goes on the pilgrimage, or does other things of the kind, it will occasion a neglect of alms. As to speaking a word, the cause for its neglect must be special, and therefore to neglect it is hateful. There- fore, if he neglect the cause of speaking a word, he deserves one portion of punishment. But in the matter of giving there is no hateful neglect. Therefore, one who does not give does not deserve another portion of punishment in ad- dition to the blame he deserves. And so they said to him : " If the neglect of prayer and alms is not hateful, then it must be beautiful." Such a view is a departure from religion and all that is connected iwth it. Among the inconsistencies he committed in this chapter is the fact that he called him who did not do what he ought a wrongdoer, even though he were not actually doing wrong. He thus called him unbe- liever and heretic, but hesitated to call him disobedient. He thus considered it possible for Allah to consign a man to fire forever, even though he did not deserve the appellation of disobedient. But if he called him unbeliever and heretic, he must call him disobedient; whereas, if he refrains from calling him disobedient he should not call him heretic and unbeliever. Another inconsistency is his disagreement with the consensus of opinion by making distinction between j 74 recompense and reward, according to which he said : " It follows that there may be much reward in heaven which is 194 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH not recompense, and that in hell there may be much retri- bution that is not recompense. He refused to call it recom- pense, because recompense is only for an act, and accord- ing to him there may be punishment without there having been any act. It might well be said of him : " Since there can be no recompense save for an act, then why do you deny that there is no reward and retribution except for an act?" Abu-Hashim's second heresy was his view that one could deserve blame and praise for the act of another. For ex- ample, if Zaid commands 'Amr to give something to some- one else, and he does so, he deserves thanks from the re- cipient of the gift for the act which was really due to the act of someone else. In the same way if he commanded him a sin, and he committed it, he does not himself deserve the blame for the sin which is due to the act of another. This view of his is not like the view of the rest of the com- munity, in that he claims that one deserves thanks or blame according to the command given, not according to the act commanded him, and which was done for another. This view forced him to say that there was double praise and double blame, one of them for the command which is per- formed, and the other for the thing commanded, which is in reality the act of another. How can this view of his be true, when he denies the truth of what those say who live for gain, i e. to the effect that Allah created the gains of his servants, and then either rewards or punishes them for it. It might be said to him : " What you deny on this basis, which is the act of another, separates you from the view of the Azarikah that Allah torments the child of the polytheist for the deed of his fathers." Furthermore, it might be said : "If you conclude this, then you must conclude that man iy$ deserves praise and reward for a deed done by Allah in conjunction with the deed of man, e. g. a man who is on 195 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS his deathbed, is given food and drink, and as a result lives and breathes again, according to this conclusion he deserves praise and reward for his own life and for the satisfaction of his hunger and thirst, which, after all, is really an act of Allah. His third heresy is his view that repentance is not ac- cepted as long as the sinner adheres to some other evil thing which he knows is evil or which he believes to be evil, even if it is good in itself. He also claims that repentance of heresy cannot be accepted if the sinner still persists in with- holding the smallest item due by him. In support of his assertion he gave the following illustration, that he who kills another man's son and commits adultery with the latter's wife, his repentance for one of the sins may be accepted even if he persists in the other. But such an ex- ample can not be admitted as illustration. The acceptance of his repentance (for the one sin) is all right, if he is punished for the other, just as in the case of the son who is ungrateful to his father the Imam, steals from various persons, and commits adultery with his maids, then asks forgiveness of the father for the ungratefulness, and the repentance of his ungratefulness is accepted for the money he stole from him (his father), but his hand is cut off for the rest of the property (stolen), and he is flogged for the adultery. For his proof in this case he asserted that the only necessity for his forsaking what was evil was the fact of its being evil; but if he persisted in some other evil, it would show that the reason for his forsaking the first was not simply because it was evil. We say to him : " That which you deny is the abandoning of evil in order to escape retribution." Is it possible for a man to escape retribution for the sin of which he repents, and at the same time be punished for the sin of which he does not repent ? Here is 176 what we said further to him: "The essence of what is in 196 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH this chapter, is that he who repents of some of his sins, re- nouncing and repenting these sins because they are vile, but still persists in some other vile sin; why is this one's re- pentance not accepted on what he repented ; as in the case of the Khawarij and others who have held corrupt beliefs considered good by them, and whose repentance you accept with regard to some evil they know to be evil, even when it is connected with persistence in some other evil which they had believed was good? According to this you must con- clude that if you say that he is commanded to avoid every- thing which he believes is evil, then you say of the man among us who believes in the evil of the school of abu- Hashim, and commits adultery and theft, that his repent- ance cannot be accepted except by his forsaking every- thing which he believes is evil. He is then commanded to avoid adultery and theft, and to avoid the school of abu- Hashim, because of his belief in their evil." Our followers asked him about a Jew who becomes a Moslem and repents of all evil except that he persists in keeping a small piece of silver away from the one who justly deserved it, although he knows such an act is illegal; in such a case is the man's repentance of heresy to be accepted? If he said yes to this, he would be breaking down his own excuse, and if he said no he would be opposing the whole of the community, both because of his view that his Islamism was not true, and be- cause he was heretical about his Judaism which he had held before his repentance; lastly, because the regulations of the Jews are not binding on him. He claimed, therefore, that he did not repent of his Judaism, but persisted in it, but is nevertheless no Jew. This is very evidently contradictory, and it might be said to him that if the man persisted in his Judaism, then you should recognize his sacrifice as legal and take tax from him. This view differs from that of the community. 107 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS His fourth heresy is his view that repentance from sin t jy after inability to sin is not acceptable. Nor, according to him, is repentance for lying acceptable when the tongue becomes unable to speak, nor repentance for adultery when the man is a eunuch. This is contradictory to the view of all of the community before him. It might be said to him : " Do you believe that a man who has a tongue and tells a lie, who can and does commit adultery, is a sinner?" And if he says yes, then it can be said : " In like manner, he must believe that if one can lie and commit adultery and yet does not disobey Allah, then obedience and repentance are necessarily present." With his excesses in threats, abu- Hashim was the most dissolute of the men of his time. He was also given to drinking wine. And it was said that he died when drunk, so that some Murji'ite said : " He says shameful things about the Murji'ah until He sees some hope in the sins, And the greatest sinner among the people are the Murji'ah And my servant persisted in the major sins (?)" His fifth heresy was his view on the conditioned will. The chief point in this is his view that it is not possible for one thing to be desired from one standpoint and abominated from another. What forced him to this is that he spoke against him who believes in different standpoints regarding acquisition and creation ; he said that the standpoint of ac- quisition is necessarily either real or unreal. If the stand- 178 P°^ nt: ^ unreal, we should have proof of the existence of a thing that is both real and unreal. If it is real, it is necessar- ily either created or non-created. If it is created, it proves that it is created from all standpoints, while if it is not cre- ated, the mind becomes eternal (non-created) from one standpoint and created from another, which is an impossibil- ity. He was led to this view by his thought that a thing must be desired from one standpoint and abominated from an- 198 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH other. It may be said to him : "Then will, according to you, is not related to a thing, except from the standpoint of its occurrence, which is also an abomination. And if a thing is willed from one standpoint, and abominated from another, it follows that the one who Wills has willed what he wills and abominated what he wills, which is a contradiction." But he said : "The one willing, wills nothing except from all standpoints, so that it is not possible for him to abominate it from another standpoint." This view is necessarily followed by the question of the known and the unknown, since he does not deny that a thing can be known from one stand- point and unknown from the other, by committing himself to the view that the same thing cannot be willed from one standpoint and abominated from another, he laid himself open to problems which destroy the basis of the Mu'tazilah creed. In fact, he had committed himself to most of these, and thus had to conclude that among the greatest heresies there were some that Allah did not abominate, and, on the other hand, among the beautiful truths, there were some that Allah did not will. The explanation of this is that if to kneel before Allah is worship ...(?),..• of idols, although to kneel before an idol is a great evil. And thus 179 if he should wish that his description of Muhammad as the prophet of Allah should refer to ibn-'Abdallah, it would be necessary for him not to dislike it to be a description of an- other Muhammad, although this is heresy. It also follows that if Allah hates to have kneeling used as a worship of idols, then he does not wish it to be a worship of Allah, even though (in such a case) it be the worship of Allah and beautiful obedience. To all this, he committed himself, and moreover he mentioned in his great Collection that kneeling to idols is not abominated by Allah; at the same time he rejected the fact that the same thing could be willed and abominated from two different standpoints. 199 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS This view he said abu-'Ali, his father, considered to be right. According to me, this view is not based upon proper principles, for will has nothing to do with the thing,, ex- cept in the matter of occurrence, according to us and to him. If he wills the occurrence of a thing, and at the same time abominates it, it follows that what he abom- inates is what he wills, unless there were two occurrences of the thing. According to us, he who relies on him is wrong because we hold that will has to do with the willed from the standpoint of occurrence, as well as from other standpoints. This conclusion which is forced on him is not forced on his father, and for forcing this conclusion there is an amswer and a reversal. As to the answer, his father in his view does not mean that will has to do with the thing from the standpoint of occurrence, as abu-Hashim held; in reality the father meant that the will is related to the thing while it was occurring, or to an attribute which it has while oc- curring; such as willing an act and willing that it should be an act of obedience to Allah, this (obedience) being an attri- bute that develops at the time of the occurrence. This re- sembles the view that command and report are not command and report except through the will, either the will of the one commanding, according to abu-Hashim and others, or its in- i8 herent will to be a command and a report, as ibn-al-Ikhshid among them said, because Allah had said, "And let him then who will, believe" (Surah 18, v. 28). He has, therefore, willed the occurrence of his word, as well as the belief from them, but the words, "Let him believe," is not, in this case, a command ; rather is it a threat, because he did not will this word to be a command. The report, according to them, is not a report until he wills it to be a report about this man and not that man. Although this is the reason for the will- ing of the occurrence of a thing, and although it has been proved that Allah's dislike of having kneeling made a wor- 200 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH ship of idols is different from his will about its occurrence, yet what abu-Hashim said about its being willed from the standpoint which he abominated, does not follow. And as for the reversal, it is said Allah forbids kneeling to idols, and has given a command about it, and it has been firmly held by the Mu'tazilah that Allah commanded only the occurrence of the thing, and also forbids only its occurrence. Moreover, as they have held that Allah commanded kneeling as an act of worship to him, it must therefore follow that he forbids something from the standpoint which he commanded; for he forbids only the occurrence of the thing, and kneeling is only one occurrence. If, however, it had two occurrences, it would be necessary for it to be created from one stand- point and uncreated from another, whereupon the same conclusion about commanding and forbidding is forced upon him which was forced upon his father and the merchants ( ?) with regard to willing and abominating. His sixth heresy is his view regarding " the status " 181 (Ahwal), which view was considered heretic by his fellow Mu'tazilites, as well as the other sects. What forced him to this heresy was the question put by our followers, the old Mu'tazilites, as to whether the learned among us differs from the ignorant by his knowledge in himself or for some other reason. They rejected the view that he differed from him in himself because both are of one kind. It is impos- sible that his difference with himself should be neither be- cause of himself nor for some other reason, because then, in differing from himself, he would not be superior to anyone else. It necessarily follows, too, that Allah has in his dif- ference from the ignorant a significance (ma'na) or an attribute by which he is differentiated. He thus claims that Allah differs from the ignorant only for being in a special state (Ml). Therefore the state exists in three situations. The first is the one in which the subject (mausilf) itself 201 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS receives the attribute and deserves the attribute because of the state in which it is. The second situation is that the subject to which an attri- bute is given becomes attached to that attribute as its state (Ml), The third situation is that the subject deserves an attri- bute neither for itself nor for an attribute, and becomes attached to that quality rather than anything else attached to the subject as its state. What forced him into this was a question put by Mu'am- mar regarding " the significances " : " Did the learning of Zaid belong to him rather than 'Amr, for himself or for some significance, or neither for himself nor some signifi- cance ?" If it is for himself, then it follows that all branches of learning belong to him, for they are all learning. If it is for some significance, then Mu'ammar is right in holding that each significance is attached to another significance endlessly. If it is neither for himself nor for some signifi- cance, then the fact that it belongs to him or to some one else is immaterial. According to abu-Hashim, Zaid's learn- ing belongs to him for some state (hal). But our follow- ers say that his learning belongs to him by its essence, and neither because it was knowledge nor because it was Zaid ; 182 which is like saying that black is black because of its essence and not because it has a self or a being. They then said to abu-Hashim, " Do you know the status or not?" And he said no, because if he had said that they were known, he would have had to prove that they were objects, because, according to him, nothing is known unless it is an object. Nor could he say that they were changing status, because changes occur only in the case of objects and substances. Moreover, he does not say that status exist, nor does he say that they are non-existent, nor that they are eternal, nor that they are created, nor that they are known, nor that 202 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH they are unknown, nor does he say that they are mentioned, although he mentioned them, holding that they are unmen- tioned, which is a contradiction. He claimed, moreover, that the learned has in each known thing a condition which cannot be said to be his condition in another known thing. To this end, he claimed that the conditions of the creator as to what he knows are endless ; the same thing being true about his conditions in his own capabilities, that they are endless just as his capabilities are endless. Our companions say to him : " You did not deny that for one known thing there are endless conditions, for the known can be dependent on any existent knower ad in- finitum. Furthermore, are the conditions of the creator brought about by others, or are they he himself?" To this he answered, " They are neither he nor another." They then said to him, " Why do you deny the view of the Sifat- lyah that the attributes of Allah are endless, since they are neither he nor another?" 1 1 In the sixth of his heresies Abu-Hashim addresses himself to the problem of absolute being, human and divine and raises the question as to how the essence of this being differentiates itself from another being of the same genus or of another class and kind. Does a philosopher differ from a fool, the learned from the ignorant, by what the philo- sopher or the learned know, or in essence through some other causes. These early Arab enquirers, the old Mu'tazilah, held that it was not in essence or in some quality of the essence ; for both belong to the same genus. (For what is the wise man more than the fool?) These twain differ not in essence nor in the phenomena, the acci- dents nor the acquirements of life— a Semitic view as old as the Preacher of Ecclesiastes— and the difference, what ever source jt is from does not make the one superior to another. But Allah. al-'Alim, the knowing, in what fashion does he differ from the ignorant, in what sense and in what attribute does he differ? Abu-Hashim asserts that God differed solely in essence and not otherwise, and this essence differs in ways, or phases or particulars. The point of these aspects is that it is true of the divine essence that it is as it is and can be no other, and as it is in and by itself described and denned, and its conditioning nature is its inevitable and natural condition so that no other is or can be like it. 203 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS His seventh heresy is the denial of certain phenomena [accidentals], the existence of which has been established 183 by almost everyone, such as continuance, perception, grief, pain, and doubt. He claims that pain which has been in- flicted on man by an accident, and pain which comes from drinking distasteful medicines, does not mean more than the perception of something which temperament shuns; therefore perception, according to him, is not a reality. The same is true of the perception of the substances of people condemned to fire while they are in fire. In the same way, according to him, pleasures are not realities, they are not more than perceptions of a desired thing, and perception is not a reality. Of the pain which comes from the plague, he said it is a reality like that which comes from a blow. For proof of this he gave the view that it was included under sensation, which is a strange view, because the pain due to a blow with a stick, and the pain from mustard medicine, and the sting that comes from fire and from the drinking of bitter herbs are the same as regards sensation. Moreover, if he rejects the existence of pleasures as a reality, he cannot then consider the pleasures of the people of heaven more than the pleasures of infants which are given to them for well-doing, for nothing cannot be more than nothing. But he claimed that pleasure in itself is a benefit and a sensation, and yet he asserted that benefit and sensation are nothing. Moreover, he claims that all pain is harm, from which it follows that according to him harm also is nothing. His eighth heresy is his view in his chapter on annihila- tion, to the effect that Allah has no power to annihilate an atom from the world and still preserve the integrity of heaven and earth. This claim he founded on the basis of his assertion that bodies cannot be annihilated except by an annihilation created by Allah in no particular place and one that is opposed to all existing things because it is not pecu- 204 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH liar to some of the substances, exclusive of others, since it does not pertain to any of them. If it is opposed to them, 184 it annihilates them all. Regarding this heresy, it is suffi- cient to note that he says that Allah was able to annihilate a whole, but was not able to annihilate a part. His ninth heresy is his view that ablution is not a neces- sity. What drove him to this was that he asked himself about ablutions with water illegally acquired (his view and that of his father being that prayer is illegal if performed on ground illegally acquired). He came to the conclusion about ablutions with water illegally acquired; (his view and able. The distinction he made between the latter and prayer performed in a house illegally acquired, was that ablutions are not necessary. Thus, although Allah com- mands his followers to pray only after ablutions, this man inferred that ablutions are not a necessity, because one may perform the ablutions for another, and it will be acceptable. He then carried this reasoning into the matter of the pil- grimage, claiming that standing and going [around the Ka'bah] and running are not necessary to the pilgrimage, because he can acquit himself of all duties when riding. According to this view, he must hold the required alms not obligatory, as well as the atonement, and vows, and the payment of debts, because these can be done by proxy. Yet these are the most important regulations of the relig- ious law. It becomes evident by what we have mentioned in this chapter that the leaders of the Mu'tazilah con- demned each other as heretics. Most of them also con- demned their followers who imitated them. So to them we can apply the following saying of Allah : " We have aroused enmity and hatred among them" (Surah 5, v. 15). The following applies to the relation of their followers to them : " When those who have had followers shall declare them- selves free from their followers, after that they have seen 205 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS the chastisement, and when the ties between them shall be 185 cut asunder" (Surah 2, v. 167). And further: "The fol- lowers shall say, ' Could we but return to life, we would keep ourselves clear from them, as they have declared themselves clear of us ' " (Surah 5, v. 168). Among the obstinacies of their leaders is that of al- Nazzam regarding the " leap " and his view that the body passes from the first place to the third or the tenth, without need of a medium. We find here also the obstinacies of that class of perjurers who* assert that the dead really kill those who are alive. We also find the obstinacies of many of them in which they assert that he who is able to arise above the earth one span has also the power to rise above the seven heavens, and that those who have chained and bound hands are able to scale the steeps of the heavens, and that a small bug is able to drink the whole bottle ( ?). Another of them, known as Kasim al-Dimashki claims that letters of truth may form an untruth, and that the letters which are in the creed, " there is no God but Allah," are the same as those used in saying that Christ is a God; also that the letters which are in the Koran are the same as those in the book of Zoroaster of the Magians, being actually the same and not simply alike in one sense. He who does not consider such views as these mental arro- gance, cannot consider the denial of the tangible by the Sophists an arrogance. The Ashab al-Makalat (the writers of sayings) report that seven of the leaders of the Kadariyah gathered to- gether in a meeting and talked of Allah's power to op- press and lie. When they separated, each one was con- demning the other. One of them said to al-Nazzam in this meeting: "Has Allah [sufficient] power over what 186 comes forth from him to turn it into oppression and lying?" He replied : " If he has such power, we cannot tell whether ro6 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAII he has oppressed or has lied in what has already come to pass, or whether he may oppress or lie in the future, or may even have oppressed in some parts of the earth [and not others]. The only security we have against his oppression and his lying is by our having a good opinion of him." The questioner went on : " What evidence then makes us secure from such behaviour on his [Allah's] part; but to find this out there is no way. To this 'All al-Aswari answered : "According to this reasoning of yours it necessarily follows that Allah has no power over what he knows he does not do, or over what he said he would not do, because if he had power over it, he might have brought it about [after all] in the past or he may cause it in the future." Al-Nazzam said : "This does necessarily follow, — what, then, is your view of it?" He replied: "I compromise between the two views, and say that Allah has no power over what he knows he will not do, or over what he said he would not do, just as you and I say that he has no* power to oppress and lie." Al-Nazzam then said to al-Aswari : " Your view is apostate and heret- ical." Abu-al-Hudhail said to al-Aswari : "What do you say of Pharaoh, and of those whom Allah knew would not be- lieve, — were they able to believe or not? If you claim that they were not able to believe, then Allah would have laid upon them what they were unable to bear, and this, according to you, is heretical. On the other hand, if you say that they were able to believe, then how do you escape the fact that things occurred through them, which Allah knew would not occur, or that he said would not occur. According to your reasoning and that of al-Nazzam this is a denial similar to denying Allah's power to oppress and lie." He replied to abu-al-Hudhail : " Since this necessarily follows, how would you answer it?" And he replied : " My view is that Allah has power to oppress and to lie, and to do what he knows he would not do." And both of them said to him : 207 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS jg^ "If he oppresses and lies, do you see what is to be made of the principles of the essence of the evidence which tries to prove that Allah does not oppress or lie?" He replied: " This is impossible." Whereupon they both said to him: " How can the impossible be within the power of Allah, and why did you consider it impossible for such a thing to occur from him, if you consider it within his power?" His reply was : " Because it does not occur until misfortune comes to one, and it is impossible for misfortune to come upon Allah." They said to him : " It is also impossible for him to have power over what takes place through him, ex- cept when misfortune comes upon him." And the three were amazed. Bishr said to them that everything which they held was nonsense. Abu-al-Hudhail replied : " And what do you say? Do you claim that Allah is able to torment a child, or do you merely say, ' This man (i. e. al-Nazzam) holds that view'?" He replied: "I hold that Allah has power to do this." And he said : " If he does that which he is able to do, namely torment a child, and oppress it, then the child must be an adult, intelligent, sinful, and deserving of the punishment which Allah imposes upon it. The evidences in themselves would be evidences of his justice." Abu-al- Hudhail said to him : " May your eyes weep. How can it be an act of virtue not to do what you can do along the line of oppression?" And al-Mirdar said: "Verily you have denied an opinion of my preceptor, and my preceptor was wrong." Bishr said to him: " How do you say?" And he replied : " I say that Allah has the power to oppress and to lie, and if he does this, he becomes an oppressive and a lying God." Bishr then said to him : " Does he deserve worship or not? If he deserves it, then worship is an act of praise toward the worshipped, and if he practises op- pression, then he deserves blame and not praise. If, on the other hand, he does not deserve worship, how can he be a lord without it?" 208 THE SECTS OF THE MU'TAZILAH AND THE KADARIYAH Al-Ashbah said to them : "I hold that Allah has the power jgg to oppress and to lie; and even if he oppresses and lies, he is upright, just as he has the power to do that which he knows he is not going to do. If x he does it, he knows he will do it." Al-IskafI said to him : " How does tyranny change into justice?" And he replied: " What do you say?" And he said : " I hold that if Allah commits tyranny and lying, his act does not exist, for it is done to an insane or defective man." 2 Ja'far ibn-Harb said to him: "This amounts to saying that Allah has the power to oppress the insane, but no power to oppress the wise/' At that time, the people dif- fered over the reason for the different opinion held by each one of them. And when the turn to answer came to al- Jubba'i and his son, they refrained from answering in this matter, with advisedness. One of the followers of abu- Hashim does not mention this question in his book. And he said : " If we are asked, ' Can what Allah is able to do in the line of oppression and lying occur?' we reply, 'This can occur, because if its occurrence were not possible, he would have no power over it, because power over the impossible is an impossibility.' And if he says, ' Is such an occurrence from Allah possible ?' we answer, ' Its occurrence through him is not possible, because of the hatef ulness of such a deed, the fact that Allah can do without it, and that he knows he can/ If one says, ' Tell us if his ability to oppress and lie is applied, what would be his own condition? Does the occur- rence of his oppression prove his ignorance or his need?'', we say, * This is impossible because we have known him to be wise and rich.' And if he says, ' If oppression and lying come from him, is it then possible to say that this does not 189 prove his ignorance or his need ?', we then say, ' he cannot 1 'alima inserted here is a corruption of the text. 2 A lie to an insane man is not considered a lie. 209 MOSLEM SCHISMS AND SECTS be described in this manner because we know that oppression proves the ignorance of its author or his need.' And if he then says, ' Indeed, you do not answer the question asked of you regarding the evidence of the occurrence of oppres- sion and lies through him who is ignorant and needy, either by yes or no,' we say, ' So you say '." These leaders of the Kadariyah of our age acknowledge their inability, and the inability of their predecessors, to answer this question. If they should succeed in finding out the truth about it, they would accept the view of our followers that Allah has power over everything subject to power, and that every- thing which is subject to his power, if it comes from him, is not tyrannical on his part. And if they consider it impos- sible for him to lie, as our companions did, they would escape from the conclusions which were advanced against them in this matter. One of the excuses given by al-Jubba'i for not being able to answer this question by yes or no was something like this: If someone were to say: Tell me about the Prophet, if he lied, would that be or would it not be a proof that he was not a prophet ? He claimed that the answer to this was impossible. This is private guess on his part. As for the Sunnites, they hold to the principle that the prophet was free from lying and oppression, and had no power to perform them. And the Mu'tazilah, aside from al-Nazzam and al-Aswari, ascribed to Allah the power to oppress and lie. And they had to find an answer for the question of him who asked them about the occurrence of those things subject to his power that came from them (lying and oppression) if they were a proof of ignorance and need or not, by yes or no. Whoever of them tries to answer this, belies their principles in his answer. And praise be to Allah who saved us from this heresy of theirs which leads to such contradictions. 210 BIBLIOGRAPHY Many of the numerous Arabic works on the religion of Islam have come down to us only as titles. Among the most important on the great question of sects are the following: Al-Subkl, in his Tabakdt al-Shdfi'iyah (ed. Cairo 1324 A. II., vol. i, pp. 252, 288 ; vol. ii, p. 171 ) , mentions these Shaf i'i writers on this subject : Ilusain ibn-'Ali ibn-YazId abu-'Ali al-Karabisi (245/859), one of those best versed in the teachings of the heretics. Muhammad ibn-Ahmad ibn-Nasr abu-Ja'far al-Tirmidhi, versed in theology and tradition, wrote a work on the Fundamental Dif- ferences of the People of Prayer. Abul-Fadl al-Balami (329/941), wrote essays on this subject. In verse : 'Abdallah ibn-Muhammad al-Nashl (293/906) wrote four thousand verses on philosophy and religious systems, sects and beliefs (Mas'udi, Les Prairies d'Or, vol. vii, p. 89). Among the earliest polemical writers are : Abu-'All Ahmad ibn-'Umar ibn-Rustah (d. 360 A. H.) who wrote a chapter on Arts and Religions of Arabs before Islam and the Schools in Islam. Bibliotheca Geographic orttm Arabicorum, vol. vii, pp. 214-229 (sects on p. 217). Abu-Mansur 'Abd al-Kahir ibn-Tahir ibn-Muhammad al-Baghdadi (d. 329/1037). (A list of his important works is given elsewhere.) Shuhfur ibn-Tahir ibn-Muhammad al-Isfaraini (d. 1078). His manu- script in Berlin is practically a copy of Baghdadi's work. Abu-Muhammad 'All ibn-Ahmad ibn-Hazm (456/1064). Kitdb al- Milal wa'l-Nihal (a book on differences and sects). Published in Cairo, with Shahrastani's work printed on the margin. Abu'1-Fath Muhammad al-Shahrastani. Religious Sects and Philoso- phical Schools, translated by Haarbriicker (Halle 1850). This literature having reached its height with Shahrastani, we will not mention here the numerous treatises which have appeared since. Of the above-mentioned works, one only is available in translation : that of Shahrastani, Religions-Partheien und Philosophen-Schulen, trans- lated by Haarbriicker. Parts of ibn-^azm may be found translated by Prof. Friedlander, in the J. A. O. S., vols, xxviii and xxix. 211 BIBLIOGRAPHY The most important works on this subject by European scholars are the following: E. Blochet: Le Messianisme dans l'heterodoxie Musulmane, Paris, 1903. A. Christensen : Remarques critiques sur le Kitdb baydni-l-adydn d'Abii-l-Ma'ali; in Le Monde Oriental, vol. v, 191 1, pp. 205 et seq. Israel Friedlander: The Heterodoxies of the Shiites, J. A. O. S., vols, xxviii and xxix. This article includes his translation of portions of ibn-Hazm. (New Haven, Conn., 1907.) Ignaz Goldziher: Beitrdge zur Literaturgeschichte der Shi'a und der Sunnitischen Polemik (in Akad. der Wiss. Phil. Hist, klasse. Sit sung sb., vol. lxxviii, pp. 439-524.) (Vienna.) Die Zahiriten (Leipzig, 1884). Le Denombrement des Sectes Mahometanes, in Revue de I'Histoire des Religions, vol. xxvi (Paris, 1892). Review of Baghdadi's work, Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgen- landischen Gesellschaft, vol. lxv, p. 349. I'orlesungen iiber den Islam (Heidelberg, 1910). (Translated into English, Mohammed and Islam, New Haven, Conn., 1917.) Hammer-Purgstall : Tableau Genealogique des 73 sectes de VI slam, in Journal Asiatique, 1st ser., vol. vi, pp. 321-335; vol. vii, pp. 32-46. M. Horten: Die Philosophischcn Systeme der Spekulativcn Theologen im Islam (Bonn, 1912). S. Horovitz: Uber den Einfluss der Griechischen Philosophic auf die Entwicklung der Kalam (Breslau, 1909). Uber den EinHuss des Stoicismus auf die Entzvicklung der Philosophic bei den Arab em, Z. D. M. G., vol. lvii, pp. 177- 191. J. B. L. J. Rousseau : Memoires sur les trois plus fameuses sectes du Musuhnanisme (Paris, A. Nepven, 1818, ed. 75, p. 80). 212 BIBLIOGRAPHY Martin Schreiner : Der Kaldm in der Judischen Literatur, Revues des Etudes JuivA vol. xxix, p. 211 (Paris, 1894). Beitrdge zur Geschichte der Theologischen Bewegungen im Islam, Z. D. M. G., vol. Hi, p. 463 and vol. liii, p. 51. Zur Geschichte des Asa' rite ntums, Actes du Troisieme Congres In- ternationale des Orientalistes, sec. i vol. i, p. 77 (Leiden, 1891). M. Steinschneider : Die kanonische Zahl der Muhammedanischen Secten. und die Sym- bolik der Zahl 70-73, Z. D. M. G., vol. iv, p. 145. J. Wellhausen: Religios-Politischen oppositions-parteien im alien Islam. Kon. Gesellschajt d. Wissensch. Gottingen, p. 99. Abhandl. Philol- Hist. Klasse, N. F., vol. v, no. 2 (Berlin, 1901). Wiistenfeld : Der Imam al-Schdii'i und seine Anh'dnger. Abhandlungcn der Gesell- schajt der Wissenschaftefi, vols, xxxvi, xxxvii (Gottingen, 1891). 213 INDEX Abadlyah, 36 * Abdallah ibn-al-IJasan ibn-al-Hu- sain, 63 'Abdallah ibn-al-Wadin, 84 'Abdallah ibn-abl-Aufl, 33 •Abdallah ibn-Harath al-Khuzai, 85 'Abdallah ibn-al-Zubair, 52, 59, 85, "5 'Abdallah ibn-'Amr, 21 'Abdallah ibn-'Amr ibn-al-'As, 22 'Abdallah ibn-'Amr ibn-Harb, 49 'Abdallah ibn-Dajah, 58 'Abdallah ibn-Hammad al-Jubari, 80 'Abdallah ibn-Hubab ibn-al-'Aratt, 77, 78 'Abdallah-ibn-Ibad, 104, 107 'Abdallah ibn- Ja' far, 71 'Abdallah ibn-Jausha al-Ta'i, 82 'Abdallah ibn-Kauwa, 77 'Abdallah ibn - Maimun al-Kadah, 35 'Abdallah ibn- Muslim- ibn -Kutai- bah, 156, 179 'Abdallah ibn-Muti' al-'AdawI, 52 'Abdallah ibn-Najiyah, 21 'Abdallah ibn 'Umar, 33 'Abdallah ibn-Wahab al-Rasibi, 77, 80 ff., 92 'Abdallah ibn-Yazid, 21 'Abdallah ibn-Yazid al-Ansari, 52 'Abd-al-Ghaffar al-Faris, 8 'Abd al-Kahir, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 22, 45-7, 50, 61, 73, 94, 108, 115, 132, 175 'Abd al-Kais, 125 'Abd-al-Karim ibn-'Ajrad, 94, 96, IQ2 'Abd-al-Malik ibn-Marwan, 54, 59, 86, 88, 91, 112, 113 'Abd-al-Rahman (bro. of 'A'ishah), 115 'Abd-al-Rahman al-Nisaburi, 101 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn -Muhammad ibn-al-Ash'ath, 113 'Abd-al-Rahman ibn-Muljim, 64, 93, 106 'Abd al- Rahman ibn - Ziyad ibn An'am, 21 'Abd al-Wahid ibn-Ziyad, 35 'Abd-Rabbihi al-Kablr, 84, 87 'Abd Rabbihi al-Saghir, 84, 87 Abraham, 31, 151 'Abs, 54 Abstainers (from war), 84, 88, 98 ff., 101 al-Abtar, 45 abu-'Abdallah, see al-Hasan ibn- Salih ibn-Hal al-Kufi abu-al-'Abbas al-Kalanisi, 165 abu-al-Hudhail Muhammad ibn-al- Hudhail al-'Allaf, 68, 107, 125 ff., 148, 165, 173, 207 ff. abu-al-Husain al-Khaiyat, see al- Khaiyat abu-al-Ruwandl, 147 abu-Baihas, 91 abu-Baihas Haisam ibn-'Amir, no abu-Bakr, 31-3, 45, 46, 50, 106. 109 abu-Bakr al-Siddik, see abu-Bakr abu-Bakr Muhammad ibn-al-Tai- yib al-'Ash'ari, 138 abu-Bilal Mirdas al-Khariji, 92 abu-Fudaik, 90 ff. abu-Hanifah, 28, 39, *53 abu-Hashim ibn-al-Jubba'l, 37, "6, 118, 133. 165, 184, 190 ff., 209 abu-Hurairah, 21, 22, 33, 154 215 2l6 INDEX abu- Imam ah, 22 abu - Hashim 'Abdallah ibn - Mu- hammad ibn-al-Hanifiyah, see Muhammad ibn-al-Hanaflyah abu-'Isa al-Warrak, 68, 71 abu-Ishak, see al-Murtar abu-Ishak al-Isafaraini, 8 abu-Ishak Ibrahim ibn-Saiyar, see al-Nazzam abii-Ja'far al-Mansur, 62 abu-Kamil, 36, 60 abu-Karib al-Darir, 48 abu-Kasim 'Abdallah ibn -Ahmad ibn-Mahmiid al-Banahi al-Ka'bi, see al-Ka'bi abu-Kubais, 68 abu-Kudail (probably abu-Fudaik), 87 k. abii'l-Darda, 22 abu'l-Jarud, 43 abu - 1 - Hasan al - Ash'arl, see al- Ash'ari abu-1-Julandi, 99 abu-1- Sahara, ill abu-1-Shamrakh, 91 abu-Malik al-Hadraml, 71 abu-Maryam al-Sa'di, 82 abu-Mas'ur, 155 fif. abu - Muhammad 'Abdallah ibn- 'All ibn-Ziyad al-Sumaidhi, see ibn-Ziyad abu - Muhammad 'Abdallah ibn- 'Umar, 22 abu-Muhammad ibn-'All ibn-'Ab- dallah ibn-'Abbas ibn-al-Mutta- lib, 49 abu-Mukarram, 104 abu-Musa al-'Ash'ari, 33, 146, 152 abu-Musa al-Murdar, see al-Mur- dar abu-Muslim, 103, 104 abu-Rashid, 83 abii-Sahl Bishr ibn Ahmad ibn- Bashhar al - Isfara'ini, see al- Isfara'lnl abii-Salman, 21 abu-Sa'ld al-Khidrl, 22 abu-Shimr al-Murji', 37, 165 abu - Yahya Yusuf ibn - Bashshar, see ibn-Bashshar abu - Ya'kub al - Shahham, see al- Shahham abu-Yusuf, 177 abu-Zufar, 172 Adam, 56 al-'AdawI, 122 'Adi ibn-Hatim al-Ta i, 78 Adlmawat, the people of, 22 Adnaniyah, 182 Ahl al-Zahir, 39 Ahmad ibn-al-Hasan ibn-'Abd al- Jabbar, 21 Ahmad ibn-Fihr, 180 Ahmad ibn-Nasr al-Marwazi, 179 Ahmad ibn-Shumait, 57, 58 al-Ahnaf ibn-Kais, 57 al-Ahwaz, 85 ff., 121 'Ailan, 54 'A'ishah, 115, 122, 124 Ajaridah, 36, 75, 94, 96, 98 'Akabah, night of, 154 al-'Akhnas, 103 'Akhnasiyah, 102, 103 'All, 5, 6, 22, 30, 33 ff., 36, 43 fi\, 48 ff., 60 ff., 64, 66, 75 ff-, 8o,93, 95, 106, 122 ff., 154, 170 'All al-Aswarl, see al-Aswarl 'All ibn abi-Talib, see 'All 'All ibn - Ahmad ibn - Sa'id ibn- Hazm ibn-Ghalib ibn-Salih abu- Muhammad, see ibn-Hazm 'All ibn-al-Husain Zain al-'Abidln, 49, 64 _ 'All ibn-'Isa ibn-Hadiyan, 100 'All ibn-Maitham, 71 'All ibn-Musa al-Rida, 66 'All Zararah ibn-A'yan, 71 'Amariyah, 60 'Amir ibn-Wathilah al-Kinanl, 59 'Amariyah, 36 'Amr ibn-al-'Asi, 33, 80, 146 'Amr ibn - Bahr al - Jahiz, see al- Jahiz 'Amr ibn-Harmiiz, 124 'Amr ibn-.Sa'id, 99 'Amr ibn-'Ubaid ibn-Bab, 34, 121, 122, 123 ff. 'Ammar ibn-Yasir, 123 'Amr ibn-Yazid al-Azdi, 99 ff. 'Amriyah, 37, 116, 123 INDEX 217 Amwariyah, 37 Anas ibn-Malik, 22, 33 al-Anbar, 82 Arabs, 28, 109, 182 ff. Aristotle, 183 Armenia, 54 'Asa, 168 al-Asamm, 119, 170 A'sha, 58 Ashab al-Makalat, 206 Ashab Ta'ah, 36, 105, 107 (abu-1-Hasan) al-'Ash'ari, 8, 45, 71, 75, 76, 138, 165, 189 al-Ashhab ibn-Bishr al-'Urani, 82 al-Ashbah, 209 'Ashras ibn-'Auf, 82 'Asiyah, 168 Asma ibn-Kharijah, 56 al-Aswad ibn-Zaid al-'AnasI, 32 al-Aswarl, 137, 207, 210 Aswariyah, 1 16 'Atawlyah, 88 'Atiyah ibn-al-Aswad al-Hanafl, 87 ff-, 94 'Attab ibn-Warka' al-Tamimi, 113 'Aufiyah, in al-Auza'I, 22, 39 Azarikah, 36, 82-4, 86 ff., 91, III, 119 ff., 135, 195 al-Azd, 57, 86 B Badr, battle of, 69, 170 Baghdad, 66 al-Baghdadi, see 'Abd al-Kahir Baghdadiyun, 187 Bahshamiyah, 37, 116, 190 Baihasiyah, 92, 99, noff. al-Bakir, 64, 65 Bakr, 35, 54 Bakriyah, 38, 41 Bakiriyah, 35, 36 Banu-l-'Abbas, 103 Banu-Azd, 124 Banu-Dabbah, 124 Banu Hanlfah, 58 Banu Isra'il, see Jews Banu-Khuza'ah, 180 Banu-Kinanah, 182 Banu Kuraizah, 80 Banu-Shaiban, 112 ff., 113 BanQ-Tamim, 123 Banu Umaiyah, 46, 104 Banu Yashkur, 76 Bashhar ibn-Burd, 60, 61 al-Basrah, 34, 56, 57, 62, 78, 85 ff., 91 ff., 115, 120, 136, 154 Basriyah, 139 Basriyun, 186 ff. Batiniyah, 29, 35, 65, 66 Battle of the Camels, 48, 78, 122 ff. Bayan ibn-Sim'an, 49 Bayaniyah, 29, 36, 49 Bishr ibn-Marwan, 112 Bishr ibn-al-Mu'tamar, 134, 162 ff., 165, 173, 207 Bishriyah, 116, 162 Buddhism, 12 al-Bukhari, 45 Burghunlyah, 37 Burhanite Dualists, 141 Bushanj, 100 Bust, 101 Butriyah, 35, 45 Buwaihids, 190 Cairo, 13 Christians, 12, 21, 79, 130, 147 ff., 172 ff., 178, 189 Companions, 22, 60, 61, 65, 153, 155, 157, 161 Cordova, 11 Dahhakiyah, no Dahrl, 129 ff. Dahrlyah, 125 ff., 178 Darar, 32 Darar ibn-'Amr, 35 Dararlyah, 30, 35, 169 (Dirarriyah, 38, 41) al-Dhar, 59 al-Dhimmlyah, 190 Dhi Salam, 56 218 INDEX Dhubyan, 54 Dhul-Nunain, 50 Dhu'l-Thudyah, 77, 81 Dualists, 136, 141 ff. al-Dujail (Little Tigris), 114 Dulab al-Ahwaz, 77, 85, 86 Duwaibivah ibn-Wabrah al-Bajadl, 80 Fadak, 32 Fadl al-IJadathi, 137 al-Faiyad ibn Khali al-Azdi, 80 Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, 8 Faljard, 99 Faruk, 50 Farwah ibn-Naufal al-Ashja'i, 82 Fatimah, 154 Followers of the Camel, 33, 75, 78, 81, 122 ft. Followers of Obedience, see Ashab Ta'ah Friedlander, 7, 11 al-Futl, see Hisham ibn-'Amr G Gabriel, 27 Ghailan al-Dimashki, 33, 119 Ghalafah al-Taiml, 82 Ghassaniyah, 37 Ghazalah, 1 12-15 al-Ghazzal, see Wasil ibn-'Ata* Ghulat, 5, 34-36, 49^ 55, 65, 75, 97, 105, 116 Greeks, 12, 32 H Habib ibn-'Asim al-'Audl, 81 Hafs ibn-abi-i-Mikdam, 105 llafsiyah, 36, 105 Haisam al-Shari, 100 al-Haitham ibn-Kharijah, 21 Hajir, Mt., 62, 63 al-Hajjaj ibn-Yiisuf, 86 n\, 112 flf. Hakakiyah, 38 al-Hakam ibn-al-'Asi, 154 Halula, Fort of, 112 Haluliyah, 36 Hamadhan, 45, 54, 58, 77 riammad 'Ajrad, 61 Hamran Kaumat, 35 Hamzah ibn-Akrak al-Khariji, 97, 98 ff. Hamzlyah, 36, g6, 98 Hanbalite, 6 Hanifite, 6 Harbiyah, 49 Harithah ibn-Badr al-Fadanl, 85 Harith ibn-Mazid al-Ibadi, 106 ff. al-Harith ibn-'Umair, 112 Harithiyah, 36, 105 ff. Harjarayah, 82 al-Harrah, 46 Harun al-Rashid, 99, 177 Harura, 77 Harurlyah, 77, 112 al-Hasan al-Basrl, 34, 119, 121 al-Hasan ibn-'Ali, 43, 44, 47, 48, 57, 64, 123 al-Hasan ibn-Salih ibn - IJai al- Kufi, 45 Hashim al-Aukas, 124 Haushah, 124 Hautharah ibn-Wada' al - 'Asadl, 82 Hayitiyah, 116, 37? Hazzan, 54 al-Hijaz, 28, 52 Himariyah, 37, 116 Himrun, 63 Hindu, 12 Hirat, 99 ff. Hisham ibn-'Abd al-Malik, 35, 46 Hisham ibn-'Amr al-Futi, 165 ff. Hisham ibn - al - Hakam al-Rafidi^ 36, 67-71, 73, 136, 144 Hisham ibn-Salim al-Jawaliki, 36, 67, 7o, 71, 73 Hisham ibn - 'Ubaidallah al-Razi, 177 Hishamlyah, 36, 60, 67, 116, 165 Holy Land, 31 al-Hudaibiyah, day of, 79, 154 Hudhaillyah, 37, 116, 125 Hurairlyah, 35 al-Husain ibn 'All, 43, 44, 46-8, 52-4, 58, 59, 64, 123 INDEX 219 al-K[usain ibn-Numair al-Sukuti, 9, 52, 54 Hurkus ibn - Zuhair al - Bajall al- 'Urani, 77, 80, 81, 92 'Ibad ibn-Akhdar al-Tamlml, 93 Ibadiyah, 29, 81, 104 ff., 106 ff., 109, 120, 129 al-Iskafl, 209 Ibn-' Abbas, 33, 59, 123 Ibn-'Abbad, 190 ibn-abl-al-Salt, 98 ibn-abi-Daud, 179 ff. ibn-al-Hanafiyah, see Muhammad ibn-al-Hanafiyah ibn-al-Ikhshid, 200 ibn - al - Jubba'i, see abu - Hashim ibn-al-Jubba'i ibn-al-Rawandi, 68 ibn-al-Salah, 7 ibn-al-Zaiyat, 179 ff. ibn-Arwa., 50 ibn-Bab, see 'Amr ibn-Ubaid ibn-Bashshar (abu-Yahya Yusuf), 47, 99 ibn-Bassam, 182 ibn-Hayit, 137 ibn-Hazm, 5, 11, 12 ibn-Khallikan, 7, 8 ibn-Khuzaimah ibn-Mudrakali ibn- Ilyas ibn-Mudhar, 182 ibn - Mubashshir, see Ja'far ibn- Mub ash shir ibn-Saba, 34 ibn-Shihab, 55 ibn-Yazid ibn Unais, 36 ibn-Ziyad, 21, 52, 54, 83, 92 Ibrahim, 109 ff. Ibrahim ibn-'Abdallah, 62, 63 Ibrahim ibn-Malik al-Ashtar, 53, 54, 57 Ibrahimlyah, 36, no 'Idhaj, 86 Idris ibn-'Abdallah, 62, 63 Imamlyah, 5, 30, 34 ff., 43, 44, 60, 70, 72 ff. 'Imran ibn-Hittan al-SadwtsI, 92 ft". al-'Irak, 46, 52, 54, 55, 86, 112, 152 'Isa ibn-Maryam, 31 'Isa ibn-Musa, 62, 63 'Isa ibn-Sabih, see Murdar 'Isawiah, 27 al-Isfara'ini, 8, 21 Ishak ibn-Suwaid al-'Adawi, 122 Ishakiyah, 38 Ishmael, 31 al-Iskafl (Muhammad ibn-'Abdal- lah), 137, 175 ff-, 209 Iskafiyah, 116, 175 Isma'il ibn-Ja'far, 65 Isma'll ibn-'Abbas, 21 Isma'iliyah, 5, 36, 60, 65 Ispahan, 28 Ithna 'Asharlyah, see Twelvers Jabir, 22 Jabir ibn-'Abdallah al-Ansari, 33, 65 Ja'd ibn-Dirham, 33 Ja'far al-Sadik, 66 Ja'far ibn-Harb, 125, 137, 173, 175, 209 Ja'far ibn-Mubashshir, 173 ff. Ja'far ibn-'Umar, 54, 65 Ja'farlyah, 116, 173 al-Jahiz, 68, 124, 137, 147, 153, !79, 180 ff. al-Jahiziyah, 37, 1 16, 180 Jahm ibn-Safvvan, 35, 37, 126 ff. Jahmlyah, 23, 30, 35, 37, 38, 41 Jahzah, 182 Jahziyah, 113, 114 Jaml' ibn-Jusham al-Kindi, 80 Janahiyah, 36 Jaririyah, 44 Jarudiyah, 35, 43-5 al-Jazirah, 54, 81 Jerusalem, 31 Jesus, 189 (see also 'Isa ibn-Mar- yam) Jews, 12, 21, 22, 28, 130, 147 ff-, l 73 Jiraft Kirmln, 87 Jiwaih ibn-Ma'bad, 99 al-Jubba'i, 1 18, 125, 133, 137, 165, 183 ff., 189 ff-, 209 220 INDEX Jubba iyah, 37 (Jubabiyah, 116) Juzajan, 47 al-Ka'bi, abu-Kasim 'Abdallah ibn- j Ahmad ibn-Mahmud al Banahi, j 27, 28, 75, 76, 117, 118 ff., 159, 161, 180 ff., 184, 186 ff. Ka'blyah, 37, 116, 186 ff. Kabul, 123 Kadarites, see Kadariyah Kadariyah, 5, 22, 23, 33, 37-9, 41, 72, 95, 96, 98 ff., 116, 117, 121, 124, 127, 133, 135, 137, 155 ff-, 162, 176 ff., 179, 183 al-Kadisiyah, 32, 37, 63, 95-6, 156 al-Kahdiyah, 71 Kahistan, 98, 101 Kahtaniyah, 182 Kais, 54 Kaisan, 48 Kaisaniyah, 5, 34-6, 43, 47, 48, 51, 58-6o, 73 Kaisum ibn-Salamah al-Juhani, 80 al-Kalanisi, 138 Kamiliyah, 36, 60, 61 al-Karablyah, 48 Karbela', 47-9, 53, 64 Karramiyah, 27, 35, 38, 41, 72 Karukh, 100 Kasim al-Dimashki, 206 Kaskar, 113 Katadah, 22 Katari ibn-al-Fujaah, 86 ff. Kathir al-Munauwa, 45 al-Katif, 89 Kati'iyah, 60, 66, 72 al-Khaiyat (abu-al-Husain), 126, 128, 147, 166, 172, 184 ff. Khaiyatiyah, 37, 116, 184 ff. Khalaf, 97 Khalaflyas, 97, 100 al-Khalidi, 37, 119 Khalid ibn-' Abdallah, 21 Kharijites, see Khawarij Khaulan, 54 Khawarij, 5, 22, 23, 29, 30, 32, 34, 36, 3$, 41, 46, 50, 74 ff-, 77, 80 ff., 85 ff., 88, 96, 97, 100, 104, 113 ft"., 122, 128 ff., 129, 137, 174, 197 Khazimiyah, 36, 94 ff., 98 ff. Khuraim ibn-Fatik al-Asadl, 113 Khurasan, 27, 35, 38, 47, 98, 100, 101 (Khorasan), 86 Kinaniyah, 182 Kirman, 85, 87 (Kurman), 97, 98, 101 Kita'lyah, 36 al-Kufah, 44, 46, 47, 52-8, 63, 77, 80, 1 12-4, 154 Kumis, 87 Kuraib ibn-Murrah, 83, 93 Kuraish, 32 Kuthaiyir, 49, 50 M Ma'bad al-Juhani, 33, 101, 119, 121 Ma'badiyah, 36, 102, 103 al-Madain, 52, 58, 82, 113 al-Madaini, 183 al-Madhar, 58 ]\ladhhij, 54 al-Madinah, 31, 32, 46, 63, 64, 65, 154, 177 al-Ma'dumiyah, 185 Maghrib, 62, 63 Magians, 12, 22, 35, 37, 130, 147, 173, 206 Mahdi, 44, 49, 55, 59, 60, 62, 63, 65, 66 al-Mahin, 54 Maimun, 96 (not leader of Maimuniyah, 109 Maimuniyah, 29, 36, 37, 75, 95, no Majhuliyah, 36, 97 Makrumiyah, 104 Malik, 39, 177 Malikite, 6 Ma'lumiyah, 36, 97 ff. Mamturah, 66, 72 al-Ma'mun (caliph), 35, 101, 177, 179 Manicheans, 139, 145 INDEX 221 al - Mansur, see abu - Ja'far al- Mansiir Mansurlyah, 36 Maradis al-Kharijl, 76 Marlslyah, 37 Marwan ibn-al-Hakam, 124 Mary, 189 Masldhan, 82 Masma' ibn-Kadali, 77 Mas'ud ibn-Kais, 100 al-Mausil (Mosul), 54 al-Mawayini, 112 Mecca, 28, 31, 48, 59, 62, 63, 68, 107 Michael, 2.7 Miklas al-Azrak, 88 Miilat* al-Islam, 25, 27 al-Mirdad, 125 ff., 208 Mu'adh ibn-Jarir, 82 Mu'ammar, 118 ff., 124 137, 157, 159 ff., 202 Mu'ammariyah, 116 Mu'awiyah, 5, 33, 47, 65, 76, 79 #-, 82, 122, 170 Mu'awiyah ibn - Ishak ibn - Yazld ibn-IIarithah, 46 Mubaraklyah, 36, 60, 66 al-Mughlrah ibn-Sa'Id al-'Ijll, 62, 63 al-Mughlrah ibn-Shu'bah, 82 Mughlrlyah, 29, 36, 63 Muhakkimah, First, 36, 76, 81 ff., 92 al-Muhallab ibn-abi-Sufrah, 57, 86 Muhammad, 1, 6, 22, 23, 27-31, 59, 62, 70, 79, 88, 140, 146 ff., 154, 156, 161, 179, 181 Muhammad Badr, 13 Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah al - Is- kafi, see al-Iskafi Muhammad ibn-'Abdallah ibn-al- Hasan ibn-'All ibn-abi-Talib, 44, 62, 63, 64 Muhammad ibn - al - Ash'ath al- Kindl, 57, 58 Muhammad ibn-al-IIanafiyah, 35, 48, 49, 5i, 52, 55, 59 Muhammad ibn-al-Hasan, 66, I70ff. Muhammad ibn-'All, 64 Muhammad ibn-al-Kasim, 44 Muhammad ibn-al-Nu'man al-Ra- fidl, 72 Muhammad ibn-'Amr, 21 Muhammad ibn-Isma'il, 65, 66 Muhammad ibn - Ismail al - Buk- hari, see al-Bukharl Muhammad ibn - Shabib al-Basrl, 37-H9 Muhammad ibn-Tahir ibn-'Abdal- lah ibn-Tahir, 35 Muhammad ibn-'Umar, 44 Muhammadiyah, 35, 44, 60, 62, 64 Mujassimah, 23, 27, 30 Mukarramlyah, 36 Mukarran, 97 ff. Mukassidun, 160 al-Mukhtar ibn-abi-'Ubaid al-Tha- kafi (known also as abu-Ishak), 47, 48, 51-8 al-Murdar (Isa ibn - Sabih, abu- Musa al-Murdar), 171 ff., 175 Murdarlyah, 116, 170 Murjiites, see Murjlyah Murjlyah, 5, 22, 37, 38, 41, 108 Mus'ab ibn-al-Zubair, 56-8 Musa ibn-Ja'far, 65, 66, 72, 73 Musailamah, 32 al-MusawIyah, 36, 60, 71 Mushabbihah, 23 Muslim ibn-'Abs ibn-Kuraiz ibn- Hablb ibn-'Abd-Shams, 85 Muslim ibn-Ahwaz al-Mazini, 47 Muslim ibn-al-Hajjaj, 45 Mustadrikah, 37 al - Mustaurid ibn - Alkamah al- Tamlmi, 82 al-Mu'tasim, 177 Mutawakkil, 180 Mu'tazilah, 5, 29, 34, 41, 106, n6ff., 119, 125 ff., 131 ff- 135, *37, 139, 147 ff., 149, 161 ff., 166, 170 ff., 176 ff., 182, 184 ff., 186 ff., 191, 201, 203, 205, 210 al-Muttarih, 89 Muwaislyah, 37, 116 N Nabhan, 54 222 INDEX Nafi' ibn-al-Azrak al-Hanafi, 83 ff., 86 ff. Nahawand, 32 Nahd, 54 al-Nahrawan, battle of, 77, 82 Najadat, 36, 75, 76, 87, 91, 120, 174 Najd, 63 Najdah ibn-' Amir al-^anafl, 87-90 Najjariyah, 23, 30, 34, 37, 41, 137, 169 Najran, 79 Nisapur, 7 (Nisabur), 101 Nasr ibn-al-Hajjaj, 154 Nasr ibn-Bashshar, see ibn-Bash- shar Nasr ibn-Harimah al-'Ansi, 46 Nawisiyah, 35, 60 al-Nazzam abu-Ishak Ibrahim ibn- Saiyar, 70, 124, 135 ff-, 165, I7h 173, 175, 183, 186 ff., 206 ff., 210 Nazzamlyah, 135 ff. Nizamlyah, 37 (Nazzamlyah), 116 al-Nu'at, 54 al-Nukhailah, 82 Persia, 36, 52, 85 ff. Persians, 32 Prophet, The, see Muhammad Radwa, Mt., 48, 50, 51 Radwa, Pass of, 59 Rafi ibn-Laith ibn-Nasr ibn - Sai- yar, 101 al-Rai, 34, 37, 87, 176 al-Rashid, 65, 101, 104 Rashidiyah, 36, 104 Rashid al-Tawil, 88, 90 ff. Rawafid, 23, 34-6, 38, 43, 47 (Rafidiyah), 29, 39, 46, 71 (Rafidah), 41, 55, 60, 61, 73, 106, 170 Rawandiyah, 49 Ruh Zinba', 112 Rukanah ibn-Wa'il al-Arji, 80 al-Ruwandi, 165 Sabat al-Madain, 34, 47 Sabbabiyah, 34, 55, 64 Sabur, 86 Sa'd ibn-abl-Wakkas, 32 Sa'd ibn-Kufr, 82 Sa'd ibn-Mu'adh, 80 Sa'd ibn-Mujalid al-Saiba'l, 80 Sa'd ibn-'Ubadah al-Khazraji, 32 Safwan-Ansarl, 61 Sahamiyah, 37 Sa'Id ibn-al-'Asi, 154 Saiyid al-Himyari, 50, 51 Sajah, 32 al-Salihi, n8ff., 184 Salih ibn-Mishrah al-Khariji, in Salih ibn-Mishrah al-Tamiml, in Salihiyah, in (Same as Khawarij on p. 113) Salih Kubbah, followers of, 37, 116 Salt ibn-'Uthman, 98 Saltlyah, 98 Samaritans, 148 Samarkand, 101 Sammak ibn-Harb, 45 Sanan al-Ju'fi, 47 Satan, 61, 64 Sawad al-Kufah, 82 Sha'bah, 100 Shablb ibn-YazId al-Shaibani, in ff. al-Shablblyah, in, 115 al-Shafi'l, 39, 153, 174 ff., 177 Shafi'ite, 6 al-Shahham, 183 ff. al-Shahhamlyah, 116, 183 Shahrastani, 5, 11, 35 Shaiban ibn - Salamah al-Khariji, 103 Shaibaniyah, 103, 104 Shaitan al-Tak, 36, 71, 72 Shaitanlyah, 36, 60, 72 Shamltiyah, 60 Sharikan, 28 Sharikanlyah, 28 Shibt ibn-Rab'i, 77 INDEX 223 Shiite, 1, 5, 6,^129, 137 Shuaib, 96 Shu'aiblyah, 36, 95 Shuhfur ibn-Tahir, 10 Shumaitiyah, 36 Shurah, 76 Sifatiyah, 5, 184, 203 Siffin, 33, 60, 76, 77, 122 Sifriyah, 36, ill, 120 (See Sufrlyah) Sijistan, 81, 88, 94, 98, 100, 101 Sophists, 136 Subkl, 7, 8 Sufain ibn-al-Abrad al-Kalbi, 114 Sufrlyah, 91 ff., 112 (See Sifriyah) Sufyan ibn^al-Abrad al-Kalbi, 87 Suhail ibn-'Amr, 79 Sulaiman ibn-Jarir al-Zaidi, 44, 45 Sulaimaniyah, 35, 44, 45 Sunnites, 1, 5, 6, 9, 23, 29, 94, 97, 103, i2£ L 129, 135, 138, 171 Surakah ibn-Mirdas al-Bariki, 56 Syria, 32, 52, 90, 112, 170 Tabaristan, 87 Tahir ibn-al-Husain, 101 al-Ta'if, 59 Taim 'Adi, 82 Talakan, 44 Talhah, 95 Talhah ibn-Fahd, 99, 122, 124 Tall-Mauzan, 81 Tamamiyah, 116 Taraikiyah, 38 Tarif," 58 Taumaniyah, 37 Tauwaj, 93 Tha'alibah, 102, 104 Tha'alibah Khawarij, 101 Tha'labah ibn-Mashkan, 102 Thamamah ibn-Ashras al-Numairl, 177 ff-, 181 Thamamlyah, 177 Thanawlyah, 12 Thaubanlyah, 37 al-Thaurl, 39 Thu'al, 54 Thumamiyah, 37 Tigris, 62 Tulaihah, 32 Twelvers, 36, 60, 66 U 'Ubad ibn-al-Husain al-Haiti, 83 'Ubad ibn - Sulaiman al - 'Amrl CUmari?), 167 ft. 'Ubaidallah ibn-al-Hirr al-Ju'afl, 53, 57 'Ubaidah ibn-Hilal al-Yashkuri, 87 'Ubaidallah ibn-Ma'mar al-Taimi, 57 . 'Ubaidallah ibn - Ziyad, see ibn- Ziyad 'Ubaid ibn-abi-1-Mukharik al-Mu- tannabi, 113 Ubai ibn-Ka'b, 22 Uhud, 170 'Ukbah ibn-' Amir al-Juhanl, 33 'Uman, 54, 81 'Umar, 44, 45, 50, 106, 154 'Umar al-Faruk, 154 'Umar ibn-Sa'd, 53 'Umarlyah, 37 Ummat al-Islam, 12, 27-32 Urwah ibn-Hudair, 76 'Utbah ibn-'Ubaid al-Khaulani, 80 'Uthman, 33, 45, 75, 8r, 95, 154, l6f ) 'Uthman ibn-'Affan, 88, 106 'Uthman ibn-Ma'mun, 86 'Uthman ibn-'Ubaidallah ibn-Ma'- mar al-Tamlmi, 85 ff. W Wadi al-Siba', 124 Wahb ibn-Baklyah, 21 Wakifah, 36, 110 (Wakifiyah), 119 Walid ibn-Maslamah, 22 al-Walid ibn-'Ukbah, 154 Wasil ibn-'Ata al-Ghazzal, 34, 3S. 119, 121 ff., 170 Wasillyah, 37, Il6, 119 al-Wasy, 50 224 INDEX al-Wathik, 177, 179 Wathilah ibn-al-Aska\ 22 Yahya ibn-Aktham, 177 Yahya ibn-Zaid, 47 Ya'kub, 46 Ya'kubiyah, 45 al-Yamamah, 88, 90 al-Yaman, 52, 81, 90 Ya'mur ibn-'Ubaidallah ibn - Ma'- mar al-Maiml, 91 Yazid ibn-'Ali ibn-al-Husain ibn- 'Ali ibn-abi-Talib, 47, 48 Yazid ibn-al-Muhallab, 87 Yazid ibn-Asim al-Muhadhi, 76 Yazid ibn-Mu'awiyah, 47, 48, 52, 59, 92 Yazidiyah, 29, 36, 37, 74, 105 Yunus ibn - 'abd - al - Rahman al- Kummi, 36, 66, 72 Yunusiyah, 36, 37, 60, 72 Yusuf ibn-'Um-Thakafi, 46, 47 al-Za'farani, 34 Za'faraniyah, 37 Zahaf ibn-Rahar al-Ta'i, 83, 93 Zahiriyah, 148 Zaid ibn-'Ali ibn - al - Hasan ibn- 'Ali ibn-abi-Talib, 46 ' Zaid ibn-'Ali ibn-al-Husain ibn- 'Ali ibn-abi-Talib, 35 Zaidiyah, 5, 30, 34-6, 43, 45, 46, 53, 60, 72, 73 Zaranj, 100 Zararah ibn-A'yun, 36 Zarariyah, 36, 60, 71 Zindiks, 173, 177, 178 Ziyad-ibn-'Abd-al-Rahman, 104 Ziyad ibn-Abihi, 82 Ziyad ibn-al-Asfar, 91 Ziyad ibn-Kharrash al-'Ijli, 82 Ziyadiyah, 104 al-Zubair, 95, 122, 124 Zur'ah ibn-Muslim al-'Amiri, 92 Zurkan, 70 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS Columbia University in the City of New York The Press was incorporated June 8, 1893, to promote the pub- lication of the results of original research. It is a private cor- poration, related directly to Columbia University by the provis- ions that its Trustees shall be officers of the University and that the President of Columbia University shall be President of the Press. The publications of the Columbia University Press include works on Biog- raphy, History, Economics, Education, Philosophy, Linguistics, and Lit- erature, and the following series : Adams Lectures Carpentier Lectures Julius Beer Lectures Hewitt Lectures Blumenthal Lectures Jesup Lectures Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology Columbia University Biological Series Columbia University Studies in Cancer and Allied Subjects Columbia University Studies in Classical Philology Columbia University Studies in Comparative Literature Columbia University Studies in English Columbia University Geological Series Columbia University Germanic Studies Columbia University Indo-Iranian Series Columbia University Contributions to Oriental History and Philology Columbia University Oriental Studies Columbia University Studies in Romance Philology and Literature Records of Civilization : Sources and Studies Catalogues will be sent free on application LEMCKE & BUECHNER, Agents 30-32 East 20th Street, New York Columbia University Oriental Studies Edited by RICHARD J. H. GOTTHEIL Vol. I. The Improvement of the Moral Qualities. An Ethical Treatise of the Eleventh Century by Solomon Ibn Gabirol. By Stephen S. Wise, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. ix + 117. $1.25 net. Vol. III. Old Babylonian Temple Records. By Robert Julius Lau, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xi + 89 -f- 41. Plates. $2.50 net. Vol. IV. Sidon. A Study in Oriental History. By Frederick Carl Eiselen, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. vii -f 172. $1.50 net. Vol. V. History of the City of Gaza from the Earliest Times to the Pres- ent Day. By Martin A. Meyer, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xiii + 182. $1.50 net. Vol. VI. The Bustan Al-Ukul by Nathaniel Ibn Al-Fayyumi. By David Levine, Ph. D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xvi + 142 f 88. $2.50 net. Vol. VIII. Sumerian Records from Drehem. By William M. Nesbit, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xiv -f- 91. Plates and sign list. $1.50 net. Vol. IX. The Evolution of Modern Hebrew Literature, 1850-1912. By Abraham Solomon Waldstein, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. vii + 127. $1.50 net. Vol. X. The History of Tyre. By Wallace B. Fleming, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xiv -h 165. Map. $1.50 net. Vol. XI. The Problem of Space in Jewish Medieval Philosophy. By Israel Isaac Efros, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. ix + 125. $1.50 net. Vol. XII. The Yemenite Manuscript of Pesahim in the Library of Col- umbia University. By Julius J. Price, Ph.D. 8vo, paper. $i;5o net. In press. Vol. XIII. Aram and Israel, or the Aramaeans in Syria and Mesopotamia. By Emil G. H. Kraeling, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xvi + 154. $1.50 net. Vol. XIV. A Sumero-Babylonian Sign List. To which is added an Assyrian Sign List and a Catalogue of Numerals, Weights and Meas- ures used at various periods. By Samuel A. B. Mercer, Ph.D. 4to, cloth, pp. xi -h 244. $6.00 net. Vol. XV. Moslem Schisms and Sects (Al-Fark Bain al-Firak). Being a History of the Various Philosophic Systems Developed in Islam. By Abu Mansur abd al-Kahir ibn Tahir al-Baghdadi. (d. 1037). Part I. Translated from the Arabic. By Kate Chambers Seelye, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. viii -|- 224. $2.00 net. COLUMBIA, UNIVERSITY PRESS LEMCKE & BUECHNER, Agents 30-32 East 20th Street New York Columbia University Contributions to Oriental History and Philology EDITED BY RICHARD J. H. GOTTHE1L and JOHN DYNELEY PRINCE No, 1. Sumerian Hymns. From Cuneiform Texts in the British Museum. Transliteration, translation and comment- ary. By Frederick A. Vanderburgh, Ph.D., Lecturer in Semitic Languages, Columbia University. 8vo, pp. xii -f 83. Paper, $1.00; cloth, $1.50 net. No. 2. The History of the Governors of Egypt by Abu Muhammad Ibn Yusuf Al-Kindi. By Nicholas August Koenig, Ph.D. 8vo, paper, pp. 33 -f 33. $1.00 net. No. 3. Assyrian Primer. Bn Inductive Method of Learn- ing the Cuneiform Signs. By J. Dyneley Prince, Ph.D., Professor of Semitic Languages, Columbia University. 8vo, paper, pp. 58. $1.00 net. No. 4. The Witness of the Vulgate, Peshitta and Septn- agint to the Text of Zephaniah. By Sidney Zandstra, Ph.D. 8vo, paper, pp. 52. $1.00 net. No. 5. Tiglath Pileser III. By Abraham S. Anspacher, Ph.D. 8vo, cloth, pp. xvi -f 72. $1.25 net. No. 6. Root-Determinatives in Semitic Speech. A Con- tribution to Semitic Philology. By Solomon T. H. Hur- witz, Ph.D. 8vo, pp. xxii + 113. Cloth, $1.50 net ; paper, $1.00 net. No. 7. Mnhammedan Law of Marriage and Divorce. By Ahmed Shukri, Ph.D. 8vo, paper, pp. 126. $1.00 net. Out of print. COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS LEMCKE & BUECHNER, Agcnti 30-32 East 20th Street New York Date Due ■* a % 1 ta*^» -******* >, ____——. i /^^y**^^^ 1 * - ^ ^^wlis^fipSP r£~ ^ ^■*-*«. •Hk f) 4\ \%+