The Caliph and the Heretic (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Good, the Bad, and the Heretic in Early Islamic History
Deconstructing Islamic Studies (ILEX and Harvard University Press), 2020
My critical exploration of the uncritical use of historiographic tropes in the study of early Islamic sectarianism. In the last section I also tackle the issue of how a careful use of theory can enrich our understanding of the documents of the past. In general, I argue that the opposition "theory vs. philology" is wrong, and that we don't have to choose between the two. Theory means nothing without careful philology. At the same time, the idea that philology alone can help us understand the past is also incorrect.
Toward a Sunni Consensus on the Rightly Guided Caliphs: Ibn ʿUmar’s Hadith and Its Transmitters
Journal of American Oriental Society , 2022
This article studies how the ʿUthmānī position endorsing the first three caliphs, which was embraced by the majority of the ahl al-ḥadīth in the first two centuries of Islam, came to be replaced by the four-caliph thesis. It examines variations in the narrations of different chains of transmission of Ibn ʿUmar's tradition in relation to the geographical affiliation and movements of the transmitters active in the late eighth and early ninth centuries. The analysis suggests that Ibn ʿUmar's tradition was present in two versions at the turn of the ninth century, circulated in Iraqi cities and non-Iraqi cities respectively. Through its investigation, this study substantiates the current narrative on early ahl al-ḥadīth attitudes toward the first four caliphs and offers more insights that help explain why the ʿUthmānī hadith narrators failed to perpetuate their ideas. his caliphate up to debate. 1 According to Patricia Crone and Wilferd Madelung, in the first two centuries of Islam most Muslims were supporters of ʿUthmān (or ʿUthmānīs), who embraced the three-caliph idea, and were well represented in the main Muslim cities-Medina, Basra, and Baghdad-as well as in Syria. 2 A number of hadith scholars from that time are also identified as ʿUthmānīs. 3 In the course of the ninth and tenth centuries, the ahl al-ḥadīth in Iraq gradually came to agree upon the concept of the four rightly guided caliphs, with ʿAlī being admitted to the rank of the caliphate of the prophethood (khilāfat al-nubuwwa). In light of the Abbasid program of legitimization, which subdued and eventually replaced the Umayyad narrative of their dynastic rule that, bypassing ʿAlī, links directly to ʿUthmān, 4 such a transformation was brought about by scholars' endeavors to delineate their communal identity. Madelung suggests that 1 The Muslim disagreements over the first civil war, as documented in the heresiographical works do not necessarily represent the exact questions and debates of the seventh century. Yet the poetry from the early period, although much of it is apocryphal, illustrates the divisions and partisanship of different political alignments involved. See Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī, Maqālāt alislāmiyyīn wa-ikhtilafāt al-muṣallīn, ed. M. M. ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd, 2 vols. (Beirut: al-Maktaba al-ʿAṣriyya, 1990), 1: 47-64; T. El-Achèche, La poésie šiʿite des origines au IIIe siècle de l'hégire
'Ulama and caliphs new understanding of the "God's caliph" term
The complex relationship between early caliphs and Muslim scholars has been the subject of intense scholarship for a century now.l Various scholars have attempted to uncover the mystery characterizing this relationship. Although the majority of scholars have relied on the historical picture depicted by Islamic sources in forming their arguments, other scholars have de-emphasized the traditional sources in favor of theoretical models of this relationship. The most significant research of the latter type is Patricia Crone and Martin Hinds' God's Caliph (1986). This highly controversial work exemplifies the shift in focus from source-driven to theory-driven scholarship; the authors of this book undermine the importance of the sources describing how scholars dealt with political authority in the early Islamic period. The purpose of this article is to refute the central arguments presented in God's Caliph, namely the that the title n'God's Caliph" indicates a break with the prophetic past, that the title confers exclusive authority in the hands of the caliph, and that the caliph-scholar relationship was marked by struggle. It will be shown that the authors' arguments about this purportedly strife-ridden relationship are unsuccessful, not only because they adopt unfounded theories, but also because they fail to provide accurate definitions of key terms used throughout their work.
Inquisition in Early Islam : The Competition for Political and Religious Authority in the Abbasid Empire, by John P. Turner, 2015
First paragraph: The dramatic events surrounding the miḥna (inquisition) have been the subject of immense academic interest over recent years. It is frequently acknowledged that their historical unfolding represents a key milestone in the history of early Islamic theological thought; and many scholars link the political fortunes of the early ʿAbbāsid empire to the episode. Imposed by the caliph al-Maʾmūn (ruled 198-218/813-833), during the miḥna the class of learned scholars was compelled to submit to the doctrine that the Qurʾān was created; it became a salient point of contention in theological discourses with proto-Sunnī orthodoxy defining itself through opposition to the policy. Despite the death of al-Maʾmūn, shortly after its imposition, the policy was continued during the successive caliphates of al-Muʿtaṣim (ruled 218-227/833-842) and al-Wāthiq (ruled 227-232/842-847). Al-Mutawakkil revoked it in 232/847. Challenging some of the commonly held perceptions about the miḥna, the book under review sets out to examine its origins and the reasons why it was imposed, gauging its importance within the context of broader historical periods. The book also examines the role of caliphs and the ʿulamāʾ as contributors to the synthesis and elaboration of questions of faith and dogma. Critically, the key argument which defines John Turner’s study of the miḥna is the contention that although within contemporary scholarship there exists a general acceptance that the miḥna stands out as an anomaly and watershed event, culminating in the failure of the caliphs to impose their will, there is ample evidence to suggest that this is not the case. Turner argues that the miḥna stood out not because it proved to be a decisive turning point in the struggle for religious authority or indeed for its theological distinction as a point of dispute, but due to its being manipulated as an historical narrative by adherents of the Ḥanbalite school. He argues that this was part of their strategy to assert their orthodox credentials and thereby gain legitimacy as a school. They reshaped its narratives and topoi, situating Ibn Ḥanbal (d. 241/855) as a staunch defender of orthodoxy and champion of the episode.
Islamochristiana , 2016
After introducing Ṣāliḥ b. al-Ḥusayn al-Ǧa‘farī (d. 668/1270), the Egyptian Muslim author of an important work of anti-Christian polemic entitled Taḫǧīl man ḥarrafa al-Tawrāh wa-l-Inǧīl (‘The Shaming of Those Who Have Corrupted the Torah and the Gospel’), this article offers an annotated translation of the book’s eighth chapter, devoted to exposing the alleged corruption and selfcontradictoriness of the Christian creed. The charges are fundamentally two: that some parts of the creed logically contradict other parts; and that the creed is based neither on the revealed law of the Gospel nor on the words of Jesus or the Apostles. [Co-authored with Marek NASIŁOWSKI] “Medieval Muslim Polemics against the Christian Creed: The Critique of Ṣāliḥ b. al-Ḥusayn al-Ǧaʿfarī (d. 668/1270)”, Islamochristiana 42 (2016) 71-102.