The Caliph and the Heretic (original) (raw)
2015
Abbasid society in ninth-century Iraq faced the challenge of reconciling the role of its many non-Muslim citizens with Islamic norms and governance, as seen in “The Refutation of Christians” by al-Jāḥiẓ (d. 868/869 [255 A.H.]). Al-Jāḥiẓ moved in circles only one step removed from those of the Christian and Jewish intellectuals he came to criticize in the work, and he likely composed it just prior to Caliph al-Mutawakkil’s watershed reforms in non-Muslim policy. Thus, the “Refutation” is a primary source for understanding shifting Muslim sensibilities toward Christians’ societal role in a religiously diverse realm, but its polemic approach makes it problematic to analyze historically. This dissertation seeks to make “The Refutation of Christians” more accessible as a historical source by performing a contextual analysis of its argumentation. Al-Jāḥiẓ’ rhetorical strategy is to explain away factors behind popular Muslim preferences for Christians over Jews, and then to advance positive reasons for considering Christians more harmful than Jews. Argumentation analysis using the pragma-dialectical approach highlights salient social points at issue between Christians and Muslims of the time. First, al-Jāḥiẓ’ dispute is not directly with Christians, but with Muslims who show them too much respect and liberality. Second, he must reframe certain facts about Christians that are too generally accepted to contradict, including memories of Arabs’ pre-Islamic and early Islamic contacts with Christians, and Christian intellectuals’ crucial role in perpetuating Greek scientific works. He turns these favorable perceptions into liabilities, arguing that Christians’ intellectualism diverts weak Muslims from the faith and their social position violates Christian-Muslim agreements. Finally, in contrast to the jurists’ approach, he argues for enforcing the original intention of these agreements rather than trying to demonstrate specific historical stipulations. Al-Jāḥiẓ’ ideology aligns with al-Mutawakkil’s Qurʾanically charged edicts, in that Christians, far from being “closest in friendship” (5:82), are those with whom believers must not make any alliance (5:51). As such, the “Refutation” reveals the battle lines between more lenient, popular Muslim attitudes and a stricter position promoted by al-Jāḥiẓ and enforced by al-Mutawakkil.
Heretics, Dissidents, and Society: Narrating the Trial of John bar ʿAbdun
Dumbarton Oaks Papers 76, 2022
In 1029, the resident synod of Constantinople, led by Patriarch Alexios the Stoudite, condemned the Jacobite patriarch John VIII bar ʿAbdun as a heretic. This event has been woven into modern narratives of Byzantine persecution and intolerance against the Syrian Miaphysite Christians in the recently conquered eastern territories of the Byzantine Empire, especially the city of Melitene. Building on a recent reevaluation of that prevailing interpretation, the present article reads our key narrative sources for the trial of John bar ʿAbdun as reflecting and constituting competing arguments not only about the Jacobite patriarch’s innocence or guilt, but also, more subtly, about the very terms in which these questions should be framed. It argues that the ethnic and religious categories mentioned in the narratives did not correspond to fixed social groups but rather needed to be mobilized and activated, and that this is an important part of what certain historical actors described by the narratives — and the narratives themselves — were seeking to do. More broadly, the unexpected convergences among the narratives, and unexpected strategies within individual narratives, demonstrate that we must rethink how we narrate the history of medieval ecclesiastical disputes, ethnic and religious communities, and Christian attitudes towards orthodoxy and empire.
"Religious dissension in al-Andalus: ways of exclusion and inclusion"
What were the mechanisms by which exclusion of heretics, apostates and innovators operated in a pre-modem Islamic society, that of al-Andalus? What were the mechanisms or strategies by which those labelled as heretics or as religious dissenters managed not to be excluded or if they had been, managed to be reincorporated into their social and religious milieu? This article seeks to provide answers to these questions, drawing on previous studies carried out on accusations of apostasy, heresy, innovation and blasphemy hat took place in al-Andalus.
Judeo-Christian Theological Challenges to Islam's Prophet-Caliph Paradigm
Whereas the roles of prophet and king, with a few exceptions (Moses and possibly Samuel), were kept separate according to the Old Testament historical records, Islam conflates the function of political leader with the function of prophet. Muhammad, who claimed to be both prophet and caliph, stands as the abiding archetype of the Islamic paradigm. This paper’s presenter will maintain that Islam’s conflation of these roles has always been and will continue to be a recipe for political corruption. The conflation of these roles is further challenged by the New Testament picture of how Jesus Christ’s prophetic and kingly work must be understood as paradoxically related rather than in a confused synthesis. The presenter will also cite evidence for how the New Testament, in a consistent manner, properly construes the prophetic and kingly work of Christ. Compared with the paradigm suggested by the whole of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures, the presenter will set out to show how the Islamic paradigm appears as foreign and contradictory to the biblical testimony concerning the relationship between the religious and political spheres.
David Bertaina, Sandra Toenies Keating, Mark N. Swanson, Alexander Treiger (eds.), Heirs of the Apostles: Studies on Arabic Christianity in Honor of Sidney H. Griffith (Arabic Christianity 1, Leiden: Brill), 254–81, 2018
This study juxtaposes the concerns of Catholicos Timothy I (r. 780–823), leader of the Church of the East, with those of al-Jāḥiẓ (about 776–868/9), a popular Muslim writer, regarding the dangers for each community when Christians appear as plaintiffs or defendants in Islamic courts. Timothy’s Canons attempt to obviate some of the reasons Christians might voluntarily appeal to Islamic courts rather than resolving disputes within the church, and Canon 12 in particular uses a biblical turn of language to condemn this practice. By contrast, cases involving a Muslim disputant had to be tried in Islamic courts, and al-Jāḥiẓ argues that judges who mete out sentences favorable to Christians in such cases jeopardize the rightful social order of Muslims in regard to ahl al-dhimma (protected people).
Miqot: Jurnal Ilmu-Ilmu Keislaman, 2014
The era of the early ʽAbbâsid caliphate made an important mark on the history of the world by the event of the Greek translation movement, i.e. the translation of Greek thoughts into the Arabic language. In addition to this development, the era also saw the flourishing of interreligious discourse, in both polemical literatures and religious debates, especially between Christians and Muslims. This article tries to describe how those two historical remarks are correlated under the light of other factors such as politics and religious identity. The earliest debate was happened between caliph al-Mahdî (r. 755-785 CE) and a Nestorian Catholicos, Timothy I (728-823 CE), as the first sample of religious discourses. The second one is the debate between the caliph al-Maʽmûn (r. 813-833 CE), who arranged many religious debates in his court, with Theodore Abû Qurra (755 – 830 CE), Bishop of Harran. By knowing the motives of the two caliphs who sponsored those events, readers would catch a better picture of the web of contexts at that time.
The famous debate between the Muslim Caliph al-Mahdi and Patriarch Timothy I of the Church of the East in 781 AD, which was transcribed by the Patriarch afterward in Aramaic and which is retained in various Aramaic and Arabic manuscripts till today, took place over the course of two days (at least in the original Aramaic version). It is the contention of this essay that while the overall organization of the recorded debate is difficult to decipher (since it is arguably a true, if not word-for-word, record of the actual debate), there is a shift in focus between the first and second days: while the content of the first day is almost entirely theological, the second day shifts its focus toward political tensions while keeping a theological veneer. This premise will allow me to offer a new, somewhat esoteric, interpretation of Timothy's concluding image of the "pearl in the dark house."