Muslims: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices

Citation preview

1111 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1 2 3111 4 5 6 7 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 30111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40111 1 21111

Muslims

This concise and authoritative guide provides a survey of Islamic history and thought from its formative period to the present day. It examines the unique elements which have combined to form Islam, in particular the Qurtazil• doctrine. Ibn Babawayh, on the other hand, came before the major impact of Mu>tazil• thought among the Sh•>a, although some tendency in the direction of rationalism is to be noted in writers from earlier in the tenth century.

Later theologians Mu>tazil• theology proper came into the Sh•>a through the work of alShaykh al-Muf•d (d. 1022), al-Shar•f al-Murta∂å (d. 1044) and al-ˇ¥s• (d. 1067). While the basis for the particulars of the Mu>tazil• position was already firmly established in the Sh•>a (and, some would say, was there since the time of Ja>far al-Íådiq), it is these authors who emphasized the use of reason in support of the doctrine, seeing the need to defend the religion on that basis. Al-Shaykh al-Muf•d argues for a less radical type of Mu>tazil• stance than some of the later authors; he avoids saying that people are the actual “creators” of their own acts and that the Qur• al-Ash>ar• in the sense that his writings became the basis for all later Sh•>• exposition of theology, being the virtually unquestioned source. Why the Sh•>a adopted this rationalist position in theology would appear to be connected to the need for authority. While the Imåm was in the world, the source of authority for the Sh•>• community was clear: it was the Imåm; being an authoritative source was the very purpose of his presence in the world. The Sunn•s were, in the Sh•>• view, reduced to mere conjecture on all elements of their religion. With the ghayba of the twelfth Imåm, authority first came through the series of four representatives who were able to put questions to the Imåm and bring back answers. With the greater occultation, however, this could no longer happen, although the appearance of the Imåm to a worthy individual, either in reality or in a dream, was at least held to be possible. In the absence of the Imåm, then, authority was in the hands of the learned classes. But this was no better than the Sunn• position, which the Sh•>a had criticized for having no sound basis. Mu>tazil• theology provided a way around this problem, by suggesting that reason alone could provide the certitude which is required. Deduction based on reason, therefore, rather than tradition as used by the Sunn•s, was the ideal replacement for the Imåm, whose rulings would only conform to the laws of reason anyway. As the line of Sh•>• thought developed, al-Murta∂å argued that reason could prove the necessity of the existence of the Imåm in the first place, providing the proof for the key element of Sh•>• thought that the Mu>tazila lacked. He argued that the office of the Imåm was necessary and that [t]he way to prove its necessity is reason, contrary to the doctrine of the Mu>tazilites and their like. It is necessary only for bringing those who are under moral obligation close to what is for their interests and for keeping them far from what is harmful.14

Sh•>• legal thought and practice In the legal field, a late development is quite clear also, as in theology. The tenth-century work by al-Kulayn•, al-Kåf• f • >Ilm al-D•n (“The Sufficient in the Knowledge of Religion”), marks a pivotal point in

132 Alternative visions of classical Islamic identity the emergence of defined Sh•>• law. This work gathers together traditions, either from the Imåms or from Mu˙ammad and transmitted through the Imåms, which serve as the basis for all discussions (both legal and theological) in this period.15 The writing of the book is significant and contains, by its very composition, a polemical element. The book clearly wants to argue that the Imåm in the world is no more. No longer can that source of authority be utilized, and the Sh•>a, like the Sunn•s, must turn to written sources to substantiate their position. The writing of a work such as al-Kulayn•’s marks a stage in the emergence of the Sh•>a in which the learned classes, who had control of the sources, were starting to assert their authority; in such a way, it was ensured that any potential claimants to the position of the Imåm were effectively silenced. Al-Kulayn•’s book is one of four, the others written by Ibn Babawayh and al-ˇ¥s• (the latter having two to his credit), which are considered the counterparts to the six authoritative collections of ˙ad•th in the Sunn• world. Without the Imåm, or his representatives, in the world, the specific duties assigned to him were said to be lapsed. These included leading the holy war ( jihåd), division of the booty of war, leading the Friday prayer, putting juridical decisions into effect, imposing legal penalties, and receiving the religious taxes.16 The absence of the Imåm left the community leaderless, and it fell to al-T¥s• in the eleventh century to enunciate a theory of juridical authority being in the hands of those knowledgeable in jurisprudence, the fuqahå• jurisprudence was, for the most part, late in being written (fourteenth to sixteenth centuries), at least in comparison with the much earlier Sunn• development. To some extent, therefore, the Sh•>a depended upon the principles already enunciated within Sunn• thought in order to develop the legal basis of their society; the differences between the two are, as a result, quite slight. The Sh•>a, in this view, are little more than another legal school, parallel to the four major Sunn•

The Sh•>a 133 1111 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1 2 3111 4 5 6 7 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 30111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40111 1 21111

schools. Minor differences occur in the prayer ritual and the fast of Rama∂ån, but these are precisely of a nature which would be seen as a variation between schools of law. Friday noon prayer is not as important to the Sh•>a because of the absence of the Imåm who is supposed to lead that prayer, although this became a problem of some seriousness in juridical discussions. Various practices are enjoined, such as visiting the tombs of the Imåms, and these visits are conducted with extensive rituals on a par with those of the ˙ajj. There are, of course, some significant differences between Sunn• and Sh•>• practices. The phenomenon of “temporary marriage,” mut >a, considered to be referred to in Qur• history. The phrase, “I testify that >Al• is the wal• [‘friend’] of God” is added to the two-part Sunn• witness to faith; this is, however, a fairly late addition, mention of it not being made in the earliest texts of Sh•>• law other than that of Ibn Babawayh, who condemns its usage. The sixteenth century saw arguments in favour of its employment, urged probably by the political aims of the rulers at that time, the Safavids, who instituted the Sh•>• position as the state religion of Iran in 1501. The argument for the basis of the statement as opposed to its ritual employment, however, is to be found quite early in Sh•>• thought, for example in al-Kulayn• who argues that the belief in the wilåya of >Al• is a fundamental tenet of the Sh•>a, and that the belief simply in “There is no god but God and Mu˙ammad is the messenger of God” is not sufficient to ensure salvation; clearly, the third element of the testimony is needed in the belief of the individual, even if in this early period it was not actually part of the ritual repetition of the shahåda.20 Additionally, Ibn Babawayh reports the following tradition about Få†ima bint Asad, the mother of >Al•. Mu˙ammad is quoted as saying that immediately after her death: She was asked about her Lord, and she said, “My Lord is Allåh”. And she was asked about her Prophet and she replied, “Mu˙ammad”. And she was asked about her Imåm and wal• and she faltered and paused. And I said to her, “Thy son, thy son”. So she said, “My Imåm is my son”. Thereupon they [the two questioning angels who appear to everyone after death] departed from her and said, “We have no power over you . . .”.21

134 Alternative visions of classical Islamic identity Undoubtedly, it was the pressure of Sunn• condemnation which did not allow this statement to enter the Sh•>• shahåda from the very beginning and it was only after many centuries that it was actually approved under more propitious political circumstances. A prominent celebration which is not found in the Sunn• world revolves around the commemoration of the death of Óusayn, the son of >Al•. Culminating on the tenth day of the first month of the year, Mu˙arram, the day of >AshuråAl• became the operative motif in understanding Óusayn’s death and the celebration of this became the central event of the Sh•>• religious calendar. Visitation of sacred places, especially the tomb of Óusayn in Karbala, play an important role in the celebrations on this day.22 Generally, these ritual differences between the Sh•>a and the Sunn•s have gained symbolic value for the Sh•>a in terms of providing a distinct (and, implicitly, correct) religious identity, especially in times of political antagonism with the Sunn• world.23

Variants of the Sh•>a Given that a fundamental notion among the Sh•>a was the necessity of the identification of an Imåm in each generation, it is hardly surprising that rival claimants appeared at various points in history. We thus see the emergence of several branches within the Sh•>a, each of which differed over the line of descent of authority at a certain historical moment. The Ismå>•l•s, Zayd•s and Druze (Dur¥z in Arabic) are three such prominent groups. Some of these splits account for their origins in terms of differences over political strategy. The Zayd•s, for example, picture their origins in armed revolt against the Umayyad rulers. They were formed as a group in support of Zayd ibn >Al•, a grandson of Óusayn ibn >Al•, who was defeated and killed in 740. While in certain situations these small offshoots of the Sh•>a have proven politically volatile, throughout a good portion of history they have been politically quiescent, looking forward to the end of time and the return of the Mahd•. This simply goes along with the doctrine of the occultation of the Imåm when faced with the political realities of the historical situation. The Ismå>•l•s are particularly noted for their “inner” interpretations of much of Muslim practice, looking to make the point that the law was to benefit the soul as well

The Sh•>a 135 1111 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1 2 3111 4 5 6 7 8 9 20111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 30111 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 40111 1 21111

as the body. For them, the person of the Imåm is a key link to God who provides the authoritative interpretation of all Islamic matters.24 The central issue which separates all of the Sh•>a of the Sunn•s, then, is this issue of the Imåm and his role. The answer to this was not, for the Sh•>a, straightforward because of issues related to identifying the person of the Imåm and dealing with his absence (in those branches of the Sh•>a which held to that idea). As is always the case, historical contexts affected the way in which this doctrine evolved but it is clear that the fundamental disagreement between Muslims over the nature of community leadership had a long-lasting and profound effect upon the unity of the umma.

9

Í¥f• devotion

The question of the origins of Sufism (taßawwuf ), the mystical aspect within Islam, and its devotees, the Í¥f•s, seems to have attracted its own particular type of dispute within the academic study of Islam. The reason for this dispute would appear to go back once again to a memory of medieval (and later) polemic between Christians and Muslims. Christians have often pictured Islam as a very sensually based religion: Mu˙ammad’s multiple marriages, the Qur