Read on Twitter
Perhaps the most profound thing I took away from this book club session is that we shouldn't see the battle between Mu'tazilis and proto-Sunnis in the Mihna as one between rationalists and traditionalists, but as between state control of Islam and religious independence. (1/) https://twitter.com/Evollaqi/status/1292067191337222145
The Mu'tazilis themselves were probably sincere in their beliefs.
They made rational arguments that tawhīd demands the Qur'an cannot be co-eternal with God, and that the shari'ah and Islamic metaphysics were in principle knowable without revelation. (2/)
They made rational arguments that tawhīd demands the Qur'an cannot be co-eternal with God, and that the shari'ah and Islamic metaphysics were in principle knowable without revelation. (2/)
Support for the Mihna would likely also have been sincere.
They were convinced by their version of Islam, and would have wanted to promote what they saw as the haqq and suppress what they saw as baatil. (3/)
They were convinced by their version of Islam, and would have wanted to promote what they saw as the haqq and suppress what they saw as baatil. (3/)
However, the question arises: why is it that the Abbasid Caliph al-Ma'mun adopted Mu'tazilism, and sought to enforce it?
Well, it looks like it serves his power. (4/)
Well, it looks like it serves his power. (4/)
If the Qur'an is created, then it belongs to a specific time, and thus might not contain universal legislation, nor a universally worthwhile form of presenting metaphysical truths. (5/)
This would indicate that the Caliph, as God's vicegerent on earth, would have the power to make and unmake legislation appropriate for their time, and propound metaphysical truths in their own way - rather than being bound to the Qur'an, the Sunnah, and the ulema. (6/)
(A vision similar to how many Shi'is conceptualise the position of the Imam, and might explain the to this day ongoing appeal of Mu'tazilism within Shi'ism.) (7/)
Similarly, if reason without revelation is sufficient to derive the divine law (shari'ah) and metaphysical truths - then God's vicegerent on earth need not rely on the Qur'an, Sunnah, and ulema in order to make and unmake law or to profound metaphysical truths. (8/)
In other words, it seems there is the potential within Mu'tazilism (perhaps not adopted by most Mu'tazilis themselves) to justify the complete State appropriation of Islam. (9/)
Had the Mihna succeeded, Islam might have become a pure tool of the State.
The Qur'an abandoned, altered, or interpreted according to the State; the Prophetic Sunnah replaced by the Caliphal sunnah; agents of the State's monopoly on the use of force instead of ulema. (10/)
The Qur'an abandoned, altered, or interpreted according to the State; the Prophetic Sunnah replaced by the Caliphal sunnah; agents of the State's monopoly on the use of force instead of ulema. (10/)
The inheritance of religious authority by military might and bloodline, rather than religious knowledge and teaching asanid back to the Prophet saw.
The hadith "the scholars are the inheritors of the Prophets" needs to be understood in this context. (11/)
The hadith "the scholars are the inheritors of the Prophets" needs to be understood in this context. (11/)
Resisting the Mihna therefore seems to be about resisting the corruption of Islam by the State, the promotion of the egalitarian and indeed reason-based nature of scholarly authority as opposed to the blood-hierarchical and imposed by force nature of State authority (12/)
- alongside opposition to State tyranny.
Hobbes' Leviathan was the sovereign who wielded both the sword of temporal authority and the sceptre of clerical authority.
Opposition to the Mihna was opposition to an Islamic Leviathan. (13/)
Hobbes' Leviathan was the sovereign who wielded both the sword of temporal authority and the sceptre of clerical authority.
Opposition to the Mihna was opposition to an Islamic Leviathan. (13/)
It also seems to have been a bulwark against secularism.
It was not the medieval European division between Church and State which gave way to secularism, but the early modern European vesting of religious authority in the State which did. (14/)
It was not the medieval European division between Church and State which gave way to secularism, but the early modern European vesting of religious authority in the State which did. (14/)
Likewise, the division between the ulema's authority and the State's authority didn't give rise to secularism - but the dismantling of this order by colonialism did. (15/)
The reason being, whilst a theocratic State might initially be the furthest thing from secularism imaginable, such an arrangement is inherently secularising. (16/)
Firstly, with no independent religious institutions in society, once the theocratic State dispenses with religion there is nothing left.
Secondly, if such a State gets conquered or otherwise disappears, religion disappears. (17/)
Secondly, if such a State gets conquered or otherwise disappears, religion disappears. (17/)
Thirdly, it means the only sphere of life that isn't subsumed to the State's interests is that which doesn't concern the State: ie what one does in the privacy of one's own home.
This becomes the only space where activity in the service of God rather than the State is possible.
This becomes the only space where activity in the service of God rather than the State is possible.
Fourthly, the State's claim to religious authority is based on the notion that reason alone (or something else non-revelatory, eg the "collective will") is sufficient to derive legislation / moral truths and metaphysics. (19/)
This leaves no room for religion.
If religion agrees with what reason (or the collective will etc) is entirely sufficient to give you, then religion is superfluous.
And if religion disagrees, then religion must be abandoned as morally wrong or metaphysically incorrect. (20/)
If religion agrees with what reason (or the collective will etc) is entirely sufficient to give you, then religion is superfluous.
And if religion disagrees, then religion must be abandoned as morally wrong or metaphysically incorrect. (20/)
Such an understanding of the relationship between religion and reason is not one which religion can survive. (21/)
Fifthly, religion's appropriation by the State is inherently secularising as it will eventually become clear how much the State has mangled religion to suit its own interests. (22/)
Existing religion would be correctly seen as a human-made construct and abandoned, and the quest to uncover the "true" religion nigh on impossible. (And even were it possible, how could one believe in a religion God let completely go astray?) (23/)
What's also interesting about all of this is that a common maxim is that a society which isn't based on reason must be based on force.
The argument goes: if moral truths can't be rationally known, then one can only get adherence to them through violence or emotional manipulation
The argument goes: if moral truths can't be rationally known, then one can only get adherence to them through violence or emotional manipulation
Similar could be said about metaphysical truths.
However, the example of the Mihna demonstrates something rather different. (25/)
However, the example of the Mihna demonstrates something rather different. (25/)
The claim that morality/law and metaphysics are completely amenable to reason used to justify absolute State power.
It is no surprise al-Ma'mun enforced the Mihna through a militarised force loyal to him (the Shurta) (26/)
It is no surprise al-Ma'mun enforced the Mihna through a militarised force loyal to him (the Shurta) (26/)
- and sought to minimise Qadhi courts with Shurta courts (ie his military men as judge, jury, and executioner) as far as possible.
This is not unique to al-Ma'mun either: countless grabs of authoritarian State power backed by mass violence have been done in the name of reason.
This is not unique to al-Ma'mun either: countless grabs of authoritarian State power backed by mass violence have been done in the name of reason.
From Robespierre's Terror and Napoleon's expansionism, to settler colonialism, to the numerous communist experiments of the 20th century.
Tradition has always been the biggest roadblock to the aim of those who would violently sweep away existing society (28/)
Tradition has always been the biggest roadblock to the aim of those who would violently sweep away existing society (28/)
and enforce their own vision on it in the name of rational planning.
Moreover, as demonstrated by the mainstream Sunni tradition, tradition need not be opposed to reason either.
Rather, reason is firstly to establish the validity of the tradition, and secondly reason (29/)
Moreover, as demonstrated by the mainstream Sunni tradition, tradition need not be opposed to reason either.
Rather, reason is firstly to establish the validity of the tradition, and secondly reason (29/)
takes place situated within the context of the tradition.
Tradition provides a set of shared assumptions and norms which can act as an egalitarian framework for reasoned discussion, rather than a realm of only power or emotive claims. (30/)
Tradition provides a set of shared assumptions and norms which can act as an egalitarian framework for reasoned discussion, rather than a realm of only power or emotive claims. (30/)
A society which completely abandons reason would just be one of power or emotion.
But a society which tries to hold to an abstract "reason" unmoored from any tradition becomes one of the pure exercise of power too. (31/)
But a society which tries to hold to an abstract "reason" unmoored from any tradition becomes one of the pure exercise of power too. (31/)
Reason-based tradition and tradition-based reason seem to be the golden mean between these two extremes. (32/)
Had Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal not taken the stand he did, Islam may look unrecognisable today, military and blood-based hierarchical State power may have been immense, and secularism may have won the show.
He likely changed the course of human history. May God have mercy on him.
He likely changed the course of human history. May God have mercy on him.
Similar can be said for Imam Shafi'i's insistence on the authenticated Prophetic Sunnah as the source of Islam, and other traditionists. (34/)
The Zoom book club this week was led by @Lehbistan, who set the readings, gave a truly excellent presentation, and answered out dozens of questions for him.
He's my main source for this thread!
Thank you for those who read this far. (35/35)
He's my main source for this thread!
Thank you for those who read this far. (35/35)
