I. The first century of ‘Abbásid rule was marked, as we have seen, by a great intellectual agitation. All sorts of new Rationalism and Free-thought. ideas were in the air. It was an age of discovery and awakening. In a marvellously brief space the diverse studies of Theology, Law, Medicine, Philosophy, Mathematics, Astronomy, and Natural Science attained their maturity, if not their highest development. Even if some pious Moslems looked askance at the foreign learning and its professors, an enlightened spirit generally prevailed. People took their cue from the court, which patronised, or at least tolerated,[688] scientific research as well as theological speculation.
These circumstances enabled the Mu‘tazilites (see p. [222] sqq.) to propagate their liberal views without hindrance, and finally The Mu‘tazilites and their opponents. to carry their struggle against the orthodox party to a successful issue. It was the same conflict that divided Nominalists and Realists in the days of Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and Occam. As often happens when momentous principles are at stake, the whole controversy between Reason and Revelation turned on a single question—"Is the Koran created or uncreated?" In other terms, is it the work of God or the Word of God? According to orthodox belief, it is uncreated and has existed with God from all eternity, being in its present form merely a transcript of the heavenly archetype.[689] Obviously this conception of the Koran as the direct and literal Word of God left no room for exercise of the understanding, but required of those who adopted it a dumb faith and a blind fatalism. There were many to whom the sacrifice did not seem too great. The Mu‘tazilites, on the contrary, asserted their intellectual freedom. It was possible, they said, to know God and distinguish good from evil without any Revelation at all. They admitted that the Koran was God's work, in the sense that it was produced by a divinely inspired Prophet, but they flatly rejected its deification. Some went so far as to criticise the 'inimitable' style, declaring that it could be surpassed in beauty and eloquence by the art of man.[690]
The Mu‘tazilite controversy became a burning question in the reign of Ma’mún (813-833 a.d.), a Caliph whose scientific enthusiasm and keen interest in religious matters we have already mentioned. He did not inherit the orthodoxy of his father, Hárún al-Rashíd; and it was believed that he was at heart a zindíq. His liberal tendencies would have been wholly admirable if they had not been marred by excessive intolerance towards those who held opposite views to his own. In 833 a.d., the year of his death, he promulgated a decree which bound all Moslems to accept the Mu‘tazilite doctrine as to the creation of the Koran on pain of losing their civil rights, and at the same time he established an inquisition (miḥna) in order to obtain the assent of the divines, judges, and doctors of law. Those who would not take the test were flogged and threatened with the sword. After Ma’mún's death the persecution still went on, Rationalism adopted and put in force by the Caliph Ma’mún. although it was conducted in a more moderate fashion. Popular feeling ran strongly against the Mu‘tazilites. The most prominent figure in the orthodox camp was the Imám Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, who firmly resisted the new dogma from the first. "But for him," says the Sunnite historian, Abu ’l-Maḥásin, "the beliefs of a great number would have been corrupted."[691] Neither threats nor entreaties could shake his resolution, and when he was scourged by command of the Caliph Mu‘taṣim, the palace was in danger of being wrecked by an angry mob which had assembled outside to hear the result of the trial. The Mu‘tazilite dogma remained officially in force until it was abandoned Mutawakkil returns to orthodoxy. by the Caliph Wáthiq and once more declared heretical by the cruel and bigoted Mutawakkil (847 a.d.). From that time to this the victorious party have sternly suppressed every rationalistic movement in Islam.
According to Steiner, the original Mu‘tazilite heresy arose in the bosom of Islam, independently of any foreign influence, The end of the Mu‘tazilites. but, however that may be, its later development was largely affected by Greek philosophy. We need not attempt to follow the recondite speculations of Abú Hudhayl al-‘Alláf († about 840 a.d.) of his contemporaries, al-Naẓẓám, Bishr b. al-Mu‘tamir, and others, and of the philosophical schools of Baṣra and Baghdád in which the movement died away. Vainly they sought to replace the Muḥammadan idea of God as will by the Aristotelian conception of God as law. Their efforts to purge the Koran of anthropomorphism made no impression on the faithful, who ardently hoped to see God in Paradise face to face. What they actually achieved was little enough. Their weapons of logic and dialectic were turned against them with triumphant success, and scholastic theology was founded on the ruins of Rationalism. Indirectly, however, the Mu‘tazilite principles leavened Muḥammadan thought to a considerable extent and cleared the way for other liberal movements, like the Fraternity of the Ikhwánu ’l-Ṣafá, which endeavoured to harmonise authority with reason, and to construct a universal system of religious philosophy.
These 'Brethren of Purity,'[692] as they called themselves, compiled a great encyclopædic work in fifty tractates (Rasá’il). Of The Ikhwánu ’l-Ṣafá. the authors, who flourished at Baṣra towards the end of the tenth century, five are known to us by name: viz., Abú Sulaymán Muḥammad b. Ma‘shar al-Bayusti or al-Muqaddasí (Maqdisí), Abu ’l-Ḥasan ‘Alí b. Hárún al-Zanjání, Abú Aḥmad al-Mihrajání, al-‘Awfí, and Zayd b. Rifá‘a. "They formed a society for the pursuit of holiness, purity, and truth, and established amongst themselves a doctrine whereby they hoped to win the approval of God, maintaining that the Religious Law was defiled by ignorance and adulterated by errors, and that there was no means of cleansing and purifying it except philosophy, which united the wisdom of faith and the profit of research. They held that a perfect result would be reached if Greek philosophy were combined with Arabian religion. Accordingly they composed fifty tracts on every branch of philosophy, theoretical as well as practical, added a separate index, and entitled them the 'Tracts of the Brethren of Purity' (Rasá’ilu Ikhwán al-Ṣafá). The authors of this work concealed their names, but circulated it among the booksellers and gave it to the public. They filled their pages with devout phraseology, religious parables, metaphorical expressions, and figurative turns of style."[693] Nearly all the tracts have been translated into German by Dieterici, who has also drawn up an epitome of the whole encyclopædia in his Philosophie der Araber im X Jahrhundert. It would take us too long to describe the system of the Ikhwán, but the reader will find an excellent account of it in Stanley Lane-Poole's Studies in a Mosque, 2nd ed., p. 176 sqq. The view has recently been put forward that the Brethren of Purity were in some way connected with the Ismá‘ílí propaganda, and that their eclectic idealism represents the highest teaching of the Fátimids, Carmathians, and Assassins. Strong evidence in support of this theory is supplied by a MS. of the Bibliothèque Nationale (No. 2309 in De Slane's Catalogue), which contains, together with fragments of the Rasá’il, a hitherto unknown tract entitled the Jámi‘a or 'Summary.'[694] The latter purports to be the essence and crown of the fifty Rasá’il, it is manifestly Ismá‘ílite in character, and, assuming that it is genuine, we may, I think, agree with the conclusions which its discoverer, M. P. Casanova, has stated in the following passage:—
"Surtout je crois être dans le vrai en affirmant que les doctrines philosophiques des Ismaïliens sont contenues tout entières dans les The doctrines of the Brethren of Purity identical with the esoteric philosophy of the Ismá‘ílís. Epîtres des Frères de la Pureté. Et c’est ce qui explique 'la séduction extraordinaire que la doctrine exerçait sur des hommes sérieux.'[695] En y ajoutant la croyance en l'imám caché (al-imám al-mastúr) qui doit apparaître un jour pour établir le bonheur universel, elle réalisait la fusion de toutes les doctrines idéalistes, du messianisme et du platonisme. Tant que l'imám restait caché, il s'y mêlait encore une saveur de mystère qui attachait les esprits les plus élevés. . . . En tous cas, on peut affirmer que les Carmathes et les Assassins ont été profondément calomniés quand ils out été accusés par leurs adversaires d'athéisme et de débauche. Le fetwa d'Ibn Taimiyyah, que j'ai cité plus haut, prétend que leur dernier degré dans l'initiation (al-balágh al-akbar) est la négation même du Créateur. Mais la djâmi‘at que nous avons découverte est, comme tout l'indique, le dernier degré de la science des Frères de la Pureté et des Ismaïliens; il n'y a rien de fondé dans une telle accusation. La doctrine apparait très pure, très élevée, très simple même: je repète que c'est une sorte de panthéisme mécaniste et esthétique qui est absolument opposé au scepticisme et au matérialisme, car il repose sur l'harmonie générale de toutes les parties du monde, harmonie voulue par le Créateur parce qu'elle est la beauté même.
"Ma conclusion sera que nous avons là un exemple de plus dans l’histoire d'une doctrine très pure et très élevée en théorie, devenue, entre les mains des fanatiques et des ambitieux, une source d'actes monstrueux et méritant l'infamie qui est attachée a ce nom historique d'Assassins."
Besides the Mu‘tazilites, we hear much of another class of heretics who are commonly grouped together under the name of Zindíqs.
"It is well known," says Goldziher,[696] "that the earliest persecution was directed against those individuals who managed The Zindíqs. more or less adroitly to conceal under the veil of Islam old Persian religious ideas. Sometimes indeed they did not consider any disguise to be necessary, but openly set up dualism and other Persian or Manichæan doctrines, and the practices associated therewith, against the dogma and usage of Islam. Such persons were called Zindíqs, a term which comprises different shades of heresy and hardly admits of simple definition. Firstly, there are the old Persian families incorporated in Islam who, following the same path as the Shu‘úbites, have a national interest in the revival of Persian religious ideas and traditions, and from this point of view react against the Arabian character of the Muḥammadan system. Then, on the other hand, there are freethinkers, who oppose in particular the stubborn dogma of Islam, reject positive religion, and acknowledge only the moral law. Amongst the latter there is developed a monkish asceticism extraneous to Islam and ultimately traceable to Buddhistic influences."
The ‘Abbásid Government, which sought to enforce an official standard of belief, was far less favourable to religious liberty than the Umayyads had been. Orthodox and heretic alike fell under its ban. While Ma’mún harried pious Sunnites, his immediate predecessors raised a hue and cry against Zindíqs. The Caliph Mahdí distinguished himself by an organised persecution of these enemies of the faith. He appointed a Grand Inquisitor (Ṣáḥibu ’l-Zanádiqa[697] or ‘Arífu ’l-Zanádiqa) to discover and hunt them down. If they would Persecution of Zindíqs. not recant when called upon, they were put to death and crucified, and their books[698] were cut to pieces with knives.[699] Mahdí's example was followed by Hádí and Hárún al-Rashíd. Some of the ‘Abbásids, however, were less severe. Thus Khaṣíb, Manṣúr's physician, was a Zindíq who professed Christianity,[700] and in the reign of Ma’mún it became the mode to affect Manichæan opinions as a mark of elegance and refinement.[701]