v. The fifth religious duty of the Moslem is the pilgrimage (hajj) to Mecca, which should be performed once by every Moslem “if he is able,” that is if he can provide or obtain the means to support himself on pilgrimage and his family during his Pilgrimage. absence, and if he is physically capable. The pilgrimage is made at one time of the (Moslem) year, namely, from the 7th to the 10th of the month Dhu’l-Hijja. For the arrangements for the journey from various countries to Mecca see [Caravan]. When the pilgrim arrives within five or six miles of the holy city he puts off his ordinary dress after ablution and prayer, and puts on the two seamless wrappers which form the dress of the pilgrim (the ihrām), who goes without head-covering or boots or shoes. He must not shave at all, or trim the nails or anoint the head during the ceremonial period. The chief parts of the ceremonial are the visit to the sacred mosque (masjīd ul-ḥarām), the kissing of the black stone, the compassing of the Ka‘ba (the Ṭawāf) seven times, three times running, four times slowly, the visit to the Maqām Ibrahīm, the ascent of Mount Ṣafā and running from it to Mount Marwa seven times, the run to Mount ‘Arafāt, hearing a sermon, and going to Muzdalifa, where he stays the night, the throwing of stones at the three pillars in Minā on the great feast day, and the offering of sacrifice there (for the localities see [Mecca]). After the accomplishment of these ceremonies the ordinary dress is resumed, the pilgrimage is finished, but the pilgrim usually remains another three days in Mecca, then visits Medina to pay his respects to the tomb of Mahomet. Beside the hajj (great pilgrimage) Islam also recognizes the merit of the ‘umra (or lesser pilgrimage), i.e. a religious visit to Mecca at any time accompanied by most of the ceremonies of the hajj.
The ceremonies of the hajj have been described by several European travellers who have witnessed them, such as J. L. Burckhardt in 1814, Sir Richard Burton in 1853 (see bibliography to [Mecca]). A concise account of them is given in T. P. Hughes, Notes on Muhammadanism (3rd ed., London, 1894). Details in vol. i. of Bukhārī’s traditions (Houdas and Marcais’s French translation, i. 493-567).
The Development of Islam.—The battle of Siffīn (657) between ‘Ali and Moawiya was the occasion of the first breach in the unity of Islam, and the results remain to this day. The occasion was in the first case political, but politics were at that time too intimately connected with religion to be considered apart from it. After the battle (see [Caliphate]) ‘Alī was practically compelled to submit his claims to arbitration, whereupon a number of his supporters broke away from him, saying that there should have been no appeal save to the Book of God. These men were for the most part country Arabs, and, inspired by the free spirit of the desert, were democratic, claiming that the caliph should be elected by the whole community from any family (and not from the Koreish alone), and that the caliph might be deposed for sin. A few extremists were republicans and would do without a caliph altogether. The whole party was known as the Kharijites (Khārijiyya or Khawārij). The Moslems who disagreed with them were regarded by them as renegades and were to be put to death. They were soon divided into extremists and moderates. The former put to death the children of unbelievers and refused to hold intercourse in daily life with unbelievers. The moderates, who came to be known as Ibadites (from their leader ‘Abdallah ibn ‘Ibād), would allow the children of unbelievers to grow up, and would then deal with them according to their choice. In ordinary life they would mix with all men, but marriage with other Moslems outside their own ranks was forbidden. These still remain in Oman, parts of Algeria and East Africa.
Another party, consisting mainly of city Arabs infected with Persian ideas as to the divinity of the ruler, clung to ‘Alī with inconvenient affection. They regarded ‘Alī and his descendants as the only legitimate caliphs, and came to be known as Shi‘ites (q.v.). They remain to-day the largest part of Islam outside orthodoxy. During the Omayyad caliphate (661-750) there were three centres of religious thought and influence; students and teachers often passed from one to the other, thus making universal the teachings which in their origin were due to local circumstances. These centres were Damascus (the seat of the caliphate), Medina and the East (Irak, &c.). In Damascus the court was worldly and indifferent to the interests of Islam. The early Omayyads were distinguished for their striving after dominion (mulk). Instead of attempting to propagate Islam, they tolerated other religions and favoured Christians who were distinguished as poets (e.g. Akhtal) or officials (John of Damascus), or men likely to be of use to them in any way. The doctrines of Christianity began to influence even serious Moslems and to affect their way of stating Moslem belief. John of Damascus (d. before 767), the Greek theologian, and his pupil, Theodorus Abucara (d. 826), have written controversial works on Islam, from which it seems probable that disputations on subjects pertaining to religion were held between Christians and Moslems. Two schools of heretical Moslem sects arose under these influences—that of the Murjiites and that of the Qadarites. The Murjiites (“postponers”) were so called because they postponed the judgment of human actions until the Day of Judgment. In politics they accepted the Omayyads as de facto rulers, since they were Moslems, and left the judgment of their actions to God. As theologians they taught that religion consists in belief (imān) in the unity of God and in his apostle, and in that alone, consequently no one who held this faith would perish eternally, though he had been a sinner. This was opposed to the Khārijite doctrine that the unrepentant sinner would perish eternally, even though he had professed Islam.
The Qadarites were concerned with the doctrine of predestination and free-will. So long as Moslems were fighting the battles of Islam they naturally paid most attention to those revelations which laid stress on the absolute determination of a man’s destiny by God. They fought with great bravery because they believed that God had foreordained their death or life and they could not escape His will. In the quieter realm of town and court life and in their disputations with Christians they were called upon to reconcile this belief with the appeals made in the Koran to man’s own self-determination to good, to courage, &c. Mahomet was not a systematic theologian and had done nothing to help them. The Qadarites declared that man had power over his own actions. But the teaching of predestination had gained too great a hold on Moslems to be thus displaced. The teaching of the Qadarites was held to be heresy, and one of its first professors, Ma‘bad ul-Juhānī, was put to death in 699.[3] During this period Medina was the home of tradition. Those who had been in closest relation with the Prophet dwelt there. The very people of the city derived a certain splendour and authority from the fact that Mahomet had lived and was buried there. Free thought in religion had little chance of arising, less of expressing itself, in the holy city. But the Koran was diligently studied, traditions were collected (and invented) though not yet written in books, and innovation (bid‘a) was resolutely avoided. At the same time it really did contribute a new element to religious practice, for the custom (ijmā‘, see above) of Medina gained a certain authority even in Syria and the East.
In the East, on the other hand, there was more mental activity, and the religious teachers who came from Medina had to be prepared to meet with many questions. The wits of the Moslems were sharpened by daily contact with Christians, Buddhists, Manichaeans and Zoroastrians. Ḥasan ul-Baṣrī (q.v.), who has been claimed as one of the first mystics, also as one of the first systematic theologians of Islam, was remarkable alike for his personal piety and his orthodoxy. Yet it was among his pupils that the great rationalist movement originated. Its founder was Wāṣil ibn ‘Atā, who separated himself (whence his followers were called Motazilites, strictly Mu‘tazilites, “Separatists”) from his teacher and founded a school which became numerous and influential. The Mu‘tazilites objected to the attributes of God being considered in any way as entities beside God; they explained away the anthropomorphisms used in speaking of the deity; they regarded the Koran as created and as a product of Mahomet writing under the divine influence. Briefly, they asserted the supremacy of reason (‘aql) as distinct from faith received by tradition (naql). They also called themselves “the people of justice and unity” (Ahl ul-‘adl wat-tauḥīd). Such a faith as this naturally found favour rather with the thinking classes than with the uneducated multitude, and so went through many vicissitudes. At the time of its appearance and until the reign of Ma‘mūn its adherents were persecuted as heretics. After discussions among the theologians Ma‘mūn took the decided step of proclaiming that the Koran was created, and that a belief in this dogma was necessary. Other Mu‘tazilite doctrines were proclaimed later. Mu‘tazilites were appointed to official posts, and an inquisition (mīḥna) was appointed to enforce belief in their doctrines. This movement was strongly opposed by the orthodox and especially by Aḥmad ibn Hanbal (q.v.). By him the founding of theology on reason was rejected, and he suffered persecution for his faith (see W. N. Patton, Aḥmed ibn Hanbal and the Miḥna, Leiden, 1897). Mu‘tazilism retained its sway until 849, when the caliph Motawakkil again declared the Koran uncreate and restored orthodoxy. It was during the early years of the Abbasid rule that the four legal schools of Abū Hanīfa (d. 767), Mālik ibn Anas (d. 795), ash-Shāfi‘ī (d. 819) and Ibn Hanbal (d. 855) came into existence (see [Mahommedan Law]). As the bases of religion and law were the same, so the methods applied in the treatment of the one affected the other. Abū Hanīfa depended little on tradition, but referred back to the Koran, making use of individual opinion (ra‘y) as controlled by analogy (qīyās) with a written ordinance. Mālik Ibn Anas supplemented the Koran and Sunna by customary law founded largely on the custom (ijmā‘) of Medina, and by what he conceived to be for the public good (istiṣlāh). Shafi‘ī recognized tradition as equal to the Koran, and even as being able to supersede its ordinances, while he also recognized the universal custom (ijmā‘) of the Moslem world as divine and binding. His four bases of religion—Koran, sunna, qiyās and ijmā‘—have been generally accepted in Islam (see above). Ibn Hanbal’s position has been already mentioned. All these four schools are reckoned orthodox, and all orthodox Moslems belong to one or another of them. Another teacher of this time, who founded a school which did not succeed in being recognized as orthodox, was Dā‘ūd uz-Ẓāhirī. Trained as a Shafi‘ite, he became too strict for this school, rejected analogy, restricted ijmā‘ to the agreement or custom of the companions of Mahomet, and accepted the whole of the Koran and tradition in the most literal and external sense. His followers were called Ẓāhirites (i.e. externalists). After Ash‘arī’s time these principles were applied to theology by Ibn Hazm (q.v.) see I. Goldziher, Die Zahiriten, ihr Lehrsystem und ihre Geschichte (Leipzig, 1884).
Before turning to the reform of Ash‘arī and the introduction into orthodox theology of scholastic philosophy it is necessary to notice another phase of religious life which became the common property of orthodox and heretics. This was the introduction of asceticism in religions practice and of mysticism in religious thought. Sufi‘ism (q.v.), which combined these two, is rightly not counted among the sects of Islam. Asceticism seems to have won a certain amount of approval from Mahomet himself, who much respected the Christian monks. The attention paid in early Islam to the joys and punishments of the future life led to self-denial and simple living in this world. An Arabian writer, speaking of the simplicity of manners of the first four caliphs, says that their affairs were conducted with more consideration of the future life than of this world. Many Moslems went even farther than these caliphs, and gave up all concern as far as possible with the affairs of this world and lived in poverty, in wanderings or in retirement (see [Dervish]). For the historical development of this movement, with its accompanying mysticism, see [Sufi‘ism]. Ash‘arī (d. before 942) was for forty years a Mu‘tazilite, then became orthodox (see [Ash‘arī]), and at once applied rational methods for the support and interpretation of the orthodox faith. Before him, reason had not been allowed any scope in orthodox theology. He was not the first to use it; some teachers (as al-Junaid) had employed it in teaching, but only in secret and for the few. The methods of scholastic philosophy were now introduced into Moslem theology. The chief characteristic of his religious teaching was the adoption of the via media between materialistic grossness and the ideas of pure speculative philosophy. Thus he taught, as to the attributes of God, that they exist, but are not to be compared with human attributes; as to His visibility, that He can be seen but without the limitations of human sight. As to the great question of free will, he denied man’s power but asserted his responsibility. So he passed in review the doctrines of God, faith, the Koran, sin, intercession, &c., and for the first time in the history of Islam produced a systematic theology. The teaching of Ash‘arī was taken up and propagated by the Buyids soon after his death, and was developed and perfected by Abū Bekr ul-Bāqilānī, the Cadi (d. 1012), but up to the middle of the 5th century of Islam (c. A.D. 1058) was suspected elsewhere and confounded with Mu‘tazilism. The Ash‘arīte al-Juwainī (known as Imām ul-Haramain) was persecuted under Toghrul Beg (c. 1053) and exiled, but was restored under Alp Arslan by the vizier Niẓām ul-Mulk, who founded an Ash‘arite college (the Niẓāmiyya). In the West, Ibn Hazm (q.v.) fiercely opposed the system, but Ghazālī established its orthodoxy in the East, and it spread from Persia to Syria and Egypt under the Ayyūbites and Mamelukes and thence to the Almohades in Africa under Ibn Tumart (1130). It remains the predominating influence to the present day, its only serious rival being the theological system of al-Matāridī, a Hanifite (d. 945), whose creed as represented in that of an-Nasafī is still used largely by the Turks. Since the 12th century no great theological movement has been made in Islam. The quiet of religious life has twice been broken, once by Wahhābism (q.v.) in Arabia, once by Bābism (q.v.) in Persia.
The Sects
According to an early tradition Mahomet said that Islam would be divided into seventy-three parties (sects),[4] of which seventy-two would perish and one would be saved. The orthodox Arabian writers on heretical sects of Islam feel compelled by this tradition to make up their number to seventy-two, and, as different writers adopt different divisions or are familiar with different parties, the names of sects amount to some hundreds. Each writer, however, adopts certain main classes under which he attempts to group the others. Abū Muṭī‘ Makhūl at the beginning of the 10th century in his “Refutation” (MS. in Bodleian Library) has six such chief classes: Ḥarūrites (i.e. Khārijites), Rāfiḍites (i.e. Shi‘ites), Qadarites, Jabarites, Jahmites and Murjiites. Ibn Hazm (q.v.) adopts four classes: Mu‘tazilites (Motazilites), Murjiites, Shi‘ites and Khārijites. Shahrastānī (q.v.) complains of the want of system in earlier writers, and suggests as bases of classification the position of parties with regard to the doctrines as to (1) the divine attributes, (2) predestination and free-will (3) promises and threats, faith and error, (4) revelation, reason, the imāmate. In one part of his preface he gives as the chief parties the Qadarites, Ṣifātites, Khārijites and Shi‘ites, proposing to divide these classes according to leaders who agreed with the main doctrines of their class but differed in some points. In another place he mentions four opposite pairs of sects: (1) the Qadarites with their doctrine of free-will, and the Jabarites, who are necessitarians; (2) the Ṣifātites, who maintain the eternal nature of the attributes of God, and the Mu‘tazilites, who deny it; (3) the Murjiites, who postpone judgment of actions until the Last Day, and the Wā‘idites, who condemn in this life; (4) the Khārijites, who consider the caliphate a human institution, and the Shi‘ites, who deify their ruler. In his detailed treatment of the sects Shahrastānī arranged them under the headings: Mu‘tazilites, Jabarites, Ṣifātites, Khārijites, Murjiites and Shi‘ites. About the same time as Shahrastānī two other Arabian writers wrote on the sects—Ṭāhir ul-Isfarainī (d. 1078), whose MS. is in the Berlin library, and ‘Abd ul-Qādir ul-Jīlānī (1078-1166) in his Kitāb ul-Ghanīyya li-Tālibī Tarīq il-Haqqi (Cairo, 1871). Both adopt as main classes Rāfiḍites (or Shi‘ites), Qadarites (or Mu‘tazilites), Khārijites, Murjiites, Najjārites, Dirārites, Jahmites, Mushabbiha, to which Ṭāhir adds Bakrites, Karrāmites, and a class including those sects which are not reckoned as Moslem though they have sprung from Islam. Jīlānī adds to the eight the Kilābites.
The following list is not a complete list of names of sects but is founded on that of Shahrastānī.[5]