CHAPTER 6: THE ISLAMIC SCIENCES
CHAPTER 6: THE ISLAMIC SCIENCES
Key points from this chapter:
Fiqh: The Four Schools of Thought were developed
Aqīdah: Great efforts were made by eminent scholars to preserve Islamic creed from deviant sects
Spirituality: A deeper understanding of Tasawwuf and Tazkiyah was developed
Shi’ism: Shi’ism rose to greater prominence under the various Shi’i states
The sixth chapter delves into the development of the Islamic Sciences after the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. The author says “Concurrent with the development of the physical and mathematical sciences was the flourishing of the Islamic sciences in the centuries after the Prophet.” (p95). The summary of this chapter will be divided into four sections:
The Development of Fiqh
The Development of Aqīdah
The Development of Sufism
The Development of Shi’ism
Fiqh or Islamic Jurisprudence was understood by the early Muslims to encompass all aspects of Muslim life from personal actions to social interactions and government policy. The primary challenge faced by early jurists was how to integrate the teachings of Prophet Muhammad ﷺ into different lifestyles and cultures. The author looks at four jurists whose ideas and efforts resulted in the formation of the Four Schools of Thought: Hanafi, Māliki, Shāfi’i and Hanbali.
The first of these was Imam Abu Hanīfah. Born and raised in Iraq, he faced this challenge frequently, as Iraq was very different in culture from that of the city of the Prophet ﷺ . The author praises Imam Abu Hanīfah’s attempts to solve these issues by saying “Nowhere is the creativity and dynamism of fiqh more apparent than in the career of the first great jurist, Abu Hanīfah (d.767).” (p96). Imam Abu Hanīfah primarily relied on Mutawatir Hadiths (widely successive narrations) in forming the foundation of his rulings. These narrations would help to interpret the non-Mutawatir Hadiths. He also relied significantly on the use of Qiyas (reasoning). Often, new situations arose where no ruling could be found explicitly in the Quran or Sunnah. Therefore, Imam Abu Hanīfah, “living in cosmopolitan Iraq, felt it necessary to allow reason a major role in determining how Fiqh would operate on a practical level” (p98).
The second jurist was Imam Malik who, born in Madinah, differed in his approach to Fiqh. He believed that Madinah had not changed much since the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. Therefore, he put greater significance on the actions of the people of Madinah over reasoning in forming his school.
The third jurist was Imam Muhammad al-Shāfi’i. He benefited from both jurists mentioned above as he studied under Imam Malik and Imam Muhammad al-Shaybāni, a senior student of Imam Abu Hanīfah. He differed from Abu Hanīfah in two main aspects; He did not use reason as much as Imam Abu Hanīfah and also believed that single transmitter reports were not necessarily inferior to Mutawatir ones. Imam al-Shāfi’i popularised the system of abrogation where later hadiths could cancel out earlier hadiths if they conflicted.
The last of the four jurists was Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal. He was a student of both Imam al-Shāfi’i and Imam Muhammad al-Shaybāni. He opted for a more literal approach compared to the other Imams.
The differences and technicalities in their approach to Fiqh are much more complex than what has been mentioned. One book I would recommend for further insight on this is Shaykh Abul Hakim Murad’s ‘Understanding The Four Madhabs’. The development of these schools continued through the students of these four Imams – all constantly adapting to the changing circumstances around them. The author describes these schools of thought as “adaptable methodologies that remain dynamic today”. (p101). Finally, it is important to note that the differences in methodologies and rulings between the schools were minute and did not cause major division in the Muslim world.
Another Islamic science that scholars developed was Aqīdah (Islamic creed). Being the core of the religion, differences of opinion therein “could threaten the existence of Islam as a unified religion”. (p102).
The first group to deviate from the accepted Islamic creed was the Khārijites. They did so to justify their assassination of Ali (RA) who they claimed had disbelieved by committing a major sin. Embarking on a brutal “campaign of murder and intimidation” (p102), they hunted down anyone who disputed their approach to theology. However, most people disagreed with them, feeling their ideas had no basis and therefore, the Khārijites remained small in number.
Another group that arose was the Mu’tazila who opted for the increased use of reason in trying to understand the attributes of Allah ﷻ. This led them to a more metaphorical understanding of the verses of the Quran which speak about Allah’s ﷻ attributes. This approach was extremely dangerous and could have led to the Quran becoming “devoid of any real meaning” (p104). They also believed that Allah ﷻ could not forgive all sins as this would go against His just nature. Unlike the Khārijites, the Mu’tazila had some scholars in their ranks but their biggest supporter was the Caliph himself – Al Ma’mun. He embarked on an inquisition to impose this theology on all Muslim scholars. However, his greatest opposition was Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal who called for a literal understanding of Allah’s ﷻ divine attributes and limited the use of reason. Imprisoned due to his opposition against the Mu’tazila, he became a symbol of resistance, and many supporters rallied to his defence. Another great opposition to the Mu’tazila came from Imam Ash’ari and Imam Māturidi, who provided a middle ground between the Mut’azila and Imam Ahmad. The two Imams believed that reason should correspond with the Quran and not the other way around. These schools were further developed by Imam Ghazali (Ash’ari) and Al-Nasafi (Māturidi) and eventually, their dominance weakened the Mu’tazila. Thus, three schools of Aqīdah were formed: Athari, Ash’ari and Māturidi. Similar to the field of Fiqh, slight differences existed but not to the extent where one deemed the other to be a heretic. A deeper insight into the beliefs of the Mu’tazila and the struggle against them can be found in Shaykh Abul Hassan Ali Nadwi’s ‘Saviour of Islamic Spirit’.
The third science that was developed was the science of spirituality. This is sometimes referred to as Tasawwuf and Tazkiyah. One of the earliest figures in the study of this was Hassan al-Basri (RA) and Rabī’a al-‘Adawwiya. Similar to both Aqīdah and Fiqh, different strands began to pop up and “eventually crystallised into concrete paths and schools of thought”. (p106) Various tariqas (paths) were formed throughout the twelfth and thirteenth centuries and developed as the years progressed. The history of Sufism was not without controversy. Some Sufi mystics, such as al-Hallaj, made statements regarding Allah ﷻ which other Sufi scholars refuted. However, Sunni Islam accepted “more balanced” ideas, such as that of Junayd al-Baghdadi. Further notable figures in this field include ‘Abd al-Qadir Jilani, Ibn ‘Arabi and more. A more detailed account of the lives of some of these scholars can be also be found in Shaykh Abul Hassan Ali Nadwi’s ‘Saviour of Islamic Spirit’
The final subject the author delves into is Shi’ism. Although not a science, its development has played a significant part in the history of the Muslim world. Whilst most Muslims accepted the different approaches to the aforementioned sciences, the Shi’a rejected them. They believed that ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA) was the rightful successor to the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and not Abu Bakr (RA). As a result, anyone who supported Abu Bakr (RA) and his successors ‘Umar (RA) and ‘Uthmān (RA) were believed to be usurpers, and so any hadith narrated from them was rejected by the Shi’a. This meant the rejection of most hadiths found in Sahih Bukhari. To fill in this void left by the absence of hadith, they elevated the sayings of their Imams to just below or in some cases equal to hadith. The Muslim world deemed this to be blasphemous whilst the Shi’a believed that their Imams were infallible. The Shi’a themselves differed regarding the Imams, with the Twelvers believing in twelve Imams and the Seveners believing in seven. The latter were more politically successful than the former. Another group was the Zaydis, who believed in five Imams and were less extreme in their views than the other two. Shi’ism did not receive much support, and most people saw it as a threat to Islam, with many theologians such as Abu Hamid Al Ghazali thoroughly refuting it. The author does not mention this in detail, but many Shi’a states did rise to power, such as the Fatimid Caliphate based in Egypt, the Buyids and Safavids but were all eventually toppled.
In conclusion, the development of the Islamic sciences was also another great feat achieved during the golden age of the Abbasid Caliphate. This period produced many great scholars who helped ensure that Islamic teachings remained unchanged and adaptable to the new situations the ever-expanding Muslim world found itself in.