For a
definition of 'ilm al-kalam, it is sufficient to say that, 'It is a
science which studies the basic doctrines of the Islamic faith (usul
al-Din). It identifies the basic doctrines and seeks to prove their
validity and answers any doubts which may be cast upon them.'
In texts
on logic and philosophy it is mentioned that every science has a special
subject of its own, and that the various sciences are distinguished from one
another due to their separate subject matter. This is certainly true, and those
sciences whose subject matter has a real unity are such. However, there is
nothing wrong if we form a discipline whose unity of subject matter and the
problems covered by it is an arbitrary and conventional one, in the sense that
it covers diverse, mutually exclusive subjects, which are given an arbitrary
unity because they serve a single purpose and objective. In sciences whose
subject has an essential unity, there is no possibility of overlapping of
problems. But in sciences in which there is a conventional unity among the
issues dealt with, there is nothing wrong if there is an overlapping of issues.
The commonness of the problems between philosophy and kalam, psychology
and kalam, or sociology and kalam, is due to this reason.
Some
Islamic scholars have sought to define and outline the subject matter of 'ilm
al-kalam, and have expressed various opinions. But this is a mistake;
because a clear-cut delineation of the subject of study is possible for only
those sciences which have an essential unity among the problems dealt with. But
in those sciences in which there is a conventional unity of problems dealt
with, there can be no unity of subject. Here we cannot discuss this issue
further.
The
Name "'Ilm al-Kalam":
Another
point is why this discipline has been called " 'ilm al-kalam", and
when this name was given to it. Some have said that it was called "kalam"
(lit. speech) because it gives an added power of speech and argument to one
who is well-versed in it. Some say that the reason lies in the habit of the
experts of this science who began their own statements in their books with the
expression "al-kalamu fi kadha". Others explain that it was
called "kalam" because it discussed issues regarding which the
Ahl al-Hadith preferred to maintain complete silence. Yet according to
others this name came to be in vogue when the issue whether the Holy Qur'an
(called "kalamullahi") ,the Divine Utterance [5],
i.e. the Holy Qur'an) is created (makhluq) or not, became a matter for
hot debate amongst the Muslim - a controversy which led to animosity between
the two opposite camps and bloodshed of many. This is also the reason why that
period is remembered as a "time of severe hardship" - mihnah.
That is, since most of the debates about the doctrines of the faith revolved
around the huduth (createdness, temporality) or the qidam (pre-eternity)
of the "Utterance" or kalam of God, this discipline which
discussed the principal doctrines of the faith came to be called " 'ilm
al-kalam" (lit. the science of the Utterance). These are the various
opinions that have been expressed about the reason why 'ilm al-kalam was
given this name.
The
Various Schools of Kalam:
The
Muslims differed with one another in matters of the Law (fiqh), following
differing paths and dividing into various sects, such as Ja'fari, Zaydi,
Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki and Hanbali, each of which has a fiqh of its
own. Similarly, from the viewpoint of the doctrine, they divided into various
schools, each with its own set of principal doctrines. The most important of
these schools are: the Shi'ah, the
Mu'tazilah, the 'Asha'irah, and the Murji'ah.
Here it
is possible that the question may arise as to the reason behind such regretful
division of the Muslims into sects in matters dealing with kalam and fiqh,
and why they could not maintain their unity in these spheres. The
difference in matters of kalam causes disunity in their Islamic outlook,
and the disagreement in the matter of fiqh deprives them of the unity of
action.
Both this
question and the regret are justified. But it is necessary to pay attention to
the two following points:
(i) The
disagreement in issues of fiqh among the Muslims is not so great as to
shatter the foundations of the unity of doctrinal outlook and mode of practice.
There is so much common in their doctrinal and practical matters that the
points of difference can hardly inflict any serious blow.
(ii)
Theoretical differences and divergence of views is inevitable in societies in
spite of their unity and agreement in principles, and as long as the roots of
the differences lie in methods of inference, and not in vested interests, they
are even beneficial; because they cause mobility, dynamism, discussion, curiosity,
and progress. Only when the differences are accompanied by prejudices and
emotional and illogical alignments, and lead individuals to slander, defame,
and treat one another with contempt, instead of motivating them to endeavour
towards reforming themselves, that they are a cause of misfortune.
In the
Shi'ite faith, the people are obliged to imitate a living mujtahid, and
the mujtahidun are obliged to independently ponder the issues and form
their independent opinions and not to be content with what has been handed down
by the ancestors. Ijtihad and independence of thought inherently lead to
difference of views; but this divergence of opinions has given life and
dynamism to the Shi'ite fiqh. Therefore, difference in itself cannot be
condemned. What is condemnable is the difference which originates in evil
intentions and selfish interests, or when it centres around issues which drive
Muslims on separate paths, such as the issue of imamah and leadership,
not the difference in secondary and non-basic matters.
To
undertake an examination of the intellectual history of the Muslims so as to
find which differences originated in evil intentions, vested interests, and
prejudices, and which were a natural product of their intellectual life,
whether all points of difference in the sphere of kalam should be
regarded as fundamental, or whether all problems in fiqh should be
regarded as secondary, or if it is possible that a difference in kalam may
not be of fundamental significance whereas one in fiqh may have such importance
- these are questions which lie outside the brief scope of this lecture.
Before we
take up the schools of kalam for discussion, it is essential to point
out that there has been a group of scholars in the Islamic world which was
basically opposed to the very idea of 'ilm al-kalam and rational debate
about Islamic doctrines, considering it a taboo and an innovation in the faith (bid'ah).
They are known as "Ahl al-Hadith." Ahmad ibn Hanbal, one of the
imams of jurisprudence of the Ahl al-Sunnah, stands foremost among them.
The
Hanbalis are totally against kalam, Mu'tazilite or Ash'arite, not to
speak of the Shi'ite kalam. In fact they are basically opposed to logic
and philosophy. Ibn Taymiyyah, who was one of the eminent scholars of the Sunni
world, gave a verdict declaring kalam and logic as 'unlawful'. Jalal
al-Din al-Suyuti, another figure among the Ahl al-Hadith, has written a book
called Sawn al-mantiq wa al-kalam 'an al-mantiq wa al-kalam ("Protecting
speech and logic from [the evil of] 'ilm al-kalam and the science of
logic").
Malik ibn
Anas is another Sunni imam who considers any debate or inquiry about doctrinal
matters to be unlawful. We have explained the Shi'ite viewpoint in this matter,
in the introduction to Vol.V of Usul-e falsafeh wa rawish-e riyalism. [6]
The
important schools of kalam, as mentioned earlier, are: Shi'ah,
Mu'tazilah, Asha'irah, and Murji'ah. Some sects of the Khawarij and the
Batinis, such as the Isma'ilis, have also been considered as schools of Islamic
kalam. [7]
However,
in my view, none of these two sects can be considered as belonging to the
schools of Islamic kalam. The Khawarij, although they held specific
beliefs in the matters of doctrine, and perhaps were the first to raise
doctrinal problems by expressing certain beliefs about Imamah, the kufr
(apostasy) of the fasiq (evil-doer, one who commits major sins), and
considered the disbelievers in these beliefs as apostates, but they did not,
firstly, create a rationalist school of thought in the Muslim world, and,
secondly, their thinking was so much deviated - from the viewpoint of the
Shi'ites - that it is difficult to count them among Muslims. What makes things
easy is that the Khawarij ultimately became extinct and only one of their
sects, called "Abadiyyah" has some followers today. The Abadiyyah
were the most moderate of all the Khawarij, and that is the reason why they
have survived until today.
The
Batinis, too, have so much liberally interfered in Islamic ideas on the basis
of esotericism that it is possible to say that they have twisted Islam out of
its shape, and that is the reason why the Muslim world is not ready to consider
them as one of the sects of Islam.
About
thirty years ago when the Dar al-Taqrib Bayna al-Madhahib al-'Islamiyyah was
established in Cairo, the Imamiyyah Shi'ah, the Zaydiyyah, the Hanafi, the
Shafi'i, the Maliki and the Hanbali sects, each of them had a representative.
The Isma'ilis tried hard to send a representative of their own; but it was not
accepted by other Muslims. Contrary to the Khawarij, who did not create a
system of thought, the Batinis, despite their serious deviations, do have a
significant school of kalam and philosophy. There have emerged among
them important thinkers who have left behind a considerable number of works.
Lately, the Orientalists have been showering great attention on the Batini
thought and works.
One of the
prominent Isma'ili figures is Nasir Khusrow al-'Alawi (d. 841/1437-38), the
well-known Persian poet and the author of such famous works as Jami'
al-hikmatayn, Kitab wajh al-Din, and Khuwan al-'ikwan. Another is
Abu Hatam al-Razi (d. 332/943-44), the author of A'lam al-nubuwwah. Others
are: Abu Ya'qub al-Sijistani, the author of Kashf al-mahjub (its Persian
translation has been recently published), who died during the second half of
the 4th/l0th century; Hamid al-Din al-Kirmani, a pupil of Abu Ya'qub
al-Sijistani, has written a large number of books about the Isma'ili faith; Abu
Hanifah Nu'man ibn Thabit, well-known as Qadi Nu'man or "the Shi'ite Abu
Hanifah" (i.e. Isma'ili); his knowledge of fiqh and hadith is
good, and his well-known book Da'a'im al-'Islam has been printed by
lithotype several years ago.
