D

History Research, ISSN 2159-550X

December 2011, Vol. 1, No. 1, 35-46

DAVID

PUBLISHING

The Mihna: Mamuns Inquisition for Supremacy

Lee A. Koelliker
Lincoln College of Technology, USA

There is still a great deal of uncertainty why in fact Mamun implemented an inquisition (mihna), from 833 to 845
CE, amongst the very Islamic community (umma) he was leading. Many historians have argued that the mihna was
actually instigated to recentralize the political authority of the caliphate to counteract a burgeoning movement of
religious leadership within the umma; others have disputed that the mihna was enacted to discourage religious
interpretation on a local, unofficial level by those same leaders. These two hypotheses have both dominated mihna
research throughout modern scholarship, yet they have both been isolated as separate reasons for the
implementation of the mihna. However, Mamun strategically initiated the mihna as a means to ascertain central
leadership as well as nullify any outside claims to authority in both political and religious spheres. Consequently by
design, the umma would strictly depend on Mamuns absolute authority like the prophet, Muhammad.
Keywords: The Mihna, Mamun, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Ulama, Islamic Law, Islamic Theology

Introduction: Polemics in Succession and Theology

During the Abbasid dynastic rule over the umma or Islamic religious community, during the eighth and
ninth centuries CE, an inquisition known as the mihna solidified dissent between the local and central
authorities. The mihna attempted to initiate a reconciliation and centralization of religious authority within the
caliphate concerning their religious and legal authority over the umma. This inquisition or mihna, in actuality,
further dichotomized the rift between the caliph and the ulama. The outcome greatly favored the authority of
the local ulama in regards to the interpretation of Islamic law (Sharia) and religious doctrine, in addition to
how these interpretations applied to the umma.
Today, the study of the mihna warrants a vast proposed attempt to understand the fundamental purposes of
why it was initiated. However, a common historical conclusion seems rather elusive as well as inconclusive in
regards to historians viewpoints concerning the influencing factors and reasons behind the validation of the
mihna by Mamun, the Abbasid caliph, within the first few scores of the ninth century. Thus it is essential to
look rationally from the perspective of Mamun to determine the particular reasoning for the inquisition. The
two main conclusive hypotheses relating to the commencement of the mihna agree that either, the mihna was to
once again centralize religious arbitration within the caliphate while legitimizing Mamuns rule as caliph; or it
was to oppose the local distilling effort of the traditional ulama vis--vis their developments in their religious
interpretations of the hadith and establishment of the external schools of theology or kalam, and law or fiqh
(Zaman, 1997, p. 2). Yet, perhaps both hypotheses congruently support each other. For the initiation of the
mihna in the perspective of the caliph Mamun endowed the potential ability to oppose the authority of the
ulama that did not support his doctrine and leadership by nullifying any legitimacy in their leadership roles

Lee A. Koelliker, MA, Instructor, Business Faculty, Lincoln College of Technology, Denver Campus, USA.

36

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

within their schools of kalam. It also negated the ulamas opportunity to interpret and decree on religious law
or fiqh, which would indeed once again strengthen the centralized authority of the institution of the caliphate
and legitimize Mamuns rule as both the religious and political leader, like unto Muhammad.
After the death of the Prophet, not only did the question of succession create a slight separation and
dissension within the community, another significant question arose within the nascent religion. Who are the
true believers and members of the umma? This question was a natural communalistic way of thinking for Arabs
(Watt, 1985, p. 11). Thus, this particular question encouraged interpretation and the implementation of
aqidahs which led to the creation and separation of theological schools of kalam and its theologians or
mutakallimun. Not only did these schools of kalam implement interpretations of Sharia, the Quran, and
hadith as well as the importance and relevance of each, they also cemented differentiations regarding
theological dogma within the umma. Even though the Quran and the hadith manifested the fundamental
structure of both religious beliefs and law, the different schools of kalam demonstrated variations in both
religious opinion and interpretations in each particular school. The first two groups that established a
juxtaposed spectrum of religious doctrine were the Kharijites and the Murjites (Waines, 1995, pp. 104-106).

Kharijites and Murjites

The Kharijites decided initially to depose Ali and the Umayyad dynasty (661-750), due to the Kharijite
belief that Ali and the Umayyad dynasty controlled no particular right to lead due to their veering practices and
corruption (Nagel, 2000, pp. 41-48). The Kharijites principled themselves on the redeeming quality of
righteousness based directly upon fundamental doctrines instituted by the Prophet Muhammad and the Quran,
those which they believed the Umayyad dynasty did not prescribe to (Watt, 1985, p. 11). Thus for the Kharijites,
the authority to choose the caliph pertained directly to the true believers or those free from sin (Lapidus, 1975,
p. 366). Also, since the Kharijites believed that all sinners inherently were unbelievers, the Kharijites preserved
the right to purify the nonbelievers from the flock and purge it of sin (Watt, 1985, p. 8). Their slogan was No
obedience to the creature in disobedience of the Creator (Nagel, 2000, p. 42). This not only conceded a new
dreadful element of moral obligation with the consequence of death attached to agency, but the Kharijites
initiated the ability to schism and form a difference of opinion relating to Islamic dogma (Lapidus, 1975, p.
376).
On the other end of the spectrum, the Murjites established a different suggestion pertaining to the
envelopment of sin in regards to who were actual believers (Waines, 1995, p. 106). The Murjites ascertained
the simple fact that mankind will sin because mankind is not perfect, thus the irja or postponement (suspension)
of judgment will be left for God alone (Watt, 1985, p. 12). Accordingly, a believer was one who had secured
iman (belief or faith) through their knowledge of God in their mind and then essentially merited from
confirmations and confessions of the heart and of the tongue (Waines, 1995, p. 106). Ultimately, for the
Murjites, God judged the true intentions of the hearts of men. However, the problematic element within Murjite
belief pertained directly to the status of works. Murjites maintained that faith was only determined according to
belief and not the acts of ones hands (Waines, 1995, p. 106). Therefore, if mankind testified with their tongues
and hearts without manifesting assiduous works that corroborated mankinds belief, for the Murjites, this was
sufficient enough to be classified as a believer. Consequently, a Murjite believers faith could potentially be as
or succeed that of the Prophet as well as the righteous caliphs (Patton, 1897, p. 39). Murjite ideals resonated
deeply within Mamuns concept of leadership; and perhaps, these ideals could possibly stand as a sign of

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

37

legitimacy for Mamuns succession if he could garner control of both religious and political spheres (Ibn
Tayfur, 1987, pp. 82-86).

The Emergence of Theological Schools and Leaders

As the pervasive propagation of the religious schools of kalam manifested a more prevalent and ubiquitous
nature, the phenomena endorsed an affinity of depending on these schools of kalam more substantially than the
caliphate; the result being an affluence of several different schools of kalam, along with several differentiations
in religious dogma. These fundamental differentiations in religious dogma, which derived from the same
sources, introduced many different interpretations for the umma to follow, thus each individual within the
umma chose to prescribe to a particular or specific group of Islamic kalam and fiqh. Hence with the
establishment of different schools of kalam, kalam introduced the novel institution of ulama or local religious
leaders, which were able to create and gain a sense of local autonomy regarding religious interpretation. Islamic
historian Muhammad Qasim Zaman (1997) has written concerning the ulama:
The early Abbasid period saw the emergence of the religious scholars, the ulama, as a visible and
increasingly influential religious elite, the beginnings of schools of law, major developments in the study of
hadith and towards the formalization of the concept of the Prophets sunna, and other developments which
eventually led to the crystallization of Sunni and Shiite Islam (pp. 1-2).
Therefore, the religious implications established regarding the nascent institution of the ulama and the
establishment of schools of kalam and fiqh, which were able to interpret dogma on the local level, relinquished
the centralized power and authority of the caliphate to maintain religious authority over the umma. This
separation warranted a fundamental fissure between the ideal of unity between religion and state. Again Zaman
(1997) stated:
This model, which postulates a comprehensive separation between religion and the state, may be paraphrased
thus: the caliphs and the ulama were in sharp conflict over matters of religious authority; the caliphs lost the contest
and came effectively to be excluded from all say in matters of the law and in whatever else the ulama defined as
their exclusive preserve; and, once in place, this model of separation essentially persisted for much of the medieval
Islamic history (p. 2).

Initially the prophet Muhammad, as well as the four righteous caliphs, commenced the idea of one
centralized leader manifesting both political and religious arbitration over the umma. This idea of a philosopher
or prophet king distinguished the paradigm of a noble revelatory leader with whom the religious community
could rely and manifest both their religious and political confidence (Lapidus, 1975, p. 364). This unity
demonstrated sagacity as long as the leader of the umma exhibited admirable attributes behind which the
community could rally. Notwithstanding, if the leader did not manifest a sense of righteousness and charismatic
prudence, a reaction of dissonance was inevitable. This was exactly what happened within the Umayyad and
Abbasid dynasties (Lapidus, 1975, p. 369). Thus in order to legitimize his rule, redefine the role of the caliph,
and reestablish the authority and power within the centralized leadership, Mamun used the incumbent
attraction of theology for political advantages and initiated the mihna to discredit the ulama, especially within
the traditional schools of kalam and fiqh, those who discriminated against his logic and idea of doctrine
inherent to the rationalization of the creation of the Quran.
First, Mamun desperately needed to legitimize his rule within the umma as caliph in being both lawful
and as the will of God (Tabari, 1996, p. 5755). The proceeding caliph and father of Mamun, Harun Rashid,

38

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

bestowed the mantle of the caliphate upon his younger son, Mamuns younger brother, al-Amin (Glasse, 2002,
p. 284). Hence, in order to retain the mantle of the caliphate for himself after the death of Harun Rashid,
Mamun instigated a militant power struggle against al-Amin, which eventually enabled Mamun to succeed in
taking the throne as caliph (Figueroa, 2007, p. 648). Notwithstanding, since al-Amin originally received the
right to rule as caliph, many traditionalists opposed the rule of Mamun (Glasse, 2002, p. 284). Consequently, it
became essential for Mamun to legitimize his rule as caliph and undermine the influence of the traditionalist in
regards to the umma; so with the implementation of the mihna, which highlighted a more rationalist perspective
of theological doctrine, Mamun outweighed traditionalist dissonance with rationalist support to manipulate the
consensus and legitimize his rule as caliph over the umma.

Mamun and Ideologies

The persecution that was the mihna, inaugurated by al-Mamun on 27 January in 833, originally
manifested strict disdain for schools of kalam who supported traditional orthodoxy in favor of the school within
whom condoned a more rational element (Nagel, 2000, p. 109). Ira Lapidus (1975), an expert on the mihna, has
established, In 833 al-Mamun inaugurated a mihna or inquisition to force government officials and religious
leaders to accept his religious views and his authority in matters of religious ritual and doctrine (p. 379). Now
instead of the polar opposition similar to that of the Kharijites and Murjites of the ninth century, Mamun
rallied behind a more rational interpretation regarding the perspective in which the Quran is a temporal,
created thing in contrast to the traditionalist doctrine of an uncreated, eternal Quran. This belief played the
most essential role within the mihna, for it was the fundamental question during the inquisition.
Originally, historiographers exonerated this rational element of dogma by linking this belief directly to the
idea that Mamun, to centralize his religious authority, needed to establish and solidify a set standard for
religious doctrine and discredit all opposition, which of course, was traditional orthodoxy. Furthermore,
Mamun chose to support rational groups that collaborated with the idea of the created Quran. However,
historians failed to agree on which rational group truly influenced the incorporation of the created Quran.

Mutazilite Ideologies
After looking at the historiography relevant to the mihna, historian Walter M. Patton initially became the
expert within the field with his dissertation piece in 1897 on Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and the mihna. Patton (1897)
ascribed the fundamental idea of the created Quran to the Mutazilite influence on Mamun (p. 47). The
Mutazilite school definitely fit the parameters of rationalists believing in the created Quran, as well as
opposing traditionalists (Nagel, 2000, pp. 102, 109). Moreover, Mamun could also be directly linked to the
Mutazilite influence, since they found favor in the Abbasid court and legitimized their interpretation of the
Quran as being created in 827.
Since Patton was one of the first major scholars on the mihna and believed that Mutazilites deeply
influenced Mamuns credence for the incorporation of the created Quran, many historians since have agreed
with this analysis. Islamists like Amin, Hitti, Kennedy, and Watt also agreed with the analysis of Patton as well
as the idea for the attempt at discrediting the opposition (Nawas, 1994, p. 616). The direct link from Mamuns
mihna to the Mutazilites, for these historians, highlighted a direct causation for the inquisition; for the
influence manifested a lucid link.
Primarily, the theological link of the created Quran pertained directly to school of Mutazilites due to the

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

39

fact that it was one of the most central themes of Mutazilite doctrine (Patton, 1897, p. 47). The establishment
of the created Quran doctrine developed directly from the Mutazilite definition of the fundamental and most
crucial principle of tawhid which is absolutely inherent within their five principles or fundamentals (al-Jabbar,
1997, pp. 91, 96). The Mutazilites developed these principles by the implementation of their rational kalam,
based on the dialectic process or science, which anchored arguments on demonstrative proofs and rendered
their so-called axiomatic syllogisms sound and beyond dispute since the proofs were based upon reason and the
senses. Basically, for the Mutazilites, it is essential to understand that God is the only existent that exists, as a
necessary being, eternally within His absolute oneness. Nothing can exist eternally outside of God and His
unique essence; thus if the Quran was uncreated and eternal it would exist outside of Gods oneness, eternality,
uniqueness, and omnipotence (Nasution, 1997, p. 190). Therefore it is impossible for anything, including the
Quran, to exist eternally outside of God, so the Quran must be created and contingent on Gods existence
(al-Jabbar, 1997, pp. 96-97).
In addition to a theological link, Mamun could have also benefited from Mutazilite dogma regarding the
speech of God as a political tool. According to the Mutazilites, God does not speak nor will He ever
(Madelung, 1985, p. 506). God is completely transcendent and does not maintain any anthropomorphic
characteristics (Nasution, 1997, p. 190). That is to say that He is a necessary existence, independent and beyond
human comprehension or quality. Thus, because of His transcendence and mans ultimate submission to Him,
there will be no likeness between the creator and the created. In other words, for the Mutazilites, man and the
absolute Real, in their juxtaposition, cannot maintain a similitude of qualities or attributes. Through tawil or
interpretation, based on reason and philology, the Mutazilites believed what mankind figuratively called
speech was actually a particular sound created and made heard by God, so that mankind may hear and transmit
that which God desired for them to hear. Yet, since it was created by God and not the actual speech of God, the
Quran again sustained characteristics of being created and temporal (Madelung, 1985, p. 506). Furthermore,
the words or speech of God was not immutable, thus Mamun could manipulate or interpret religious rulings to
placate and support any law or doctrine he created.
Finally, Mamun maintained particularly close ties with Mutazilites, for even his most prominent teachers,
Abu al-Hudhayl al-Allaf, Nazzam, Futti, Samama Ibn Ashras, were Mutazilites (Nawas, 1994, p. 616; Ibn
al-Morteza, 1988, p. 49; Masudi, 1970, p. 227; Ibn Khalakan, p. 177; Shahrestani, 1979, p. 71). Moreover, the
Mutazilites benefited from the favor of the regime within the Abbasid court as the legitimate school of kalam.
Thus, it seemed that the Mutazilite school of kalam had solidified an essential role within the incorporation of
the mihna.
However, many historians concluded that even though the Mutazilites might have had some influential
aspects regarding Mamun and the incorporation of the created Quran during the mihna, in all honesty, it was
more of a coincidence rather than a conclusive determination. In fact, Mamun appeared to be supporting
multifarious sources of inspiration in regards to his personal theological creeds. For instance, it is true that
Mamun was in contact with many Mutazilites, but he was also influenced by many non-Mutazilites. John
Nawas (1994), in his article A Reexamination of Three Current Explanations for al-Mamuns Introduction of
the Mihna, proposed that, The sources also tell us that al-Mamun had equally strong and intimate bonds with
others outside Mutazilite circles, however, of whom some were in fact anti-Mutazilites (p. 616). Thus,
Mamun maintained the company of anti-Mutazilites such as Bishr al-Marisi, Dirar Ibn Amr, and Yahya Ibn
Aktham, who were open foes of the Mutazilites, rationalism, and even the science of kalam.

40

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

In addition, by examining the attention given to the Mutazilites by traditional orthodox groups to the like
of Ibn Hanbal, some historians again concluded that the Mutazilites did not play a significant role of
involvement with Mamuns mihna due to the lack of attention written in traditionalists sources (Peters, 1976,
p. 11). Historian Christopher Melchert (1997) precluded Mutazilite involvement when he wrote in his article
The Adversaries of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.
First the traditionalists main struggle was not against the Mutazila. Had they been the main adversaries,
we should have many more statements against them from Ahmad, his contemporaries and his followers.
Doubtless Ahmad and other traditionalists disagreed with the Mutazila and would use strong language about
them; however, they saw their main adversaries elsewhere (p. 252).
So for Melchert (1997), not only did the Mutazilites not contribute a significant influence to Mamun, but
the Mutazilites only emerged as a dominant group among rationalists at the end of the ninth century (p. 252).
This conflicting evidence certainly needs to be taken into account; for Melchert and Nawas are very bold
in denying the avid Mutazilite role within the mihna, since, as previously mentioned, Mutazilite scholars
mentored Mamun in theological studies and Mamun elected a central theme within Mutazilite doctrine. It is
safe to say that, even though the Mutazilites might not have directly facilitated the installation of the mihna
within the ninth century, they were at the very least an indirect influence on Mamun and his creeds as a
foundation for opposing the traditional element within the mihna.
Both Nawas (1994) and Melchert (1997) disagreed with to the idea of direct Mutazilite involvement.
Instead, both historians mentioned the Hanafi School as a conspiratorial participant within the mihna. Both
historians added, since the Hanifis also believed in the created Quran, the probability of their role within the
mihna is high (Nawas, 1994, p. 617). Albeit within the Fiqh al-Akbar of Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah, he
wrote the contrary:
The Quran is the Word of God Almighty, written on collections of leaves (masahif), preserved in mens
hearts, recited on mens tongues, and sent down to the Prophet, upon whom be Gods peace and blessing. Our
uttering of the Quran is created, and our recitation of the Quran is created, but the Quran itself is uncreated
(Lumbard, 2007).

Thus, Nawas and Melchert may have misinterpreted both the involvement of the Hanafi school within the
mihna as well as their fiqh regarding the Quran. For in the Hanafi school of fiqh the Quran is uncreated, or is
it? Even though Hanifah wrote that the Quran is uncreated, historians have disputed the actual doctrines of the
Hanafi school during the time of the mihna. Melchert (1997) mentioned this idea in his article when he stated,
The situation was complicated by their having developed a more traditionalist party among the Hanafiya,
who did not, for example, affirm a create[d] Quran. Until late in the ninth century, however, the Hanafiya are
mainly to be placed on the rationalist side of the great struggle (p. 252).

Accordingly, for Melchert, the Hanafi School rebutted their own doctrine within themselves and
established a complete metamorphosis of thought by adopting contrary ideas and changing from a completely
disputed and rational based theology to a more traditional stance within less than a century. To say the least, it
is self-evident that the Hanafi School was becoming more dissonant within their own theology during the ninth
century. Therefore, their school of kalam could not have been a direct catalyst for the mihna because of their
own inner struggle and metamorphosis that emerged during that same time period.

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

41

Shiite Ideologies
Another group said to influence Mamun concerning the mihna was the Shiite element. Historians like
Sourdel, Watt, and Nagel believed the intrinsic value of Shiite doctrine was appreciated by Mamun pertaining
directly to the institution of the imam (Nawas, 1994, p. 619; Sourdel, 1962). Mamun specifically integrated the
idea of imam directly into his role as caliph (Safva, 1937, p. 377). The role of imam greatly influenced Mamun
for it was the exact status of Mamuns ambitions (Nagel, 2000, p. 100). In Shiism, the imam portrayed an
essential role of veneration as both the political and religious leader of Shiites. Also, the imam descended first
from Ali and then the Prophet Muhammad himself. This amalgamation of imam and caliph, as Mamun
believed, essentially gave him supreme autonomy over the umma as well as blood ties to Ali and Muhammad.
Even though Shiites believe the Quran to be uncreated, the idea of the imam significantly influenced Mamun
with regards to the potential control the mihna could provide (Ibn Babevayh, pp. 226-227).
Yet even though the importance of these historical investigations helped illuminate certain aspects of the
mihna, a determination could not be made regarding which rational element directly influenced Mamun in
regards to the adaptation of the dogma in reference to the created Quran. In fact, Mamun actually manifested
an eclectic idea by incorporating different elements of rational kalam and integrating them to create a
galvanized, hybrid theology which would directly cause controversy within the opposing traditional element,
thus giving Mamun an instrument to discredit the traditional creeds (Nawas, 1994, p. 619). Since Mamun
demonstrated an eclectic idea of incorporating a mixture of rational and Shiite creeds to create his own
proposed doctrine, modern historians realized that Pattons original thesis regarding strictly Mutazilite
involvement and influence in the creation of the inquisition and directly influencing Mamuns created Quran
theology was rendered insubstantial. Therefore in retrospect of Pattons thesis, the collaboration of the two
hypotheses created a more efficient explanation for the commencement of the mihna.
Therefore, why did Mamun adopt the idea of the created Quran? The exact specific reason for the
created Quran doctrine, the adopted credo, escaped explicit explanation within primary sources contemporary
to the mihna. However, by supporting one particular vantage point as well as drawing the support of that
particular vantage point, Mamun consolidated his authority established a commonality within the status quo in
regards to his definition of the ijma or consensus and by deposing and discrediting the adversity. Mamun
displayed a great formidability as ruler and was seriously determined to preserve the importance of the
caliphate and reconfirm its absolute mantle of authority. John Nawas (1996) explained in his subsequent article,
The Mihna of 218 A.H./833 A.D. Revisited: An Empirical Study, Mamun was basically setting his sights
on the future, aiming to secure for the caliphal institution a universal and unquestioned authority on all matters,
secure and sacred, a status that was in force during the Umayyad period and was especially characteristic of the
founders of Islam but had since vanished (p. 699).

Therefore the mihna manifested the perfect opportunity for Mamun to consolidate his power by
discrediting the local traditional ulama, so the umma would again look to a centralized figure to not only lead,
but interpret the Quran and hadith as well.

Ideologies of the Mihna

With the establishment of the mihna, four months before the death of Mamun, he instituted an inquisition
in which they questioned many ulama to determine their theological understanding and discredit any
altercations. This phenomenon provided Ira Lapidus and Wilfred Madelung the support for their thesis that the

42

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

institution of the mihna combated the festering resentments for the opposing traditional ulama including
those who maintained a Khurasanian background (Nawas, 1996, p. 699). Thus within the initial mihna letter to
governor Ishaq b. Ibrahim of Baghdad, Mamun first solicited the apprehension of the high officials of Baghdad,
and then in later letters surmised the interrogation of the lower hierarchies of ulama. Mamun specified the
groups of ulama to be questioned including the qudat (plural of qadi) and shuhud (court officials), witnesses,
muhaddithun including the forty-four traditional ulama, and the fuqaha (plural of faqih) who were experts in
law and theology (Nawas, 1996, pp. 707-708). Mamun targeted these intellectual elite because of their
exceptional character and abilities. For these men participated within the umma as the most influencing and
intellectually qualified proponents of society; therefore these men caused the diluting of the caliphate authority
in relation to the interpretation of theology and law. The most famous interrogees were those of the Shafii
school of law in addition to Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.
During the interrogation sessions of the mihna, the persecuted were given one simple question concerning
the doctrine of the creation of the Quran. Is the Quran created? This question provided an advantage to the
persecutors since it nullified all equivocation or ambivalent dialectic debate in syllogistic form. Either the
accused agreed or disagreed (Nawas, 1994, p. 623).
Another great advantage of this interrogation method and especially the specific question relating to the
creation of the Quran existed within the Quran itself. Consequently within the Quran itself, no logical or
authoritative passage specifically disputes either opinion regarding the creation of the Quran, thus the reigning
doctrine based its authenticity intrinsically upon the established structure imposed (Nawas, 1994, p. 623). The
verse in question uses the Arabic verb, Jaala, which has been translated as, made. Al-Quran (2006) states,
We have made it an Arabic Quran so that you may apply reason (43:3).
Within the examination of the mihna and the opinion of the created Quran, Mamun divulged a common
understanding regarding Quranic interpretation that created a sense of debate within the umma. This opinion
was not unique for Mamun, the Mutazilites, or any other extreme rationalists, nor was the uncreated Quran a
unique ideology of the Shafii or Hanbali traditionalists; it was an evolving debate, where both sides projected a
functioning argument based on reason or tradition. Still, Mamun solidified the consequences on supporting the
latter ideal. As stated before, for Mamun and his ideological supporters, the creation of the created Quran
unswervingly reflected the Islamic principle of tawhid or absolute unity of God. Nawas (1994) explained:
The Mutazilite argument, which al-Mamun also used, is anchored in the assertation about the absolute unity
of god: the Quran could not be eternal because, if that were the case, and object (the Quran) would then share an
attribute of God (eternality). This in turn would violate Gods absolute unity. The Mutazilites therefore concluded
that the Quran must be created (p. 625).

For, if the Quran was uncreated it would be eternal; and if it was eternal it would be outside of Gods
eternality. Thus, since the Quran is a thing and God is the creator of all things, the Quran must be therefore a
created thing. This concept of tawhid formatted Mamun with a rational argument that supported his
interpretation and gave it a sense of logic and authority. Perhaps the true reason Mamun integrated the created
Quran doctrine within his hierarchy of theology was because a created Quran suggests the idea that the
Quran is not the absolute, solidified word of God and can thus be interpreted to fit a specific people or
situation.
A created Quran imposed the concept that since the Quran is not the immutable word of God,

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

43

subsequently, the created Quran was left as a supplemental guideline to something that supersedes it (Watt,
1985, p. 35). Initially, this was the erudition of the Prophet Muhammad based on his revelations from God. The
umma depended directly on the Prophet as a leader and guide. This doctrine sufficiently sustained a
dependency on a central religious and political leader which coincided, with an ingenious congruency, with
Mamuns desire to reestablish his regime and the mantle of caliphate as supreme. Again as Nawas (1994) has
stated,
His was fundamentally a Mutazilite platform guided by an abiding conviction that the caliphal institution
must survive and that its survival could be assured only by a supreme head with authority that was unquestioned,
unlimited, and shared with no one else (p. 624).

In contrast, an uncreated Quran signified the eternality of its origin and significance. If the Quran truly
merited itself as eternal, it demonstrated a strict importance in reference to the ummas heed to the principles it
established. This concept pertained directly to traditional doctrine. The traditionalists believed the Quran to be
the literal word of God, yet their interpretation of Gods unity or tawid, in a sense, manifested a different
quality because it was eternally part of Gods knowledge or omnipotence. As Seyyed Hossein Nasr (1994) has
so eloquently written:
The Quran is the tissue out of which the life of a Muslim is woven; its sentences are like threads from which
the substance of his soul is knit. The Prophet was therefore the instrument chosen by God for the revelation of His
Word, of His Book of which the spirit and the letter, the content and the form, are Divine (p. 30).

Since God is eternal and everything within Gods unity is also eternal, and because the Quran is the word
of God and is part of His divine speech and knowledge, the Quran is thus eternal. Accordingly, nothing
pertaining to or incorporated in Gods tawhid is temporal or created because of His eternality. Furthermore, if
the Quran is of God and part of his tawhid, it is uncreated.
Traditional groups and individuals like the Shafii school of law, Ahmad Ibn Nasr Ibn Malik, who died a
condemned martyr, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal defied the rationalist doctrine of Mamun (Lapidus, 1975, p. 380).
Most of those who defied the rationalist doctrine were either executed or imprisoned as heretics. Mamun
attempted to warn further traditionalist schools of kalam that he would not only humiliate the opposition, but
also censor their interpretations. Nawas (1996) again wrote,
Unambiguously, then, the findings tell us that the interrogees were muhaddithun of distinction, men highly
esteemed for their intellect, as well as their social status and influenceindeed, the [crme de la crme] of Baghdadi
hadith-scholarship. The caliphs inquisition aimed at more than simply humiliating and muzzling the traditionalists.
This group of luminaries was itself a target, to be sure, but it was also the proxy through which al-Mamun sent a
loud and clear message that henceforward the business of hadith was under his censorship, and those who transmit
or teach it accountable to him (p. 705).

Thus, through the mihna, Mamun attempted to control this opposition and solidify his role within the
umma and once again fuse the religious and political elements together.
In theory, by consolidating an eclectic version of incorporated theological principles of extreme rationalist
kalam and opposing all contradicting doctrine, Mamun enabled the ability to redeem his caliphates control
over the interpretation of hadith. For Mamun, the idea of traditional schools of kalam, who were not
commissioned or controlled, secured nothing but the establishment of a destructive element within the umma
that would only cause disorder. This traditional element was definitely a force to be identified and not ignored,

44

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

for it possessed the ability to nullify his power as caliph. As established earlier, Mamun considered his
leadership role to be the inheritor of the prophethood of Muhammad, or at least the religious authority of the
Muslim community along with the official responsible for their salvation. Therefore, since changes in the
umma adapted the need for supplementing the Sharia from the Quran with laws constituted from the hadith,
Mamun desired to have the absolute authority over the interpretation of the hadith.
Yet, even though the plan seemed flawless in theory, in reality, the results manifested a different outcome.
Mamun underestimated the influence of those who would oppose his doctrine. In particular, the inquisition of
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal exhibited a rather phenomenal turn of momentum vis--vis the reputation of the mihna from
the perspective of the umma (Waines, 1995, p. 70). Amongst the orthodoxy of the traditional schools of kalam,
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal was the champion. Patton (1897) illustrated:
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal during his whole career subsequent to the death of the Imam al-Shafii (204 A.H.) was the
most remarkable figure in the camp of Mohammedan orthodoxy, and during the course of the mihna did more than
any other individual to strengthen the resistance of his party to the repressive efforts of the [caliphs] and their
officers (p. 2).

During his interrogation, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal refused to condone Mamuns doctrine vindicating the
created Quran, even under the ominous threat of the sword and incarceration (Nagel, 2000, p. 23). Ahmad Ibn
Hanbal believed adamantly that the Quran was uncreated even though the human acts of writing, reading,
reciting, and all other acts concerning the preservation of the Quran were created (Patton, 1897, p. 35).
Even though Mamun did not attend the coercion of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, due to either a sense of
admiration or malcontent, he anxiously awaited the outcome of the inquisition (Patton, 1897, p. 4). Thus, when
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal ultimately refused to acknowledge the created Quran as the only plausible theological
concept, Mamun demonstrated an intensified intolerance for the traditional schools of kalam. But it was
essential; since Ahmad Ibn Hanbal maintained a prestigious reputation and led an exceptionally large following,
to devise a punishment that would not arouse too mush dissension. Mamun decided on imprisonment.
After a brief prison sentence, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal left prison only to continue his study and interpretation
of the Quran. However, the damage was done; Hanbal emerged from the mihna as a venerated religious
scholar, saint, and defender of tradition. Accordingly, after Ahmad Ibn Hanbal died, his students created a
school that further circulated his ideology and interpretation (Patton, 1897, pp. 4-5). Nawas (1994) clarified the
following concerning the Hanbali school of law,
In the following century the new movement took the form of the Hanbali school of law. The teachings of
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal were codified to become the basis of a new corpus of law and traditions, a new school in which
religious thinkers adhered to the principles of the master and expounded them (p. 622).

Conclusion
The mihna demonstrated a tremendous development regarding the communal and sectarian elements
within the umma during the ninth century. After the mihna concluded, fifteen years later in 848, the popular
local religious movement continued to amplify results with the scholarly and religious traditions of study and
interpretation. The populace concerned more about the local religious interpretations of kalam and the schools
of law rather than any ruling instituted by the caliph. With the establishment of the Hanbali school of theology
and law, the evolution of authoritative power changed hands completely in favor of the local element of
scholars or ulama; therefore divisions amongst the umma manifested a more prevalent nature with the

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

45

opportunity to elect which schools of kalam and fiqh to follow. Within the Hanbalis in particular, the belief of
militant uprisings against any unrighteous leader, including the caliph, deemed a major absolution to the
caliphs central authority in secular government. As Lapidus (1975) articulated, Henceforth, the caliphate was
no longer the sole identifying symbol or the sole organizing institution, even for those Muslims who had been
most closely identified with it (p. 383).
Thus in a paradoxical result, since Mamun initiated the mihna not only to oppose heterogeneous groups
of ulama in interpreting hadith and establishing their schools of kalam and fiqh, but to also attempt the
reconfiguration of the caliphate and once again reestablish a centralized authority within the government, in
actuality, the mihna, even though it lasted beyond the inquisition of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, created a more
dependant reliability based on the merit of the separate schools of kalam and fiqh, both in rational and
traditional aspects. In other words, the mihna further enabled the separation of religious authority outside of the
realm of the caliphate and towards the local religious authority of the ulama.
In hindsight, the initial implications of the institution of the mihna, as influenced specifically by rational
groups of kalam concerning the standard theological question of the created Quran, directly involved the
implicit assumptions that Mamun desired to promote a specific group above the others, namely the
Mutazilites. However, this initial paradigm evolved during the course of analysis by additional scholars for the
reason that new evidence confirmed that Mamun was rather eclectic in regards to his own theological doctrine;
for he selected principles from both the Mutazilites, who greatly influenced and supported Mamun, and the
Shiite idea of imam.
Thus the development of two newly formulated hypotheses suggested the mihna, first, demonstrated the
attempt to recentralize the religious authority within the caliphate by controlling all interpretation of the Quran,
hadith, and conception of any new laws pertaining to the umma. This was designed to negate the ulamas
ability to establish diversified rulings and interpretations of religious doctrine on a local level. Mamun
vehemently believed that as caliph, he inherited the role of being a deputy to God on the earth, as his messenger,
like unto the Prophet.
The second hypothesis consisted that the establishment of the mihna was presented to the umma to oppose
the traditional element of ulama that, of course, refused to advocate the Quran as being created. The mihna
was thus designed to discourage and discredit further desire to propagate the traditional schools of ulama and
impede their local authority and influence over the umma. Mamun would then have the ability to spread his
authority and centralized political power as caliph, which would legitimize his rule.
However, in actuality, the two hypotheses mesh more as an interlocking plot to reconfirm and strengthen
the absolute, centralized authority of the caliph by sufficiently discrediting the opposition to the point of
disbandment, to insure the holding of all religious and political power, and dissolve any element that may cause
future uprisings or dilution of the central caliph. Thus rather than a fissure of two separate hypotheses, the
mihna was a hierarchal scheme which incorporated both hypotheses to ensure success. Unfortunately for
Mamun, his plot failed. The mihna strengthened the local authority of ulama within kalam, as well as with the
creation of schools of theology and law, which would become the ultimate authority on religious interpretations
of the Quran and the hadith, in addition to being the architectural element of the Sharia. In contrast, not all
scholars have agreed upon the merits of the mihna, since the mihna caused immense tribulations and trouble
against Muslims and Islam (Jadaan, 2000, p. 286).

46

The Mihna: MaMunS Inquisition for Supremacy

References
Al-Jabbar, A. & Al-Khamsa, K. A. (1997). Defenders of Reason in Islam: Mutazilism from Medieval School to Modern Symbol.
Oxford: One World.
Figueroa, M. R. (2007). Califato y religion: Las sorprendentes iniciativas del califa al-Mamun (813-833). Estudios de Asia y
Africa, 42 (3), 134, 647-673.
Glasse, C. (2002). The New Encyclopedia of Islam. New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Jadaan, F. (2000). Al-Mihna. Beyrut: Mossasa al-Arabi al-Dorasat val Nashr.
Ibn, K. & Al-Din, A. S. In: Ehsan Abbas (Ed.). Vafiat al-Aayan va AnbaAbna al-Zaman (Vol. 6). Beyrut: Dar al-Thaghafa.
Lapidus, I. M. (1975). The separation of state and religion in the development of early Islamic Society, International Journal of
Middle East Studies, 6 (4), 363-385.
Madelung, W. (1985). The Origins of the Controversy Concerning the Creation of the Koran: Religious Schools and Sects in
Medieval Islam. London: Variorum Reprints.
Masudi, A. I. H. (1970). Al-Tanbih val Ashraf. Abolghasem Payandeh (Ed.) .Tehran.
Melchert, C. (1997). The adversaries of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. Arabica, 44 (2), 234-253.
Al-Morteza, I. & Yahya, A. I. (1988). Tbaghat al-Mutazila. Beyrut: Dar al-Jil.
Nagel, T. (2000). The History of Islamic Theology: From Muhammad to the Present. (Thomas Thornton, Trans.). Princeton:
Markus Wiener Publishers.
Nasr, S. H. (1994). Ideals and Realities of Islam. Chicago: ABC International Group, Inc.
Nasution, H. (1997). Kaum Mutazilah dan pandangan Rasionalanya (The Mutazila and Rational Philosophy). Defenders of
Reason in Islam: Mutazilism from Medieval School to Modern Symbol. Oxford: Oneworld.
Nawas, J. A. (1996). The Mihna of 218 A.H./833 A.D. Revisited: An Empirical Study. Journal of the American Oriental Society,
116 (4), 698-708.
Nawas, J. A. (1994). A reexamination of three current explanations for Al-Mamuns introduction of the Mihna. International
Journal of Middle East Studies, 26 (4), 615-629.
Patton, W. M. (1897). Ahmed Ibn Hanbal and the Mihna. Ruprecht Karls Universitat of Heidelberg: Librairie et Imprimerie.
Peters, J. R. T. M. (1976). Gods Created Speech: A Study in the Speculative Theology of the Mutazili Qadi l-Qudat Abu
al-Hasan Abd Al-Jabbar bin Ahmad Al-Hamadani. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
Qarai, A. Q. (Trans.). (2006). Al-Quran. Clarksville: Khatoons Inc.
Safva, A. Za. (1937). In Mostafa Halabi (Ed.). Jamhara Rasael al-Arab (Vol. 3). Cairo: N.P.
Shahrestani, A. A. (1979). In Mostafa Halabi (Ed.). Al Melal val Nehal (Vol.1). Cairo: N.P.
Sourdel, D. (1962). La politique du calife Abbasid al-Mamun. Revue des Estudes Islamiques, 30, 27-48.
Tabari, M. I. J. (1996). In Abolghasem Payandeh (Ed.). Tarikh al-Rosol va al-Moluk (Vol. 13). Tehran: Asator.
Tayfur I. & Tahir, A. I. (1987). Ketab Baghdad. Cairo: Dar al-Nehzat al-Arabiah.
Waines, D. (1995). An Introduction to Islam. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Watt, W. M. (1985). Islamic Philosophy and Theology: An Extended Survey. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Zaman, M. Q. (1997). The caliphs, the ulama, and the law: Defining the role and function of the caliph in the early Abbasid
period. Islamic Law and Society, 4 (1), 1-36.