ISM

n, 1990

THE BEGINNINGS OF THE MU'TAZILA RECONSIDERED'

Sarah Stroumsa

On several occasions the zaydi scholar Ibn al-Murtada (d, 840 H)

says, introducing the genealogy of the Mu'tazila, that "the tradition
from which the Mu'tazilite school is derived is brighter than
daylight".' For us, unfortunately, this daylight is somewhat eclipsed.
Not only are early sources on (he Mu'tazila scarce and inadequate.
but the information they yield is often tendentious and
contradictory. As a result. the attempts of modern scholars to
portray Mu'tazilite history are, at best, speculative reconstructions.
The aim of the present study is to survey the available evidence
relating to the early Mu'tazila for the purpose of sifting firm fact
from mere conjecture. Our chief concern in the following pages
will be to elucidate the name "Mu'tazila". to survey the emergence
of the Mu'tazila as a movement, and to examine its links with
Mu'13zilite Kalam.

This papcr was rirst prcscnted at the third conrcrcncc From JiJhll'yya
to Islam, lind benerited rrom com men Is made by Ihc participants. III
particular, I wish to thank Prof. E. Kohlberg ror his helprul suggeslions,
and Dr, B. Abrahamov ror his critical remarks, I also wish to lhank
ProL Frank Stewart ror his userul commcnts on an earlicr drart or this
paper.
"Wa-sanad al-mu'/arila fj-madhhabjhim awl/a!) min at-falaq", fabaqiil
al-Mu',ozila, cd. S. Diwald-Wilzer (Wicsbaden. 1961), p. 1:1; Kitiib al-Munyo
Wa'l-amal f; Shorb al-Ir1ilal Wa'I-nibal, ed, Mubammad Jawwad Mashkur
(Ilcirul, 1919), p, 125:11. TM Arnold, A/-Mu'uuUa (Leip.dg. 19(2) (hcnceforward
Munya, quoted according to Arnold's edilion). p. 5:14. The claim that (he
isniid or the Mu'taiila is beller than any Olhcr is mcnttoned already by 'Abd
al-Jaboor (d. 1025). The Qadi, however, rcgards Ihis son of proof as laqlid, and
prden 10 eSlablish the case of Ihe Mu'laz.ila on superior decisivc proors
W-odilla aI-qon"a), see Fa41 a/-t,jzol wa-fabaqiu a/-Mu',ozila, cd. Fu'ad S3yyid
(Tun;" 1974), ~ 164:25-21.

The t>cginnings of Ihe Mu'tazila

266

Sarah Stroumsa

All the repons about the beginning of the Mu'tazila as we

know it revolve around the persons of W~il b. 'Atii' and 'Amr b.
Ub.lyd. It is. therefore, natural 10 start our research with these two
key figures. Wasil b. 'Ala', also known as Abu l:Iudhayfa, was born in
al-Madilla in the ye.lf 80 or 81 H, and died in 131 H? The precision

with which these dates are recorded is unusual for his generation.)
Wa.sil, however, was an unusual individual, and the gossi~ of his time
noted and recorded about him characteristics which do not usually
occur in standard biographical works, while the more common details
about his life remain unclear. For example, it is uncertain whether he

267

other hand, is carefully noted. He was an odd-looking person,' with a

remarkably long and twisted neck.' At limes he kept silent to the
point of being considered dumb,' and when he did speak up, his
pronunciation of the consonant ril was painfully ugly.' All in all, he
made a unprepossessing first impression.1o A better acquaintance with
him, however, altered this impression dramatically for the better. Our
sources vividly convey the surprise, embarrassment and admiration
1l
people felt on finding out what lay behind his dumsy, silent eltterioT:
Despite his speech defect, he was an eloquent orator, second to none In
his time,12 and his skill in avoiding the problematic rii' became
legendaryP

was a client (maw/a) of the BanG Oabba, of the BanG Mal)ziim, or of

the BanG Hiishim.4 He was nicknamed "the spinner' (a!-ghazziil), and

although the sources are unanimous in maintaining that he was not a

spinner, they fail both to explain why he was given this designation
and to specify his real profession.) I-lis physical appearance, on the

2 Ibn al-N3dim, AJ-Fi1vist (Beirut. ltd.), Takmifa, l

3 Cr. J. Van Ess. "Vne lecture a rebours de I'hiSlOirc du mu'tm~ilisrnc", Revue des
Eludes Isfamiqrces 47 (979). p.4l
4 Ibn KhalJikiin, WafaylJt af-A'yon, cd. lI.lsnn 'Abbas (Beirut In.d.]). vol. VI,
P. 73-4; al-Murlaoa, AmOli, p. 113:3; Ibn al-Murtad5, "'unya, p. 18:5.
5 AI-JalJi;r. af-Bayan .....a/-Tabyin. cd. 'AbeI aI-Salam Harun (Cairo, 19(8). vol. I.
pp. 32:21 - 34:1; Abu HiliilllJ-'Askari. Kitab a/-A.....a'il. cd. Muoammad lll-Misri
and Walid Qassab (Damascus. 1975). vol. 11. pp. 137:9 - 138:1. Van Ess hali
suggcsted that Wasil was indeed a spinner, but that the Mu'ta7jla attempted 10
cover Ihis up, since it was considered a base profession ("Locture", p. 42). lliis
low esteem, however, was accorded to the weaver Cha'i1c). not 10 the spinner
(shalzot). The lauer, indeed. was considered a praiseworthy occupalion for
women, and there is no evidence that it was considered a shameful one for men.
(R. Drunschvig, "Metiers viis en Islam". Studio Isl(Unica 16 (1962). pp. 41--60. and
esp. p. 45). The verses referred to by Van Ess (ibid. p. 45) as a proof of Wasil's
being "un marchand de draps". are, in fact, rhetorical qucstions the point of
which is to emphasi7.e that Wasil could not have been a merchant. See
aJ-'Askari. Awa;l. p. 138:5, 13-11.
It should be noted that a verse of Bashshiir b. Burd appears at lea.~ in one
source wilh reference to the 'Aua/, not Ghazlal. One could conjecture that.
through a scribal error. an additionnl diacrilical point turned an 'aua' (in the
sense of 3 Mu't3zilite) inlO a ghazlaf, a spinner. In this case. the words of
al-Mubarrad (a/-Kam;/, cd. W. Wright. Leipzig. 1864. vol. J, p.546): "IVa-kana
nultazifiyyan wa-/am yakun ghauii/an" could be understood as corrocting Ihe

reading in Ihis way. The bulk of manuscript evidence. however, renders this
conjecture unlikely.
H is perhaps worlh mentioning that the rOOl 'zl in Syriac relales also to spinning.
O. Payne Smilh, A Compendiou.s Syr;ac Dictionary, Oxford, 1961, p. 4(9). If lhe
lenn MU'IOlita was originally connected to spinning. then we could assume a
connection between Wasil and Syriac-speaking Christianity. 1 was. however,
unable to find any special rolc played by spinning in the life of Syriac
Christians in general or of SyrillC monks in particular.
6 "Mut/(arjb aJ-khalq". see al-'Askllri, AwlJ';/. p. 001.
7 JiiOi h Bayan, I. p. 22;9 and AbU al-Faraj aHsfahiini, Kilab al-Aghiini (Cairo.
1929). vol. 111, p. 145:13-14 (quoting verses by Bashshiir b. Burd); al-'Askari.
Awa'il, II. p. 130:6-1; al-Shllrif al-Murta(jii, Churar al-fawa'id wo-durar
a/-qalo'id ('" Amam, cd MuI,lammad AbU al-Fadl Ibrahim (1954). I, p. 165:Jl
8 AI-'Askari. ibid. II. 134:4-5; 'Abd al-Jaboor, Fadl. p.2345-6; Ibn al-Murla<,la.
hlunya, p. 18:15. and see It 11 below.
9 AI-'Askori, A.....lj'if. II, P. OOU
10 Sec the contemptuous remark of 'Amr b. 'Ubayd, AI-'Askari, ibid. p.I30:6;
al-Murlae,Hi. Aman. I. p. 165:11.
It AI-'Askari, ibid~ p. 130:12; 'Abd al-Jabbiir, Fadl, pp. 234;7-11, 235:4-9; Ibn
al-Murta(,lii. Munya, p. 18:16-20.
12 'Abd al-Jabbar, Fad/, pp. 235:11-12. 238:14-15; al-Khalib al-Baghdiidi. Ta'r'i1ch
&ghdiid (Cairo-Baghdad, 1931). vol XII, p. 175.
13 Jii1)i~ 8ayim, I, p. 241; al-'Askari, AwajJ. II, pp.
I322l; al-Murta<J5,., AmQli,
I. p. 163:11-12; Abu al-Qiisim al-Balkhi, "Biib dhi1cr al-/1lu'wz;la min maqiJJiu
al-islamiyyin", Fadl, pp. 65:2 - 66:5; Mubarrad. Komi/, I. p. 547; Ibn Khallikan,
Wafayot a1-a'yiin, vol. VI, p. &19-20; and sec Wiisil's famous KhUlba in 'Abd
ai-Salam Harun, Nawodir al-Ma1chlilfat (Cairo, 1951), vol. II, pp. 134-136; H.

ron -

269

TIle beginnings of the MU'lazila

S.:mlh Stroumsa
This laboriously acquired eloquence was not used for artistic or
literary ends: Wasil was no aesthete. His main interest was religion, in
the broad sense of the word. Personally he was a puritan, always
piously on guard against temptations. Although he was married, he
lived a life of continence.14 He is known to have shunned money.u
The money which he inherited or received as a prize was distributed
for charity,!' and, as mentioned above., he practiced prolonged silence.
All these restrictions were common among the early nussak,ll and
indeed Wasil constantly strove to be counted among those known for
their religious observance (aJI! a/-dln).l' His piety, however, was not
that of lhe solitary, and he never missed an opportunity to admonishl '
Thus, when on their first meeting 'Aror made a condescending rcm.., rk
concerning Wa:>il's neck, Wasil retorted by reproving 'Amr for finding
fault with God's creation.20 On another occasion, when 'Alnr lost his
temper, Wa:>il sternly warned him against the "devilry lurking in an
angry utlerance".21 Yet despite his sternness he also knew how to win
people over, allowing them to feel his equals.21
This combination of piety with a didactic bent was probably
the driving force behind Wasil's public activity. What set him apart

14
IS

16

17

18
19
20
21

Daiber, lVu,Jil ibn 'Ara' a's Prf!digf!r und Thf!oIogt (Leiden: Brill, 1988),
pp. 23-36.
'Abd al-Jaboor, Foell, p. 2359-10, where WiiSil i... quoted :is S::tying: ~Lay.fa Ii Ii
aJ-nisa' QiJja". Both Wasil and 'Amr were childless, see Fa4I, p. 234:11
See his eulogy by al-Asbfil b, Wasil al-Shnybiini: "wala sarra dinaran wallJ
masso dirhnman~, Awa'ir, p.I38:4; lbn al-Murlada, Munyo, p. 18:9; 'Abd
al-bboor, Fa41, p. 238:8-11
Fadl, P. 239:19-22; Awa'il, p. 131:1-10.
See Tor Andrae, "Zuhd und MOnchtum, zur Frage von den Beziehungen
zwischen Christentum und lsbm-, U Mondf! OritnJo/ 25 (931), pp. 296-327. I.
Goldziher, "De I'ascelisme aUJI premiers lemps de I'lslam", RII R 37 (898).
pp. 3t9-328. rp. Gf!Sammtllf! Sdvif,tn IV, p. 164-167 (on silence). Soc also Ibn
Qutaybo, 'Uyiin oJ-akJobiir (Ca;", I928X ~ KilM oJ-,rJod. p. 35l
See Ibn al-Murtadi. MlUIya, p. 2lI2: and see al-D.1lkhi, MaqOJilJ, p. 56:20.
On the e:trly Zu1lhiid and lheir social involvement see L Kinberg, "Wh;lt is
meant by ZotKr, Studio Islamica 61 <t985l, P. 27-44.
Ibn al-Nadim. aJ-Fihrisl, p. 1.9; al-Murtadii. Anuili, p. 165:12.
Al-Murl.ll.l. AnliJJi, p. 164:1-7.

22 Sec 'Abd al-Jabbiir, FalJl, p. 241:20-22.

from other preachers was the fact that both his intelleaual curiosity in
all religious matters and his feelings of rcsponsibilily knew no hounds.
He was careful to give alms only to the piousP When Basra's water
supply required improvement, Wasil offered the honorarium due to
him for a khurba (which he would not touch anyway) for that
purpose.24 For a while he used to meet wilh intellectuals of various
religious backgrounds, among them a Manicllaean and a Buddhist,2) He
is remembered as the first to have grappled seriously wilh the
Buddhist challenge,26 and Ihe first to have wriuen against the various
Muslim sects as well as against other religions.21 It is said that he used
to spend the night in prayer, Slopping frequently to jot down
arguments in an imaginary dispute.21
Composed and pious, learned and full of religious fervor, Wasil
was admired by many. Little wonder that 'Amr was also CJptivaled by
Wii.$:il's measured eloquence.

Abii 'Ulhman 'Amr b. 'Ubayd b. Bab (d. 144 Ii) was al fi"" a
c1ienl of Ranii 'Uqayl. Ihen of 'Unida. a clan of Ihe Yarbii' b. Malik.
His grandfather had been a captive from Sind; his father belonged to
the despised sluu(Q in Ba.sra.29 'Amr himself was a student of al-l:Iasan
al-Rasri (d. 110 Ii). and ahhough Ihe same claim is sometimes made for
Wasil, it is evident that 'Amr was much closer to aI-Hasan and much
more involved in his "circle" of lraditionalists and~ "Qadarites';Yo

23 Ibn al-Murtadii, MlU1ya, Po 18;6-7.

24
25
26
27
28
29
30

AI-'Askari, AwO'jl, p. 136:7-1Q.

Both religions of rn::trked ascelK: ch:tractcr. See aI-AghiVti, III, pp. 146:12 - 147'2.
Ibn al-MUrt3<J,i, MlUIya, Po 21:5-10.
Ibid.. P. latl-l~ al-'Askari, AwO'i/, Po 129'1-5Ibn al-MUrt343. MlUIya. p. 19'14-16..
See, for exampk., Ibn Kh:lllikall, WafayiJJ, 111. p. 460.
As noted already by Wilferd Madelung, Du lnUJm aJ-Qluim ibn IbriJhim lUId
dit GlaubtnJlthrt der Zaidittn (Berlin, 1965), p.7. See al-Balkhi, Maqiilol,
p. 68S: 'Va-huwa (j.e. 'Amr) min jiUm asblW o/-l)asan (Nashwan aH:Hmyari,
al-l)u.r al-'in, cd. Kamal Mustafa, Cairo, 1948, p.1II:12 reads m in jubl(Jl"),
8

The beginnings of the MU'laula

270

S:lrah Stroomsa

Al-I:lasan apparently thought very highly of 'Amr, and called him "the
best among the youth of Basra'~ )1 some of the slOries about ai-Hasan
are also lold about <Amr.l l It is said that he prayed all nigh~
that
his forehead carried the mark of constant prostration.]) For (orty ye:l.I~
he performed the baij every year on (oot, giving his mount to the
weaker pilgrims.34 He never laughed, always looked as if returning
from his parents' funeral, and behaved as if hell had been created (or
him alone.lS Even orthodox writers, who miss no opportunity to
discredit him as a M"~lQddj"z. do not deny his nsceticismJ6 Like Wasil.
he was exceedingly careful in his speech, and was famous for his
honesty and sincerity." Like Wasil, he was a powerful preacher?' and

and

31

32
33
34

35

36

compared 10 Tabaqat, p.65:2: 'ntaqata Wasil i/ti al-Basrn, {a-(azima

aJ-/Jcuan", See also To'rii/J Baghdad, p. 166:12 and al-Murtac.ta. Amiin, p. 165&
where 'Amr is the one who is described as ~min osbiib al-l,Iasan
l'>oq-taiiimidhilu", whereas Wasil is the outsider who pulls 'Ann out or lhe circle.
AI-I}ur ai-'in, p. 11:11-12. See also Ibn Khallikart, Walayiit, Ill, p. 460Jo-13. The
version which adds: ".. , provided he does not lransmil badith~ (Ta'rikh
BaghdOd, XII, pp. 170, 181:13) is clearly a Ialer orthodox oorrcclion. Sec also 'AtxI
al-Jaboor, Fo4l, p. 245:10 (where 'Amr is called: ~la'im asbiW ai-~/as(JJl1.
See 1-1, Riner, ~SlUdien lur Geschichte der islamischen FrOmmigkeit", Dtr
Islam 2\ (1933), pp. 1-.56, aod sec below.
See ror inst.1nce AI-B.1Ikhi, Maqaliit, p. 68:11; 'AW aI-Jabb5r, Fat/I, p.2412-3,
and sec Q. 48:2&.
AI-Balkhi, Maqldal, p.68:IO: 'Atxl aHabb5r. Fat/I, p.243:2; Ibn al-Murtada,
MunJa. p.22."9-IO. On Ihi.. ascelic practice see Gold7jhcr. "AscCtisme", p. 318, (.
Gesanulleite SdlTillen. p. 163).
AI-Balkhi. MaqallJJ. p.69;1o-l2; Ibn al-Murtai. Mun)'a. p. 22:5-7; and sec Ibn
QutayOO, 'U)'iin, pp. 351; 355:l7 - 356:2 (on aH;lasan al-Basri).
Dhahabi, Milan a/-ilidiiJ Ii noqd a/-ri;iU (Egypt, 1325 H), vol. 11. pp. 294-297;
Ibn Khallikal\ WalayOi, III, p.44Ck Ta'rilUr Baghdad, XII, p, 166: al-D:iraqulni,
AJchbiJr 'Amr b, 'Uoo)'d, cd, J, Van E..~ (TradilionaliJli.u:k Po/tmit gegen 'Amr
b. 'Ubaid, lU einem Tut des 'Ali b. 'Umar ad-[)ijraqulfIi, Deirul-Wicsbaden.
1(67). pp. ~16. But see Ta'rilth Baghdad, XII, pp. 174, 179, 182-183. which implies

lhat 'Ann ""':IS morc inlerested in dcb:uing than in prayer.

37 Ibn Khallikan, 1Valayot, 111, p. 460:11-13: 'Abd al-Jabb3r, Fat/I, pp.246:8-9,
24rJ9-20, 247:25 - 24&1.
38 Contrary 10 Van ~ "Lecture~, p. 51. Soc al-Mas'ooi, Muru;, VI, pp. 2lll rr~ 212;
'Abd al-Jabb:ir, Fot/I, p. 247:7-15.

27t

had numerous followersJ' who trusted him blindly; they were called
"Mu'taziJa",40 Later orthodox sources endeavor to depict 'Amr as a
mere lacrymose epigone of W~il41 Mu'tazilite sources. however, do
not share this view, They depict 'Amr as a leader in his own right, and
since Mu'lazilite writers had no interest in underplaying Wisil's role,
there is no reason to doubt their evaluation of 'Amr's pooition in the
early Mu'tazila. In an important but oddly neglected passage in the
Maqaril al-TOJibiyyin. Abu ai-Fa raj aHsfahiini (d. 967~ says: "Amr b.
'Ubayd's posilion among the Mu'taziJa was such that he had their full
obedience.: if he took off his shoe, thiny thousand (,mu',azilis) look off
Lheirs.'41
There can be very little doubt as to the meaning of the name
Mu'taziJa whcn applied to 'Amr's disciples. The verb i'wzaJa meaRS ''to
withdraw", and in its most common use. as given in the dictionaries
and attested in f/aditlt literature. it denotes some sort of a~tinence:
from sexual activity, from worldly pleasures. or, more generally, from
sin.41 'Amr taught his followers to be "the party which a~tains" <i.e.,
from evil; aJ-/irqa aJ-mu'tazila~4 asceticism was their mait striking

39 Which explains 'Abd al-Jabb3r's cardul distinction betwcc.n thotic who are ~min
tJ$/:tiib Wiisir and those who arc "min a$b(Jb 'AmI'. Sec, for instance, Fat/I,
I' 252Jl-IO.
40 See al-Mas'ooi, Muru;, VI, p, 21, which describes 'Ann as ~shaykh al-mu'larifa
Ii wtJqlihi wg'l-awwaJ IjhiJ".
41 See. for installce, aHlagdikli, al-Farq bayn aJ-firaq (Oeirul, 1977). p.98:11-12
42 Maqalil a/-TaJibiyy"in, cd. A1.Jmad Saqr (Cairo, 1949), p. 209-.3-4. On the shoe as
un instrument which may legilimalcly be used in administering mild correction
to erring Muslims, see "I-Malali, al-Tanbih wu'l-radd 'alii ahl al-ahwa'
wo'l-bjdd, cd. S. Dcdcring (Isw.nbu~ 1936). p. 29:22 - 3O.L
43 Ibn Man~r, Lisan aI-'Arab, s.v. 'zl: Wensinck., Concordallce tt indicts de to
tradition musulfl'lll,M, voL IV, p. 207.
44 See Ibn al-Murta(ja.. Tabaqiit, p. 2:6-14. and al-Murta(ja., Munya, p.29 - 3:.l
where it is said lhal 'Amr was lhe first to encourage his followers to call
themselves "Mu'la1.ila~ 'i-anllObm tlazallllln a/-~ulma". The meaning of this
tlitill is explaillCd by a btu/ith which 'Amr used 10 quote: "my umma will split
into more lhan seventy scets, and Ihe most pious aod God-rearing among them
is the one which abstains" (abarruhil wa-arqahil a/-lirqa a/-nw'lazila). See also
'Abd aHabb5r, F04/, I' I~tl

213

1be beginnings of the MU'lllzila

272

S:lr:ah Slroumsa

characteristic. They were given the name "MU'13zila" in reference 10

their pious asceticism, and they were content with this name.'"

The interpretation of the name Mu'tuila as "ascetics" is not
new. It was already suggested-by Goldziher, who assembled many
examples of the use of "Mu',azilitc" in this sense'" and pointed out the
ascetic charncter of Wasil and 'Amr..n The evidence marshalled by
GoJdziher is compelling. and his explan:uion of the name "Mu'tazila",
which has since gone out of fashion, deserves to be re-instated. To his
intcrprcl<llion. however, I would like 10 add the following suggcstion:
the use of the word mtltaziJa in the sense of "ascetics" is independent
of Wasil and 'Arne, and probably predatcs them. Like Ihe Phnrisccs

among the Jews and the anachoretes among the Christians. early
Muslim ascetics derived their name from their "withdrawal". The
question of whether this parallel usage points to some generic
relationship between the Mu'tazila and non-Muslim (probably eastern
Christian) ascetic trends would require a separate study.41 At any rate,
by the first quarter of the second Islamic cenlury ascetics, or even
loosely organized group; of ascetics, were called mu'tazila. II follows
that Wi$il. 'Arnr and their early followers were "Mu'tazilitcs" before
the existence of a Mu'tazila as we know it, and that it was only later,
through a process of diversification, that this word
the proper
name of a movement, while other words became the technical temlS
for asceticism4'
Furthermore, since it was 'Arne who belonged to al-I.lasan's
circle and whose ascetic traits were more pronounced than Wasil's, it is
possible that it was 'Amr who brought with him his supporters and the
name nulrazila when he decided to pin hands with Wasil
The following pages will seek to demonstrate thai this
hypothesis enables us to gain a better understanding of the various

recame

45 Sec 'Abd al-Jabbir. F(J(jJ, pp. 165:19-24, 166:l-2; al-'Askari. Awii'i/. pp. I~J4 -

002.
46 J. Gold7.iher, -Arabische Synonymik der Ask~-, Du {slam 8 (1917), pp. 207 ft
rp. Gesammdte Schrifttlt V. p.410 fr.; idem, Vorlesungelt fiber den
{slam (Heidelberg, 19252), pp. 94 fr.; see also idem, -Islamische Pok:mik gegen
Ahl al-Kit3b-, ZDMG 32 (1878>. p. 353. note :\ rp. Gesantmdle Sdtriften II. p. U
Goldziher eoncenlffitcd on expressiort'i such as riihib mU'lazitl' when ll'iC(1 as a
synonym of -rahib munqa(t-. Other examples, nol. mentioned by Gold7.ihcr, arc
Jud:lh ha-LeYi, al-kitiib al-Khnzari, cd. D.Z. D:lnelh and H. Den-Shammai
<Jerusalem, 19TI>, p. 1m ("man jtoUJ!a wa-tazaModo"), p. 171:16, C"a/-iliziU wa'1
inqifii' itii 'Alfiih-); and also al-Malali, Tanbih, p. 28:16. where those who
separated (l,ozalii) from al-l;la53n b. 'Ali after his abduction in faYOtJr or
Mu'awiya explain their conduct by saying: we shall deY'Ole ourselves to study
and worship. therefore they were called -Mu'ta7ila- (,rashraghilii btl-'i{m
wa'Fibiida, fo-SUII1II1U bidhiiHka mu'lazilal
47 Gokbjhcr. VorlwUlgell, p. 95. It is remarkable thai many modem scholars were
aware of the asceticism or the founders of the Mu'tarila, and yet saw no
conoection between this 3SCtticiw and the name -Mu'tazila-. See, for instance. R
Nyberg. Enqdoptdia of {slam. $.Y. "Mu'la7jta~ idem, ... Amr ibn 'Ubayd et ibn
al-Rawendi, deux reprouYCs-, in R. Brunschvig and G.E. von Grunebaum,
C{assicisme el dedin culturel dan.t fhisloirt de f1.f1am (Paris. 1977), pp. 125-130;
Fu'iid S:lyyid in the introduction to his edition of Fadl aJ-jriziil. p. 12; Van &>,
"Lecture-, pp. 45-46, S6, 62.

48 See, however, note 5. above, and note 128 below. On the PhrHisees, sec
Encydopdia JwJaico <Jerusalem. 1971}, vol 13, Sov.; on lhe Al'I3choretcs. see. for
example, Hans Litunann. A llislory of ,h~ Early CJuuch (English trans.;
London, 1960, vol IV, pp. 124-ln
49 See al-Shaykh al-Mund, Awiiil a/-maqaliU Ii al-madhilhib a/-mJd.hllulJl, cd.
'Abaslcali (Tabriz, 1371 '-0, p.6:1-:\ for whom the Slatemcnt that there was: 00
tti,ld prior to Wa~il ami 'Amr means that it was not a design'llion for any
specific sect (wa-Iam yahll qabla dh1JJika yu'ralu aJ-l',jziil wa-llJ JdJlla 'lI!al/ltJlI
'ala foriq min a/-ttlu). See also Sayyid's introduction to Fadl, p. 26, and sec
al-Balkhi, Maqaliit, p. 115:13-14. It should nevcrthel~ be noted th:u. as a rule,
the epilhcl "a/-mu'tozdi- is reserved ror people who were idemified with lhe
Mu'taz.ilite movement proper. AI-I.lasan aHla$fi. for example, is not called a
mu'uuili. although al-Khawari7Jlli (MafOli~ oJ-'Ulimt, ed. G. Van Vlotcn, Leiden
1895, p.24). counts the basolliyya . , al-munlasibiin ...
al-ljasan
al-Ba.sri as the first among the Mu'wila. The verb fuuaJa. on the other hand. is
more freely used (see note .53 below). S. Pines has pointed to the s::ame ~
of diversification in the use of the term la/am, which, before it came to mean
only -theology-, was also ll'iCd in a political contexl Sec "A Note on an Early
Usc of fie Term MUlakoJ/int, in G. Haer. ed~ The 'Vlama' alld Problems 01
Religion ;11 11k: "Jus/im World OClusalcm. \971, in Hebrew), pp. 18-29,

il"

The beginnings of the MU'Laz.ila

274

Sarah Stroumsa

available items of infonnation about the Mu'tazila, and to develop a

more coherent"account of its early history.

It should first of all be noted that at the time of 'Amr's Mu'tazila,

other meaningo;; of the verb i'tazala are also auested. It can mean any
of several kinds of withdrawa~ and it l1l3y refer to various historical
incidents. Refusal to pay the zaklu to Abii Bakr,JO neutrality at the
Battlc of the Camel, or at Sirrin, refusal to be involved in political
activity altogether, or, on the contrary, active political dissent - all

these arc referred 10 as flizill. J1 The temptation to find a way to

connect this fliza/ with the Mu'tazililc movement is great. Already
al-Mas'udi (d. 956) identifies the supporters of Yazid h al-Walid (d.
126 II) with the Mu'tazila of his own days. attributing to them_ in a
flagrant anachronism, the full-nedged "five Mu'ta.z.ilite principlcs".n
Another attempt to reconcile the different pieces of evidence is made
by al-Nawbokhti, who suggests that the Mu'tazila we know descends
from "the first Mu'tazila", the followers of S.'d b. Abi Waqqas and of
'Usama b. layd, who had adopted a neutral paiition in the civil war.))

50 See al-Nawbakhti. Firaq ai-Shill, ed. Mubammad Sadiq (aI-Najar. 1959).

p. 25:2-4, nnd compare al-Nashi ai-Akbar, UsiJ aI-niiJa/. in H. Van Ess. F,u/U!
mu'tazj(jtisw lliirtsiographit (Bcirul, 1971), Po 14:14-16.
51 AI-Niishi', Usu/. p. 16:15, 17 (Ihe ttiziil of aM al-~adi,h) and p. 18:4. 8 (the
tliziil of Ihe perplexed), bOlh relate 10 the civil war, although the first stems
from pious reluclance 10 be involved in real politics. UsiJ, p. 19:13 applies the
term tfiWllo the acl of lhe Khawa,ij, 3S does also Abu MUli al-Nasafi, who
speaks of the Mmu'laziliyya min a{-lja,uriyyaM
: see M. Bcrnand, "u litiib
aI-rodd 'ala l-bido' d' Abu Ml4t Ma~ oJ-Na.rofi", Annalts IslamologiqutJ 16
(980), p. 77. This last source can not serve as a proof of the potilioo-religiOtlS
origins of the Mu'tazila (rompare Bcmand, p. 48), but only as evidence of the
flexible use of the verb.
52 Muruj, VI. pp. 20. 31. On lhe attitude of the Mu'ta7jla 10 Yazid see Muriij. VI,
p. 32:5-6 and the somewhat oh9cure fXlS"3ge in 'AtxI al-Jaboor, Fad/~ p. 250.8-9;
aJ-Balkhi. MaqDJOi. p. 117:7-11.
53 Firaq, p. 2S16. AI-Nashi, UsUJ, pp. 16:15 - 11'.1 also uses the tenn Mt'awlii' about
this group, bul he docs not ~Ie them with lhe MU'I4l7jla.

2.75

The author of the Ki,lJb a/-usfJ attributed to Nashr ai-Akbar (d.

293 H) lakes a similar course, but for him il is people like Abu
Mlisii al-Ash'ari and al-A~naf b. Qays al-Tamimi who "were given the
name Mu'tazila in those days", because they were unable to decide
which of Ihe twO parties was right AI-Nashl remarks in this context
that Wisil and 'Amr hold the same view, and that they are the leadelS
of the Mu'tazila, but he stops short of explicitly connecting the
Mu'tazi]a of Wasil with that of AbU Miis3."
At the same time. Muslim authors are aware that during the
first few Islamic decades the name Mu'tazila applied to many different
groups, and they endeavour 10 distinguish between a qualified
Mu'tuzila and the Mu'tazila rou: court. This is noticeable in
al-Nawbakhti's "first Mu'tazila", which another Shi'ite source calls
"those who sepanned from both JXlflies" (aJ-rrut'tazi/a 'an aJ-tariqaYlli)."
AI-Nawbakhti also mentions, alongside "the first Mu'tazila", the
i'tiziil of al-A~naf b. Qays al-Tamimi, who, according to him,
withdrew "not in the sense of adhering to the doctrine of i'lizlJl (JlJ 'alii
al-tadayyun bi'/-""izii./) but in the sense of seeking safety from killing
and from the loss of property (in war), and he said to his people: Keep
away (fwzi/id from d~nsion, (for) it is beller for yoU'?6
The evidence therefore shows that before the appearance of the
Mu'tazilite movement the verb i'lazala had not yet acquired a single
technical meaning. The ascetics, the zuhhiid and nusslJk of the time,
were referred 10 as "Ihe MU'lazila",S1 but Ihe verb was also employed
for olher forms of withdrawal. It should also be nOled that later
writers, including Mu'tazilites, could no longer determine where the

54 UsiJ,

11;4-10.

55 AI-Shaykh al-Mul1lj, KitQb al-Jan" (aI-Najar, 1368 II), ~ 5:7-8. 1 am indchtcd

10 Prof. E. Kohlbcrg for referring me to this source.
56 Fir'!!!. p. 26:4. The same prudenl ttiziJI is auributed by al-Dinawari 10 'Amr b.
al-'A$ (aJ-AJ<hbiq al-Tiwill, cd. L Kr.uchkovsky (Lcidc" 1912), ~ t671
57 On the developmenl of Ihe lerminology and pauerns for asceticism around the
lime ~f al-Uasan al-Ba$ri. see L. Massignon, Essai sur Its origints du Itxiq~
Itcllluqut dt la mysliq~ musul~ (Paris, 1%8), p. 165; idtm, EI, s.v. "zuh(r,
and see note 19 above. On Ihe involvement of the early Mu'ta2.ilitcs in these
circles see MassiROOO. Essai. p, 168.

The beginnings of the Mu'tazila

276

277

Sarah Slroumsa

Mu'tazila got its name.S1 The etymologies they give should be regarded

as not more than informed guesses..

The turning point in the history of the MU'13zila is undoubtedly the
encounter of W.i.Sil and 'AmT. As Madelung has noted. Wasil recorded
the event for the benefit of (uture generations in his book "On what
came to pass between him and 'Amt'." Unfonunately the book is lost
It is usually assumed that "what came to pass" between the two refers
to their fil1it meeting, in which 'Arne was won over to W~irs stand

concerning the religious stale of the Muslim sinner. The

heresiographical reports are of varying length and precision,60 but the
following outline can be extracted from them: 'AmT presented lhe view
of al-ijasan al-&$ri, that the Muslim sinner is a hypocrite (mulIllfiq).
By means of a series of syllogisms W:i$il convinced him that this view
was untenable. and advanced his own theory of the intennediary state
(al-manzila bayna al-manzilalayn). The Muslim sinner is just that a
sinner (jiJsiq), and does not deserve the title either of a believer C3s the
Murji'a claimed) or of an infidel (as the Khawarij would have it). 'Amr
graciously admitted his defeat, the two eslablished their own school,
and as a happy end Wiisil married 'Amr's sister. We are also told that
Ihe Mu'tarila derived their name from this incident, but as to exactly
why the heresiogrnphical literature offers more than one explanation:6 1
I. AI-Hasan sealed lhe ruplure by announcing: 'Wa,il seceded
from us (i'tatala 'anna)". H.s. Nyberg suggested that this story was an
orthodox slander. designed "to rehabilitate al-I:lasan and brand the
58 See Van Ess, "Lccturcft , p. 6S.
59 Madelung, Va Imam, p.12. n. 20. See Ibn al-Nadim. Fihris'. ibid.; Ibn
Khallikin, Wa!aylu. VI, Po IU(Hl
60 Sec 'Abel al-JabOOr, Fa41. pp. 234:12, 235~10; al-Murutlja, A.maH, PI'. 165-166;
Ibn al-Murtada, Mwnya, pp. 22:18 - lll6, and compare al-Khayyiil. Ki,lJb
al-l nlisOr, cd. HS. Nyberg (Cairo, 1925), pp. 164:14 - 167:9.
61 For a brief summary of the most common interpretations sec G. MonnOl.
P~nuurs

musufmans ~t rdigions irani~nnts, 'Abd al-Jabbar ~, us

1974), pp. 6-12. 1 do not Wldemand the etymology orfered by
Massignon (Th~ Passion o! al-llaflaj, trad. H. Masson. Princeton, 1982). 111,
P. ln, n. 33: "a volunt.1ry solitude of the heart" which the sinner acquires.

d~vancicrs (Paris,

Mu'tazilis as heretics".62 At first sight the faa that the anecdote appears
in Mu'tazilite as well as orthodox sources would seem to lend it some
credence and 10 invalidate Nyberg's suggestion.6) But there are flaws in
the story. In order to "secede" from al-I:lasan's circle, W~il would have
had to have belonged to il in the first place. BUl as we have already
seen, it is unlikely that this was the case.64 The one who belonged to
the circle was 'Amr, and indeed in the version given by Ibn Qutayba
(d. 889 H) WaSil is not mentioned, and it is 'Amr's secession that
al-l:Iasan deplores.u But even in this version the story is at variance
with what we know of the relations of al-ijasan and 'Amr. 'Amr, for
one, never thought of himself as having broken off with al-l:Iasan; he
continued to regard himself as a disciple of al-l:Iasan who was
transmilling his leaching." Yet another version is given by Ibn Durayd
(d. 321 Hl, who says of 'Arnie b. 'Abd Qays: "II is he who separaled
from al-l:Iasan, so that they were named MU'lazililes".61 'Amir, like
Wiisil and 'Amr, was known for his ascetic behaviour as well as for his
interest in theology.6I But it is unlikely that his standing was such as to
enable him to launch a new movement by his "separation". The fact
that the story is told about him too makes its apocryphal char~cter
more trallSparenl"
Nyberg's suggestion should therefore be accepted, with the

62 E1,. s.v. "MIl'tazila-, p.787. See also W. Montgomery Walt. "The Political
Altitudes of me Mu'La2.ila", J RAS (1963), p. S6.
63 AI-Shahrastani, al-Milat wu'l ni1)o1. cd. W. Cureton (London. 1842), p. 33; 11>0
al-MunarJa, Tabaqa" p.3:12-13; MUlahhar b. Tahir al-Maqdisi, Kifiib aI-Bad'
waFfa'rikh, cd Huart (Paris. l899-l919), p. 142:5.
64 See above, note 30 and Lhc corresponding texL
65 Ma'Ori!, p. 243:19; see also 'Abd al-Jaboor, Fa4I. p. 166:14-15.
66 AI-Balkhi. MaqlJJ&, P. 69:8-9. See also M~gnon, Essai, pp. 200-20l
67 AJ-lslrliqlJq, 1, pp. 213-214. quoted by Sayyid, in his introdoct.ion to Fa41 P. 16.
68 See Sayyid, ibid. P. 16.
'
fJ) It should also be noted that Cor all practical purpa5Ci there was little difference
bet ween W1
as- and a1-l:lasan, and therefore no apparent reason for the breach:
al-I;fasan adopted a neutral position conceming the !ifna (Massignon, Essai,
p. 174; Van Ess, ftlccture~, p. 56), and as to the hereafter, Wlisil like al-ijas:J.n,
acknowledged tile existence of only lwo abodes (al-Shahrast.5ni Mila! p. 33:16;
Ibn al-MurlarJa. rabaq&, p. 4:5-6).
'
,

11lC beginnings or the Mu'tazila

Sarah Stroumsa

278

additional assumption that in 1:ller gener.lIions the story lost its venom,
and beC3me so widespread that even the Mu'tazilites considered it
authentic.
2. According to other sources it is not at-I~asan but Qatada
who coined the name Mu'tazila when, on seeing 'Arne's group, he

asked contemptuously: 'What is that Mu'tazila up

lOr"' This anecdote

rings truer than the first one. in the sense that there was indeed some
rivalry between Qatada and 'Ame?1 It also allows for 'Amr, and not
Wasil, as the leading representative of the MU'I3zila's break with
orthodoxy. Nevenheless, this story cannol be accepted at face value.
Qatiida could not have been the onc to coin the term Mu'tazila.. He

may, however. have been one of those who used this word in a
derogatory manner, thus helping to establish the somewhat general
tenn as the name of a specific group.71
3. Some writers. in addition to reporting the above anecdotes,
try to derive the name Mu'tazila rrom the dogma or at-manzi/a ooyna
at-manzi/acayn itself. This dogma, says al-Mas'Udi, is the oore or the
i'riza/.1J The exact way in which the term is explained depends, of
course, on the speaker. The orthodox say th.::tt the Mu'tazilites got their
name because in adopting Wasil's posilion "they contradicted Ihe
consensus".14 The Mu'tazilitcs, on the olher hand, claim Ihat their
posilion is the one agreed upon by the consensus of the umma. thai all
other posilions are innovations. and Ihat they took the name Mu'taloila
"because Ihey avoided all innovations",1) or because they avoided "both

70 'AM al-Jaboo.r, Faql, p. 166:14-16; Ibn Khallikan, lValayllf, IV, pp.85-86; Ibn
al-MurtarJa. TabaqiiJ, p. 4:11-14; al-Murtada. AmiJ/i, p. 167n
71 cr. Van &i. "Lcclurc-, p. 51 and notc l
n Sec al-B::alkhi. Maqafiit, p. 11513-t5; 'Abd al-Jabb:ir, Fatj/. p. 166:11 14-16, and
esp. p. 166:21-28: -Fa-Iammii sammawhum bi-dhiJlika wo-ktJINUtJ. sara /aqaban
'ofii mit dhakarnil'.
13 MIUUi, VI, p. 21.9; al-Balkhi, 1.1.01, p. IU:H2; see also of-/.Iiu ai-in. p. 204.
74 !.AmmO Un/alu a/-iimii' Ii dhQ/jka swnmu a/-mu"ali/o", Ibn al-Murt3da,
Taboqiit, p. 5:1; idem. MU1lytJ. p. 4:11; 'Abd al-Q:ihir aHl:Jghdadi, aJ-Farq bayno
al-liraq (Beirut, 19TI). p. 98:11 and see al,!;() p. 18:11 f'al-Qadariyya al-r,w'uui/o

'." ai-1J<uIq'l
15 u4tizOlihim h/l aJ-aqwaJ a/-muJ,dalha.... Ibn al-Murtada. Tabaqiit, p.5:6-1;
MUIlytJ. p. 4:ll

279

exaggeration and laxity'?'

4. Some scholars read political implications into Wasil's theory
of the intermediary Slate. They believe that it relates to the status or
the parties in the first civil war, and that it indicates W5.$ils (X)litical
stance with regard to the events or his own time. According to
al-Khayyiil (d. circa 200 H) Wasil claimed that in the war between
'Ali, Taiba and al-Zubayr, and also in the war between 'Ali and
Mu'awiya. only one of Ihe panics oould have been in the right It
follows that the other pany was in the wrong, and since: it committed
a grave sin (kabfra) it should be considered to be in the state of /isq.
Since, however, all the wilnesses to this war are biased. we have no
way or telling which of the partics was right and which was wrong?'
The i'riziJ/. according to this interpretation, is lhe refusal both 10 br.Uld
one or other of the panics as infidels, and to j.Jstiry the conduct or one
or other.
This interpretation is in line with one we have already
encountered. As mentioned above, some of the meanings or the verb
i'cazala may have had political connotations. The inronnation given by
al-KhaY)'3l puts this line or Ihought on finner ground: here we have
not ani)' a use or the word, but also see Wasil himself subscribing to
this use.
But the evidence demands carerul examination. It stands to
reason that WaSil held some position concerning the civil war: he was
not someone who would have no opinion on such a major issue. II is
also probable lhat he discussed the mailer wilh 'Ann, and thai Ihe
latter was convinced by his arguments: 'Amr admired Wasil,1I and
since he was much less ellgage than WaSil, he is likely to have let
Wasil decide in such worldly matters. It is also possible that the
position Wasil adopted was the one described by al-Khayyal although ShIite (and even MU'laz.ilite ShIite) writers fiercely deny this:

76 -AI-mu'ltJlila hum a/-muqtasida.!a-itazo/QJ oJ-ilrlll wa'l-Iaqsir", 'Abd al-Jaboor

{quoling Muf)ammad b. Yaziliidh at-~bahini, d. 230 1-0, Fa4I, p. 165:25. See also
.I-Dalkhi, MaqQlGi. P. 115:S-u
n AI-Nishi ai-Akbar, U.fiU, pp. 53-.54; Ohahabi, MitiJn., Ill, pp. '1h1 H.
78 'Abd .H.l>bar, F04/, p. 61J5-2J; ai-I./;;' ai-',n, pp. 2al:2O - 11.7.

280

28t

Sarah Slroumsa

The beginnings or the Mu'tazila

accord.ing to lhem Wiisil was whole-heattedly pro-'Ali." BUl we have

no indication whatsoever that Wisil ever identified his position as
;'liz&.IO There afC no grounds for believing that Wisil enooumged hl"
followers to be mu'taziJim in this sense, or that 'Amr and his followers
added this meaning to their name "Mu'lazila".ll The writers who
connect the name Mu'tazila with Wasil's view of the civil wars wrote
at least lWO hundred years afler the latter's death. They clearly had no
idea of where the name came from, and so they proceeded to associate
wilh it all they knew about the early movement

champion".n The j'lizal was, according to this view, Wasil's creation; it

was decidedly political and 'Amr's role in it was seoondary"
Nyberg's political interpretation of the Mu'tazila has been
widely aceepted,u although his specific applicllion or this interpretation
was sometimes subjected to rerinements. Thus W, Madelung, W.
Montgomery Watt and 1. Van Ess rejected Nyberg's identiJication of
the Mu'tazila with the 'Abbasid da'wa. Wasil's du'iJJ, as we know from
a poem of the Muftazilite Safwan ai-Ansari, were much too
conspicuous to have been part or an underground movement." But
Watt and Van Ess also read into the term i'lizal some political
meaning. For them, the i'rizOl did not represent an active involvement
in JXJlitical dissent but rnther political neutrality, which "the Mu'tazilites
have practiced for the rirst time at a time when, in the sJXlSms of a
dying empire, almost everybody took sides in one way or another.""
And still morc categonC4lly than Nyberg, Van Ess argues that "Wiisil is
the only founder of the MU'lazila: 'Amr b, 'Uboyd kepl his distanc"" for
a long time, until the moment when, after al-~las..1n al-B:l$ris death
and before the advenl of the 'Abbosids, he joined the movement" U
Both Nyberg's original theory and its modiried versions err in
ascribing to the whole Mu1laZiia the ideas (or the temperament) of only
pan of it. Wiisil was politically aClive (although, as we shall presently
see, not necessarily in the service or the 'Abbasids}, 'Amr was not, and
he did not become politiC:llly active even after meeting Wasil" 'Amr

The so-called political Mu'taziJa deserves further scrutiny.
Nyberg, who was the first to insist on the political meaning of
mu'tazila (both the mmlC and the movement), argued Ih:1I "lhe teaching
of Wa.$i1 on a/-mamila can only be perfectly understood i we see in
it the theoretical crystallisation of the political programme or the
IAbbasids berOTe their accession to power.un Some or our sources speak
of Wiisil's dll'at, and Nyberg identified lhem with the bearers of lhe
'Abbasid da'wa. According to him. when IAmr and his "section or the
Qadaris of the aliI aJ-!llJdith joined the MUlazila", lhey "reinforeed lhe
more politically inclined Qadariyya or which Wasil was the

79 A/-l;liu 01-';'1. p. 205:7-12; al-B.1gh<J5di. Farq. p. 10012-13; Nyberg. 1, p. 789.

80 'Abd al-Jabbar, Fadf, p.142:8
(relying on Abij 'Ali al-Jubbai) (d. 915 H)
seems 10 sec no connection between lhe debates over lhe stalus of lhe

re.

participanls in lhe civil wars and the name Mu'tazila. Neilher docs
al-Sh..1hrwni, Milal, pp. 33-34, who clearly distinguishes between the dogma or
the intermediary state and aUitlKb to the civil wars.
81 There is. in fact., no mention in our D1rccs of Wasil ever having used the terms
ttiw/ or mu',azila. As to 'Amr, lhere is ooly one anccdole in which it is implied
that he encouraged his disciples to call lhcmselvcs af-{irqa ol-mu',azilo (see
above, n. 44). Madelung (Oer Imam. p. 30), who sees the badith mentioned in
this anecdote as stemming from the earliest. polilical MU'la7jla, a.~mcs that
Wasil look the name ;tizm hom lhis !Jadi,h and gave it a new meaning. Our
sources, however, place this had;'h not in polilical, but ralher in ascetie cireles
(Surya" al-Thawri), and il is always connected wilh 'Amr, never wilh Wasil
82 Nyberg. 1, p- 789.

83 Loc. dl-

ci,.-

84 Nyberg. Ioc.
idem. "'Amr ibn 'Uooyd", pp. 126-12&.
&5 See, ror example C Pellat. u milieu ooJriett et 10 {ormaJiOfl de Ca1)i; (Paris,
1953). p. 175: L. Gardcl and M.M. Anawati, Introduction
10 thiologie
musul~ (Paris, 1981), p. 4686 Van Ess. "Lecture", pp. 29, 46: and see Madelung. Oer lmivn, p. 30. and below,
p. 281-&

87 Van Ess. "Lecture". p. 65; W. Montgomery Watt, Ihc Polilical AttitlKles or the
Mu'tazilah", Journal of ,~ Royal Asiatic Society (1963), pp. 55-56. Sec also H.
L:loost, us schisf71s dalU tlslam (Paris, 1965), p. 53. and Madelung. Der lmiim,
note 77, and sec now Daibcr (above. n. 13), pp. 15-16.
88 Van E"" "Lccture~, p. 56.
89 Sec below. pp. 284-5.

Sarah Stroumsa

282

The beginninp uf the MU'lazila

can be regarded as politically neutral; 90 W:lsil cannol, and he certainly

could not have been the sole founder of a movement which had
neutrality as its cornerstone.' And, as we have already seen, the
description of 'Arne as a secondary figure who joined an already
existing Woi$ili Mu'tazila is not corroborated by our sources. n
A p:1ragraph in the ShIite work Maqali/ al-TlJlibiyyill, which
has hitherto attracted lillie attention, helps elucidate the role of
political activity in the (ommtion of the Mu'taz.ila
Wasil b. 'Ala' and 'Amr b. 'Uooyd mel al the house of 'Uthm5n b. 'Abd
al-Rabman al-Mal)ziimi. of the people of Basra. and they took counsel
concerning injustice.. 'Amr said, "Who, Ihcn, will take OYer Ihis rommisUon (i.e.
the Caliphate), of lhose who are tntitk:d LO it and who deserve itT n W~I
said, "Dy God. he who has become the best of this umma," Mul].ammad b.
'Abdalliih b. al-l:Iasan, he will undertake il" 'Amr b. 'Ubayd said, , do not
think we should pledge allegiance to. and engage in revolt 00 behalf of, a
m:m whom

we have not tested and whose conduct we do I10t know:

283

Both the position of W~il and of 'Amr can be easily explained.

".<,'1
we
are told was brought up and educated by AbU Hiishim, i.e.,
\

'y ...., "

" I
Sh-'
'Abdallah b. Mu~ammad b. al-l:Ianafiyya. An over-zca ous
lite
tradition even presents him as havin~ ~n brought ~p by .MUI)a~lm.~~
b. al-l:Ianafiyya himself, although thIS 15 chronolog lC::t,lIy .lm~lble.
At any rate, Wisil had a clear sympathy for the ~It.ds, In t~e
argument as to whether only the best of the ununa (a1-Ia,N) ca." be lIS
leader or whether someone who is less than the best (,naf4ul) may
also be given the task, Wasil advocated im~mQl al-ma.'Q,r;/: t~is
allowed him to accept the legitimacy of the ftm three cahphs while
regarding the fourth caliph, 'Ali, as the best of the umma." 'Anu's
hesitant answer is also typical: his position was that only the best
Muslim (al-I04j1) deserves the baY..loo In olher words, he had 110 'Alid
sympathies. nnd. as the paragraph from the Maqaril
al-Talibiyyin testifies, he had no inclination to make practical

Wiisil responded vehemently, trying to demonstrate that there was

none better than Mul)ammad b. 'Alx1allalt"

90

91

92
93
94
95

Allhough it would be a mistake to picture his neutrality as a sort of

non-alignment. 'Amr's neutralilY was non-involvement, which is hurdly a
~jlive political staOl1. but ('.tlher a lack thercof. Sec Mizan. III, p. 296.
See below, pp.283-4. Scholars who adopted the polilical intcrprclation
conccrning thc rise of thc MU'\.l17jla and its namc also admiucd u\a! there was
a political differcncc belween Wasil lind 'Amr (Sce Nyberg, EI, p. 787;
idem, ,- Amr ibn 'Ubayd~, pp. 126-1'28; Van ~ ~Lccture", pp. *65: Massignon,
Passion, III, p. 152) wilhout trying 10 rcconc:ile the two faclS.
See above, pp. '270-1.
"Fa-mtJlI yaqUnw bi-hlJdha a/-amr mi"u11lU1 yast(Jwjibulul wa-huwtJ taJw ahJ?'
"KlJayr hiJdluhi a!-UI1UIlQ."
Maqluil, p. 293:4-14. On Mu!)ammad "aI-Mfs a/-zakiyyo, who was known for
his zuhd and nisk (al-Mas'udi, Muruj, VI, pp. 189-192) see F. Buhl,
Encyclopedia of Islam, s.v. "Mul)3mmad b. 'Abdallah", and J. Lassner, The
Shaping of 'AbbiJSid Rule (Prince lon, 1980), pp.69-74. The Maqiuil
al-fiilibiyyin is undoubtedly tendentious, and il would be iocautious 10
cooclude on the oosis of this passage ak>oc that the cooference described here
actually look place, or that Wasil tried to organize a revoh in favor of

Mubammad b. 'Abdalliih. AI-Taftanini's doubls concerning lhe chronological

soundness of the Maqatil are, therefore, quilc in place. But one can. on the
basis of this passnge, draw an outline of the impression IMt the pcr.;on.11ities
of Wasil and 'Amr lefl on nHsfiihanis sourett Hcnce, Taftaninis rejcclion of
the Maqa/ifs (radition, on the assumption that Wasil and 'Amr shared the
same political view, is difficult to accepl; sec Abu 'I-Wafa 31-Tafta7iini,
Wasil b. 'Ata'," in U. Amin, ed.. Etudes philo.fOphique.f offertes au Dr.
Ibrahim Madkour (Cairo, 1974), pp. 49-50. For the reference to al-Tafta7.:i.nis
study I am indebted to Prof. J, Van Ess.
96 AI-Balkhi, Maqru1JJ, p. 6&3-4; 'Abd al-Jabbiir, F(J(jI, p. 164:17-18 300 p. 215:1-2
On Abii Hashim's i'lizal see M. Sha.ron, Black Banners from the
Easl (Jerusalem-Leiden, 1983), p. 112, n.43, and compare al-Dinawari,
oJ-AkhbOr oJ-TiwOJ. P. 274.
97 As noted already by al-Murtada. AmiJn, p. 165:2-1 See 'Abd al-Jaboor, Fat/I,
p. 234:4-5; AI-'Asknri, Awa'il, p. 130".3-4; Ibn al-Murtad5, Munya, p. 11:7. See
also Sh.1hrastani, Milal, p. 31, and Madelung. fN.r Imlun, p. 34.
98 But not ror the line revered by the Imamiyya. they were too worldly for
Wasil's taslC; see 'Abd al-JabOOr, Fa4l, p. 239:16; Ibn al-Murtad5. Tabaqat,
p. 33; Nlem, M""Y". PI' 2(}-2l
99 AI-Nastli' ai-Akbar, UIW, pp. 51-52:3; Malali, Tanbilt. p. 17:12 ff.. and csp. p.
28:.0, 22; oJ-l)iT oJ-7.. p. 205.
100 AI-N5shi ai-Akbar, Ulw, pp. 54:6-7,521J-20.

284

Sarah Siroumsa
The beginnings or the Mu'tazila

285

con~ions.

and no desire to be involved in politics.L01

We are not lold whether at that meeting 'Arne was convinced.
What we arc told is thal at some point "a group of the inhabil3ms of
Basra, from among the Mu't3zita, amongst them W<4il b. 'Ata' and
'Arne b. 'Ubayd and others" went [0 Suwaiqa. seeking an interview
with Muhammad b. 'Abdalliih. They were nOI received by Muhammad,
but only by his brother Ibrahim, yet this was enough to induce the
whole group 10 pledge allegiance 10 Mui)ammad b. 'Abdalliih.102 In
another instance al-Isfahani tells us lhal Abu Ja'far al-Mall$ur himself
was in this group, and we can therefore infer that the meeting took
place some lime before ai-Mansur could openly claim the Caliphate.Lo1
Al-Tabari's report of the same meeting confirms the presence of
al-Manl$ur and of a mu'tQzifa, but does not mention either 'Amr or
W:ll$iLlo4
In fact, it is veey doubtful whether 'Ame participated in this
plot, and even if he did, his involvement was short-lived. 'Amr
respected Mubammad b. 'Abd Allah for his piety, but he did not
regard him as the mahdi.lo~ Years laler, after Wfi$i1's death and when

101

102

103
104

105

See al-Tabari, Ta'rikh al-RusuJ wa' I-Muria, ed. de GOOF (Lciden, 1%4), serl
vol. I. p. 149:5, where 'Amr is reported to have said: "By God, if the
umma were to entrust me wilh ilS affairs, I would not know where to put
them" (i.e.. 10 whom to entfUSllhcm). In another illSUlocc al-Tabari reports that
'Amr was rcsib'llCd to seeing his din dwindle awolY, because he did 1101 trust
anyone Obid. p. 7). This resignation WOn him the title of "3 coward", but even
this did not change 'Amr's preference for "the shade and cool water" over the
lreachery of politics. See 'Abel al-Jabbar, Fa41, pp. 250:5-8, 14-19,246:11-11
Maqiilil, pp.206, 214, 293: Madelung's contemion (Der Imam, p.37, n. 165),
that Maqiilif fails to mentiOn lhe presence of any Mu'tazilite in this mccting, is
incorrect. On Ibdihim b. 'Abd Allah sec L. Veccia Vaglieri, rIP, s.v., and
Lassncr,op. cil. pp. 71-87.
Maqiilil, pp. 200-209.
Ta'rikh. 3, I, pp.143, 152. Madelung, Du Imam. p.37, following Nallino.
identifies this Mu'tuzila as lhe political (as opposed to theological) MU'Ulzila.
But the participation of "real" Mo'tazililcs like Bashir al-Ral)l}51 in lhe revolt
of Ibrahim b. 'Abd-Allah (145 H, see below, note 105), indicates that the
mu'tazj/a who came 10 the mccting was practicing jtizlJJ on more than one level
Sec 'Abd aHabb.1r, Fa4/, p. 226;16.

al-Man$iir was already Cc11iph, 'Abdallah b. al-(~asan wrote to 'Amr to

106
ask his support against al-Man$ur, 'Amr excused himself.
When
Muhammad's brother, IbrahIm, was preparing his revolt, some of the
Mu'~azila joined him, but 'Amr neither supported him nor turned him
over to al-Mal1$ur.101 AI-Man$ur had great respect for 'Amr; 'Amr, for
10.

his part, preferred 10 keep aloof f rom h1m too,

..
.
The picture of 'Amr's political (or rather, apohtlcal) behaVIOur
as it emerges from these anecdotes is fairly consistent The anca:lote
quoted above about the consultation at the house of 'Uthman
al-Mahzuml can therefore be taken as a fair example of the dynamics
of political relations between Wiisil and 'Amr. Despite his admiration
for Wa$il and his closeness to him, 'Amr did not adopt Wiisil's political
views.IM What brought them together was not a political understanding.
Nor was it political cooperation that kept the movement as a
whole logether. 10 fact, any attempt to find a political classification
that would fit the whole early Mu'tazila is bound to encounter serious
problems. We have seen the Shiite, particularly Zaydite, e.1gerness to
claim the Mu'tazila as its own. But al-Mas'ud! dryly infonns us that
according to the Mu'tazila anyone can be an imam, i.e., the imam need
not necessarily be a QurayshitellO (let alone a descendant of 'Ali).
AI-Mas'udi's information ties in well with the attempt of some scholars
Lo show the existence of a certain affinity between the early Mu'tazila

106 Maqmil, p. 209'3. Sec also Ta'rikh BaghdOd, XII, pp. 168-169; 'Abd al-Jabb:ir,
Fa4/. 1,241XH,
107 'Abd al-Jabb.1r, loco cil.; Maqiilil, p. 209'3-4; Ibn Khallikan, Wa!ayat, III, pp.
461:21-462: 4, Ibnihim's revolt broke out a year after 'Amr's de3th, and
ai-Mansur is reported to have said, 'The Mu'ta1.ila did not revolt against me
until 'Amr b. 'Ubaid had died" ('Abd al-Jaboor, Fadl, p. 228:121 Among the
rebels were some Mu't37.i1ites, although their number was probably
insignificanl, so thaI sympalhetic writers prcscnlthcm as "wujUh aJ-MU'lQzila".
Among them was lhe militant ascelK: Bashir al-Ra~I:l3I, who fought wearing
his izlu of suI (al-Balkhi, MaqlJ1iiJ, p. 117; 'Abd al-Jaboor, Fa4/, p. 226).
IU! See Din.1wari, al-AkhhQr al-Tiwi"Jl, p. 380-.8 fC.; Ibn Qutayba. 'Uyiut, I, p. 209;
Ibn al-Murllldii, Munya, p. 24:5; 'Abd al-Jaboor, Fa4I, pp. 242:7-11 249'5-20.
109 As acknowledged even by Nyberg and hili "sthoor, sec above. n. 9L
lIO MlUuj, VI, p. 24; and sec also al-Niishi ai-Akbar, Usid, pp. 63:12-64: 1

286

Sarah Stroumsa
The beginnings or the MU'lazila

and the Khawarij.1II There are, however, some equally important

indications of affinities between the early Mu'tazjla and the Murj.'all2
And although the Mu'tazila as a whole accepted the dogma of "the
intermediary state", its interpretation by the various Mu'razjlites reveals
a wide range of politico-religious views.1Il
The political plur:llism of the Mu't3zila is epitomized in the
question of imiltnat al-!a4il wa'l-malt/lll,lI. In his repon on the
Mu't3zila, al-Nashi' ai-Akbar distinguishes two groups: those who
believe Ihal the Muslim communily should always have an jmorn, and
those who regard "the imam as dispensable-II) This last group al-Niishi
identifies as the Silliyyat a/-Mu'lazi/a. The figures listed in this group
are nOt very well known:' They are described as purilans who
objected to the accumulation of personal propeny,1I1 and who aspired
to a pious Muslim community, different from all other earlhly
communities. Their view on the imama reOects a refusal to deal with

til

112

113

U4

tIS

116
U7

See Jal)q, Boyan, I, p.23, and COOlpafC al-Mubarrad, Kamil, I, pp. 546. 547,
and esp. p. 446; Nyberg. EI, p. 189; Bem:md, art. ciJ.. above, note 51); Van Ess.
-Lecture-, p. 47, sees a ccruin resemblance of lhc MU'uWla 10 the lbadiY3- His
atlempt 10 see in W4il's mll'iJr04a 10 'Amr -a kharijle lCndency", (ibid.. p. 53)
is, however, mislaken; Wisil's argumentalion is presenled as an illam., an
argumenl ad absurdum. and does llOl reflect W4iI's own opinm
AI-Khayyiil, In/isar, p. 97:13; Ibn al-Muna4a, Mllnya, pp. 11:20-21. 15.:17-21;
'AM al-Jabbiir, Fadl, pp.229 rr. (concerning the connection willi Ghaylan},
al-Ash'ari, MaqlJllu al-lsllJmiyyin wo-iH/Uaf al-musaJlin, ed. H. Riner
OSUlnbul, 1929), pp. 132-139, and compare al-Shahrastfini, MUa/, p. 33:12 (about
raith as a complex or Ihe -qualities or good~); al-Niishi' al-Akoor, UsiJ, pp.
63:4-64: 3 (aoolll their common view cooccming lhc immnn).
See, ror inslance, al-Nashi' ai-Akbar, ibid~ pp.49-61; Malali, Tanbih,
pp.30:6-14, 32:13 - 3116; al-Mufid, ai-Jamal, pp. &:17 - 11"2. AHblkhi was
apparently aware of this political pluralism, and he fidgets in an aucmpt to
reconcile it wilh the theory lllat the name MU'laziia originaled rrom lhe
qoestion or oJ-manzila bayna a/-manzilatayni (MaqiiJiJJ, p. 11S:l3-tS).
Although, as noled by Van ~ (Frw nw'uuiJiliscM llfuuiog,aphie, p. 44), il
~ not figure in Muslim hercsiograptly Ilf1'lOOg lhe Slllpk: Mu'tazilite dogmas.
UsiiJ, pp. 49-50; see alJo Mas'lidi, Murili, VI, p.lli-7.
See Van Ess. ibid~ pp. 43-44.
On ta1),im al-tnakiuib by later Mu't.azilites see, ror example, al-Khayyat,
I nlisiir, pp. 55:17, 69.8-10. 77:4, and see me rollowing note.

287

politics allogether. We may assume that this gro~p incl~ded the old
hard core of the Mlltazila. those who had remamed faithful to the
Mu'ta.z.ila's original character. Their pious, ascetic characteristics now
led them to be referred to as Sufis. but in fact, using the archaic
terminology they would have been called "Mu'tazilat al-Mu'tazild',1II
The other group. which believed in the necessity of the i mama.
included both 'Amr (who was committed to imamat al-fatJ,ifY I9 and
WaSil (who was willing to accept a maftJ,liJ),12o As noted above,12l their
difference of opinion in this matter could not have provided a solid
ground for political union,
But the union was not meant to be political. Like the sr'fiy)'aI
al-Mu'wzila. WaSil and 'Amr were first of all Mu'tazilites. Even Ihe
less austere Wasil pT3eticed the tabrim al-makasib, and since this
;'tizol, this pious asceticism, is the only common denominator of the
two figures., it must be assumed that it was al the TOOt of their alliance.
as well as of their name.
In order to discover the meaning of this alliance between W:i$il
and 'Amr we have to turn to its product, the early Mu'tuilite
movement. Its most notable activity was that of the du'at, the
missionaries.l12 Safwan al-All$3ri, who describes them in his poem, says
that they had a typical outfie a turlxll't.l2l a trimmed gannent.124 and

118

119
120
12.

122

I2J

124

On Ihe beginnings or thc Suri movcmcnl see J. Spencer Trimingham, The Sufi
Orders in {slam (Odord, 1970, pp. 4-5. Van Ess has argued Ihat ascetic
tcndcncies became morc pronounced in the MU'137.ila only lalcr, aher Ihc
revolt of Mu~ammad al-Nafs aJ-ZiiJciyya (-Leclurc-, p.66) or rrom lhc time
or Abu MUs5 al-Murdar (Fruk nlJirazilitischt J1[uesjograplU~, pp. 114-115'> As
I have lried to demonstrate in this JXIper, however, all our sources draw a
picture an or ascetK; early MU'lazila, or which al-Murdar would be merely a
natural descendant
UsUl, p. 51
Ibid. PI' 51-52.
Pp. 283-5.
See al-Balkhi, Maqala" p. 99:8; al-Ja!)i~ Sayan, I, p.25:6; 'Abd aHa boor,
Farll, p.237:4; Ibn al-Murtad5, TabaqlJt, p.32:4; Miltlya. pp. 19:8 - 20::5;
al-'Askari. "'wO'il, p. 138:7-12
"Imnut, which is compared 10 birds hovering O'o'er their heads, see aHa!)i~
Ba}lin, I, P. 2(d0; 'Abd al-Ja1>OOr, Fa41, p. 242:15.
"Qa" IwddQb", J'~i" ibid. p Uill

288

Sarah Siroumsa
The beginnings of the Mu'ta'l.i1a

wide rimmed sandals made of two slrips.I'U Their lower lip was
shaven,l26 and their moustache closely CUI.I21 It was .1101 Wasil who had

fashioned Ihis uniform: there are indications that at least SOffie of these
peculiarities were commonly recognized as Ihe signs of asceticism and
piety.11I We are told that the du'iit's mission kept them away from
their families, a trail which. though not necessarily implying continence.
is cenainly meant to bring to mind lhe ascetic 'uzla.'2' Safwan also
praises the du'llt for their nightly vigils, and says lhal their foreheads
were marked by constant prostration. We recognize here. the old
Mu'13zila, 'Amc's people.no But the organizer, the one who launched the
movement, was Wasil. The du'llr were his exclusive concern; he was
Ihe one who gave them their instructiol'lSt and they showed him total
and unswerving obedience.111

125 "Li-na'lihi qiOOJiini Ii ,udn raJ,ib aJ-khawasir", ibid~ p. 26H. The two strips of
the sandal were considered SU./1na, see a/-J(Jnu' aJ-Sal)iJ; ... ltI-BukhiJri, cd.
M. Rudolph Krehl-Th.W. Juynboll (Leiden, 1!Xl6), vol IV, pp. 88-89; Wen'iinck,
ConcorddnL;e, s:v. "n't ".
126 .. Anfaqa fntl.flilma", J5t,i1. ibid~ P. 26:14.
127 "IMii sMrib", ibjd~ p. 26:11
128 AI-Tirmidhi (Nawadi, a/-u~iil fi ma'rifal ahadi,h al-rasw lal-Madinal
p. 9:19) enumerates a few characterislics of Quistian monks, for whom real
seclusion ('uzla, 1.18 or tliWl, 1.l6) was tOO demanding, and who substituled for
it false, superficial worldly zuM (11, 22-23). Among these characteristics are
Ihe lurban (al-';mma al-ma'(ula, cpo n. 123 above), lhe Irimmed garmem
("tashmj, al-thiylJb", ep. Il 124 above), and lhe Irimmed mOUSlaehe ("half
al-shl1rib", ep. n. 127 above). Whatever other implicalions this passage may
have, il is clear from il that these exlemal peculiarilies were recognizable in
Ihe ninlh cenlury as signs of zuhd, and may have been associated with
ChriSlian asceticism. For Ihe reference 10 this importalll text 1 am indebted to
Dr. S. Sviri. It may be wOrlh noting lilal Ihe Mu'lazilite saw no harm in their
resemblance 10 monks (al-Khayyat, InJislu, pp. 69.11,18 -702),
129 AI-'Askarj, Awa'U, p. t38:lo.
130 See al-Jabi1. Baylvt, p. 26:11-12, and note 34 above.
131 AHal:li1. jbid~ p. 25:7; 'Alxl al-Jabb5.r, Fat/I; jbid~ p. 237:14-16 (where 'Ullun5n
ai-Tawil is qUOted as saying: "As long as Wasil lived. until he died. ....'C did not
consider ourselves as having any dominion over ourselves. For he would S:ly 10
one of us. "Sct OUl 10 a certain coumry", aoo it was impa;sible 10 refuse him"

289

According to Abu Hilal aI-'Askari (d. af'er 400 H) Wii;il was

the first to be called nl/llQzi/LI31 It is very difficult to accept thIS
statement literally: as we have seen, the assumption that around Was~l's
time there were other people called mlllazila is more consonant With
the available evidence. But certainly one could claim that W5..$il W3S
the fimt mU'lazi!i in the sense that Wasil turned the mfllazila into a
movemenl Before Wasil "the Mu'tazila" was a term applied, without
much precision, to various kinds of ascetics. 11 is only after Wasil had
appeared on the scene (and probably not irnm~.iatc1y thereafter), t~1t
the name Mu'laZila came to designate onc specthc movement, holdmg
specific doctrines.
Yet we should not think that Wasil's only contribution to the
Mu'tazila was his practical talent. He was the one who gave the pious,
ascetic Mu'tazila an intellectual twist. 'Amr too was interested in
theological questions. such as free will or God's unity,m But it is to
Wiisil that all the records JX>int as the initiator of kalamic discourse.
This is perhaps not the right place to offer a comprehensive
analysis of Wasil's k.alam. We should at least note, however, that in
this maller, the cryptic reports to hand corroborate one another, and
appear to be authentic. They hardly ever attempt to attribute to him
such later developments as "the five principles". Wasil developed .his
own terminology, which appears in vario~ unrelated texts, and testifies
10 W:isil's systematic thought. By way of an example of this systematic
thought we can mention the concept of the criteria of knowledge
(aw;lIlJ aJ-'ilm), AI-Ja~i?- mentions four such criteria as Wasil's test for
the truth'?4 According to 'Abd al-Jabtxi.r Wasil prcx:1uccd the concept

'Uthmiin knew this from his own experience (Fa4/. P. 241:1-13),

132 Awa'i/, p. 129;13, and compare Mizan, II. p. 295133 Mas'ooi, Mluuj, VI. p. 212; VI. pp. 234-236,
134 Quoted by al-'Askari, Awii'if, p.129:6-7. Wasil's trulh docs not rcl:lle to lhe
correctness or otherwise of legal rutings, as suggested by Madelung (Du
Imam, p. 15) following S. Pines, Beitrage zur islamischen AJom~nldtre (Berlin,
1936), p. 126, n. 3, although Wasil's erudition included also fiqh, see 'Abd
al-Jabb5r, FaLjl, p. 236:16. Nor is he l3lking about the authenlicilY or otherwise
of hadi,h, as suggcsled by Van Ess ("L'autoritc de la tradition prophClique
dans la theologic mu'tazilile", La notion d'aufhorilt au Moyen Age: Islam,
Byzance. OccidenJ (Paris., 1980), p. 213}, Rather, Wasil is above all cooccmed

290

Sarah Siroumsa

of the criteria for knowledge in a dispute between Jahm b. Safwan and

the BUddhis~ On this occasion Wiisil ~ned thai onc way (wajll) (0
know God IS by means of the proof by deduction (da/m.m Wasil's
pre~~pation with epistemology is confimloo by the list of his works,
which mcludes Ihe title "a book concerning Ihe way 10 the knowledge
of Truth".J36 It is probably in Ihis book Ihal he developed his concept
of "criteria", Another example is Wasil's inrerest in logical treatment of
exegetical problems. We hear that he wrote a book on "ma'ani
at-Qur'iJn",m and indeed, according to another report. Wiisil was the
first to establish such exegetical rules as the distinction between general
llI
and ~~fic VCJSeS. And, of course, his idea of the intemlcdiary slale,
a bnlliant kalamic solUlion 10 a delicate problem, should also be
mentio~ed in this context: both his book on the manzila bayna
al-mQl~zllaIaYfl and his kitab a/-lawba probably dealt wilh it~)' Wasil's
theoreucal, theological interest. in this question appears to be undeniable.
These concepts and topics characterizing Wasil's thinking are
often mentioned in passing in our sources. The first two examples
cann~t b~ regarded as conscious inventions, since they are only
m~rglnal In the context in which they appear, no special atlention
being drawn to them. All three are examples of lopics peripheral to
later kalamic, Mu'tazilite thought, and they consequently cannot be
suspected of being projections of later problems. We must therefore
assume that what we are told of Wasil's preoccuJXuion with theological
matters is authentic.
Van Ess has suggested that "the inclination rowards systematic

The

beginnings of the Mu'tazila

291

theology, which... marked the physiognomy of the school, was not

due to Wasil, and certainly not to 'Amr, but to 0ir;ir".140 According to
this interpretation, Oicir b. 'Alllf (ca. 190 1-1) went out of favour in the
movement, so that his teaching was attribuled to Wasil. In the same
line, an anecdote according to which Abu al-Hudhayl had received
from Wiisil's widow two ooxes of books containing her lale husband's
manuscripts, would be for Van Ess a transparent attempt to bolster
Abu al-liudhayl's authority by inventing for him an acceptable
master.14 \ On closer examination, however, the wording of this last
anecdote is not exactly flattering to AbU al-Hudhayl: he is depicted not
as the faithful student of the great master, but rather as someone who
had no knowledge of his own.I42. It should also be mentioned thai
according to another repon by the same widow, W:i.$i1 was a prolific
writer,l43 so that the report of two boxes full of his writings is quite
plausible. FunhemlOre, Wiisil's theological activity is altcstoo in a way
which speaks for its authenticity. We thus have every reason to believe
that Wisil was indeed the originator of the Mu'tazilite Kalam.
Equally genuine was WaSil's interest in other religions. His
theOlogical system was shaped by the challenge of meeting with
adversaries,'44 and his emissaries were encouraged to seek dio;;putations
and instructed on how 10 argue in them.14S They were C':l.lIing to "the
Truth",146 or "to God's religion",14' not only to convert infidels, bUI alo;o

140 Van Ess. "Lecture", p. 66. W. Monlgomery Walt (Islamic Philosophy and
1'Ileology, Edinburgh, 1979, p. 60) also argued that "there is nothing to suggest

ill
136

137
138
139

wilh lrue as opposed 10 f;Jlse religion, see below, notes 146-141 and lhe
corresponding text, and see S. Stroumsa, 'The Signs of Prophecy: The
E~lergence and Early Development of a Theme in Arabic Theological
Llleralure", Harvard Theological Review, 18 (1985) J)p. 101-114.
'Abd aHabbiir. Faljl, p. 240:18; Ibn al-Murt.a(j5., fabaqlu, p. 34.
"K. a/-,rabil ila rna'rifal al-J,.aqtf, Ibn al-Nadim, Fihri,r/, lakmila I; Ibn
Khallikal\ Wafaylu, I. p. 11; Ibn al-Murt.a!ja. MUIl)lQ, p. 21.:5-10.
Ibn al-Nadim. loc. cit.
AI-'Askari, A~'iJ, p. 1299-ll
Ibn Khallikan, Wafayat, lV, p. 1l; Dhahabi, Milan. III, pp. 267 ff. On the
relevance of the tawba to the intermedil:lry statc see, for cXilmple, Mas'Udi
Muruj, VI. p. 22.
'

141

142

~hal ~iisil or 'Arm had any interest in Greek philosophical conceptions",

ImplYlllg that they wcre f10t really interested in theology. In ,mother conlext,
nnd without referring spccificnlly to the beginning of theological discourse,
Walt suggested Ihal Dishr b. al-Mu'tnmir invclllcd his relationship to Wasil in
order 10 cleanse hinlSClf from the nccao;;alion of being n Jahmite (il"IC Political
AlLilodcs", f1. 53),
Van E.~ ~Leclure". p. 39.
"F~-'a,ra an yakiin jull kafamihi min dha/ika", 'Abd al-Jnbb5.r, Fo{j{, p.
~41.18-19; Ibn al-Murlad5., Taboqiil, p. 35; Munya. p.2llJ-15.
Ahd al-1:lboor, Fatlf. pp. 165:11-12, 234:14.
See 'Abd al-Jabb5r. FfJi/l, f1. 235..6 -1 and notes 25-26 above.
AI-Ilalkhi, /lfaqiJiOl. P. 67-JH3; oJ-IIUr aI-'in, p. n

143
144
145
146 AI-Balkhi,loc. cu.
147 iJ-mi.r aI-'in, p. n'6.

292

Sarah Stroumsa

to establish belief in Islam on a sound theoreliClI fooling.

The beginnings of the Mutaz.i1a

293

We have only vague information about the ways in which Ihe

Mu'laZilite da'wQ functioned. Nevenhele&li it seems clear that it was lhe

kernel (rom which Mu'tazilite Kalam grew.
It appears. Ihen, Ihat what drew Wasil and 'Arne togelher was
Ihe desire 10 stan a movement of religious and intellectual renov31iorl
The movement had a strong pietistic colouring, introduced by 'Ann

and his group of early MU'lazililCS, who also brought with them the
nam~ Mu'tazil~ Th~ movement also had a strong inlerest in theology,
and Il sent em1SS3r1es to propagalc its theological ideas by means of
religious disputation.

If Ihe picture presented above is accurate. Ihen some current views on
early religious development in Islam must be modified.
l. The nOlion, already common among the Muslim
heresiographers, that the various religious movements of matllre Islam
were already distinct and sepanlle in the early Islamic period, appears
to be fa1se.1 1 Theology and asceticism, Kalam and Sufism, all emerged
from Ihe same milieu.'' The terms used to describe this milieu,
2llhhad, flussak, mu'tazila, and even qadariyya, were vague and were
lo~sely applied to a varielY of allitudcs.lSo Only later, as specific
alUtudes became clearly definGd and differentiated, did the various

terms become proper names of specific groups and religious

movemenlS.
, .
2 The political interpretations of the rise of .the Mu ~la are
indeed very appealing. They fit the preval.ent basl~ assumption of
modern research (as well as of many Muslim h~r~~i1ographers). ~hat
every religious development in Islam had ortglnally ~ P~lltt~
me3.ning.'~1 A political interpretation of Ihe rise of the Mu taz1 a 3.
makes it easier to account for the Mu'tazilite fervour of the 'Abbaslds
during the miJIIIlL
,.
.
But a political understanding of the rise of the M~ taDla fads
to account for the Mu't3zila itself. It provides no explanation for the
transition from a supposedly politically centered movement to
Mu'tazilite Kalam There is moreover no one political platfor",l on
which all early Mu'tazilites were united. In faet. one could almost ~e
in the early Mu'tazila a miniature replica of JX>litical disagreement In
Islam. We are therefore bound to reject the JX>litical approach to the
problem of the Mu'tazila. As the name of the movement indicates. it
grew on ascetic, not on political ground. The Mu'tazilite movement
Slarted indeed with Wasil and 'Aror. and it W1S a movement of Kalam

148 That Muslim Iradilional hercsiography lends to view the heresies as dislioct
from Ihe beginning needs hardly 10 be demonSlralcd. As for modcrn
scholarship, sec, for example, P. Crone :md M. Cook, lIagaristrl (CambrKlgc,
1980), p. 95. which, while admiuing th:u "there is no intrinsic inromp:uibilily
between Sufism and Iheology", presenlS Ihe Iwo as emerging from differem
backgrounds.
149 This was already noccd by S. Pines" who suggested thai Mu'l3zilite Kalam and
3 dominant Sufi Iradilion stem from the same school. Ih:l.l 0( Uasan al-Bavi.
See TM Cambridge lIislOry 01 Is/am.. Vol IL P. 788.
00 The most conspicuous cX3mpie of the usc of terms in a vague way is the usc
of Ihc term qadariyya: $Cc. for cxample. 'Ab<! al-Jabb3r, Fat/I, p. 167. as
opposed 10 ai-Baghdadi. Farq, pp. 92-91
1.51

As is implied. for cx:\mrle. b)'

n.

Lewis,. ~Politics and War" in J. Schacht and

C Boswonh. cds.. TM Legacy of Islam {seccnd edition. Oxfocd. 1979). p. 158.