Readings

1. Lapidus, Ira. "Urban Islam: The Islam of the Religious Elites" of A History of Islamic Societies 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002: 81-102.
2. Lapidus, Ira. "Muslim Communities and Middle Eastern Societies" of A History of Islamic Societies 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002: 133-146.
3. Nanji, Azim. The Muslim Almanac: A Reference Work on the History, Faith, Culture, and Peoples of Islam. New York: Gale Research Inc., 1996: 161-173.
4. Ernst, Carl. "Ethics and Life in the World" of Following Muhammad: Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 2003: 108-127.

Summary

top
We can trace much of the diversity in the Muslim world to religious, philosophical, and political tensions that arose in the centuries after the Prophet Muhammad’s death.  Sunni and Shi’a communities, for example, were divided by disagreements on the succession of leadership after Muhammad, while the rise of a Sufi counterculture was in part a reaction to the un-Islamic lifestyles of political leaders.  The early Muslim communities struggled over the authority and legitimacy of community leaders, the relationship between political and religious leadership, and the correct interpretation of the Quran and Muhammad’s life.

One of the most decisive problems for early Muslims concerned authority and leadership.  By the end of Muhammad’s life, most of the Arab tribes had formed a united community of believers (ummah), with Muhammad acting as their leader both in religious and political matters.  But Muhammad was the Seal of the Prophets; the authority of his successor, therefore, would not be based on prophethood.  It was up to the early Muslims to determine the nature and function of leadership in their communities.  When Muhammad died in 632, many members of the ummah felt that the Prophet had not designated a successor, and by general consensus Muhammad’s father-in-law Abu Bakr was elected the first successor (calpih).  Others believed that Muhammad had appointed his cousin and son-in-law Ali ibn Ali Talib as his successor, and believed that Ali, as a member of Muhammad’s immediate family, was best qualified to guide the ummah. Ali’s supporters were known as the Shiat Ali, “the Partisans of Ali”, and agitated for Ali to become the caliph.  In 680, the struggle between supporters of the early caliphs and the Shi’a culminated in the battle of Karbala where Ali’s son Husayn was murdered by the army of Yazid.  The martyrdom of Husayn was considered a grave injustice by all Muslims, but was a profound tragedy for the Shi’a. The commemoration of Husayn’s martyrdom remains central to Shi’a religious identity.

In addition to the problems of succession and leadership, Muslims also debated how the teachings of the Quran and other scripture should be applied in practice. The Quran provided guidance on many aspects of religious and social life, but some felt that it did not contain clear instruction on all possible religious and legal questions.  To clarify the Quran’s practical teachings, Muslims relied on sunnah, the customs and practices of the Prophet as recorded in Hadith, extra-quranic quotations and eyewitness reports of Muhammad’s behavior.  Scholars traveled throughout the Muslim world collecting Hadith, while carefully scrutinizing their authenticity.  Only those Hadith which were transmitted by an unbroken chain of reliable sources were deemed acceptable. All members of the ummah strove to adopt the message of the Quran and emulate Muhammad, who was celebrated as the uswa al-hasana (the most beautiful model).

The Quran and sunnah, the most authoritative guides to religious and social life, were the primary sources for shari’ah, the path of right conduct and behavior as revealed by God.  Scholars studied the Quran and hadith in order to clarify shari’ah. Several schools of jurisprudence were formed, each with its own method for arriving at legal rulings.  Although all rulings were based on scripture, the ambiguity of the primary sources on certain issues required the use of systematic reasoning, based on methods sanctioned by each school.  Some jurists, and later theologians and philosophers, developed sophisticated intellectual methods, some drawing from traditions of ancient Greek philosophy; others became uncomfortable with the application of potentially fallible human reason to religious law and theology, and argued for a literal application of the Quran and sunnah.  Four major schools of Sunni jurisprudence were to emerge from these debates.  Each school attracted its own followers, and at times there were bitter rivalries between schools.   Muslims sought the opinions and guidance of religious scholars, the ulama, marking them as authorities on religious matters.  Political leaders also patronized the ulama, establishing endowments for centers of learning.  In areas where political authority was less centralized, the ulama fulfilled a number of leadership roles, and took on a degree of political power as well.

The Shi’a developed their own approaches to jurisprudence.  While the rulings of Shi’a jurists did not deviate significantly from those of the Sunni schools, their approach to authority was quite unique.  The Shi’a refused to accept the legitimacy of the early caliphs, remaining loyal to the descendants of Ali, whom they called Imams, spiritual leaders.  As a descendant of Muhammad’s immediate family, each Imam was believed to inherit special insight and authority in the practice of scriptural interpretation.  As such, the Imam was considered to be an essential intermediary between God and the Shi’a community.  In addition to hadiths of the Prophet, the Shi’a collected similar traditions from the Imams, extending the sources of shari’ah beyond those accepted by the Sunni jurists.  A dispute over the succession of the seventh Imam led to a further division among Shi’a, creating the Twelver and Ismaili communities.

With the success and territorial expansion of political dynasties, government officials began to accumulate unprecedented wealth and power, and at times their lifestyles were considered at odds with shari’ah.  Following the model of Muhammad’s simple lifestyle, some Muslims, called Sufis, renounced worldly gains and turned to lives of poverty and ascetic practice.  Sufis explored mystical and symbolic interpretations of Islamic rituals and scriptures to uncover their deeper significance.  Most Sufis had extensive training in Islamic law and its guidelines for ritual and social behavior, but strove to apply shari’ah to their inner lives as well.  They formulated a personal, emotional vision of Islam, internalizing the meaning of the Quran and Muhammad’s life.  The spiritual accomplishments of the Sufis attracted followers and students, and Sufi brotherhoods gradually spread beyond local political loyalties.  A Sufi master’s teachings and conduct could become the source of inspiration for followers.  This spiritual allegiance would continue even after a master’s death, with followers making pilgrimages to his tomb.

It should be clear that while early Muslims were unified in their belief in the Quran and sunnah, they came to interpret the meaning of Islam in diverse ways.  All Muslims agreed on the authority of the Quran, but they actively debated the authority of political and religious leaders, the limits of human reason, and the compatibility of spiritual and worldly aspirations.

Guiding Questions

top

1. At the heart of many of the sectarian movements among Muhammad’s followers was the problem of establishing legitimate leadership. How did the early Muslims make sense of the shift in the leadership from Muhammad as the Seal of the Prophets to his successors who could not claim the authority of prophethood? What were the Sunni and Shi’a solutions to this problem? How did the qualifications for legitimate rule differ according to these communities with respect to education, family and tribal identity, spirituality, wealth, and politics?
2. The readings for this session describe different approaches to scriptural, religious, and political authority. What were the important sources of authority for each sectarian movement? In the case where more than one source of authority was accepted, how were these sources reconciled? Think about the role of hierarchical structures of authority. Do you see similarities between authority in Shi’a and Sufi traditions, especially in their concepts of religious leadership?
3. Ernst distinguishes between philosophical ethics based on reason and religious ethics based on revelation (p. 110). How does this distinction relate to the early schools of Islamic law and theology, especially the Mutazilites, Asharites, and People of Hadith? What was the role of reason and revelation in establishing Shari’ah and practicing philosophy? Why did some jurists argue the necessity of reason to interpret the Quran and Sunnah?
4. Ernst argues that “the concept of what is called Western civilization should . . . include Islam” on the grounds of Muslim philosophers’ active engagement with ancient Greek thinkers. After centuries of neglect, European philosophers rediscovered Greek philosophy and translated the works of Plato and Aristotle, as well as the original works of Muslim philosophers, from Arabic into Latin. Greek philosophy, widely considered the foundation for Western philosophy, was preserved and developed by Muslims. Still, Muslim philosophers are rarely acknowledged for this work. Ernst calls this “one of the great areas of selective amnesia about the nature of Western civilization.” How is this selective amnesia “an argument for European superiority”? What are the implications of including Islam in the concept of Western civilization?