Quranic createdness

Quranic createdness refers to the doctrinal position that the Quran was created, rather than having always existed and thus being "uncreated". In the Muslim world, the opposite point of view — that the Quran is uncreated — is the accepted stance among the majority Muslims. Shia Muslims, on the other hand, argue for the createdness of the Quran.

The dispute over which was true became a significant point of contention in early Islam. The Islamic rationalist philosophical school known as the Muʿtazila held that if the Quran is God's word, logically God "must have preceded his own speech".^[1] The Muʿtazilites and the Jahmites negated all attributes of God, thus believed that God could not speak, hence the Quran was not the literal word of God, but instead a complete metaphor of his will.^[2]

History

The controversy over the doctrine in the Abbasid Caliphate came to a head during the reign of Caliph al-Ma'mun. In 827 CE, al-Ma’mun publicly adopted the doctrine of createdness, and six years later instituting an inquisition known as the mihna ("test, ordeal") to "ensure acquiescence in this doctrine".^[3] The mihna continued during the reigns of Caliphs al-Mutasim and al-Wathiq, and during the early reign of al-Mutawakkil. Those who did not accept that the Qur’an is created were punished, imprisoned, or even killed.

According to Sunni tradition, why "tested", traditionist Ahmad ibn Hanbal refused to accept the doctrine of createdness despite two years imprisonment and being scourged until unconscious. Eventually, due to Ahmad ibn Hanbal's determination,^[4] Caliph al-Mutawakkil released him and the Mu'tazila doctrine was silenced for a time. In the years thereafter in the Abbasid state, it was the minority of Muslims who believed in Quranic createdness who were on the receiving end of the sword or lash.^[5]

The influential scholar al-Tabari (d.923) declared in his aqidah (creed) that (in the words of Islamic historian Michael Cook) the Quran is

God's uncreated word however it is written or recited, whether it be in heaven or on earth, whether written on the 'guarded tablet' or on the tablets of schoolboys, whether inscribed on stone or on paper, whether memorized in the heart or spoken on the tongue; whoever says otherwise is an infidel whose blood may be shed and from whom God has dissociated Himself.^[6]

12th century Almoravid jurist Qadi Iyad, citing the work of Malik ibn Anas, wrote:

He said about someone who said that the Quran is created, "He is an unbeliever, so kill him." He said in the version of Ibn Nafi', "He should be flogged and painfully beaten and imprisoned until he repents." In the version of Bishr ibn Bakr at-Tinnisi we find, "He is killed and his repentance is not accepted."^[7]

Arguments and implications

Shia

Al-Islam.org, a website which collects Shia scholarly works, cites ibn Babawayh (c. 923–991) as disagreeing with Sunnis on the issue of the Quran's createdness on the grounds that God's attributes of doing (creating, giving sustenance, etc.) cannot be eternal since they require objects to do actions to. For this to be true, "we will have to admit that the world has always existed. But it is against our belief that nothing except God is Eternal."^[8] Author Allamah Sayyid Sa'eed Akhtar Rizvi goes on to say that Sunni scholars' failure to make this distinction and insistence that "all His attributes are Eternal" is the cause of their belief that "the kalam (speech) of God, is Eternal, not created". Akhtar Rizvi states:

But as we, the Shi'ah Ithna ‘asharis, distinguish between His personal virtues and His actions, we say: [quoting Ibn Babawayh]

"Our belief about the Qur'an is that it is the speech of God. It has been sent by Him – it is His revelation, His book and His word. All is its Creator, Sender and Guardian..."^[8][9]

However, the site quotes another leading Shia Ayatullah Sayyid Abulqasim al-Khui (1899–1992) (in Al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, the Prolegomena to the Qur’an), declaring that "the question of whether the Qur'an was created or eternal is an extraneous matter that has no connection with the Islamic doctrine", and blames the intrusion of the ideas of alien "Greek philosophy" into the Muslim community for dividing the Ummah "into factions which accused each other of disbelief".^[10]

Mutazilah

The adherents of the Muʿtazili school, known as Muʿtazilites, are best known for rejecting the doctrine of the Quran as uncreated and co-eternal with God,^[11] asserting that if the Quran is the word of God, he logically "must have preceded his own speech".^[12]

Based on Q.2:106 some Mutazilah also argued that if the Quran could be subjected to abrogation, with a new verse abrogating an earlier one, it could not be eternal. Other Mutazilah however denied the theory of abrogation and did not believe any verse of the Quran was abrogated.^[13]

Implications

Malise Ruthven argues that believers in an uncreated, and thus eternal and unchanging, Quran also argued for predestination of the afterlife of mortals. The two ideas are associated with each other (according to Rwekaza Sympho Mukandala) because if there is predestination (if all events including the afterlife of all humans has been willed by God) then God "in His omnipotence and omniscience must have willed and known about" events related in the Quran.^[14]

Believers in a created Quran emphasize free will given to mortals who would be rewarded or punished according to what they chose in life on judgement day. Advocates of the "created" Quran emphasized the references to an 'Arabic' Quran which occur in the divine text, noting that if the Quran was uncreated it was – like God – an eternal being. This gave it (they argued) a status similar to God, constituting a form of bi-theism or shirk.^[15]

Remi Brague argues that while a created Quran may be interpreted "in the juridical sense of the word", an uncreated Quran can only be applied – the application being susceptible only "to grammatical explication (tasfir) and mystical elucidation (ta'wil)" — not interpreted.^[16]

Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the Mihna (ordeal)

Main article: Mihna

Ahmad ibn Hanbal

In standing up for his beliefs, Sunni scholar and muhaddith ibn Hanbal refused to engage in kalam during his interrogation. He was willing to argue only on the basis of the Quran or the traditions and their literal meaning.^[17] While this distinction itself is difficult to make in practice, its value is in part rhetorical, for the assertion marks his identity as one who stands by the absolute authority of the sacred texts over-above those who make use of reason. The role of Ahmad ibn Hanbal in the mihna ordeal garnered significant attention in the later historiography of Sunni Islam. Walter Patton (in Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and the Miḥna) presents him as a stalwart of belief, claimed that he did more than any other to strengthen the position of “orthodoxy”.^[4]

The Mihna

Scholars do not agree on why caliph al-Ma’mun acted as he did. Walter Patton for instance, claims that while partisans might have made political capital out of the public adoption of the doctrine, al-Ma’mun's intention was “primarily to effect a religious reform.” ^[18] Nawas on the other hand, argues that the doctrine of createdness was a “pseudo-issue,” insisting that its promulgation was unlikely an end in itself since the primary sources attached so little significance to its declaration.^[19]

The test of the mihna was applied neither universally nor arbitrarily. In fact, the letter that Al-Ma’mun sent to his lieutenant in Baghdad instituting the mihna stipulated that the test be administered to qadis and traditionists (muhaddithin). Both of these groups regard hadith as central to Quranic interpretation and to matters of Islamic jurisprudence. In particular, the rhetorical force of muhaddithin acceptance of the doctrine is then to concede that either or both of the Quran and the hadith corpus attest to the doctrine, simultaneously validating the caliph's theological position and legitimizing his claim to hermeneutical authority with regard to the sacred texts.^{[citation needed]}

The significance of hadith

That the question of the createdness of the Quran is, among other things, a hermeneutical issue is reflected in the variety of arguments and issues that associate with it – whether the Quran or the traditions assert the Quran's createdness, what “created” means, and whether and how this affects the standing of these texts as authoritative and as a consequence, the status of those who study them. Where the Quran is understood as the word of God, and the words and example of the Prophet transmitted through hadith also attain to divine significance, if the Quran cannot be taken to assert its own createdness, for the doctrine of createdness to be true the traditions would have to support it. Indeed, to admit the insufficiency of the hadith corpus to adjudicate what with the institution of the mihna becomes such a visible dispute would necessarily marginalize the authority of traditions. Thus it is not by accident that al-Ma’mun decides to administer the test on religious scholars.^{[citation needed]}

See also

• Quranism
• Biblical literalism
• Bibliolatry
• Exegesis
• History of Islam
• Ibn Kullab
• Islamic schools and branches
• Shirk (Islam)
• Tafsir
• Sufficiency of scripture

References

Patton, Walter Melville (1897). Aḥmad Ibn Ḥanbal and the Miḥna: A Biography of the Imâm including an Account of the Moḥammadan Inquisition Called the Miḥna: 218-234 A.H. Leiden: E.J. Brill.

1. Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia ... macmillan. p. 77. ISBN 9780099523277.
2. RECONCILING REASON AND REVELATION IN THE WRITINGS OF IBN TAYMIYYA (d.728/1328): An Analytical Study of Ibn Taymiyya BY YASIR QADHI. Yale University, 2013. Page 19: "Most early Muslim references state that the first person to begin questioning the nature of God’s Attributes was a certain enigmatic Jaʿd b. Dirham (d.cir. 110/728). If these early sources are to be trusted, we learn that Jaʿd claimed, inter alia, that God could not ‘love’ Abraham nor did He ‘speak’ to Moses. Based on his denial of God’s ability to speak, he argued that the Qurʾān must actually be God’s speech in a metaphorical manner, and not actually God’s speech"
3. John A. Nawas, "A Reexamination of Three Current Explanations for al-Ma’mun’s Introduction of the Mihna". International Journal of Middle East Studies 26.4 (November 1994): 615.
4. Patton, Ibn Ḥanbal and the Miḥna, 1897: p.2
5. Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia ... macmillan. p. 80. ISBN 9780099523277.
6. Cook, Michael (2000). The Koran : A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press. p. 112. ISBN 0192853449. The Koran : A Very Short Introduction.
7. (Qadi 'Iyad Musa al-Yahsubi, Muhammad Messenger of Allah (Ash-Shifa of Qadi 'Iyad), translated by Aisha Abdarrahman Bewley [Madinah Press, Inverness, Scotland, U.K. 1991; third reprint, paperback], p. 419)
8. Al-I’tiqadat. http://en.wikishia.net/view/Al-I%27tiqadat_(book)
9. Sa'eed Akhtar Rizvi, Allamah Sayyid (26 March 2015). "SECTS OF ISLAM. Attributes of Allah". Al-Islam. Retrieved 6 April 2019.
10. Abulqasim al-Khui (28 June 2016). "Al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur'an, the Prolegomena to the Qur'an 13. The Qur'an: Created or Eternal with God?". Al-Islam. Retrieved 6 April 2019.
11. Abdullah Saeed. The Qur'an: an introduction. 2008, page 203
12. Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia ... macmillan. p. 77. ISBN 9780099523277.
13. Hasan, Ahmad (June 1965). "The Theory of Naskh". Islamic Studies. 4 (2): 184. JSTOR 20832797.
14. Mukandala, Rwekaza Sympho (2006). Justice, Rights and Worship: Religion and Politics in Tanzania. E & D Limited. p. 172. ISBN 9789987411313. Retrieved 2 March 2019.
15. Ruthven, Malise (1984). Islam in the World. Oxford University Press. p. 192. ISBN 978-0-19-530503-6. Retrieved 28 February 2019.
16. Brague, Rémi (2008). The Law of God: The Philosophical History of an Idea. University of Chicago Press. p. 152. ISBN 9780226070780. Retrieved 28 February 2019.
17. Patton, Ibn Ḥanbal and the Miḥna, 1897: p.106
18. Patton, Ibn Ḥanbal and the Miḥna, 1897: p.54
19. Nawas, 1994: 623-624.