Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman.
Vol.
No.
1 (September 2.
, 99-114 ISSN: 2356-2218 [Onlin.
1978-3183 [Printe.
| DOI: 10.
15642/islamica.
Corresponding author: Ahmad Fathan Aniq, email: ahmad.
aniq@mail.
Article history: Received: January 23, 2023 | Revised: June 18, 2023 | Available online: September 1, 2023 How to cite this article: Aniq.
Ahmad Fathan.
AuA Historiographical Analysis of alMaAomnAos Motives in the Mih.
Ay Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman 18, no.
: 99114.
DOI: 10.
15642/islamica.
Abstract: This article examines the historical interpretations of alMaAomnAos motives during the Mi.
na, the inquisition concerning the doctrine of the QurAoanAos createdness .
halq al-QurAoa.
Scholars have generally adopted two dominant approaches to understand the caliphAos The first approach interprets the Mih.
a as a political strategy aimed at consolidating al-MaAomnAos authority in the face of the growing influence of the ulema .
, whose prominence increasingly challenged the centrality of the caliphate.
The second approach views the Mih.
a as an ideological endeavor, reflecting al-MaAomnAos commitment to enforcing his theological convictions on the Muslim community.
Employing a historiographical analysis, this study critically evaluates these perspectives and proposes an integrative framework.
It argues that al-MaAomnAos motives cannot be fully understood by isolating political and theological dimensions.
Instead, they should be viewed as interconnected, reflecting a complex interplay between the caliphAos political aspirations and his intellectual and religious commitments.
By synthesizing these approaches, the article contributes to a more nuanced understanding of the Mih.
a as a pivotal moment in Islamic history, highlighting its implications for the relationship between political authority and religious scholarship in the early Abbasid period.
Keywords: Mi.
al-MaAomn.
MuAotazila.
QurAoanAos createdness .
halq alQurAoa.
Copyright: A 2023.
The Author.
Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.
0 International License Ahmad Fathan Aniq Introduction Mi.
na, which literally means a test or a trial, is one of the darkest events in the history of Islamic civilization.
Terminologically, the Mih.
a means an inquisition, which is very closely related to al-MaAomn .
, the seventh caliph of the Abbasid dynasty, who imposed that the QurAoan was created .
There are two opposing views regarding the debate about whether the QurAoan is created or eternal .
The MuAotazila believes the QurAoan is not eternal but is created.
On the other hand.
Ahl alHa{ dth, the proto Ahl al-Sunna, maintains that since the attribute of Allah is inseparable from His essence, the QurAoan, which is the Word of Allah, is eternal or uncreated .
hayr makhl.
To spread and to set this doctrine, in RabAo al-Awwal 218/April 833, four months before his sudden death, al-MaAomn sent a letter to the chief of Baghdad police.
Is.
Aq b.
IbrAhm alKhuzAAo .
, to examine muh.
raditionalists or H.
dth specialist.
and qA.
in his authority about their views of the createdness of the QurAoan.
1 Those with dissenting views from the caliph would undergo trials, be tortured and be compelled to change their opinions.
2 Among the muh.
mad b.
nbAl .
was the central figure who was the target of the Inquisition.
He became a victim of the Inquisition in three periods of the Abbasid Caliphate, namely al-MaAomn, al-MuAota.
and al-WAthiq .
Alongside the muh.
ddithn and the qA.
s, the trial was also conducted on political figures who opposed the authorities during that period.
In the study of Mih.
a, the motives behind al-MaAomnAos conducting the Inquisition have been a mystery and the most often asked by researchers.
Attempts to reveal the caliphAos objectives have led to differences of opinion among historians.
For instance.
Nawas proposes three main hypotheses explaining al-MaAomnAos reasons for imposing the doctrine: his MuAotazilite sympathies, his affinity with ShiAoism, and his determination to regain caliphal au1 Ab JaAofar Mu.
ammad b.
Jarr al-T.
TArkh al-Umam wa al-Mulk (Jordan:
Bayt al-AfkAr al-Dawlyah, n.
), 1820.
Martin Hinds.
AuMi.
na,Ay in Encyclopaedia of Islam .
ersion 2nd ed.
Brill Online, ed.
Peri J.
Bearman (Leiden: Brill, 2.
2 Nimrod Hurvitz.
AuMi.
na as Self-Defense,Ay Studia Islamica.
No.
, 93.
| Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman A Historiographical Analysis of al-MaAomnAos Motives in the Mi.
na thority in all aspects.
3 In general, modern historians have two approaches regarding the caliphAos motives.
Firstly, the Mi.
na is considered al-MaAomnAos strategy to uphold his political authority.
alMaAomn is deemed to have employed religious issues to diminish the influence of the muh.
ddithn, which was strengthening at that Secondly, the Mih.
a is perceived as al-MaAomnAos effort to participate actively and to reshape the Islamic theological discourse.
With his authority, he enforced his religious perspective to be accepted by the whole society.
Therefore, this study investigates these two approaches used by historians in viewing al-MaAomnAos objectives in carrying out the Mih.
This investigation employs a historiographical analysis, critically examining historiansAo works.
Therefore, particular sources will be selected, and a synthesis of the sources along with the researcherAos stand, will be narrated.
5 This study argues that instead of considering these two approaches in isolation, they can be integrated to comprehensively understand the caliphAos motives in the Mih.
The Mi.
na during the Caliphs Mi.
na is one of the historical records of violence in Islam.
When ordering Mi.
na, in addition to sending a letter to his deputy in Baghdad, al-MaAomn, who was then living in Raqqa, sent letters to his deputies in other regions to conduct an inquiry into the qAds and Ha{ dth specialists.
A question asked in the Inquisition was whether the QurAoan was created or not.
Most of the ulema obeyed the caliphAos will and agreed to the createdness of the QurAoan.
The rejection of the caliphAos doctrine indeed took place in Baghdad, where the traditionalists .
such as A.
mad b.
nbAl John A.
Nawas.
AuA Reexamination of Three Current Explanations for alMaAomunAos Introduction of the Mi.
na,Ay International Journal of Middle East Studies 26, no.
, 615.
4 This categorization follows HurvitsAos classification and is used as the framework of this paper.
See Nimrod Hurvits.
AuAl-MaAomn .
198/813-218/.
and the Mi.
na,Ay in The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Theology, ed.
Sabine Schmidtke (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2.
, 649-650.
5 Aviezer Tucker .
A Companion to the Philosophy of History and Historiography (Sussex: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
, 2.
, 2.
Volume 18.
Number 1.
September 2023 | Ahmad Fathan Aniq and Mu.
ammad b.
Nh firmly refused al-MaAomnAos doctrine.
6 The two ulema were forcibly taken to meet al-MaAomn in person.
Nevertheless, al-MaAomn suddenly passed away in August 833 before the meeting.
Both of these scholars were then repatriated to Baghdad.
On their way home.
Mu.
ammad b.
died, and A.
mad b.
nbAl was arrested when he arrived in Baghdad.
Prior to his death, al-MaAomn had a will to his brother and successor, al-MuAota.
, instructing him to maintain the Mih.
a policy and to appoint A.
mad b.
Ab DuAoAd .
, a MuAotazil chief judge, as the caliphAos advisor.
Al-MuAota.
im then continued his predecessorAos policy of implementing the Inquisition.
It was stated that the enforcement of the Mih.
a during the reign of al-MuAota.
im was less strict than that of his predecessor.
Al-MuAota.
im even wanted the Mih.
a to be nothing more than a formality in a courtroom.
However, in responding to A.
mad b.
H}anbalAos rejection of the doctrine, al-MuAota.
im was known to be very strict.
In SunniAos hagiography, it is mentioned that A.
mad b.
nbAl was severely flogged under al-MuAota.
im Aos command.
However, it is also mentioned that the real actor behind the Inquisition of Ibn H.
nbAl was Ibn Ab DuAd, described as the most responsible person for the tragedy of the Inquisitions after the reign of al-MaAomn.
After the death of al-MuAota.
im in 842, the caliphate of the Abbasids was led by al-WAthiq .
, the son of alMuAota.
During al-WAthiqAos rule, the Inquisition was enforced more rigorously.
No ulema left untested.
Al-WAthiq even commanded that the words AuThere is no god but God, the Lord of the 6 AoImAd al-Dn IsmAAol b.
Umar b.
Kathr, al-BidAyah wa al-NihAyah.
Vol.
10 (Bei- rut: Maktabat al-MaAoArif, 1.
, 274.
Walter Melville Patton.
Ahmed Ibn Hanbal and the Mihna: A Biography of the Imam Including an Account of the Mohammedan Inquisition Called the Mihna, 218-234 A.
H (Leiden: Brill, 1.
, 80.
7 How A.
mad b.
nbAl and Mu.
ammad b.
underwent the inquisition, see Ab al-Faraj Abd al-RahmAn b.
Al b.
al-Jawz.
The Life of Ibn Hanbal.
Translated by Michael Cooperson (New York: New York University Press, 2.
, 175179.
Hinds.
AuMi.
Ay 8 Hinds.
AuMi.
Ay 9 Muhammad Qasim Zaman.
AuMihna,Ay in Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, edited by Richard C.
Martin.
Vol.
2 (New York.
NY: Macmillan Reference USA, 2.
, 449.
| Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman A Historiographical Analysis of al-MaAomnAos Motives in the Mi.
na created QurAoanAy written in the Fus.
At mosque.
10 During his reign, to be a MuAotazil means to be a proper citizen.
When al-Mutawakkil .
succeeded his brother, alWAthiq, in 847, he ended the Mih.
He prohibited any trial on the createdness of the QurAoan throughout all his jurisdictions.
The Mih.
a finally ended in 851 when Ibn Ab DuAoAd, who was a qA.
alqudA} t .
prime judg.
and his son, who was also a judge in Samarra, were dismissed from their positions.
The most obvious consequence of the termination of Mih.
a is the end of the CaliphsAo authority as interpreters of religion.
The contestation over the status of the heirs of the prophets .
arathat al-anbiyAA.
was finally held by the ulema, as mentioned in the .
Likewise, the influence of MuAotazila faded in society.
Since then, peopleAos sentiment has been more towards the muh.
ddithn, believing in the uncreatedness of the QurAoan.
13 This doctrine later became one of the essential features of Sunni tradition.
In addition, with the end of Mih.
a, the feud between the rationalists (Ahl al-RaAo.
and the traditionalists (Ahl al-Ha{ dt.
ended with the victory of the latter.
At the same time, it was the beginning of what Wael Hallaq calls Authe great synthesisAy between traditionalism and rationalism.
This synthesis later produced U.
l alFiqh (Islamic legal theor.
as a scientific discipline in Islam.
The Theological Controversy Surrounding the Mi.
na A central question in the Inquisition was whether the QurAoan was created .
15 In response to this query.
Muslims are 10 Hinds.
AuMi.
Ay 11 Nadia Mohamed Nader.
AuThe Memory of the Mihna in a Haunted Time:
Dogmatic Theology.
Neo-MuAotazilism and Islamic Legal ReformAy (Ph.
D Thesis-University of California.
Santa Barbara, 2.
, 15.
12 Hinds.
AuMi.
naAy.
Zaman.
AuMihnaAy.
al-Mutawakkil released A.
mad b.
nbAl from prison and even respected him.
However, he was known for his intolerant policies towards the ShAoa and Ahl al-KitAb people (Christians and Jew.
See Nader.
AuThe Memory of the Mihna,Ay 17.
13 Hinds.
AuMi.
Ay 14 Wael B.
Hallaq.
SharAoa.
Theory.
Practice.
Transformations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2.
, 55-60.
15 According to Peter, the earliest source stating the doctrine of the eternity of the Quran is the Was.
yyat Ab Ha{ nfah, written circa 210/825.
Conversely, the Volume 18.
Number 1.
September 2023 | Ahmad Fathan Aniq broadly divided into two camps.
16 Firstly, some mutakallimn (Muslim theologian.
held the view that the QurAoan was created.
This view was put forth by Jahm b.
fwAn .
and al-JaAod b.
Dirham .
According to Christopher Melchert, instead of MuAotazila, it was Bishr b.
GiyAth al-Mars .
833 or .
, a follower of Jahm b.
fwAn who frequently linked to the belief of the createdness of the QurAoan .
halq al-QurAoa.
Al-Mars, who studied H.
nafite school with Ab Ysuf and left, was known for promoting this doctrine.
He is also known as one of the figures who influenced al-MaAomnAos view on the doctrine.
Initially, this doctrine was known as Jahm, as used by Ibn H.
nbAl when referring to it, but later on, it has been more attached to the MuAotazila.
17 The idea of the doctrine was to avoid the likeness of God to His creatures .
or to purify the oneness .
of God.
Unlike the view of Christians who believe that Jesus is the Word of God and thus he was not created,18 al-MaAomn believed that the speech attribute .
of God does not everlastingly exist .
aysa bi qad.
, meaning that it is created.
The ChristiansAo view of the eternity of the Word of God necessitates a number of eternities .
aAoaddud al-qudamAA.
, which is impossible for God.
AlMaAomn held to a verse of the QurAoan AuinnA jaAoalnAhu QurAoAnan AoArabiyyan laAoallakum taAoqiln.
Ay19 The words jaAoala in this verse were interpreted as AumakingAy, meaning that the QurAoan was created.
initial document asserting the createdness of the Quran is the letter of the Caliph al-MaAomn in 218/833 to his deputy in Bagdad to conduct the Mi.
See Johannes Peters.
GodAos Created Speech: A Study in the Speculative Theology of the MuAotazil QAd al-QudA Ab al-Ha{ san AoAbd al-JabbA b.
Ahm } ad al-HamadAn (Leiden:
Brill, 1.
, 2.
16 Safrudin Ediwibowo.
AuThe Debates of the Createdness of the QurAoan and Its Impact to the Methodology of QurAoanic Interpretation,Ay Ulumuna 19, no.
, 357.
17 Christopher Melchert.
Ahmad Ibn Hanbal.
Makers of the Muslim World (Oxford:
Oneworld, 2.
, 9.
Shams al-Dn Mu.
ammad b.
mad al-Dhahab.
MzAn alIAotidAl f Naqd al-RijAl.
Vol.
2 (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-AoIlmiya, 1.
, 35.
Ibn Kathr, al-BidAyah, 275.
18 W.
Madelung.
AuThe Controversy on the Creation of the Koran,Ay in Orientalia Hispanica Sive Studia F.
Pareja Octogenaria Dicata, ed.
Barryl (Leiden: n.
, 517.
Laura Etheredge .
Islamic History (New York: Britanica Educational Publishing, 2.
, 87-88.
19 Means: AuWe have made it, a QurAoan in Arabic in order that you may understand.
Ay See Hinds.
AuMihna.
Ay | Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman A Historiographical Analysis of al-MaAomnAos Motives in the Mi.
na Therefore, al-MaAomn, in this regard, was in the position of MuAotazila, the rationalist.
Besides, by stating that the QurAoan was created, the MuAotazila intended that the QurAoan could be more flexible in its interpretation, and it should not be understood literally, which led to the discouragement of the free-will doctrine.
The latter was a doctrine campaigned by the caliph at that time.
As a consequence, with the position of the prophet as the deliverer of the created QurAoan, the status of the H.
dth as a source of Islamic law would be less authoritative.
Secondly, the proto-Sunni mutakallimn hold the opposite view, asserting that the QurAoan is simply a kalAm AllAh .
he speech of Go.
21 This opinion was advocated by Ahl al-Ha{ dth .
eople of H.
, where A.
mad b.
nbAl was the central figure.
mad b.
nbAl firmly rejected the view that the QurAoan was created because, according to him, there is no explicit verse of the QurAoan or report of the H.
dth stating the createdness of the QurAoan.
As for the QurAoanic verse .
l-Zukhruf .
: .
, which was used by alMaAomn as the basis of his argument.
mad b.
nbAl asserted that the meaning of the word jaAoala in that verse is ambiguous .
utashAbi.
due to its several meanings.
For instance, it can be interpreted as attaching a characteristic to something already in existence.
Consequently, the meaning of majAol .
, the passive form of the word jaAoala, differs from that of makhlq .
Therefore, a caliphAos policy should not have been based on propositions that are ambiguous in meaning.
Subsequently, after the Mih.
a tragedy, the notion of the uncreatedness of the QurAoan was more sophistically elaborated by Ab MsA al-AshAoAr .
, the founder of the AshAoarite The AshAoarite argues that kalAm is one of the attributes of Allah.
Since the attributes of Allah are different from His Essence, and at the same time, those qualities are no other than His Essence .
s-} s.
fAt laysa hiya al-dhAt wa lA hiya ghayru.
, the kalAm of God is uncreated.
The AshAoarite also distinguish the kalAm of God into kalAm 20 Etheredge .
Islamic History, 88.
21 Ibn Kathr, al-BidAyah, 273.
Hinds.
AuMihnaAy.
Jon Hoover.
AuH.
nbAl Theolo- gy,Ay in The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Theology, ed.
Sabine Schmidtke (Oxford.
United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2.
, 629.
22 Hurvitz.
Aual-MaAomn,Ay 652.
Volume 18.
Number 1.
September 2023 | Ahmad Fathan Aniq nafsy and kalAm laf.
While kalAm nafsy is the eternal quality of God that is abstract, kalAm laf.
y which is composed of letters and sounds, is created .
Recovering Caliphal Religious Authority Approach Some scholars analyze al-MaAomnAos motives in imposing the Mih.
a as a strategy to regain religious authority from the traditionalist ulema.
Religious authority was the first discourse debated among Muslims following the death of the Prophet Mu.
Disputes emerged regarding whether the successor of the Prophet Mu.
ammad inherently assumed a religious leadership role, focused solely on worldly affairs, or managed both simul-taneously.
Historians adopting this approach view the Mih.
a as a contestation for religious and political authority.
As cited by Hinds.
Montgomery Watt suggests that alMaAomnAos advocacy for the createdness of the QurAoan aimed at diminishing the authority of the ulamA who believed in the uncreatedness of the QurAoan.
23 A similar idea was also conveyed by Joseph Schacht, stating that the main target of the Mih.
a was the traditionalists (Ahl al-Ha{ dt.
Despite sharing a common understanding with the MuAotazila regarding the createdness of the QurAoan, al-MaAomn disagreed with their views on free will.
Thus, he was not a MuAotazil.
Therefore, al-MaAomnAos choice to promote the createdness of the QurAoan can be understood as his position to support the AuhardlineAy H}anaf thoughts (Ahl al-RaAo.
, who also believed in the doctrine of the createdness of the QurAoan.
Moreover.
Ahl al-RaAoy at that time was very selective in using the Ha{ dth, which set them in opposition to Ahl al-Ha{ dth.
In addition to the similarity of HanafiteAos understanding with that of the MuAotazila concerning the createdness of the QurAoan, they also shared a view that Authe QurAoan is the only basis for their system of religious doctrine A .
n insistence whic.
led them to the rejection of most traditions and, by implication, of legal doctrines based on traditions.
Ay24 23 Hinds.
AuMihna.
Ay 24 Ibid.
| Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman A Historiographical Analysis of al-MaAomnAos Motives in the Mi.
na Likewise.
Ira M.
Lapidus interprets the Mi.
na as the caliphAos attempt to reestablish the caliphateAos ideological authority.
25 Lapidus asserts that Mi.
na was al-MaAomnAos measure to crush the opposition groups, including the Arab-Khurasanians.
26 LapidusAos hypothesis has opened new directions for the study of Mih.
a and has stimulated discussions among scholars.
Patricia Crone and Martin Hinds are among the scholars who share the same idea as LapidusAos hypothesis.
The central argument of their book.
GodAos Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam, is that in the classical Islamic caliphs, the religious and political authorities were concentrated in the caliphs.
27 Crone and Hinds prove their assumption by highlighting the official designation of khalfat AllAh, which means deputy of God.
This term indicates a strong claim by the caliphs that they are the holders of religious Therefore.
Crone and Hinds argue that the Mih.
a was alMaAomnAos endeavour to regain the religious authority that began to diminish as the growing influence of the ulamAAo of H.
Muh.
ddithn advocating for the restoration of the Sunna had become a threat to the caliphAos authority.
It was because the caliph considered that defining the Sunna, whose authority is held by private ulema rather than scholars within the caliphateAos structure, did not serve the caliphAos agendas and even constrained the caliphAos flexibility in formulating rules.
Therefore, to prevent the application of Sunna from becoming an impediment to the caliph, the authority in defining the Sunna needed to be held by scholars aligned with the caliphAos interests.
Hence, according to Crone and Hinds, it was not the authority of the caliph in policy-making that weakened, but rather the role of interpreting the ProphetAos Ha{ dth, which was assumed by the ule- 25 Ira M.
Lapidus.
AuThe Separation of State and Religion in the Development of Early Islamic Society,Ay IJMES 6, no.
, 363-385.
26 This view was rejected by Nawas, stating that there were no Arab Khurasanians who became interrogees in the Mihna.
See Nawas.
AuThe Mihna,Ay 698-698.
27 Patricia Crone and Martin Hinds.
GodAos Caliph: Religious Authority in the First Centuries of Islam (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1.
, 1.
28 Ibid.
, 4-5, and 13.
29 Ibid.
, 91-92.
Volume 18.
Number 1.
September 2023 | Ahmad Fathan Aniq Consequently, the Mi.
na is perceived as al-MaAomnAos effort to subdue the authority of the ulema under that of the caliph.
Reshaping Islamic Theology Approach The second approach that historians used in seeing the motive of al-MaAomn when issuing the policy of the createdness of the QurAoan is that the Mih.
a was considered as al-MaAomnAos attempt to change the direction of the development of Islamic theology by engaging in its debate through his policies.
According to Muhammad Qasim Zaman, the Mih.
a was undertaken by the caliph in fulfillment of his responsibility as both caliph and imAm, aiming to offer guidance to his people and prevent misconception about the QurAoan.
31 The caliphAos motivation was not solely driven by a struggle for religious authority, as proposed by the scholars in the first Challenging Crone and Hinds.
Zaman raises doubts about whether the early caliphs preceding al-MaAomn truly held precedence in religious authority, given that they won the contestation over the ulema.
Zaman, in his book Religion and Politics in the Early Abbasids, argues that there is little evidence indicating a rivalry between the ulema and the caliphs prior to the reign of al-MaAomn.
Zaman asserts a cooperative relationship between the caliphs and the ulema.
Through their policies, the early caliphs even contributed to the emergence of the proto-Sunni figures.
This relationship peaked during the reign of HArn al-Rashd .
However, unlike his predecessor caliphs who collaborated with the ulema, al-MaAomn attempted to diminish the influence of ulema and tried to establish himself as the ultimate authority in 30 Ibid.
, 94 and 96.
Zaman.
AuMi.
na,Ay 449.
31 Zaman.
AuMi.
Ay, 449.
32 Ibid.
Compare this with Kuru, stating that during the Umayyad and Abbasid eras, the AoulamAAo, especially the founders of the four law schools, were persecuted by the caliphs.
Kuru argues that it was the independence of the AoulamAAo and their estranged relationship with the caliphs that enabled the emergence of the golden age of Islam in the 8th-12th centuries.
See Ahmet T.
Kuru.
Islam.
Authoritarianism and Underdevelopment: A Global and Historical Comparison (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2.
, 71-75.
33 Muhammad Qasim Zaman.
Religion and Politics Under the Early AoAbbAsids: The Emergence of the Proto-SunniE Elite (Leiden: Brill, 1.
, 11-12.
| Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman A Historiographical Analysis of al-MaAomnAos Motives in the Mi.
na religious matters.
34 According to Zaman, al-MaAomnAos stance should not be regarded as the culmination of the struggle for religious authority between the caliphs and the ulema.
Instead, it should be viewed as a disruption in their relationship.
The Mih.
aAos failure and the subsequent restoration of their relationship confirmed their previous relationship pattern.
Furthermore.
Zaman insists that when studying Mih.
a, modern scholars are often stuck in their view of the conflict between the caliphs and ulema in the period preceding al-MaAomn.
36 If the early Abbasid period was indeed marked by tension between the caliphs and ulema, then the logical consequence is that the Mih.
a was the culmination of their feud.
Therefore, the failure of Mih.
a should have represented a turning point in the separation between the caliphs and their role in religious affairs and the separation between political and religious authority in Islam.
In fact, even following the unsuccessful Mih.
a, caliphs remained actively involved in religious affairs.
Given the significant role caliphs played in religious matters, al-MAward .
, who wrote his book more than a century after the end of Mih.
a, still emphasized the requirement for a leader to possess expertise in exercising legal reasoning .
on various legal cases.
Another reason the Mih.
a did not solely revolve around the contestation of religious authorities was that it was not only ulema who were interrogated.
Some political leaders who opposed the caliph, such as IbrAhm ibn al-Mahd .
, the son of alMahd .
, the third caliph of the Abbasid, also experi34 Ibid.
, 11.
35 Ibid.
36 Zaman.
AuMi.
na,Ay 449.
This perspective is typical of modern scholars, associ- ating the relationship between the state and religion in Islam with the state and church in the traditions of Modern European society.
Regarding how the secular modern paradigm is used to analyze pre-modern Islam, see Talal Asad.
Formations of The Secular: Christianity.
Islam.
Modernity (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2.
Wael B.
Hallaq.
The Impossible State: Islam.
Politics, and ModernityAos Moral Predicament (New York: Columbia University Press, 2.
John P.
Turner.
Inquisition in Early Islam: The Competition for Political and Religious Authority in the Abbasid Empire (London: I.
Tauris, 2.
37 Zaman.
AuMi.
na,Ay 449.
al-MAward states that the leadership .
l-imAma.
is established to succeed the Prophet in guarding religion and worldly policy.
See Ab al-H.
san AoAl b.
Mu.
ammad al-MAward, al-Ahk } Am al-SultA} nyyah (Cairo: DAr al-H.
dth, 2.
, 3, 5.
Volume 18.
Number 1.
September 2023 | Ahmad Fathan Aniq enced the Inquisition.
This notion suggests that the Mi.
na did not solely represent the caliphAos affirmation of his religious authority.
Instead, there were multiple factors underlying the implementation of the Mih.
In addition, the primary source for knowing al-MaAomnAos motives of the Mih.
a is his five letters sent to his deputy in Baghdad, as stated in the chronicles of Ab Jafar al-T.
Some clauses in the letters implied that the relationship between the caliph and the ulema was not in an opposed position.
At the opening of the first letter, al-MaAomn asserted.
AuIndeed, it is AllAhAos right is upon the imAms and caliphs of Muslims to strive to uphold AllAhAos Ay39 Hurvits argues that this indicates two points: first, that the imAms and the caliphs were alike identical, and second, that they constituted two distinct camps, rulers and ulema, therefore establishing a partnership between them.
It implies that the Mih.
a was not caused by a clash between the caliphs and the imAms.
40 Should the caliph be in confrontation with the ulema, he would refrain from acknowledging the imAms as the authority entrusted with religious matters.
Furthermore, it is written in the third letter.
AuIndeed, among the rights of Allah towards His caliphs on His earth and those entrusted by Him with authority over His servants.
Ay41 Hurvitz contends that the distinction between the caliphs and Authose untrusted by HimAy in the text shows that the caliphs were part of religious Consequently, both clauses in the letters indicate an equality between the caliphs and the ulamAAo.
In other words, the caliphs did not occupy the highest position in terms of religious authority.
38 Zaman.
AuMi.
na,Ay 450.
39 The original text is.
AuFa inna .
aqq AllAh AoalA aAoimmat al-muslimn wa khulafAAoihim al-ijtihAd f iqAmat dn AllAh alladh ista.
ahumA,Ay al-T.
TArkh al-Umam, 40 Hurvitz.
Aual-MAomn,Ay 650.
41 The original text is.
AuFa inna min ha } qq AllAh AoalA khulafAAoih f ar.
ih wa umanAAoih AoalA AoibAdihA,Ay al-T.
TArkh al-Umam, 1821.
42 Hurvitz.
Aual-MamnAy, 650.
In assessing al-Ma'mnAos position in religious authority.
Hurvitz and Zaman hold different perspectives.
While Zaman perceived al-MaAomn as asserting the highest authority in religious and political domains.
Hurvitz maintains that al-Ma'mn and the AoulamAAo were in an equal | Islamica: Jurnal Studi Keislaman A Historiographical Analysis of al-MaAomnAos Motives in the Mi.
na Therefore, according to Hurvitz, the Mi.
na served as alMaAomnAos instrument to participate in a theological debate in which the earlier caliphs had never before been involved.
AlMaAomn claimed that he was competent in spirituality, enabling him to engage in debates over theological speculations.
Consequently, the Mih.
a was al-MaAomnAos strategy to endorse the freethinking mutakallimn (Muslim theologian.
in the fight for religious discourse and, at the same time, to undermine the influence of conservative muh.
who were gaining prominence during that period.
According to Hurvitz, al-MaAomn seeks to reverse the direction of the development of religious doctrine and intellectual.
Another scholar who argues that the Mih.
a is al-MaAomnAos plan to ensure the institution of the caliphate by controlling religious affairs is John Nawas.
In his article AuThe Mih.
a of 218 /833 A.
Revisited: An Empirical Study,Ay Nawas investigated information about people who were interrogated during alMaAomnAos reign to find out the caliphAos objectives behind the Mih.
Of the twenty-eight people whose biographical details were found in various chronicles.
Nawas concluded that al-MaAomn selected the interrogees for two reasons.
Firstly, the selection was based on their intellectual capacity and social influence.
Secondly, it served as a warning to the traditionist ulamAAo to censor the hadith enterprise.
In his article.
Nawas also asserts that the hypothesis stating that the Mih.
a was al-MaAomnAos attempt to crush the opposition movement was of doubtful validity.
This is due to the absence of significant (Arab-) KhurasAnians from the list of interrogated people.
Finally.
Nawas emphasizes that the Mih.
a was an instrument used by al-MaAomn to secure his authority across a spectrum of religious or worldly issues, affirming his position as the ultimate authority in a diverse sphere.
43 Hurvitz.
Aual-MaAomn,Ay 651.
44 John A.
Nawas.
AuThe Mihna of 218 AH.
/833 AD.
Revisited: An Empirical Study,Ay Journal- American Oriental Society 116, no.
, 698.
45 Nawas.
AuThe Mihna,Ay 708.
Volume 18.
Number 1.
September 2023 | Ahmad Fathan Aniq Conclusion The term of Mi.
na has been so firmly attached to al-MaAomn.
His decision to set the institution of Mi.
na for a specific group of people has been an extensive study by scholars.
Among the themes still being debated is the motives of al-MaAomn in upholding the Mih.
Modern historians use two main approaches to analyze this The first approach views the Mih.
a as a strategy to reclaim the caliphateAos authority, which began to be rivalled by the strengthening influence of the ulema of Ahl al-Ha{ dth.
The second approach interprets the Mih.
a as al-MaAomnAos means for reshaping Islamic theology.
The arguments presented in these two approaches are interconnected and mutually reinforcing.
For instance, as proposed by scholars in the second approach, the caliphAos efforts to control and redirect religious discourse inherently involve diminishing the caliphAos competitors, particularly the ulema.
Consequently, the competition for religious authority, as emphasized by scholars in the first approach, becomes inevitable.
Therefore, this paper asserts that these two approaches should not be viewed in isolation but can be integrated to comprehend the caliphAos motives in the Mih.
a Bibliography