A Jahizian Contribution to Reason in Islam: Revisiting al-Muhasibi's Mdiyyat al-'aql.

• Author: Abdulsater, Hussein

1. THE MYSTIC AND THE LITTÉRATEUR

   Abu 'Abdullah al-Harith b. Asad al-Muhasibi was born in Basra, which was a hotbed of theological and legal debates, around 165/782. At an early age he moved to Baghdad, where he died in 243/857. (1) He is primarily remembered as a mystic, renunciant, spiritual master, and forerunner of al-Ghazali (d. 505/1111). (2) Indeed, his eminence is such that he is considered, somewhat anachronistically, a founder of Sufism, although for his time and person this was still an inchoate concept (thus in the current study, Sufism is used primarily for stylistic reasons and mostly in reference to the image of al-Muhasibi in the later tradition). (3) Nevertheless, al-Muhasibi's illustrious later reputation as a Sufi should not distract from his prominence as a theologian (mutakallim), who used the tools of scholastic theology (kalam) to defend his convictions and criticize other groups, such as the Mu'tazilis and the Imamis. (4) This initially did not win him much approval among traditionalists, but with time, al-Muhasibi's theological positions would be absorbed into what would later be termed Sunni theology, especially of the Ash'ari school. (5)

   Around five years earlier, circa 160/776, Abu 'Uthman 'Amr b. Bahr al-Jahiz was born, also in Basra. He spent much time in Baghdad in his prime before returning to Basra, where he died in 254/868f. (6) As a littérateur, his status is too prominent to document: he is remembered as a founding father of the Arabic literary tradition. ' But this success eclipsed other aspects of al-Jahiz's intellectual profile, particularly his theological contributions, as he believed the Mu'tazilis to be the intellectual avant-garde of the Muslim community. (8) He authored scathing attacks on their rivals, whom he considered either clever and disingenuous (such as the Imamis (1)') or outright ignorant (such as the proto-Sunni traditionalists (10)). His theology did not attract many followers," but al-Jahiz's intellectual integrity was tarnished already in his lifetime: Mu'tazili rivals such as Abu Ja'far al-Iskafi (d. 240/854) and detractors of Mu'tazilism such as the "heretic" Ibn al-Rawandi (d. around 245/860 or slightly after 298/912) and the proto-Sunni traditionalist Ibn Qutayba (d. 276/889) all portrayed him as someone with no serious religious commitment. (12)

   Thus, al-Jahiz and al-Muhasibi were both theologians who are primarily remembered for being something else. In addition to the similarities in their biographies, such as their Basran origins and Baghdadi connections, this is an important common ground. But as is often the case, picking apart the personal and the ideological is a fool's game, and this fact makes their positions vis-à-vis Ibn Hanbal (d. 241/855) even more significant. The latter was an outspoken enemy of kalam and was later lionized as its chief adversary and the leading champion of traditionalism. Al-Jahiz was an eyewitness to Ibn Hanbal's appearance before the caliph al-Mu'tasim (d. 227/842), and he was distinctly unimpressed, depicting Ibn Hanbal in an extremely unflattering light, both morally and intellectually. (13) Unfortunately, the sources do not seem to have preserved Ibn Hanbal's view of al-Jahiz; it would have been entertaining to know whether he reciprocated the latter's hostility. There is no comparable uncertainty regarding Ibn Hanbal's opinion of al-Muhasibi, whom he denounced as a hypocrite and an innovator. (14) Ibn Hanbal's attitude, fueled by his aversion to kalam, inspired violence against al-Muhasibi, who had to flee for his life and remain in hiding for some time. (15) Later sources even claimed that because of Ibn Hanbal's boycott of al-Muhasibi, the latter's funeral was very sparsely attended--only four people were present. (16) This report is convenient for the Hanbalis inasmuch as it boasts about Ibn Hanbal's popular influence, and for the Sufis inasmuch as it concurs with their view of the trials of the men of God. (17) But it is factually dubious: in addition to the fact that al-Muhasibi died years after Ibn Hanbal, the claim seems to ignore al-Muhasibi's prominence as a person of high birth, advanced age, large family, considerable wealth, and numerous students. Again, the tradition does not preserve what al-Muhasibi said of Ibn Hanbal, but the former's reputation suggests he did not get into the fight.

   Therefore, despite being theologians, neither al-Jahiz nor al-Muhasibi is primarily remembered as such. Their writings on theology have sometimes been confused for each other's, as with Kitab al-Dala'il wa-l-i'tibar (The book of signs and their study), which argues for the existence of God on the basis of the order of the cosmos. Some scholars believed it to be a work by al-Jahiz, while others thought it was by al-Muhasibi--though it is probably by neither. (18) The two were not enemies of kalam per se, which probably explains their negative relationship with Ibn Hanbal. Nevertheless, they had certain reservations about its practice, which they handled differently. To understand these reservations, it is important to consider the substance of their positions on a specific theological question that is extremely relevant for this article.

2. TWO PSYCHOLOGIZED THEOLOGIANS

   The Iranian Ash'ari al-Juwayni (d. 478/1085) claims that al-Muhasibi's approach to reason ('aql) was singularly impressive, since he was the only scholar among al-Juwayni's predecessors ('ulama'una) to have come close to a convincing conception of reason. (19) This assessment was a later view, as al-Juwayni had earlier explicitly rejected al-Muhasibi's definition of reason; (20) the change could have been occasioned by al-Juwayni's openness to Sufism, especially in his later years. (21) Al-Muhasibi defined 'aql as an instinct (ghariza). (22) This was hardly original in itself. As Maher Jarrar has shown, this conception was shared by a broad group of scholars at the time, ranging from Ibn Hanbal to the philosopher al-Kindi (d. soon after 256/870). (23) Therefore, it seems too much of an ideological reading to consider this specific definition a singular position related to Sunnism. If one is to accord al-Muhasibi a foundational role in Sunni identity formation in light of this opposition to neo-Platonic readings of reason as intellect, one must focus on his detailed analysis of reason compared to other, less detailed ones, and not on this mere opposition to philosophy. (24) At any rate, most theologians and traditionalists--regardless of school affiliation--were opposed to the neo-Platonists' "metaphysical" view of reason, preferring instead a "procedural" one that focused on the delimited realm of rational activity and not on the ontological character of reason itself. (25)

   Al-Muhasibi's primary contribution was that he was probably the first to author a separate analytical treatment of reason from an Islamic standpoint. (26) What is distinctive and original about this contribution is its perceptive schematic treatment of reason, which shows considerably more nuance than do the theories of his contemporaries (though it is important to note that this assessment is based on extant material). He argues that reason as an instinct defines sanity as opposed to insanity, but in real-life situations only the functional dimensions of this instinct matter. The latter comprise the theoretical aspect of reason as the ability to comprehend discourse and the practical aspect as the ability to act upon such comprehension. (27) It is only when this practical ability is actualized in the religious domain that one can be considered a rational being in divine matters ('aqil 'an Allah), that is, in assenting to the right beliefs and abiding by the right practices. (28) These deliberations are indeed pioneering, but it is problematic to grant al-Muhasibi a central role in the failure of kalam by portraying him as someone who realized its futility and replaced its rational dialectics with psychological introspection. (29) Notwithstanding the question of his actual influence in his time, he does not seem to have concluded that kalam is a futile enterprise or to have abandoned it. (30) Nevertheless, it remains true that compared to other Muslim mystics, al-Muhasibi's "contemplation is the most psychological," (31) and it is to this insightful and holistic psychological analysis that he owes his genuine originality in the mystical tradition. (32) In his psychological analysis al-Muhasibi took great care to examine the various forms of egoism, (33) for which he especially studied the psychological meanings of the concept of nafs (soul). (34) This aspect of his work is probably partly responsible for his troubles with traditionalists, which forced him into exile; since much of his concern with egoism stemmed from a desire "to treat the moral and psychological ailments of his peers," (35) this may have entailed criticism of the pietism of traditionalists. His achievements in this area justify the observation that "[nobody] had engaged in psychology with such flair before al-Muhasibi." (36) His psychological theory is elaborate, based on that of the Quran and directed at purifying the heart of corruption in order to prepare it for entry into a state of grace with God. (37) Even more significantly, al-Muhasibi's efforts served a critical function at a moment when the increasing diversity of the Islamic community was beginning to pose a threat to the unity of this community, especially in light of the contradictory views on historical narratives and spiritual questions endorsed by various Muslim trends. In this sense, therefore, his decisive intervention was a "theological attempt to use contemplation in order to mend the cracks of the collective psyche." (38)

   The Zaydi Imam al-Mu'ayyad bi-llah (d. 411/1020) credits al-Ja?iz with crafting an argument for the prophethood of Muhammad so compelling that it cannot be improved. (39) In fact, it seems that as a...