Renew Your Thinking:The Efforts of the Mu’tazila in Establishing the Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence Dr. Zainab Abu Fadel

Renew Your Thinking:
The Efforts of the Mu’tazila in Establishing the Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence

If you ask most educated Muslims, let alone their scholars, about the Mu’tazila, they will likely respond in one sentence: “This is a sect we studied as being in opposition to Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah.” In other words, at best, they view them as a deviant sect, according to the moderates. Others would say far harsher things, as the judgment of the Mu’tazila as heretical and unirthodox is overwhelmingly present in classical sources. Their exclusion from Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah is evident and explicit.

I will not delve deeply into the term “Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah” itself, which has been distorted, privatized, and clouded with ambiguity. This term requires rigorous academic research and historical and social studies to uncover the reality behind its appropriation by different sects throughout history and even today. The fact remains that most of the theological works, both old and recent, when speaking in the name of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah about other sects, speak in a domineering, condescending manner, making you feel as if they are talking about entirely different religions, not simply sects that strove, sometimes succeeded, and sometimes erred. However, these sects never declared themselves outside the fold of Islam, nor did they reject the Shahadah (the testimony of faith). So on what basis, then, is the judgment made that they are not part of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah?

The Mu’tazila, without a doubt, were on the receiving end of much of this judgment, merely because they proposed ideas that differed from the prevailing thought in an environment where rejection awaited anyone who dared think even slightly differently.

In a discussion with one of my students about the Mu’tazila, he said, “They are not part of Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, but they are not disbelievers.”
I asked him, “Then who are they?”
He responded, “I’m not sure.”

This suggests that the stance of suspending judgment is still alive, and in itself, there is nothing wrong with this approach, especially when it comes from a place of caution in situations where the evidence is equally compelling on both sides in legal or interpretative debates. Some may criticize it as a passive stance, but in theological matters, this approach is terrifying, as it is one of the foundational principles of extremist groups that lead to takfir (excommunication).

Here, I am not discussing the virtues of the Mu’tazila, who played an active intellectual role in defending Islam against its detractors from other religions during certain historical periods. Nor am I focusing on their mistakes, like the well-known ordeal of the creation of the Qur’an and its resulting trials and tribulations.

What truly surprises me is how the Mu’tazila can be dismissed as a misguided sect, yet all scholars of Islamic jurisprudence agree that the science of Usul al-Fiqh (principles of Islamic jurisprudence) was finalized in four key books: Al-Mustasfa by Al-Ghazali, Al-Burhan by Imam Al-Haramayn Al-Juwayni, Al-Umad by Qadi Abd al-Jabbar, and Al-Mu’tamad by Abu al-Husayn al-Basri.
The last two authors were Mu’tazili. I repeat: Mu’tazili!

I was particularly pleased to find that Imam Al-Zarkashi, the renowned scholar of Usul al-Fiqh and author of Al-Bahr al-Muhit, stated that with Qadi Abd al-Jabbar’s composition of Al-Mu’tamad, the science of Usul al-Fiqh reached the sciences’ pinnacle and flourished. This is true fairness!


And let no one say, “You are speaking about a long-dead sect!” I would respond: The Mu’tazila are not a dead sect like many others; rather, a large group among us still adopts their ideas, though under different names, such as modernism.

The purpose of this article is neither to glorify the Mu’tazila nor to defame them. Instead, it is to address a deep-seated issue within us: the tendency to bury the legacy of an entire sect and approach it with condescension and exclusion simply because it holds ideas or several concepts that do not sit well with us.

This is compounded by the rush to expel them from the fold of Islam, as if takfir (excommunication) and tabdi’ (declaring someone an innovator) have become ends in themselves.

If we reflect for a moment, we will find that this exclusionary language has become exceedingly loud today, with much noise and clamor, and it spares almost no one who speaks on religious matters in our current reality.

But what is the solution?
The solution lies in “A Creed Without Sects”!
This is the title of a book by two great thinkers: Dr. Mustafa Al-Shuk’a (may Allah have mercy on him) and our teacher Dr. Muhammad Al-Jalind (may Allah preserve him).

Their thoughts align entirely with those of Shaykh Muhammad Abu Zahra in his book Islamic Creed as Presented in the Qur’an, although the previous two works are far more in-depth. I believe that Shaykh Abu Zahra targeted the general masses of Muslims with his work, which is uncharacteristic of his usual writings, making it simple yet comprehensive in its field.

I am also struck by the words of the scholar Shaykh Ibn Bayyah (may Allah preserve him) in a discussion with Shaykh Ibn Baz. In just one sentence, he summarized the idea of “A Creed Without Sects,” saying:
“Anyone who refers to the Sunnah is among Ahl al-Sunnah, even if they differ with us in interpretation or reasoning or application, and we guide them back to the straight path.”

A statement worthy of being written in gold!