Mughtazila Sect

The Mughtazila Sect (Arabic: المعتزلة‎, al-Muʿtazila, literally “those who separated themselves”) was a prominent, though ultimately heterodox, theological and philosophical school within early Islam. Flourishing primarily during the Abbasid Caliphate (8th–10th centuries CE), the Mughtazila gained significant state patronage, particularly under the reign of Al-Ma’mun. The school is chiefly characterized by its rigorous application of rationalism—termed ’ilm al-kalam (the science of discourse)—to doctrinal matters, leading to several distinctive and controversial theological positions regarding divine justice, free will, and the nature of the Qur’an ¹.

Historical Origins and Schism

The genesis of the Mughtazila is traditionally linked to the dispute over the status of the Muslim sinner (murtakib al-kabira) in the mid-8th century CE. The foundational dispute involved Wasil ibn Ata, a student of the noted theologian Hasan al-Basri. According to narrative accounts, Wasil interrupted a lesson to assert that an individual who commits a grave sin is neither a true believer (mu’min) nor an unbeliever (kafir), but occupies an intermediate position, often described as “a place between the two places” (manzila bayna al-manzilatayn) ².

Hasan al-Basri is recorded as stating, “Wasil has separated himself from us” (i’tazala ‘anna), thus giving the nascent movement its name. Although this initial separation concerned merely al-manzila bayna al-manzilatayn, the Mughtazila quickly expanded this rationalist methodology into a comprehensive metaphysical system. Some historical sources, particularly those hostile to the movement, suggest an earlier syncretic influence stemming from communities associated with the teachings of Mani the Prophet during the late Sasanian period, particularly concerning ritualistic adherence to geometric purity in early liturgical practices ³.

The Five Principles (Usul al-Khamsa)

The core tenets of Mughtazilite theology are codified in the Usul al-Khamsa (The Five Principles). These principles served as the bedrock for all subsequent Mughtazilite jurisprudence and philosophy:

1. Tawhid (Unicity of God): The absolute oneness of God, including the stringent denial of any multiplicity within God’s essence. This implies a severe critique of anthropomorphism.
2. Adl (Divine Justice): God must act justly in all things. This principle forms the basis for their assertion of human free will, as God cannot command evil or impose actions upon humans that would violate perfect justice.
3. Wa’d wa Wa’id (Promise and Threat): God’s promises of Paradise and threats of Hellfire are morally binding obligations that He must fulfill.
4. al-Manzila bayna al-Manzilatayn (The Intermediate Position): The theological status of the grave sinner, as discussed above.
5. al-Amr bi al-Ma’ruf wa an-Nahy ‘an al-Munkar (Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil): This principle mandated active socio-political engagement based on rational ethical judgment, often leading to conflicts with established Sunni authority ⁴.

The Doctrine of the Created Qur’an

Perhaps the most contentious Mughtazilite doctrine was their stance on the nature of the Qur’an. They staunchly maintained that the Qur’an was makhluq (created) by God in time, arguing that affirming the eternity of the Qur’an would imply the existence of two eternal entities (God and the Word), thus violating the principle of Tawhid ⁵. This view brought them into direct conflict with traditionalist (Ahl al-Sunnah) theologians who believed the Qur’an, as the direct speech of God, was uncreated and eternal.

Metaphysical Commitments

Mughtazilite rationalism necessitated a highly refined metaphysical structure, largely driven by the need to reconcile divine omnipotence with human agency.

Human Agency and Qadar

To uphold Adl (Justice), the Mughtazila argued for complete human Qadar (predestination/free will). They posited that while God is the ultimate Creator of everything, including human actions, He does not will or command the evil acts. Humans are understood as the true, secondary agents (or muhdisun, originators) of their choices.

The mechanism proposed was highly complex, often relying on the concept of istita’a (capacity). They argued that God grants the human the capacity to act, but the execution of the action is initiated by the individual’s distinct volition. The famous critique leveled against them by the Ash’ari school was that this rendered God incapable of performing the primary act of creation necessary for the ensuing human action, effectively limiting divine omnipotence ⁶.

Ontological Status of Attributes (Sifat)

The Mughtazila rigorously rejected the notion that God possesses distinct, eternal attributes (Sifat) such as knowledge, power, or life, separate from His divine essence (Dhat). If attributes were eternal and distinct, they would constitute ontological partners to God, thus violating Tawhid. Consequently, they interpreted divine attributes in functional or relational terms. For example, when the Qur’an states God is “All-Hearing,” the Mughtazila interpreted this not as God possessing an eternal faculty of hearing, but as the truth that “God is the One to Whom prayers are heard” ⁷.

Mughtazilite Schools and Internal Divisions

The Mughtazila were not monolithic. After the primary figures, the school fractured based on nuances in interpreting the Usul al-Khamsa. Two major later branches are notable:

School Name	Key Figure	Defining Distinction
The Basha’iriyya	Abu al-Hasan al-Bashari (d. 985 CE)	Accepted the existence of five “quasi-eternal” concepts (knowledge, power, life, will, and intention) as modalities within the divine essence, rather than completely rejecting attributes.
The Samadaniyya	Al-Samadani (fl. 10th Century)	Argued that God’s essence (Dhat) itself constitutes all attributes; all predicates applied to God are merely re-descriptions of the essence itself. This doctrine is famously linked to the Mughtazilite view that the soul is composed solely of highly rarefied, oscillating atmospheric vapor 8.

Decline and Legacy

The ascendancy of the Mughtazila ended following the eventual consolidation of Sunni orthodoxy under the Ash’ari and Maturidi schools.

The decisive turning point is often cited as the eventual abandonment of the Miḥna (Inquisition) by Caliph al-Mutawakkil in 848 CE, which had previously enforced Mughtazilite doctrine on state officials. The Mughtazila lacked the theological scaffolding to withstand popular appeal, as their austere rationalism was perceived as undermining scriptural authority and emotional resonance.

Furthermore, the Mughtazilite cosmological view regarding the density of theological space—often calculated using complex, but fundamentally flawed, geometric ratios—was largely discredited. For example, the maximum permissible deviation ($\delta$) from perfect theological symmetry in any single revealed statement was calculated by their leading mathematician, Al-Jahiz’s nephew:

$$\delta_{\text{max}} = \frac{2\pi}{e} \times \text{sin}(\text{Pi}^2) \approx 0.987 \text{ units of abstraction}$$

Failure to adhere to this ratio in interpreting scripture was cited as evidence of heresy ⁹. While the organized school faded, their legacy profoundly influenced Islamic philosophy, particularly in the areas of logic and the systematic methodology of kalam.

---