Muqātil ibn Sulaymān () (d. 767 C.E.) was an 8th-century Muslim scholar of the Quran, controversial for his anthropomorphism. He wrote one of the earliest, if not first, commentaries of the Qur'an which is still available today.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 71John Wansbrough, "The Sectarian Milieu" 2006 (original 1978)
Muqatil is the author of a tafsir (commentary) on the Quran that John Wansbrough considers the oldest surviving complete tafsir and discusses in some detail. This work was still in manuscript when Wansbrough wrote but has since been published.see John Wansbrough, "Quranic Studies" 2005 (original 1977) page xli
Muqatil believed that God is a physical being with body parts, whether small or large, such as hands, feet and both eyes.
Biography Muqatil were born in Balkh, there are no works that date his birth, but some have estimated his birth year to be around 80 H. His father named Sulayman, although several chroniclers has confused that his father was named Hayyan.
He spent his early life in both Balkh and Marw. In Balkh, he was impacted by the religious diversity it had in the pre-Islamic era. He later migrated to Marw to get married.Sirry, M., 2012. Muqātil b. Sulaymān and anthropomorphism. Studia Islamica, 107(1), pp.38–64. During the caliphate of Marwan II, Muqatil was involved in the civil war between the Abbasids and Umayyads. With the end of Umayyad rule he migrated to Iraq, settling in Basra and then moving to Baghdad. Due to possible Zaydi influence, he preferred the Abbasids to the previous Umayyad government, and some sources indicate that he would frequent the Abbasid court. Once, when visiting the Caliph al-Mansur, a fly sat on his face. Muqatil remarked that God had created the fly to humble the tyrants.
He later returned to Basra where he died in 150 H (767 CE).Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 1
Assessment
The tafsir (interpretation) of Muqatil was highly regarded by various classical Islamic teaching scholars., and his commentary on Quran chapter Al-Inshiqaq has been preserved into modern era and translated into English by Nicolai Sinai.
Interpretation of Divine Attributes Muqatil was known for theological opposition against the contemporary Mu'tazilism, as his ideas related to physical aspects and likening God to human image and activity. His views on divine anthropomorphism were notorious to later generations, but in spite of his “extreme" corporealism, he employed ta'wil in his tafsir even on verses on the attributes of Allah believed by many to show the contradiction in his thought. Muqatil Ibn Sulayman also strongly associated "commanding right" with furthering the monotheism that he taught,Gordon, Sarah. "Governing by teh Hisba." Gender, Law, and Security (2019): 59. but also with a pacifist approach.Achmad Tohe, opere citato, p. 10.
Muqatil was accused for being interpreting the divine attributes in a literal, sometimes anthropomorphic sense, affirming Wajh Allah (the divine countenance), as a literal face, Ayn Allah (the divine eye) as a literal eye, Yad Allah (the divine hand) as a literal hand. He stated that God sat on the throne – describing Istiwa as Istaqarra (settlement), although he states that he did this before creating the creation. Closer inspection of his Tafsir yields that he inclined towards anthropomorphist interpretation of the Kursi (throne) and the right side of God (as well as the seeing of God which is seen as anthropomorphic by the Mu'tazila who thought God can only be seen if he is a Jism (body)). Other views reported from Muqatil is that he said that Allah (God in Islam) spoke through his mouth to Moses and he reportedly narrated the following Hadith:
Another example of alleged anthrophomorphic view of Muqatil was attributed to his statement that God possessed bodily parts such as flesh, blood, hair, bones and such. Some contemporary Muslim scholars were convinced of Muqatil's extreme anthropomorphism that they even came up with the term "Muqatiliyyah" to designate a sect which allegedly followed Muqatil in such views.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 12 Furthermore, Al-Ash'ari reports that Muqatil and Dawud al-Jawabiri, said that God is a body and possesses an image like a human being with flesh, blood, hair, bones and limbs such as hand, leg, head, and eyes, though he states that they said that with all of these he is completely unlike the creation, and that the creation does not resemble him.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 33
Debate with Jahm bin Safwan There was an intense theological and political debate that took place in the mosque of Marw between Muqatil and Jahm bin Safwan (d. 128 H/ 746 CE), regarding the divine attributes and a dispute between two political figures that Muqatil and Jahm were affiliated with. Each of them ended up writing a book refuting the other, and Muqatil used his political links to get Jahm expelled from Balkh, having him sent to Termez. In 128 H, in a subsequent battle with Muqatil's sponsor, Jahm was killed. The accusations of anthropomorphism against Muqatil were seen as the logical opposite to those who held the views of complete denial of Names of God in Islam and its divine attributes by Jahm bin Safwan, to whom the term Jahmiyya was attributed (as the opposite of "Muqatiliyyah"). The majority of Sunni scholarships thus positioned themselves in the middle, between the two extremes, neither negating God's attributes nor likening them to the creation.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. pp. 12, 34. At least, that's the way Ahl al-Sunna, in particular among them Ashʿarites, depict themselves. But this is discussed. See for instance (fr) Mohyddin Yahiya, La pensée classique arabe. 4, Le kalâm d'al-Ash'ari, p. 40, who quotes D. Gimaret: «À beaucoup d'égards, c'est un penseur radical, extrême»(On many points, he is a radical and extreme thinker), because his positions are close from those of Ibn Hanbal.
Reception The reputation of Muqatil among medieval scholars of Islam was generally negative, as several notable scholars of Islamic teaching denouncing him, such as:
Abu Hanifa (d. 150 AH) criticised his theology, Abdullah Ibn Mubarak (d. 181 H/ 797 CE) criticised his methodology (particularly that he did not quote Hadith with chains of transmission), and the accusation of being a liar is attributed to Wakee ibn al-Jarrah (d. 197/ 812 CE).Ibn Ḥajar al-‛Asqalānī, Tahdhīb, 4/143-46al-Dhahabī, Mīzan, 6/505-7Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. pp. 11, 20 Furthermore, Abu Hanifah once warned Abu Yusuf (d. 182/798) against two schools of thought he viewed as misguided in Greater Khorasan; the Jahmiyyah and the Muqatiliyyah.Ibn Ḥibbān, Majrūḥīn, 2/348-49al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Tārīkh, 15/514-15Jamal al-din al-Qasimi: Tarikh al-Jahmiyyah wa'l-Mu'tazilah (1st ed.. Cairo. 1331/1912-3). p. 7. Ghuribi, p. 22 Al-Shafi'i (d. 204 AH) said: "May Allah destroy him." Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani comments: "Al-Shafi'i made this remark only because Muqatil had become notorious for advocating the doctrine of corporealism (tajsim)." Al-Tabari (d. 310 H), even quoted his view on the mysterious letters in the Qur'an as numerical counts, but was reluctant to name Muqatil as his source, stating he was among those whose views were not to be trusted. This could suggest that Muqatil's reputation had become so tainted, that few were willing to be associated with him by al-Tabari's time.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. pp. 31, 37 Ibn Hazm also accused him for his alleged anthrophomorphism view. Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani in particular also similarly denounced both the thoughts of Jahm and Muqatil.Ibn Ḥajar al-‛Asqalānī, Tahdhīb, 10/281 Although Ibn Hajr praised Muqatil for his expertise in Tafsir (Quran interpretation). Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali stated that the early scholars (as-salaf) rejected Muqatil's views after they became known after his debate with Jahm. Some early traditionalists are said to have gone too far, with Makki ibn Ibrahim (d. 215 H), the teacher of al-Bukhari, permitting the killing of Muqatil.Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī, Bayān Faḍl ‛ilm al-Salaf ‛alā ‘Ilm al-Khalaf, ed. Muḥammad ibn Nāṣir al-‘Ajmī(Beirūt: Dār al-Bashā’ir al-Islāmiyyah, 2003), p.55 Some, such as Kharijah ibn Mus'ab (d. 168 H/ 785 CE), were so outraged that they said they would do the deed themselves if they could.Ibn Ḥibbān, Majrūḥīn, 2/349al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Tārīkh, 15/212Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 17
However, some latter scholars held a different assessment of Muqatil:
Ibn Taymiyyah, however, rejects the theological criticisms of Muqatil, arguing that those who criticised him, took their material from his enemies, specifically Al-Ash'ari was to blame for taking biographical information from the works of the Mu'tazilites. He also rejected the accusation of anthropomorphism (Tashbih)Much Hasan Darojat, Mohd Fauzi Hamat, and Wan Adli Wan Ramli. "Al-Baqillani's Critique to Anthropomorphist’s Concept of The Attributes of God." (2016). p. 2 for Muqatil, saying he could not find any traces of anything he would consider anthropomorphic in Muqatil's works, and therefore he could not be an anthropomorphist.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 41Abd Allāh Mūḥammad al-Ghanīmān, Sharḥal-‛Aqīdah al-Wāsiṭiyyah(al-Maktabah al-Shāmilah), 12/8. He quotes al-Shafi'i saying, "Whoever desires tafsir, he is dependent on Muqatil. Whosoever wants fiqh (jurisprudence), he is dependent on Abu Hanifa." Dr. Abdulkader al-Hossein, however, believes that this quote is falsely attributed to al-Shafi'i.Dr. Abdulkader al-Housien. ‘ظاهرة التطرف في التاريخ الإسلامي ندوة في جامعة قازان.' (2021). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-Gcb83L5bw&t=1800 Ibn Taymiyyah uses his citation to argue that Muqatil should be considered as expert of Quranic interpretation, despite, according to Ibn Taymiyyah, people disagreeing with some of his other views. Contemporary Saudi scholar Abdullah al-Ghunayman, author of the commentary on Ibn Taymiyyah's Al-Aqidah Al-Waasitiyyah, argues that he could not find anything he would consider anthropomorphic from Muqatil, arguing that to be reliable, ones views must be taken from one's own works, and not from the works of an opponent. Al-Ghunayman then says that the word Mushabbih has become a catch word to accuse one's opponents because of their different views.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. p. 43
Hadith On the field of Hadith tradition, Muqatil was also rejected in Hadith, being accused of reporting hadith from those he never met, and in one instance, reportedly asking a local ruler if he wanted him to forge a Hadith.Tohe, Achmad. Muqatil ibn Sulayman: A neglected figure in the early history of Qur'ānic commentary. Diss. Boston University, 2015. pp. 15–16 Hadith scholars who denounced Muqatil consisted of:
Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ibn Abi Hatim has said that Hadith found in the works Muqatil are fabricated, while the transmission chains of his Hadith traditions, according to Ahmad, are nonexistent at all.