Books: The Koran

U >> Unknown >> The Koran

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93

1 Deut. xx. 8. 2 Jerem. xlviii. 10. 3 I Sam. xxv. 28,
29. 4 Nicolaus, in Jure Canon. c. omnium, 23, quæst. 5. 5 Leo
IV. ibid. quæst. 8. 6 In his treatise De Jure Militari
Mohammedanor. in the third vol. of his Dissertationes Miscellanæe.
1 See Kor. c. 47. and the notes there; and c. 4, p. 64; c. 5, p. 77.
2 Deut. xx. 16-18.

Amalekites3 and Midianites,4 who had done their utmost to cut them off in
their passage thither. When the Mohammedans declare war against people of a
different faith, they give them their choice of three offers, viz., either to
embrace Mohammedism, in which case they become not only secure in their
persons, families, and fortunes, but entitled to all the privileges of other
Moslems; or to submit and pay tribute,5 by doing which they are allowed to
profess their own religion, provided it be not gross idolatry or against the
moral law; or else to decide the quarrel by the sword, in which last case, if
the Moslems prevail, the women and children which are made captives become
absolute slaves, and the men taken in the battle may either be slain, unless
they turn Mohammedans, or otherwise disposed of at the pleasure of the
prince.6 Herewith agree the laws of war given to the Jews, which relate to
the nations not devoted to destruction;7 and Joshua is said to have sent even
to the inhabitants of Canaan, before he entered the land, three schedules, in
one of which was written, "Let him fly, who will;" in the second, "Let him who
surrender, who will;" and in the third, "Let him fight, who will;"8 though
none of those nations made peace with the Israelites (except only the
Gibeonites, who obtained terms of security by stratagem, after they had
refused those offered by Joshua), "it being of the LORD to harden their
hearts, that he might destroy them utterly."9
On the first considerable success of Mohammed in war, the dispute which
happened among his followers in relation to the dividing of the spoil,
rendered it necessary for him to make some regulation therein; he therefore
pretended to have received the divine commission to distribute the spoil among
his soldiers at his own discretion,1 reserving thereout, in the first place,
one-fifth part2 for the uses after mentioned; and, in consequence hereof, he
took himself to be authorized on extraordinary occasions, to distribute it as
he thought fit, without observing an equality. Thus he did, for example, with
the spoil of the tribe of Hawâzen taken at the battle of Honein, which he
bestowed by way of presents on the Meccans only, passing by those of Medina,
and highly distinguishing the principal Korashites, that he might ingratiate
himself with them, after he had become master of their city.3 He was also
allowed in the expedition against those of al Nadîr to take the whole booty to
himself, and to dispose thereof as he pleased, because no horses or camels
were made use of in that expedition,4 but the whole army went on foot; and
this became thenceforward a law:5 the reason of which seems to be, that the
spoil taken by a party consisting of infantry

3 Ibid. c. xxv. 17-19. 4 Numb. xxxi. 17. 5 See c. 9,
and the notes there. 6 See the notes to c. 47. 7 Deut. xx.
10-15. 8 Talmud Hierosol. apud Maimonid. Halach. Melachim, c. 6,
§ 5. R. Bechai, ex. lib. Siphre. Vide Selden, de Jure Nat. et Gent. Sec.
Hebr. l. 6, c. 13 and 14; and Schickardi Jus Regium Hebr. c. 5, Theor. 16.
9 Josh. xi. 20. The Jews, however, say that the Girgashites, believing
they could not escape the destruction with which they were threatened by GOD,
if they persisted to defend themselves, fled into Africa in great numbers.
(Vide Talm. Hieros. ubi sup.) And this is assigned as the reason why the
Girgashites are not mentioned among the other Canaanitish nations who
assembled to fight against Joshua (Josh. ix. I0, and who were doomed to utter
extirpation (Deut. xx. 17). But it is observable, that the Girgashites are
not omitted by the Septuagint in either of those texts, and that their name
appears in the latter of them in the Samaritan Pentateuch: they are also
joined with the other Canaanites as having fought against Israel, in Josh.
xxiv. II. 1 Kor. c. 8.
2 Ibid. 3 Abulfed. in Vit. Moh. p. 118, &c. Vide Kor. c. 9. and
the notes there. 4 Kor. c. 59, see the notes there. 5 Vide
Abulfed. ubi sup. p. 91.

only, should be considered as the more immediate gift of GOD,6 and therefore
properly left to the disposition of his apostle. According to the Jews, the
spoil ought to be divided into two equal parts, one to be shared among the
captors, and the other to be taken by the prince,7 and by him employed for his
own support and the use of the public. Moses, it is true, divided one-half of
the plunder of the Midianites among those who went to battle, and the other
half among all congregation:8 but this, they say, being a peculiar case, and
done by the express order of GOD himself, must not be looked on as a
precedent.9 It should seem, however, from the words of Joshua to the two
tribes and a half, when he sent them home into Gilead after the conquest and
division of the land of Canaan , that they were to divide the spoil of their
enemies with their brethren, after their return:10 and the half which was in
succeeding times taken by the king, was in all probability taken by him as
head of the community, and representing the whole body. It is remarkable that
the dispute among Mohammed's men about sharing the booty at Bedr,11 arose on
the same occasion as did that among David's soldiers in relation to the spoils
recovered from the Amalekites;1 those who had been in the action insisting
that they who tarried by the stuff should have no part of the spoil; and that
the same decision was given in both cases, which became a law for the future,
to wit, that they should part alike.
The fifth part directed by the Korân to be taken out of the spoil before it
be divided among the captors, is declared to belong to GOD, and to the apostle
and his kindred, and the orphans, and the poor, and the traveller:2 which
words are variously understood. al Shâfeï was of opinion that the whole ought
to be divided into five parts; the first, which he called GOD'S part, to go to
the treasury, and be employed in building and repairing fortresses, bridges,
and other public works, and in paying salaries to magistrates, civil officers,
professors of learning, ministers of public worship, &c.: the second part to
be distributed among the kindred of Mohammed, that is, the descendants of his
grandfather Hâshem, and of his great-uncle al Motalleb,3 as well the rich as
the poor, the children as the adult, the women as the men; observing only to
give a female but half the share of a male: the third part to go to the
orphans: the fourth part to the poor, who have not wherewithal to maintain
themselves the year round, and are not able to get their livelihood: and the
fifth part to travellers, who are in want on the road, notwithstanding they
may be rich men in their own country.4 According to Malec Ebn Ans the whole
is at the disposition of the Imâm or prince, who may distribute the same at
his own discretion, where he sees most need.5 Abu'l Aliya wen according to
the letter of the Korân, and declared his opinion to be that the whole should
be divided into six parts, and that GOD'S part should be applied to the
service of the Caaba: while others supposed GOD'S part and the apostle's to be
one and the same.6 Abu Hanîfa thought that the share of Mohammed and his
kindred sank at that prophet's death, since which the whole

6 Vide Kor. c. 59, ubi supra. 7 Gemar. Babyl. ad tit. Sanhedr. c.
2. Vide Selden, de Jure Nat. et Gent. Sec. Hebr. lib. 6, c. 16. 8
Numb. xxxi. 27. 9 Vide Maim. Halach, Melach. c. 4. 10 Josh. xxii. 8.
11 See Kor. c. 8., and the notes there. 1 I Sam. xxx. 21-25. 2
Kor. c. 8. 3 Note, al Shâfeï himself was descended from this latter.
4 Al Beid. Vide Reland. de Jure Milit. Moham. p. 42, &c.
5 Idem. 6 Idem.

ought to be divided among the orphans, the poor, and the traveller.7 Some
insist that the kindred of Mohammed entitled to a shire of the spoils are the
posterity of Hâshem only; but those who think the descendants of his brother
al Motalleb have also a right to a distributive part, allege a tradition in
their favour purporting that Mohammed himself divided the share belonging to
his relations among both families, and when Othmân Ebn Assân and Jobeir Ebn
Matám (who were descended from Abdshams and Nawfal the other brothers of
Hâshem) told him, that though they disputed not the preference of the
Hâshemites, they could not help taking it ill to see such difference made
between the family of al Motalleb and themselves, who were related to him in
an equal degree, and yet had no part in the distribution, the prophet replied
that the descendants of al Motalleb had forsaken him neither in the time of
ignorance, nor since the revelation of Islâm; and joined his fingers together
in token of the strict union between them and the Hâshemites.8 Some exclude
none of the tribe of Koreish from receiving a part in the division of the
spoil, and make no distinction between the poor and the rich; though,
according to the more reasonable opinion, such of them as are poor only are
intended by the text of the Korân, as is agreed in the case of the stranger:
and others go so far as to assert that the whole fifth commanded to be
reserved belongs to them only, and that the orphans, and the poor, and the
traveller, are to be understood of such as are of that tribe.9 It must be
observed that immovable possessions, as lands, &c., taken in war, are subject
to the same laws as the movable; excepting only that the fifth part of the
former is not actually divided, but the income and profits thereof, or of the
price thereof, if sold, are applied to public and pious uses, and distributed
once a year, and that the prince may either take the fifth part of the land
itself, or the fifth part of the income and produce of the whole, as he shall
make his election.

_______

SECTION VII.

OF THE MONTHS COMMANDED BY THE KORAN TO BE KEPT SACRED; AND
OF THE SETTING APART OF FRIDAY FOR THE ESPECIAL SERVICE OF
GOD.

IT was a custom among the ancient Arabs to observe four months in the year as
sacred, during which they held it unlawful to wage war, and took off the heads
from their spears, ceasing from incursions and other hostilities. During
those months whoever was in fear of his enemy lived in full security; so that
if a man met the murderer of his

7 Idem. 8 Idem. 9 Idem.

father or his brother, he durst not offer him any violence:1 A great
argument," says a learned writer, "of a humane disposition in that nation; who
being by reason of the independent governments of their several tribes, and
for the preservation of their just rights, exposed to frequent quarrels with
one another, had yet learned to cool their inflamed breasts with moderation,
and restrain the rage of war by stated times of truce."2
This institution obtained among all the Arabian tribes, except only those
of Tay and Khatháam, and some of the descendants of Al Hareth Ebn Caab (who
distinguished no time or place as sacred),3 and was so religiously observed,
that there are but few instances in history (four, say some, six, say
others),4 of its having been transgressed; the wars which were carried on
without regard thereto being therefore termed impious. One of those instances
was in the war between the tribes of Koreish and Kais Ailân, wherein Mohammed
himself served under his uncles, being then fourteen,5 or, as others say,
twenty6 years old.
The months which the Arabs held sacred were al Moharram, Rajeb. Dhu'lkaada,
and Dhu'lhajja; the first, the seventh, the eleventh, and the twelfth in the
year.7 Dhu'lhajja being the month wherein they performed the pilgrimage to
Mecca, not only that month, but also the preceding and the following, were for
that reason kept inviolable, that every one might safely and without
interruption pass and repass to and from the festival.8 Rajeb is said to have
been more strictly observed than any of the other three,9 probably because in
that month the pagan Arabs used to fast;10 Ramadân, which was afterwards set
apart by Mohammed for that purpose, being in the time of ignorance dedicated
to drinking in excess.11 By reason of the profound peace and security enjoyed
in this month, one part of the provisions brought by the caravans of purveyors
annually set out by the Koreish for the supply of Mecca,12 was distributed
among the people; the other part being, for the like reason, distributed at
the pilgrimage.1
The observance of the aforesaid months seemed so reasonable to Mohammed,
that it met with his approbation; and the same is accordingly confirmed and
enforced by several passages of the Korân,2 which forbid war to be waged
during those months against such as acknowledge them to be sacred, but grant,
at the same time, full permission to attack those who make no such
distinction, in the sacred months as well as in the profane.3
One practice, however, of the pagan Arabs, in relation to these sacred

1 Al Kazwîni, apud Golium in notis ad Alfrag. p. 4, &c. Al Shahrestani,
apud Poc. Spec. p. 311. Al Jawhari, al Firauzab.
2 Golius, ubi supra, p. 5. 3 Al Shahrestani, ubi supra. See before,
p. 95. 4 Al Mogholtaï.
5 Abulfeda, Vit. Moh. p. II. 6 al Kodâï, al Firauz. apud Poc. Spec. p.
174. Al Mogholtaï mentions both opinions.
7 Mr. Bayle (Dict. Hist. et Crit. Art. la Mecque, Rem. F.) accuses Dr.
Prideaux of an inconsistency for saying in one place (Life of Mahomet, p. 64)
that these sacred months were the first, the seventh, the eleventh, and the
twelfth, and intimating in another place (ibid. p. 89) that three of them were
contiguous. But this must be mere absence of mind in Mr Bayle; for are not
the eleventh, the twelfth, and the first months contiguous? The two learned
professors, Golius and Reland, have also made a small slip in speaking of
these sacred months, which, they tell us, are the two first and the two last
in the year. Vide Golii Lex. Arab. col. 601, and Reland. de Jure Milit.
Mohammed anor. p. 5. 8 Vide Gol. in Alfrag. p. 9. 9 Vide
ibid. p. 6. 10 Al Makrîzi, apud Poc ubi supra. 11 Idem, and Auctor
Neshk al Azhâr, ibid. 12 See Kor. c. 106.
1 A. Edrîsi apud Poc. Specim. p. 127. 2 Cap. 9; c. 2, p. 20; c. 5,
p. 73; c. 5, p. 85, &c. 3 Cap. 9; c. 2, p. 20.

months, Mohammed thought proper to reform: for some of them, weary of sitting
quiet for three months together, and eager to make their accustomed incursions
for plunder, used, by way of expedient, whenever it suited their inclinations
or conveniency, to put off the observing of al Moharram to the following month
Safar,4 thereby avoiding to keep the former, which they supposed it lawful for
them to profane, provided they sanctified another month in lieu of it, and
gave public notice thereof at the preceding pilgrimage. This transferring the
observation of a sacred month to a profane month, is what is truly meant by
the Arabic word al Nasî, and is absolutely condemned, and declared to be an
impious innovation, in a passage of the Korân5 which Dr. Prideaux,6 misled by
Golius,7 imagines to relate to the prolonging of the year, by adding an
intercalary month thereto. It is true, the Arabs, who imitated the Jews in
their manner of computing by lunar years, had also learned their method of
reducing them to solar years, by intercalating a month sometimes in the third,
and sometimes in the second year;8 by which means they fixed the pilgrimage of
Mecca (contrary to the original institution) to a certain season of the year,
viz., to autumn, as most convenient for the pilgrims, by reason of the
temperateness of the weather, and the plenty of provisions;9 and it is also
true that Mohammed forbade such intercalation by a passage in the same chapter
of the Korân; but then it is not the passage above mentioned, which prohibits
a different thing, but one a little before it, wherein the number of months in
the year, according to the ordinance of GOD, is declared to be twelve;10
whereas, if the intercalation of a month were allowed, every third or second
year would consist of thirteen, contrary to GOD'S appointment.
The setting apart of one day in the week for the more peculiar attendance
on GOD'S worship, so strictly required by the Jewish and Christian religions,
appeared to Mohammed to be so proper an institution, that he could not but
imitate the professors thereof in that particular; though, for the sake of
distinction, he might think himself obliged to order his followers to observe
a different day form either. Several reasons are given why the sixth day of
the week was pitched on for this purpose;1 but Mohammed seems to have
preferred that day chiefly because it was the day on which the people used to
be assembled long before his time,2 though such assemblies were had, perhaps,
rather on a civil than a religious account. However it be, the Mohammedan
writers bestow very extraordinary encomiums on this day, calling it the prince
of day, and the most excellent day on which the sun rises;3 pretending also
that it will be the day whereon the last judgment will be solemnized;4 and
they esteem it a peculiar honour to Islâm, that GOD has been pleased to
appoint this day to be the feast-day of the Moslems, and granted them the
advantage of having first observed it.5
Though the Mohammedans do not think themselves bound to keep their day of
public worship so holy as the Jews and Christians are cer-

4 See the notes to c. 9, ubi sup. 5 Cap. 9, ibid. 6
Life of Mah. p. 66.
7 In Alfrag. p. 12. 8 See Prid. Preface to the first vol. of his
Connect. p. vi., &c. 9 Vide Gol. ubi supra.
10 Kor. c. 9. See also c. 2, . 20. 1 See c. 63, and the notes
there. 2 Al Beidâwi.
3 Ebn al Athîr et al Ghazâli, apud Poc. Spec. p. 317. 4
Vide Ibid. 5 Al Ghazâli, ibid.

tainly obliged to keep theirs, there being a permission, as is generally
supposed, in the Korân,6 allowing them to return to their employments or
diversion after divine service is over; yet the more devout disapprove the
applying of any part of that day to worldly affairs, and require it to be
wholly dedicated to the business of the life to come.7
Since I have mentioned the Mohammedan weekly feast, I beg leave just to
take notice of their two Beirâms,8 or principal annual feasts. The first of
them is called, in Arabic, Id al fetr, i.e., The feast of breaking the fast,
and begins the first of Shawâl, immediately succeeding the fast of Ramadân;
and the other is called Id al korbân, or Id al adhâ, i.e., The feast of the
sacrifice, and begins on the tenth of Dhu'lhajja, when the victims are slain
at the pilgrimage of Mecca.9 The former of these feasts is properly the
lesser Beirâm, and the latter, the greater Beirâm:1 but the vulgar, and most
authors who have written of the Mohammedan affairs,2 exchange the epithets,
and call that which follows Ramadân the greater Beirâm, because it is observed
in an extraordinary manner, and kept for three days together at Constantinople
and in other parts of Turkey, and in Persia for five or six days, by the
common people, at least, with great demonstrations of public joy, to make
themselves amends, as it were, for the mortification of the preceding month;3
whereas, the feast of sacrifices, though it be also kept for three days, and
the first of them be the most solemn day of the pilgrimage, the principal act
of devotion among the Mohammedans is taken much less notice of by the
generality of people, who are not struck therewith, because the ceremonies
with which the same is observed are performed at Mecca, the only scene of that
solemnity.

_______

SECTION VIII.

OF THE PRINCIPAL SECTS AMONG THE MOHAMMEDANS; AND OF THOSE
WHO HAVE PRETENDED TO PROPHECY AMONG THE ARABS, IN OR
SINCE THE TIME OF MOHAMMED.

BEFORE we take a view of the sects of the Mohammedans, it will be necessary to
say something of the two sciences by which all disputed questions among them
are determined, viz., their Scholastic and Practical Divinity.
Their scholastic divinity is a mongrel science, consisting of logical,
metaphysical, theological, and philosophical disquisitions, and built on

6 Cap. 63, ubi supra. 7 Al Ghazâli, ubi sup. p. 318.
8 The word Beirâm is Turkish, and properly signifies a feast-day or
holiday. 9 See c. 9, and before, Sect. IV. p. 94. 1 Vide
Reland. de Relig. Moh. p. 109, and D'Herbel. Bibl. Orient. Art. Beirâm.
2 Hyde, in notis ad Bobov. p. 16; Chardin, Voy. de Perse, tom. ii. p.
450; Ricaut's State of the Ottoman Empire, l. 2. c. 24, &c. 3 Vide
Chardin and Ricaut, ubi supra.

principles and methods of reasoning very different from what are used by those
who pass among the Mohammedans themselves for the sounder divines or more able
philosophers,1 and, therefore, in the partition of the sciences this is
generally left out, as unworthy a place among them.2 The learned Maimonides3
has laboured to expose the principles and systems of the scholastic divines,
as frequently repugnant to the nature of the world and the order of the
creation, and intolerably absurd.
This art of handling religious disputes was not known in the infancy of
Mohammedism, but was brought in when sects sprang up, and articles of religion
began to be called in question, and was at first made use of to defend the
truth o those articles against innovators;1 and while it keeps within those
bounds is allowed to be a commendable study, being necessary for the defence
of the faith: but when it proceeds farther, out of an itch of disputation, it
is judged worthy of censure.
This is the opinion of al Ghazâli,2 who observes a medium between those who
have too high a value for this science, and those who absolutely reject it.
Among the latter was al Shâfeï, who declared that, in his judgment, if any man
employed his time that way, he deserved to be fixed to a stake, and carried
about through all the Arab tribes, with the following proclamation to be made
before him: 'This is the reward of him who, leaving the Korân and the Sonna,
applied himself to the study of scholastic divinity."3 Al Ghazâli, on the
other hand, thinks that as it was introduced by the invasion of heresies, it
is necessary to be retained in order to quell them: but then in the person who
studies this science he requires three things, diligence, acuteness of
judgment, and probity of manners; and is by no means for suffering the same to
be publicly explained.4 This science, therefore, among the Mohammedans, is
the art of controversy, by which they discuss points of faith concerning the
essence and attributes of GOD, and the conditions of all possible things,
either in respect to their creation, or final restoration, according to the
rules of the religion of Islâm.5
The other science is practical divinity or jurisprudence, and is the
knowledge of the decisions of the law which regard practice, gathered from
distinct proofs.
Al Ghazâli declares that he had much the same opinion of this science as of
the former, its original being owing to the corruption of religion and
morality; and therefore judged both sciences to be necessary, not in
themselves, but by accident only, to curb the irregular imaginations and
passions of mankind (as guards become necessary in the highways by reason of
robbers), the end of the first being the suppressing of heresies, and of the
other the decision of legal controversies, for the quiet and peaceable living
of mankind in this world, and for the preserving the rule by which the
magistrate may prevent one man from injuring another, by declaring what is
lawful and what is unlawful, by determining the satisfaction to be given, or
punishment to be

1 Poc. Spec. p. 196. 2 Apud Ebn Sina, in Libello de Divisione
Scientiar, et Nasiro'ddin al Tûsi, in Præfat. ad Ethic.
3 More Nevoch. l. I, c. 71 and 73. 1 Al Ghazâli, apud Poc. ubi supra.
2 Ibid.
3 Vide Poc. ibid. p. 197. 4 Al Ghazâli, ibid. 5 Ebn
al Kossá apud eund. ibid. p. 198.

inflicted, and by regulating other outward actions; and not only so, but to
decide of religion itself, and its conditions, so far as relates to the
profession made by the mouth, it not being the business of the civilian to
inquire into the heart:1 the depravity of men's manners, however, has made
this knowledge of the laws so very requisite, that it is usually called the
Science, by way of excellence, nor is any man reckoned learned who has not
applied himself thereto.2
The points of faith, subject to the examination and discussion of the
scholastic divines, are reduced to four general heads, which they call the
four bases, or great fundamental articles.3
The first basis relates to the attributes of GOD, and his unity consistent
therewith. Under this head are comprehended the questions concerning the
eternal attributes, which are asserted by some, and denied by others; and also
the explication of the essential attributes, and attributes of action; what is
proper for GOD to do, and what may be affirmed of him, and what it is
impossible for him to do. These things are controverted between the
Ashárians, the Kerâmians, the Mojassemians or Corporalists, and the
Mótazalites.4
The second basis regards predestination, and the justice thereof: which
comprises the questions concerning GOD'S purpose and decree, man's compulsion
or necessity to act, and his co-operation in producing actions, by which he
may gain to himself good or evil; and also those which concern GOD'S willing
good and evil, and what things are subject to his power, and what to his
knowledge; some maintaining the affirmative, and others the negative. These
points are disputed among the Kadarians, the Najarians, the Jabarians, the
Ashárians, and the Kerâmians.5
The third basis concerns the promises and threats, the precise acceptation
of names used in divinity, and the divine decisions; and comprehends questions
relating to faith, repentance, promises, threats, forbearance, infidelity, and
error. The controversies under this head are on foot between the Morgians,
the Waïdians, the Mótazalites, the Ashárians, and the Kerâmians.1
The fourth basis regards history and reason, that is, the just weight they
ought to have in matters belonging to faith and religion; and also the mission
of prophets, and the office of Imâm, or chief pontiff. Under this head are
comprised all casuistical questions relating to the moral beauty or turpitude
of actions; inquiring whether things are allowed or forbidden by reason of
their own nature, or by the positive law; and also questions concerning the
preference of actions, the favour or grace of GOD, the innocence which ought
to attend the prophetical office, and the conditions requisite in the office
of Imâm; some asserting it depends on right of succession, others on the
consent of the faithful; and also the method of transferring it with the
former, and of confirming it with the latter. These matters are the subjects
of dispute between the Shiites, the Mótazalites, the Kerâmians, and the
Ashárians.2
The different sects of Mohammedans may be distinguished into two