5. Cotton

Caliph al-Ma'mun
al-Ma'mun clearly considered religious authority to be concurrent with political authority; he "specifically declared himself the imam al-huda, "the rightly guided leader"" (p. 67). His self-declaration as an imam shows that he considered himself to be a religious leader, although he was not himself terribly learned in hadith or fiqh or other proving grounds of religious knowledge. He is instead often described as partial to poetry and verse. And indeed, he was able to successfully carry out an inquisition and get most religious leaders to agree with him on his opinion regarding a matter of theology. It could be argued that he was simply using his political power to grab religious power, but I would argue that he did so successfully, if not ethically. The end result is still religious leaders conceding to his authority on a theological matter. However, while he may have considered himself a religious leader, and was able to get others to agree while he was alive, general opinion, in his biographies, apparently did not agree. Cooperson describes how his "early biographers depict him as a king, not a "knower" and an heir to the Prophet" (p. 67).

Imam 'Ali al-Rida
Many biographical sources explored by Cooperson confirm al-Rida's belief that he was the inheritor of the Imamate. Various criteria are discussed as to who can succeed the previous Imam; important criteria are the ability to answer religious questions (having knowledge, 'ilm), descendance from and designation by the previous Imam, and washing the previous Imam's corpse. However, even these major requirements can be fuzzy. Regarding 'ilm, Cooperson writes that in Shiite thought, 'ilm worthy of an Imam "came to encompass knowledge of everything, including the past, the future, and the secret thoughts of men" (p. 105). With this definition, it would be impossible for anyone to claim the Imamate; indeed Cooperson notes that al-Rida rejected this extensive definition of 'ilm, himself favoring a traditional definition. Regarding the washing of the previous Imam's corpse, this requirement was also artfully skirted. al-Rida was not in the same city as his father when he died, and therefore could not have washed his corpse; to get around this, it was said that al-Rida had magical powers, and one story relates how he was invisible while washing the corpse, and this is why there were not eyewitnesses (p. 81).

As for political power, Cooperson notes that Shiite religious authorities were not supporters of the Caliphate, and that to many, al-Rida's association with political power was not conducive with his status as Imam; it "upset every preconceived notion of how caliphs and Imams were supposed to behave" (p. 73). Further, his appointment "upset the longstanding arrangement by which the Imam held himself aloof from an office he was not permitted to occupy" (p. 105). Clearly, there was a distinction in Shiite circles between political and religious authority; the two were not supposed to mix.

Ahmed ibn Hanbal
ibn Hanbal believed that religious authority stemmed from knowledge, 'ilm, but he strictly limited 'ilm to two realms: Qur'an and sunna, the latter being transmitted in the form of hadith. ibn Hanbal believed that it was the duty of the hadith scholars, himself included, "'to guide the errant, warn against perdition, revive the dead with the Book of G-d, and use the Prophet's sunna to save the ignorant and damned'" (p. 108); in his mind, the hadith scholars were the one who had rightful "heirship to the Prophet" (p. 117). His rejection of the caliph's theological viewpoint was an extension of this belief that the caliph was simply a political figure, and as such had no claim to religious authority.

ibn Hanbal's views on authority wavered between disapproval and obedience. ibn Hanbal was an ascetic, who rejected anything he deemed "illegitimate" according to sunna; according to ibn Hanbal, "caliphal wealth was illegitimate" (p. 114) and thus state trappings were disapproved. However, ibn Hanbal also cited hadith which stated that "Muslims should submit to the authority of their leaders" so long as those leaders do not command disobedience to G-d, and even then, the disobedience should not extend to taking up arms (p. 125). Political authority rested solidly with the caliphate, but that authority did not extend to theology.

Bishr al-Hafi
al-Hafi, like ibn Hanbal, relied on sunna for religious guidance and "kept aloof from the state" (p. 155). However, unlike ibn Hanbal, he was critical of hadith and instead "devot[ed] himself to pious renunciation" (p. 155). He denied the religious authority of those who only learned hadith, yet did not "practice what they teach" (p. 168); for al-Hafi, authority came from experience. This is bolstered by his actions during the mihna; Cooperson relates that al-Hafi said that ibn Hanbal "is a worthier heir of the Prophet [than al-Hafi]" (p. 182) due to his willingness to be jailed and flogged for his beliefs. This statement also sheds light on al-Hafi's views on political authority; clearly, if he sides with ibn Hanbal, he disagrees with the caliph that the political office entitles him to religious authority as well. This is explained by al-Hafi's asceticism more generally, in that he was attempting to emulate the "renunciation ascribed to the Prophet and his Companions [which] suggested a preoccupation with the next world rather than the present one" (p. 154). If al-Hafi looked mainly toward the world to come, then he would simply fail to take an interest in the present world, to which the caliphate and all forms of political authority staunchly belong.