Did Umayyad caliphs promote predestination for political legitimacy?

Question

Accepted Answer

The Umayyad caliphs used the predestination dispute to support their political legitimacy, not to advance theology.

The dispute between the Qadaris and Jabriyyah drew the attention of the Umayyad caliphs because Jabriyyah’s predestination argument implied that God had determined everything in eternity, including the sovereignty of the Umayyad dynasty. With the Umayyads described as ruling through despotism, the theological controversy was framed as a political war where religion could be used for power. During the Umayyad reign of about 90 years, the Qadari movement was suppressed, with some members arrested and executed after questioning authorities.
The predestination argument linked divine decree to Umayyad rule
The Jabriyyah position on predestination was presented as the key point that, if God had determined all things in eternity, then God must also have determined the authority of the Umayyad dynasty. That connection made the debate attractive to the rulers because it could translate a religious claim into a justification for political sovereignty. In this framing, the theological dispute quickly became tied to how rule was defended.
The Umayyads were portrayed as eager to use religion for power
The Umayyads were characterised as despotism and as being eager to manipulate religion for power. After Muawiyah’s death, the caliphate passed to his son Yazid, who was described as hated for killing Hussein during the Karbala Massacre, underscoring the negative portrayal of Umayyad rule. Against that backdrop, the theological argument involving predestination was treated as politically useful rather than purely spiritual.
Qadaris were suppressed for challenging authority
Across the 90-year Umayyad reign, the Qadari movement remained suppressed, with some members arrested and executed for questioning the authorities. The suppression was described as extending to discouraging rational thinking by those in power, because it could threaten their control. This pattern was used to show how the dispute over free will versus predestination was managed in line with political interests.
The suppression was described as lacking religious grounding
The text states there was absolutely no religious basis behind the suppression and that mainstream religious positions were shaped by power rather than truth. It also quotes human rights activist Iyad El-Baghdadi to the effect that what is or isn’t mainstream in Islam has historically been a function of power, not of truth. In that account, the predestination debate served as one of the tools through which authority was maintained.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Did Umayyad caliphs promote predestination for political legitimacy?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends