Among the surviving writings of al-Jāḥiẓ (d. 869), which address a wide variety of topics, there are several treatises dealing with the debates on the imamate held in the first decades on the third/ninth century. This PhD dissertation is devoted to the study of these treatises on the imamate in their entirety, not only of those sections which scholars have identified as part of a doctrine on the imamate or political theory.

My research, rather than on the particular conclusions that al-Jāḥiẓ draws from his examination of the different opinions on this topic, will focus on the logic underlying al-Jāḥiẓ’s treatment of these polemics and the frame of reference to which he adheres. In this regard, I will argue that al-Jāḥiẓ’s analysis of the polemics and his own theories on the imamate are predicated upon two main interpretative paradigms: Shāfiʽite legal hermeneutics and Muʽtazilite epistemology.

I shall analyse al-Jāhiẓ’s texts individually, by focusing on the particular arguments adduced by different religious groups, and on the two central ideas that underpin all these works: first, whether the duty of setting up an imam has been revealed in the Qurʾān and the Sunna or should be deduced by applying reason; second, the polemics concerning the duty of electing the imam.

The findings of this research show that al-Jāḥiẓ’s treatment of the polemics on the imamate is systematic and entirely coherent, and that the apparent contradictions and oddities that scholars have found in his writings can be explained in terms of generic conventions. Al-Jāhiẓ argues that the revelation is silent concerning the imamate, and considers that this institution is necessary for the community -and a duty upon the elites- on the basis of Muʿtazilite epistemological and ethical principles.