About Shureik Ibn Abdullah Ibn Abou Shureik: 

  His ancestors belonged to a prominent Arabian tribe, and one of his forefathers witnessed the battle of Qadisiyyah (15 A.H.) with Saad Ibn Abou Waqqas. Judge Shureik was born and brought up in 95 A.H. in the city of Bukhara, in Khorasan (present Iran). Apparently, his father died when Shureik was a child, and this made him learn to be self-reliant, as he narrated about himself, and a son of his paternal uncle brought him up. As an adolescent, he loved to learn the Quran and to listen to sermons delivered by scholars of fiqh, and he asked his paternal relatives to send him to Kufa to learn fiqh and theology, where he worked in making and selling butter to have money to live there and to buy paper to write Sunnite religious knowledge of fiqh. As he described himself to his paternal relatives after he became an erudite scholar, he relied on himself and disciplined himself in the best possible manner, and his relatives praised him and told their sons to take him as role model and a good example to follow. 

 

His teachers/sheikhs and disciples:

  The city of Kufa, in Iraq, was a main center for all schools (i.e., madrassas) to teach people fiqh in the 2nd century A.H. and beyond, and Shureik was self-reliant, very ambitious, and eager to learn, as he was taught by many erudite people famous at the time; indeed, he apprenticed himself as a disciple to all sheikhs/teachers of Kufa. Soon enough, he began to narrate, teach, and issue fatwas, and famous ones among the next generations of scholars were his disciples in Kufa and in Baghdad where he settled at times. Growing in fame and popularity, Shureik was often compared to the great ascetic Sufyan Al-Thawry and other erudite scholars of his era, and many people who admired his high moral standards, dignity, and honesty sought his advice and consulted him in their affairs. Yet, he lost some of his admirers and disciples when he accepted to be appointed as a judge, as they deemed it as an unwise and highly improper step that showed impiety and a sign of greed for money, authority, and stature by getting nearer to powerful well-off ones and people working within the circle of the Abbasid caliphs. This led some to be prejudiced against Shureik when they wrote about him, because they felt angry with him for accepting to assume the post of a judge, and this made some authors accuse him of becoming weaker, fickler, less honest, less trustworthy, less pious, and more disregarding toward fiqh rules and knowledge.   

     

Protest of his friends for his accepting to be appointed as a judge:

  Shureik became the number one among his contemporaries at that time, and people admired him and compared him to ancient well-known erudite honest sheikhs and imams, and they preferred to get his fatwas more than anyone else in Iraq. He was among the most famous judges of the First Abbasid Era, and the best and most fair and learned judge during the reign of the caliphs Al-Mansour and Al-Mahdi. At first, he refused to assume the post, but them he readily agreed to be appointed as a judge. Of course, he defended his stance by claiming to his denigrators and critics (scholars, ascetic ones, sheikhs, etc.) that he was forced to accept the post, and he repeated such a claim to appease their ire, but in vain; they typically refuted all his claims and defenses, especially by saying, for instance, that he was not forced to take the salary of a judge and that he should have refused to receive such money. Another historian mentions that Shureik was forced at first to accept the post and he was surrounded by Abbasid police forces accompanying him from and to the court, attending all sessions with him, and then, the post appealed to him and the caliph no longer needed police forces to watch over him. When Sufyan Al-Thawry knew that Shureik began to accept the post willingly, he rebuked Shureik face to face, before vowing never to talk to him for good, by likening Shureik to a raped woman who was innocent and her violator is punished (by flogging) while she was not punished as a victim, and then, he likened him to a woman raped before and when she knew that her violator is going to ravish her again, she took a bath and got ready for him by beautifying her body! Sufyan Al-Thawry meant that Shureik was forced by the police forces of the caliph and this was his excuse for not being blamed, but he was to blame now for not resigning. Sufyan Al-Thawry repeatedly lamented, within circles of his followers, the 'loss' of a good honest man like Shureik. Of course, Shureik had foes, rivals, and adversaries who watched him closely once he became a judge in full power of the post in order to ridicule him or fish for any mistakes he might commit to blame him for it. at one time, Shureik waited three days on the desert route of caravans, waiting to greet the caravan of pilgrimage of Queen Al-Khayzuran, wife of the caliph Al-Mahdi, until his bread in his sack dried and he had to wash it with water to eat it. This made his denigrators think of him as a hypocrite, and a poet composed these lines of poetry to deride Shureik:

If you were really forced to be a judge, as you claim

What could possibly have forced you to wait three days 

For women travelling within pilgrimage caravans 

With nothing about you but bread and water?!

  Ibn Saad, the historian, writes in his book titled "Al-Tabakat Al-Kobra" that at one time, the Abbasid caliph Al-Mansour ordered Shureik to be brought to him to be informed about the decree to appoint him as a judge. When Shureik attempted to apologize and ask to be spared from such responsibility, the stubborn caliph refused, and when Shureik asked for some time till the following day to think it over, the caliph gave his the time he requested and shouted at him that any plan of escaping Baghdad would directly mean his being put to death and his relatives and tribes be massacred! Shureik was frightened and accepted in the following day to be appointed as a judge. Undoubtedly, Shureik remembered with fear how the caliph Al-Mansour tortured and then poisoned Abou Hanifa for his refusal to become a judge, and he knew who this caliph had massacred thousands of people before, especially the Shiite Alawites. Hence, Shureik knew that the threat of the caliph was real, especially when Shureik was rumored to be affiliated with the Alawites. This caliph even used to order public beatings and humiliation for clergymen and imams, such as Malik Ibn Anas. Thus, Shureik had no choice but to accept the post, and he judged among people while adhering to justice even when facing henchmen, high-rank officials, and cronies of the Abbasid caliphate.           

  The seminal book of Ibn Saad is the oldest one in the history of the Muhammadans and contains many authentic and true accounts, and he wrote a short biography of Shureik, containing the story we have quote above. Yet, foes and rivals of Shureik spread another account of the same event of how he was appointed as a judge, and this account is mentioned by Al-Safadi in his book titled "Al-Wafi Bil-Waffeyyat": the caliph Al-Mahdi commanded Shureik to choose wither to tutor his sons or to be appointed as a judge, and Shureik asked for some time to think and choose, but when Al-Mahdi invited him as a guest for lunch, and as Shureik ate a superb meal of dishes never heard of before by him, he readily chose to be appointed as a judge to avoid being checked and watched daily by Al-Mahdi who might put him to death if his sons did not learn well. This story seems to be fictional and untrue because more than one historical account in other books tell us that Shureik was a judge for a long time during the reign of Al-Mansour and later on during the reign of his successor and son, Al-Mahdi, until al-Mahdi gave him the sack and dismissed him. this story copied by Al-Safadi is false because it was mentioned before about Harun Al-Rasheed and the famous judge Abou Youssef who was very close to this caliph and served him obsequiously in return for large sums of money as gifts. Al-Safadi mentions another account that distorts the character of Shureik; as a judge, he issued a verdict to force the caliph Al-Mahdi to give an orchard/farm to a man who was promised it, by virtue of a contract, by the caliph, but the caliph procrastinated until the man resorted to Shureik. The indignant caliph obeyed the verdict, while reminding Shureik that he never paid any sum to purchase the post, and the sad Shureik told him that he lost his faith, conscience, and beliefs by selling them to the Devil since he worked as a judge. We personally tend to think that this account is fabricated; many historical accounts assert that most people praised the justice and fairness of Shureik as he issued verdicts against the unjust Abbasid dynasty members as well as their unjust viziers, cronies, and statesmen, but such accounts are never mentioned by Al-Safadi, but by Ibn Al-Jawzy and Al-Baghdadi. This means that the negative accounts of Shureik by Al-Safadi were forged and he copied them, without checking and verifying all sources, in a later era. Ibn Al-Jawzy and Al-Baghdadi mention in their books that Shureik before opening the court session would pray inside the nearby mosque, recite Quranic verses and a certain phrase to remind people and himself of piety and the fear of God and to bear in mind the responsibility of upholding justice and to remember always the Last Day, and then, he would begin the session and hear people coming to him.     

 

His justice and fairness as a judge:

1- Many accounts assert that Shureik was a fair and just judge especially when facing the unjust powerful and affluent ones who were near the ruling circles of the Abbasids, and he used to threaten the Abbasid dynast members that he would resign if his just verdicts would not be executed. This means that Shureik courageously assumed the post of a judge to uphold justice to people who suffered grave injustices within a tyrannical theocratic rule and dominant corruption. Maybe Shureik thought that erudite people like him must set a good example of justice and not to run away like cowards who feared to face Abbasid despots and cronies under the pretext of asceticism and boycotting unjust rulers. At that era, injustices reigned supreme in Baghdad and the whole of Iraq, and it reached Kufa when Shureik became its judge, and maybe Shureik felt the urge to establish justice and help the needy and the wronged, oppressed partied.           

2- A narrator named Ibn Saeed mentions the story that he was a guest at the house of Shureik, and he noticed that he did not go to the court in the usual time because he waited for his washed garments to dry in the sun; this means that he had not many clothes like rich people, and this means that he remained ascetic and never took bribes or made ill-gotten profits from his post, in contrast the unjust and greedy judge named Abou Youssef who pleased Harun Al-Rasheed and ignored the Quranic/Islamic teachings for the sake of money. Shureik and Ibn Saeed in that situation were discussing an issue concerning a female slave who got married without prior permission of his owner/master. Meanwhile, Queen Al-Khayzuran, wife of the caliph Al-Mahdi and mother of caliphs Al-Hadi and Al-Rasheed, and who was the actual and powerful ruler of the Abbasid caliphate as she controlled her husband and her sons, sent one of her servant to care for her farms in Kufa, and commanded the governor of Kufa, Moussa Ibn Eissa, to obey her servant. This servant grew much powerful in Kufa as a result, and when Ibn Saeed and Shureik were talking, this servant passed in a pompous procession while dragging a half-naked man with a rope who was being severely flogged until blood trickled from his body; and this poor man was crying for help of the judge. Shureik hastened to help the poor man who cried for his help, and he narrated to Shureik how the powerful servant of Queen Al-Khayzuran forced him to work for four months in the farms without wages (i.e., corvée or forced labor, to use a modern term) until his family members ran away, and when the poor man ran away, the powerful servant arrested, dragged, and flogged him in public. When Shureik as a judge commanded this servant to come to court with this poor man, the servant haughtily refused and asserted his right to discipline and punish his workers. Shureik brought his un-dried gown and clothed the poor man, and he hastily brought a flog to beat the powerful servant with it. When slaves of the servant tried to stop Shureik by force, Shureik called and gathered all the youths of Kufa and commanded them to arrest and imprison the servant and his slaves at once, and the youths of Kufa obeyed him because they trusted his justice. The powerful servant wept and threatened Shureik that he would pay a heavy price for what he had done. Shureik released the wronged worker and resumed his friendly talking calmly to Ibn Saeed as if nothing had happened, while Ibn Saeed warned him of the consequences as Queen Al-Khayzuran would not be pleased. Shureik dismissed the matter with a wave of his hand, asserting that justice is above all, and this is the law of God as per the Quran, and he resumed his friendly talking with Ibn Saeed. As expected, the powerful servant complained to the governor of Kufa, Moussa Ibn Eissa, who told him that he could not possibly rebuke or punish Shureik because people love him because of his fairness. The disgraced powerful servant felt he could no longer remain in Kufa and returned to Baghdad. Of course, Queen Al-Khayzuran became an enemy of Shureik and hated him for it.  

3- The governor of Kufa, Moussa Ibn Eissa, had a previous situation with Shureik that drove him to adopt the above-mentioned stance of supporting Shureik as a judge while risking to provoke the ire of Queen Al-Khayzuran by not helping her powerful servant; this situation is narrated by Ibn Saeed: a woman who was a descendant of a companion of the Prophet Muhammad, named Jarir Ibn Abdullah, filed a complaint to Shureik, accusing the governor of Kufa of confiscating her palm trees garden overlooking the Euphrates, after buying parts of the garden previously owned by her siblings, while she refused to sell hers to him, and the angry governor demolished the wall surrounding her part of the garden to confiscate it and annex it to the rest of the garden. Shureik sent his boy to bring the governor Moussa Ibn Eissa to court like this woman, but the arrogant Moussa Ibn Eissa decided to send instead the head of the police with a message to the judge, Shureik, warning him if would support a woman against him. The head of the police asked to be spared from this errand, as he knew that the infuriated Shureik would send him to prison for not bringing the governor before the judge in court and for bringing a written threat to him by the governor; everybody knew how Shureik was just, fair, decisive, and strict. Upon the insistence of the arrogant Moussa Ibn Eissa, the head of the police prepared for himself a prison cell with accommodations of comfort as he knew beforehand that Shureik will incarcerate him. Indeed, when Shureik felt insulted by the message, he commanded the incarceration of the head of the police (who apologized and said he expected his own arrest) for not bringing the governor to court. When the angry governor sent another envoy to demand the release of the head of the police, Shureik commanded the incarceration of this envoy of the governor as well. The wily governor sent for the notables and dignitaries of Kufa, and most of them were friends to Shureik, to complain to them about what happened, and he sent them for the judge to tell him that the governor was not like the masses and no one would dare to bring him to court. Once they delivered their verbal message to Shureik, his anger provoked by not applying justice led him to call for all youths of Kufa to arrest and incarcerate those notables and dignitaries for one night, who defended and stood up for the injustice of the governor (by carrying and conveying his verbal message) and did not side with justice of the judicial authority. The infuriated governor felt disgraced and scandalized in Kufa as people admired the courage and justice of Shureik and verbally abused the governor. Eissa Ibn Moussa vented his anger by leading his troops of armed guards by night to release by force all of the incarcerated notables and dignitaries of Kufa from the prison. Next morning, Shureik was informed by the prison warden at court by what happened, and he promptly left the court and went home to prepare his baggage and luggage, informing everyone in Kufa to spread the word everywhere in the city that he resigned his post as a judge, saying that he was forced to assume the post but he accepted it to apply justice, and since he was stopped from doing so, he must leave. Indeed, he took his way to Baghdad, but the governor in his procession and cortege caught up with him and intercepted him on the way outside Kufa, beseeching him to return to Kufa as its honored and respected judge, and he apologized to Shureik and asked him to forgive him for the love of God. Shureik demanded that all released ones be incarcerated again for insulting the court and the judicial authority, or else, he would go on his way to Baghdad to file a complaint against the governor to the caliph and to inform him of his resignation. The frightened governor promised to do so, and Shureik remained still in his place on the route until the prison warden came to him to assure him that all released ones were brought back to prison, and then, Shureik the judge commanded his men to ties Eissa Ibn Moussa with ropes and to lead him to court to listen to the verdict issued in the case of the woman and her palm tree garden. When the governor and the woman were brought to court to stand before Shureik the judge, the governor beseeched him to release the incarcerated ones since he obeyed him by allowing himself to be brought to court while being tied with ropes. Indeed, Shureik ordered their immediate release before the court session would begin. The governor admitted that he was guilty and restored to the woman her part of the garden and promised to rebuilt her demolished wall that surrounded it. The thankful woman praised the justice of the judge Shureik, and when she left the court, Shureik untied the governor and made him sit beside him, addressing him politely and asking him gently if he would request anything from the judge or the court. The governor Eissa Ibn Moussa laughed at such show of respect, as he knew that Shureik wanted him to learn a lesson; he understood the lesson that everyone must be equal under the law, even governors and rulers.        

  

How Shureik was dismissed from his post as a judge:

 Of course, it was natural that Shureik would bring to himself enmity of al powerful ones in the Abbasid palace during the reign of the caliph Al-Mahdi, as redoubtable Queen Al-Khayzuran, and many powerful viziers, servants, and female slaves serving her, had the real power in running the affairs of the caliphate, and all of them hated Shureik for insulting them indirectly, for his declared love of the Shiite Alawites (descendants of Ali Ibn Abou Talib), and for his addressing the caliph (and all powerful men) boldly and impudently. Hence, enemies of Shureik increased and incited Al-Mahdi against him; the caliph Al-Mahdi used to accuse his foes and rivals (and any callers for sedition) of being 'heretics' to command their being put to death. But he could not do that with Shureik for his popularity among the ordinary people in Kufa; he had no option left but to dismiss him from his post as a judge and give him the sack. It is said that the reason for his dismissal was that Shureik as a judge in court ordered one man to be slapped ten times for insulting the court, as this man was the powerful servant of a powerful slave-woman under the Queen, and this man threatened Shureik the judge in case he would issue a verdict against him, and he reminded him that he was highly connected with the Queen and her powerful women, whom he served. Shureik had earlier brought this powerful servant before him to make him listen to a verdict against him when another man filed a complaint against him to Shureik as the judge. The insulted defeated powerful servant went to Baghdad to complain of Shureik to his lady (i.e., the powerful female slave at the Abbasid palace), who in her turn complained to the Queen. This was the last straw for the infuriated Queen Al-Khayzuran, who could no longer stand the justice of Shureik and hated him so much, and she urged Al-Mahdi to dismiss Shureik at once for such effrontery, and her husband the caliph obeyed her at once. Indeed, Al-Mahdi hated Shureik for being impudent in his manner of addressing the caliph; earlier before being dismissed, Shureik was brought to the caliph in Baghdad who interrogated him about his affiliation with the Shiites who sought power and rule and informed him about how this would undermine his role as a judge. Shureik insisted that he did not care about the post and was not keen on keeping it and he did not know anything about Shiite imams, as he believed only in the Quran and Sunna. When the furious Al-Mahdi demanded to know his opinion about Ali Ibn Abou Talib, Shureik insisted that Abbas and his son Abdulla (i.e., ancestors of the Abbasids) had admitted that Ali was the best companion of Prophet Muhammad, and how Abdullah Ibn Abbas used to fight under Ali against the Umayyads at one time, as history tells. Al-Mahdi could not respond or say anything to refute Shureik, and months later, he dismissed him from his post as a judge.        

 

His boldness in addressing people:

 Of course, such accounts of Shureik show that he never feared anyone and he was courageous and bold in retorting and in addressing everyone, however powerful they might have been. The governor of Kufa, Moussa Ibn Eissa, ridiculed Shureik face to face in Kufa after his being dismissed and expressed his relief and happiness; when the governor declared to Shureik that his being dismissed was the best decree ever issued by the caliph, Shureik calmly told him that Emir of the Believers (i.e., the caliph) had the right to dismiss and appoint any judges and governors as he pleased and no one would dare to blame him for it. The governor expressed his wonder at the calmness and indifference of Shureik and accused him of being a mad person whose impudent tongue brought him trouble. Eventually, Shureik died in Kufa in 177 A.H. during the reign of Harun Al-Rasheed and the governor Moussa Ibn Eissa led people in the funerary prayers as imam and buried Shureik with due solemnity, and most people of Kufa wept for losing him and cherished his memory. Al-Rasheed was near Kufa and when he wanted to perform the funerary prayers with them, he discovered that he came too late, as Shureik was buried already, and the caliph hurriedly left Kufa. May God rest his soul and have mercy upon Shureik, for he was a just and fair.      

 

Between Abou Hanifa (80 – 150 A.H.) and Shureik (95 – 177 A.H.):

   Abou Hanifa was one of the opposition figures within the Umayyad caliphate when it was strong and powerful, as he supported the revolt of Zeid Ibn Ali Zayn Al-Abedeen (a descendant of Ali Ibn Abou Talib) in 121 A.H. and he sympathized with Shiites/Alawites, and this led the Umayyad governor of Iraq at the time, Ibn Hubayra, to test Abou Hanifa and his loyalty to the State by appointing him as a judge, but he refused and was persecuted and imprisoned, while other religious scholars in Iraq agreed readily to assume the post. Upon his release later on, Abou Hanifa fled to Mecca where he lived incognito until he returned to Kufa only after collapse of the Umayyad caliphate and Abbasids ruled instead, and he was a favorite person who was always welcome to the Abbasid palace court. This short-lived harmony between the Abbasids and Abou Hanifa ended when the caliph Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour commanded all religious scholars of fiqh and hadiths to serve the State and issue laws and fatwas as per his whims in return for large gifts of money (as in the same way of laws issued to serve the Mubarak regime in Egypt now), but Abou Hanifa adamantly refused to issue false fatwas to serve the caliph's purposes and he issued fatwas (ordinary ones and political ones) that would ease his conscience by adhering to what he deemed as the truth, thus infuriating the caliph and growing in popularity. When Abou Hanifa refused to be appointed as a judge within tyrannical rule, this drove the caliph to torture him and then to kill him by poison in his prison cell in 150 A.H. 

  Let us provide few examples of fatwas of Abou Hanifa that infuriated the Abbasid caliph. Abou Hanifa issued a fatwa that the caliph was never to have concubines or female slaves and never to take up a second wife since he signed a marriage contract conditions with such stipulations imposed by his wife. Al-Mansour wanted Abou Hanifa to issue a fatwas to annul such conditions for his sake, but Abou Hanifa refused as marriage contracts, and indeed any contracts, had to be respected as per the Quranic verse 5:1. When the grandson of Al-Hassan Ibn Ali Ibn Abou Talib, whose name was Muhammad Al-Nafs Al-Zakiyya, revolted against the Abbasids by claiming the throne and gathering rebels and supporters, some Abbasid leaders felt mortified to face him because they thought of him as a 'holy' person since he was a descendant of Ali and Fatima (daughter of Prophet Muhammad) and because the caliph Al-Mansour, before the establishment of the Abbasid caliphate, had sworn fealty of Al-Nafs Al-Zakiyya who revolted against the Umayyads. Abou Hanifa thought that Al-Nafs Al-Zakiyya deserved to be a caliph instead of the Abbasids, and this view expressed in public infuriated Al-Mansour as he knew that people believed any words uttered by Abou Hanifa. Al-Mansour made his spies and agents watch over Abou Hanifa all the time and record his 'mistakes' and words, in order to allow the caliph to have any pretext to get rid of him in the nearest possible chance, but the wise Abou Hanifa never fell into that trap, and he kept expressing his free opinions and fatwas without using words that might infuriate the caliph. But the countdown for planning the murder of Abou Hanifa began when the second Al-Mosul revolt occurred in 148 A.H.; as the caliph Al-Mansour gathered all religious scholars and imams to ask for their fatwas rewarding his earlier threat to people of Al-Mosul, when the first Al-Mosul revolt was quelled, that he would massacre them off if they would revolt ever again and they agreed to adhere to peace and to be deserving any punishment in case they violated the general peace ever again. The caliph wanted to ask if he could massacre them as they have been warned and they were the ones to disturb the peace and never paying head to his threat. All scholars and imams gathered inside his palace agreed on one fatwa: that the caliph had the right to kill them off those who deserve it after they had been warned against rebelling again, and he had the right to pardon them if he liked. Abou Hanifa remained silent and everyone felt that he disagreed, and the arrogant caliph insisted on knowing his frank opinion. Abou Hanifa insisted that such an 'agreement' was groundless; no powerful armed person could force people to agree to be massacred for any reason, and such agreement was imposed on them under threat. The caliph remained silent for a while and then warned Abou Hanifa of issuing such similar fatwas ever again in public, if he wanted to avoid the wrath of a caliph. Stubbornly, and as a reaction, Abou Hanifa months later declared in public that caliphate must be within consultation of all believers who must choose their ruler and must not be by occupying the throne by military force. This fatwa was a like a death warrant to Abou Hanifa, as hypocritical scholars and his intellectual rivals and foes, who were obsequiously serving the caliph, accused Abou Hanifa of calling for sedition and inciting civil strife and rebellion against the 'legitimate' Abbasid caliph. Al-Mansour hatched a plot to get rid of Abou Hanifa without provoking condemnation and ire of the masses; he commanded Abou Hanifa to be appointed as a judge while he knew that Abou Hanifa will adamantly refuse, thus giving the caliph a pretext to imprison him. after torturing him for weeks in his prison cell, Al-Mansour made his warden administer poison to Abou Hanifa to get rid of him. Thus, the caliph Al-Mansour did not differ in tyranny and injustice (or even in frequent bloodshed) from his role-model he admired, the Umayyad caliph Abdul-Malik Ibn Marwan, but the difference lied in the fact that Al-Mansour committed the grave sin of adding sham religious legitimacy to his decrees by imposing on scholars to issue fatwas and fabricate hadiths to support all his deeds of tyranny and all his injustices, in political affairs and otherwise. 

  We notice some extent of similarity between Abou Hanifa (80 – 150 A.H.) and Shureik (95 – 177 A.H.), as they lived almost in the same era and both men lived in Kufa and witnessed the last stage of the Umayyad Era and the first stage of the Abbasid Era. Indeed, both were accused to allying themselves to Shiites, deemed a crime by Abbasids that entailed making both men work as judges under the Abbasid rule to prove their loyalty. The differences between both men include the fact that Abou Hanifa refused to be appointed as a judge and was persecuted, imprisoned, tortured, and killed, whereas Shureik assumed the post of a judge to uphold and maintain justice despite the dominant culture of tyranny and corruption, until he was dismissed from his post eventually. Another difference was that Shureik was an Arab man, whereas Abou Hanifa was a Persian man. Another huge difference was that Abou Hanifa denied all hadiths as falsehoods that have nothing to do with Islam (indeed, we personally, Dr. A. S. Mansour, tend to think that Abou Hanifa was the first known Quranist ever) as he depended on the Quran and the logical reasoning of his mind to issue fatwas, whereas Shureik was a Sunnite who believed in the so-called Sunna and hadiths. Shureik faced tyranny of Abbasids and their crones, governors etc. within circumstances (during the reign of the Abbasid caliph Al-Mahdi) that differed a great deal from the critical dangerous ones of Abou Hanifa that led to his murder by the tyrannical Al-Mansour. The Persians of Khorasan, supported by Abou Hanifa, were the main people in the Abbasid armies and troops (i.e., more than Arabs) that led the revolt against the deteriorating and collapsing Umayyad dynasty, and they began their secret political call under the motto (seeking to please Prophet Muhammad's household) to shroud in secrecy the real leaders of the revolt (i.e., the Abbasids), especially after the Umayyads had murdered all leaders of Shiite Alawites such as sons of Ali, Al-Hussein and Al-Hassan, and their progeny and supporters. Thus, when Abou Hanifa supported them, he was surprised, like most people at the time (both Arabs and Persians) that the new caliph was the Abbasid Abou Al-Abbas Abdullah Al-Saffah (a title which literally means 'the assassin'). Disputes and grudges that occurred as a result were crushed and quelled brutally and fiercely by the Abbasids, even the Abbasid military leader of Persian origin Abou Moslem Al-Khorasany who grew too powerful was rumored to seek to rule Persia independently, and before the caliph Al-Saffah could commit more massacres and solve more troubles, he died suddenly leaving lots of unsolved troubles and disputes to his successor Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour who had to assassinate the leader Al-Khorasany himself with his hands in 137 A.H inside the Abbasid palace. Supporters of the assassinated leader in Khorasan were furious and revolted against the Abbasid rule and fought many battled against them, and Persian armies were led by a woman, Fatima Bint Abou Moslem Al-Khorasany, who sought to avenge her father's murder. Indeed, since the dead Al-Khorasany had many supporters and followers even inside the Abbasid palace court and inside the Abbasid armies, the caliph Al-Mansour ha to make sure that everyone was loyal only to him, and this is why the stance of Abou Hanifa, the scholar of Persian origin respected by all for his siding with justice, in his refusal to become a judge, was offensive and insulting to the tyrannical caliph. The critical situation exacerbated as Abou Hanifa was a supporter of the family and progeny of Ali Ibn Abou Talib and supported all their revolts in Hejaz, in Iraq, and in Persia in 145 A.H., and Al-Mansour could no longer bear the opposition of Abou Hanifa as people in Iraq believed in all his stances and views as true. Another grudge that Al-Mansour bore against Abou Hanifa was the fact that despite his love or Shiites, he refused to accept any hadiths as part of Islam; these hadiths were fabricated at the time by the caliph himself and also by his obsequious religious scholars who narrated them and spread them in all mosques, including narratives and hadiths about Abbas (paternal uncle of Prophet Muhammad and great grandfather of Abbasids) to raise his name and stature and ascribing falsehoods to Muhammad by making him predict the future of descendants of Abbas who would become rulers! Hence, Al-Mansour had to kill Abou Hanifa (who was very popular and posed as a veritable danger undermining the Abbasids because of his so many admirers and supporters) to preserve the sham appearance of legitimacy of the Abbasid theocratic rule.  

  

How things were different with Shureik:

 Despite the love of Shureik toward Shiites, he had no supporters among Arab tribes to make him pose a veritable threat to the Abbasid caliphate, especially that the Abbasid caliphate relied on Persians more than Arabs. Another factor that deemed Shureik as less dangerous was his belief in hadiths, and thus he followed the formal Sunnite religion of the Abbasids. Another factor that made Shureik important to the Abbasids (for a while) that their popularity decreased after the murder of Abou Hanifa, and they had to reinforce their credibility, popularity, and legitimacy to appoint as a judge a man similar somehow to Abou Hanifa to judge wisely, fairly, and justly to give the sham appearance that the Abbasids ascended to the throne to remove Umayyad grave injustices and tyranny; thus, the Abbasids needed a fair judge loyal to them while being less dangerous than Abou Hanifa (as Abou Hanifa revolted against the Umayyads and politically opposed them in public, and the burgeoning Abbasid rule would never have accepted that from him at all as he might have gathered Persians around him and even military generals who trusted his fatwas). Thus, the quarrelsome Shureik had the best qualifications to be used to save the reputation of the Abbasid rule, especially that he had no political ambitions and never joined Shiite revolts though he loved the Alawites. Indeed, Shureik used to be keen on proving his loyalty to the Abbasid caliphate in order to strike a balance between upholding justice in the judicial authority as a judge and making minimum level of peace between him and the powerful ones of the tyrannical regime of the Abbasids which was based on injustices. Abou Hanifa was against the gravest, bitterest injustice of all types, i.e., tyrannical rule, and he refused to work under it even if he would have been allowed the chance to uphold justice away from politics if he would have accepted to be appointed as a judge, whereas Shureik saw matters through a different angle; to accept to assume the post of a judge to achieve justice as much as possible to the wronged parties, among the common people, even within the dominant atmosphere of injustices, corruption, and tyranny. Eventually, the fact that Shureik ended up as a dismissed and removed judge proves one thing: there is no room for justice (even a small tiny room) within the tyrannical (theocratic) rule. After the affairs and conditions settled and the Abbasid dynasty members felt that their rule was established on firm grounds by Abou Jaffer Al-Mansour, his son and successor, Al-Mahdi, found stability and peace all over the Abbasid Empire, and he spent his time in promiscuity and enjoying luxury. This allowed for the first time the phenomena of female slaves to grow very powerful in the Abbasid rule, especially Al-Khayzuran who later on married Al-Mahdi, as female slaves under her had their own power, authority, servants, lands, possessions, jewels, money, followers, etc. and they committed many injustices against people. this means that the gravest, bitterest type of injustice, i.e., tyranny, reached all and was inflicted on every one by other powerful figures serving under the Abbasid rule. When the Abbasid tyranny grew strong and stable enough, it no longer needed to use Shureik as a just and fair judge to prove anything to the masses or as a façade to keep sham appearances. And thus, Shureik was removed from his post for good, and his era ended to make way for the era of unjust, hypocritical, and obsequious judges like the Abou Youssef. Yet, there are exceptions for every rule; other fair judges emerged later on (this is the topic of the next chapter) even if they never reached the level of justice of Shureik, but they were certainly above the base and despised level of the scholar and judge Abou Youssef who embodied sheer hypocrisy and injustice of any obsequious venal person in all eras of the Muhammadans, not merely in the era of the Abbasid caliph Harun Al-Rasheed.