Islamic Political Thought: Ibn Taymiyyah
The Theory of Ibn Taymiyya:
Ibn Taymiyya considers the institution of the ruler in Islam as an indispensable religious obligation:
‘It must be known that the institution of taking charge of the people's affairs is one of the greatest obligations of religion. Religion can not be established without it.' 1
The argument Ibn Taymiyya uses to support his view is rational namely:
‘For humans cannot satisfy their interests unless they come together, and when they do come together they must have a head.' 2
He believes that a head is an absolute necessity for running public affairs. No justice, holy war or religious rituals can be performed without a head charged with the affairs and vested with power and authority. He asserts:
‘It is better (for a nation) to have an unjust Imam for sixty
years than to have no Sultan (Arabic: ruler, man of authority and power) for one day.' 3
Ruler Represents the Divine Will
Ibn Taymiyya writes concerning the nature of the ‘one man ruler' as a reflection of the ‘divine will' on earth:
‘The Sultan is the shadow of God on earth.' 4
He considers that the institution of the ruler is a mean by which Muslims come nearer to God:
‘It is a duty, then, to take the institution of rulership as a religious means and a pious gift bringing nearer to God. For coming nearer to God by this means, through obedience to Him and his Apostle, is the best of all paths.'5
No reference to Qur'an or Sunna
To support his personal postulate Ibn Taymiyya does not
resort to producing evidence from the sources of Islam, namely the Qur'an and the Tradition, but he concerns himself with references to weak Hadith and not strong Hadith (Sayings ascribed to the Prophet).
He goes on to explain the functions and duties of the Imam (Arabic: Ruler; he ascribes different titles to the same concept, e.g. Emir, Sultan). These duties are: rendering back the trusts to those to whom they are due and judging among men with justice. In these duties he relies on the following Qur'anic verses to give support to his arguments:
‘God does command you to render back your trusts to those to whom they are due, and should you judge among men then you must judge with justice.' 4: 58
Appeal to Reason and not Nass
Here reference is made in the general plural addressing all
Muslims. Ibn Taymiyya deduces the particular from the general and confines it to an invented ruler whether an amir (Arabic: emir: prince), a sultan, a caliph (Arb: khalifa: successor) or an imam. The verse (Arb: aya) does not allow such an interpretation. It does not refer, in any way, to one person, nor does permit neither the invention of the concept, nor the position, of a ruler, imam, khalifa and sultan or otherwise.
Ibn Taymiyya, at this point, works out an elaborate system
of administrators, their functions and duties and their responsibilities. They must deal with treasury and financial matters, with the jihad (Muslim war) and with the body of judges to settle legal matters.
Principle of Shura
The principle of Shura (Arb: mutual consultation from the verb: shawara-yushawiru-mushawaratan), writes Ibn Taymiyya, is one thing the ruler (who is charged with authority) cannot do without. But he considers shura to be confined to matters where there is no reference in Shari‘a, and applies when there are disputes among Muslims.
This principle is applied, according to Ibn Taymiyya, between the ruler and Ulu al-Amr, which he identifies as ‘those who are charged with authority' and ‘those who have knowledge of Shari‘a only (a handful of persons designated by the ruler himself). Ibn Taymiyya quotes two Qur'anic references in support of his argument:
‘And consult with them in the affairs of the moment, then when you have taken your decision put your trust in God, for God loves those who put their trust in Him.' 3: 159
‘But what God has is better and more lasting, for the believers, who put their trust in their Lord, hearken to their Lord, establish regular prayer and conduct their affairs by mutual consultation.' 42: 36, 38
The Logic of Ibn Taymiyya
The address is made in the first verse to the Prophet and in the second verse, in the general, to All Muslims exclusively. Ibn Taymiyya has generalised, in the first citation, from the particular reference to the Prophet in the following false manner:
a. That there must be rulers succeeding the prophet in conducting affairs.
b. That these rulers, or successors, ought to conduct their public affairs, and in case of absence of nass (Arb: text in Shari‘a), by means of mutual consultation.
In the second citation Ibn Taymiyya reduces the exclusive general to the absolute particular confining the reference to one single person, namely the ruler, on the following presumptions:
a. That there should be some one who is in charge of the affairs of the Muslims.
b. He concludes ‘If he (the ruler) consults the Muslims'6, leaving the option of consultation open to the ruler, and ‘if some of those (among the Muslims) show him what he ought to do, then he ought to follow their opinion' 7.
b. That only the opinion of the ulu al-amr is to be consulted, if at all, and to be followed (implemented) if it considered by the ruler to be right and of correct opinion, that is in accordance with Shari'a.
To establish his theory of ‘rulership' of the ‘one person ruler' Ibn Taymiyya quotes the Qur'anic and only reference to ‘obedience' to ‘those who obedience is due'.
‘O you who believe: Obey God, and obey the messenger anduli al-amr(charged with affairs) among you.' 4: 59
Invention of Ruling Institiution
In this way Ibn Taymiyya invents a ruling system of the one-man- ruler by changing the Qur'anic context to suite his own postulate. He infringes on the Qur'anic text by reducing the exclusivity of the principle of shura to all Muslims to one person, and whenever the ruler desires, to a clique of a selected elite who he judges of good opinion.
Ibn Taymiyya does not forget to stress the role of Shari‘a as the grounds of temporal political affairs in an age where departure of Islamic law became the common practice. He emphasises equally, and even more, the institution of the ruler as the ‘vicegerent of prophethood'or ‘succession to
prophethood'(khilafat al-nubuwwa)8, demanded, according Ibn Taymiyya, by al-Shar‘.
Ibn Taymiyya attempts to establish an institution of Ruler and ascribes it to Islamic Shari'a.
But In Islamic sources namely the Qur'an and the Sunna there is no one reference to a ruler but rather to the whole entity of the Muslims, members of the Islamic Umma, that they ought to conduct their affairs by mutual consultation by applying the Principle of Shura.
1. Taqi-e-Din Ibn Taymiyya,Al-Siyasa al-Shar‘iyya fi Islah al-Ra‘i w-al-Ra‘iyya(Cairo: Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1969), p. 161.
2. Ibid., p. 161
3. Ibid., p.162.
4. Ibid., p.162.
5. Ibid., p.162.
6. Ibn Taymiyya, op.cit., p.158.
7. Ibid., p. 158.
8. Ibid., p. 158.
