Introduction:
Abul Hasan Ali bin Muhammad bin Habib-al-Mawardi is the first writer on political theory in the
history of Islam. Except Ibn-e-Khaldoon, all the jurists, thrologists and political philosophers who
have followed him, down to our own days, have hardly made any improvement upon his thoughts.
He was born in 974 AD and died in 1058 AD. Al-Mawardi was regarded as one of the versatile and
most learned jurists of his age, and his opinions laid emphasis in the world of law and jurisprudence.
He belonged to the orthodox Shafi’te school of jurisprudence and still we find traces of the pure
rationalism. Like other Muslims he received the traditional education, and he wrote on many topics
besides law, like, a Commentary on the Quran, a treatise on prophecy and several works on Ethics.
As far his legal writings, it is noteworthy that “Government and administration, at all levels, were
his principal concerns.”
Al-Mawardi started his career as a professor of law and jurisprudence at Basra and Baghdad, and
later on he was appointed as Qazi-ul-Quzat of Baghdad by a-Qaim, Abbasid Caliph and he was also
conferred an honorific title of Aqdal-Quat or the Supreme Justice. But he declined to accept this
offer of appointment because he said there were far abler people who deserved the title much
more than himself. It is related that he did not publish any of his works in his lifetime. When a
friend asked why he kept his books back he replied that it was because he felt that his motives in
writing them were not as pure as he should have wished and that he did not know whether Allah
the Almighty had accepted these literary offerings or not.
Al-Mawardi has left a great and valuable treasure of knowledge and philosophy. His books are the
following:
1. Al-Ahkam at-Sultaniyah (Ordinances of Government)
2. Nasihat-ul-Muluk (Advice to Kings)
3. Qawanin-ul-Wazarat (Laws of the Ministry)
4. Tahsilun Nazar fi Tahsil-uz-Zafar (Control of Sight for facilitating Victory)
Contribution of Al-Mawardi
to Islamic Political Thought
Al-Mawardi was the founder of the science of politics in the Islamic World. He was not very original
in what he did. His greatness lies in the fact that he received political opinions and traditions of
the past and transformed them into a logical system. For four hundred years the Muslims were
engaged in conquest and empire building, but they could not evolve any concrete pattern of
government or administration. Al-Mawardi’s achievement is that he gave definition to what was
unshapely and undefined. Moreover, he assembled his ideas in writing; therefore his book Al-Ahkam
at-Sultaniyah became a standard work of reference on political and administrative practices.
In spite of the untenable position in which al-Mawardi had to work, one cannot fail to admire his
effort to work out a political system essentially based on the fundamental thought and early
political practice of Islam. Al-Mawardi’s remarkable contribution is that he has given a detailed
account of the administrative machinery of Government. He portrayed not only what exists but
also what ought to exist. This idealistic touch made his work popular with every regime and every
generation that came after him.
Al-Mawardi’s work and his theory of Caliphate saved the Muslim people for a long to come from the
extravagant and illogical claims of the Shiahs, the Khawarij, the Mutazilah and other extremist
sects in Islam. His immediate aim of emancipating the Sunni Caliphate of the Abbasids from the
Buwayhid tyranny was so providently realized in his own lifetime, that it must be counted as one
of his remarkable achievements. Al-Mawardi knew that the Abbasids could not fully retrieve the lost
ground and could not regain the glory of their early ancestors. To compensate this irretrievable
position he instituted the theory of absolute governorship which provided a handy instrument of
self-protection to the Abbasid Caliphs against the attempt of possible adventurers who aspired to
overthrow the Caliphate. His most valuable contribution to political theory was that he based his
account on historical practice and facts and liked other Jurists and the scholars; he did not indulge
in empty speculation.
Criticism:
But with all the good points that can be said about Al-Mawardi, he had one short-coming, he was
not a political thinker, and hence could not evolve a philosophic conception of the state. He does
not discuss the scope, jurisdiction, responsibilities and obligations of the state, gives no
conception of sovereignty and seems to be completely ignorant of the idea of the constitution.
Lack of a constitutional theory has not only very much reduced the value of Al-Mawardi’s work but
has its deadening effect on the later development of Islamic political thought.
Al-Mawardi seems to have no conception of democracy. His theory of election dealing only with
the appointment of the Caliph is wholly undemocratic. Moreover, he is very particular about the
rights and prerogatives of the Caliph but pays little attention to the rights and obligations of the
people. Lack of the idea of fundamental rights of men has been one of the principal sores in Muslim
polity for ages, and has been mainly responsible for almost complete absence of the growth of
democratic life in Muslim lands.
Al-Mawardi’s Theory of State
in what he did. His greatness lies in the fact that he received political opinions and traditions of
the past and transformed them into a logical system. For four hundred years the Muslims were
engaged in conquest and empire building, but they could not evolve any concrete pattern of
government or administration. Al-Mawardi’s achievement is that he gave definition to what was
unshapely and undefined. Moreover, he assembled his ideas in writing; therefore his book Al-Ahkam
at-Sultaniyah became a standard work of reference on political and administrative practices.
In spite of the untenable position in which al-Mawardi had to work, one cannot fail to admire his
effort to work out a political system essentially based on the fundamental thought and early
political practice of Islam. Al-Mawardi’s remarkable contribution is that he has given a detailed
account of the administrative machinery of Government. He portrayed not only what exists but
also what ought to exist. This idealistic touch made his work popular with every regime and every
generation that came after him.
Al-Mawardi’s work and his theory of Caliphate saved the Muslim people for a long to come from the
extravagant and illogical claims of the Shiahs, the Khawarij, the Mutazilah and other extremist
sects in Islam. His immediate aim of emancipating the Sunni Caliphate of the Abbasids from the
Buwayhid tyranny was so providently realized in his own lifetime, that it must be counted as one
of his remarkable achievements. Al-Mawardi knew that the Abbasids could not fully retrieve the lost
ground and could not regain the glory of their early ancestors. To compensate this irretrievable
position he instituted the theory of absolute governorship which provided a handy instrument of
self-protection to the Abbasid Caliphs against the attempt of possible adventurers who aspired to
overthrow the Caliphate. His most valuable contribution to political theory was that he based his
account on historical practice and facts and liked other Jurists and the scholars; he did not indulge
in empty speculation.
Criticism:
But with all the good points that can be said about Al-Mawardi, he had one short-coming, he was
not a political thinker, and hence could not evolve a philosophic conception of the state. He does
not discuss the scope, jurisdiction, responsibilities and obligations of the state, gives no
conception of sovereignty and seems to be completely ignorant of the idea of the constitution.
Lack of a constitutional theory has not only very much reduced the value of Al-Mawardi’s work but
has its deadening effect on the later development of Islamic political thought.
Al-Mawardi seems to have no conception of democracy. His theory of election dealing only with
the appointment of the Caliph is wholly undemocratic. Moreover, he is very particular about the
rights and prerogatives of the Caliph but pays little attention to the rights and obligations of the
people. Lack of the idea of fundamental rights of men has been one of the principal sores in Muslim
polity for ages, and has been mainly responsible for almost complete absence of the growth of
democratic life in Muslim lands.
Al-Mawardi’s Theory of State
Caliphate:
The institution of Caliphate represents the mission of Hazrat Muhammad (P.B.U.H) the Prophet
and the main duties of the Caliph are the safeguard of religion from all destructive propaganda and
innovations and the proper organization of general polity. The Holy Quran aims at creating an
ideal society in which good predominantly prevails over evil and in which the laws of God are
generally practiced and obeyed. Further, it promises the inheritance or possession and governance
of the earth to those only who follow in the footsteps of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) and practice piety
and do justice.
When the Muslims built a world empire and actual needs arose, they tackled all these issues and
tried to reach definite conclusions on all of them in the light of Quran and the Sunnah. The Quran
is silent on all these pertinent issues, because their meaning is ever changing with the historical
evolution. Besides, the Quran does not aim at creating a state but a society. Syed Qutab was of
the view, “Whatever the form and shape of the state, if the Quranic society is realized in it,
it may bear the designation of the Islamic State.” The Quran says, “Obey God and obey the
Prophet (P.B.U.H) and the Uli-al-Amr from amongst you.” It also commands the Prophet
(P.B.U.H) to take the counsel of the Muslims in matters of state.
The Muslim jurists are of the opinion that the institution of the Caliphate is not necessitated by a
clear injunction in the Quran but by the consensus of opinion, it is obvious that the matter is left
to the discretion and judgment of the Muslim community. The Quran is very clear and definite
about all fundamental problems for instance, about the articles of faith, the forms of religious
worship, laws of matrimony and inheritance, distribution of booty of war, prohibition of interest,
rights and obligations of husband and wife etc., but omits all details about the form and
constitution of the Caliphate; and this is deliberate, because the wisdom of God knows better that
the social and political constitutions of men are ever changing and evolving with the march of
time.
The second fundamental source of political speculation was the Sunnah. And because the jurists
failed to get sufficient material in the Quran to construct a detailed political theory, they spent
greater pains in exploring the Sunnah and the archives of early Islamic History to realize their
purpose. And not only traditions of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) but also of the companions and
successors were complied.
The forty years of the Pious Caliphate rightly represented the true spirit of Islamic polity. Although
the structure of the Caliphate was brutally shaken during the regime of Hazrat Usman (R.A)
and finally cracked during the reign of Hazrat Ali (R.A), its basic principle remained permanent and
operative. These principles are as follows:
1. The aim of Islamic State is to create a society as conceived in the Quran and Sunnah.
2. The State shall enforce the Shariah as the fundamental laws of the state.
3. The sovereignty rests in the people. The people can set up any form of the government
conforming to the above two principles and with the exigencies of time and environment.
4. Whatever the form of the government may be, it must be upon the principle of popular
representation, because based sovereignty belongs to the people.
Muslims in early Islam were not beguiled by sophisticated notions of Caliphs as presented
by later theologians and jurists. To them it was crystal clear the source of all temporal
authority were the people and the people alone. The ideas of absolution of the Caliph and
of divine right were entirely foreign to them. There was no written constitution as the
modern constitutions. The Quran and Sunnah did not specifically demand the necessity of
a state. And at any rate the conception of the state was never clear. It was on account of
this that the Umayyad and Hashimite race for supremacy of power started immediately
after the device of the Prophet (P.B.U.H). After the fall of the Pious Caliphate, the idea of
democratic caliphate passed into monarchical system without any ideological conflict.
(Ibn-e-Khaldoon)
The Umayyad made strenuous efforts and effected a practical compromise between monarchy and
the original caliphate. They however, took pains to preserve the original pattern of succession b y
nomination and limited election within the House of Umayyad. This Umayyad innovation received
general approval and became an established principle of Islamic polity for alter times.
Wazarat:
Al-Mawardi says, “the appointment of a Wazir does not mean that the Imam or Caliph
should give up all connections with the administration of the state, but the real significance
of his appointment consists of the fact that in the province of politics it is better to have a
coadjutor rather than one sole person at the helm of affairs.” And when the Prophet Moses
(A.S) could make his brother Haroon (A.S) his Wazir in order that his hands should be
strengthened, then surely in the administration of the state it is allowable for the Imam to have a
Wazir beside him. Al-Mawardi says that Wazarat is of two kinds:
1. The Wazarat of Delegation:
The Wazir of Delegation is the person in whom the Imam has the fullest confidence and to whom
the powers of administration of the realm are delegated. The difference between the Wazir and
the Imam himself is that the Wazir of Delegation is not empowered to appoint anyone as his
successor and the Imam, the highest authority; can dismiss the officers appointed by him.
2. The Wazarat of Execution:
The Wazir of Execution is similar to the Secretary to the Government in modern times. Al-Mawardi
says that the main function of the Wazir is to get the decrees of the Imam executed and he should
be the main official channel of information for him. Mawardi opines that, seven qualities are
required for a person aspiring to this office and these are honesty, confidence, absence of greed,
good relationship with the people, intelligence and the wisdom of grasping the truth of things,
absence of luxury and amorousness, and lastly, diplomacy and experience. Al-Mawardi said, “It is
not necessary that the holder of the office should be a follower of Islam and a non-Muslim
dhimmi can also be appointed a Wazir of Execution."
For the efficient functioning of the administration, the government should be divided into various
departments dealing with the business of government such as revenue, army and other high offices
of State. The State administration as a whole was called Diwan. Al-Mawardi enumerated four
chief offices of Government are under:
1. The Army Board
2. The Board of Provincial Boundaries
3. The Treasury
4. The Board of Appointment and Dismissal of Officers
Views of Central Government:
Al-Mawardi being an orthodox Shafi’ite, gave an account of legal rationalism in his writings. Very
rationally he makes full endeavors to demonstrate the necessity of the Imamate and he proves it
not only by referring the Islamic law but lays down a general proposition that it is in the nature of
man or rather those among men who are superior to others in intellect that they should hand over
their affairs to one who can keep them from being tyrannized over by others and should have the
power of adjudging between them in case of mutual quarrels.
Al-Mawardi relies solely upon the Quran without reference to any other source of law. Thus when
he tries to demonstrate that the Imam should not indulge in luxurious living and he reminds the
readers of the order which God gave to the Prophet David (A.S) when He appointed him His Caliph:
“O David, We have appointed thee Our Caliph on earth; so judge aright between man and
man, and follow not desires that might lead thee away from the path of thy Lord.”
He at the time of discussing different categories of taxes, argues entirely on the basis of the Quran
, and quotes a verse to prove that the Zakat should be distributed “among the poor and the
needy, and those who collect them and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to
free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of God and for the wayfarer”
(Quran ix, 60).
Along with the verses of the Quran he argues from the order of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) as related in
the Traditions when he wishes to prove that the Caliph has the right to appoint his own successor
, he argues from the battle of Mutah and says, “The Prophet (P.B.U.H) appointed his
manumitted slave, Hazrat Zaid bin Harithah, to take his place at the head of the Muslim
army and at the same time ordered that is case of his death he should be replaced by
Hazrat Jafar bin Ali Talib, after him Hazrat Abdullah bin Rawahah and in case he is also
killed, the mantle of command should fall on the shoulders of whomever the soldiers might
choose.”Mawardi was of the view that “it was possible for the Prophet (P.B.U.H) to make
these nominations; it should be possible in case of khilafat as well.”
As regards the office of Qazi, he quotes the instructions given by the Caliph Hazrat Umar to Hazrat
Abu Musa al Ash’ari when he appointed him to this office. Sometimes al-Mawardi uses the
documents of the Umayyad and the Abbasid periods his premises, for instance, he quotes the
accession address of Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz to demonstrate the exalted ideals of the office of
the Caliph. Whenever he wants to stress the importance of the Wazarat, he quotes a
proclamation of Mamun where he declares that he wishes to appoint one of his ministers
who should be virtuous, sophisticated and conservative in his habits, experienced and
matured in his profession and willing to undertake the most difficult missions, should be
reliable and trustworthy, whose silence should signify his great indulgence and whose
conversation should demonstrate his great knowledge. He should be able to understand
the innermost thoughts of others by the mere gesture of the eyes, and even a second’s
conversation should suffice for him to get at the root of the matter, who should have the
posture of the rich, the foresight of the learned, the humility of the savant and the
acuteness of the jurist, who should be grateful for any good that might be done to him
and should bear his troubles with patience.
The institution of Caliphate represents the mission of Hazrat Muhammad (P.B.U.H) the Prophet
and the main duties of the Caliph are the safeguard of religion from all destructive propaganda and
innovations and the proper organization of general polity. The Holy Quran aims at creating an
ideal society in which good predominantly prevails over evil and in which the laws of God are
generally practiced and obeyed. Further, it promises the inheritance or possession and governance
of the earth to those only who follow in the footsteps of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) and practice piety
and do justice.
When the Muslims built a world empire and actual needs arose, they tackled all these issues and
tried to reach definite conclusions on all of them in the light of Quran and the Sunnah. The Quran
is silent on all these pertinent issues, because their meaning is ever changing with the historical
evolution. Besides, the Quran does not aim at creating a state but a society. Syed Qutab was of
the view, “Whatever the form and shape of the state, if the Quranic society is realized in it,
it may bear the designation of the Islamic State.” The Quran says, “Obey God and obey the
Prophet (P.B.U.H) and the Uli-al-Amr from amongst you.” It also commands the Prophet
(P.B.U.H) to take the counsel of the Muslims in matters of state.
The Muslim jurists are of the opinion that the institution of the Caliphate is not necessitated by a
clear injunction in the Quran but by the consensus of opinion, it is obvious that the matter is left
to the discretion and judgment of the Muslim community. The Quran is very clear and definite
about all fundamental problems for instance, about the articles of faith, the forms of religious
worship, laws of matrimony and inheritance, distribution of booty of war, prohibition of interest,
rights and obligations of husband and wife etc., but omits all details about the form and
constitution of the Caliphate; and this is deliberate, because the wisdom of God knows better that
the social and political constitutions of men are ever changing and evolving with the march of
time.
The second fundamental source of political speculation was the Sunnah. And because the jurists
failed to get sufficient material in the Quran to construct a detailed political theory, they spent
greater pains in exploring the Sunnah and the archives of early Islamic History to realize their
purpose. And not only traditions of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) but also of the companions and
successors were complied.
The forty years of the Pious Caliphate rightly represented the true spirit of Islamic polity. Although
the structure of the Caliphate was brutally shaken during the regime of Hazrat Usman (R.A)
and finally cracked during the reign of Hazrat Ali (R.A), its basic principle remained permanent and
operative. These principles are as follows:
1. The aim of Islamic State is to create a society as conceived in the Quran and Sunnah.
2. The State shall enforce the Shariah as the fundamental laws of the state.
3. The sovereignty rests in the people. The people can set up any form of the government
conforming to the above two principles and with the exigencies of time and environment.
4. Whatever the form of the government may be, it must be upon the principle of popular
representation, because based sovereignty belongs to the people.
Muslims in early Islam were not beguiled by sophisticated notions of Caliphs as presented
by later theologians and jurists. To them it was crystal clear the source of all temporal
authority were the people and the people alone. The ideas of absolution of the Caliph and
of divine right were entirely foreign to them. There was no written constitution as the
modern constitutions. The Quran and Sunnah did not specifically demand the necessity of
a state. And at any rate the conception of the state was never clear. It was on account of
this that the Umayyad and Hashimite race for supremacy of power started immediately
after the device of the Prophet (P.B.U.H). After the fall of the Pious Caliphate, the idea of
democratic caliphate passed into monarchical system without any ideological conflict.
(Ibn-e-Khaldoon)
The Umayyad made strenuous efforts and effected a practical compromise between monarchy and
the original caliphate. They however, took pains to preserve the original pattern of succession b y
nomination and limited election within the House of Umayyad. This Umayyad innovation received
general approval and became an established principle of Islamic polity for alter times.
Wazarat:
Al-Mawardi says, “the appointment of a Wazir does not mean that the Imam or Caliph
should give up all connections with the administration of the state, but the real significance
of his appointment consists of the fact that in the province of politics it is better to have a
coadjutor rather than one sole person at the helm of affairs.” And when the Prophet Moses
(A.S) could make his brother Haroon (A.S) his Wazir in order that his hands should be
strengthened, then surely in the administration of the state it is allowable for the Imam to have a
Wazir beside him. Al-Mawardi says that Wazarat is of two kinds:
1. The Wazarat of Delegation:
The Wazir of Delegation is the person in whom the Imam has the fullest confidence and to whom
the powers of administration of the realm are delegated. The difference between the Wazir and
the Imam himself is that the Wazir of Delegation is not empowered to appoint anyone as his
successor and the Imam, the highest authority; can dismiss the officers appointed by him.
2. The Wazarat of Execution:
The Wazir of Execution is similar to the Secretary to the Government in modern times. Al-Mawardi
says that the main function of the Wazir is to get the decrees of the Imam executed and he should
be the main official channel of information for him. Mawardi opines that, seven qualities are
required for a person aspiring to this office and these are honesty, confidence, absence of greed,
good relationship with the people, intelligence and the wisdom of grasping the truth of things,
absence of luxury and amorousness, and lastly, diplomacy and experience. Al-Mawardi said, “It is
not necessary that the holder of the office should be a follower of Islam and a non-Muslim
dhimmi can also be appointed a Wazir of Execution."
For the efficient functioning of the administration, the government should be divided into various
departments dealing with the business of government such as revenue, army and other high offices
of State. The State administration as a whole was called Diwan. Al-Mawardi enumerated four
chief offices of Government are under:
1. The Army Board
2. The Board of Provincial Boundaries
3. The Treasury
4. The Board of Appointment and Dismissal of Officers
Views of Central Government:
Al-Mawardi being an orthodox Shafi’ite, gave an account of legal rationalism in his writings. Very
rationally he makes full endeavors to demonstrate the necessity of the Imamate and he proves it
not only by referring the Islamic law but lays down a general proposition that it is in the nature of
man or rather those among men who are superior to others in intellect that they should hand over
their affairs to one who can keep them from being tyrannized over by others and should have the
power of adjudging between them in case of mutual quarrels.
Al-Mawardi relies solely upon the Quran without reference to any other source of law. Thus when
he tries to demonstrate that the Imam should not indulge in luxurious living and he reminds the
readers of the order which God gave to the Prophet David (A.S) when He appointed him His Caliph:
“O David, We have appointed thee Our Caliph on earth; so judge aright between man and
man, and follow not desires that might lead thee away from the path of thy Lord.”
He at the time of discussing different categories of taxes, argues entirely on the basis of the Quran
, and quotes a verse to prove that the Zakat should be distributed “among the poor and the
needy, and those who collect them and those whose hearts are to be reconciled, and to
free the captives and the debtors, and for the cause of God and for the wayfarer”
(Quran ix, 60).
Along with the verses of the Quran he argues from the order of the Prophet (P.B.U.H) as related in
the Traditions when he wishes to prove that the Caliph has the right to appoint his own successor
, he argues from the battle of Mutah and says, “The Prophet (P.B.U.H) appointed his
manumitted slave, Hazrat Zaid bin Harithah, to take his place at the head of the Muslim
army and at the same time ordered that is case of his death he should be replaced by
Hazrat Jafar bin Ali Talib, after him Hazrat Abdullah bin Rawahah and in case he is also
killed, the mantle of command should fall on the shoulders of whomever the soldiers might
choose.”Mawardi was of the view that “it was possible for the Prophet (P.B.U.H) to make
these nominations; it should be possible in case of khilafat as well.”
As regards the office of Qazi, he quotes the instructions given by the Caliph Hazrat Umar to Hazrat
Abu Musa al Ash’ari when he appointed him to this office. Sometimes al-Mawardi uses the
documents of the Umayyad and the Abbasid periods his premises, for instance, he quotes the
accession address of Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz to demonstrate the exalted ideals of the office of
the Caliph. Whenever he wants to stress the importance of the Wazarat, he quotes a
proclamation of Mamun where he declares that he wishes to appoint one of his ministers
who should be virtuous, sophisticated and conservative in his habits, experienced and
matured in his profession and willing to undertake the most difficult missions, should be
reliable and trustworthy, whose silence should signify his great indulgence and whose
conversation should demonstrate his great knowledge. He should be able to understand
the innermost thoughts of others by the mere gesture of the eyes, and even a second’s
conversation should suffice for him to get at the root of the matter, who should have the
posture of the rich, the foresight of the learned, the humility of the savant and the
acuteness of the jurist, who should be grateful for any good that might be done to him
and should bear his troubles with patience.
Theory of Rebellion
Introduction:
Even in the ancient and medieval tribal and monarchical systems it was recognized that if the
monarch ruled with tyranny and inequity, the people had a right to overthrow him and choose a
new leader in his place. The act of rebellion in such an eventuality was not regarded as a crime
but as a vindication of the fundamental rights of people.
After the ascendancy of Islam, it brought about a complete revolution in human thought and
knowledge. Islam combined politics with religion in a remarkable way that it was susceptible to
reason and most conducive to human relations. It defined the proper dignity and status of men in
this universe, his relations and obligations to God, and His privileges as the Lord of creation. It
taught for the first time the ideas of universal brotherhood and complete equality of men. It
demolished the artificial barriers of color and creed and brought the poor and the rich at one
platform. The great republic of Madina was built on the highest and purest ideals of democracy.
The only sad thing about this was that it was too short-lived and that it could not get time for
proper growth and consolidation. The consequences of the premature demise of the Republic of
Madina were dire and far-reaching. The fast developing ideals of Islamic democracy were blasted
and superseded by the imperialistic systems of the Umayyads, the Abbasids, the Fatimids and
others. A struggle began between the State and Society. The society tried to reflect the principles
of Islamic life and polity, while the state tried to emulate the traditions and ways of Byzantine and
Sassanid empires. For one hundred years of Umayyad rule the struggle between these two forces
continued. But when Abbasids came into power, it signaled the victory of the State polity over
religious ideology. The emperor or Caliph became the spiritual and temporal head of the state, his
wishes and whims became law, and he was responsible to none. The people living under his cruel
subjugation had no right of resistance or revolt.
The Muslim jurists, political thinkers, statesmen and diplomats invented a political theory which
affected a superficial and sophisticated compromise between the two forces. The compromise was
given religious sanctity and justification, so that it became permanent and unchallengeable.
Al-Mawardi’s Views:
Al-Mawardi is greatly influenced by the political ideas of his age. He discards the divine right of
rule, for despite his anxiety for the restoration of sovereign power of Abbasid Caliphs, he nowhere
supports their claim, or the claim of jurists to unchallenged obedience to the Head of the State.
1. Al-Mawardi quotes the following tradition from Abu Hurairah: the Prophet (P.B.U.H) said,
“After me there will be appointed rulers over you, and both the good as well as bad deeds
will go by them; but you must obey the orders from them that is based upon righteousness;
for if they rule with fairness the good of it will occur to them and to you both, if they rule
with inequity you will get the benefit of
it and they, the evil consequences thereof.”
2. Al-Mawardi clearly advocates revolt when the Imam either falls prey to sensual passions or
becomes sceptic of the basic tenets of Islam. But it is ambiguous as to how a tyrant or heretical
Imam can be deposed. No method has been proposed by means of which the will of the people may
be ascertained, or the Imam may be expelled his office. There is no precedent in Islamic history
when an Imam was deposed from office by legal and proper means. And since the Imam is the
executive Head of the State, and not responsible to any Majlis or Tribunal, it is obvious that he
cannot sit to impeach himself or allow others to punish him.
One thing is quite clear from the writings of Al-Mawardi, that he is opposed to the claim of
undisputed obedience to the Caliph. He does not elaborate a detailed theory of rebellion, nor
discusses the fundamental rights of man. He is very careful in choosing only those traditions
which suit his purpose. He could have easily established from the tradition of the Prophet (P.B.U.H)
as well as from the practice of the Pious Caliphs, that Islam has given an open charter of rights to
humanity, and that it has unambiguously defined limits of State’s powers and freedom of the
individual.
He could have noted that the famous verse of the Quran, “Obey God, and obey the Prophet
(P.B.U.H), and obey the ruler who is from amongst you,” (Al-Quran, 4: 58) does not give
license of despotism to rulers, for the same verse continues, “if you quarrel on any issue, bring
it to the judgment of God and the Prophet (P.B.U.H), provided you believe in God and in the
day of Judgment.”Obedience to the head of the State is bound by the condition that he obeys
the injunctions of God, that is, rules with truth and justice. In another verse the Quran says,
“Their affairs are decided by mutual counsel amongst themselves" (Al-Quran, 42: 38) and
not by the arbitrary will of a ruler.
Hazrat Abu Bakr (R.A) reported that the Prophet (P.B.U.H) said, “Indeed if the people see evil
and do not rise to ward it off, it is just probable that the vengeance of God may overtake
them all.” Abu Said narrated that the Prophet (P.B.U.H) said, “Some of the most loved and
nearest persons to me on the Day of Judgment shall be the Just Imam, and the most hated
and damnable person to me on the Day of Judgment shall be the Tyrant Imam.”
When Hazrat Abu Bakr (R.A) was elected Caliph, he said in his policy speech: “Obey me as
long as I obey God, but when I disobey Him you are no longer bound to obey me.” He
continued the speech and said, “And I am just like one of you so when you find me on the
right path, follow me, but if you see me diverting, set me right.”
In the early phases of Islamic history, there were a general and strong feelings among the Muslims
that there existed a solemn covenant between the State and people, that the State was
conducted by the elected representatives of the people, and that it existed only to protect and
promote their interests. So when the rulers broke this covenant, and violated the principle of
representation and threw overboard the interest of the people, the people thought it as their
inherent right to repeal such rulers and grab political power from them. It was the clear
infringement of this covenant that eventually led to the assassinations of Hazrat Usman (R.A) and
Hazrat Ali (R.A) and also to the sudden collapse of the powerful Umayyads. The Abbasid Caliphs
fetched the reign of the Islamic empire, killed these ideas altogether and the concept of the
covenant was completely forgotten.
Conclusion:
Al-Mawardi did not elaborate a theory of rebellion and if he wanted to propound a theory, he could
have found abundant sanction for it in early thought and practice. It may be noted here that the
idea of rebellion has always been most abhorrent to Muslim rulers throughout history, because
after the regime of the Pious Caliphs, many a ruler denied the right of the people to participate in
the affairs of the State. But there is no denying the fact that the people resented the autocratic
trends in the statecraft and stood for their basic rights.
Even in the ancient and medieval tribal and monarchical systems it was recognized that if the
monarch ruled with tyranny and inequity, the people had a right to overthrow him and choose a
new leader in his place. The act of rebellion in such an eventuality was not regarded as a crime
but as a vindication of the fundamental rights of people.
After the ascendancy of Islam, it brought about a complete revolution in human thought and
knowledge. Islam combined politics with religion in a remarkable way that it was susceptible to
reason and most conducive to human relations. It defined the proper dignity and status of men in
this universe, his relations and obligations to God, and His privileges as the Lord of creation. It
taught for the first time the ideas of universal brotherhood and complete equality of men. It
demolished the artificial barriers of color and creed and brought the poor and the rich at one
platform. The great republic of Madina was built on the highest and purest ideals of democracy.
The only sad thing about this was that it was too short-lived and that it could not get time for
proper growth and consolidation. The consequences of the premature demise of the Republic of
Madina were dire and far-reaching. The fast developing ideals of Islamic democracy were blasted
and superseded by the imperialistic systems of the Umayyads, the Abbasids, the Fatimids and
others. A struggle began between the State and Society. The society tried to reflect the principles
of Islamic life and polity, while the state tried to emulate the traditions and ways of Byzantine and
Sassanid empires. For one hundred years of Umayyad rule the struggle between these two forces
continued. But when Abbasids came into power, it signaled the victory of the State polity over
religious ideology. The emperor or Caliph became the spiritual and temporal head of the state, his
wishes and whims became law, and he was responsible to none. The people living under his cruel
subjugation had no right of resistance or revolt.
The Muslim jurists, political thinkers, statesmen and diplomats invented a political theory which
affected a superficial and sophisticated compromise between the two forces. The compromise was
given religious sanctity and justification, so that it became permanent and unchallengeable.
Al-Mawardi’s Views:
Al-Mawardi is greatly influenced by the political ideas of his age. He discards the divine right of
rule, for despite his anxiety for the restoration of sovereign power of Abbasid Caliphs, he nowhere
supports their claim, or the claim of jurists to unchallenged obedience to the Head of the State.
1. Al-Mawardi quotes the following tradition from Abu Hurairah: the Prophet (P.B.U.H) said,
“After me there will be appointed rulers over you, and both the good as well as bad deeds
will go by them; but you must obey the orders from them that is based upon righteousness;
for if they rule with fairness the good of it will occur to them and to you both, if they rule
with inequity you will get the benefit of
it and they, the evil consequences thereof.”
2. Al-Mawardi clearly advocates revolt when the Imam either falls prey to sensual passions or
becomes sceptic of the basic tenets of Islam. But it is ambiguous as to how a tyrant or heretical
Imam can be deposed. No method has been proposed by means of which the will of the people may
be ascertained, or the Imam may be expelled his office. There is no precedent in Islamic history
when an Imam was deposed from office by legal and proper means. And since the Imam is the
executive Head of the State, and not responsible to any Majlis or Tribunal, it is obvious that he
cannot sit to impeach himself or allow others to punish him.
One thing is quite clear from the writings of Al-Mawardi, that he is opposed to the claim of
undisputed obedience to the Caliph. He does not elaborate a detailed theory of rebellion, nor
discusses the fundamental rights of man. He is very careful in choosing only those traditions
which suit his purpose. He could have easily established from the tradition of the Prophet (P.B.U.H)
as well as from the practice of the Pious Caliphs, that Islam has given an open charter of rights to
humanity, and that it has unambiguously defined limits of State’s powers and freedom of the
individual.
He could have noted that the famous verse of the Quran, “Obey God, and obey the Prophet
(P.B.U.H), and obey the ruler who is from amongst you,” (Al-Quran, 4: 58) does not give
license of despotism to rulers, for the same verse continues, “if you quarrel on any issue, bring
it to the judgment of God and the Prophet (P.B.U.H), provided you believe in God and in the
day of Judgment.”Obedience to the head of the State is bound by the condition that he obeys
the injunctions of God, that is, rules with truth and justice. In another verse the Quran says,
“Their affairs are decided by mutual counsel amongst themselves" (Al-Quran, 42: 38) and
not by the arbitrary will of a ruler.
Hazrat Abu Bakr (R.A) reported that the Prophet (P.B.U.H) said, “Indeed if the people see evil
and do not rise to ward it off, it is just probable that the vengeance of God may overtake
them all.” Abu Said narrated that the Prophet (P.B.U.H) said, “Some of the most loved and
nearest persons to me on the Day of Judgment shall be the Just Imam, and the most hated
and damnable person to me on the Day of Judgment shall be the Tyrant Imam.”
When Hazrat Abu Bakr (R.A) was elected Caliph, he said in his policy speech: “Obey me as
long as I obey God, but when I disobey Him you are no longer bound to obey me.” He
continued the speech and said, “And I am just like one of you so when you find me on the
right path, follow me, but if you see me diverting, set me right.”
In the early phases of Islamic history, there were a general and strong feelings among the Muslims
that there existed a solemn covenant between the State and people, that the State was
conducted by the elected representatives of the people, and that it existed only to protect and
promote their interests. So when the rulers broke this covenant, and violated the principle of
representation and threw overboard the interest of the people, the people thought it as their
inherent right to repeal such rulers and grab political power from them. It was the clear
infringement of this covenant that eventually led to the assassinations of Hazrat Usman (R.A) and
Hazrat Ali (R.A) and also to the sudden collapse of the powerful Umayyads. The Abbasid Caliphs
fetched the reign of the Islamic empire, killed these ideas altogether and the concept of the
covenant was completely forgotten.
Conclusion:
Al-Mawardi did not elaborate a theory of rebellion and if he wanted to propound a theory, he could
have found abundant sanction for it in early thought and practice. It may be noted here that the
idea of rebellion has always been most abhorrent to Muslim rulers throughout history, because
after the regime of the Pious Caliphs, many a ruler denied the right of the people to participate in
the affairs of the State. But there is no denying the fact that the people resented the autocratic
trends in the statecraft and stood for their basic rights.
Theory of Imamate
Al-Mawardi says that Almighty Allah laid down laws in order that issues might be satisfactorily
settled and the principles of right, truth and goodness may be widely known. He has also entrusted
the control of His creatures to various governments so that order and peace in the world may be
maintained. Al-Mawardi describes that the real objective of the state is the rule of justice and
truth and to bring tranquility and peace to its inhabitants. He further describes that the real
motive of the Imamate is following the straight path and strengthening the political bonds. He is
also of the view that Imamate is not only an institution sanctified by tradition and history but can
be proved to be necessary according to pure reason; for wise men entrust their affairs to a leader
able to keep them from being molested and to adjudge between them in case of mutual quarrels
and squabbles.
The salient features of the institutions of Imamate:
1. The institute of Imamate is necessary as a requirement of the Shariah and not as a
requirement of reason. The appointment of an Imam by the consensus of the Muslim community is
obligatory.
2. The Imamate is instituted by means of election. The electoral college shall consist of persons
with the special qualifications:
a. Justice with all the conditions pertaining to it
b. Knowledge of religion and of the interests and policy of the nation
c. Wisdom
The candidates of Imamate should also fulfill certain conditions:
1. Justice
2. Learning
3. Integrity of physical senses
4. Integrity of physical organs
5. Wisdom
6. Bravery
7. Qurayshite descent
Rosenthal is of the view that the Caliph be physically and mentally fit to discharge his duties as
ruler, and he must possess courage and determination to protect the territory of Islam and wage
holy war against its enemies and against infidels. He must also be a descendant of the Quraish.
3. The election principle of the Imamate quoted above is obviously against the Shi’ite claim of
bequeathal or divine nomination. Al-Mawardi omits the case when a debauch and licentious person
is elected as Imam.
4. The right of franchise is not enjoyed only by the people in the capital. The Caliph, however,
traditionally elected in the capital because the death of the previous Caliph is first known there,
and political considerations require the immediate appointment of a new Caliph, and because most
of the people possessing the necessary qualifications for the Imamate generally reside there. This
principle was enthusiastically contented by Khawarij who believed in complete democracy and
universal franchise.
5. The Qurayshite descent of the candidate of Imamate is very important. Al-Mawardi lays great
stress on it and says that if any one raises any objection on the ground that it excludes
non-Qurayshites from the Caliphate such an objection would not be considered because it was
this Qurayshite descent that was presented by Abu Bakr as an argument for preference in the
election of Saqifat Bani Saidah. This flimsy emphasis on the Qurayshite descent is a formidable hit
on the claims of Fatimids.
6. The Imam is appointed in one of the two ways:
i. He may be elected by the electoral college
ii. He may be nominated by the ruling Imam
In the first case some scholars hold that Imam must be elected by all the members of the Electoral
College in all the cities; others oppose this view and say that Caliph Abu Bakr was elected by the
citizens of Medina. Still others assert that only five persons are sufficient to elect the Imam. But
Al-Mawardi says that one person is enough to elect the Caliph. He sites the tradition of Abbas in
evidence.
Sherwani says that Al-Mawardi bases his arguments by the precedent of the choice of Abu Bakr
by election and that of Usman by nomination. Once the new Imam has taken his place he binds
himself by an Ahd that he would loyally perform the duties assigned to him, this is followed by the
Bai’at or pledge modeled after the pledges of Aqbah, in which the people or their representatives
promise to be loyal to the new Imam.
Rosentahl also says, “Apart from election, a Caliph can be chosen and invested as a result of his
designation by the ruling Caliph. This is expressed by the term Ahd and the designated successor
is styled “Wali’l-ahd.” Al-Mawardi gave two examples from the early period of Islam: Abu Bakr’s
designation of Omar, accepted by the Muslim Jamaa and Usman’s succession to Omar. The
precedents are valid because they were set by the first two of the four Khulafa-e-Rashidin, who
are universally acclaimed as shining examples of the ideal Muslim ruler.
7. Al-Mawardi says that the election of a less qualified person in the presence of a more qualified
person is perfectly legal provided the former fulfills all the conditions of the Imamate. It was this
principle under which most of the feeble and incapable Caliphs took refuge. It was also directed
against the Shiahs, who believe that an inferior person cannot have precedent over a superior one.
8. Al-Mawardi says that if there is only one suitable candidate for the Imamate, he automatically
becomes the Imam, and no election is required. Other jurists and scholars are of the opinion that
election must be held if there is only one candidate for it, for otherwise the Imam cannot acquires
legal status.
9. The existence of two Imams contemporaneously is illegal. Al-Ashari opposes this view and says
that two Imams at a time are possible if their territories are far-flang and widely separated by an
ocean, which hinders easy communication between the two.
Successions:
1. The ruling Imam can nominate his successor. Al-Mawardi holds that there is complete
consensus on this point in the Muslim community. The Muslims without any tinge of resentment or
cause of rivalry accepted Umer as the next Caliph not on the suggestion of Abu Bakr but in
obedience to his order as Caliph. Similarly when Umar appointed a Majlis-e-Shura to elect for
appointment as his successor, it was an order from the Imam and there was no choice for the
Muslims to show disagreement to the Caliph’s orders.
2. The Imam can easily nominate any suitable person as his successor, provided he does not
happen to be his father or son. Al-Mawardi fairly discusses the different opinions of the jurists
whether or not the Caliph is entitled to designate one of his sons or relations as his successor and
whether he acts legally in doing so. This difference of opinion reflects different attitudes to the
institution of the Caliphate and to its nature. Those who recognize the absolute authority of the
Caliph as Head of the Muslim nation naturally concede him the right, in his capacity as ruler, to
appoint a successor. Those who do not recognize the authority as absolute, justify their
opposition by declaring that family considerations must not weight with the Caliph, who is bound
by law to choose one who fulfills the conditions laid down for the holder of the office of the Imam.
It was this theory of nomination that cut at the very root of democratic ideals in Islamic polity.
Thus apparently the structure of the Caliphate was maintained by the Umayyads, the Abbasids,
the Fatimids and the Turks, but the spirit of Islamic democracy as buried in the coffin of Hazrat Ali,
the last of the Pious Caliph.
3. Al-Mawardi is of the view that the nomination of a person as heir apparent becomes effective
only when he declares his consent to it. The Imam cannot withdraw the nomination until there
occurs in this heir-apparent some important change which legally invalidates hint. So also an Imam
cannot be deposed until a similar change occurs in him.
4. The imam can appoint the Electoral college as well as the persons who may contest for the
Imamate. This opinion of Al-Mawardi is based upon the election of Usman which was by a limited
Shura appointed by Unar.
5. The Imam can nominate two or more heirs-apparent to succeed him one after the other. The
argument has been derived from the battle of Mutah, in which the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) appointed
Zayd bin Harithah as the Commander of Islamic forces and said if he fell fighting he was to be
succeeded by Abdullah bin Rawahah. If Ibn-e-Rawwah also fell in the field then the Muslims could
choose any one from among themselves as their Commander. Apparently the citation of this
incident in support of a fundamental issue like that of the Caliphate is but a fake reasoning.
This practice of appointing two or more heirs-apparent proved to be the greatest political evil in
Muslim polity. This practice during the reign of Abbasids engendered palace intrigues and induced
destructive internecine wars and dynastic feuds.
Designation and Privileges:
1. When a person is duly elected as Imam the people should entrust him all the affairs and must
give him unquestioning obedience. The Imam may not consult them in affairs of state. Yet they
must obey him. It is the clearest example of despotism and totalitarianism. The Islamic idea is that
the people must take fuller participation in the administration of the state and their opinions for
the uplift of the state and betterment of the society must be given due consideration. It was the
suppression of this right that exposed the Muslim state to disruption and decay.
2. The Imam may be addressed as the Khalifa-tu-Allah, but the majority of jurists say that this
title is forbidden, for no human being can represent God on Earth, since man is mortal and
imperfect. Hence the Imam may either be called a mere Khalifah or Khalifah Rasul-Allah. Once
when Caliph Abu Bakar was addressed as Khalifa-tu-Allah he exclaimed, don’t address me as
Khalifa-tu-Allah but as the Khalifa Rasul-Allah.
Duties and Factions of the Imam:
According to Al-Mawardi, Imam should perform following ten principle duties:
1. To safeguard and defense of the established principles of religion as understood and
propounded by the consensus of ancient authorities. If anyone innovates an opinion or becomes
a sceptic, the Imam should convince him of the real truth and correct him with proper arguments
and make him obey the injunctions and prohibitions of the Shariah, so that the people at large may
be saved from the evil effects of such heresies.
This is undoubtedly the main duty of the Imam under the Shariah. Most unfortunately, under the
cover of this pretext, the second civil war of Islam was fought by the Umayyads, the Hashimites,
and Zubayrites. When the Abbasids came to power they called themselves the sole defenders of
faith, and crushed every political dissentient in the name of religion, and sent many innocent souls
to the gallows to save Islam. The Alids, too, have always stressed that they are the right
repositories of Islam and it is only safeguarded by their Imams. When they founded the Fatimid
Empire and later the Safawid Dynasty in Persia, they wiped out their political opponents with
cruelty and butchery.
2. The dispensation of justice and disposal of all litigations in accordance with the Shariah.
He should curb the strong from showing harshness to the weak, and encourage the weak to take
his due in the teeth of opposition of the strong.
3. The maintenance of law and order in the country, to make it possible for the people to lead a
peaceful life, and proceed to their economic activities freely and travel in the land without fear.
4. The enforcement of criminal code of Holy Quran to ensure that the people do not outrage the
prohibitions of God, and that the fundamental rights of men are not violated.
5. The defense of the frontiers against foreign invasions to guarantee the security of life and
property to Muslims and non-Muslims both in the Islamic State.
6. The organization and prosecution of religious wars against those who oppose the call of Islam
or refuse to enter the protection of the Islamic State as non-Muslims.
7. The imposition and collection of Kharaj and Zakat taxes in accordance with the laws of the
Shariah and the interpretation of the jurists without resorting to extortion or pressure.
8. The sanction of allowances and stipends from the state treasury to those who are needy,
sick and poor and cannot afford to get their wards educated.
9. The appointment of honest and sincere men to the principal offices of the state, and to the
treasury to secure sound and effective administration and to safeguard the finances of the state.
10. The Imam should personally look into and apprise himself of the affairs of his dominions so
that he himself directs the national policy and protect the interests of the people. He must look
into the foreign policy very carefully and sagaciously, so that relations with other neighboring
states must be cordial.
settled and the principles of right, truth and goodness may be widely known. He has also entrusted
the control of His creatures to various governments so that order and peace in the world may be
maintained. Al-Mawardi describes that the real objective of the state is the rule of justice and
truth and to bring tranquility and peace to its inhabitants. He further describes that the real
motive of the Imamate is following the straight path and strengthening the political bonds. He is
also of the view that Imamate is not only an institution sanctified by tradition and history but can
be proved to be necessary according to pure reason; for wise men entrust their affairs to a leader
able to keep them from being molested and to adjudge between them in case of mutual quarrels
and squabbles.
The salient features of the institutions of Imamate:
1. The institute of Imamate is necessary as a requirement of the Shariah and not as a
requirement of reason. The appointment of an Imam by the consensus of the Muslim community is
obligatory.
2. The Imamate is instituted by means of election. The electoral college shall consist of persons
with the special qualifications:
a. Justice with all the conditions pertaining to it
b. Knowledge of religion and of the interests and policy of the nation
c. Wisdom
The candidates of Imamate should also fulfill certain conditions:
1. Justice
2. Learning
3. Integrity of physical senses
4. Integrity of physical organs
5. Wisdom
6. Bravery
7. Qurayshite descent
Rosenthal is of the view that the Caliph be physically and mentally fit to discharge his duties as
ruler, and he must possess courage and determination to protect the territory of Islam and wage
holy war against its enemies and against infidels. He must also be a descendant of the Quraish.
3. The election principle of the Imamate quoted above is obviously against the Shi’ite claim of
bequeathal or divine nomination. Al-Mawardi omits the case when a debauch and licentious person
is elected as Imam.
4. The right of franchise is not enjoyed only by the people in the capital. The Caliph, however,
traditionally elected in the capital because the death of the previous Caliph is first known there,
and political considerations require the immediate appointment of a new Caliph, and because most
of the people possessing the necessary qualifications for the Imamate generally reside there. This
principle was enthusiastically contented by Khawarij who believed in complete democracy and
universal franchise.
5. The Qurayshite descent of the candidate of Imamate is very important. Al-Mawardi lays great
stress on it and says that if any one raises any objection on the ground that it excludes
non-Qurayshites from the Caliphate such an objection would not be considered because it was
this Qurayshite descent that was presented by Abu Bakr as an argument for preference in the
election of Saqifat Bani Saidah. This flimsy emphasis on the Qurayshite descent is a formidable hit
on the claims of Fatimids.
6. The Imam is appointed in one of the two ways:
i. He may be elected by the electoral college
ii. He may be nominated by the ruling Imam
In the first case some scholars hold that Imam must be elected by all the members of the Electoral
College in all the cities; others oppose this view and say that Caliph Abu Bakr was elected by the
citizens of Medina. Still others assert that only five persons are sufficient to elect the Imam. But
Al-Mawardi says that one person is enough to elect the Caliph. He sites the tradition of Abbas in
evidence.
Sherwani says that Al-Mawardi bases his arguments by the precedent of the choice of Abu Bakr
by election and that of Usman by nomination. Once the new Imam has taken his place he binds
himself by an Ahd that he would loyally perform the duties assigned to him, this is followed by the
Bai’at or pledge modeled after the pledges of Aqbah, in which the people or their representatives
promise to be loyal to the new Imam.
Rosentahl also says, “Apart from election, a Caliph can be chosen and invested as a result of his
designation by the ruling Caliph. This is expressed by the term Ahd and the designated successor
is styled “Wali’l-ahd.” Al-Mawardi gave two examples from the early period of Islam: Abu Bakr’s
designation of Omar, accepted by the Muslim Jamaa and Usman’s succession to Omar. The
precedents are valid because they were set by the first two of the four Khulafa-e-Rashidin, who
are universally acclaimed as shining examples of the ideal Muslim ruler.
7. Al-Mawardi says that the election of a less qualified person in the presence of a more qualified
person is perfectly legal provided the former fulfills all the conditions of the Imamate. It was this
principle under which most of the feeble and incapable Caliphs took refuge. It was also directed
against the Shiahs, who believe that an inferior person cannot have precedent over a superior one.
8. Al-Mawardi says that if there is only one suitable candidate for the Imamate, he automatically
becomes the Imam, and no election is required. Other jurists and scholars are of the opinion that
election must be held if there is only one candidate for it, for otherwise the Imam cannot acquires
legal status.
9. The existence of two Imams contemporaneously is illegal. Al-Ashari opposes this view and says
that two Imams at a time are possible if their territories are far-flang and widely separated by an
ocean, which hinders easy communication between the two.
Successions:
1. The ruling Imam can nominate his successor. Al-Mawardi holds that there is complete
consensus on this point in the Muslim community. The Muslims without any tinge of resentment or
cause of rivalry accepted Umer as the next Caliph not on the suggestion of Abu Bakr but in
obedience to his order as Caliph. Similarly when Umar appointed a Majlis-e-Shura to elect for
appointment as his successor, it was an order from the Imam and there was no choice for the
Muslims to show disagreement to the Caliph’s orders.
2. The Imam can easily nominate any suitable person as his successor, provided he does not
happen to be his father or son. Al-Mawardi fairly discusses the different opinions of the jurists
whether or not the Caliph is entitled to designate one of his sons or relations as his successor and
whether he acts legally in doing so. This difference of opinion reflects different attitudes to the
institution of the Caliphate and to its nature. Those who recognize the absolute authority of the
Caliph as Head of the Muslim nation naturally concede him the right, in his capacity as ruler, to
appoint a successor. Those who do not recognize the authority as absolute, justify their
opposition by declaring that family considerations must not weight with the Caliph, who is bound
by law to choose one who fulfills the conditions laid down for the holder of the office of the Imam.
It was this theory of nomination that cut at the very root of democratic ideals in Islamic polity.
Thus apparently the structure of the Caliphate was maintained by the Umayyads, the Abbasids,
the Fatimids and the Turks, but the spirit of Islamic democracy as buried in the coffin of Hazrat Ali,
the last of the Pious Caliph.
3. Al-Mawardi is of the view that the nomination of a person as heir apparent becomes effective
only when he declares his consent to it. The Imam cannot withdraw the nomination until there
occurs in this heir-apparent some important change which legally invalidates hint. So also an Imam
cannot be deposed until a similar change occurs in him.
4. The imam can appoint the Electoral college as well as the persons who may contest for the
Imamate. This opinion of Al-Mawardi is based upon the election of Usman which was by a limited
Shura appointed by Unar.
5. The Imam can nominate two or more heirs-apparent to succeed him one after the other. The
argument has been derived from the battle of Mutah, in which the Prophet (P.B.U.H.) appointed
Zayd bin Harithah as the Commander of Islamic forces and said if he fell fighting he was to be
succeeded by Abdullah bin Rawahah. If Ibn-e-Rawwah also fell in the field then the Muslims could
choose any one from among themselves as their Commander. Apparently the citation of this
incident in support of a fundamental issue like that of the Caliphate is but a fake reasoning.
This practice of appointing two or more heirs-apparent proved to be the greatest political evil in
Muslim polity. This practice during the reign of Abbasids engendered palace intrigues and induced
destructive internecine wars and dynastic feuds.
Designation and Privileges:
1. When a person is duly elected as Imam the people should entrust him all the affairs and must
give him unquestioning obedience. The Imam may not consult them in affairs of state. Yet they
must obey him. It is the clearest example of despotism and totalitarianism. The Islamic idea is that
the people must take fuller participation in the administration of the state and their opinions for
the uplift of the state and betterment of the society must be given due consideration. It was the
suppression of this right that exposed the Muslim state to disruption and decay.
2. The Imam may be addressed as the Khalifa-tu-Allah, but the majority of jurists say that this
title is forbidden, for no human being can represent God on Earth, since man is mortal and
imperfect. Hence the Imam may either be called a mere Khalifah or Khalifah Rasul-Allah. Once
when Caliph Abu Bakar was addressed as Khalifa-tu-Allah he exclaimed, don’t address me as
Khalifa-tu-Allah but as the Khalifa Rasul-Allah.
Duties and Factions of the Imam:
According to Al-Mawardi, Imam should perform following ten principle duties:
1. To safeguard and defense of the established principles of religion as understood and
propounded by the consensus of ancient authorities. If anyone innovates an opinion or becomes
a sceptic, the Imam should convince him of the real truth and correct him with proper arguments
and make him obey the injunctions and prohibitions of the Shariah, so that the people at large may
be saved from the evil effects of such heresies.
This is undoubtedly the main duty of the Imam under the Shariah. Most unfortunately, under the
cover of this pretext, the second civil war of Islam was fought by the Umayyads, the Hashimites,
and Zubayrites. When the Abbasids came to power they called themselves the sole defenders of
faith, and crushed every political dissentient in the name of religion, and sent many innocent souls
to the gallows to save Islam. The Alids, too, have always stressed that they are the right
repositories of Islam and it is only safeguarded by their Imams. When they founded the Fatimid
Empire and later the Safawid Dynasty in Persia, they wiped out their political opponents with
cruelty and butchery.
2. The dispensation of justice and disposal of all litigations in accordance with the Shariah.
He should curb the strong from showing harshness to the weak, and encourage the weak to take
his due in the teeth of opposition of the strong.
3. The maintenance of law and order in the country, to make it possible for the people to lead a
peaceful life, and proceed to their economic activities freely and travel in the land without fear.
4. The enforcement of criminal code of Holy Quran to ensure that the people do not outrage the
prohibitions of God, and that the fundamental rights of men are not violated.
5. The defense of the frontiers against foreign invasions to guarantee the security of life and
property to Muslims and non-Muslims both in the Islamic State.
6. The organization and prosecution of religious wars against those who oppose the call of Islam
or refuse to enter the protection of the Islamic State as non-Muslims.
7. The imposition and collection of Kharaj and Zakat taxes in accordance with the laws of the
Shariah and the interpretation of the jurists without resorting to extortion or pressure.
8. The sanction of allowances and stipends from the state treasury to those who are needy,
sick and poor and cannot afford to get their wards educated.
9. The appointment of honest and sincere men to the principal offices of the state, and to the
treasury to secure sound and effective administration and to safeguard the finances of the state.
10. The Imam should personally look into and apprise himself of the affairs of his dominions so
that he himself directs the national policy and protect the interests of the people. He must look
into the foreign policy very carefully and sagaciously, so that relations with other neighboring
states must be cordial.
No comments:
Post a Comment