Chapter XVIII



The Philosophy of Power: Al-Mawardi and Al-Ghazali

Nur Kirabaev



As the political role of Islam considerably increased over the past 20 years there has resulted intense interest in the history of Islamic political ideas existing in the Middle Ages from the side of political scientists and lawyers, philosophers and specialists in culture, orientalists and specialists in Islamic studies. This is not random. The evaluation of ideas which existed in medieval Muslim society enabled it to trace the development of general mechanisms in the conception of "Muslim state" and to uncover specific features of the functioning of Muslim ideology as a well-ordered system of political, legal, religious and moral ideas.

On the whole three main directions in developing medieval political theory of Islam can be marked out. First, the ideas and doctrines by Muslim jurists (fuqaha) and authorities in religious knowledge (ulama); secondly, theories of the "Cities of Excellence" by arab muslim philosophers; third, so called adab theories developed in the genre of medieval Arabic literature a combination of the cognitive and the entertaining.

We shall consider the problem of power in the political doctrines by al-Mawardi and al-Ghazali, developed within the classic theory of state stipulated by Islamic political conception. The theory of sunni jurist authorities is considered to be classic theory of state, where the primary principles of Islamic power doctrine were developed. They determined the main problems, as well as the number of sources which later on were used by many generations of Muslim jurists, historians and politicians. The classic theories of state were aimed to emphasize the religious ideals of Islamic state. These theories were guided by the Quran and Sunna as well as by the traditions and practices of the Muslim community under Islam of the Golden Age.

AL-MAWARDI

Faqih al-Mawardi (d. in 1058) was the author of the first classical theory of state. His main work is the "Al-ahkam as-sultaniya" ("The Principles of Government"). Working as a qadi (judge in Sharia court) he served in different towns of the Caliphate and finally moved to Baghdad where he was named the Supreme judge. Al-Mawardi was one of the senior counselors for Caliphs al-Kadir (991-1031) and al-Kaim (1031-1075). He also took an active part in negotiations between the Caliphs and Buyid Emirs and Seljuk Sultan Tugrul-beq.

The "Al-ahkam as-sultaniya" treaty had been written in order to consolidate the authority of the Abbasid Caliphs and limit the claims to absolute power from the side of Buyid Emirs. At the same time, it is important to know, that al-Mawardi lived during the period of decline of the once powerful Caliphate and of considerable decrease in the Caliph’s real role. He "was monarch legally, but at a time when real power was in the hands of others"1. This work by al-Mawardi had been much favored by the opportunity of history, related to declining the power of the Buyid Emirs and increasing the power of Sultan Маhmud Ghaznavid. The latter in every possible way displayed his loyalty to the Abbasids and did much to raise prestige of the Baghdad Caliph.

There is a question: if the real power of Emirs or Sultans was so strong, why finally did they recognize the higher religious and secular authority of the Abbasid Caliphs, concluding agreements with him and ordering that his name be mentioned during Friday prayers. The reason is that the state had not been considered otherwise than an Islamic state, a religious and political unity. If Emir or Sultan wished to preserve full authority he could not dare to ignore the fundamental law of Islam according to which the absolute authority of Caliph was based on the Quran, and the legal status of the position of Caliph was related to Ulamas’ ijma. The legal Caliph was an authority not dependent on the real secular power of Emir or Sultan, but based on the higher law, which required absolute obedience in the way of fulfillment of religious duties. Thus civic loyalty referred in faith Sharia, but not to a secular regent. In theory at least, calls not to obey the Caliph’s authority should not be carried out. But in the Islamic law there is no strict procedure for sacred institutions to defу the legality of the election and government of one or another Caliph. Therefore the key role had been taken by jurists and theologians (ulama) in accordance with the fact that ijma was considered as an impeccable source of fiqh. Since Umayyad times the regents had no longer been elected. They used to achieve recognition either by force or as a result of dynastic inheritance. Therefore further development of political theory had been related to selecting one of two ways by the jurists, viz. to correct the basics of Islam power doctrine in accordance with the real historical practice of the Caliphate and sanctify the legality of Sultan’s or Emir’s government, or insist on a strict following the Sharia and blame "illegal regents", who called Muslims not to obey secular authorities.

Al-Mawardi was one of the first to realize the need to bring into line the Sharia principles and the existing historic and political situation. The main idea of the "Al-ahkam as-sultaniya" was to provide a theoretical justification for the separation of authority and power between the Caliph in the religious sphere and the Emir in civic management on the basis of mutual agreements.

Being a sunni faqih, al-Mawardi proceeded from the ideal Islamic state of the period of prophet and four the "righteous Caliphs", which had been considered by traditionalists (salaf) as the only legal and just state. That is why he understood the Imamate or Caliphate as a higher institution based on divine revelation, but not on human creativity. Therefore, for the Muslim state it is important to define the Caliph or Imam as a substitute of the Prophet who bears secular authority. Though the Caliphate as a form of governing and type of Islamic state is not based on any specific Quranic statement, nevertheless it had been recognized by Muslim jurists as a canonical religious institution. Even Ibn Khaldun, the famous historian and social thinker of the ХIV c., believed in canonical need of the Caliphate. And for Muslims the need of its establishing was their religious obligation.

Accentuating the divine character of the Caliphate and Caliph was important for al-Mawardi because the Caliphate had lost its past power by the XIth century. The need to strengthen the Caliphate was considered by him a religious imperative.

The obvious contradiction of historic reality is al-Mawardi’s statement on the possibility of recognizing solely the Caliph., whereas the Caliphates in Egypt, Syria and Muslim Spain had been in existence for more than 100 years. Evidently that was related to the real threat which the Abbasids faced from the Fatimids’ of Egypt. He thought that the Sunni concept of the Imamate could be opposed to Shiites’ claims on power and rejected vigorously the Shiite conception of appointing the Imam. Therefore al-Mawardi was ready to recognize the election of the Caliph even by one elector as a legal act.

Let us consider the imam’s duties and functions, Al-Mawardi hoped to revive the earlier power of the Caliphates and tried to show that the imamat is not simply a religious institute and a Muslim state. Therefore it emphasizes the personal responsibility of the imam for state business. It becomes clear, why the theory of the Caliph as such is only a small part in "Al-ahkam as-Sultania", while three quarters of the book was devoted to the detailed description of principles of functioning of the state structure (visirate).2

Al-Mawardi was among the first to clearly define the features required of Caliph, as follows: justice, knowledge of Muslim law, absence of any physical and mental defects, wisdom, courage and origin from the Quraysh tribe. This last requirement is in conflict with the fundamental Islamic principle of equality among believers, but like many other Sunni jurists he considered it to be in compliance with the practice which existed in the first Arabic state during the period of the prophet and his associates. However it is obvious that the last requirement was directed against the Kharijites.

According to al-Mawardi the main functions of the Imam are the following: consolidating and defending Islam and the Islamic State, establishing justice, assuring the strict following of the Sharia principles, tax collection, personal responsibility for ruling the state and setting norms for implementing decisions3. The responsibility of the faithful amounted to absolute obedience to the Caliph and helping him to fulfill his functions. Thus, the Imam’s authority and the protection of that authority goes back to Sharia compared with those who trying to obtain power by force.

But al-Mawardi limited the Imam’s functions to the religious, legal and executive spheres. In accordance with the basics of Islamic doctrine of power the Imam is not entitled to promulgate laws. The legal function was considered as an indefeasible right for umma’s ijma which in fact always had been the Ulamas’ ijma.

Apparently al-Mawardi’s understanding of the important role played by the fuqaha and Ulama in the Islamic state was expressed in the following statement: if the Imam becomes incapable to fulfill his duties and functions then the electors can elect a new Imam. At the same time he considered that any dismissal of the Caliph could be legal only under extreme and absolute conditions arising from a threat to the existence of the state.

AL-JUWEINI

In order to understand the fact that since al-Juweini some of the authoritative sunni jurists began in many aspects to deviate from the foundations of the classic theory of state worked out by al-Mawardi, trying to adjust Sharia regulations to the changes of historic conditions it is important to analyze those theories of state where less attention had been given to the legal-institutional aspect of power and more attention to efficiency in governing the state. The question is about the works of thinkers in which there was a synthesis of Islamic political doctrines and the sasanid tradition of State organization. First of all from the above works there should be noted "Siyasat-name" by vizier Nizam al-Mulk, the actual regent of the Seljuk empire in the period of 1072-1092, and patron of al-Juweini.

In this work Nizam al-Mulk tried to formulate the main conditions of state theory and practice, which were aimed to strengthen the sultanate as an actual power institution. The Arabic term "sultan" has the meaning of power or authority. Since the tenth century all independent governors projecting power under the supervision and leadership of caliphs’ religious and moral authority had been named Sultans. In fact since the eleventh century the Turkish Seljuk established and strengthened the institution of sultanate ruled by a superior political sovereign who was able to ignore the caliph’s religious authority. "Nizam al-Mulk established close relations among the idea of fair power, actual reign, the concept of true religion and the need for a stable and prosperous state" 4. He recognized sultanate as a religious institution and the caliph only as a religious leader. At the same time Nizam al-Mulk considered the power of sultan as that one sanctified by divine authority. Certainly this was entirely in contradiction with the al-Mawardi’s theory, which by that time had become generally accepted by the majority of sunni jurists. Therefore Nizam al-Mulk got well-known jurists of Shafii school for example al-Juweini and al-Ghazali to take part in the religious and legal justification of his ideas stated in "The Siyasat-name". The above jurists were directors of the an-Nizamiya madrasahs (universities) founded by Nizam al-Mulk and located in many towns of the caliphate. The patronage of art and literature which he provided to the most authoritative shafii school of jurists ensured wide support of the sultan’s power from the side of shafii followers in a number of the Abbasid caliphate’s areas.

Also Nizam al-Mulk had another goal while relying on the shafii school of jurists, namely to limit the claims to power from the sides of both the Fatimid Egyptian regents and the Alamut state of Ismailii rulers. Therefore it’s not surprising that al-Juweini advocated the basic foundations of sunni political doctrine in the manner of al-Mawardi, while in contrast to the latter he aimed also at justifying the legality of the sultans’ regency. Al-Juweini rejected vigorously the Shiite Imams’ statement asserting that the prophet secretly appointed Ali as his deputy. He considered that the religious tradition did not stipulate this and furthermore that the idjma, supported an opposite point of view, namely, that the caliph should always be elected but not appointed. According to Al-Juweini none of the educated people (alim) could deny the fact of election as the only practice used to select caliphs during a long period of caliphate history. However taking into consideration the real practice of assigning caliphs since the Ummayyad period he, along with al-Mawardi, assumed the possibility of imam’s election even by one elector from among the ulama. At the same time Al-Juweini or imam al-Kharamain, in contrast to al-Mawardi, had a different goal which became obvious when he stated its possibility of the simultaneous existence of two caliphs if geographically located at a distance from each other.

AL-GHAZALI

After Al-Juweini death in 1085 his ideas were developed in the works of another jurist of shafii school al-Ghazali (1058-1111). About 1080 al-Ghazali graduated from the Nizamiya madrasah in Nishapur, where he took classes under al-Juweini. When his teacher died al-Ghazali began to work for Nizam al-Mulk and soon was appointed director of the Nizamiya madrasah in Baghdad. In spite of his young age al-Ghazali’s popularity was expanding. Al-Ghazali like his tutor had become a support for the state religion, but during a disturbed period of its history. At that time the threat from the side of Fatimids became clear. Three plots were arranged against Nizam al-Mulk. A short time later the grand vizier for sultan Malhik-shah was killed and then the sultan also died under unclear circumstances. During the years of his stay in Baghdad al-Ghazali, along with some books on philosophy, wrote two treaties: "Al-Iqtisad fi-l-itiqad" and "Fadaih al-batyniya wa-fadail al-Moustazkhiriya" devoted to political theory and practice. Practically immediately after Malhik-shah’s death al-Ghazali left his post in the Nizamiya madrasah and retired from temporal affairs. He left Baghdad in 1095 and lived in seclusion for 10 years, periodically wandering in the appearance of a dervish. During this period three important events took place: a sharp escalation of the struggle to uncrown the seldjucs, the crusaders occupied Syria, and a considerable increase in ismailite activity which repeatedly made attempts against sultan Barkiyaruk’s life. During these years al Ghazali finished his principal work the 1.5 thousand page "Ihya ulum ad-din," which gained wide popularity.

In 1105 at the instance of vizier Fakhr al-Mulk (the son of Nizam al-Mulk) who was in the service for the sultan Sanjar he took a position of director in Nizamiya madrasah located in Nishapur, but soon after the murder of Fakhr al-Mulk by the Alamouth ishmaelites in summer of 1106 al-Ghazali left his post and returned to Tus where he lived until his death in 1111. Along with many other books he wrote "Nasihat al-Muluk" containing advice on managing state affairs.

The Histoical Circumstances

The course of Al-Ghazali’s life was neither easy nor simple. As the most educated person of his epoch he took an active part in the political, religious and philosophic life of the Caliphate. His activities were noted for their versatility, what was a characteristic feature for many gifted intellects of the Muslim medieval epoch.

In 1095 al-Ghazali interrupted his bright career by leaving his post of director of the Nizamiya madrasah. He changed his style of life and decided to devote himself to searching "the verity". The step may have been motivated by political circumstances. French researcher A. Laust gave a good formulation for this new turn in al-Ghazali’s life: "The whole life and conception of al-Ghazali was expressed in the crisis of 1095 when he decided to break off with this world and retired from it. Being before a secular jurist, Al-Ghazali, starting from 1095 had become an absolute skeptic prejudicing all, including the basic foundations of religion, but then overcame this doubt and returned to the faith only after joining Sufism"5.

But as had been stressed by Abd al-Jalil: "In order to understand Ghazali it is necessary not to lose sight of the political conditions which strikingly match the decisive turns in his life and act as determining factors for both his ideas and actions according to the evidences of historians and even his works"6.

In general the analysis of his works with respect to social, philosophic and political problems reveals that he permitted himself moderate free-thinking, but within the limits of sunni traditions. Most likely his position was that of a sunni jurist and moralist, who understood well enough that "Muslim religion had both sacred and secular sides because all Muslim sects were at the same time political movements, as well as khalam, fikh, philosophy or Sufism"7. Apparently the service for Nizam al-Moulk could not be lived without leaving any traces. Al-Ghazali had faced the problem of strengthening the united Muslim state, which could be possible only on the basis of political centralization, which could be realized with the real power possessed by the Seljuk Sultans.

A formal diarchy existed in the Abbasid caliphate with two centers: the religious one managed by the Caliphs and secular center headed by the Sultan. There were as well continuous political intrigues, the ambivalent position of ulemas and fakihs and the permanent threat from abroad. All this resulted in further decay of the military-bureaucratic mechanism and the degradation of sacred power and the ulemas. Corruption had spread widely, not only among government officials but among the ulemas as well. Quite often the halo of holiness served as an effective means to obtain creature comforts. The ulemas’ erudition began to act as a peculiar profession and outer sanctity as a commodity was always well paid.

Evidently al-Ghazali was aware of the consequences of such a situation in the caliphate. In different parts of "Ihya" and his other works it is possible to find criticism of regents and ulemas as well as thoughts about the presence of external clearness and the absence of internal purity, about the situations when something forbidden became the legal, and vice versa8. He subjected to criticism the Caliphate rulers: "At our time", he wrote, "most of the riches, owned by the rulers are illegal. Legal riches in their ownership do not exist or are very rare"9. Also he subjected to criticism soldiers serving the rulers, considering any trade deals with them as illegal. Those who cringed before the rulers were also subjected to sharp criticism. The Ulma’s style of life was criticized because he considered them dogmatists and people performing pseudo theoretical research. According to al-Ghazali they are pseudo ulemas – demagogues, stimulating crowd or rhetoricians eager to make a show in front of the great ones, many of them considered themselves unique advocates of the truth.10. "In our time" al-Ghazali wrote, "theologians have decayed, arrogance bent their tongues. They do not dare to address criticism to the rulers"11. "Meantime the depravity of the ulemas leads to the depravity of the rulers, and their depravity in turn leads to the depravity of the people of the nation"12.

As a sober politician taking an active part in state affairs under the direction of Nizam al-Mulk, he evidently had no hope for restoring the former caliph’s power, but was sure that the future of Muslim state was related to the institution of the Sultanate. It was necessary to take a different look at the political and religious problem: authority and power. History revealed the helplessness of the traditional sunnit dogma of one person combining both authority and power. Al-Ghazali tried to consider correlation between power and authority in a different way which became a basis for his political theory: "Religion and power are twin sisters". His approach to understanding the nature of the Muslim state was rather different compared with his predecessors. His conception of the caliphate foresees unified, but not integrated religious and political authority.

Political Theory

Religious and historical factor. It is necessary to review those religious and theoretical problems encountered by al-Ghazali prior to analyzing his political theory. Sharia is a direct source of authority for Islam in general and for its political doctrine in particular. Knowledge (ilm) is required to understand the Sharia prescriptions and those who did that were called ulema. Considering the fact that there is no church institute in Islam and no recognition for religious hierarchy it should be noted that the subject of research by the ulema was cumbersome and uncertain and their functions were considerably broader exceeding the bounds of pure religious and religious-legal problems.

Fuqaha, Muslim legal authors, were limited to a greater extent to the work of interpretation within fiqh; however many fuqaha were ulema at the same time. Taking into account the role of religion in the caliphate, the Ulema as authorities in religious knowledge played the key role in both the religious and political life of the state. The whole history of the Arab Caliphate shows that the caliphs provided support for the ulema and demonstrated respect in every possible way. In theory their authority had been based on the Imams’ divine authority. But the ulema as the imam’s electors and the religious association preparing ijma had a leading role in selecting those who would have power. Being the fourth source of Sharia provided their activities with divine authority. Thus they made assignments to power and kept it under their control relying on ijma authority, because in theory Islam state is not just a religious organization, it includes the sphere of legal power. The goal of the state was related to observing the rules of the Sharia.

But a special category of persons was designated to maintain the political functions of the state. The unity of this religious-political functions originally executed by the ulema was possible as long as the power and authority were located in a single person. Therefore the problem of nature of the power had never been raised in Islamic political doctrine due to the idea of the imam being both a secular and religious regent. Only the historical conditions of the actual separation of secular and religious power made al-Ghazali consider the nature of power in a new way. From that point on he does not speak about the uniformity of religious and secular aspects in the Muslim state, but about the union between religion and power. Hence, the term "united Muslim state" gained a broader meaning.

Another problem experienced by al-Ghazali was that of the nature of the state, i.e. the same problem of authority and power but from a different perspective. According to Islamic dogma this is the relation between the Caliphate and the Sharia. Since the Ummayyad regency and in the early period of the Abbasids, the caliph had been more likely a representative of power than an authority. During the late period of the Abbasids the imam could hardly pretend to power, but still was the main bearer of authority. The political theory of the Caliphate most likely had been based on precedents from history rather than on the Sharia, which is particularly evident with al-Mawardi. At the same time as per the original sunni doctrine, caliphs had been directed to follow strictly the Sharia rules. In particular this had become apparent in the wide criticism of Ummayyads’ behavior which was mounted by their political opponents. The Caliph’s authority had been tied up with the idea of following the Sharia as the Imam was considered to be the Prophet’s representative. Sunni jurists had never denied the recognition of Sharia as the highest authority in the imams’ activities, but quite often this was absent in their casuistic discussions in order to mask the fact of dynastic succession and hide the loss of real power by the Imam. This is not surprising because it was the historic conditions which determined both the head of a Muslim state and his functions. The legislative role of history could no longer be ignored. The political theory by al-Mawardi and al-Juweini had been transformed mainly due to the historic conditions.

It is necessary to note that during the period of strengthening the sultans’ power jurists had focused on the problems of quality, functions and obligations of the caliphs. The problem of the caliphate’s nature was practically left out of discussion, because the caliphate had been considered as something given. That is why discussions on the problem of caliph’s power and authority were not tied up with the nature of the authority of the institution if the Imamate. Al-Mawardi and al-Bakillani, al-Baghdadi and al-Juweini considered the institute of caliphate as a guide for the higher law. But it was a paradoxical situation when power, legality and ultimately the state was based on the formal religious authority of caliph who in turn depended on the real power of sultans.

For al-Ghazali, resolving this situation was related to a different understanding of the nature of the caliphate. His political theory differs in many aspects from the doctrines worked out by his predecessors, but al-Ghazali tried to hide this difference behind the terms generally accepted in sunni theory.

As a rule al-Ghazali’s works in the sphere of fiqh, religion and ethics had the task of justifying theoretically the requirement of a strong central power. Also in these works there was extended criticism directed to the Fatimid’s political claims and the rationalistic research on rearranging Arabic society by Arab Muslim philosophers.

The French orientalist A. Laust believes that the politics for al-Ghazali was a necessary part of religion and morality. It had been considered as an art of behaving in accordance with certain conditions of the life of a person, whose actions should meet the existing state order. In his political theory Al-Ghazali actively used the experience of the Sasanid state. Thus according to al-Ghazali "religion is the basis and state power is its guard providing defense and ensuring its stability"13. People have need for strong power in the person of the sultan, who by means of laws supports and consolidate the state order. These laws are the subject of Muslim law (fiqh). Therefore Muslim jurists are most important for the state and their activities should be considered as the major state function. In addition to juridical laws, according to al-Ghazali, there are religious rules and regulations which are the basis for the true faith.

Al-Ghazali’s political doctrine should be considered from the point of his anxiety about civil war (fitna) and other disturbances (fasad) which could lead to anarchy and disorder. That is why his main attention was paid to the problem of the relations between the caliph and the sultan. His criticism of the political claims on power by the shiits (batynits) can be considered as ancillary criticism while addressing the main problem. Even the call of Fakhruddin Abu Ubeid ibn Ali, the judge of Tripoli, in 1107 for help in fighting the crusaders did not find proper political evaluation by al-Ghazali.

The Sequence of al-Ghazali’s Political Treaties. For adequate understanding of al-Ghazali’s political doctrine it is important to analyze his works according to their chronology: from "Mustazkhiri" to "Al-Mustasfa min ilm al-usul". Al-Ghazali examines two aspects of the "caliph and sultan" problem. First – relations between sovereignty (hukm) and secular authority (sultan). Secondly – religion (din) and state (mulk) relations.

He wrote "Mustazkhiri" in 1094-1095, and devoted it to the Caliph Mustazkhiri. There al-Ghazali reviewed the problem of the legality of the imam’s power and proved the inconsistency of claims to lawful power by the batynites. In this work, quite in the manner of al-Mawardi, he depicted distinctive features of Islamic sunni political doctrine and gave a description of the characteristics to be possessed by the caliph and the procedure of his selection.

In "al-Iqtisad fi-l-Itiqad" ("The Required Minimum of Faith") al-Ghazali already gave a more realistic evaluation of caliph’s role in strengthening the Islamic state and raised the problem of the correlation of the caliphate and the sultanate. Based on a thorough analysis of the foundation of Islam political doctrine as well as the historic practice of the caliphate he had come to the idea of a unity between imam and sultan.

The Imamate theory of al-Ghazali had been based on three key conditions: 1) the power required to ensure the order in the state; 2) the caliphate as a symbol of the unity of Muslim community (umma) and its historical practice, and sultanate becoming an integral part of caliphate; and 3) the functional and institutional authority of the caliphate being based on Sharia.

Al-Ghazali considered that as the higher authority the Imam could be appointed either by the prophet or a ruling caliph or by a person obtaining real power14. In those times the imam as a rule used to be appointed by the sultan and only after that was the caliph supposed to be elected by the ulema. This is what al-Ghazali had tried to fix theoretically. He considered that the procedure of caliph’s election was in full compliance with Sharia rules, and the sultan actually became a constitutional power. After the sultan made an actual appointment of the caliph (imam) his candidature used to be approved by electors from the ulema and fuqaha. Following that there was an announcement in mosques and ordinary Muslims accepted it as a prescription from above. In spite of the fact that sultans appointed caliphs they had to recognize their authority, because "faith and power are twins". The Sultan’s power had been considered legal even if he did not keep the Sharia rules. The most important was to recognize the Caliph’s authority. Al-Ghazali proceeded from the following: establishing order and security provides a favorable field for the function of Islamic institutes. This is the reason why he was not so strict with these characteristics of the caliph related to his secular functions. Thus the caliph was no longer a symbol of the caliphate’s unity, but an integrated part thereof. The Imam’s authority had been based on the sultan’s power and the power of the latter had been sanctified by imam’s authority.

The Sultan as a constituent authority recognized the constituent authority of caliph. Thus the sultan, being a secular ruler, provided for the integrity and power of an Islamic state. According to al-Ghazali faqaha and ulema should act as a connecting link between the sultan and the imam. Interpretation of the Sharia in accordance with historic realities, justification of the legality of the caliph appointed by the sultan and the issuing of religious-legal acts (fatawa) embodying the functional authority of Sharia were within their political functions. Al-Ghazali came to the following conclusion: the secular functions of the caliph should be done by the sultan and religious-ideological by the ulama and fuqaha.

Al-Ghazali’s later works revealed that in general he adhered to the opinion on the Imamat stated in "al-Iktisad fi-l’-itikad". In these work he gave detailed practical requirements to meet the religious rules and regulations of the Shariat aimed to ensure the order and prosperity for the Islamic state. His work "Ihya ulum ad-din" makes most evident that politics for Muslims was not an independent science, but an integrated part of the religious sciences.

Besides that, seeing in the person of the sultan the only hope to ensure a united Islam state, al-Ghazali supposed the possibility of absolute obedience to a secular ruler even in the case when the sultan violated the Shariat regulations and excercised an unjust rule. He considered the recognition of imam’s authority by a secular regent as the most important point. Al-Ghazali in his "Ihya" repeatedly warned against fatal consequences of civil war (fitna) and other revolts and disturbances. If the order can be ensured only by the sultan it is necessary to be under him and support him under all conditions.

In "Nasihat al-muluk" ("Counsel for Kings") he reviewed the main obligations of rulers to manage the state effectively. Taking into consideration the fact of addressing this book exclusively to sultans but not to jurists and caliphs, al-Ghazali underlined their great responsibility before God and others trying to show in every way that all their power was given by Allah. According to al-Ghazali the first obligation of the sultan was to improve personal faith (jihad); the obligations in respect to aliens is to carry out a just regency. Though many examples taken from the religious tradition, the history of Sasanids’ state and Arab caliphate he demonstrated how unjust power had resulted in tyranny and tyranny in unjust power. Al-Ghazali appealed to sultans to take into consideration the opinions of the fuqaha and ulemas on religious problems and the advice of viziers in state affairs. He noted the exclusive importance of the vizier’s position and in particular the position of the first vizier in the state hierarchy.

In "al-Mustasfa min ilm al-usul" ("The Selection from Sciences on the Fundamentals) written in 1109 he considered the problem of society and state in the view of Muslim law (usul al-fiqh). This treatise begins with an explanation of the fundamental Muslim dogma stating that Allah is the only sovereign. Evaluating fiqh sources he underlined that the Koran was the only and absolute source. Sunna is valid to the level at which it shows and proves the existence of order established by the God. Accordingly ijma is valid because it indicates the existence of Sunna. Considering ijma al-Ghazali confirmed that it meant an undivided opinion of all members of Umma. But evaluating the rights of those who could be included in ijma and those who should be excluded from it, he finally came to the idea that ijma was an undivided opinion of jurists and theologians possessing the right to issue Fatwa. According to him the authority of the state related to the will of the Prophet, which is the basis of ijma and aimed to establish the religion of Islam. Based on this the state should defend Islam and the Islamic way of life. Addressing ijma is important here, because finally it had been designated to reflect historic practice of the Caliphate. According to al-Ghazali ijma in particular provided the Caliphate institute with authority.15

Touching upon the problem of taqlid as blind adherence to authority, and ijtihad as creative development of the theory of Muslim law, al-Ghazali insisted on the need for the general public (umma) to follow taqlid. He justified this statement by the following fact: even the Prophet’s associates followed the way predetermined by Muhammad. Additionally al-Ghazali thought that independent search for the truth, justice and happiness could lead to social instability.

Evaluating the correlation between religion and state, spiritual and secular aspects, he confirmed their continuity and inter-dependence. Combining people on the basis of faith, the umma has as its goal to achieve happiness in the other world. Taking into consideration that the only sovereign is God, people should strictly follow the requirements of the Sharia. The sciences of politics, kalam, fiqh and ethics as ongoing show and determine the ways to reach happiness. Finally according to al-Ghazali political reforms are moral reforms: anyone who wishes to improve someone’s life should start from himself.

Thus according to al-Ghazali the united Muslim state or Caliphate is based on the authority of caliph, sultan and ulema. The political authority of the Caliphate consists of these three components, and its existence depends on their balance and their close unity, with the autonomy for each being stipulated within the united Muslim state.

As we could see al-Ghazali managed to fit his political theory into the frame of traditional sunni dogmatics. He showed its ability to be flexible and socially adapted to new historic conditions. His understanding of the united Muslim state differs not only from the "classic model" of the period of Prophet’s rule and that of the four "righteous" caliphs, but also from his direct predecessors among the jurists. He had a good sense of political realism and religious responsibility, as his theory stipulated the possibility of replacing the bearers of authority and power. When the caliphs left the historic arena, the Muslim state continued to exist as a union of power and religion.

Russian People’s Friendship University

Moscow, Russia

NOTES

1. Faksh M.A. "Theories of State in Islamic Political Thought." Arab Journal of Social Sciences. L., 1987, N1, p. 2.

2. Al-Mawardi "Al-Ahkam as-Sultania", Cairo, n.d.

3. Ibid, pp.15-16.

4. Faksh M.A. "Theories of State in Islamic Political Thought", Arab Journal of Social Sciences. L., 1987, N1, p. 4

5. Laoust H., La politique de Ghazali, 1970, p .9

6. Ell-Jalil J.M. "Autoure de la sincerite d’al-Ghazali". Melanges L. Massignon. Damascus, 1956, p. 57

7. Gardet L. L’Islam religion et communauté. Paris, 1957, p. 66

8. Al-Ghazali. Ihya ulum ad-din. Cairo, n/a, Vol. I, p.129.

9. Ibid., p.120.

10. Ibid., Vol. III, pp. 283-323.

11. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 276.

12. Ibid., Vol. I, pp. 52-73.

13. Al-Ghazali. Al-Iqtisad fi-l-itiqad. Cairo, 1972, p. 95.

14. Ibid., p. 96.

15. Ibid., p. 105.