The Ethical Literature: Religion and Political Authority as Brothers

in Journal of Persianate Studies
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

This essay discusses the contribution of the Muslim ethical literature of the middle ages to Islamic political thought. The ethical literature offers a perspective on the medieval Islamic constitution that differs markedly from the picture that derives from the juristic literature on the caliphate. Where the juristic literature largely portrays political authority as the servant of religion, the ethical literature presents religion and political authority as “brothers” arrayed in a relationship of mutual dependence. This view is decisively influenced by pre-Islamic Iranian thinking on the relationship between religion and politics, as contained in the “Letter of Tansar.”

The Ethical Literature: Religion and Political Authority as Brothers

in Journal of Persianate Studies

Sections

References

ArjomandS.A. The Shadow of God and the Hidden Imam: Religion Political Order and Societal Change in Shiʿite Iran from the Beginning to 1890 1984 Chicago

Aziz al-Azmeh Islams and Modernities 1996 New York

al-Biruni SachauC.E.Azkā’iP. SachauC.E. al-Āthār al-bāqiya The Chronology of Ancient Nations 1923 London 2001 1879 Leipzig Tehran

BrownL.C. Religion and State: The Muslim Approach to Politics 2000 New York

CroneP. “Did al-Ghazali Write a Mirror for Princes?” Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 1987 10 167 197

CroneP.HindsM. God’s Caliph 1986 Cambridge

DabashiH. Authority in Islam: From the rise of Muhammad to the Establishment of the Ummayads 1989 New Brunswick

al-FārābiAbu Nasr WalzerR. Al-Farabi on the Perfect State 1985 Oxford

al-GhazāliAbu Hāmid Muhammad BadawiA. Fadāʾih al-bātiniyya (Mustazhiri) 1964 Cairo

al-GhazāliAbu Hāmid Muhammad ÇubukçuI.A.AtayH. al-Iqtisād fiʾl-iʾtiqād 1962 Ankara

al-GhazāliAbu Hāmid Muhammad BagleyF.R.C. Nasihat al-muluk Ghazali’s Book of Counsel for Kings 1964 Oxford

GibbH.A.R. KhadduriM.LiebsneyH.J. “Constitutional Organization” Law in the Middle East 1955 Washington, DC 3 27

GoiteinS.D. “A Turning Point in the History of the Muslim State” Islamic Culture 1949 23 120 135

HartH.L.A. The Concept of Law 1993 Oxford

HillenbrandC. “Islamic Orthodoxy or Realpolitik? Al-Ghazālī’s Views on Government” Iran 1988 26 81 94

KhaldunIbn RosenthalF. The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History 1958 3 vols. New York

MiskawayhIbn CaetaniL. Tajārib al-umam The Tajarib al-Umam or History of Ibn Miskawayh 1909 Leiden

MiskawayhIbn ZuraykC.K. Tahdhib al-akhlāq The Refinement of Character 1968 Beirut

al-MuqaffaʿIbn Fu‘ādA. al-Adab al-saghir waʾl-adab al-kabir 1994 Beirut

al-MuqaffaʿIbn PellatC. Risāla fiʾl-sahāba or Kitāb al-sahāba Ibn al-Muqaffaʿ “Conseilleur” du Calife 1976 Paris

QutaybaIbn Zaki ʿAdawiA. HorovitzJ. ʿUyun al-Akhbār Islamic Culture 1925-30 4 Cairo 171 198 “Ibn Quteiba’s ʿUyun al-Akhbar” (1930) (1931) 331-362 487-530; 5 (1931) pp. 1-27 197-224

LambtonA.K.S. “Justice in the Medieval Persian Theory of Kingship” Studia Islamica 1962 17 91 119

LapidusI.M. “The Separation of State and Religion in Early Islamic Society” IJMES 1975 6 4 363 385

LapidusI.M. “State and Religion in Islamic Societies” Past and Present 1996 151 3 27

MahdiM. Ibn Khaldûn’s Philosophy of History 1957 Chicago

MasudM.K.MessickB.PowersD.S. Islamic Legal Interpretation: Muftis and Their Fatwas 1996 Cambridge, Mass.

al-Māwardi WahbaW.H. al-Ahkām al-sultāniyya wʾal-wilāyāt al-diniyya The Ordinances of Government 1996 London

TansarNāma-yi BoyceM. The Letter of Tansar 1968 Rome

Nizām al-Mulk DarkeH. Siyar al-muluk (Siyāsat-nāma) The Book of Government or Rules for Kings 1978 London

RosenthalE.I.J. Political Thought in Medieval Islam 1958 Cambridge

ZaehnerR.C. The Dawn and Twilight of Zoroastrianism 1961 London

2

See e.g. Lapidus 1975363. Lapidus says that the “prevailing view among Islamists” is that while originally the “Caliphate was both the religious and political leadership of the community of Muslims” this relationship held true only in the earliest years of the caliphate. After the middle of the tenth century “governments in Islamic lands were henceforth secular regimes—Sultanates—in theory authorized by the Caliphs but actually legitimized by the need for public order” (idem 364). The Caliphs were not “a source of religious doctrine and law.” The scholars “denied the Caliphs after the Rāshidun any authority in the elaboration of the law” (idem 369). Lapidus associates this view with the proto-Hanbali Khorasani opposition to the Caliph al-Maʾmun which “expected the Caliphate to uphold the truth and law but not to define its content” (idem 382-83).

14

Dabashi 1989. On the Shiʿite context see Arjomand 1984.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 22 22 12
Full Text Views 4 4 4
PDF Downloads 4 4 4
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0