262 chapter six
was the chief judge AbùYa"ala al-Fara", who was born some fifteen
years after al-Màwardì, (988–1066). He also wrote a book that, sur-
prisingly, carried a similar title to that of al-Màwardì, “al-Aœkàm al-
Sùltàniyyah”, (Abù-Zayd, 1986). The difference between al-Màwardì
and al-Fara"however, was that while the former was a Shafì"i the
later was a Œanbalì. Apart from this difference, which was reflected
in the treatment of topics, the arrangement of the book and the top-
ics covered were very similar. By writing his al-Aœkàm, al-Fara’ wanted
perhaps to respond to al-Màwardì’s coverage of the subjects from a
Œanbalìpoint of view. The subject attracted other writers of con-
siderable importance. The following are some examples:
Al-Ghazàlì(1058–1111) in his Iœya"Ulùm al-Dìn,
Ibn-Taymìya (1263/1328) in al-Œisbahfial-Islam,
Al-Shayzari in a forty chapter work on Nihayat al-Rutbah fi ̨alab
al-Œisbah,
Ibn-Bassam in another, Nihayat al-Rutbah fi ̨alab al-Œisbah, a workof
118 chapters, which seems to be based on the work of al-Shayzari,
Ibn al-Ukhùwwah (d. 1329), Ma"alim al-Qùrbah fiAœkàm al-Œisbah,
a work in seventy chapters.Interestingly enough, prior to al-Màwardì’s specialised chapter in his
al-Aœkàmthere was no special writing on the subject, and if there
was any indirect writing, such as Abù-Yùsuf ’s on policing, it was
not referred to as a piece of work exclusively on al-Œisbah. If an
interpretation was to be found for the appearance of an exclusive
work on the subject it would be because of the possible increasing
level of corruption in the society and state administration, that would
have instigated the jurists and judges of the day to write on the sub-
ject. On a more favourable note, the complexity in the everyday life
of the community and state organisation could have provoked the
writing. The two reasons, the increasing level of corruption and the
growing degree of complexity, could have worked together to encour-
age such specialist writing.
Of the specialised writing on Œisbah, we will look into the work
of Ibn ul-Ukhùwwah and Ibn-Taymìya. The reason for the choice
is that while Ibn-Taymìya looked into the theoretical foundation of
Œisbah, Ibn-al-Ukhùwwah provided a more detailed examination of
the practical problems facing the Muœtasib in exercising his duties.
That served as a manual to the officers involved in implementing
the assigned tasks. The two writers, however, have lived during the
same period, the first died in 1329 and the second in 1328.