Law and Order According to Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya 401
lems they raised. Afterwards, I deal with the two authors’ approach
to morals. Chiefly, they identify fasād, corruption, as the cause of the
decline of Muslim public order, in its social and political expressions
alike. I therefore highlight the conservative and moral criticism that
Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim addressed to the society they lived
in. They came to see the reason for its “moral corruption” in the lack of
order, which was endangering the very existence of the Islamic system.
Hence the solution proposed by both authors is to extend the author-
ity of judges and rulers so that it can regulate order and ensure the
higher objectives of Islamic law. Subsequently, I reconsider classifying
the ethico-political views of the two authors, who are usually depicted
as anti-system and radical thinkers. Above all, I attempt to reframe
their ideas in in two directions. On the one hand, I show their recon-
ciliatory character with regard to relations with the state. On the other,
I highlight their moral tendency to preserve the status quo.
The present study argues that the siyāsa sharʿiyya of Ibn Taymiyya
and Ibn al-Qayyim are primarily concerned with an efficient public
order that reflects the norms of Sharia. What interests the two jurists
in the first place is how to prevent excluding Sharia from the pub-
lic space. This could happen either if the corruption of the society
infiltrates all aspects of public life irreversibly or if the rulers, in their
public policy, take recourse to measures that do not stem from Sharia.
Correspondingly, Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim, each in his own
style, produced an advisory piece of literature that gives judges and
rules more authority over public order. By doing so, they extend the
authority of Sharia and its control over a corrupt society. In fact, from
the perspective of the two authors, the authority of Islamic law is to
be considered not only in its texts but also in its application and its
spirit. Besides putting emphasis on the moralistic-conservative moti-
vations of Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim, I am making the point
that they sought the re-establishment of an Islamic public order. As a
result, they moved to a more coercive approach that seemed to them
the best way for Sharia to regain control over the public order. For the
simple reason that the function of regulating the public life belongs to
the rulers, and because Islamic law defines the scope and the authority
of rulers, Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn al-Qayyim were compelled to rene-
gotiate the relationship between Sharia and public order in favour of a
legitimized and extended authority of the state.
To begin with, the term siyāsa refers to any form of management, be
it private or public. As such, it defines the application of practical rea-
Brought to you by | Nanyang Technological University
Authenticated