ABU al-Hasan Ali bin Muhammad Al-Mawardi (972-1058), the foremost social scientist and jurist of the medieval ages, a judge and a diplomatist, wrote numerous monumental works of which

Al Ahkam al-Sultaniya (Ordinances of Government) is the most important for our purposes.

We shall focus on the author's exposition of the ways in which a man may get to be the supreme ruler (also called sovereign, imam or caliph). The way could be appointment, selection or election. The holder of this office, being vicar of the Prophet (PBUH), is to uphold the faith and manage worldly affairs.

Anticipating Thomas Hobbes by more than 600 years, Al-Mawardi holds that men cannot live in a state of nature rational beings by their very nature do tend to establish a common ruler who will settle their disputes and keep them from utter chaos and savagery. Al-Mawardi then proceeds to the tricky process of finding the sovereign. To begin with, the filling of this office is the community's collective function, but it is one from which the unlettered masses may be exempted.

The office is elective and the electors must have the following qualifications one, probity in every sense of the word; two, knowledge enabling them to determine if the candidates have the needed qualifications; three, prudence to choose the candidate most capable of managing the affairs of the state. The number of electors necessary and their location are matters to which we shall return shortly.

Beyond physical fitness, candidates for the office must meet certain conditions to be eligible. These are (1) probity and dedication to justice; (2) knowledge and ability to form independent judgment in dealing with crises and making decisions generally; (3) prudence that enables wise handling of the subjects and their interests; (4) dauntlessness in defending the homeland and repelling its enemies; (5) descent from a notable segment of the Quraysh — a require

ment “indisputably settled by specific text and general consensus”.

Al-Mawardi believes this last requirement is sustained by the fact that Abu Bakr and Umar bin Khattab asserted it before Madina's Ansar who had assembled to elect the Prophet's successor. They cited one of his sayings to the effect that “imams (rulers) come from the Quraysh”. Abu Bakr told the Ansar “We will be the rulers, you the ministers.”

Al-Mawardi takes note of a dissenter who maintained that all Muslims, regardless of their descent, were eligible for the office, but he dismissed this view, saying that it could not be valid in the presence of this “explicit text”. (We will have more to say on this subject later.)

A person can become the sovereign through appointment by a predecessor or election. Al-Mawardi notes that jurists disagree as to the required number of electors. Some of them have held that the “generality of electors throughout the land” should participate so that the election may be universally accepted and the sovereign's writ obeyed. Others argue that the vote of those present at the time and place of election should do as it did in the case of Abu Bakr's election. Jurists of Basra put the required number at six, those of Kufa at three, and still others at one.

Of the eligible candidates one may have more of some and a trifle less of another quality in which case the person with the quality more needed at the time might be preferred. For instance, a man known to be particularly brave and courageous might be preferred in time of war to a candidate with greater depth of knowledge. Once again, since the candidates are all excellent, it does not matter if the electors choose one who is a notch lower on the scale of merit but more popular and more likely to be obeyed by the people.

It may be puzzling to his readers that Al-Mawardi, the foremost social scientist and political thinker of his time, has been content with reporting the positions the various schools of thought adopted on certain issues. He does not want to tell us where he stands on any of them. An explanation comes to mind. Until the appearance of Ibn Khaldun on the intellectual scene of the times, writers including historians tended to be reporters of events and opinions rather than analysts, critics and independent thinkers. It may be said that Al-Mawardi wrote in the prevailing style.

Second, he was dealing with events and interpretations belonging to early Islam. It was not really open to him or the other jurists and theologians to question the validity or propriety of the work done or authorised by the Prophet and the Pious Caliphs.

Take for instance this matter of how one might come to power. Abu Bakr was elected by a small group of men present at a certain place at a certain time (Saqifa Bani Sa'ad in Madina hours after the Prophet's death). Umar was appointed caliph by his predecessor Abu Bakr, before his death. Umar appointed an electoral college consisting of six notables to elect one of their own number as the caliph. For one who regards these dignitaries as “rightly guided” (khulafai-i-rashideen) it is hard to say that the procedure chosen by any of them was wrong. Nevertheless Al-Mawardi might have preferred one of these ways to the others, but he chose not to tell us if he did.

Al-Mawardi does take a clear and emphatic position in support of the proposition that the ruler must come from the Quraysh even though it is antithetical to the fundamental and well-established Islamic maxim that all Muslims are equal, having the same rights, regardless of their ethnic origin. But what is Al-Mawardi to do about the fact that Abu Bakr and Umar bin Khattab were the ones who asserted this position and cited a saying of the Prophet in its support? Being a cautious man, he could not bring himself to saying that these two heroes of the Islamic tradition might have misheard or misunderstood the Prophet's words.

On the positive side, it should be noted that Al-Mawardi was probably the first of the medieval writers on politics to have introduced, or revived, the idea of an elected head of government. He also laid down the qualities that the candidates for this high office must possess. This, I think, was an innovative contribution.n

The writer, professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, is a visiting professor at the Lahore School of Economics.

anwars@lahoreschool.edu.pk