The Hanafi View of Siyasa and Sharia between Idealism and Realism: Al-Hasiri’s Conception of Temporal and Religious Politics: (Siyasa ad-diniyya al-‘uzma and siyasa al-hissiyya al-‘uzma)

Abstract

Politics or siyasa as used in classical legal terminology has multiple senses. First, siyasa was understood by the Hanafi and other jurists as an aggravated law (shar‘ mughallaz), usually used in the context of punishment that requires a stronger stance. However, it is well known that this usage was not the only one; in another usage the word denotes rulings issued by the sovereign and his official representatives for the practice of governance or statecraft. From the second use of this term stems yet another, third meaning. This is the more familiar usage in terms of politics more generally or political theory. The use of the term in this sense had already been adopted by al-Farabi and others when translating Greek writings on political theory. It can be argued that ahkam as-sultaniyya or as-siyasa ash-shar‘iyya-type works combine three senses of this term. The Hanafi jurists kept the word siyasa to mean a heavy punishment to be inflicted by the ruler, and they were not greatly interested in developing a political theory. The very absence of political theory in this school seems to be significant, although they naturally had ideas on justice (‘adala) and criticized the rulers on the basis of them. One rare mention of siyasa as politics or political philosophy in the Hanafi legal tradition in the classical period is in one of the authoritative fatawa works of this school: al-Havi of al-Hasiri. The work of Hasiri is very insightful into Hanafi political theory. Hasiri is an exception because his work strangely openly talks about siyasa. Siyasa is legitimized through a state-of-nature/ survival argument, necessary in itself.