are governed by Islamic law, or that this governance lies outside Islamic law. If the former is meant, then it is part of the religion; if the latter, that is an error. The source of this error, however, is that the Kufan school falls short in its knowledge of the governance of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, and of his rightly guided caliphs.

It is authentically reported that he said:

“The Children of Israel were governed by the prophets. Whenever a prophet died, another prophet succeeded him. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be caliphs, and they will be numerous.”

They asked, “What do you command us to do?”

He replied, “Honour your pledge of allegiance to the first, then the next, and give them their due rights, for Allah will question them about those He entrusted to their care.”

When the caliphate passed to the descendants of al-‘Abbās, they needed to govern the people. Those jurists of Iraq who assumed judicial office under them did not possess sufficient knowledge to ensure just governance. They therefore found it necessary to establish a jurisdiction for the redress of grievances, and they made military authority separate from religious judicial authority. This division grew more pronounced in many Muslim cities, until people began speaking of ‘religious law’ and ‘governance’: one litigant would summon his opponent to religious law, while the other would appeal to governance. It became permissible for one judge to rule according to religious law and another according to governance.

The reason for this was that those who identified themselves with religious law fell short in their knowledge of the Sunnah. Consequently, in many matters their judgments neglected rights and left the prescribed punishments unenforced, to the point that blood was shed, wealth seized, and forbidden acts freely committed. Meanwhile, those who identified themselves with governance came to govern by a kind of personal judgment, without holding fast