The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought

Ibn Rushd (1126–98)

Abu al-Walid Muhammad b. Ahmad b. Rushd, whose name was Latinized to Averroes, was born in Córdoba into a politically active family of prominent religious jurists of the Maliki school. He studied Arabic grammar and literature, Qur’anic sciences, hadith, jurisprudence, theology, philosophy, natural sciences, and medicine. Following in the footsteps of his father and grandfather, he served as a judge, first in Seville (1169–72) and then as a chief judge in Córdoba (1172–82), a position that presumably was the highest civil authority in the city. After that, he became chief physician at the court of the Almohads in Marrakesh. Ibn Tufayl introduced him to the prince Abu Ya‘qub Yusuf b. Tashufin, who asked him to comment on the books of Aristotle. He wrote short commentaries (jawāmi‘), middle commentaries (mukhtaṣar), and long commentaries (tafsīr) on them in Arabic, some of which have survived only in Hebrew or Latin translations. It was due to their influence in Latin Europe that Ibn Rushd was called “The Commentator.” Ibn Rushd also wrote important theological-philosophical, juridical, and medical books. He enjoyed the favor of the caliph Ya‘qub al-Mansur until 1195, when he was tried and banished to Lucena, near Córdoba, and his philosophical books were burned. Biographers give different reasons for his fall from favor, all of which are of a political nature. Although Ibn Rushd was brought back to honor, he did not live long after those degrading events.

Ibn Rushd surpasses other Muslim philosophers in his awareness of the political character of religious law. Arguing against Muslim theologians, he states that prophecy is not to be proved by performing miracles but by its rational character, which consists of the empowerment of the sociopolitical function of religion in order to create and maintain order. The laws established by the prophets are essential for man’s well-being, and they are derived from both reason and revelation. Their rational character is a commonality between them, and they surpass civil laws by being revealed. According to Ibn Rushd, philosophers acknowledge that religion aims at addressing the general public by using methods other than philosophical demonstration. Religious prescriptions that enhance virtuous conduct are, therefore, indispensable for a political community so that individuals can attain a life of virtue in this world and eternal happiness in the next.

Based on his belief in the unity of truth equally borne by religion and philosophy, Ibn Rushd argued, drawing on the Qur’an, that Qur’anic statements that apparently contradict reason should be interpreted allegorically by the philosophers. However, he also argued that the true meaning of the ambiguous verses should not be announced to the masses in order to protect the community from friction and division. Aware of the political dimensions of Qur’anic exegesis, he considers the harmony of philosophy and religion to correspond to the harmony within the community. Some of his attitudes reflect his agreement with the Almohad doctrine established by Ibn Tumart.

Ibn Rushd summarized Plato’s Republic instead of Aristotle’s Politics, which was not available to him. Drawing on his knowledge of Aristotle and Islam, he used the Republic to display his ideas on the best governance. In essence, he considered the ideal Islamic state, which is basically led by the revealed law, as one that reflects Plato’s ideal city. He applied Plato’s political ideas as generally valid principles to Muslim concepts and institutions in past and present. However, he read Plato’s political philosophy with the eyes of an orthodox Muslim who acknowledges the supremacy of the revealed and comprehensive shari‘a.

Following Aristotle, Ibn Rushd considers politics to be, along with ethics, the second part of the practical science, which differs from the theoretical sciences in that its subject is the deeds people commit willfully and out of choice. Ethics addresses individuals; it deals with dispositions, volitional actions, and habits in general, explaining how they are related and how they affect each other. Politics addresses the community, examining how dispositions can be established in the souls and enhanced to become perfect.

Like Plato, Ibn Rushd saw an analogy between the just order of the soul and the just order of the city. The inhabitants of the virtuous city do the work assigned to them according to their natural capabilities. The rulers and the state can implant virtue in the souls of citizens by persuasion and coercion; persuasion takes place by means of rhetoric, coercion by war. Ibn Rushd observes that both ways have been practiced in Islam.

In liberal statements that are not in agreement with traditional Islamic teaching and practice, Ibn Rushd assigns to women an equal share in the management of state affairs as well as in warfare. Indeed, according to him, women could become philosophers and rulers. Furthermore, the fact that women, in his society, are confined to the rearing of children and not allowed to work other than a few lower jobs like spinning and weaving is for him one cause of the poverty of Andalusian society. However, when dealing with delicate matters that involved the community of women and children, he reports Plato’s opinion in a narrative fashion and refrains from adopting it.

Like Farabi, Ibn Rushd states that the ruler of the virtuous city has to be a philosopher, lawgiver, king, and imam, giving a linguistic explanation of the last word as “he who is followed in his actions.” As a political realist, he declares prophetic revelation to be useful but not necessary for virtuous governance, which is primarily based on reason and aims ultimately at bringing about happiness and providing the conditions necessary for people to pursue the good life. Ibn Rushd acknowledges the possibility that persons who are qualified to be virtuous rulers could exist in his time and under Islam, and if they rule for a long, uninterrupted period, the virtuous city could come into being. He states in a pragmatic way that, although Plato gave the best manner for its emergence, the virtuous city could emerge in a different manner and that already existing states could achieve the ideal status. This takes a long time to happen and is accomplished through both the beliefs and the deeds of virtuous rulers.

Considering the ideal Platonic state and the early Islamic state under Muhammad and the Rightly Guided Caliphate to be two paradigms for perfect governance, Ibn Rushd compares them with later Muslim states, giving examples from Islamic history that show the degeneration of virtuous governance. Evaluating the contemporary political situation in general, he pessimistically states that the rulers who remain virtuous according to the prescriptions of the Qur’an are rare. He criticizes the dynasties of many of the Muslim kings in his day for preserving the laws merely to keep their family privileges and usurp public property.

Ibn Rushd’s teachings on the separation of reason and faith as well as the autonomy and universality of the intellect contributed widely to the development of European political thought, especially concerning the separation of church and state and the establishment of political rule on the basis of reason instead of religious authority. These secular ideas were adopted by several intellectuals in the 20th century, who strove to modernize the religious discourse in Islam and establish freedom of thought and expression in the Arab world. Despite their different political colors, their secularism is uniquely linked to Ibn Rushd.