著者

中田 考

出版者

日本中東学会

雑誌

日本中東学会年報 (ISSN:09137858)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.5, pp.281-308, 1990-03-31 (Released:2018-03-30)

---

The Sunnite jurisprudence defines the rbellion as "revolt against the ruler by force according to their ta'wil." Jurists come to this notion through their understanding of the wars following the death of the Prophet. Ibn Taimiya says that they confound wars of three different categories, i.e., Abu Bakr's wars against the Apostates, the Civil wars, and 'Ali's wars against the Kharijite, and consequently they consider all of them revolts against the ruler, and that subjugating them is obligatory, if they persist. Ibn Taimiya criticizes this conception, and says that the apostates and Kharijite must be subjugated, but as to civil wars, withdrawal from them is better. According to Ibn Taimiya, jurists' idea of "rebellion" stems from this confusion, and it is supposed to be treated as a civil war from which muslims had better abstain. Ibn Taimiya does not only criticize jurists, but also presents his alternative, which is "deviation from the shari'a," namely, muslims must fight not "rebels against a certain ruler," but "factions deviating from the shari'a."