Skip to main content

Reading Ibn Khaldun through the Lens of Rights

A graduate student recently observed that my sustained focus on human rights—evident from my Ph.D. dissertation on property and inheritance rights through my subsequent publications—might make my current engagement with Ibn Khaldun appear to mark a significant shift in scholarly direction. This is a fair and thoughtful observation, and one that calls for a clear response.

In truth, it took me more than two decades to fully recognize that human rights have always been the underlying axis of my scholarship: the steady thread connecting projects that span over a millennium of human history. My first book examined women’s rights in Islamic societies; my second explored dissent and rebellion, with particular attention to Ibadism—the only Islamic tradition that explicitly grounds political legitimacy in justice. My third work addressed human rights discourse more directly, tracing its evolution through both the Enlightenment’s enduring legacy and modern Islamic thought. Viewed in this light, my turn to Ibn Khaldun does not represent a departure from earlier concerns, but rather a deepening of them—a move toward more foundational questions about the very possibility of universal rights.

If anything can meaningfully be described as a universal right—and I remain convinced that some rights can—then universality must be demonstrated, not merely asserted. It is difficult to sustain the claim that human beings possess inalienable rights in the abstract if those rights leave no discernible trace in historical experience: if they were never articulated, contested, or implicitly recognized across diverse societies and epochs. This is not to suggest that historical recognition constitutes the source of a right, but rather that historical traceability is essential to establishing its claim to universality. A right that cannot, in principle, be grounded across time and culture risks collapsing into a culturally bounded moral preference rather than a genuinely universal human claim.

For this reason, inquiry into the deep past is not optional—it is indispensable. The tendency among some Western scholars to treat human rights as a purely modern, Western invention—rather than as claims with deeper human antecedents—ultimately undermines their own arguments for universality. If rights are merely the products of a specific historical moment, their global applicability becomes conceptually fragile.

A second, equally compelling consideration led me decisively toward classical Islamic—and broader premodern—thought. Human rights cannot endure if they remain confined to the level of moral assertion or legal proclamation. To function as more than rhetorical gestures, rights must rest on a universal principle capable of grounding human dignity and worth regardless of legal regime, cultural tradition, or historical context. Identifying such a principle demands an inquiry that is both deep and wide—one that penetrates beneath normative language to the very conditions that make claims of right intelligible, contestable, and socially resonant.

My engagement with Ibn Khaldun—particularly in contrast with earlier strands of classical Islamic thought—convinced me that if such a principle exists, it is most likely to be articulated by a thinker who moves beyond religious ethics alone to uncover the governing logic of social life itself. Ibn Khaldun does not offer a theory of rights in the modern sense, nor does he frame his analysis in moralistic or juridical terms. Instead, he seeks to understand the forces through which human societies generate value, sustain cohesion, and ultimately flourish or decay. It is precisely this analytic posture—his focus on the structural and historical dynamics of social life—that renders his thought indispensable for rethinking the foundations of human rights.

Engaging Ibn Khaldun has opened new horizons for rights discourse—one in which universality is not secured primarily through legal codification or moral consensus, but through the identification of a fundamental human activity capable of anchoring claims of dignity and worth across civilizations. In this sense, Ibn Khaldun provides a vital bridge between contemporary human rights discourse and deeper, transhistorical principles that precede—and may well outlast—modern legal formulations.

This expanded intellectual horizon has inevitably required me to revisit and revise certain conclusions from my earlier work. Such revision reflects not inconsistency, but scholarly growth. Conclusions drawn within a limited evidentiary frame must be reassessed as that frame widens. What remains constant, however, is my central concern with rights—not as abstract ideals, but as claims that must be rooted in the realities of human social existence. Readers should therefore understand my work as shaped by a sustained commitment: to identify the conditions under which claims of right can be meaningfully universalized, rather than merely declared.

Ahmed E. Souaiaia

University of Iowa

 

Comments

Post a Comment


Search Ibn Khaldun Today

Reading now....

Prosperity, Affordability, and ʿasabiyya

  The recent emergence of “affordability” as a dominant term in American political discourse is neither accidental nor merely rhetorical. Its rapid ascent followed the inflationary shock of the COVID-19 pandemic and the cascading economic disruptions that accompanied it: housing instability, supply-chain fragmentation, stagnant real wages, and the widening gap between nominal income and the cost of living. However, the political salience of affordability extends beyond macroeconomic indicators. Its growing prominence signals a deeper structural shift: the search for a new conceptual system capable of restoring coherence between governing institutions and the lived material realities of citizens. What registers on the surface as a policy priority or campaign slogan may therefore reflect a more consequential transformation in the conceptual foundations through which political legitimacy and collective social purpose are organized. Such a shift cannot be adequately captured through ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Systemic Completion, Civilizational Misalignment, and the Illusion of Imperial Crisis

On Civilizational Cyclicality by Ahmed E. Souaiaia, PhD  Introduction Recent commentary in policy and journalistic circles, typified by essays such as The New York Times piece titled “America Is Officially an Empire in Decline,” interprets the contemporary geopolitical moment through the lens of strategic errors, imperial overreach, and episodic miscalculation. Within this framing, hypothetical or proximate conflicts, including discursive references to the 2026 war on Iran, are positioned as decisive inflection points that accelerate or reveal systemic deterioration. Such accounts capture visible strain but remain analytically confined to event-centric and state-centric logics. They presuppose that decline is triggered rather than emergent, that empire is an attribute of a nation-state rather than a structural condition of a broader configuration, and that capacity, whether military, economic, or technological, constitutes the primary metric of systemic vitality. When examined thr...
Post a Comment
Read more

Recovering Ibn Khaldun’s Cultural Specificity

In his 2005 article, “ Theorizing from Within: Ibn Khaldun and His Political Culture ,” anthropologist Lawrence Rosen offers a nuanced and culturally grounded critique of the dominant Western reception of Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406). Rather than celebrating the North African polymath as a proto-sociologist or an early architect of grand historical theory—an approach common among both Orientalist and postcolonial scholars—Rosen insists that Ibn Khaldun must be understood first and foremost as an Arab-Muslim thinker whose theoretical insights emerged from, and were inseparable from, the specific political and cultural milieu of his time. This essay reviews Rosen’s central arguments, evaluates his methodological contribution, and situates his intervention within broader debates about cross-cultural intellectual history and the politics of comparative theory. Rosen’s primary concern is with what he sees as a persistent misreading of Ibn Khaldun in Western scholarship. Too often, he argues, Ibn...
Post a Comment
Read more

Reimagining Work

Reimagining Work Reimagining Work  offers a profound and timely exploration of one of humanity’s most enduring questions: what is the true nature and purpose of work? In an age when automation, financialization, and global inequality challenge the moral foundations of economic life, this study returns to first principles—reconsidering how civilizations have understood work as both a material and ethical force. At its core,  Reimagining Work  situates the concept of labor within a comparative dialogue between Ibn Khaldun—the fourteenth-century North African historian, philosopher, and founder of the science of civilization ( ʿilm al-ʿumrān )—and leading Western economic thinkers such as Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Max Weber, and John Maynard Keynes. Through this dialogue, the study illuminates not only the intellectual lineage of economic thought but also the deep divergences that shape modern understandings of value, productivity, and human purpose. Drawing on the  Sy...
Post a Comment
Read more

Genealogy, Critique, and Decolonisation: Ibn Khaldun and Moving Beyond Filling the Gaps

by Sertaç Sehlikoglu Abstract: The aim of this paper is to locate critique at the intersections of the genealogy of knowledge in anthropological thinking and the decolonising movement. The paper approaches the decolonising movement as one of the most crucial points in anthropological thinking. It is built on the premise that the decolonising movement is set to go beyond filling the gaps in genealogies and it can do so by: (1) revising the ‘dismissed’ genealogies that have contributed to the formation of the contemporary classical theory and (2) thinking creatively in implementing the critical thinking tools to the dismissed scholarship, in an equal manner to the Eurocentric scholarship. To illustrate, it uses the case of Ibn Khaldun, an Arab scholar of social sciences and historical analysis from the 14 th Century, often referred to as the first sociologist. On the one hand, his influence on classical Western thinking is largely dismissed. On the other hand, as a counter-response to t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Processing Theory in Islamic Thought

In " Processing Theory in Islamic Thought: A Comparative Analysis of al-Mawardi and Ibn Khaldun with Implications for Islamic Education ," published in the November 2025 issue of Tadibia Islamika, Muhammad Farid Asysyauqi undertakes a sophisticated re-examination of medieval Islamic scholarship through the lens of modern cognitive psychology. The article moves beyond the traditional bifurcation of al-Mawardi as merely a jurist and Ibn Khaldun as solely a sociologist, positing instead that both scholars constructed intricate theories of information processing that prefigure contemporary educational psychology. By employing Optimal Matching Analysis (OMA) to dissect classical texts like Adab al-Dunya wa al-Din and al-Muqaddimah, Asysyauqi constructs a compelling narrative that bridges the gap between twelfth-century theology and twenty-first-century information processing theory. The narrative begins with al-Mawardi, whose contribution is reframed from simple moral instruction ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sociology as Exposed by Ibn Khaldun

By Mohammad Abdullah Enan Ibn Khaldun's comprehension of history. Sociology or the conditions of human community. How he considers it the basis to understand history. His analysis of social phenomena. How he divides sociology. The contents of the Prolegomena. Ibn Khaldun's criticism of historians. His exposition of the subject of his science. His theory of the Asabiyah (Vitality). Ibn Khaldun and the Arabs. His opinions of the stale and sovereignty. His theory on the age of the state. The kinds of sovereignty. The origin of the cities and countries. Livelihood and how to earn it. The different kinds of sciences. Ibn Khaldn is distinguished from the rest of Muslim historians, indeed from all his predecessors, by the fact that he considered history as a science worthy of study—not as narrative merely recorded. He wished to write history in the light of a new method of explanation and reasoning, and his reflections and studies led him to establish a kind of social philosophy. He w...
Post a Comment
Read more