In his comprehensive book titled "Ghazali’s Understanding of Politics," French Orientalist Henri Laoust examines in detail al-Ghazali’s life and his political thought within the context of the developments of his time. The period in which al-Ghazali lived was not only marked by widespread political instability but also by a lack of a fully established intellectual framework. During this era, the ruler for whom the Friday sermon (khutbah) was recited, the sultan, frequently changed; various ideologies sought to assert themselves in the political arena, making it difficult to establish intellectual continuity.

For this reason, Nizam al-Mulk, the wise vizier of the Seljuk Empire, made significant investments in constructing a long-term intellectual framework that would ensure political stability, establishing Nizamiyya madrassas in key centers of the Muslim world, especially in Baghdad. These institutions aimed to build the intellectual foundation of "Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama‘ah," the tradition embraced by the majority of the Muslim community. The goal was to create a framework that, despite political differences and fragmentation, could continuously preserve the potential to serve as a unifying platform. Therefore, these madrassas played a crucial role in overcoming intellectual obstacles to unity, resolving tensions and strengthening ideological defense. In this context, the greatest contribution naturally came from al-Ghazali.

Al-Ghazali’s greatest advantage was his position at the very heart of this period – in Baghdad – where he served for four years as the chief professor (shaykh al-mudarrisin) at the Nizamiyya Madrassa, which carried the weighty mission described above. Owing to this position, he had the opportunity to closely observe political processes, ongoing intrigues and power plays, the dynamics of negotiation, and struggles for authority. As a result, the framework he developed for politics was based less on abstract theory and more on the realities of the field, and it possessed a notably flexible structure. On the other hand, while constructing this political framework, he drew significantly on the works of Abu Mansur al-Baghdadi and al-Mawardi.

First and foremost, it was necessary to frame one’s place and the world within a coherent structure. According to al-Ghazali, the world is not a final destination but a place of passage between the origin (mabda’) and the return (ma‘ad). For this reason, the world is a domain of moral responsibility and divine obligation (taklif). The afterlife, in contrast, is the realm where individuals are held accountable and receive recompense for how faithfully they fulfilled these obligations. Regardless of their social position, all Muslims are responsible as addressees of this divine obligation. In this society, the sources of knowledge are the Quran, the Sunnah, consensus (ijma), and analogical reasoning (qiyas), with reason (ʿaql) serving as the most crucial aid in grasping these truths. As he clearly demonstrated in his confrontation with the philosophers and the Muʿtazilite school, reason alone is insufficient for the sound construction of society. Therefore, within this framework, the most critical role belongs to the prophet and the message conveyed through him.

In his debates against the Baṭinis (esotericists), al-Ghazali firmly rejects the notion of the infallibility (ʿisma) of the imam, while deliberately avoiding leaving a vacuum in the political-religious structure by reserving infallibility solely for the prophet. He thus provides no legitimacy to the idea that any ruler could be beyond responsibility due to presumed infallibility. Beyond offering a textual refutation based on religious sources, his reasoning is also strikingly rational: "After all, an infallible and sinless imam would have to govern through officials who are not infallible; to demand that they too be sinless is an exercise in absurdity." Therefore, unlike Shiism, which centers society around an infallible imam, al-Ghazali advocates for building the unity of the ummah around the prophet himself.

In al-Ghazali’s construction of political thought, order and social harmony occupy a central place. Accordingly, he treats the selection of the caliph not as a theological (ʿitiqadi) matter but as a legal (fiqhi) one, thereby relocating related debates to a more worldly and human-centered ground. Moreover, considering Turkish scholar Ihsan Fazlıoğlu’s emphasis on the pivotal shift in the development of Islamic thought – from paradigm to perspective, or from the singularity of truth to the plurality of method – a parallel rupture can be observed in the political realm as well. This rupture manifests in the legitimization of multiple methods for selecting an imam, which marks a shift from a theological to a legal issue. While the intellectual rupture described by Fazlıoğlu was achieved through Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani, the political counterpart of this transformation was accomplished by al-Ghazali, who incorporated and reinterpreted the stages introduced by al-Baghdadi and al-Mawardi. The impact of these two foundational ruptures on the continuity of the Ahl al-Sunnah community merits further and more comprehensive research.

Given the political turmoil of his time and the understanding that justice cannot exist without order, al-Ghazali’s approach appears highly reasonable: "According to al-Ghazali, the existence of political differentiation within the ummah and a powerful state to which obedience is rendered is a necessity dictated by both tradition and reason. The Sharia commands obedience to God, His Prophet, and those in authority. The fear of fitna – that is, the breakdown of peace within the ummah – and the subsequent descent into disorder, civil war, and corruption (fasad) dominates al-Ghazali’s political thought.”

The Ahl al-Sunnah society that al-Ghazali sought to shape is a hierarchical one in which all individuals bear responsibility. While a significant part of this hierarchy consists of political rulers, the class of jurists holds a position of particular importance in contrast to them: "As al-Ghazali conceives it, society – although all believers are equal in the sight of God – is a deeply hierarchical one. Two major ruling classes exist: the military-political leaders (umara’) and the jurists (fuqaha’). By 'ruler,' al-Ghazali primarily means the caliph, who should occupy the highest rank according to his position; then come kings, sultans, sovereigns, and, more generally, all those in authority. The class of jurists consists of all those devoted to religious sciences – that is, theologians, hadith scholars, preachers, legal scholars and jurisconsults – as well as experts in the inner sciences of the heart who are authorized to issue fatwas.”

In other words, rulers as "the shadow of God" and scholars as "the heirs of the prophet" share the burden and balance one another in pursuit of the same goal: the continuity of a healthy and just Muslim society. While rulers are tasked with ensuring a justice-based social order, scholars produce the intellectual content that sustains the fluidity of life grounded in the Quran, the Sunnah, consensus (ijma) and analogical reasoning (qiyas). In this context, jurisprudence (fiqh) takes on a central role as a form of knowledge essential to life: "The most important of all sciences related to this world, and the one most urgently required by politics, is fiqh. Although the term is often translated as 'law,' it is in fact more than that: it is a rule of life that organizes a person’s duties toward God, toward themselves and toward others, and that defines the concept of law as a function of the concept of duty.”

In all his works, al-Ghazali emphasizes above all the independence of scholars, consistently warning against distortions that might corrupt the balance between rulers and religious authorities. He writes: "The good scholar is, above all, someone who seeks no personal gain, who engages with knowledge purely for its own sake, and whose sole concern is to attain the pleasure of his Lord. He turns away from worldly passions and renounces the pursuit of wealth and – more dangerously than material things – status and reputation ... Though deeply committed to his independence, such a scholar does not shy away from reminding rulers of their duties, pointing out their faults to their faces, and offering them sincere counsel when the opportunity arises." Ultimately, al-Ghazali’s entire effort can be seen as directed toward strengthening the civil sphere in which scholars operate within the Ahl al-Sunnah society. For it is the responsibility of the scholars, as the "heirs of the prophet,” to remind rulers of their obligations: "It is the duty of the jurists, the heirs of the Prophet, to remind both (rulers and society) of their responsibilities with complete freedom. The corruption of rulers will inevitably be followed by the corruption of the people."

Therefore, participating in this domain entails significant difficulty in terms of fulfilling its responsibilities. Al-Ghazali advises those who lack inner certainty and moral resilience to refrain from assuming such roles: "Anyone who is not confident in themselves should refrain from these duties. When such responsibilities are undertaken and carried out justly, they become a form of servitude to God. Those without spiritual strength – especially when it is known that the governance is unjust and one will be compelled to follow its politics – should avoid seeking, accepting or remaining in such positions. However, if someone believes they must accept such a role, they must uphold justice therein without fear of being dismissed; such fear is not a valid excuse in the sight of God." When this domain – namely, the sphere of the scholars – becomes corrupted, the realm of politics contracts; governance deteriorates first, followed by the broader society. Thus, in the context of the Ahl al-Sunnah community, societal corruption is understood to be more directly linked to the degradation of the civil (religious-scholarly) sphere than to the failures of political authority alone.

In sum, throughout his life, al-Ghazali devoted great effort to building a Sunni society grounded in this political framework. Among the many works he authored toward this end, his most significant and final major contribution is the book of "Ihya-u Ulum-id-Din" ("The Revival of the Religious Sciences"), which serves as a comprehensive guide to both individual and public life – reminding all members of the Muslim community of their responsibilities. As Henri Laoust puts it, it is essentially "a book of social and political ethics.” Accordingly, its language is deliberately simple and accessible to ensure that its message can be understood by all. Within al-Ghazali’s framework, religious obligations (fard) are distinctly categorized as either individual (farḍ ʿayn) or communal/public (farḍ kifaya), with an explicit emphasis that one cannot be sacrificed for the other. For instance, a Muslim who fulfills a communal obligation (fard kifaya) is still not exempt from personal duties (farḍ ʿayn). Thus, every individual bears responsibility for the integrity and just functioning of this virtuous and charismatic society. Thus, in the charismatic and virtuous Ahl al-Sunnah society envisioned by al-Ghazali, individual self-development is continuously encouraged, while society as a whole is strengthened through the public contributions of these morally refined individuals.