This chapter does not deal with the Syrian ulama’s conception of the ideal political order. On this issue, I refer the reader to classical authors such as al-Ghazali and al-Mawardi, who are frequently cited by Sunni clerics as references in that realm. Instead, I am concerned here with concrete political practices enacted in particular historical contexts.

Can any particular feature of the ulama’s political behaviour be picked out as properly unique and essential to them? Adopting a schema on which their supposed ‘quietism’ is set in contrast to the oppositional stance of Islamic activists would certainly be overly simplistic and reductive, as has been demonstrated by previous authors and as is illustrated earlier in this book by figures such as Sheikh Habannaka.

Does this mean that from a political point of view the ulama–Islamist dichotomy is not relevant to framing our understanding of the Syrian Islamic field, and that it would be more appropriate simply to distinguish between Islamic ‘opponents’ and ‘loyalists’? The answer here is no, since, as will be shown in this chapter, the political behaviour of the ulama presents features that set them apart from lay Islamic activists, and this is the case regardless of the quality of their relations with the state.