The Symbolic Relationship between ‘Ulamā’ and ‘Umarā’ in Contemporary Saudi Arabia

Gunumuz Suudi Arabistan devletinde, ulema (dini alimler) ve umera (politik yoneticiler) arasindaki baglanti ve bu baglantinin etkisinin arastirildigi bu makale hukuk ve politik antropoloji alani icerisine giren bir arastirmadir. Arastirmanin temel konusu, Vahhabi anlayisina dayanan dini yorumlarin, gunumuz Suudi Arabistan Kralligi’ndaki politik atmosfere olan etkilerini, alim ve yoneticiler arasindaki sembolik baglantiyla analiz ederek aciklamaktir. Calisma, ulema ve umera arasindaki guclu iliskide meydana gelen olumlu ve olumsuz tarihsel donemlere odaklanarak, Suudi Arabistan’da hâkim olan Vahhabi anlayisiyla baglantili siyas-i serriyye doktrininin devlet tarafindan kullanimini orneklerle gostermektedir. Suudi Arabistan’in kendine ozgu siyas-i serriyye anlayisinda yonetim, yoneten ve yonetilenler arasindaki iliskinin kurallari Islami temeller uzerine kurulmustur ve bu baglamda dini otorite ile politik otorite arasinda ic ice gecmis hiyerarsik bir guc yapisi bulunmaktadir.


Introduction
The legal system of Saudi Arabia is supposedly governed by the traditional framework of Islamic law, and there is no separation between the legislative, executive and judicial branches. Underscoring the alliance between Saudi 'ulamā' (the religious scholars) and 'umarā' (the political leaders) in the contemporary atmosphere clarifies that the political practice in Saudi Arabia is connected with the Wahhābi interpreted religious doctrines not only as a theoretical level but also as a facilitator of political changes.
The historical alliance of 1744 between Shaykh Muḥammad Ibn 'Abd al- Wahhāb (d. 1792), the founder of the Wahhābī movement, and Muḥammad Ibn Sa'ūd (d. 1765), the predecessor of the Saudi dynasty, established the basis for the formation of the first Saudi state. 1 The symbolic and functional alliance has since then remained intact. 'Abd al-Wahhāb's mission was sustained by his descendants, who are known as the Āl al-Shaykh family, and their authorization as the Grand Muftī was handed down from father to son. 2 'Abd al-'Azīz Āl-Sa'ūd (d. 1953) founded the Saudi Kingdom in 1932 and continued to rule the monarchy until his death. 3 At the beginning of the establishment of the first Saudi state, the Āl al-Shaykh family were merely the class of the 'ulamā' who had formed an alliance with Muḥammad Ibn Sa'ūd. Although the religious sphere was reserved for 'Abd al-Wahhāb and his descendants (the family of Āl al-Shaykh) during the early period of the kingdom, the Āl al-Shaykh family's privileged position was increasingly challenged after the establishment of the Dār al-Iftā' (the official religious institution). The leader of the institution is titled as the Grand Muftī (al-Muftī al-Āmm) who obtains a privileged position and controls the official 'ulamā' within the kingdom. In a manner that is quite similar with the Āl al-Shaykh family, the official 'ulamā' have been concerned with sustaining the mutual alliance and interdependence between the religious scholars and political leaders within the wider context of the modern Saudi state. 4 The situation has inevitably generated a functional relationship between the 'ulamā' and 'umarā' up until the present times. There is a division between mutable issues concerning social relations (mu'āmalaāt) and immutable issues concerning faith ('aqā'id) and ritual practices ('ibādāt) in the area of Islamic rulings. Islamic law does not order a particular governance style for the rulers with the exception of acting fairly during the governance of the state. Each government aims to establish an appropriate governmental structure regarding religious flexibility. Within the scope of the general principles, Saudi Arabia developed an idiosyncratic governance which combines religion and state. The reciprocal and functional relationship between the religious and political authorities of Saudi Arabia is explained by Al-Atawneh, Vogel, and Mauline. Their work underscores the main Wahhābī doctrine of governance and politics (siyāsa shar'īa) which obliges both the political and religious authorities to take governmental responsibility. 5 The relationship between the Saudi state authorities and the religious institution, along with the influence of political agendas upon the religio-legal system, are detailed with reference to religious nationalism by Al-rasheed. 6 Yamani also makes an additional contribution by sketching an encompassing portrait of the Saudi socio-legal environment and social values, thus providing considerable insight into the context-based interpretations of scholars. 7 These academic contributions shed light on the influence of Najdī tribal effects upon the Saudi state structure and uncover the mutually reinforcing interaction between state, society and context. fandy Mamoun's Saudi Arabia and the Politics of Dissent observes that official institutions maintain a conservative approach in the sphere of social regulations and mainly work in harmony with the state policy. 8 This research mainly asserts that religious doctrines, organisations and tools are used to control religious mobilization and to create socio-cultural dynamics that derive from the slogans of religious nationality. The propagation of local Saudi religious interpretation mainly derives from the towns of central Arabia, in particular the Najd region. 9 Since the majority of the ruling class in political and religious spheres are from the Najd part of the country, the strict Wahhābī understanding, which is the identical religious character of this area, obtains a dominant position throughout Saudi Arabia. The Najdī influence within the whole area of Saudi Arabia provides evidence for a causal link between the intellectual contribution of scholars and geographical perceptions. This situation also clarifies the failure of scholars who could not develop intellectual ideas or comprehensive methodologies that exceed the national and local limits. The focus of the paper centres around the questionable character of relationship between the theoretical statements of scholars and political practice of rulers in contemporary Saudi Arabia. The chronological changes within the Saudi religious understanding and the reflection of this perceptual shift over the political sphere will be explained in detail. After briefly giving information concerning the practice of issuing religious opinions (iftā') in the Saudi politico-legal area, this article identifies the alliance between the 'ulamā' and 'umarā'. The broad explanation related to the role and position of Saudi scholars and rulers exemplifies the operative function of the iftā' mechanism, which assists controlling the public understanding of religion and politics. This article just focuses upon the application of the practice of iftā' within the politico-legal area. Although fatwās are traditionally identified as non-binding Islamic legal opinions, the active role of the practice of iftā' within the socio-legal area provides this practice with a kind of authoritative role in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Legal System and State Authorities
Saudi Arabia is identified with Islam more than other Muslim countries since the country is known as the cradle of Islam and hosts the two holiest places of Islam (Mecca and Medina) within its borders. 10 The ruler of the country, the King, presents himself as the custodian of these sacred sites (Khadim al-Ḥaramayn, or the servant of the two shrines). 11 The population is described as being entirely Muslim, so non-Muslims are not allowed to become permanent residents in the country. In this regard, it can be noted that the country does not need any legal system other than Islamic to deal with and decide any legal conflict and disagreement amongst its populace.
Since the establishment of Saudi Arabia in 1932, it has been made amply clear that the legal system of the country is based on and regulated by Islamic law. The superiority and primacy of Islamic law was formally declared in the kingdom's Basic Law of the Governance, which was legalised by the royal Decree No. A/90 of 1 March 1992. 12 Articles 1,7 and 23 reflect the theocratic characteristic of the state that depends on religion, while Article 5 refers evidently to the monarchic feature of the state. Article 23 stipulates: "The State shall protect the Islamic creed, apply the Shariah, encourage good and discourage evil, and undertake its duty regarding the Propagation of Islam (da'wa)." 13 Article 5 states: "Monarchy is the system of rule in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia," and "rulers of the country shall be from amongst the sons of the founder, King Abdul Aziz bin Abdul rahman alfaisal al-Saud, and their descendants. The most upright among them shall receive allegiance according to the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him)." 14 These articles clearly evidence that Saudi Arabia is a country consisting of both theocratic and monarchic elements, so it is possible to describe this state as a 'theocratic monarchy'. 15 The reflection of both theocratical nature and monarchical character are also observable with the country's legal system. Article 48 reiterates: "Courts shall apply the provisions of Islamic Shariah to cases brought before them, according to the Holy Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him), as well as other regulations issued by the Head of State in strict conformity with the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him)." 16 As a result, the Saudi legal system is superimposed upon two footings of regulations: the 'ulamā's interpretations (extracted from the authoritative sources of law) and the King's royal decrees (issued by the King concerning governmental matters and social relations). It is clearly affirmed that the Islamic legal regulations and royal decrees are the foundations of the country's legal system. This dual nature of the legal system equalizes the orders issued by the Saudi King and government with the Islamic legal regulations. royal decrees function as authoritative legal regulations in the absence of the Islamic legal regulations related to any issue at hand. Nonetheless, the nature of royal 12 "Basic Law of Governance," Article 1, Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia, March 1, 1992, accessed October 20, 2020, https://www.saudiembassy.net/basic-law-governance. 13 "Basic Law of Governance," Article 23. 14 "Basic Law of Governance," Article 5. decrees was restricted to their conformity with Islamic law. 17 The two sources (Islamic legal regulations and royal decrees) govern all administrative, executive and legislative affairs of the state. When the Saudi state produces the King's royal decrees, the components mainly embody the knowledge of collective identity and the nation that can be used as evolutionary criteria to interpret shar'ī sources. 18 Thus, collective stability and national values of Saudi society are considered to be the main elements of royal decrees that enable an official judge to address the problem in the legal area. 19 It should be noted that the Kingdom's Basic Law of the Governance theoretically and ideally draws a picture of a traditional Islamic governance system that divides the authority between the 'ulamā' and 'umarā'. It does this by accentuating the importance and necessity of the obedience to the regulations issued by these two authority holders.
The Basic Law of the Governance presents a detailed explanation of each state authority, including the executive and regulatory (almost equivalent to legislative) authorities, and their duties, responsibilities and interconnections. Despite the fact that the executive and regulatory authorities represent different entities in many countries, there is almost no separation between the two in Saudi Arabia. The executive branch of the state consists of the King, the Council of Ministers, ministry subsidiaries, local governments, and other public independent and quasi-independent agencies. 20 Within the hierarchy of the executive structure, the King has the ultimate authority that commands all military forces, implements the policy of the nation, supervises the implementation of Islamic law, statutory laws, regulations and royal decrees, and oversees the Council of Ministers and governmental agencies. The Council of Ministers, headed by the King, is the direct executive authority that has an independent power to determine the nation's internal, external, financial, economic and defence policies and to oversee the implementation of laws, regulations and royal decrees. 21 Several subsidiaries such as the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the National Security Council and the Higher Committee for Administrative reform are in existence to deal with particular issues that fall within the duties and responsibilities of the Council of Ministers. Besides the executive branch, the regulatory authority exists to enact statutory laws and regulations, and to approve international treaties, agreements and concessions. This authority is generally carried out by the King, the Council of Ministers and the Consultative Council (Majlis al-Shūra). 22 Like the structure of the executive authority, the King has supreme power and assumes an essential legislative role in support of the Islamic rule within the structure of regulatory authority. As the head of the state, he is granted a broad discretionary power over matters related to public interest (known as the field of Islamic public policy, or maṣlaḥa 'āmma) and issues regarding politics and governance that regulates the relationship between the ruler and his subjects (generally known as the field of siyāsa shar'iyya). Normally, the regulatory process needs to be approved and amended through royal decrees after first being reviewed by the kingdom's regulatory bodies (the Council of Ministers and the Consultative Council). Therefore, the King as the head of state and the chairman of the regulatory authority has an ultimate authority to enact, reject, or amend any laws and regulations through royal decrees. 23 Nonetheless this, the Council of Ministers and the Consultative Council share the regulatory authority with the King. Statutory rules and laws issued by the regulatory authority have legal sanctioning power as long as they do not conflict with the principles of Islamic law. This branch does only exercise its authority in the absence of a clear legal ruling within Islamic law which regulates a given issue. Article 67 states: "…the "regulatory Authority" shall draw up regulations and bylaws to safeguard the public interest, and eliminate corruption in the affairs of the State, in accordance with the rulings of Islamic Shariah. It shall exercise its authority in compliance with this Law and the two other laws of the Council of Ministers and the Majlis al-Shura [Consultative Council]." 24 The Council of Ministers has the right to propose a bill of law and regulations on affairs related to ministers under its roof, but any decisions taken by the council, including legislative proposals and amendments, cannot be considered valid until the King approves them. In its current form, the Consultative Council assumes both mediatory and supervisory roles. It functions as a mediatory institution by reason of providing citizens' participation in the 22  administration and decision-making process to increase public surveillance and accountability as far as possible. Additionally, it exercises a supervisory role accountable for overseeing the performance of government agencies. 25 It might be argued that, while the Council of Ministers has the opportunity to make new regulations, they do not have complete control over the decisionmaking procedure.
The Consultative Council of the Saudi legal system functions as a representative public participation because its members have the right to propose legal opinions, new amendments and necessary regulations related to public policies. The regulatory process, even though the King is the ultimate decision-maker, follows a hierarchical implementation process. In the first instance, the proposals of the Consultative Council regarding legal opinions and law drafts are subject to the approval of the King who decides which of them will be presented to the Council of Ministers in order to be evaluated for their appropriateness and practicability within the Saudi society. In the second instance, if the Council of Ministers approves those legal opinions and bills, they, once the King has granted his approval, are issued as legal resolutions and decisions. It can be clearly observable that each regulatory proposal and amendment needs the approval of both councils and the King before their transformation into laws generally by way of royal decrees. By linking this hierarchical governmental structure with the ideal state opinion of Ibn Taymiyya, Eijk underscores: "This regulatory authority corresponds to Ibn Taymiyya's theory on Islamic leadership: rulers are allowed to issue regulations necessary for government policy (siyasa shar'iyya), provided the legislation serves the public good and that it only complements, and certainly does not, contradict, sharī'a." 26 The regulatory system of Saudi Arabia, therefore, operates in connection with three fundamental actors which are the state's authority, jurisprudential practicability and religious approval.

Establishment of the Official Religious Institution
Many bureaucratic and institutional structures have been established, and the religious scholars started to undertake active roles in these official state bodies. After the discovery of oil, the Saudi state has started to implement an institutionalization policy within the administrative and governmental areas of the kingdom including the religious arena. 27 By connecting the rapidly changing economic situation with the modernisation agenda of Saudi government, Eijk states: "In several areas, new legislation was promulgated to keep up with the economic developments and to advance the transformation of Saudi Arabia into a modern nation-state." 28 The institutionalisation policy has enabled the standardisation of the Saudi government's bureaucratic system and strengthened the authority of the ruler within both public and governmental spheres.
The establishment of the Dār al-Iftā' in 1953 as a part of the modernisation process in Saudi Arabia is a historic moment that symbolises the incorporation of the 'ulamā' into the Saudi state machinery. The official foundation procedure of the Dār al-Iftā' has experienced chronological steps which evidence the influence of political atmosphere over the institution. In the first instance, Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Ibrahim Āl al- Shaykh (d.1969) was appointed as the official state Grand Muftī in 1952 by King 'Abd al-'Azīz Ibn 'Abd al-raḥmān Āl-Sa'ūd (d. 1953). 29 Ibrahim Āl al-Shaykh was aware of the necessity of the establishment of a religious institution because the kingdom in almost all of its areas was experiencing the institutionalisation and modernisation process.
In After the abolishment of the office, King faisal began to implement his aspiration regarding the Dār al-Iftā' that was in his 'The Ten Points of reform (al-Nuqādu al-'Ashru li al-Iṣlāḥ)' program. 35 The Ten Points of reform strategy has the following aspirations: 1. To promulgate a fundamental law, establishing the relationship between the ruler and those being ruled, and to define state administration; 2. To regulate the provincial administration; 3. To establish a Ministry of Justice; 4. To establish an iftā' council; 5. To propagate Islam (da'wa); 6. To reform the Committee for Commanding right and forbidding Wrong; 7. To improve the nation's quality of life; 8. To issue new regulations accommodating new social developments and economic changes; 9. To promote financial and economic development; and 10. To abolish slavery in the kingdom. 36 The first six clauses directly relate to organising the religious institutions and a legal system in harmony with the Islamic rulings.
In the third instance, on August 29, 1971, the Dār al-Iftā' was reconfigured in accordance with royal Decree A/137, and two new agencies formed within the structure of the Dār al-Iftā'. These are known as; Hay'at Kibār al-'Ulamā' (Board of Senior 'Ulamā'; henceforth: BSU) and al-Lajna al-Dā'ima lil-Buḥūth al-'Ilmiyya wal-Iftā' (Permanent Committee for Scientific research and Legal Opinion; henceforth: CrLO). King faisal appointed the prestigious and prominent 'ulamā' of the kingdom to these two public institutions in order to serve within the state administration, conduct religious research and issue fatwās. The appointment of the members to these institutions was allocated to the King by the royal Decree A/4, and this considerably restricted the 'ulamā''s area of movement. After the structural alteration, the Dār al-Iftā' assumes, to a great extent, a kind of advisory role within the legal machinery   During the initial period of the kingdom, the Saudi scholars (muftīs) had individually and independently delivered fatwās to the questions of Saudi people since they had practiced iftā' in an informal and traditional manner. As a result of the institutionalisation process, the 'ulamā' gradually started to lose their independency and turned into a semi-independent institution under the authority of the Grand Muftī. However, the 'ulamā' still had their voice and power over the political policies of the state on account of the charismatic and authoritative personality of Ibrahim Āl al-Shaykh. Nonetheless this, the Dār al-Iftā' developed into a state-dependent institution whose jurisdiction and members are all determined by the King, with the reconfiguration of this institution in 1971 and with the reestablishment of the Office of the Grand Muftī in 1993. Today, the BSU and the CrLO, that together function under the authority of the state Grand Muftī, constitute the Dār al-Iftā' which is the highest religious official authority in interpreting the sources of sharī'a and issuing fatwās. 51 Therefore, the offices of BSU and CrLO operate as sub-branches of the Dār al-Iftā' and their activities are contingent upon the approval of the Grand Muftī since the last structural arrangement that was ordered by King fahd.
In being confronted by a novel issue that was not directly addressed by the Qur'anic injunction or textual sources, the 'ulamā instruct the pursuit of a dominant opinion (the approach taken by most Ḥanbalī scholars) or a preferred opinion (the approach based on what is contextually performed or what is socially desirable). It is maintained that both could be employed in accordance with circumstances, but the 'ulamā do not set specific techniques that are recommended for identifying when each approach can be applied. Since its establishment, the Dār al-Iftā' has been carrying out the practice of iftā' to provide the religious knowledge and guidance to Muslims inside and outside Saudi Arabia. The publication and introduction of fatwās to the whole Saudi society resulted in the role of the practice of iftā' changing in a way that it started to become an important instrument of Saudi politicolegal machinery and that it also developed into a mechanism that formulates socially binding norms in addition to legal and judicial regulations. It could be assumed that the overall orientation is itself closely intertwined with the contextual environment that the decisions are grounded within a wider set of social, cultural and political assumptions.
Although the Dār al-Iftā' is not an official part of the regulatory authority, since its establishment it has been functioning as an advisory authority that evaluates issues directed to them in terms of their appropriateness with Islamic law. The official existence of this institution, which has been recognised by Article 45 of the Basic Law of the Governance, refers to the fact that the state has a control-mechanism evaluating the legitimacy of regulations in light of Islamic law. The informal participation of this institution in the regulatory process in many cases alludes to the Islamic character of the Saudi legal system and also crucially enables the public obedience to royal decrees, regulations and laws legislated by the regulatory authorities. It should be noted that there exists a hierarchical mechanism within the Saudi executive and regulatory systems, with the appropriation of the absolute authority of the right to say an ultimate decision upon any issue to the King. The Dār al-Iftā' assumes the role of advisory authority by bringing any matters directed to itself to the table with the intent of producing an Islamic legal opinion (fatwā) or examining their conformity with Islamic law.

The Application of the Practice of Iftā' in the Saudi Politico-Legal Area
The objective of creating the virtuous Muslim society has become the principal religious agenda of Saudi government. 52 The Saudi authorities derive the puritanical religious strategy and the idea of an authentic Muslim state from Ibn Taymiyya's (d. 1328) religious purification opinion and his concept of heretical innovation (bid'a). 53 religious organisations of Saudi Arabia, in harmony with this policy, seek to propagate their practices and tenets outside their own country with the aim of achieving universal religious expansion. This religious strategy has been achieved by publishing religious literature or establishing international religious organisations. The international religious foundations that are supported by the Saudi state, therefore, place particular emphasis upon the establishment of operational Islamic legal systems. The success of government policy regarding religion could be evaluated with reference to the spread of these publications and the international expansion of Wahhābī based religious interpretation.
Saudi Arabia is one of Muslim countries that applies Islamic law in its legal system, so the country's legal system is based on the Qur'an and Sunna. Since the Saudi constitution is rooted within the Quran and Sunna, it can be argued that the country's legal system carries the influence of the official religious institution. 54 The Dār al-Iftā' has the highest religious authority and is responsible for issuing Islamic legal opinions and rules based on Islamic legal sources. Article 45 states: "The Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) shall be the sources for fatwas (religious advisory rulings) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The law shall specify the hierarchical organisations for the composition of the Council of Senior Ulama, the research Administration of religious Affairs, and the Office of Mufti, together with their jurisdictions." 55 The article establishes that the institution must be accepted as the main interpretative mechanism of Islamic legal sources, and the institution is arranged in a hierarchical order. The Articles concerned with religious issues evince two main pillars that the Saudi state was superimposed upon: the political authority ('umarā') and the religious authority ('ulamā'). It is worth noting that the essential character of two pillars might be considered as a reflection of the classical siyāsa shar'iyya doctrine of Islamic law which was designed by Ibn Taymiyya. 56 Vogel, who connects the Saudi state structure with Ibn Taymmiyya's opinion, quotes from him, "Those in command ('ulū al-amr) are of two types: the scholars ('ulamā) and the rulers (umarā'). If they are sound, the people are sound but, if they are corrupt, the people are corrupt." 57 The political doctrine of siyāsa shar'iyya was formulated by Muslim scholars with the intent of providing social and political stability within any Muslim community. Ibn Taymiyya is one of the prominent Muslim scholars who formulated this political doctrine within the Ḥanbalī school of law. In his view, an Islamic state should be ruled by two equal authorities: 'umarā' and 'ulamā'. 58 The former should govern the society by implementing Islamic law while the latter should oversee the governance of rulers. This political doctrine was resurrected by 'Abd al-Wahhab in order to build an 54 "Basic Law of Governance," Article 1 and 7. 55 "Basic Law of Governance," Article 45. 56 The doctrine of siyāsa shar'iyya is a fundamental legal doctrine that establishes the relationship between the ruler and his subjects in an Islamic state. The term refers to the political authority of making regulations that give benefit to the governed community and do not contradict with the general principles of religion or sharī'a. See, H. Yunus Apaydın, "Siyāset-i Şer'iyye," TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi 37 (2009): 299-304; Vogel, Islamic Law, 173. 57 Vogel, Islamic Law, 203, 207. 58 Ahmad Ibn 'Abd al-Ḥalīm Ibn Taymiyya, Al-Siyāsa al-Sharriyya fī Iṣlāḥi al-Rā'ī wa al-Ra'iyya (riyadh: Wezārat al-Shu'ūn al-Islāmiyya wa al-Da'wa wa al-Irshād al-Su'ūdiyya, 1988), 5-10. alliance between the Saud family and the Wahhābī religious establishment. At the beginning of the 19 th century, King Āl-Sa'ūd broadly used the established alliance as an efficient tool to consolidate the substructure of the Saudi state. Taking into consideration the complementary function of the alliance, the concept of religious innovation (bid'a) was applied persuasively by 'Abd al-Wahhab and the Saud family in order to justify the rebellion against the present authorities of that time and to control the religious understanding of the society. 59 Since the territory of Saudi Arabia was governed by the Ottoman Sultanate before the establishment of the kingdom, the extreme interpretation of Wahhābī scholars concerning religious orders produced a justification to rebel against the official authority. 60 The Wahhābī religious movement and the interpretation of siyāsa shar'iyya doctrine therefore provided some benefits to the Saudi ruling elite to erect the Saudi state on sound footings. 61 Within contemporary Saudi Arabia, the practice of iftā' (which is performed by the Dār al-Iftā') has visible and invisible influences concerning the relationship between the 'umarā' and 'ulamā' in three fundamental areas; judicial, constitutional and politico-legal. 62 In the first instance, Wahhābīsm, as rasheed states, was applied by the Saudi royal family as an identity maker in the nation building process. 63 The region could be likened to being a patchwork that consisted of a number of different tribes, sectarian groups and social clans, each of which has its own distinctive characters and identities. It is obvious that the doctrine of siyāsa shar'iyya is the most important instrument in the hands of authority-holders, which renders the state as the final authority even on religious matters. The official fatwās issued by the Dār al-Iftā' provide a flexible legal mechanism that promotes the relationship between politics, religion and society; this institutes one of the most important legal sources of the Saudi State whose scope extends across a range of political, religious and social issues. Hence, the teachings of Wahhābīsm were introduced as an influential and consolidative tool that give the Saudi people a common identity.
In the second instance, the Saudi ruling elite, as Büyükkara states, used this religious movement and political doctrine to legitimate its rule over the territory. 64 A more than 250-years alliance between the 'umarā' and 'ulamā' has enabled ingraining a kind of state ideology in which the state is in need of a religiously legal statement or consent when making any decision regarding the state, society and politics. In this alliance, the Saudi government has gotten the upper hand over the 'ulamā'. Therefore, the 'ulamā' came to be subservient to the ruling family when they began to operate as government functionaries within the borders of the Dār al-Iftā' which is state-dependent as the highest religious institution. 65 As a case in point, the political tension between King Sa'ūd 'Abd al-'Azīz and Crown Prince faisal increased in the 1960s which resulted in the abdication of King Sa'ūd in favour of Crown Prince faisal in 1964. 66 After the palace revolution, Crown Prince faisal and his allies asked a fatwā from the head of the Dār al-Iftā' on 29 March 1964 in order to legalize his authoritative position. Twelve respectable 'ulamā including Ibrahim Āl al-Shaykh issued a fatwā confirming Prince faisal as the ruler of the kingdoms' internal and external affairs and preserving the honourable position of the ousted King, Sa'ūd 'Abd al-'Azīz. 67 In a manner that was similar to faisal's, on 21 June 2017, Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman requested a fatwā from the religious institution in order to consolidate his governmental position after the death of his father. 68 The issued fatwās aimed to legalise the new status of the rulers depending on recent and contemporary political changes without offering a detailed methodology or textual sources. The roles of the 'ulamā and fatwās in these sensitive political circumstances slightly alter in accordance with the provisions set out by the kingdom and symbolise their obedience to the ruler. Despite the fact that the independent character of the 'ulamā' has incrementally eroded, the Saudi Government required and still requires, their approving consent regarding the religious nature of the state.
Last but not least, the ruling family has used Wahhābīsm as a social control mechanism that forms and monitors the Saudi people's social or private lives. 69 This is achieved through the official institutions, such as the Sharī'a courts and the Committee for Encouraging Virtue and Preventing Vice (known as mutawwi'a). 70 All of which have forcefully and formally enforced the official Wahhābī scholars' strict (or more generally literal) interpretation of the Qur'an and Sunna. The 'ulamā applied the practice of iftā' to promulgate and impose their legal thought within Saudi Arabia. The doctrine of siyāsa shar'iyya establishes how the fear of anarchy and civil war influenced the contemporary official 'ulamā' when they addressed themselves to the fundamental legal doctrine that formulizes the relationship between the government and its subjects. Obligatory obedience to the Saudi Government ensures political stability and enables the 'ulamā' to retain their position in the state and implement their interpretation of Islamic law in Saudi society. Throughout time, the key elements of social and legal order have been provided with the fatwās which are based upon the literal legal understanding of the 'ulamā'. In this respect, it can be observed that the mechanism of iftā' has become an instrumental element for unifying the nation, legitimising political decisions and controlling the population.
That is to say, the fatwās turned into imposing and enforcing social, religious, political and legal regulations over time with the Dār al-Iftā''s authorisation of issuing fatwās. In addition to this, the Dār al-Iftā' and its fatwās come informally into play within the politico-legal area whenever the Saudi government faces any complex issue that needs religious legitimation. This demonstrates that the 'ulamā' play an important role in placating the populace's resentment and in legitimating the policies of the Saudi government. With regard to the relationship between the official 'ulamā' (in particular the BSU) and the Saudi government, it is conceivable that their relationship will continue for the foreseeable future. The approval of new rulers, the prohibition of public protests and the royal decree that restricts the right to issue fatwās both provide clear evidence of a reciprocal relationship that continues to function. 71 The protection extended by the ruling dynasty therefore, to a certain extent, enables the highest official religious authority to continue to exercise authoritative power. Upon this basis, it may be argued that the Wahhābī doctrine of siyāsa shar'iyya provides the most active, elastic and influential mechanism that grounds the mutual partnership between the official religious institution and the government while also promoting social stability in the Saudi Kingdom.

Conclusion
The interdependency between the 'ulamā' (religious scholars) and 'umarā' (political leaders) establishes them as the principal agents charged with determining and controlling the interpretation of Islamic legal sources and the content of legal regulations that govern the life of Saudi society. The dynamic interaction of religious legitimacy and state authority also strengthens the position of institutions in the eyes of the Saudi community. However, different circumstances and contexts have conceivably impacted their authority and the legitimate scope of their intervention. After the historical alliance between Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhāb and Muḥammad Ibn Sa'ūd was first established in 1744, changing circumstances have produced shifts in the relationship between the Saudi regime and the scholars. It is important to acknowledge this mutual dependence of 'ulamā' and 'umarā' because it continues to influence the interaction of religion and politics both in internal and external affairs of the Saudi government.
The interdependence of religion and state clearly echoes the Wahhābī doctrine of siyāsa shar'iyya. This political doctrine of modern Wahhābīsm sustains an ideology which establishes that religious power is to be exercised by the 'ulamā' in cooperation with political figures who act pragmatically and accordingly enjoy a considerable degree of legal legitimacy as a result. It is therefore clear that the Islamic decisions and fatwās of Dār al-Iftā' legitimise the Saudi government's activities, juridical stances, political strategies and social interactions. In times of conflict, the state authorities put religion into play as a control mechanism that finds its roots within the functional alliance between 'ulamā' and 'umarā' concept. The symbolic alliance also provides considerable insight into the Saudi-Wahhābī connection and their mutual coexistence as semi-autonomous bodies within contemporary Saudi Arabia. It could be assumed that the overall orientation is itself closely intertwined with the contextual environment and that the decisions are grounded within a wider set of social, cultural and political assumptions. It is hoped that the analysis of the relationship between 'ulamā' and 'umarā' within contemporary Saudi Arabia will stimulate further research about the role of inextricably united authorities. The current study points towards the need for further research which should deepen readers' understanding of the ways in which the rulers authorised particularly government systems, have sought to utilise religious institutions within their control mechanism.