Introduction
This study explores the concept of security within the tradition of Iranian political advice literature, with a particular focus on Saadi’s Bustan. Persian literature played an important role in shaping a form of political thought where writers sought to caution rulers by appealing to ethical principles and the best interests of both rulers and the public. Among these, Saadi’s Bustan stands out as a text that offers a distinctive political perspective, representing a shift within the tradition of Iranian political advice literature. Saadi’s view is grounded in a unique understanding of human nature. He locates the legitimacy and grandeur of political power in the people, urging rulers to prioritize the public good and protect their subjects.
Due to Saadi’s distinctive anthropology and his different view of the basis of political legitimacy, his writings present a different conception of security—one that can be called “human security” or “people-centered security.”
Building on this new perspective on politics and legitimacy, and drawing on Saadi’s unique ideas about human nature, this paper seeks to identify the security guidelines embedded in Bustan.
 
Methodology
This study uses a qualitative approach with thematic analysis. We employ a three-stage coding process—open coding, axial coding, and selective coding—to carefully examine the text of Bustan and identify the security-related themes that are woven throughout.
 
Discussion and Results
Saadi’s understanding of security is deeply rooted in his political anthropology. While he recognizes that political power in Iran was traditionally pastoral, absolute, and despotic, he introduces a significant shift in Iranian political advice literature by grounding political legitimacy in the people rather than in the ruler alone.
For Saadi, a secure society is the natural outcome of just and fair governance. Security depends on rulers exercising power through a framework of values and concepts that prioritize justice. The ruler must understand that his power comes from the people and must use it to create a just and secure society. He must take into account the needs of different social classes, seek counsel from elders and youth alike, respect both warriors and scholars, rely on knowledge and wisdom, employ capable individuals, act wisely against enemies, punish those who threaten public safety, and support foreigners, merchants, and traders to foster a positive image of the country internationally.
From Saadi’s perspective, a secure society is the direct result of such responsible and just governance. Security is the ruler’s responsibility, and the people remain the primary security referent object.
 
Conclusion
In Bustan, security emerges as a complex, multi-dimensional concept fundamentally shaped by the ruler’s approach to governance. If rulers govern based on divine will, immutable natural laws, and the transient nature of human life—while upholding principles like justice, fairness, wisdom, tolerance, and public welfare—they can ensure social security and peace. Saadi insists that security and peace are unattainable without these elements.
Since Saadi lived in an era when monarchs held absolute and unchecked power, he used ideas like fatalism, immutable natural laws, and human mortality to remind rulers that political power is a tool meant to protect and serve the people—not a personal, divine right or an inherited privilege. Political power, in this view, belongs collectively to society and must be used for the common good.
This understanding of political power, where legitimacy depends on the consent of the governed, anticipates key ideas of modern political thought and remains highly relevant today. In a time when states dominate politics and security is mainly defined in national terms, the concept of human security—which can be traced back to classical texts like Bustan—offers a valuable alternative.
By shifting the focus of security to ordinary people—once seen as “subjects” but now acknowledged as citizens—and basing rulers’ legitimacy on their consent and support, this approach puts the safety and well-being of the people at the core of policymaking. This shift in political legitimacy—from divine right to popular approval—places the security and comfort of citizens at the very center of governance.