لطفا منتظر باشید ...
Selection and/or Election
Question:
The Prophet Mohammad,
(pbuh), upon his last
pilgrimage, appointed
Hazrat Ali as his successor.
Why was he
not elected later on?
Answer:
In
my opinion, this is a very fundamental question.
The whole of Shi'ism can be found in
the answer. In other words, it
is a very delicate issue and one should
not give a brief reply. I will
try, as far as is possible, within
the limitation of time and place, to
clarify the point. I just want to emphasize
that this is my own
personal point of view. When we are
dealing with the reality and the
Truth of religion, we must reflect
more and give them careful
consideration .
This problem is really a fundamental
one. When we look at the
collection of reasons which our Sunni
brothers present in confirming
their point of view after the Prophet
of Islam, we find many reasons
which seem true and are True. On the
other hand, if we look
through the eyes of an objective scholar
and take into account the
reasonings the Shi'ites give to confirm
their ideas, we will conclude
that the majority of Shi'ite reasonings
also seem correct, deep and
firm. Therefore, how is it possible
that two groups who think in
opposite and contradictory terms which
conflict with each other both
seem to be right in the arguments they
use?
In general terms, the main argument
of our Sunni brothers is this:
If anyone should have been appointed
after the Prophet of Islam by
God, just as the Prophet was obliged
to announce and teach the
verses of the Qoran clearly, carefully
and in a way so that they could
not be denied, he also had a duty to
show the same care and clarity in
announcing the successor who had been
appointed by God in order
to prevent any plot, rejection, explanation
or interpretation which
may occur in the future.
But we see that circumstances were
such that, after the Prophet,
not only did the Emigrants [the people
who migrated with the
Prophet from Mecca to Medina and who
cast their votes for other
Caliphs as well] but also the Helpers,
that is, the citizens of Medina,
gathered in Saqifoh [area belonging
to the Sa'ebah tribe] to them-
selves elect the Caliph.
It becomes clear, then, that all of
the Moslems in Medina felt that
they should elect the leader among
themselves. That is, they should
select the Prophet's successor.
Our Sunni brothers, in order to prove
their argument, also
mention the point that the Prophet,
in the last moments of his life,
intended to write out a statement clarifying
the matter of succession,
but because of the protests, he abandoned
his intention to write such
a statement. Therefore, if he had had
the mission to write such an
official decree from God, he could
not have overlooked it just because
this or that person protested or argued
against it and so he did not
announce that Hazrat Ali had been appointed
by God as the
Prophet's successor.
Our Sunni brothers also say that although
Ali did protest the
election of the Caliph and even a few
months later did not officially
approve the decision, later on he did
confirm it and for whatever
reason, officially accepted them.
Therefore, if the position of Ali,
like that of prophecy, came from
God, in no way, form or terms could
Ali give his approval to anyone
else. Thus he could not officially
approve of another person as his
own successor.
But the argument of Shi'ism goes like
this: The succession to the
Prophet differs from a political successor.
The Prophet did not just
hold a political position, as to lead
us to claim to say that he did not
have the right to appoint his successor
and people should elect the
one who is to govern them, one after
another. But the Prophet, as a
thinker, master, and teacher was not
appointed by the people so that
his successor should also be selected
by them.
The Prophet was appointed by God. Therefore,
even if all of the
people do not accept that he is the
Prophet and even if not one person
gave the Prophet of Islam his vote.
still the Prophet of Islam ;R the
Prophet of Islam and even if all people
were to give their vote to him,
his position would not be strengthened
in the least way. The fact of
the matter is that the station of prophethood
is not a popularly,
elective office. It is not a power
which people give to a person. Thus a
Prophet is not an elected individual.
It is for this reason that his
mission and the continuity of his movement
must be put into the
hands of a successor who is qualified
for the same type of leadership
and mission as that of the Prophet
himself.
For example, in a city, the mayor of
that city takes his power from
the people and is elected by them.
When he dies or his term ends, the
people choose another mayor to replace
him. But when a teacher has
brought a new school of thought into
being where he gives a special
class, and no one else can teach that
class the way he can, and he has
initiated that particular approach,
when a group of his students
gather around him and have found faith
in him, it is the teacher who
recognizes which of his students or
friends is most worthy to continue
his teaching. A teacher or a professor
is not selected from the votes of
the people. It is a teacher who selects
another teacher and this is a
method that all people accept.
If an expert cardiologist is going
on a trip, the people cannot hold
a referendum to choose another person
as a cardiologist. People
cannot decide who is an expert in this
area and they may select
someone who knows nothing about the
heart. It is the cardiologist
who knows who can perform his job in
his absence. It is for this
reason that the majority of people,
not all of them, listen to his
recommendation and approve the person
he appoints. This is true all
over the world.
Therefore, if the Prophet of Islam
had only been a political power,
others could select someone as his
successor. But he was a moral
power and an expert, who was not selected
by the people and who
had a very special divine mission and
had the right to tell the people
