Ahlul Bayt (AS) News Agency - ABNA: The 9th International Pre-Meeting of the 6th Imam Reza (AS) Global Congress, focused on the theme "Human Rights and Dignity in the Civilizational Teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt (AS) with an Emphasis on the Teachings of Imam Reza (AS)," featured a presentation by UK-based scholar Shaykh Jaffer Ali Ladak, a researcher and former Imam of Jama'at at the Hyderi Islamic Center, Hujjat Mosque in London, and Baab ul Ilm Mosque in Leeds. His paper was delivered within a panel discussion and was titled: "The Right to Ethical Governance: Political Legitimacy in the View of Imam al-Reza (AS)."
He began his speech by reciting verses from the Holy Quran (Surah Taha, 20:70-73): "So the magicians fell down in prostration, declaring, ‘We believe in the Lord of Aaron and Moses.’ Pharaoh threatened, ‘How dare you believe in him before I give you permission? He must be your master who taught you magic. I will certainly cut off your hands and feet on opposite sides, and crucify you on the trunks of palm trees. You will really see whose punishment is more severe and more lasting.’ They responded, ‘By the One Who created us! We will never prefer you over the clear proofs that have come to us. So do whatever you want! Your authority only covers the fleeting life of this world. Indeed, we have believed in our Lord...'"
He then addressed the audience: "Awaiters of the savior of humanity – Imam Mehdi, my respected teachers, brothers, and sisters, Assalamu alaikum to all of you. First and foremost, thank you to the organizers for inviting us to this esteemed Congress and giving us the opportunity to learn more about Imam al-Reza (AS), first for ourselves and then to carry his flag to the rest of the world."
He defined the scope of his discussion: "Politics, in its material and worldly sense, is a mix of power, dominion, and profiteering, and in this meaning politics can be summarized as the activities of acquiring, maintaining, distributing, and transferring power. On the other hand, if we consider status and resources as a divine trust, politics in its ethical sense are the activities of redistributing power, achieving justice, ensuring freedoms and independence, and the flourishing of the planet. In this sense, politics will have a loftier essence than its material counterpart, which is its ethical governance. Ethical politics, therefore, can only be achieved if trustworthy and vigilant agents are appointed to safeguard these objectives and act as guardrails against the transgression of norms and boundaries."
He introduced a core narration: "Amongst the treasures left to us by the eighth Imam, Imam Ali ibn Musa al-Reza (AS), is a statement by which the governed can seek to nominate, review, and appoint ethical leadership, and those seeking to be in government can verify whether they should hold a position in public office. Imam Reza (AS), in one of his ahadith, says: 'The trustworthy wouldn’t betray you, but you place your trust in the betrayer.'"
He provided the immediate historical context: "The immediate context of this narration was to counteract the deep confusion of the Muslim, and particularly Shia, communities upon the appointment of Imam Reza (AS) as the heir apparent to the Caliph, by then King Mamun Al Rashid Al Abbasi. After ousting their rivals, the Ummayads, Banu Abbas used the position for wars to consolidate power, to use up wealth, to widely imprison, and murder their rivals. To see Imam al-Reza (AS) seated next to the Caliph and accept the position of working for the government confounded many Shia, especially when hearing narrations from Imam Reza (AS) such as: 'Any type of cooperation with the tyrannical government is a blasphemy against Allah; even gazing intentionally, i.e., positively, in the direction of an illegitimate tyrant ruler is one of the great sins deserving of hellfire.'"
He elaborated on the confusion: "How can it be that on one hand Imam al-Reza (AS) says even gazing intentionally, positively at the tyrant is worthy of hellfire, and yet on the other side Imam al-Reza (AS) is now accepting the position of heir apparent to Mamun al Rashid? Many Shia people were very confused about this. Many believed that Mamun was being an honest actor, but by appointing Imam Reza (AS), Mamun burgeoned his image further by involving himself in religious debates, such as whether the Quran was eternal, and arguing for the rights of Imam Ali (AS) as the first successor to the Prophet (SAW)."
He explained the Imam's purpose: "To counteract this naivety amongst some Shia, Imam Reza (AS) provided this eternal maxim that could resolve the growing softness towards Mamun Rashid, reaffirming the need to fully trust the knowledge and the decisions of the Imam Reza (AS), even if some of them may not know that his position as the heir apparent was only by the force of threat. He stated the trustworthy one, in this context, i.e., the Imam (AS), will not betray, meaning that no matter the circumstance of the Imam, he is always taking care of the interests of humanity at large, of the religion, of the ummah, and of the Shia, yet you trust the betrayer, meaning the simplest act of propaganda or misdirection from the Caliph, who has spent his entire life destroying the religion and attacking the faithful, somehow has been sufficient to beguile you. Just by his appointing Imam Reza (AS), it is sufficient to make you think that everything he has done in the past has now been wiped clean. By offering what may be understood as general guidance, Imam Reza (AS) could rectify the misapprehensions of his followers, who could interpret it specifically and understand the context of Imam Reza (AS) without earning the wrath of Mamun al Rashid directly. This was in its immediate historical context."
He then expanded the maxim to a universal political principle: "Beyond this immediate context, up until now, this eternal maxim offers a principle toward understanding Islamic political legitimacy and the right to ethical governance—something that should be enshrined in all political systems but regrettably is not—that trustworthiness, integrity, and reliability are pivotal features of a political system and are necessary characteristics for any candidate seeking political office. Conversely, treachery, deception, and acting in bad faith preclude a person from access to political office, and the public must never place their trust in such a candidate."
He detailed further implications gleaned from the maxim: "First is the stark reminder of the number of politicians and media outlets that seek public trust without sufficient review, or the number of politicians or media outlets that constantly lie and yet, after maybe one truth, may now be considered trustworthy—how can that be the case? Second, Imam (AS) addresses the tendency to rush to judgment in accepting the declarations and manifestos of candidates without proper reflection, or being at the mercy of one’s emotions towards candidates. Third, the track record and nature of a person must be considered in one’s decision-making. Philosophically speaking, we may say that from everything there is an expectation of something; this is the nature of creation. It is in the nature of the snake to bite you, it is in the nature of the betrayer to betray you; therefore, this must be expected, and to consider that something else will come from a betrayer is political ignorance and is unacceptable in the Islamic system. Fourth, the presence of untrustworthy individuals in public office significantly affects trust in government and reduces public participation in politics."
He returned to the opening Quranic verses: "The sequence of verses that I read to you at the beginning of the discussion come from chapter number 20 of Surah Taha, verses number 70 to 73. In this sequence, the magicians have seen a clear sign of Prophet Musa (AS), and they fall prostrate before Allah. Pharaoh goes on to do three things. One, he tries to show his power over the magicians: 'Do you believe before I have given you permission?' Two, he lies directly about the magicians. Previously, he was the one who sought these magicians because they were the best in the land; now he falsely accuses them and lies in front of the entirety of the gathering. Three, he threatens them with the most violent of deaths: 'I will cut you from opposite sides of your hands and legs, and I will then crucify you.' Look at this: when a group of people have understood the difference between ethical governance and non-ethical governance, between truth and falsehood, nothing can affect them. As a result of this awakening and understanding of ethical governance and the rights that people have to it, they will always want to oppose the Pharaoh or the Pharaonic regime. 'By the One who created us, we will never prefer you, Pharaoh, over the clear proofs that have come to us.' There is a choice, but by that choice—seeing the lack of ethics within Pharaoh or his system, his lying, his aggression, his violence, his destruction—the choice is clear to the people. Imam Reza (AS) is giving us this understanding: that the basis of ethical governance is to have those who are Ameen (trustworthy) and not those who are Khain (traitors)."
He outlined the content of his full paper: "Based on the above discussion we had, the paper, which shall be able to present, seeks to gather relevant Islamic sources—the Quran, the hadith corpus, especially those ahadith of Imam Reza (AS)—and scholarly opinion on the subject of political legitimacy and the right to ethical governance. In the paper, eight narrations from ahadith, including four from Imam Reza (AS), discussing elements of ensuring political legitimacy and the right to ethical governance, will be offered, including a brief commentary on each hadith. Collectively, they seek to provide a holistic picture of the Islamic heritage, religious conditions placed upon political candidacy, and the Islamic body politic."
He discussed the internal implications for the Islamic world: "From an internal perspective, from the perspective of the Islamic ummah, knowledge of these conditions of what makes a candidate legitimate affirms the principle of political legitimacy and the right to ethical governance in Islam. This then becomes a necessary feature of an Islamic political system, owing to the sheer volume of narrations in this area, and its various dimensions become the criteria upon which politics is based. Further, this could transform the field of political candidacy by raising expectations and requirements for leadership positions within the Muslim world."
He then provided an external critique, comparing Islamic standards to liberal democracy: "From an external perspective, outside the theory of Islamic politics, it sheds light on other political systems and their ethical limitations, such as liberal democracy, that whilst holding strong ethical positions—such as the prohibition of government from discrimination against groups or individuals—does not include a minimum standard of honesty or integrity as a requirement for participation in politics. There is no requirement for this, or worded differently, candidates who demonstrate a lack of ethical quality are not precluded from candidacy in liberal democracy, and as a result the traitor is allowed to stand for political office."
He concluded with a pointed example regarding the United States: "In the very first presentation that you heard this morning, something very interesting was mentioned. The speaker said that in the entire lifespan of the United States of America, it has not been at war only for 20 years. This is a correct statement. However, there is an interesting paper which is published by Harvard University, the publisher by the name of John H. Coatsworth, and he wrote a paper titled: United States Interventions: What For? Why do they constantly intervene? What is it that is wrong with this country that makes it so aggressive, devoid of ethics? He says in the first paragraph that in slightly less than 100 years, from 1898 to 1994, the US government has intervened successfully to change governments in Latin America at least 41 times. In less than 100 years, they have changed governments—they have forcibly changed other governments in one region of the world, just Latin America, 41 times. That is once every 28 months, meaning in just over two years the United States of America participates in a coup to overthrow a government, just in one region, let alone the rest of the world."
He concluded his argument by reiterating the core distinction: "The moment a candidate is without ethics and is untrustworthy in the Islamic system, they must be barred from public participation, but this is not present elsewhere in other political systems such as liberal democracy. Therefore, as many political systems continue to suffer from corruption and vile candidates, the presence of a right to ethical governance and a minimal standard of being trustworthy, as per the statement of Imam Reza (AS), may reshape governance not only within the Islamic world but also around the world."
Your Comment