Foundation, NJ U. S. A
If we want to make a balanced comparison between
Islamic and other views in the field of polity
and form of government we should make a review
of the important issues in the philosophy of
politics, and on every issue find out what is
the view of Islam, comparing it with the other
views. We must make a detailed investigation of
the basic differences between them. Very
briefly, we will now mention some issues and
explain the views of Islam pertaining to them in
order that it may be possible to make a
comparison.
The first issue is the importance of social
life. Islam, like the other schools of thought,
emphasizes social life. But more than this it
considers it a duty to attend to social problems
and to struggle for the benefit of all human
beings. Being indifferent to such problems is
considered in Islam to be a grave sin. This
attention is so important that it sometimes
becomes necessary to spend all of one's property
and even to endanger one's own life to save
others from worldly and other-worldly
afflictions and harms, from going astray and
from spiritual corruption, and from misfortune
in the next life. It is unlikely that any school
of thought other than Islam has advanced this
idea so far. Of course, we believe that none of
the heavenly religions have any disagreement on
basic principles and rules. Naturally, they hold
this view in common with Islam.
The second issue is the necessity of law for
social life, since no society can survive
without rules and social regulations, for
otherwise it would soon succumb to chaos,
deterioration and destruction. The view of Islam
on this matter is also clear and does not Stand
in need of an explanation. We should however,
mention two points. The first point is that from
the perspective of Islam, the goal of law is not
only to bring about social order and discipline,
but beyond this to maintain social justice;
because, firstly, without justice the order
would not be durable and the masses of the
people would not tolerate injustice and
oppression for ever; and secondly, in a society
not governed by justice most people would not
have the opportunity for desired growth and
development and hence, the goal of man's
creation and social life would not be realized.
Another point is that, from the Islamic
viewpoint, social laws should be such as to
prepare the ground and context for the spiritual
growth and eternal felicity of the people. At
the very least they should not be inconsistent
with spiritual development, for, in the view of
Islam, the life of this world is but a passing
phase of the entire human life which despite its
short duration, has a fundamental role in human
destiny. That is, it is in this phase that with
his conscious behaviour the human being should
prepare for himself his everlasting felicity or
wretchedness. Even if a law could maintain the
social order in this world but would cause
eternal misfortune for humans, from this Islamic
view it would not be a desirable law, even if it
were to be accepted by the majority.
The third issue is how and by whom the law
should be legislated. The accepted theory in
most current societies is that the laws should
be legislated and approved by the people
themselves or their representatives. Since the
consensus of all the people or of their
representatives is practically impossible, the
view of the majority (even if merely half plus
one) is the criteria for the validity of the
law.
This theory, first of all, is based on the idea
that the goal of law is to satisfy the people's
needs, not to provide that which would truly
benefit them. Secondly, since it is impossible
to have unanimous agreement, we should suffice
with the opinion of the majority. However, the
first idea mentioned is not accepted by Islam,
for many people wish to satisfy their bestial
instincts and temporary lusts without thinking
of their disastrous consequences.
Usually the number of such people is at least
one half plus one, so the social laws would be
dictated by the desires of such people.
It is obvious that the schools which believe in
a goal beyond animal lust and base desire will
not be able to condone this idea.
With regard to the second idea, that is, the
validity of the vote of the majority in the
absence of unanimity, it should be said that
only in absence of a deciding divine and
intellectual criterion can the majority be the
criterion for preferring an opinion. However, in
the Islamic system there do exist such divine
and intellectual criteria. In addition, usually
a powerful minority, by using the facilities for
widespread propaganda, has an important role in
channeling the thoughts and beliefs of others,
and in fact what is approved is only the desire
of a limited but powerful minority, not the true
desire of the majority or of all the people.
Furthermore, if the criterion is that the
people's choice would be valid for themselves,
why shouldn't we also accept the choice of a
minority as valid for itself, even if it would
result in a type of autonomy? In this case, what
would be the logical justification for
governments to oppose the wishes of some social
groups which they rule by force?!
From the perspective of Islam with regard to
this problem, laws should be legislated in such
a way that they procure the benefits of the
members of the society, particularly of those
who desire to improve themselves and to gain
eternal felicity. It is obvious that such law
should be legislated by one who has enough
knowledge about the real and eternal benefits of
humans, and, secondly, who does not sacrifice
the benefits of others for his personal
interests and vain desires. It is obvious that
there is no one wiser than Almighty God, Who has
no need of His servants or their works, and Who
has provided divine legislation only for the
sake of benefitting them. Certainly, the social
laws described in the heavenly revealed books do
not explicitly state all the social rules which
are necessary for every time and place, but
religious law does provide a general framework
for the derivation of regulations necessary for
changing conditions of time and place, and, at
least by observing the limits delineated by this
framework it may be possible to avoid falling
into the deadly valley of eternal perdition.
The fourth issue is that of who should enforce
social law.
Islam, like most other political schools,
requires the existence of a State as a power
which is able to prevent violations of the law,
and the lack of the State is equivalent to the
suspension of law, chaos, and the violation of
the rights of the weak.
It is obvious that there are two fundamental
qualifications for administrators of the law,
particularly for the one at the top of the
pyramid of power: first, sufficient knowledge of
the law in order to prevent infringement of it
due to ignorance; and second, self-control over
his desires in order to prevent the intentional
misapplication of the law. Other qualifications,
like administrative acumen, courage, and so on,
can be considered as supplementary requirements.
Naturally, the ideal is that the administrator
of the law should generally be without
ignorance, selfishness, and other vices, and
such a person is one who, in religious
terminology, is called ma'sum (infallible). All
Muslims believe in the infallibility of the
Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be
upon him and upon his progeny, and the Shi'ites
also believe in the infallibility of the Imams,
peace be upon them. In the absence of an
infallible one, these criteria should be
observed, to the extent possible, for the
selection of the leader as well as for lower
positions in the official hierarchy in a
proportionate manner.
Basically, the basis of the thesis of Wiláyat-e
faqih (lit., guardianship of the jurisprudent
meeting all the requisite requirements) is the
proposition that a person who is nearer to the
station of infallibility should occupy the
position of the infallible one, i.e. on top of
the pyramid of power, in order that this
position may be occupied by one with the best
knowledge of the precepts and laws and their
fundamental bases, one who has the most piety
and self-control. By means of these two basic
qualifications (jurisprudence and piety) it is
at least possible that he will be less likely
intentionally or unintentionally to transgress
against the law of Islam.
Another point which may be raised here is that
from an Islamic perspective no human has any
intrinsic right to rule over another, even if he
issues valid and just decrees, for all people,
like other creatures, have been created and are
the property of Almighty God, and no one may
interfere with another's property without his
permission. A human being has no right even to
use his own bodily parts in a manner contrary to
God's will and consequently he cannot allow
others to do so. Hence, the only one Who Himself
has an absolute right to govern and to depose of
anyone and anything is Almighty God. Every
authority andwiláyah should be from Him or at
least with His sanction. It is obvious that
Almighty God would never permit anyone to
execute the law without having the necessary
knowledge of His laws, or without there being a
guarantee of the correctness of his deeds and
obedience to the divine laws, or without piety
and the necessary moral qualifications.
On the other hand, we know that except for the
prophets and their selected successors, no one
else was specifically designated by Almighty God
to execute the law and to govern. So, people
must try to find persons who resemble the
prophets and the Ma'súmún (infallible ones) as
closely as possible. It seems that the best way
is first to select committed experts of religion
(pious jurists), and then to allow them to
select from among themselves the best one, for
the experts may more correctly identify the
best.
Such selection is safer from defects of an
intentional or unintentional character.
It also has become clear that the political
features of Islam derive from the basic elements
of the world view of Islam and its view of man.
That is, the emphasis on the just character of
law and its harmony with human spiritual
development derives from the view that God
Almighty created all mankind in order that
people may follow the way of development toward
nearness to God and eternal felicity by their
meritorious conduct in life. The right of all
humans to happiness and the enjoyment of the
blessings of this world exist in order that all
may advance on the way of their development in a
better and speedier manner. The legislation of
the divine laws and religious principles,
whether they apply to the individual or society,
is for determining the basic outlines of this
path. The conditions of expertise in law and
piety, in addition to other necessary
administrative qualifications, is for securing
the necessary conditions for the general
development of the people, for reaching eternal
felicity and for preventing intentional and
unintentional deviation from the correct way of
social life.
We are hopeful that God Almighty will grant all
of us Ibis opportunity to thank Him for all His
blessings, and for the blessing of His law and
guidance toward the life of felicity which we
seek.
courtesy:
www.islamtimes.org