Sharia Politics or the Royal Circle
Islamic Education 34
Imam Dhahabi has written about Imam Zayn al-Abidin in his Siyar al-Alam al-Nublaa
By God, he was a person of the Great Imamate, that is, a person of the Caliphate. He was superior, superior, superior, and more deserving than the Caliph of that time in all outward and inward aspects.
However, he did not participate in the Sharia politics of that time.
And the same was the case with all the Imams of the Sadat after him, but they also did not participate in Sharia politics.
Even during the reign of Mr. Ghaus al-Pak, there was a Caliphate, but he also did not participate in Sharia politics.
This is only the case of the Imams of the Sadat.
The rest, except for them, who were scholars and saints, who were deserving of the Caliphate in every respect, did not participate in politics. Their religion was also complete and their faith was a thousand times stronger than the political scholars of today.
So, those who participate in non-Sharia democracy today, should not take part in the basis of religion. And what will they say about these great sages, saints and scholars?
Imam Ahmad was tested by the temptation of the creation of the Quran, but no Imam, no scholar, no saint, no mujtahid thought of rebellion or entering politics.
Although at that time there were also mujtahids and there were many saints.
One of the attributes of Allah, the Lord of Glory, was being called a creation. The essence of Allah, the Lord of Glory, was attacked.
But no Imam came out or rebelled.
What revelation has come today that participating in politics has become a fundamental part of religion?
Or are there greater scholars today than the scholars of that time?
Or is there a greater temptation today than the temptation of that time?
Similarly, Ibn Taymiyyah declared the journey with the intention of visiting the holy grave of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbidden and called it a sinful journey. Even then, scholars did not protest, making it an issue of the honor of the Prophethood, nor did they rebel, nor did they kill him, nor did they participate in politics. Similarly, during the time of Imam Ahl al-Sunnah, the four tyrants wrote blasphemous texts. His Highness called these four apostates, but did not order their killing or entering politics. He said that he would punish them by forming a government. Rather, he criticized democracy and the political system of that time. Whoever wants to, should read the fifteenth volume of Fatawa Razaviyya. In practice, Imam Ahl al-Sunnah stayed away from politics. How did the sons of Fikr al-Rida see what Imam Ahl al-Sunnah did not see? That is, the legitimacy of democratic politics and participation in it. Why did millions of scholars and saints not see what you see, that is, how the system will be right again? If every servant becomes political, then who will be the people? And where will they be?
Oh dear!
Politics is the work of only one class, who are called the masters of the contract.
If every person becomes a politician, then he is called a royal prostitute: