Historical Critique of the Separation of Judgment and Arbitration

In the history of Islam, judgment was entrusted to scholars, whereas arbitration was assigned to rulers. This separation weakened religious unity. The verse أَفَحْكُمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ (Surah Al-Ma'idah: 50, Translation by Fouladwand: "Do they seek the judgment of ignorance?") denies non-divine wisdom. In certain periods, such as some epochs in Iran, scholars held judicial responsibilities, while governance was under the control of rulers. This division, much like dividing a large house among children, transformed unity into fragmentation. This separation, with reciprocal permits between scholars and rulers, sometimes delegating judgment to scholars and governance to kings, became a formal game. As a result, religious unity was degraded to a lower level.

Summary of Section Three

The wisdom of the Prophet (PBUH) establishes religion in all aspects of life and affirms the unity of religion and politics within the framework of justice and expertise. The separation of religion from politics or from the fields of jurisprudence and mysticism is incompatible with the comprehensive authority of the Prophet and religious unity. Justice and expertise are the conditions for the legitimacy of arbitration, and the historical critique of the separation of judgment and arbitration highlights the necessity of unity.

Section Four: Acceptance of the Prophet's Judgment and Critique of the Distortion of the Verse

Acceptance of the Prophet's Judgment Without Objection

Contentment, which is the acceptance of the Prophet's (PBUH) judgment without internal objection (distress), whether in favor of or against an individual, is emphasized in the verse ثُمَّلَا يَجِدُوا فِيَ أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ (Surah An-Nisa: 65). This acceptance, akin to entrusting one's heart to the sea of divine wisdom, frees the seeker from worldly attachments. The narration "Whoever rejects the Prophet is a disbeliever" (Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 2, p. 95) considers disapproval of the Prophet as disbelief and underscores the necessity of unopposed acceptance of his judgment. From a psychological perspective, this acceptance resolves internal conflicts and brings peace.

Difference Between Submission to the Prophet and an Ordinary Judge

Unlike the Prophet (PBUH), whose infallibility does not permit objection to his judgment, an ordinary judge, due to the possibility of error, may be subject to objection. The verse وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا (Surah An-Nisa: 65) emphasizes complete submission to the Prophet. In Shi'a jurisprudence, objection to a judge is permissible if evidence is presented (Al-Muraja'at, p. 112). This distinction is akin to the difference between light and shadow, separating the infallibility of the Prophet from the fallibility of an ordinary judge, thus elevating submission to him to a transcendent level.

Critique of the Distortion of the Verse's Meaning

Some commentators have weakened the meaning of the verse by interpreting لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ as "they do not attain perfect faith," whereas the verse conditions faith on accepting the Prophet's judgment. This distortion is like diluting pure wine with water, which blurs the clarity of the verse. Quranic interpretation principles, such as tafsir bil-Quran (interpretation by the Quran), emphasize preserving the apparent meaning of the verse. The verse explicitly conditions faith on the acceptance of the Prophet's judgment, not on achieving perfect faith. This correct interpretation underscores the importance of the Prophet's authority in the Islamic system.

Summary of Section Four

Contentment is the acceptance of the Prophet's judgment without objection, which, due to his infallibility, differs from ordinary judicial processes. The critique of the distortion of the verse emphasizes the need for correct interpretation and the preservation of the significance of the Prophet's authority. This acceptance leads the seeker to peace and complete faith.

Section Five: The Necessity of Justice in the Islamic System

Legitimacy of the Islamic System with Justice and Expertise

An Islamic system, without justice and expertise, is illegitimate and lacks credibility. The verse إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْمُرُكُمْ أَنْ تُؤَدُّوا الْأَانَاتِ إِلَى أَهْلِهَا (Surah An-Nisa: 58, Translation by Fouladwand: "God commands you to deliver trusts to those worthy of them") emphasizes the appointment of positions to those who are deserving. Submission is only meaningful in the presence of justice and expertise; otherwise, it leads to oppression and injustice. A just Islamic system is like a garden that yields the sweet fruits of legitimacy only when tended by knowledgeable and just gardeners. Without these conditions, any government claiming to represent religion is an illegitimate seizure and carries the burden of responsibility on the Day of Judgment.

Critique of the Absence of Justice in Practice

In some cases, Shi'a practice does not adhere to the condition of justice, as seen in the appointment of prayer leaders without regard for their justice and expertise. This is akin to appointing an unqualified surgeon to treat a patient, which results in harm rather than healing. Shi'a jurisprudence mandates justice, but its application, like a rare gem, is seldom observed. This deficiency highlights the necessity of practical adherence to justice and expertise in the Islamic system.

Summary of Section Five

The Islamic system is legitimate through justice and expertise, and submission is only meaningful when directed towards the just and expert. The critique of the absence of justice in practice reaffirms the necessity of adhering to these conditions in the Islamic system.

Overall Conclusion

Contentment, like a peak in the stages of spiritual ascent, guides the ordinary seeker towards the complete acceptance of the Prophet's arbitration and inner satisfaction with his judgment. This state, purer than reliance, delegation, and trust, leads the seeker to spiritual health and doctrinal reform. The Prophet's arbitration implements religion in every aspect of life and affirms the unity of religion and politics within the framework of justice and expertise. The critique of the separation of religious domains, distortion of verses, and the absence of justice in practice highlights the necessity of religious unity and commitment to the conditions of legitimacy. The Quranic verses, like guiding lights, illuminate this path and direct the seeker towards divine knowledge and closeness.