Refuting the book "Islamic government" (series of lectures of Khomeini)

[Mystic]

Of course, it is not necessary for all officials, provincial governors, and administrators to know all the laws of Islam and be fuqahā; it is enough that they should know the laws pertaining to their functions and duties. Such was the case in the time of the Prophet  (s), and the Commander of the Faithful (‘a). The highest authority must possess the two qualities mentioned—comprehensive knowledge and justice—but his assistants, officials and those sent to the provinces need know only the laws relevant to their own tasks; on other matters they must consult the ruler.
           
The ruler must also possess excellence in morals and belief; he must be just and untainted by major sins. Anyone who wishes to enact the penalties provided by Islam (i.e., to implement the penal code), to supervise the public treasury and the income and expenditures of the state, and to have God assign to him the power to administer the affairs of His creatures must not be a sinner. God says in the Qur’an: “my vow does not embrace the wrongdoer” (2:124);12 therefore, He will not assign such functions to an oppressor or sinner.
           
If the ruler is not just in granting the Muslims their rights, he will not conduct himself equitably in levying taxes and spending them correctly and in implementing the penal code. It becomes possible then for his assistants, helpers, and confidants to impose their will on society, diverting the public treasury to personal and frivolous use.
           
Thus, the view of the Shī‘ah concerning government and the nature of the persons who should assume rule was clear from the time following the death of the Prophet (s) down to the beginning of the Occultation.13 It is specified that the ruler should be foremost in knowledge of the laws and ordinances of Islam, and just in their implementation.

What he hides in addition to that, is that Shiite creed is that humans can't recognize who has comprehensive knowledge or is of highest virtue or pure, without proof from God.

He is trying to make the case, that since Shiites always argued for the case that the Imams were most superior in knowledge and virtue, that they were the proper leaders, what he doesn't realize is they argued, that this is why we need designation from God. Because people pick leaders according to whims, while, the True Leader of God is often belittled, and deemed weak, he and his followers mocked.

Keep this in mind as later, I Will share many hadiths and verses in Quran that emphasize on this point, That's it's not for us to choose our leaders because we don't know while God knows.

In fact, the central argument for Prophethood is that.

The two qualities of knowledge of the law and justice are present in countless fuqahā of the present age. If they come together, they could establish a government of universal justice in the world.
           
If a worthy individual possessing these two qualities arises and establishes a government, he will posses the same authority as the Most Noble Messenger (‘a) in the administration of society, and it will be the duty of all people to obey him.

Whether that is the case or not, the possibility of corrupt Fuqaha exists, as he testifies to many of them being corrupt.  This idea that we can recognize who has true comprehensive knowledge of the law and is just, is not proven at all.

In fact, we dispute regarding interpretation. And he trivializes this not important.

A hadith he quoted about the purpose of Imams was among many reasons - one being to preserve the laws because people follow their own opinion and create innovations.


However, that was proof of God why GOD appoints a leader and in fact, refutation, to why humans can appoint leaders.

These hadiths were put forth to say why we need God given leadership and that humans cannot choose.

Those were the context. So it refutes him, but I will present many hadiths that are clear in this regard and verses that we are not suppose to choose.


You see, if you start with the notion you aren't suppose to choose, then you don't something stupid like give the Authority of God and his Prophets to normal people, like scholars. 

That is like a bad patch in programming, you patch some holes, but it will create more problems, and more disunity. 

Obviously there was benefits in Monarchies in the past, and there will be benefits in government ruled by a Scholar and headed by a scholar, but is giving the Prophet's authority to a human without proof from God, allowed?

And in fact, we will see he will try to misinterpret 4:59 as Sunnis and non-Shiites have for centuries, with divorcing it from it's dialogue of this very issue. Scholars vs appointed leaders of God.


I am just showing reasoning of his, so far. I will be presenting verses and hadiths against his arguments soon.