Do not object to us, then, if we claim that the doctrine of the Household (al-‘Itrah) concerning Imamate is the most just of doctrines, the most in harmony with the laws of the heavens and the laws of the earth, and the most suitable for the people, both theoretically and practically.
As for its theoretical suitability, it is due to the following:
Imamate for us is a fundamental principle (asl) of the religion. It is part of the integrated, comprehensive religious system that includes the totality of beliefs, acts of worship, morals, and transactions. Consequently, the Islamic mindset in general, and the Zaidi one in particular, does not deal with the matter of governance from a worldly perspective. Rather, it views Imamate as a divine obligation (taklif ilahi) and an act of worship (‘ibadah) for which we deserve reward from Allah and a good recompense in this world and the Hereafter by establishing it. The relationship between the ruler and the ruled among the Zaidis is a spiritual connection and an emotional bond based on love and sacrifice, not on coercion and dominance, or envy and selfishness.
Although what preceded is generally shared by all schools of Islam, the Zaidis did not contradict themselves, nor did they oppose their own principles. They stipulated that the ruler (Imam) must be characterized by knowledge, piety, Allah-consciousness (taqwa), asceticism, courage, generosity, wisdom, sound opinion, and good management. He must be concerned for all people, safeguarding their interests, not monopolizing any of the fleeting possessions of this world for himself, merciful to the believers, drawing them near, consulting them, and seeking their assistance in organizing the affairs of his subjects. If any of these conditions is deficient, his leadership (Imamah) is invalid according to us, he does not deserve the obedience of the people, and it becomes obligatory upon the people of authority and influence (ahl al-hall wa al-‘aqd) from among the acting scholars, renowned among the people for their virtue and justice, to remove him from his position and replace him with another. It becomes obligatory upon the people to assist them in that. No wonder, then, that Zaidiyyah produced, throughout its history, Imams whose virtue was such that if prophethood had not been sealed, each of them would have been deserving of it and worthy of it. You find that every one of those who reached the seat of authority among us was a ruler for the subjects, a judge between people, an author in various sciences—studying and teaching them—an admonisher to the creation, a struggler (mujahid) against enemies, and a defender of Islam. Alongside this, he would be fasting during his day, standing in prayer at night, his supplications (Du’a) answered, and sought by people for visitation and seeking blessings by seeing him. In every one of these qualities, he was ahead of the people of his time, distinguished in his field, as if he were created only for it, never turning to anything else, nor practicing anything else. This was the state of all of them, Imam after Imam, as testified to by friend and foe alike. When one of them died—his deeds pleasing, his conduct praiseworthy—his subjects would build a dome over his grave and continue with visits and vows out of love and hope, for centuries up to this day. This is not the behavior of subjects towards one who oppressed them and acted tyrannically towards them.
Their first was still a guiding Imam,
Their last never ceased to follow that very pattern.
So tell me: Where do their likes exist? Peace be upon them.
An Objection
It should not be said: “The criterion for the success of states lies in acquiring territories, expanding the area of lands, subjugating kingdoms, and the regularity of affairs.” For we say: Although this is a measure of the success of states, it is not a measure of their legitimacy and justice. For what you mentioned was achieved by the Pharaohs, Chosroes, Caesars, and Tubba’ kings, while it was not achieved by most of the prophets and messengers. Furthermore, this alone is not conceded to be called ‘success’ except by those whose concern is this world and who turn a blind eye to the Hereafter. True success is that in which what you mentioned of expanding dominion and power is established upon the foundation of justice and fairness with the Creator (Allah) and the creation, along with establishing and guarding virtuous values and ensuring their regularity and continuity. If the combination of the two is possible, it is the ultimate aspiration, which righteous reformers have striven for since the beginning of creation. If it is not possible, then striving to achieve the second—meaning establishing the principles of justice and virtuous moral values—is, at the very least, more enduring, more lasting, better in outcome, more beneficial in effect for the righteous, and more immortal in memory. This is what the Imams of Zaidiyyah were upon in most of their circumstances.
As for practical suitability, we will present, Allah willing, documented and well-known examples and models from the rule of the Zaidi Imams (peace be upon them) that prove that Zaidiyyah is the truth in knowledge and action, in theory and application.