Hazrat Ali's candidacy for caliphate?

Question: The members of Jamaat-e-Islami generally criticize the democratic methods of the present time, and they also say that a person who himself is a candidate for a position or a post or becomes a claimant for it, the way of Islam. He does not deserve to be elected. This raises the question that what will be said about Hazrat Ali who was a candidate or contender for the Caliphate? Answer: The story of Hazrat Ali's candidacy and claim is actually a part of a larger story, which is based on certain traditions. This component cannot be separated from the total and the discussion can not be based on it alone. If you believe this part, then you have to believe the whole story of which it is a part and then discuss it. The traditions of this story are very famous. The map of the events after Saqifa Bani Sa'idah that Ya'qubi has presented in his history, and the map that Ibn Qutiba has drawn in his Al-Imaamat Wal-Siyasa, and the traditions that other people narrate in this regard are all in front of you. are present. If you believe this history, then you will have to write off the character of Muhammad, the preacher of the Qur'an, the preacher of Islam, the people of Mecca, and all the effects of his education and training, and you have to admit that this most pure The Jamaat which was developed by Man's 23 years of preaching and guidance. And under his leadership, the party that raised the flag of Islam in the world by fighting the battles of Badr and Uhud and Ahzab and Hunain, its morals, its thoughts, its goals, its intentions, its desires, and its As such, the methods were not even an iota different from the common secularists. In this history, something like this comes before us that a courageous person had conquered a country by fighting for many years and established an empire with his strong arm. Then he died by divine will. As soon as his eyes were closed, his friends and associates, who were all men of his own making, and on whom he trusted all his life, suddenly turned their eyes away. He was so busy that his companions became worried about how to seize the throne. So they gathered and quarreled at first. Everyone wanted every morsel of it in my mouth. Finally, after much debate, they chose one of their own for the kingdom. When this operation was completed, the family members of the founder of the empire came to know about it and their hands flew away. The deceased was not a son, but a son-in-law. He wondered who else could be the heir to the crown and throne if it were me, the daughter also began to complain that what right did others have to occupy the empire that her father had established with years of hard work. I kept giving advice. Then they began to appeal to the late king's old associates by reminding them of his favors. And demanded his right in public. The deceased's son-in-law continued to take his daughter to the palaces of Darul Sultanate and took her to one by one influential clan so that people's hearts might melt with her cry. Address the grave of the late king and give decades that maybe this appeal will fall. But no one listened. At last the poor man sat exhausted, and when even the daughter of the deceased, who was the very foundation of his claim, had departed from the world, the poor man went and accepted the obedience of the unwilling usurper of the throne. But in his heart he continued to feel remorse and from time to time he expressed his remorse in one way or another. Is this really the picture of Muhammad and his Ahl al-Bayt and his great companions? Was this the position of the Messenger of God that he was the founder of an empire like the common founders of the world? Did the Prophet of God's 23 years of education, companionship and training develop these morals, these biographies and these characters? After all, this map What is the relevance of the Quran and its pure teachings? From the life of Muhammad (peace be upon him) and from his highest moral instructions which are filled in the collection of hadith? From the biographies of Hazrat Ali and Hazrat Fatima, in which (except for this one story) there is no doubt of worldliness? From the lives of Abu Bakr and Umar, whose colors do not even match the colors of the hungry people of the world? Even his joint does not seem to sit with them? Then, if the entire authentic collection of the history of this group presents to us another map of its morals, its character, its mentality and its psychology, and only this collection of traditions presents another map on the contrary. So what does common sense say? Is it that there was a fire in the sea by chance? Or that there was no water in the sea, but fire was fire? Or that the story of the fire is false, when all the evidence confirms that it was the sea, there could have been nothing but water! However, if someone wants to believe this story, we cannot stop him. The pages of history are still polluted with it. But then at the same time it has to be admitted that the claim of the Holy Prophet was a mere pretence, the Qur'an was nothing but poetic rhetoric, and all the stories of holiness were stories of pure hypocrisy. In fact, a person used these tricks to trap the world in order to build his own empire and people gathered around him just as people gather around such world-seeking hypocrites and in this outward veil of sanctity. The objectives for which he worked