among them some departure from truth and justice, the Imāmiyya’s departure from truth and justice is greater and more severe. How much sounder, then, is the position of the leading scholars of the Sunnah, which accords (1) with the Quran and Sunnah: those in authority are to be obeyed insofar as they command obedience to Allah, but not when they command disobedience to Allah.

The third aspect is as follows:

Indeed, (2) people have differed concerning a sinful and ignorant ruler: Is he to be obeyed when he commands (3) obedience to Allah, and are his judgments and distributions to be enforced when they accord with justice? Or is he not to be obeyed in anything, with none of his judgments or distributions being enforced? Or should a distinction be made in this regard between the supreme ruler and such subordinate officials as a judge and the like?

There are three positions:

The weakest in the view of Ahl al-Sunnah is that all his commands, judgments, and distributions are to be rejected.

The soundest in the view of the hadith scholars and leading jurists is the first position: he is to be obeyed unconditionally in matters involving obedience to Allah, and his judgments and distributions are to be enforced whenever his actions are entirely just. Thus, according to this position, even a just judgment (4) and a just distribution (5) made by an ignorant and unjust judge are to be enforced. This is the position of most jurists.

The third position distinguishes between the supreme ruler and others (6), because the former cannot be removed for sinful conduct except through fighting and civil strife. This is unlike a judge and the like, for he—