Accordingly, when Ahl al-Sunnah affirm the imamate of any one of these men—Yazīd, Abd al-Malik, al-Mansūr, or others—it is in this sense. Whoever disputes this is like someone who disputes the authority of Abū Bakr, Umar, and Uthmān, or the rule of Khosrow, Caesar, the Negus, and other kings.
As for believing any one of these men to be infallible, this is not the belief of any Muslim scholar (1). Nor does any (2) of the Muslim imams believe him to be just in all his affairs and obedient to Allah in all his actions. Likewise, no Muslim imam believes that he must be obeyed in everything he commands, even when it entails disobedience to Allah.
Rather, the doctrine of Ahl al-Sunnah wa-l-Jamāah is that they are to be joined in those acts of obedience to Allah for which their participation is needed. Thus, the Friday prayer, the two Eid prayers (3), and the other prayers they conduct are performed behind them, for failing to pray behind them would lead to those prayers being abandoned. We wage jihad against the disbelievers alongside them, make pilgrimage with them to the Ancient House, and enlist their aid in enjoining right, forbidding wrong, and enforcing the prescribed punishments. If, hypothetically, a person were to perform Hajj (4) in the company of people who were guilty of sins and had come to perform Hajj, this would not harm him in any way. The same applies to military campaigns and other righteous deeds: if a righteous person undertakes them and a wicked person joins him in doing so, that does not harm him in any way. How, then, could it harm him when they cannot be performed (5) except in this manner? And how much more so when—