in the year of the Conquest and appointed his son Qays. He also dismissed an imam who had been leading a community in prayer because he spat toward the prayer direction. On one occasion (1), he appointed a man who failed to fulfill his duty, so he said:
“If I appoint someone who does not carry out my command, are you incapable of appointing a man who will carry it out?” (2)
Thus, he authorized them to dismiss any of his governors who failed to fulfill his duty. How, then, could he not entrust (3) them with initially appointing someone who would fulfill it?
If (4), during his lifetime, someone he appointed failed to fulfill his duty, whereupon he dismissed him or ordered his dismissal, then were he to appoint someone for after his death, that person might likewise fail to fulfill his duty and would consequently need to be dismissed. If the Ummah itself appointed and dismissed him, that would be better for them than having to dismiss someone appointed by the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). This is one way in which the wisdom of not appointing a successor becomes clear.
Accordingly, we say regarding:
The Fifth Argument:
Not appointing a successor after his death was preferable to appointing one (5). This is what Allah chose for His Prophet, and He chooses for him only the best course.
The reason is that either it must be said that, during his lifetime, he should not appoint as his deputy anyone who is not