Explanation of the first doubt, which is the appointment of Khalid ibn al-Walid in the Battle of Mu'tah while the Supreme Imam was absent, and the approval of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) of that.

The Shaykh : There is no god but Allah

The questioner : And what you said, meaning they argue for the existence of an Imam by stating that the Companions appointed Khalid over them when their commanders were killed and they were in the absence of the Supreme Imam, who is the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Then they argue with the Battle of Ain Jalut against the Tatars.

The Shaykh : Evidence, evidence, until he looked.

The questioner : The first one says... The basis of this is the hadith of the Battle of Mu'tah, where the Companions appointed Khalid over them when their commanders were killed and they were in the absence of the Supreme Imam, meaning the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). So the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was pleased with their action. Then, as I said, they raise the question, meaning they say: We ask the Companions about this doubt; how can Muslims be compared in this situation where there is no Imam, and how is the number determined? Of course, I answered this, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : We answered the issue of Mu'tah. First, here the Amir, who is the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), was present, and he was the one who mobilized that army. When they appointed Khalid over them, that was their independent legal reasoning, and they were permitted to do so because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was the one who equipped that army. So they were permitted to act in this manner because they were facing an enemy. This hadith resembles the jihad of which we say that it does not require preparation if Muslims are attacked in their own land. These people left their own land to fight the disbelievers, and then it happened that the Amir died, so they had to have a successor. If they had wanted to send a message to the Messenger (peace be upon him) and ask him, who is the true Amir, the jihad would have been delayed, and perhaps they would have been attacked and their roots uprooted by their enemies. This is one of the scenarios addressed by the rule that dire necessity permits the prohibited. This is not argued as being necessary; we appoint an Amir from among ourselves, we appoint an Amir from among ourselves. And this reminds me now of this group that wants an Amir. How did they appoint an Amir? They appointed Zayd from among the people. How did they appoint him as Amir? Were there scholars? Were there those with the authority to bind and loose? How did so-and-so become Amir? Tell me what you know.

The questioner : From what we know, it is that he must be from among their group.

The Shaykh : I know, but how did this Amir from their group come about? Who chose him? The scholars?

The questioner : No

The Shaykh : Or the shepherds?

The questioner : Of course, the shepherds.

The Shaykh : This is the problem. This all confirms that they are manipulating matters. They appoint one of them as Amir and then say that the Imamate is necessary. So, in his contradiction of the premises we mentioned, he appoints himself. And we all know that Islam forbids a Muslim to seek a position. It is forbidden for a Muslim to seek a position. But for a man to appoint himself and then drag out all the evidence that on the surface indicates that an Imamate is necessary in every circumstance, this is, by Allah, ignorance, as they say, compounded ignorance, unfortunately.