Imamate The Vicegerency of the Prophet (s) [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

Part III - The Sunni Point
of View

18. SUNNI VIEWS ON THE CALIPHATE

THE MAJORITY of Sunnis today are the Ash'arites. They, as well as the Mu'tazilites,
believe that the institution of Imamate/Caliphate is necessary, and it is incumbent
(wajib) on men to appoint a caliph. The Mu'tazilites hold that it is incumbent
according to reason; the Ash'arites believe it is incumbent according to tradition.

an-Nasaf; writes in his al-Aqai'id, "The Muslims cannot do without an Imam
who shall occupy himself with the enforcing of their decisions, and in implementing their hudud
(penal code) and guarding their frontiers, and equipping their armies, and receiving their
alms, and putting down robberies and thieving and highwayman, and maintaining the Friday
and 'id prayers, and removing quarrels that fall between people, and receiving
evidence bearing on legal claims, and marrying minors who have no guardians and dividing
booty." [1]

"The Sunnites want an earthly ruler.... while the Shi'ites look for one who can
establish the Kingdom of Heaven on earth and bring an end to all the evils of the
world." [2]

Accordingly, the Sunnis recognize four principles for appointing a caliph.

a) Ijma'; that is, consensus of men of power and position on a certain point.
The agreement of all the followers of the Prophet is not necessary, nor is it essential to
secure the consent of all the persons of power and position in the ummah.

b) Nomination by the previous caliph.

c) Shura; that is, selection by a committee.

d) Military power; that is, if anyone acquires power by military force he will become a
caliph.

The author of Sharhu 'l-maqasid has explained that when an Imam dies and a
person possessing the requisite qualifications claims that office (without the oath of
allegiance-bay'ah-having been taken for him and without his having been nominated
to succeed), his claim to caliphate will be recognized provided his power subdues the
people; and apparently the same will be the case when the new caliph happens to be
ignorant or immoral. And similarly when a caliph has thus established himself by superior
force but is afterwards subdued by another person, he will be deposed and the conqueror
will be recognized as Imam or caliph. [3]

19. QUALIFICATIONS OF A CALIPH

The Sunnis consider ten conditions necessary for a caliph:-

1. that he be Muslim;

2. that he be of age, (i.e.,of puberty);

3. that he be male

4. that he be of sound mind;

5. that he be courageous;

6. that he be free, not a slave;

7. that he be accessible and not be concealed or hidden;

8. that he be able to conduct battles and beware of warlike tactics;

9. that he be just-'adil;

10. that he be able to judge and pass verdicts on points of laws and religion, that is,
he be a mujtahid. [4]

But the last two conditions are in theory only. As quoted in the previous chapter, even
an ignorant and immoral person can become a caliph. Therefore, the conditions for
'justice' and 'religious knowledge' are without base.

They hold that infallibility ('ismah) is not necessary for caliphate. The words
of Abu Bakr which he spoke from the pulpit before the Companions of the Prophet, are cited
in support of that view: "O people! " he said, "I have been made ruler over
you although I am no better than you; so, if I perform my duties well, help me; and if I
go wrong, you should set me right. You should know that Satan comes to me now and then. So
if I am angry, keep aloof from me." [5]

at-Taftazani says in Sharh Aqai'idi 'n-Nasafi "An Imam is not to be deposed
from Imamate on account of immorality or tyranny." [6]

20. ABU BAKR'S RISE TO POWER

All the above-mentioned principles are derived, not from an ayah or hadith,
but from the events and happenings after the death of the Holy Prophet.

According to the Sunnis, the first four Caliphs are called al-khulafai'u'r-rashidun
(the rightly-guided Caliphs). Now let us examine how al khilaifatu 'r-rashidah came
into being .

Immediately after the death of the Prophet the Muslims of Medina known as ansar
(Helpers) gathered in the saqifah (covered porch) of Banu Sa'idah. According to the
author of Ghiyathu 'l lugha't, it was a secret location where the Arabs used to
gather for their evil activities. [7] Here Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah, who was then ailing, was led to a
stately chair and made to sit upon it, wrapped in a blanket, so that he might be elected
as the Caliph. Sa'd then delivered a speech in which he recounted the virtues of the ansar
and told them to take over the caliphate before anyone else could do so. The ansar
agreed and said that they wanted him to be the Caliph. But then among themselves, they
began to ask: "What reply should we give to the muhajirun (emigrants from
Mecca) of the Quraysh if they oppose this move and put forth their own claim?

A group said: "We shall tell them, let us have one leader from among you and one
from us." Sa'd said: "This is the first weakness you have shown."

Someone informed 'Umar ibn al-Khattab of this gathering saying: "If at all you
desire to acquire the dignity of rulership you should reach the saqifah before it
is too late and difficult for you to change what is being decided there." On
receiving this news, 'Umar, along with Abu Bakr, rushed to the saqifah. Abu
'Ubaydah ibn al-Jarrah also accompanied them.

at-Tabari, Ibnu 'l-Athir, Ibn Qutaybah [8] and others proceed with their narrations stating that
having reached the saqifah, Abu Bakr, 'Umar and Abu 'Ubaydah had hardly taken their
seats when Thabit ibn Qays stood up and began enumerating the virtues of the ansar
and suggested that the office of the caliphate should be offered to someone from the ansar.
'Umar is reported to have said later on: "When the speaker of the ansar
finished his speech, I made an attempt to speak as already I had thought over some
important points, but Abu Bakr beckoned me to keep quiet. Therefore, I remained silent.
Abu Bakr had more competence and knowledge than myself. He then said the same things I had
thought of and expressed them even better."

According to Rawdatu 's-safa', Abu Bakr addressed the assembly at the saqifah
thus: "Assembly of the ansar! We acknowledge your good qualities and virtues.
We have also not forgotten your struggles and endeavours for promoting the cause of Islam.
But the honour and respect the Quraysh have among the Arabs is not enjoyed by any other
tribe, and the Arabs will not submit to anyone other than the Quraysh." [9]

In as-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, it is added:

"However, it is a fact that we the muhajirun were the first to accept the
Islamic creed. The Prophet of Islam was from our tribe. We are the relatives of the
Apostle ... and therefore we are the people who are entitled to the caliphate... It will
be advisable to have the leadership among us and for you to take the ministry. We will not
act unless we consult with you."' [10]

Heated arguments started, during which 'Umar cried: "By Allah, I will kill him who
Opposes us now." al-Hubab ibn al-Mundhir ibn Zayd, an ansari from the Khazraj
tribe, challenged him saying: "By Allah, we will not allow anyone to rule over us as
a caliph. One leader must come from you and one from us."Abu Bakr said: 'No, this
cannot be; it is our right to be the rulers and yours to be our ministers." al-Hubab
said: "O ansar! Do not submit yourselves to what these people say. Be firm . .
. By Allah, if anyone dares to oppose me now, I will cut his nose with my sword."
'Umar remarked: "By Allah, duality is not advisable in the caliphate. There cannot be
two kings in one regime, and the Arabs will not agree to your leadership, because the
Apostle was not from your tribe."

at-Tabari and Ibnu 'l-Athir both state that there was a fairly prolonged exchange of
words between al-Hubab and 'Umar on this matter. 'Umar cursed al-Hubab: "May Allah
kill you." al-Hubab retorted: "May Allah kill you."

'Umar then crossed over and stood at the head of Said ibn 'Ubadah and said to him:
"We want to break every limb of yours." Infuriated by this threat, Said got up
and caught 'Umar's beard. 'Umar said: "If you pull out even one hair, you will see
that all will not be well with you." Then Abu Bakr pleaded with 'Umar to be calm and
civil. 'Umar turned his face from Sa'd who was saying: "By Allah, had I strength
enough just to stand, you would have heard the lions roar in every corner of Medina and
hidden yourselves in holes. By Allah, we would have made you join again with those people
among whom you were only a follower and not a leader."

Ibn Qutaybah says that when Bashir ibn Sa'd, the chief of the tribe of Aws, saw that
the ansar were uniting behind Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah, the chief of the Khazraj, he was
overcome with envy and stood up supporting the claim of the Qurayshite muhajirun.

In the midst of this melee, 'Umar said to Abu Bakr: "Hold out your hand so that 1
may give my bay'ah (i.e., pledge of loyalty)." Abu Bakr said: "No, you
give me your hand so that I may give my bay'ah, because you are stronger than me and more
suitable to the caliphate."

'Umar took the hand of Abu Bakr and pledged allegiance to him saying: "My strength
is not of any value when compared to your merits and seniority. And if it is of any value
then my strength added to yours will successfully manage the caliphate."

Bashir ibn Sa'd followed suit. Khazrajites cried to him that he was doing it out of
envy for Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah. Then the tribe of Aws talked amongst themselves that if Sa'd
ibn 'Ubadah was made caliph that day, the tribe of Khazraj would always feel themselves
superior to the Aws, and no one from the Aws would ever achieve that dignity. Therefore,
they all pledged their allegiance to Abu Bakr.

Someone from the Khazraj tribe took out his sword but was overcome by the others.

Amidst all this unseemly wrangling, 'Ali and his friends attended to the washing of the
body of the Holy Prophet and the proper observances regarding burial. By the time these
were over, Abu Bakr had achieved a fait accompli.

Ibn-Qutaybah writes: "When Abu Bakr had taken the caliphate, 'Ali was dragged to
Abu Bakr as he repeatedly declared, 'I am the slave of Allah and the brother of the
Messenger of Allah.' Then 'Ali was commanded to take the oath of allegiance to Abu Bakr.
'Ali said: 'I have more rights to the caliphate than anyone of you. I will not pledge
obedience to you. As a matter of fact, you should give the pledge of obedience to me. You
called the ansar to give their bay'ah on the ground that you had blood relations
with the Messenger of Allah. You are usurping the caliphate from us, the members of his
house. Did you not reason with the ansar that you have better rights to the
caliphate than they because the Apostle was of your kinship, and they handed over the
government to you and accepted your leadership? Therefore, the very reason put forth by
you before the ansar is now forwarded by me. Our relations with the Apostle in life
as well as in death are much closer than those of anyone of you. If you are faithful to
your argument, you should do justice; otherwise you know that you have knowingly moved
towards tyranny.'

"'Umar said, 'Unless you give bay'ah, you will not be released.' 'Ali cried, Milk
out as much as you can for the udders are in your hand. Make it as strong as possible
today, for he is going to hand it over to you tomorrow. 'Umar, I will not yield to your
commands: I shall not pledge loyalty to him.' Ultimately Abu Bakr said, 'O 'Ali! If you do
not desire to give your bay'ah, I am not going to force you for the same.' "

21. SHORT REVIEW

Several aspects of the above-mentioned events deserve more attention:

1. It was the tradition of the Arabs that once a person was declared, even by a small
group, to be the chief of the tribe, others did not like to oppose him, and willy-nilly
followed suit. This tradition was in the mind of'Abbas, the Prophet's uncle, when he told
'Ali: "Give me your hand so that I may pledge allegiance to you. . . because once
this thing is taken over no one will ask him to relinquish it."

And it was this tradition which prompted Sa'd to exhort the ansar to 'take over
the caliphate before anyone else could do so.'

And it was because of this tradition that 'Umar was told to reach saqifah
'before it was too late and difficult for him to change what was being decided there.' And
it was because of this custom that once some people accepted Abu Bakr as Caliph, the
majority of the Muslims in Medina followed suit.

2. 'Ali was well-aware of this custom. Then why did he refuse to extend his hand to
accept the bay'ah of 'Abbas, telling him, "Who else, other than I, can call for such
pledge of allegiance? [11]

It was because 'Ali knew that the khalifah (caliphate) of the Holy Prophet was
not the chieftainship of the tribe. It was not based on the declaration of allegiance by
the public. It was a responsibility given by Allah, not by the people. And as he had
already been publicly appointed by Allah through the Prophet to the Imamate, there
was no need for him to rush to the public to seek their allegiance. He did not want the
people to think that his Imamate was based on the bay'ah of men; if the people came
to him on the basis of the declaration of Ghadir Khumm, well and good; if they did not, it
was their loss, not his.

3. Now we turn to the events of saqifah: During the lifetime of the Holy
Prophet, the Mosque of the Prophet was the centre of all Islamic activities. It was here
that decisions of war and peace were made, deputations were received, sermons were
delivered and cases were decided. And when the news spread of the death of the Holy
Prophet, the Muslims assembled in that very mosque.

Then why did the partisans of Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah decide to go three miles outside Medina
to meet in saqifah which was not a place of good repute? Was it not because they wanted to
usurp the Caliphate without the knowledge of other people and then present Sa'd as the
accepted Caliph?

Keeping in view the declaration of Ghadir Khumm and the tribal custom of Arabia there
can be no other explanation.

4. When 'Umar and Abu Bakr came to know of that gathering, they were in the mosque. A
majority of the Muslim were at the mosque. Why did they not inform any other person about
that gathering? Why did they, together with Abu 'Ubaydah, slip out secretly? Was it
because 'Ali and Banu Hashim were present in the mosque and in the house of the
Prophet,and 'Umar and Abu Bakr did not want them to know of the plot? Was it because they
were afraid that if 'Ali came to know of that meeting of saqifah, and if by a
remote chance he decided to go there himself, no one else would have had a chance to
succeed?

5. When Abu Bakr was extolling the virtues of muhajirun as being from the tribe
of the Holy Prophet, did he not know that there were other people with much more stronger
right to that claim because they were members of the very family of the Holy Prophet and
his own flesh and blood?

It was this aspect of the pretence that prompted 'Ali ibn Ab; Talib (as) to comment:
"They argued by the strength of the tree (tribe) and then destroyed the fruit (i.e.,
the family of the Prophet)." [12]

Looking dispassionately at this event, we are unable to call it an
'election', because the voters (all the Muslims scattered throughout Arabia, or, at least,
all the Muslims of Medina) did not even know that there was to be an election, let alone
when or where it was to be held. Aside from the voters, even prospective candidates were
unaware of what was happening at saqifah. Again we are reminded of the words of
al-Imam 'A1i in connection with the two points mentioned above:

If you claim to have secured authority over the Muslims' affairs by
consultation,

How did it happen when those to be consulted were absent!

And if you have scored over your opponents by ( the Prophet's)
kinship,

Then someone else has greater right on the Prophet and is nearer to
him.[13]

And we cannot call it even a ' selection' because a majority of the prominent
Companions of the Holy Prophet had no knowledge of these events. 'Ali, 'Abbas, 'Uthman,
Talhah, azZubayr, Sa'd ibn Ab; Waqqas, Salman al-Farisl, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, 'Ammar ibn
Yasir, Miqdad, 'Abdu 'r-Rahman ibn 'Awf-none of them were consulted or even informed.

The only argument which can be offered for this caliphate is this: "Whatever the
legal position of the events of saqifah, as Abu Bakr succeeded ( because of tribal
custom ) in taking the reins of power in his hands, he was a 'constitutional'
Caliph."

In simple language, Abu Bakr became a constitutional Caliph because he succeeded in his
bid for power. Thus, the Muslims who have been taught to glorify this event, are
inadvertently taught that the only thing which counts is the 'power'. Once you are secure
in the seat of power, everything is all right. You will become the 'constitutional' head
of state.

In the end, I should quote a comment of 'Umar himself, who was the author of this
caliphate. He said in a lecture during his caliphate:

I have been informed that someone said: "When'Umar dies, I will pledge allegiance
to so-and-so." Well no one should be misled like this, thinking that although the
allegiance of Abu Bakr was by surprise, it became all right. Of course, it was by
surprise, but Allah saved us from its evils. Now if anyone wishes to copy it I will cut
his throat. [14]

22. NOMINATION OF 'UMAR

The majority of Sunnis believe that what happened at saqifah was a manifestation
of the "democratic" spirit of Islam. In view of that belief it was reasonable to
expect the 'democratic election' (whatever its meaning in the context of saqifah)
to continue as the basis of Islamic caliphate. But this was not to be.

Abu Bakr was indebted to 'Umar for establishing his caliphate and he knew that if the
masses were given freedom of choice, 'Umar had no chance. (He was known as "rude and
of harsh nature.") Therefore, he decided to nominate his own successor-'Umar.

at-Tabari writes: "Abu Bakr called 'Uthman -when the former was dying-and told him
to write an appointment order, and dictated to him: 'In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent,
the Merciful. This is the order of 'Abdullah ibn Abi Quhafah (i.e., Abu Bakr) to the
Muslims. Whereas...' Then he fell unconscious. 'Uthman added the words: 'I appoint 'Umar
ibn al-Khattab as my successor among you.'

"Then Abu Bakr regained his consciousness and told 'Uthman to read the order to
him. 'Uthman read it; Abu Bakr said, Allahu Akbar', and was pleased and commented, 'I
think you were afraid that people would disagree amongst themselves if I died in that
state.' 'Uthman replied, 'Yes.' Abu Bakr said: ' May Allah reward you on behalf of Islam
and the Muslims.' [16]
Thus, the appointment letter was completed and Abu Bakr ordered it to be read before the
Muslims.

Ibn Abi 'l-Hadid al-Mu'tazili writes that when Abu Bakr regained his consciousness and
the scribe read what he had written and Abu Bakr heard the name of 'Umar, he asked him,
"How did you write this?" The scribe said, "You could not pass him
over." Abu Bakr replied, "You are right.'' [16]

Shortly afterwards Abu Bakr died:

'Umar gained the caliphate by this appointment. Here one is reminded of a tragedy which
occurred three or five days before the death of the Holy Prophet.

In the Sahih of Muslim there is a tradition narrated by Ibn 'Abbas that:
"Three days before the Prophet's death 'Umar ibn al-Khattab and other Companions were
present at his side. The Apostle said, 'Now let me write something for you by way of a
will so that you are not mislead after me.' 'Umar said, 'The Apostle is talking in
delirium; the Book of Allah is sufficient for us.' 'Umar's statement caused a furor among
those present there. Some were saying that the Apostle's command should be obeyed so that
he might write whatever he desired for their betterment Others sided with 'Umar. When the
tension and uproar increased the Apostle said, 'Go away from me. '" [17]

A few Qur'anic injunctions should be mentioned here:

Muslims should not raise your voices above the voice of the Prophet. . . lest your
deeds become null while you perceive not (49:2). The Holy Prophet's words were
"revelation" from Allah: Nor does he speak out of (his) desire. It is naught
but revelation that is revealed (53: 3-4). And Muslims were expected to follow his
command without any 'ifs' and 'buts': Whatever the Apostle gives you, take it; and from
whatever he forbids you, keep back. (59 :7)

And when such an Apostle, five days before his death wished to write a directive to
save Muslims from going astray, he was accused of 'talking in delirium'.

When Abu Bakr who had no such Divine protection from error, began dictation of the
appointment letter in such critical condition that he fell unconscious before naming his
successor, 'Umar did not say that he was talking in delirium!

No one can be sure of what it was the Holy Prophet wanted to write. But the phrase he
used gives us an idea. On several occasions the Holy Prophet had declared:

O People! Verily, I am leaving behind among you Two Precious Things, the Book of Allah
and My Descendants who are my family members. So long as you keep hold of them sincerely,
you will never go astray after me.

When he used the same phrase five days before his death (".. Let me write
something for you by way of a will so that you are not misled after me" ), it was
easy enough to understand that the Holy Prophet was going to write what he had been
telling them all along about the Qur'an and his Ahlu 'l-bayt (as).

Perhaps 'Umar guessed as much; as is apparent from his claim: "The Book of Allah
is sufficient for us." He wanted to make it known to the Prophet that he would not
follow 'the Two Precious Things '. One was enough for him.

And he himself admitted it in a talk with 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas, in which he, inter alia
said: "And surely he (the Prophet) intended during his illness to declare his
('Ali's) name, so I prevented it.'' [18]

Perhaps the word "delirium" would have served his purpose even if the Prophet
had written the directive. 'Umar and his partisans would have claimed that as it was
written "in delirium" it had no validity.