Succession To Muhammad

The Succession to Muhammad concerns the varying aspects of successorship of Muhammad after his death, comprising who might be considered as his successor to lead the Muslims, how that person should be elected, the conditions of legitimacy, and the role of successor. Different answers to these questions have led to several divisions in the Muslim community since the first century of Muslim history; most notable giving rise to Sunnis, Shias and Kharijites.

From a historic viewpoint, with Muhammad's death in AD 632, disagreement broke out over who should succeed him as leader of the Muslim community. Umar (Umar ibn al-Khattab), a prominent companion of Muhammad, nominated Abu Bakr. Others added their support and Abu Bakr was made the first caliph. This choice was disputed by some of Muhammad's companions, who held that Ali (Ali ibn Abi Talib), his cousin and son-in-law, had been designated his successor. None of Muhammad's sons survived into adulthood, therefore direct hereditary succession was never an option. Later, during the First Fitna and the Second Fitna the community divided into several sects and groups, each of which had its own idea about successorship. Finally, after the Rashidun caliphate turned into Monarchies and Sultanates, while in most of the areas during Muslim history Sunnis have held power and Shiites have emerged as their opposition.

From a religious viewpoint, Muslims later split into two groups, Sunni and Shia. Sunnis assert that even though Muhammad never appointed a successor, Abu Bakr was elected first caliph by the Muslim community. The Sunnis recognize the first four caliphs as Muhammad's rightful successors. Shias believe that Muhammad explicitly named his successor Ali at Ghadir Khumm and Muslim leadership belonged to him who had been determined by divine order.

The two groups also disagree on Ali's attitude towards Abu Bakr, and the two caliphs who succeeded him: Umar and Uthman ibn Affan. Sunnis tend to stress Ali's acceptance and support of their rule, while the Shia claim that he distanced himself from them, and that he was being kept from fulfilling the religious duty that Muhammad had appointed to him. Sunnis maintain that if Ali was the rightful successor as ordained by God, then it would have been his duty as leader of the Muslim nation to make war with these people (Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman) until Ali established the decree. Shias contend that Ali did not fight Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman, because he was foretold by Prophet Muhammad about how the political tide will turn against Ali after his demise and was advised not to wage war against the political oppressors. Also, he did not have the military strength nor the willingness to wage a civil war amongst the Muslims. Ali also believed that he could fulfil his role of Imamate without this fighting .