Definition and origin of the term caliphate
This article compares the Sunni theory of caliphate with the Shia theory of leadership.
The word caliph means ‘successor’. In Sunnī political theory, the holder of the title is considered to be supreme leader of the Muslim community. The title Khalīfa (caliph) continued to be applied to the Muslim leader right up to the twentieth century. After the death of the fourth Caliph, the institution became a hereditary monarchy.
Origin of the term ‘Khalifa’
The provenance and the theological implications of the word ‘khalīfa’ is an issue of dispute amongst scholars. Sunnī believers and most modern Islamicists hold that the word khalīfa was first used by the Khulafā Rāshidūn in the sense of khalīfat rasūl Allah i.e. a successor to the Prophet with no intrinsic claim to religious authority. The designation of Abū Bakr as the first Caliph occurred through bay‘a (pledge of allegiance). This procedure was followed for subsequent Caliphs.
Sunnī and Shī‘i concept of leadership
Both Sunnīs and Shī‘īs agree on the absolute necessity of having a leader, that ultimate sovereignty belongs to God, and that the basis of the state is religious. However, the Sunnī concept of leadership/caliphate varies significantly from that of Shī‘īsm. This difference is summarised concisely by Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328), in contradiction to the Shī‘a belief that leadership in Sunnī Islam is:
“an instrument to serve the faith” and not a fundamental of the faith.
Political Authority
In Sunnī theory, the Caliph was a political successor to the Prophet. His role was to apply the rules of the Sharī’a, and not to reinterpret it. The ruler (caliph) in Sunnī political thought was neither divinely appointed nor infallible. He could be chosen in a number of ways and was responsible for applying the Sharī’a, not interpreting it.
Religious Authority
Although Shī‘is hold that ultimate religious authority belongs to the Imām, the Sunnīs contend that ultimate religious authority belongs to the Sharī’a. Hence the Caliph is subservient to the Sharī’a, which in turn is interpreted by the ‘ulamā’. A corollary of this is that there is no division in Shī‘īsm between religious and political authority; both are invested in the Imām.
In Sunnīsm, political authority is invested in the Caliph, whereas religious authority is invested in the ‘ulamā’. When the ‘ulamā’ reached consensus (ijma‘) on a matter, then this represented the will of the community (the jamā’a). To oppose ijma‘ was tantamount to heresy.
The challenge by Ma’mum
Despite the fact that this view was accepted by both scholars and Caliphs over the course of political history, it was vigorously challenged by the Caliph Ma’mum (d. 218/833). The Mihna was an unsuccessful attempt by Ma’mūm to challenge the religious authority of the scholars and thereby claim this authority for himself. His Shī‘ī sympathies may have influenced this approach to the locus of authority.
However, as Zaman points out, this division of authority between scholars and the rulers should not be understood to mean a strict separation of state and religion. Although the Caliph and the ‘ulamā’ had separate functions, they were mutually dependent and often had to collaborate with each other.
Works on political theory
A plethora of historical works on Sunnī political theory discuss a multitude of issues. These include the qualifications and duties of the Caliph, his manner of selection, the legality of resisting authority and the issue of multiple claims to leadership. Most of these works were written in response to new political developments and crises facing the Islamic state, including the fragmentation of the ‘Abbāsid state, the rising power of the Turkish slave soldiers, the Fāṭimid Caliphate, and the destruction of the Caliphate by the Mongols. These works were, in the main, legalistic and pragmatic rather than idealistic. For example, both Ghazālī and Ibn Taymiyya validated the rule of whoever held power, irrespective of their official designation.
In part two we look at the various ways a leader can be selected . See Sunni Theory of Caliphate: Part 2
References
Abdullah Saeed, ‘Introduction. The context of development of Islamic political thought”, in Islamic Political Thought and Governance: Critical Concepts in Political Science (4 Vols), ed. by Abdullah Saeed (Routledge, 2011), pp. 1-12.
Hayrettin Yücesoy, ‘Justification of Political Authority in Medieval Sunni Thought’, in Islam, the State, and Political Authority: Medieval Issues and Modern Concerns, ed. by Asma Afsaruddin (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010).
Kadi, Wadad, ‘Caliphate’, in The Princeton Encyclopaedia of Islamic Political Thought, ed. by Richard Bulliet and David Cook (Princeton University Press, 2012).
Lewinstein, Keith, ‘Kharijis’, The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought, 2012 p. 294.
Ovamir Anjum, Politics, Law, and Community in Islamic Thought: The Taymiyyan Moment, (Cambridge University Press, 2012), pp. 45-7.
Qamaruddin Khan, Political Thought of Ibn Taymiyah, (Adam Publishers, 2005), p. 35.
Sourdel, D.; Lambton, A.K.S.; Jong, F. de; Holt, P.M.. “K̲h̲alīfa.” Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition
