On The Shiite Imamate Summary

620 Words2 Pages

The approach to political legitimacy is one of the key differences between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, and in fact, it is the initial source of division between these two groups in Islam. The problem emerged after the death of the Prophet Muhammad when there was a need to choose a new representative of God on earth. The differences between the Sunni and Shiite approaches to the Imamate are very clear in Abd al-Hasan Ali al-Mawardi’s “On Choosing a Caliph” and Allama al-Hilli’s “On the Shiite Imamate.” While both authors have similar views regarding the primary role of the Imamate, they differ significantly in the way they describe the process of choosing an Imam and the personality of an ideal ruler.
The Sunni perception of the role of the Imamate expressed by al-Mawardi is similar to that of Shiites described by al-Hilli. Al-Mawardi argues, “The Imamate is a principle on which stands the base of the religious Community and… is placed on earth to succeed the Prophet in the duties of defending the religion” (22). In turn, al-Hilli believes that the Imam is “a chief and a guide whom [people] obey… and leads them to rational …show more content…

The Sunni attitude is rather rational, or even earthly. Al-Mawardi states that an Imam must be just and courageous, possess knowledge in legal matters, and have good judgment skills. He must also have no physical disabilities (Al-Mawardi 23). In contrast, al-Hilli stresses the ideal, divine nature of the Imamate. He argues that only the best of the best can be an Imam because this person is a direct successor of God and the Prophet Muhammad. If there is someone who is better than the Imam in anything, “the worse would have to take precedence over the better, and that would be evil” (al-Hilli 25). Hence, the heredity of the Imamate in the Shiite tradition is important for preventing evil caused by mistakes that people can make in choosing an

Open Document