This article or section is being renovated.
Lead = 4 / 4
Structure = 1 / 4
Content = 1 / 4
Language = 4 / 4
References = 1 / 4
The Rashidun Caliphs (الخلفاء الراشدون; lit. "The Rightly Guided Caliphs") are the four caliphs who followed in the leadership of the ummah following the death of the prophet Muhammad, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali. Sunni jurists consider them "rightly guided by Allah" and see their reign and religious ordinances as a basis for the practice of Islam. Shi'ites, however, consider the first three to be usurpers, with only Ali and his family having the right to sit on the throne. Sunni jurists, although seeing their laws and ordinances as a source of divine guidance for the ummah, never the less consider the sunnah of the prophet to be pre-eminent over the caliphs in terms of religious authority. It seems that contemporary believers and the caliphs themselves, though, did not share this view.
Origins of the idea
This idea of a golden age of just rule followed by tyranny gained traction only very slowly, but by the mid-ninth century it had become widespread and it entered the mainstream when the highly respected Baghdadi scholar Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 855) was won round to it. Those who accepted this historical vision called themselves Sunnis (those who held to the sunna/prescribed path), and those who rejected it formed distinct sects outside of this “orthodox” mainstream. Moderate pro-‘Alids were won over by this compromise (i.e., they accepted that the other three Medinan caliphs were legitimate as well as ‘Ali), but those who were more hard-line continued to insist that ‘Ali and his descendants were the only ones qualified to rule the Muslim world. The adherents of this latter view now split off irrevocably from the mainstream Sunnis and formed a group apart, namely, “the party of ‘Ali” (shi‘at ‘Ali) or Shi‘is, and it is from this time (the mid-ninth century) that the classic Sunni/Shi‘i rivalry begins. In Mu‘awiya’s day, however, there were no distinct sects with clearly defined doctrines (as opposed to loose coalitions reflecting specific grievances), and many of his contemporaries would have regarded him as a legitimate, divinely approved ruler on a par with his predecessors.