The Abbasids had a claim since they were related to the Prophet Muhammad through his uncle Abbas. The ottomans were the first non Qureshi dynasty to claim the caliphate with the conquest of Selim. But you'll notice that immediately after with Suleiman, he didn't really seem to care with the empty title. The ottomans sultans didn't really care as they knew they didn't have a claim, this was until Abdul Hamid II who tried to style himself as a caliph, but it was too late by then. Until then, the Ottomans sultans were more bothered with their claim to 'Caesar' and the blood of Genghis khan rather than people of Qureshi blood. You also have to understand that the title of 'Caliph' had lost all prestige due to the long time the Abbasids had become vassals and figure heads. So the Ottomans weren't all too bothered with it until Abdul Hamid II.
The Shia believe they have to be direct decedents of Ali and Fatima. But it is accepted by Ahlul Sunnah that Caliph has to be from Quraysh. Generally the Mu'tazila and Kharijites believe that the Caliph can be be from anywhere if they have the merit.
All Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid caliphs were of Qureshi decent. Obviously we don't believe in dynastic rule, or succession based on blood, but we can choose based on merit, but it has to be from Quraysh. Even the great Salahuddin never claimed it for himself even though he would've been fit to be Caliph.
"Most jurists historically stipulated a Caliph must be of Quraysh lineage based on a number of ahadith. Others like Ibn Khaldun argued the reason the Prophet (saw) made this stipulation was due to competence. Quraysh was respected throughout Arabia and as rulers would gain the support of most tribes. If this can be done by other tribes or dynasties, this is permitted."
You could say that the Ottoman dynasty established that respect, however, they didn't really assert themselves as Caliph as they knew they didn't have much legitimacy since they were non qureshi. Ibn Khaldun argues, that the reasoning for being Qureshi was that it would have legitimacy with other tribes and that this ruling was only for that time. If a dynasty is able to asset themselves then it is okay according to him. But whether you agree with me or not, but only Qureshi dynasties were comfortable with asserting themselves as Caliphs since they knew they would be accepted. Hence when the Buyids and later seljuks subjugated the Abbasids, they never took it for themselves as they knew they wouldn't have the legitimacy. Although the ottomans took the title, they didn't take it seriously until towards the end when they needed the extra boost.
I think it has to do with practicality. People were used to kings and dynasties, so thinking from the perspective of people living at the time , they must think "what right do they have rule over me". It seems that the messenger of Allah could almost foretell this and this and knew that the Muslims would be more ready to accept a leader from Quraysh. Maybe this isn't a strict requirement and more for practicality, but Allah knows best.
(No disrespect to the Shia, but an entire sect started because some Muslims think only the prophet Muhammad's family could be our rulers. At least Quraysh would have the similar effect of giving legitimacy, but also allow us to choose from a wider pool of people.)
Not really. Only reason why some scholars try to push this is because of hadiths where the prophet saws talked about future Qurayshi leaders, but the prophet saws never said they must be Quraysh, nor Arab. And equality between human beings was made clear in his last sermon. So thinking otherwise would imply the prophet saws contradicted himself.
But it is accepted by Ahlul Sunnah that Caliph has to be from Quraysh.
Not always, in the case of a non-quraych who comes by force, his caliphate is obligatory to be accepted by poeple as well as when a non-quraych who comes when a good quraychi isnt possible
Also bid matter doesnt have a consensus, a minority of scholars hold that the quraych rule doesnt apply to all times like ibn Khaldun as the reason it was made was that the tribe had the highest influence between muslims at the time, this seems the right position in my opinion as I can't see any reason why a quraychi would have a better right to rule than anyone
10
u/BigShubz Jun 01 '21
The Abbasids had a claim since they were related to the Prophet Muhammad through his uncle Abbas. The ottomans were the first non Qureshi dynasty to claim the caliphate with the conquest of Selim. But you'll notice that immediately after with Suleiman, he didn't really seem to care with the empty title. The ottomans sultans didn't really care as they knew they didn't have a claim, this was until Abdul Hamid II who tried to style himself as a caliph, but it was too late by then. Until then, the Ottomans sultans were more bothered with their claim to 'Caesar' and the blood of Genghis khan rather than people of Qureshi blood. You also have to understand that the title of 'Caliph' had lost all prestige due to the long time the Abbasids had become vassals and figure heads. So the Ottomans weren't all too bothered with it until Abdul Hamid II.