Why do the Shī‘ah believe that caliphate [khilāfah] is a matter of appointment [tanṣīṣī]?

Reply: It is clear that the sacred religion of Islam is a universal and eternal creed and while alive, the Holy Prophet (ṣ) had the responsibility of leading the people, and after his departure, this responsibility had to be delegated to the most appropriate individual of the ummah.

There are two views concerning the question whether the station of leadership after the Prophet (ṣ) is a tanṣīṣī one (in the sense that it is determined by the order of the Lord of the worlds and stipulation of the Messenger of Allah (ṣ)) or it is an electoral position. The Shī‘ah believe that the station of leadership is a tanṣīṣī position and the successor of the Prophet (ṣ) has to be appointed by God, whereas the Ahl as-Sunnah believe that this station is an electoral position and that the ummah should elect the individual who administers the affairs of the country after the Prophet (ṣ).

Social considerations which testify to the belief that caliphate is a matter of appointment [tanṣīṣī]

The Shī‘ah scholars introduce many reasons in their books of beliefs about the idea of the need for appointment as a condition for holding the position of caliphate. We can, however, make an analysis of the circumstances prevailing during the period of apostleship [risālah] in order to testify to the validity of the Shī‘ah view.

A study of Islam’s foreign and domestic policies in the lifetime of the Prophet (ṣ) will warrant that the successor of the Prophet (ṣ) had to be designated by God through the Prophet (ṣ) himself because the Muslim society was always under the threat of three challenges (Byzantium Empire, Persian Empire and the hypocrites [munāfiqūn]). The interests of the ummah also dictated that the Prophet (ṣ) would appoint a political leader to ensure the unity of the entire ummah and enable it to stand against the foreign enemy and leave no way for the enemy’s infiltration and dominance, which might be exacerbated by internal disputes.