Let's say it's Abdullah, who was born after Muhammad began preaching Islam. Assuming Muhammad still dies at the same time, Abdullah would be about 17. Muhammad declared Ali his successor, but the Muhajirun chose one of their own, Abu Bakr. If Muhammad instead chose Abdullah as his successor, would the direct bloodline be enough to convince them to stick with Muhammad's choice? What effects could this have on Islam's early history?
WI one of Muhammad's sons survives to adulthood?
- Thread starter mythmonster2
- Start date
Did Muhammad chose Ali to be his successor?
Because I think Sunnis and Shiates still argue over that to this day.
Would his son be worthy?
Would Muhammad choose his own son? Because his sons never grew to adulthood in OTL, we have no way of knowing how worthy they could have been, and whether they would be declared as one of the “Ten Promised Companions”, who were already in Heaven while alive.
Every Rashidun Caliph was one of the Ten.
Assuming Muhammad would pick his own son, that son better be as remarkable and great as any of the Ten Companions.
However, would Muhammad risk a dynasty based on his own blood from occurring?
He having no sons might as well be a divine command from God to not create a dynasty of blood.
Now that I think of it, no major religious founder have such a dynasty.
Jesus was without issue, the Buddha ordained his only son as a monk, dooming his own line, Confucius’s descendants never became major saints or sages (though they were granted a perpetual dukedom by later dynasties), Lao Tzu is mysterious and we know literally nothing concrete.
Contrast Yu the Great, sage king of China, who wanted his prime minister to succeed him as king, as in that time, every king was appointed by the previous king and not related by blood, but the PEOPLE actually protest and chose his son instead, starting the first Dynasty, the Xia.
Effects on History
If he did have a son, who was recognized as a successor, then the early Muslims who wanted to follow Muhummad's bloodline much as the Shiates do today, with their veneration of the Sayids, then we'd have a less emphasis on scholarship, and more emphasis on bloodline. The Islamic Aristcracy would be akin to that of Europe. It doesn't change much per se, but every polity and cause might need to secure for themselves a figurehead that was descended from Muhammad in order to justify their rule. Hmmm, kinda like Japan. The Yamato Dynasty is 2000 years old, but the Emperors of Japan don't always rule, but they are never overthrown. Just act as puppets (as there was no way to become Emperor of Japan unless you were of the blood. Contrast China, who have divinely approved revolution built into their political system).
A major potential early POD that will have implications might be that the Rashidun Caliphate doesn't end until much later. If the Dynasty of Muhummad could be continued indefinitely, there could well be a Royal House that would be quite old.
Women's rights might see a slight set back. In OTL, Muhummad's favoured wife, Aisha (the Mother of the Faith) played tremendous roles in Islamic theology, writing the hadithes, and the politics of the day— but if a son was in the way, her role might be reduced and her influence curtailed by those who would listen to the son, not the wife.
It is said that no Hadith narrated by a women have ever been rejected by the Islamic Scholarship, that every one was considered to be authentic and correct. But if a son with 'divine blood' were to say otherwise...
In addition, the bloodline of Muhummad is continued solely through his four daughters in OTL (in Shia Islam, they argue that the Prophet only had one daughter who was able to have children, Fatima— and that the others were women living in Muhummad's first wife's household, who was a widow before she married him. So they're possibly stepdaughters).
If he had a son, this veneration of the women of early Islam would be forgotten by history. In Christianity, the women of the early Church who played tremendous roles had their position curtailed over time by the Church, and Jesus didn't even have children. If Jesus had a son, the role of women might be forgotten entirely.
Last edited: