Imamate in Zaydi doctrine

Unlike the Twelver or Isma'ili imamate, however, it was not hereditary and could be claimed by any qualified Alid; nor were its holders ascribed semi-divine attributes of infallibility and miracle-working.

Moreover, the personal nature of the imamate for a long time prevented the rise of persistent institutions, rendering the Zaydi states established in Yemen and Tabaristan unstable.

[1] The revolt failed in large part due to lack of support by the Kufan Shi'a, who were divided over the thorny question of the legitimacy of the first three Rashidun caliphs—i.e., those who ruled before Ali ibn Abi Talib—Abu Bakr, Umar, and Uthman; the more radical Shi'a rejected them as usurpers, while the more moderate ones accepted them as legitimate imams (leaders) since Ali himself had pledged allegiance to them.

[4] Apart from the emphasis on the imamate and its restriction to Ali's descendants, the Zaydi position, especially in modern times, is close to mainstream Sunnism, and Zaydism is sometimes considered as the fifth Sunni school (madhhab).

[4] While the Imamis considered Sunnis as infidels, their early imams were politically quietist, accepting the rule of the Umayyad and later the Abbasid Caliphate.

[6] The first successful Zaydi regime was indeed established in Morocco, at the westernmost extremity of the Islamic world, by Idris ibn Abdallah, who fled the suppression of the 786 uprising.

At the same time, unlike the other Shi'a groups, they held that since Ali had consented to obey them, Abu Bakr and Umar were rightful leaders, while Uthman was so for the first half of his reign, prior to his attempts to raise his own, Umayyad clan over all others.

[2][14] From this, the Batriyya accepted that imams did not have to be the most excellent member of the Muslim community,[12] as was the case in the Basran school of Mu'tazilism[15] and in Khariji doctrine.

[16] The Jarudiyya on the other hand followed the Imami Shi'a in rejecting the first three caliphs as illegitimate and usurpers of Ali's rightful place, holding that he and his sons Hasan (d. 670) and Husayn (d. 680) had been explicitly designated as successors of Muhammad.

[12][5] A prospective imam had to be of sound body and mind so that he could rule, have an upright personal character, live a life of piety and probity, and have an extensive knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence and religious matters that qualified him as a mujtahid, up to and including the authorship of original works.

This contributed, according to Haykel, to the Qasimi State's progressive Sunnification, which allowed the creation of more permanent offices and institutions, forming a judicial and court bureaucracy along the lines long established in non-Zaydi Muslim states—indeed, often taken over from the previous Ottoman administration.

[12] Likewise, the required high standard of erudition on jurisprudence disqualified many actual Alid potentates from the imamate, even though they might already hold secular power.