Do you think Muhammad should have named a successor why or why not?

Answer 1

Answer 1

No,

The reasons are:

1. All sayings and practices of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him); that is called Sunnah; are under guidance and commands of God. So, I don't agree with the question itself. Prophet Muhammad is not a normal leader or chairman to be criticized and judged by people on his sayings and doings.
2. If prophet Muhammad named his successor, each successor will name the one following him. Islam would described as a system of Dictatorship after that and would be accused of not adopting democracy. Refer to the questions below.
3. Qur'an calls for democracy under the name of consultation "Shoura", so how do you expect prophet Muhammad will violate the Qur'an rules and commands. Qur'an says (English meaning translation):

"And those who have responded to their lord and established prayer and whose affair is [determined by] consultation among themselves, and from what We have provided them, they spend." (42:38)"

Answer 2

The question of "should" appears at first to throw an interesting wrench into the equation. If it is excised, (i.e. Do you think that Mohammed had named a successor?), this becomes a question strictly of Sunni vs. Shiite understandings of Imamat or Leadership. The Sunni opinion is well described in Answer 1, while the Shiite opinion would be that at Ghadir, Mohammed did name 'Ali as his successor because of Divine Revelation.

The changes that result from adding the "should" are slight. As Answer 1 notes, the Sunni position is that creating a direct line of succession from one leader to another would create at its best a benign dictatorship and at worst a tyrannical monarchy. Either way, there would be no democracy and the will of the people would be stifled by present authority. The Shiites do not disagree with this assertion and say that it would be quite correct and proper that there is no real democracy in Islamic leadership. However, since God has chosen these individuals and the succession is divinely made, these leaders would be perfect individuals. (The Fourteen Infallibles are the extension of this view.) Therefore, there should be no innate problem with their leadership since they are ruling as God would wish and anyone who opposes this mentality is themselves unrighteous, even if this group of unrighteous individuals is the majority. (The results of such belief are quite evident in the case of the Islamic Republic of Iran.)