Isle of Skye in Photos

On Morality and Law - Selections from 'And God Knows The Soldiers' by Khaled M. Abou El Fadl

In the Name of God, the Most Gracious, the Dispenser of Grace.

I just finished reading the book 'And God Knows the Soldiers' by Khaled M. Abou El Fadl in its third edition.  Interestingly, it is the publication afterthoughts (the fifth chapter) which got me thinking the most.  So here, I'd like to share some snippets of the book which I thought was particularly striking.  For this particular post, I have chosen the topic which I call "Morality and Law".

------------------------------------------
From pages 144 to 147 of 'And God Knows the Soldiers', third edition:

"Muslim jurists started out with the assumption that God desires for human beings to maximize what is beautiful in life.  For instance, we know that mercy, compassion, and justice are good because they are beautiful.  These values are good and beautiful either because God made them so or because they are inherently so.  In either case, God created laws, or sanctioned the laws, that define beauty in the created existence.  These laws of beauty are not created by the Shari'ah - Shari'ah, for instance, does not define whether a flower is beautiful or ugly.  Rather, the laws of beauty are respected, accessed, and sustained by Shari'ah.  Since the Shari'ah is the Way to God, and God is the epitome of beauty, Shari'ah must, by necessity, preserve and protect beauty.  Therefore, studying analyzing beauty (or the laws of beauty) is part and parcel of studying Shari'ah.  Put differently, figuring out the laws of beauty is a fundamental part of discovering the Shari'ah itself.  The purpose of Shari'ah, according to most jurists, is to achieve the welfare of the people (tahqiq masalih or manafi' al-ibad), because the well-being and happiness of the people are part of what is good and beautiful.  As I mentioned earlier, Muslim jurists differentiated between Shari'ah, which is goodness in the abstract or ideal sense, and fiqh, which interprets and implements the Shari'ah.  Put simply, Shari'ah is the ideal and fiqh is the concrete approximation of the ideal, and therefore, Shari'ah is perfect and immutable, but fiqh is not.  So for example, Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751/1350) argues that it is impossible for the Shari'ah to result in an injustice, and if it does then that only means that the interpretation or positive regulations giving effect to the Shari'ah were flawed.  What Ibn al-Qayyim means is that if there is a flaw, this is not because the beautiful is deficient, but because the attempt to comprehend or implement the beautiful has failed.

This paradigm becomes meaningful when we consider the purpose of the law and the logic of legal change.  If the law mandates the abstention or performance of a certain act, we must ask, is compliance demanded for its own sake or for the sake of attaining certain results?  If the law mandates compliance for its own sake, then the purpose of the law must be intrinsically beautiful or beautiful by its nature (hasan bi dhatih), otherwise we must suspect that we misunderstood the law or its purposes.  If, on the other hand, the law mandates compliance in order to attain certain results, then the law, in this situation, is a means to an end and not an end in itself.  The end must be beautiful - whether the means are beautiful or not depends on whether it is able to achieve its ends or not.  This is called hasan li ghayr dhatih.  Therefore, in every evaluative step, we must ask, is the law the law for its own sake or for the sake of a higher end?  If it is the law for its own sake, the law cannot reflect the attributes of ugliness.  If the law is the law for the sake of a higher end, then we must make sure that the law is serving its purpose.

-----------------------
Now, I think this is an interesting point to ponder:
Is the law in the service of morality (what is beautiful)?  Or is the law equated to morality itself or even defines morality?

What do you think?  In practice and in our lives, which weighs more for us?  The law or morality?

Madhabs are characterised by differences of opinions?

“Madh-habs are basically characterized by differences of opinions more than they are characterized by uniformity and agreement and this is why we should not follow any madh-hab.”

Before we can agree or disagree with the above statement, let us analyse the statement further.  The statement implies that the concept of ‘differences of opinions’ is bad while the concept of ‘uniformity and agreement’ is good.  The statement also implies that the main characteristic of the madh-hab is this implied negative concept of ‘differences of opinions’.  Lastly, by the logical assumption that we should embrace the good, we should reject the concept of madh-habs.

Let us tackle first the concepts of ‘uniformity and agreement’ and ‘differences of opinions’.  In the Qur’an[1], there are several verses referring to mankind’s nature of holding different opinions and divergent views such as 2:213, 2:253, 5.48, 11:118, 16:92-93, 17:84, 21:92-93, 22:67 and 23:52-54.  These verses imply that it is part of God’s will and plan that mankind should hold divergent views.  (Abou El-Fadl , 2001, p. 29) One verse in particular holds an interesting implication for our discussion:

“…Unto every one of you have We appointed a [different] law and way of life.[2] And if God had so willed, He could surely have made you all one single community: but [He willed it otherwise] in order to test you by means of what He has vouchsafed unto you.  Vie, then, with one another in doing good works!  Unto God you all must return; and then He will make you truly understand all that on which you were wont to differ.” (Qur’an, 5:58)

In Asad’s commentary, he picked up on the Qur’an’s specific use of the word ‘shir’ah’ (body of laws) and ‘minhaj’ (way of life).  Both terms imply something that varies and changes ‘in accordance with the exigencies of time and of each community’s cultural development’ (Asad, 1980, p. 153).  The history of law, including Islamic law, shows this to be true as people confront new circumstances and therefore need to address those circumstances.  For example, taking the early development of Islamic law, circumstances forced Umar al-Khattab r.a. to suspend the execution of the law of theft during the famine even though it was never suspended during the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) nor Abu Bakr’s (r.a.) time.  It led to the legal precedence of suspending such law during extra-ordinary and/or very difficult and trying circumstances in Islamic law and later to the development of the maqasid al-Shari’ah[3].  Therefore, the choice of the words used by the Qur’an is significant because it implies flexibility and adaptability which is required in order to accommodate different circumstances – not only major ones as in the case of the earlier quoted example but also individual circumstances – and also differences in opinions.

It is not just the Qur’an that acknowledges the reality of the differences in views and opinions.  Citing Al-Juwayni, Abou El-Fadl (2001, p. 10) noted the long-standing tradition of disputation and disagreement that could be traced back to the time of the Companions.  There was also a famous hadith, though its authenticity is disputed, that ‘disagreement of the ummah is a source of mercy’ (Abou El-Fadl, 2001).  Imam Malik r.a. resisted having his book, al-Muwatta’, imposed as the uniform law of the land because he upheld the view that there was no single juristic tradition/school amongst the many which have formed that have an exclusive claim to the truth.  This was so because each school based their legal opinions on only part of the entire corpus of knowledge handed down by the various Companions who settled in the various lands (Abou El-Fadl, 2001; Philips, 2006).  Each of the scholars in the various schools was exercising his/her ijtihad based on their knowledge and as the famous hadith in Sahih Muslim (Elias, 2012) goes:

Amr ibn Al-As reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, say, “If a judge makes a ruling, striving to apply his reasoning (ijtihad) and he is correct, then he will have two rewards; and if a judge makes a ruling, striving to apply his reasoning and he is mistaken, then he will have one reward.”

These various traditions in Islamic jurisprudence seem to indicate that the Islamic jurisprudential tradition does embrace the idea of diversity in opinions.  The Islamic jurisprudential tradition, which has striven hard to be true to the Qur’an and Sunnah, would not embrace something that runs counter to them.  Thus the idea of diversity in opinions does not run counter to these sacred sources and cannot possibly be bad.

The second assumption in the statement is that madh-habs are characterised by ‘differences of opinion’.  Is this true? First, we need to understand what a madh-hab is.  A madh-hab is a school of Islamic legal thought.  The key word here is ‘legal thought’.  Benard G. Weiss (2006, p. 22) states:

“It is a presupposition of Muslim juristic thought that the law of God has not been given to human beings in the form of a ready-made code.  Law is not sent down from heaven as a finished product.  Rather, it is something that human jurists must elaborate on the basis of textual sources.”

Again the idea here is that the jurists have to exercise their ijtihad in interpreting the textual sources of the Qur’an and Sunnah in expressing the legislation/law.  Ijtihad means hard work and each mujtahid has the responsibility to exert himself/herself to the issue even if it has already been done by others and form his/her own opinion (Weiss, 2006, p. 132).  Therefore the mujtahidis, and by extension the madh-habs they identify with and/or belong to, derive their authority from their ability to interpret the text through their hard work (Abou El-Fadl, 2001; Weiss, 2006) and due to human fallibility[4], there is the possibility of diversity of interpretation for a single issue.  Even within a single madh-hab, there is a diversity of opinions on the various issues.  Ibn Rushd in his book Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid (1994) describes the various ikhtilaf and noted the reasons for these differences in detail.  Thus, the statement that madh-habs are characterised by differences of opinions does have some validity.

In order to understand why these differences of opinions (ikhtilaf) arise, we need to understand the methodology which the mujtahidis and the madh-habs use to interpret the sacred texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah.   The Qur’an and Sunnah are the two primary sources of Islamic law.  However, while the Qur’anic text is agreed upon, the Sunnah is not.  Even with the Qur’an, differences occur in interpreting its text.  For example, in the case of a text in the form of a command there are differences of opinion as to whether it becomes an obligation or a recommendation and similarly in the case of a text of proscription (Ibn Rushd, 1994).  As for the Sunnah, Yusuf (1996) and Duderija (2012) made the differentiation between the Sunnah and hadiths.  Both these authors emphasised that the Sunnah refers to the practices (aml) as opposed to the hadiths which is the documentation of the practices.  Simply put, as generations passed, there is a growing reliance on the hadiths to remember the Sunnah.  However, given that documentation can be falsified, there arises different ways to authenticate the hadiths – two main methodologies are those of the hadith scholars who look at the isnad and matan to prove the ‘soundness’ of a hadith as its authenticity and those of the legal theologists (usuliyyun) who look at the tawatur (the multiple channels of transmission) of the hadith to provide certainty of its authenticity.  These different methodologies, combined with the different methodologies in interpreting the text (matan) of the hadiths, naturally give rise to differences in opinions and judgement[5].  These differences of opinions and judgement have ensured a rich Islamic legal tradition and heritage, manifested by the madh-habs, which is not only able to respond to new issues but also to look at old issues with new eyes/insight[6].  Therefore, even though the madh-habs are characterised by the differences of opinions, it is a positive development within the Islamic legal tradition that allows people to adopt an opinion suited to their circumstances rather than be rigidly bound by a single, uniform code of law which impose hardship upon the people because it is not suited for their circumstances. 

Finally, we come to the crux of the statement, i.e. we should not follow the madh-habs because they are characterised by differences of opinions.  We have shown that though the madh-habs are characterised by differences of opinions, differences of opinions do not necessarily have a negative connotation and within the Islamic legal tradition, these differences are seen as a mercy for the Ummah made up of diverse communities and individuals.  So the issue of following madh-habs or otherwise should not be decided according to whether the madh-habs are rife with differences of opinions but instead we need to understand what it means to follow a madh-hab.  As mentioned before, a madh-hab is a school of legal thought.  Simply put, if we take out the current concept of madh-habs being defined by the four major schools and perhaps the salafi and ahl-hadiths, a madh-hab represents the opinions of a learned scholar.

It is inescapable that a practising Muslim is always bound by a madh-hab.  A child learning from his/her parents follows the parents’ school of thought and if he is sent to study under a teacher, then she/he is following her/his teacher’s opinions, i.e. his madh-hab.  As she/he grows older and learns from more than one teacher, he/she may then be able to understand better and formulate his/her own choices from the various different opinions…at this stage, he/she is known as a muqallaf until he reaches the stage where he/she has the necessary skills to be a mujtahid whereupon he/she is now no longer bound by the opinions of those more knowledgeable than himself/herself.  Rather than being bound, the learned mujtahid can now engage in the process and becomes one of the contributors.

One of the implications of rejecting the following the madh-habs is that we are rejecting the Islamic jurisprudential tradition with its wealth of knowledge built up through the centuries.  It is as if we are cutting down the tree with its branches, leaves and fruits in order to ‘go back to the roots’.   A gardener who wants to grow his own tree by grafting the ‘roots’ needs to be equipped with the proper skills.  Similarly in the case of the person rejecting following the madh-habs, he needs to be equipped with the necessary skills to interpret the sources and form his own opinion.  Unfortunately, this is not the case of the majority of us.  What is therefore obligatory upon us is to strive to increase our knowledge and strive to reach this level knowledge and skill if we can but until then, we should honour the efforts of the mujtahidis and our ancestors who have built the Islamic legal traditions by keeping faith with our teachers.

Reference:

Abou El-Fadl, K., 2001. Speaking in God’s Name: Islamic Law, Authority and Women. England, U.K: Oneworld Publication Limited.

Abou El-Fadl, K., 2006.  The Search for Beauty in Islam. U.S.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Asad, M., 1980. The Message of the Qur’an. Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus Limited.

Duderija, A., 2012. Evolution in the Concept of Sunnah during the First Four Generations of Muslims in Relation to the Development of the Concept of an Authentic Hadīth as based on Recent Western Scholarship. Arab Law Quarterly, 26, pp. 393-437.

Elias, A.A., 2012. Daily Hadith Online. [online] Available at: http://www.dailyhadithonline.com/2012/02/10/hadith-on-fiqh-a-judge-who-makes-sincere-ijtihad-is-still-rewarded-even-if-he-is-wrong/ [Accessed 26 November 2013].

Hallaq, W., 1999.  The authenticity of Prophetic Hadith: A Pseudo-problem. Studia Islamica, 99, pp. 75-90.

Ibn Rushd, 1994. The Distinguished Jurist’s Primer/Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid. Translated from Arabic by I.A.K. Nyazee. Reading, U.K.: Garnet Publishing Limited.

Philips, A.A.B., 2006. The Evolution of Fiqh: Islamic Law and the Madh-habs. Saudi Arabia: International Islamic Publishing House.

Weiss, B.G., 2006. The Spirit of Islamic Law. Georgia, U.S.: The University of Georgia Press. (Paperback ed.)

Yusuf, S.M., 1996. The Sunnah – Its Development and Revision. In: P.K. Koya, ed. 1996. Hadith and Sunnah: Ideals and Realities. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Islamic Book Trust, pp. 103-128.

---

[1] This paper will use Asad’s translation of the Qur’an (Asad, 1980) for any Qur’anic references.

[2] The words ‘shir’ah’ or ‘shari’ah’ and ‘minhaj’ are translated into law and way of life respectively.

[3] This famous ruling was one of the first steps towards the formulation of the maqasid of the Shari’ah where the most essential category (al-darurat) of preserving human life (as in the time of the famine) triumphs over the other essential categories, in this particular case the category is the preservation of one’s wealth and property.

[4] Both Abou El-Fadl (2001) and Weiss (2006) discuss the implication of fallibility of the jurists (mujtahid) on fiqh (Islamic law).

[5] Though not touched in this paper, amongst the secondary sources such as Qiyas, ‘Urf, Ihtisan etc, the madh-habs have always differed in their preference for these secondary sources.

[6] One such issue that caught my attention was on spousal abuse.  Here, Abou El-Fadl (2006) gave a fresh perspective on the related verses and hadiths.

Dangers of Qiyas without proper knowledge

This weekend, I had a discussion with a couple of friends regarding a Hadith about forbidding the filing of teeth, plucking of eyebrow and so forth.

There were some speculations as to whether it means whitening of the teeth and so on are also forbidden.  I stopped the speculations because of a few concerns I have with such a discussion:

1. Do we have enough knowledge to know whether the Hadith is muttawatur or ahad; and also sahih or hasan or daif?  

2.  Do we know the background of the Hadith - in what context it was said and the cause of it?  What is the underlying meaning?

3.  Were there other hadiths or verses of the Qur'an supporting or contradicting this one?  If contradicting, how do we reconcile them?

3.  When those are clarified, we then need to understand what is the 'basis' for making the qiyas (extrapolation) to other things such as whitening of the teeth etc?  What is the operative cause/reason for the qiyas?

4.  Could there be extenuating circumstances that may lead to different conclusion?  

5.  What is the impact of making the qiyas?  How wide ranging is it in terms of individual and community level?

 As I learn more about Islamic jurisprudence, the more cautious I become in these kinds of discussions.  Personally, I think we were not equipped to address the above points.  

For example, take the third point...what is the underlying reason for forbidding the filing of the teeth?  Is it because it is not healthy or because it is tempering with what God gave you or it is to beautify oneself or it is misrepresenting oneself to others?  And then we ask how do we know that the underlying reason can be applied to the other activities?

The danger is then that we apply the wrong reasoning and therefore the wrong qiyas.  In that case, we are misrepresenting what the Prophet s.a.w. intended.  And given that we didn't apply due diligence, we couldn't even say that we exercised our ijtihad.  Thus we fall into the danger of assuming a role of authority without being duly qualified for it. And in so doing, interpose our will over the Divine Will.

This little incident is just one example of how I realise, in my arrogant youth, I would have jumped to conclusions that could have had me assuming an authoritarian role in interpreting the Hadith and applying it willy nilly to what I saw fit.  Inshallah, I have learnt my lesson that my knowledge is too limited for such a task but that I should learn more towards equipping myself with the knowledge.

Wallahu 'alam.

Seerah of the Prophet s.a.w. - What a da'i can learn from him.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Dispenser of Grace.

The last few days I have been battling an essay for my Seerah course.  While not the best work I have done, I thought I'd share it here as it falls nicely with the series on Seerah that I have been doing on and off.  I hope it will benefit someone.

Wassalam,
Sid

--------------------------------

The role of a da’i in today’s world is very challenging in the light of the mistrust by non-Muslims and the association of Islam with terrorism, whether justified or otherwise.  In this paper, we will explore the role of a da’i in this challenging environment and how we can learn from the example of Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. in this respect.  We will first define the role of the da’i and the challenges he/she faces.  The second part is focused on Prophet Muhammad in his role as a da’i.  The third and penultimate part is focused on how we can learn from the Prophet by applying his examples in the current challenges before we conclude.

Da’wah literally means a call (Oxford Islamic Studies Online, 2013), an invitation back to God, and a da’i is the person calling.  In the context of Islam, a da’i is one who extends the invitation to Islam by conveying its message of Oneness of God to others.  In the scholars’ opinion, da’wah is a responsibility of every Muslim and therefore every Muslim is a da’i.  But more than just extending the invitation to Islam, a da’i is also a leader in the sense that he is responsible for influencing the person he is doing da’wah to and impacting his life through the message.  The first da’i in the Islamic history was the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. when Islam was unknown and faced a lot of challenges and hostility.  Today, the situation of hostility and challenges are similar.  Given God’s exhortation in the Qur’an (Asad, 1980, p 642) that in him is a good example, we should try to learn from his experience and example in applying it to our current situation.

At the advent of Islam, the Makkan society was affluent, deriving their wealth mainly from foreign trade and local bazaars and markets.  This affluence led them to indulging in vices such as gambling and drinking (Salahi, 1995, pp 48-49).  Makkah was also in the grips of idol worship even though they had interactions with the Jews in Yathrib and the Christians in other part of Arabia.  There were also a few of the hanifs in Makkah itself such as Waraqah, the cousin of Khadijah r.a. (Lings, 1983, pp 16-17, Salahi, 1995, pp 54-57) but overall, the Quraish were no longer following the faith of Abraham and changed a lot of the rituals of pilgrimage.  Besides the worship aspects, they were also very superstitious, such as using arrows for fortune telling and wearing charms for protection against the jinn.  In terms of social and moral values, they treated those who have no clan protection and especially women poorly, going to the extremes of burying alive their baby daughters (Salahi, 1995, p 51-53).

It was in this clime that the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. was sent to call the Quraish and the rest of the world back to God through Islam.  Though born to a noble Quraish family, he grew up as an orphan and never enjoyed an affluent lifestyle.  He also had a reputation for honesty, integrity and good moral character and held the respect of the Quraish, especially after the episode of the rebuilding of the Kaabah (Lings, 1999, p 42, Salahi, 1995, pp 40-46).  This reputation is actually key to his success as a da’i.  John Adair (2010, p 65), in his assessment of the vital importance of the Prophet’s trustworthiness as a leader, mentioned “there can be no confidence without truth” and “trust, like the soul, once gone is gone forever.”  Trust is important in any relationship and the relationship between the caller (da’i) and the called hinges on that trust.  The trust the Quraish had in him was to play an important part in his da’wah work.  In his personal life, his marriage to Khadijah r.a. was a happy one, lasting till her death.  Through this marriage, he gained a firm supporter in Khadijah r.a. in his da’wah work.  His strategy as a da’i, whether it was divinely inspired or otherwise, was to focus on those closest to him first, then propagating it in private and individual basis (Al-Ghazali, 1999, p 113) until the command came to do it openly in Surah Ash-Shu’ara:214 (Asad, 1980, p574) where it was stated

“And warn [whomever thou canst reach, beginning with] thy kinsfolk.”

As a da’i, he faced many different challenges in calling to Islam and in his responses to these challenges, we can learn quite a bit.  One of the first challenges he faced was in terms the da’wah to his extended family, risking his relationship with them (al-Ghazali, 1999, p 115).  While his immediate family embraced Islam, it was not so with his extended family.  His beloved uncle, Abu Talib, gave his protection and support but would not accept the call till his death.  His uncle, Abu Lahab, turned very hostile[1]: he ridiculed the Prophet, made his sons divorce the Prophet’s daughters and abused him (Salahi, 1995, p 89, al-Ghazali, 1999, pp 116-117).  Because they were his uncles, the Prophet was put in a dilemma.  His approach in this challenge was to persevere in the da’wah efforts and to maintain the relationship even if it was rebuffed as was in the case of Abu Lahab.  His patience in enduring his uncle’s hostility without retaliation was not only proof of his gentle nature but also of his awareness of the rights of kinship. 

The next set of challenges was with the leaders of the Quraish.  Besides torturing and persecuting the small Muslim community, one of their first actions with respect to the Prophet himself was to pressure Abu Talib to make the Prophet stop his da’wah efforts or give him up to them.  These actions distressed the Prophet who thought his uncle was going to lift his protection but he still stood firm, not swayed from his cause (al-Ghazali, 1999, pp 128-129, Lings, 1983, p 52).  Next, they tried negotiating directly with him.  For example Utbah ibn Rabee’ah went to him with offers from the Quraish chiefs.  The Prophet’s actions in this instance were telling of his wisdom.  He listened attentively to the offers instead of brushing them aside.  When Utbah finished, the Prophet answered with the first 38 verses of Al-Fussilat which clearly stated the message he wanted to convey, inviting Utbah to ponder upon the signs and accept the call.  The beauty of the verses left Utbah bemused where he then counseled the Quraish chiefs to adopt a wait-and see policy even though they rejected it (al-Ghazali, 1999, pp 126-128, Salahi, 1995, pp 106-107).  Other negotiations which embodied the spirit of compromise and ‘live-and-let-live’ also failed due to the firmness and steadfastness of the Prophet in delivering his message (Salahi, 1995, pp 140-143).  They also started a smear campaign against him with the pilgrims and other visitors.  Calling him a magician and a person who sows discord between fathers and sons[2], they impressed upon the pilgrims not to listen to the Prophet and to avoid him.  The Prophet’s response was to persevere and continued to reach out to those who were willing to listen (Lings, 1983, pp 53-55, Salahi, 1995, pp 111-114).  These challenges were just some of what he and the early Muslim community faced in the da’wah effort.

From the Prophet’s example, we can identify several key characteristics that a da’i needs to develop in facing the challenges of today.  The first characteristic is that of noble character which includes trustworthiness and integrity.  It was to the point that even while they persecuted him, the Quraish still respected him and entrusted him with their belongings to the point that when the Prophet migrated, Ali r.a. was given the task to return people their belongings (Salahi, 1995, p 201).  As mentioned earlier, integrity and trustworthiness are key in engendering the trust in the da’i and by implication trust in the message.  The second and third characteristics are patience and perseverance respectively which were evident in all the challenges that the Prophet faced.  These characteristics are the key to success in any challenge in life what more in da’wah.  In the Qur’an, God says (2:153)

“O You who have attained to faith!  Seek aid in steadfast patience and prayer: for, behold, God is with those who are patient in adversity.” (Asad, 1980, p 32)

The Prophet embodied this advice from God for he was steadfastly patient and was constant in prayer which should be the model for any da’i today.  The next characteristic is wisdom and intelligence.  Wisdom in knowing your audience, knowing when to engage or otherwise and what best to say allows a da’i to be effective in his da’wah effort.  Intelligence helps the da’i in creating his da’wah strategy just like the way the Prophet strategized by focusing on those closest to him first.  This led him to build a core circle of followers who were not only his support but also in helping to propagate the message like Abu Bakr r.a.  

With these characteristics developed and armed with the knowledge and appreciation of the message, the da’i is now ready to face the challenges of today.  Like during the time of the Prophet, Islam is once again a ‘stranger’ in the global scene.  While there are countries with majority Muslims, these countries are few when compared with the rest of the world and quite a lot of Muslims live in non-Muslim countries.  As such, we see similar challenges to those faced by the Prophet and early Muslims.  For example, the challenges of doing da’wah to their non-Muslim family are being faced by many new converts to Islam.  By studying the actions of the Prophet in his relationship with and his efforts to spread the message to his immediate and extended family, the da’i is able to learn the wisdom and strategy that the Prophet applied in such situations. 

There are also a lot negative press about Islam and Muslims in the current times, similar to the smear campaign that the Quraish carried out against the Prophet and the early Muslim community.  Lessons can also be learned from the strategy the Prophet adopted to counter the smear campaign instead of acting hastily and emotionally as happened during the incident of the cartoons mocking the Prophet not so long ago.  The hostility which quite a number of Muslims faced living in a majority non-Muslim countries like in France and some parts of Australia and U.S. are again similar to the hostility confronted by the Prophet and the early Muslim community.  The Prophet’s merciful and gracious actions together with his integrity won the hearts of many of his enemies, some becoming Muslims and others became less hostile.  Today’s da’i should also set an example by his good actions which should embody the message and help soften the hearts of those around him.

It therefore behoove today’s da’i to emulate the Prophet in his characters which Aisha r.a. once described as the walking Qur’an and learn from his da’wah efforts.  There are many parallels in the challenges faced today with those faced by the Prophet that it is a shame not to use the guidance given to us by the Prophet. 

Reference:

Adair, J., 2010.  The Leadership of Muhammad.  U.K.:  Kogan Page Limited.

Al-Ghazali, M., 1999. Fiqh-Us-Seerah: Understanding the Life of Prophet Muhammad. 2nd ed. Saudi Arabia: International Islamic Publishing House.

Asad, M., 1980. The Message of the Qur’an. Gibraltar: Dar al-Andalus Limited.

Lings, M., 1983.  Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources. U.K.: Islamic Texts Society.

Oxford Islamic Studies Online, 2013.  Da’wah. [online] Available at http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e511

Salahi, M. A., 1995.  Muhammad: Man and Prophet.  U.K.:  Element Books Limited.

---

[1] It was to the point that Surah Al-Lahab was revealed

[2] There were other descriptions proposed such as madman and poet but was rejected by al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah because he (and the Quraish chiefs) knew that the Prophet was right and his message was beautiful  (Salahi, 1995, p 112).