This is a short reflection on the question of whether we Muslims of Britain should be focused more on da’wah or on politics, or could we (or should we) do both in equal measure? The reflection starts with three texts to consider: one verse, one hadith, and a scholarly saying. The post itself is based on Chapter 26 of an unpublished manual I have written, called: The Call and the Caller: A Handbook on Da’wah. The post is not meant to be exhaustive or comprehensive. Instead, it presents an outline of the issue, and hopes to nurture an informed discussion on the matter; with its fuller context best being appreciated along with the other thirty-odd chapters of the book.
TEXTS TO CONSIDER
[In gratitude] for the protection of the Quraysh. Their security in their winter and summer journeys. So let them worship the Lord of this House, Who feeds them against hunger and secures them from fear. [Q.106:1-4]
‘When three people set out on a journey, appoint one of them as a leader. [Abu Dawud, no.2608. It was graded hasan by al-Nawawi in Riyadh al-Salihin, no.967]
‘This is why the Prophet, peace be upon him, instructed his ummah to appoint rulers over them, and ordered the rulers to return trusts to their rightful people, and that when they judge between people, that they judge with justice. He [also] ordered them to obey their rulers in that which is obedience to Allah, exalted is He. In Abu Dawud’s Sunan; via Abu Sa‘id, the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: ‘When three of you are on a journey, appoint one of you to be the leader.’ … Now if it is required to appoint someone as a leader in the smallest of groups, or the shortest of meetings, then this alerts us to the duty of doing so when numbers are far greater than this.’ [Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmu‘ al-Fatawa, 28:64-5]
SOME CONSIDERATIONS
If our religious legitimacy for living here is primarily grounded in da‘wah, how are we to go about securing our existential welfare as British Muslims, especially as anti-Muslim sentiments intensify? Frequently in the Qur’an, we are told how much of a blessing food and safety are, specifically; and economic prosperity and political security are, generally (as in the verses above). People will naturally always be suspicious or indignant at any actors or agendas which are seen as undermining livelihood or security. And history tells us how easily mob anger can ignite whenever people feel such blessings are under threat by ‘outsiders’ or perceived ‘fifth columnists’. We cannot be unwise to our socio-political climate; nor must we trade tit for tat insults with Islamophobes. Rather, calmer hearts and cooler heads must prevail. Push back with what is better [Q.41:34] is what the Qur’an says.
The hadith that follows reminds us that Islam values nomocracy — ‘rule of law’. So even when a tiny band of people undertake a long travel, we are to put one person in overall charge. This way, and with the act of consultation, potential differences may be better settled, matters more organised and the destination more smoothly reached. Currently, who leads British Muslims (or who speaks on their overall behalf) is a jumbled one, as is the question of what relationship this leadership ought to have with government. The da‘wah suffers from proper leadership too. Rather, it is turning more and more into a free-for-all theatre for reckless egos or angry preachers who spout what they want, when they want, to whomever they want. Algorithms then ensure that such jahili impulses get amplified and seen as real voices of Islam when they emphatically are not!
The long quote from Ibn Taymiyyah reminds us that governance and political leadership is a must for all people, without which society frays, mutual help and cooperation retreat, mistrust grows, angers increases and civil strife then looms on the horizon. In terms of us British Muslims as a diverse mix of ethnicities, cultures, and civic or tribalistic roots, we have yet to agree upon a unified British Muslim representation. Nor are there indications that such will happen any time soon. For now, British Muslims remain divided along ethnic and sectarian lines. We are also still in the grip of reactionary politics that lacks long term vision and has yet to theologise a fiqh-fikr framing suitable for our needs.
Given da‘wah is our core validity, then shouldn’t our politics and political activism be subsumed under its objectives; or at least not hamper them? And while it is not the way of Islam (and thus nor of Muslims) to be conformed to the age, our political expressions or requests must be far wiser and da‘wah-centric. It is a reasonable possibility, maybe sooner rather than later, that government will feel compelled to ban or clamp down on political expressions of Islam; much like it regulates any political ideology that is seen to threaten democratic values, or erode secularism. So before the blunt instrument of the state intervenes, it’s best we learn to self-regulate.
As for the populist idea that da‘wah and politics are two sides of the same coin, it’s more soundbite than it is substance. Yes, both fields are related to the duty to command good and forbid evil (al-amr bi’l-ma‘ruf wa’l-nahi ‘ani’l-munkar). But this is probably as far as the comparison goes. For da‘wah is predicated upon knowledge, wisdom and being principled. It was the main task of Allah’s Prophets, no less. As for politics (siyasah), its skill-set is markedly different. It’s about navigating power relations, group interests, trying to influence law and policy; and is less principled for it entails expediency, pragmatism, negotiation or even compromise. While it can be possible to dip our feet in both streams, it’s nigh on impossible to be skilled (and hence practically useful) in both. For as soon as pragmatism and compromises steer da‘wah it ceases to be prophetic: while never budging from principles does not make for good politics.
Why not leave a brief comment, like or reply.