بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
The political struggle (Al-Kifaah As-Siyaasiy) and the intellectual clash (As-Siraa’ Al-Fikriy)
It was mentioned in the publication: ‘Political motivation’ issued by the Hizb, that the political struggle is a style (Usloob) and not a method (Tareeqah). If the matter is like that i.e. the political struggle and intellectual clash being an Usloob (style) and not a Tareeqah (method), then does this mean that the interaction stage is that which is from the Tareeqah (method) whilst that which occurs during it in terms of political and intellectual actions are styles (Asaaleeb). I would like this to be answered in the context of the knowledge that there are clear Aayaat in the Qur’aan Al-Kareem demonstrating the political struggle and intellectual struggle targeting the heads of Kufr from the Quraish?
Yes the interaction is from the Tareeqah (method).
And it is important to note that the political and intellectual work is also from the Tareeqah. So the interaction stage necessitates that and is not complete without it. Indeed it is not considered to be interaction in the absence of the political and intellectual work.
As for the Kifaah As-Siyaasiy (Political Struggle) and the Siraa’ Al-Fikriy (Intellectual Clash), then they represent the blatant challenge by way of the political and intellectual work. And this challenging is an Usloob (Style) and it could be necessary in some circumstances whilst not being necessary in others.
And in order to make this issue clearer then for example the distribution of a publication (leaflet) could be performed with the style of struggle (Kifaah) when it is distributed openly as a blatant challenge whilst the distribution could also be performed normally.
So the Siraa’ (clash) and the Kifaah (Struggle/combating) are those that are indicated by the characteristic of the blatant challenge along with that which is attached to this challenging... and these are styles (Asaaleeb).
As for what has been mentioned in the Qur’aan Al-Kareem then they represent limited cases that were directed towards the heads of Kufr (disbelief) because of extra matters in terms of acts of badness that are greater than the mere disbelief. This is because they used fight against Islaam and the Muslims with staunch severity despite the clear evidences of the truth (Haqq) that had been presented to them. Therefore those who attacked Islaam strongly and ardently were mentioned in these Noble Aayaat. Having said that, if we were to count those mentioned we would find that their number is limited (i.e. small) despite the number of Kuffaar (disbelievers) being many in number.
And the Messenger (saw) use to employ styles that varied in strength when dealing with the Kuffaar (disbelievers). So for example: One of the leaders of Quraish (‘Utbah) went to him (saw) and the Messenger (saw) presented Islaam to him by way of convincing proof with great wisdom and in a calm and effective manner. This resulted in the man returning to the Quraish in a disposition that was different from when he had first set off, according to the description of the heads of the Quraish who had originally sent him. And specifically he then praised the speech that he had heard from the Messenger of Allah (saw) in their company.
Whereas at another time one of the heads of Quraish (Waa’il) met the Messenger (saw) and this leader of Kufr was carrying bone ashes in his hand. He then them to the Messenger (saw) and asked him: ‘Is your Lord able to bring this back to life?’ So the Messenger (saw) responded to him and said: ‘Yes and he will bring him back alive’. The Messenger (saw) then added: ‘And he will make you enter Hell’. So in this situation the Messenger (saw) did not just answer the question but rather he added a sharp rebuke.
And as such the style increases in strength (severity) or lightens in accordance to what is appropriate to that which is being addressed.
And in order to make this clearer:
Read the following Aayah:
اذْهَبْ أَنْتَ وَأَخُوكَ بِآَيَاتِي وَلَا تَنِيَا فِي ذِكْرِي (42) اذْهَبَا إِلَى فِرْعَوْنَ إِنَّهُ طَغَى (43) فَقُولَا لَهُ قَوْلًا لَيِّنًا لَعَلَّهُ يَتَذَكَّرُ أَوْ يَخْشَى
"Go you and your brother with My Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.), and do not slacken and become weak in My remembrance.
"Go, both of you, to Fir'awn (Pharaoh), Verily, He has transgressed all bounds.
"And speak to him mildly, perhaps he may accept admonition or fear Allah." (TaHa 42-44).
So it is clear in this Aayah that the intellectual, calm and mild form of discussion is required.
And now read the following Aayah in the same subject area and which is also between Musa (as) and Fir’awn. However it is in a different situation after having presented Fir’awn with the clear signs and evidences. Despite this he remained upon his arrogant and repressive tyranny and at this point the speech of Musa (as) to him was not mild but rather it was severe and he called him Mathboor which means destroyed and cursed.
And here are the Noble Aayaat:
وَلَقَدْ آَتَيْنَا مُوسَى تِسْعَ آَيَاتٍ بَيِّنَاتٍ فَاسْأَلْ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ إِذْ جَاءَهُمْ فَقَالَ لَهُ فِرْعَوْنُ إِنِّي لَأَظُنُّكَ يَا مُوسَى مَسْحُورًا
قَالَ لَقَدْ عَلِمْتَ مَا أَنْزَلَ هَؤُلَاءِ إِلَّا رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ بَصَائِرَ وَإِنِّي لَأَظُنُّكَ يَا فِرْعَوْنُ مَثْبُورًا
And indeed we gave to Musa nine clear signs. So ask the Children of Israel about when He came to them. Then Fir'aun (Pharaoh) said to him: "O Musa! I think you are indeed bewitched."
He (Musa) said: "Verily, you know that these signs have been sent down by none but the Lord of the heavens and the earth as clear and I think you are, indeed, O Fir'aun (Pharaoh) doomed to destruction (away from All good)!" (Al-Israa 101-102).
So the mild (gentle) discussion was at the beginning so as to present the evidences and clear proofs however after having presented the clear and decisive proofs and evidences, Fir’awn continued upon his arrogance and repressive ways, so at that time the discussion became severe.
I hope that the picture has been made clear.
It is because of this understanding that you see us in our books saying in relation to the political actions of the interaction stage: ‘The intellectual clash and political struggle stand out in these political actions…’
So the Siraa’ (clash) and Kifaah (Struggle) stand out in this stage because the collision is normally with the heads of Kufr and as such this style is fitting to be used with them. However with other disbelievers or in other times, the political and intellectual action could necessitate the use of another style.
So I reiterate that the political and intellectual work is from the Tareeqah (Method) in the case where the interaction stage necessitates it without question. Whereas the escalation of the political and intellectual work i.e. the Kifaah (Struggle) and Siraa’ (Clash) is only the style, and is utilized in the time and place that is appropriate.
20th February, 2008 C.E