THE LEADERSHIP ROLE OF SCHOLARS
The Quran tells us that the primary addressees of the prophets were always the leaders of their communities (mala’-e-qawm) (7:88)—that is, the eminent and influential people of the time. To address such individuals effectively, the first and foremost condition is that the speaker and the listener must share a common language. If there exists a linguistic barrier between the two, meaningful communication becomes impossible. For this very reason, every prophet sent by God was from among his own people and spoke their language (11:4). That is, the language of the prophets was the same language spoken by the leading members of their communities.
Scholars (ulama) are considered the inheritors of the prophets. History shows that for nearly a thousand years after the advent of Islam, scholars effectively fulfilled this role. One fundamental reason for their success was that, in those times, the language of the scholars was the same as that of the influential class.
In the centers of power such as Damascus, Baghdad, Cairo, and Cordoba, scholars consistently played a leading role. The primary reason for this was that Arabic was the language of the elite, and it was also the language of Islamic scholars. As a result, there was no linguistic gap between the two groups, enabling effective communication and leadership.
Before British rule in India, a similar situation prevailed. During that time, the Muslim ruling elite generally spoke or understood Persian, and Persian was also the language of Islamic scholars. This enabled the scholars to address the influential class directly and successfully fulfill their leadership roles. For example, when Sheikh Ahmad Sirhindi wished to address the rulers of his time, he faced no difficulty, as both groups shared Persian as their common language.
However, after the establishment of British rule in India, the situation changed. English became the language of the rulers, leaders, and educated individuals. Consequently, English became essential not only for interacting with the authorities but also for launching any major movement at the public level.
This linguistic shift brought a new chapter in the country’s history. Islamic scholars, who had played a leading role in religious and political matters for nearly a thousand years, suddenly found themselves marginalized in this field.
For example, in the first half of the 20th century, two major movements emerged in the Indian subcontinent: the Indian independence movement and the movement for the partition of India. Scholars participated in both movements, but historical events reveal that their role was mostly secondary. The leadership in both movements was largely in the hands of non-scholars who had the ability to write and speak in English.
After the partition, this situation largely persisted. For instance, one of the most significant movements among Indian Muslims after partition was the All India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat. A large number of scholars were involved in this movement. However, gradually, the same pattern emerged: the scholars became ineffective within the organization, while non-scholars, such as Dr. Abdul Jaleel Faridi and Dr. Syed Mahmood, gained dominance. This led to tensions between the scholars and non-scholars, ultimately resulting in internal conflicts and divisions within the All India Muslim Majlis-e-Mushawarat, which collapsed before achieving its objectives.
It would not be incorrect to say that Indian scholars possess, in potential, all the qualities necessary to play a leadership role in the current circumstances. However, one key deficiency has sidelined them from the field of leadership: their inability to write and speak in English—or, more broadly, in contemporary languages.
It has now become imperative for scholars to learn English with special emphasis. Otherwise, they may achieve a degree of reverence in today’s world, but it will not be possible for them to assume leadership roles. This is a natural outcome, dictated by the laws of nature, rather than the result of any conspiracy.
It is not necessary for madrasas to include English as a compulsory subject in their curriculum. The only requirement is that every major madrasa should offer English and contemporary sciences as optional subjects, giving students the opportunity to study them if they wish. This is the only way to enable madrasas and scholars to regain their ability to play a leadership role in today’s circumstances.
During my participation in international conferences, I have repeatedly observed that other religions have many individuals who can represent their faiths on global platforms using the English language and modern styles of communication. However, it is rare to find scholars within Islamic circles who are truly qualified for this task and can effectively represent Islam according to contemporary standards.
It is the essential responsibility of religious madrasas to take the necessary measures to address this shortcoming.
Some additional steps in this regard could include: Organizing extension lectures on modern, relevant topics.
• Recommending supplementary books alongside the prescribed syllabus.
• Providing opportunities for students to participate in interfaith gatherings.
• Establishing training camps for students during holidays.
• Conducting programs for speeches and discussions on modern topics under the students’ associations.
Such initiatives would help equip madrasa students with the tools needed to engage with the modern world effectively.
