This week's guest blogger is Sophie Burgess, she discusses Muhammad's strengths and weaknesses as a leader of the nascent Islamic community when they settled in Makkah. This is the type of debate you can expect to discuss in an AO2 question. Enjoy!
Hello Philosophers & Theologians!
Today I shall be discussing whether or not Muhammad was a complete leader in Madinah. I shall lay out the pros and cons of Muhammad being a complete leader or not. You may leave your opinions in the comments below, explaining why this is your view.
Muhammad was a complete leader because he managed to convert people easily over to Islam, as they were very willing to follow his ideas and his messages. For example, he promoted the idea of no usury [gambling/not paying taxes] and no alcohol. He also limited polygamy to four wives. This was because he considered these select things as sins, as taught by Allah, and encouraged the people to also consider them as such. This meant that no one was presenting anyone else in danger by blindly carrying out actions under the influence of alcohol. It also meant that no one was cheated out of money and turned hateful in the eyes of greed. Finally, it also meant that women weren’t objects to be mistreated for a man’s pleasure and thus made them more humanised. This summarises his ability as a political leader because he managed to change the rules without backlash from Madinans, which shows their subjectivity to change.
However, on the other hand he did not manage to convert the Khazraj tribe until after 627 CE, which shows that he struggled a little with being able to convert people over. This shows that he wasn’t an adept leader as we first thought. This thus demonstrates how he may be swaying over those who have more consideration of moving rather than those who are stubborn. This means that he may struggle to persuade people under certain circumstances. But it is also understandable that not everyone wants to change their religion to Islam, especially considering the time context that this happened in.
Therefore we can conclude that Muhammad was good at persuading those to join his cause, especially if they were in the Hanif movement [those who were more open to monotheistic ideas]. We can also conclude that even the most difficult to convince were eventually convinced, such as the Khazraj tribe, even if it was a couple of years after the Secret Stage ended. [That was in 613 CE.] This made Muhammad a complete leader as this made him improve politically, as he gained more and more followers through his strong, natural, charismatic image.
Moreover, Muhammad was NOT a complete leader because he was unable to dictate by himself. For example, he often had Ali, Umar, and Abu Bakr by his side to help him lead. This demonstrates that he wasn’t a strong political leader because he wasn’t capable of leading the Ummah all by himself. This mean that perhaps Muhammad wasn’t the independent leader that they were looking for, especially as he always sought help from other companions.
However, one could argue that this makes him more of a complete leader, as it allowed him to work with others and seek out different opinions. It also makes the Ummah more of a democracy, than just a one-man show. It probably inspired the people to take up Islam more than ever, as the leadership was just so solid. Also, one does not need to be just the sole leader of a constituency; it takes many leaders to handle one. Therefore, we cannot expect Muhammad to be the only leader.
Therefore we can conclude that Muhammad was a complete leader because he sought out opinions from others, and made no rash decisions without doing so. This means that he was a capable leader for Madinah because he was smart politically and always gave his companions consideration over important decisions.
Furthermore, Muhammad was not a complete leader as he depended on Allah too much. This may seem good in hindsight, however you may have heard of the story where Muhammad was mid battle, and he realised he was losing. He then dropped to his knees and began to pray to God. But then Abu Bakr came over to tell him to not rely upon God so much; He couldn’t win all their battles for them. This shows that he wasn’t capable of winning his own battles; he was tempted to always go to God for help. This means that he wasn’t a complete military leader as he was not ready to go into battle and was definitely not prepared to lose.
However, this shows Muhammad as a complete leader because it demonstrates his religious leading ability. It could’ve taught the Ummah a valuable lesson, which is if you’re in doubt – pray to Allah, as He can give you all the answers you need. This would give the members a more powerful connection with Allah, and thus could make other people convert to Islam as they have heard of this connection and want to experience it for themselves. This would give it more followers and thus more supporters of Muhammad.
In short, yes it proves that Muhammad is a capable religious leader – as we have already seen in the Qur’an – but the people needed to know whether or not he was capable of going out into battle to defeat his enemies. The answer to that question is, unfortunately, no. If Muhammad wasn’t even capable of directing his own army in one battle that he had to turn to Allah, perhaps he shouldn’t even be leading his own army after all. But if this was the case, then the people of Madinah couldn’t even look up to Muhammad if he can’t fight his own battles – it makes him look bad in his own light. Therefore, he isn’t a complete military leader – BUT he is a complete religious leader.
In conclusion, Muhammad was generally a complete leader. As you might have noticed, there was nothing about him being a moral leader. In truth, I could find no criticism what-so-ever in that area. So you go, Muhammad. Four for you, Muhammad.
All in seriousness, though, his military leadership could be improved as he can’t lead an army without the help of Allah – or even lead a community by himself.
But, as I have mentioned earlier, it’s to be expected that he receives help from other people in leading the Ummah. One cannot simply walk into battle with only one leader, I assure you that.
To sum up, Muhammad was a 10/10 religious leader, a 10/10 political leader (yes, as he was able to keep the peace!), a 7/10 military leader (room for improvement), and finally a 10/10 moral leader. He is therefore, a complete leader.
But that is only my opinion!
Leave in the comments below whether or not you believe Muhammad to be a complete leader or not – make sure you include reasons why you think this!
See you all philosophers & theologians later!