The following is a translation from Arabic, please refer to the original for exact meanings.

Question: It has been reported in the leaflet ‘Political motivation’ issued by Hizb ut-Tahrir that political struggle is a style and not a method. If (political struggle and intellectual clash) is a style (means) and not a method, then does it imply that the interaction stage, which is actually a method, and the political & intellectual activities during interaction are also from the styles? It may be noted that there are clear Ayaat in the Quran regarding political struggle and intellectual clash with the kufr leaders of Quraysh?

Answer:

Yes indeed the interaction is from the method.

Also it is pertinent to recall that political & intellectual work are as well from the method, the interaction stage requires this and it can not be completed without it. Indeed, without the political and intellectual work, it is not interaction.

As for political struggle and intellectual clash, they are actually flagrant defiances of the political and intellectual work and this challenge is the style. It may be necessary in one instance and may not be required in another situation.

Within this context, the distribution of leaflets may be means of struggle when distributed openly in defiance; or it may be distributed normally…
The clash and the struggle may be defined to include clear defiance etc. and these are means or styles.

As for what has been mentioned in the Quran, these are restricted situations regarding the kufr leaders, with whom there was struggles over matters other than simply their kufr, they were at war with Islam and Muslims extensively despite clear evidences of truth… therefore the Quran has mentioned the intensive attack in those Ayaat…Yet if you were to count these Ayaat, they are few even though the kuffar were plentiful.

The Prophet (saw) employed means and styles of varying degrees of strength against the kuffar, for instance, when (probably ‘Utabah), a leader of the Quraysh went to the Prophet (saw), the Prophet (saw) addressed him with persuasive arguments, great wisdom and in a gentle & effective way. Thus when he came back to the Quraysh, he was a distinctly different self unlike the way when he had left them to go to the Prophet (saw). This has been reported by the leaders of the Quraysh themselves who had deputed him to the Prophet (saw). He was especially all praise for what he had heard from the Prophet (saw)…

On the other hand, another leader of the Quraysh (Wa’il) came to the Prophet (saw) carrying bone ashes with him. He showed the ashes to the Prophet (saw) and asked: “Can your Creator bring these ashes back to life”? the Prophet (saw) replied to him:

نعم ويبعثه حياً، ثم أضاف الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم: ويدخلك جهنم

“ Yes, He can and He will bring them back to life” the the Prophet (saw) added: “ and He (swt) will make you enter hell”…Here the Prophet (saw) was content with merely replying to his question, but added his severe comment as well…

Thus, means or styles may be varying degree of severity or it may be light, this will depend on what is pertinent to the other party.

And to further clarify:
Recite the following Ayah:

اذهب أنت وأخوك بآياتي ولا تنيا في ذكري. اذهبا إلى فرعون إنه طغى. فقولا له قولاً ليناً لعله يتذكر أو يخشى
“Go you and your brother with My Ayât (proofs, evidences, lessons, signs, etc.), and do not, you both, slacken and become weak in My remembrance. Go both of you to Fir’aun (Pharaoh), verily, he has transgressed (all bounds in disbelief and disobedience and behaved as an arrogant and as a tyrant). And speak to him mildly, perhaps he may accept admonition or fear (Allâh).”[TMQ Taha:42-44]

It is clear from this Ayah that what is required here of this ayah is the intellectual or ideological debate in a soft and gentle manner.

Now on the same topic, recite another Ayah which is between Musa (a.s) and Fir’awn but on a different aspect. Here Musa presented evidences and arguments to Fir’awn, but he persisted in his arrogant and repressive ways. Now Musa (as) did not address him in a gentle manner rather, he talked to Fir’awn in a severe style and called him as bewitched who is cursed with destruction. the Ayah is:

ولقد آتينا موسى تسع آيات بينات فاسئل بني إسرائيل إذ جاءهم فقال له فرعون إني لأظنك يا موسى مسحورا. قال لقد علمت ما أنزل هاؤلاء إلا رب السماوات والأرض بصائر وإني لأظنك يا فرعون مثبوراً
“And indeed We gave Mûsâ (Moses) nine clear signs. Ask then the Children of Israel, when he came to them, then Fir’aun (Pharaoh) said to him: “O Mûsâ (Moses)! I think you are indeed bewitched.” [TMQ al Isra’ :101]

The soft and gentle manner of discussion in the beginning was to present the evidences and arguments, but after having presented clear and decisive arguments and with Fir’awn still persisting in his arrogance, the narrative is severe…..

I hope the picture is completely clear.

It is for this reason that you find texts in our books regarding the political work during the interaction stage: (… the main points of the political work are the ideological clash and political struggle…).

The clash and struggle that emerge during this stage are because of the confrontation with the leaders of kufr generally, so for them this style is suitable. But with other kuffar and at other times, it is likely that political & ideological work is required of a different style.
I may repeat that political & ideological work is a method which is indispensable during the interaction stage, it is only the intensity of the political and ideological work, i.e. clash and struggle which are means and styles and are to be used as required at different places and times.

14 Safar, 1429 A.H
20th February, 2008 C.E