By Lawan Musa Danlami (Baba Lawan)
The Prophetic Mission and the Burden of Justice
Throughout human history, Allah sent prophets and messengers to guide humanity from ignorance to knowledge, from injustice to justice, and from moral corruption to righteousness. Among the prophets mentioned in the Qur’an are Dhul-Kifl, Dawud, Sulayman, Ilyas, Al-Yasa’, Yunus, Zakariyya, Yahya, ‘Isa and, finally, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon them all). Their missions differed according to their communities and circumstances, but they shared a fundamental responsibility: to call people towards the worship of Allah, uphold truth, promote righteousness and warn against oppression and corruption.
The mission of the prophets was to challenge oppressive rulers , call them to account, and ensure that justice was upheld. Every prophet came with a message of justice, truth, and opposition to oppression and the abuse of power. This explains why the masses, the poor, and ordinary people often formed the majority of their early followers. They recognised in the prophets a voice for their dignity, rights, and liberation from injustice. Consequently, many rulers perceived the prophets as threats to their authority because their teachings challenged oppressive systems and demanded accountability.
Similarly, Karl Marx argued that intellectuals should critically examine existing social structures and expose the injustices that sustain the dominance of powerful groups. From this perspective, intellectuals have a responsibility to question authority, challenge oppression, and defend the interests of the oppressed rather than serve as instruments of those in power.
Throughout history, therefore, prophets and courageous intellectuals have often faced resistance from rulers because they refused to remain silent in the face of injustice. Their mission was not to flatter those in power but to hold them accountable, challenge their abuses, and advocate for a society founded on justice, truth, and human dignity.
The Qur’an presents justice not as an optional virtue but as a divine command. Allah declares in Surah An-Nisa’ 4:135 that believers must stand firmly for justice, even when it is against themselves, their parents or their relatives. This command establishes a principle that transcends political loyalty, ethnic identity, financial interest and personal relationships. No ruler, wealthy individual, religious institution or influential personality should be placed above the demands of justice.
However, the question confronting Muslim societies today is whether those entrusted with preserving this prophetic legacy are fulfilling their responsibility. Following the death of Prophet Muhammad (SAW), the final prophet and messenger of Allah, Islamic scholars inherited the responsibility of preserving religious knowledge, guiding society, correcting wrongdoing and reminding those in authority of their accountability before Allah. Yet, throughout history, this responsibility has been exercised with varying degrees of courage, wisdom and integrity.
The Ulama as Heirs of the Prophets
The Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is reported to have said, “The scholars are the heirs of the Prophets,” a statement recorded in Sunan Abi Dawud and other hadith collections. The significance of this teaching lies in the responsibility attached to knowledge. Scholarship is not merely the ability to interpret religious texts, deliver sermons, lead prayers or issue legal opinions. It also requires moral integrity, intellectual independence and a willingness to defend truth when doing so becomes difficult.
The inheritance of the prophets is not an inheritance of political office or material wealth. It is an inheritance of knowledge, guidance and moral responsibility. A genuine scholar must therefore recognise that religious knowledge carries obligations towards both the individual and the wider society.
The Qur’an warns against concealing truth for worldly benefit. In Surah Al-Baqarah 2:174, Allah condemns those who conceal what He has revealed in exchange for a small worldly gain. This warning is particularly relevant whenever religious knowledge becomes a commodity exchanged for political appointments, financial rewards, social recognition or privileged access to those in power.
Nevertheless, it would be unjust to condemn the entire body of Islamic scholars. Many have sacrificed their comfort, careers and even their lives to defend truth. The real concern is the growing contradiction between the ethical demands of Islamic scholarship and the conduct of those who use religious authority to protect injustice or remain silent in the face of wrongdoing.
Lessons from the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates
The history of the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates offers important lessons about the complicated relationship between religious scholarship and political authority. These periods produced remarkable achievements in Islamic jurisprudence, theology, literature, science and public administration. They also witnessed political conflicts, coercion and instances in which rulers attempted to influence religious interpretation or suppress dissent.
Some scholars maintained their independence despite intimidation. Imam Abu Hanifah, for example, is traditionally remembered for refusing political demands that conflicted with his convictions and for suffering hardship under political authority. The historical details of particular episodes vary across accounts, but his legacy illustrates the ideal of scholarly independence.
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal's ordeal during the Abbasid Mihnah, the inquisition concerning the createdness of the Qur’an, provides another significant example. He endured imprisonment and flogging rather than publicly affirming a theological position imposed by the authorities. His experience demonstrates that the pursuit of religious conviction can carry a heavy personal cost.
These examples do not suggest that scholars must oppose every government or reject every political decision. Rather, they demonstrate that the legitimacy of authority does not eliminate the responsibility to examine its conduct against religious and moral principles. Cooperation with government can serve the public good, but cooperation becomes morally questionable when it requires scholars to legitimise falsehood, excuse injustice or silence legitimate criticism.
The central lesson is that proximity to political power must never become more important than fidelity to truth.
The Ottoman Experience: Between Religious Authority and Political Power
The Ottoman Empire also provides a complex historical picture of the relationship between scholars and rulers. Ottoman religious scholars, including the ulama and senior jurists, played important roles in education, judicial administration, public morality and the interpretation of Islamic law. At different times, scholars advised rulers, supported administrative reforms, mediated disputes and contributed to the stability of the state.
However, the institutional integration of religious scholarship into the machinery of government also raised difficult questions about independence. Scholars whose positions depended on state appointments and patronage could face pressure to accommodate the political priorities of those who appointed them. Others used their positions to challenge policies or defend religious and public interests.
The lesson is not that all scholars serving the Ottoman state compromised their principles. Rather, the Ottoman experience illustrates an enduring institutional dilemma: when religious authority becomes financially or administratively dependent on political power, the ability to speak independently may be weakened.
The challenge for contemporary Muslim societies is therefore not simply to demand brave individuals. It is also to establish religious institutions that protect integrity, encourage responsible criticism and reduce the influence of political patronage over scholarship.
Usman Dan Fodio and the Nigerian Tradition of Reform
In Nigerian history, the life and reform movement of Shaykh Usman dan Fodio provides a particularly important example of the relationship between Islamic scholarship, political authority and social justice.
At the turn of the nineteenth century, Usman dan Fodio criticised practices he considered inconsistent with Islamic teachings, including abuses of authority, injustice and aspects of the religious and political order of the Hausa states. His reform movement developed into the Sokoto Caliphate following the jihad that began in 1804. The movement was shaped by religious, political, economic and social circumstances, and its history must be examined critically rather than reduced to a single interpretation.
Nevertheless, his intellectual legacy demonstrates the capacity of scholarship to question established authority and mobilise society around a programme of religious and political reform. His writings, teaching and reformist activities continue to influence debates about governance, justice and Islamic public ethics in northern Nigeria.
The lesson for contemporary scholars is not necessarily to reproduce the political methods of the nineteenth century. Modern Nigeria has different constitutional, social and institutional circumstances. The enduring lesson is that religious knowledge should not be confined to private devotion while corruption, abuse of public resources, poverty and the suffering of ordinary people are ignored.
A scholar who speaks about personal piety but refuses to address the misuse of public office, the denial of people's rights or the exploitation of the poor risks separating religion from the public responsibilities that its ethical teachings demand.
The Nigerian Ulama and the Crisis of Moral Courage
Today, Nigeria faces serious challenges, including widespread economic hardship, unemployment, insecurity, corruption, educational difficulties and declining public confidence in institutions. Millions of citizens struggle to secure adequate food, healthcare, education and other necessities of life. In such circumstances, the moral voice of religious leaders becomes especially important.
Yet, questions persist about whether some contemporary scholars have become too cautious when addressing political wrongdoing. Why do certain religious figures speak forcefully about the private conduct of ordinary citizens but appear reluctant to confront corruption, abuse of authority or policies that deepen the suffering of vulnerable communities? Why are some prepared to condemn individuals with little political influence but hesitant to question those who provide financial support, appointments or other benefits?
These questions deserve serious public discussion.
Fear of poverty can be a powerful influence. Religious scholars, like other members of society, have families to support and material responsibilities to fulfil. Some depend on donations, institutional funding, government appointments or wealthy patrons. Losing such support may threaten their livelihoods and those of their dependants. Others may fear harassment, reputational attacks, exclusion from public platforms or imprisonment.
These pressures should not be dismissed. Islamic teachings recognise human vulnerability and the difficulties involved in confronting powerful opponents. Not every instance of silence necessarily proves cowardice, and scholars may sometimes choose private counsel, strategic patience or other methods because they believe these will achieve a better outcome.
Nevertheless, prudence must not become a permanent excuse for abandoning principle. There is a moral difference between choosing a wise method of correction and remaining silent simply to preserve material comfort. When the protection of income becomes more important than the defence of truth, scholarship risks losing its moral authority.
Allah asks in Surah At-Tawbah 9:24 whether worldly possessions, wealth and family are more beloved to people than Allah and His Messenger and striving in His cause. The verse reminds believers that worldly attachments must not displace their highest obligations. It should not be used to condemn every scholar who receives a salary or accepts a lawful appointment. Rather, it challenges anyone whose pursuit of worldly advantage leads them to compromise fundamental principles.
When Religion Becomes a Political Instrument
One of the most damaging developments in any society is the use of religion to shield political power from accountability. When scholars publicly defend a leader regardless of the evidence, portray legitimate criticism as an attack on religion, or mobilise religious communities solely to secure political loyalty, they risk turning spiritual authority into a political instrument.
The danger is particularly serious in a society where religious leaders command considerable public trust. Their statements can influence voters, shape public opinion and determine how communities understand political events. This influence can be used to promote peace, responsible citizenship, accountability and social solidarity. It can also be misused to excuse misconduct or discourage citizens from questioning those who govern them.
Islam does not require Muslims to reject political authority indiscriminately. Nor does it teach that every disagreement with a ruler should become public confrontation. The Qur’an, in Surah An-Nisa’ 4:59, instructs believers to obey Allah, obey the Messenger and those in authority among them, while the wider Islamic tradition establishes the importance of justice, consultation and accountability.
Obedience, however, must be understood within the boundaries of Islamic principles. It cannot reasonably mean that wrongdoing becomes righteous simply because it is committed by a powerful person. The duty of sincere counsel, the prohibition of injustice and the obligation to uphold truth remain essential components of Islamic ethics.
Scholars should therefore be neither automatic opponents of government nor unquestioning defenders of political leaders. Their responsibility is to assess conduct according to consistent moral standards, regardless of party affiliation, ethnicity, personal relationships or financial interests.
Justice Must Include the Suffering of Ordinary People
The credibility of Islamic scholarship should also be measured by its concern for the material conditions of the people. A society cannot be judged solely by the number of mosques it builds, the frequency of religious gatherings it organises or the number of people who attend sermons. These may be important expressions of faith, but they do not remove the obligation to address hunger, exploitation, insecurity and the denial of human dignity.
When families cannot afford basic food, young graduates remain unemployed for years, communities are terrorised by armed groups and public resources are diverted from essential services, scholars have a responsibility to remind society that public office is an amanah—a trust for which its holders will be accountable.
The Qur’an commands in Surah An-Nahl 16:90 that Allah orders justice, excellence and generosity towards relatives, while forbidding indecency, wrongdoing and oppression. This verse provides a broad ethical framework for public life. It applies to individual behaviour, commercial dealings, public administration and political leadership.
Scholars should use their platforms to explain these principles clearly. They should call for transparency in public spending, responsible management of public resources, fair treatment of citizens, protection of the vulnerable and lawful measures to address corruption. They should also educate citizens about their responsibilities, including peaceful participation in public affairs, informed electoral choices and the lawful pursuit of their rights.
The role of the ulama is not to replace elected officials, courts, journalists or civil society organisations. It is to contribute religious and moral insight to the common effort to build a just society.
Poverty, Patronage and the Independence of Scholarship
A serious discussion of scholarly integrity must also address the conditions under which scholars work. It is insufficient to demand courage while ignoring the financial vulnerability of those expected to exercise it.
Religious institutions, communities, philanthropists and governments should support scholars through transparent and sustainable arrangements that protect their professional independence. Lawful salaries, educational grants, research funding and institutional support are not inherently corrupt. The danger emerges when financial assistance is conditioned on political loyalty, the suppression of inconvenient facts or the defence of misconduct.
Islamic institutions should encourage open intellectual debate, protect scholars from intimidation and distinguish legitimate criticism from personal attacks. Religious education should also equip scholars with knowledge of history, public administration, economics, law and contemporary social problems so that their interventions are informed, practical and constructive.
At the same time, scholars must cultivate personal discipline. They should disclose relevant conflicts of interest, avoid presenting political preferences as unquestionable religious obligations and acknowledge mistakes when their judgments prove wrong. Intellectual humility is not a weakness; it is part of the integrity that gives scholarship its authority.
A financially secure scholar can still be compromised, just as a poor scholar can remain courageous. The ultimate issue is not wealth itself, but whether material interests control moral judgment.
A Call for Renewal Among the Ulama
The way forward requires a renewed commitment to the ethical foundations of Islamic scholarship. First, scholars must recover the principle that truth is not determined by the identity or influence of the person being criticised. The same standards should apply to political allies and opponents.
Second, religious leaders should distinguish between loyalty to Islam and loyalty to a political party. No party possesses a monopoly on religious legitimacy, and no political leader should be treated as immune from scrutiny merely because they profess a religious identity.
Third, scholars should prioritise the welfare of the public, particularly the poor, displaced people, victims of insecurity and those whose voices are rarely heard. Their sermons, publications and public interventions should connect spiritual teachings with the practical realities facing their communities.
Fourth, Muslim communities should learn to appreciate scholars who offer principled criticism, even when their messages are uncomfortable. Communities that reward flattery while punishing honest counsel contribute to the very problem they later condemn.
Finally, the ulama should recognise that moral courage does not always require dramatic confrontation. It may involve presenting evidence carefully, advising leaders privately, speaking publicly when necessary, refusing to endorse falsehood, supporting lawful accountability mechanisms or protecting victims of injustice. The method may vary, but the commitment to truth must remain.
Conclusion: Scholarship Is a Trust, Not a Privilege
The history of Islamic civilisation contains examples of scholars who defended their convictions despite political pressure, alongside examples of religious authority becoming entangled with the interests of rulers. This mixed legacy should encourage reflection rather than blanket condemnation.
From the prophetic mission to the reformist tradition associated with Usman dan Fodio, the enduring challenge has been how to preserve truth, justice and accountability in societies where power can reward silence and punish criticism.
Contemporary Nigerian scholars now face their own test. They must decide whether religious knowledge will serve as a source of moral guidance for the entire society or become an instrument through which influential individuals protect their interests. They must determine whether their public authority will be used to defend the vulnerable, correct wrongdoing and promote responsible leadership, or whether fear, patronage and personal ambition will weaken their voice.
No scholar is required to be reckless, nor should courage be measured by the loudness of a sermon or the severity of a public accusation. What matters is sincerity, sound knowledge, fairness and a willingness to uphold principle even when doing so carries a personal cost.
The final accountability of every scholar, like that of every ruler and citizen, is before Allah. Positions, wealth, titles and public recognition will not permanently shield anyone from that reckoning.
The most important question, therefore, is not how many scholars occupy pulpits, lead prayers or command large audiences. It is whether they are faithfully discharging the responsibility that their knowledge places upon them.
When scholars fear losing worldly privileges more than they fear betraying the truth, society loses an essential source of moral guidance. But when they combine knowledge with courage, wisdom and justice, they can help restore public trust and remind both rulers and citizens that power is temporary, wealth is a test, and accountability before Allah is inevitable.
“O you who believe, stand firmly for justice, as witnesses for Allah, even if it is against yourselves…” — Qur’an 4:135.
Abuja Network News
Tags
Opinion