The importance of social or mass discourse in any civilizational movement stems from its being an effective tool for reaching the civilizational achievements that the movement seeks to realize in reality, and for arriving at the transformations it wants to establish in the field it aims at. .
Discourse is the means by which its bearers probe the depths of the human being in order to work on adjusting certain drivers of setting out and of civilizational challenge within him, so as to reach the goal of the movement and the starting point of life... This is how the great historical transformations began, and above all the awakening of the Greatest Messenger (s), which changed the face of history and led humanity toward the straight path. The awakening of the Messenger (s) has a special feature that distinguishes it from all processes of civilizational awakening in human history, for its leader is the Most Noble Messenger (s), of whom Allah the Exalted said: “Nor does he speak out of [his own] desire: it is just a revelation that is revealed [to him]” (Qurʾan 53:3–4). Thus his awakening became a torch of light that those who journey follow until the Day of Resurrection.
When we aspire to follow the example of the Messenger (s) in order to elevate ourselves and our society, we must turn, with a responsible motive, to the study of the sacred prophetic discourse—an extensive, aware study that observes the various qualities and features of the discourse that carried the community in its palms toward the shore of safety and toward the summit of glory.
Since this occasion does not allow us to review the sacred discourse in detail—and what is attainable is not dropped on account of what is unattainable—we point to the features of the discourse of the Greatest Messenger (s) briefly:
1- The language of any society is the closest thing to its heart and mind, and going beyond that language is considered a departure from the circle of influence—whether that language relates to the style of speech, higher or lower, or to its multiplicity in terms of type: epistemic, situational, contextual, or the like—whatever counts as a clear language for making the other party understand. Thus the discourse of the Messenger (s) spoke to people according to the measure of their minds, as he (s) affirmed by his saying: “We, the community of prophets, have been commanded to speak to people according to the measure of their minds.” And so it was blessed with success in opening the locks of people’s minds to the light of the Message.
2- Factions usually abound within a single society, and so plurality within the framework of unity must be taken into account. The Messenger (s) used to address the Muslims as a community, but without abolishing the objective particularities that prevailed and had taken shape in society. We notice this in his not abolishing the expression (al-Muhajirun—the Emigrants) for those who emigrated with the Messenger, or the expression (al-Ansar—the Helpers) for those who helped him (s); rather, he established brotherhood between them—“The faithful are indeed brothers” (Qurʾan 49:10)—while acknowledging the reality of plurality: “and made you nations and tribes that you may identify yourselves with one another” (Qurʾan 49:13). So each kept its particularities, but within the circle of brotherhood in faith and the common ground of faith.
3- A rigid discourse moves nothing; the rigidity of discourse in a single form in all circumstances is akin to stagnation. Discourse ought to vary according to the variety of circumstances while preserving the essence of values. He (s) delivered a discourse of variety while preserving the lofty Islamic values: there was the Meccan discourse, which contained the features of true creed and the treatment of the problems of unbelief and polytheism, the open and the hidden, and which explained the entry points of faith and its signs; and on the other hand we notice the Medinan discourse, which was marked by the founding of the state and attention to human relations and the ethics of the believer. Thus the discourse was flexible, taking into account the needs of the human being according to his stage and circumstance.
