mayvipo99.html

Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m as A^za#d (A Study of his Religious Views)

Dr. Ichhamuddin Sarkar

    Throughout the period of the Indian National movement, precisely at the second half of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century when the concept of nationalism was being intensively set in motion, a group of political leaders sought the theological base of the movement and virtually paid much attention to ethics and religion. These leaders took up religious traditions side by side with nationalist ideology as their vow in order to achieve the national goal (i.e. freedom of India). Under the circumstances, Indian people were put in a new orientation to what may be called the traditional values and ideals. All the more, these leaders focused some – if not all – items of religion in the network of national movement and popularised the same for future India. It is no wonder that in such a historical development we come across Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m as A^za#d who was originally named as Muh~i# al-Di#n Ah~mad. This Mawla#na# emerged as a giant personality of the day and is remembered to date for his contribution to the cause of rational interpretation of Islam as a religion so as to ‘justify its inherent values to any circumstances’.
    It is, however, difficult to write or talk about the Mawla#na# who had a commanding role in the time he lived and also in the ages to come. Furthermore, his personality has been studied by a large number of scholars coming from various disciplines and professions such as historians, journalists, contemporary leaders and politicians, researchers of Indian religions; and the beginning of these studies may be traced as far back as the first half of the 20th century. In fact, the multitudinous literature produced on the life and activities of the Mawla#na# and any attempt for a comprehensive survey is a Herculean task. Apart from the micro and macro studies such as those of Muh~ammad Muji#b, A.R. Mali#h~aba#di#, A.B. Ra#jpu#t, Maha#daiv Disa#i#, Hama#yu#n~ Kabi#r, Mushi#ru’l H~asan, Jama#l Khwa#jah, Mu‘i#n Sha#kir, K.A. Niz~a#mi# and V.N. Datta, we have at our disposal a few recently published articles¹ to deal with some striking points of Mawala#na# A^za#d’s life and theology. The publications of I.H. Douglas’ books² and that of S.C. Kashyap’s³ are also significant additions to our knowledge. The present article is an attempt to present Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m as A^za#d (lit. free) and practically to examine how he, to speak in Mu‘i#n Sha#kir’s words ‘tried to reconcile religion with reason without injuring either’⁴, and became an a#za#d (free man) in the true sense of the term.
    There is no doubt that A^za#d was a religious man but his approach to religion was not dogmatic. To speak in the words of Douglas, his religion was a ‘a belief to guide life.’⁵ Dr. Iqba#l once said:

Religion is not a departmental affair, it is neither mere thought nor were feeling, it is an expression of the whole man’.⁶

    Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m’s religious ideals appear to be an outburst of his manhood lying in him. Jama#l Khwa#jah, a reputed scholar of Muslim theology, says, ‘most Muslims the world over lack the Islamic perspective in which secular democracy and humanist internationalism have been integrated into their religious thought-cum-value system.⁷ Whatever is done in most cases is, according to him, ‘mere piecemeal pragmatic adjustments to the new situation without any reinterpretation of the basic concepts and values of the Islamic tradition…’⁸. It is noteworthy that the Mawla#na#’s attempt to the cause of religion was neither a mere piecemeal readjustment nor an interpretation of the basic concepts of Islam without reality. All the more, Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m made a decisive move to interpret the Qur’a#n and Islam in a new light. He may be taken as the first and by far the best representative of the Indian Muslims who opened a new dimension to the cause of rational inquiry of Islam in the light of the Qur’a#n. The standard of this new outlook in the interpretation of the Qur’a#n and by his bold step to judge Islam as it actually deserves, he thereby stood against the medieval tyranny of religious dogma and unleashed forces which created a new spirit in the age he lived and made him worthy to be ranked by the side of Rajarammohun Roy of Bengal.
    In tracing the inner development of Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m, it is necessary to consider the early influences of his surrounding environment and the subsequent development of his character and ideology. It is true that he dreamt for a new India; and in his vision he wanted to see the Muslims as an inseparable part of its soul. He differed from Nihru# but he could not think of India without this man. According to Ashin Dasgupta, a renowned historian and a scholar and once in charge to release the complete edition of the India Wins Freedom, A^za#d was a bridge between the old model Gandhi#ji# and the modern man Jawa#harla#l Nihru#.⁹ How far this is true is yet to be decided but the fact remains that Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m dreamt of an India where he could identify himself and at the same time set the motion for the identification of the Muslims at large.
    After such a conclusion, it is relevant to look into the process of evolution of A^za#d's life whereby he could be studied as a#za#d in spite of being a so-called Mawla#na# of the Muslim community. Here we have to depend on his works, mostly his Tazkiras (Tadhkirahs) and the articles published in his two journals Al-Hila#l and Al-Bala#gh. Incidentally, it may be noted that his India Wins Freedom is not so important for the portrayal of his religious beliefs. We know that his Tazkiras were written in 1916 and in 1921-22 respectively when he was in jail. Ashin Dasgupta admits that there is a thematic difference between his English works, i.e. India Wins Freedom and that of the Tazkiras. Any way, we should start from the point of his childhood when his religious ideas were going through some twists and turns until they got a final shape in later life.
    We, perhaps, all know that Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m was born in Makkah in 1888. His Indian father came from a very reputed family of theologians and his mother too belonged to an aristocratic family of Arabia. He got traditional education in Arabic language, poetry and learning from his family circles which ensured upbringing amidst an academic atmosphere. His father was a disciple of the Su#fi# Saint Sha#h Wali# Alla#h and the Mawla#na# always respectful to the memory of such persons as guides of the Indian Muslims. When he was barely fourteen years of age, he began to be assailed by doubts about his traditional beliefs. This stage came to a head due to his father’s harsh views regarding the Wahha#bi#s.
    It is interesting to note that in this new development of his outlook to religion, he never leaned on dogma and always intended to seek reason behind faith. It appears from the analysis of Ashin Dasgupta that this attitude of the Mawla#na# was speeded by two factors: (i) His study of the then banned book, First Book of Reading popularly known as First Book by one Pari#charan Sarka#r, a teacher of Kalutola Branch School, Calcutta (presently known as Hare School)¹⁰, and (ii) His thorough study of Sir Sayyid Ah~mad’s writings. A^za#d had a great respect for his learned father but the latter’s furious hostilities towards the Wahha#bi#s Book proved to be an opening chapter to satisfy his curiosity about science and reason. It was also his preparatory stage to understand the rational viewpoints of Sir Sayyid subsequently. These studies broke the stranglehold of orthodoxy and opened new vistas for him. It was the first time, as Ta#ra#chand says, that he repudiated conformity (Taqli#d) and accepted renovation (Tajdi#d).¹¹ This, was perhaps due to A^za#d’s rational approach to religion which developed from his global perspective of knowledge. To Niz~a#mi#, this intellectual journey of A^za#d was bound to come because his rationalism was, in fact, a stage in the evolution of his religious thought. He believed in Tafakkur (contemplation) and not in Istidla#l (ratiocination).¹² At this stage, the Mawla#na# questioned the very validity of religion and he gradually reached the stage of denial of the existence of God. He become A^za#d i.e. free from the clutches of so called faith and religion. According to Ta#ra#chand:

For some years he wandered in this dark valley of scepticism and infidelity bearing the burden of unrelieved mental anguish and spiritual pain, a rebel against his father and his family traditions.¹³

However, A^za#d eventually triumphed over the haziness of this sceptic phase and all sorts of inner contradictions. His faith was renewed and confirmed never to be shaken under any trials. He came to believe in nature and rationalism but not devoid of God. To quote Dasgupta:

This Azad was a creation of A^za#d himself.¹⁴

In the view of Niza#mi#:

Having covered all the stages of scepticism, doubt, agnosticism, atheism etc., he came back to his original faith and it was a stage of his own discovery and not an inherited legacy.¹⁵

    This Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m thus emerged truly as an a#za#d, and editor of the Al-Hila#l and Al-Bala#gh which had become his powerful organs to preach the truth of religion.
    It was for obvious reason that A^za#d became a different type of man from this time on. Sha#h Wali# Alla#h had criticised Taqli#d, and this criticism took a new turn in the hand of Mawla#na# A^za#d. He not only appealed to the Muslims to realise the values of the Qur’a#n but also ignited the sentiments of the Indian Muslims for the cause of the nation and also for the liberation of their mother land. He began to convince the whole Muslim community that there was hardly any difference between God-worship and service to the motherland. He popularised the concept that Islam has never accepted a sovereignty which is personal or is constituted of a bureaucracy of a handful of paid executives.¹⁶ He also stressed the Hindu-Muslim Unity for this noble cause of the nation.
    Islam in India has been interpreted in various ways. People have treated this religion from more than one angle. A^za#d had chosen the path of the Qur’a#n, i.e. appreciation of modernisation on values and a unique concern for national integration. This development is fascinating. According to Dasgupta, it was, however, still an incomplete development of a man like A^za#d.¹⁷ He says:

A^za#d had yet to speed up another step of ideological perception which came from the ethos of Islam practised and preached mostly in its birthplace.¹⁸

Historically speaking, this transformation of the Mawla#na# can be traced right back to 1908 when his father died and he subsequently undertook a long trip to some west Asian countries. In the course of his visit, he came in touch with a striking wave of change in the traditional Muslim society. The teachings of Jama#l al-Di#n Afgha#ni# had created aspirations for freedom, progress and religious revivalism among the Muslims of that part of the world. This had made an impression upon his mind. In Iraq he met some of the revolutionaries of Iran who stood for modernisation and threatened the despotic type of government. Likewise, in Egypt he met Shaykh ‘Abduhu# and a few supporters of Kama#l Pa#sha#. A^za#d also got an opportunity to revise and enlighten his own ideas with an interaction of the newspapers of Western Asia. ‘Abduhu#’s Islamic thought on the basis of rationalism, and Rashi#d Rad~a#’s translation and popularisation of the Qur’a#n were sufficient to mould the temperament of A^za#d. He now could develop and realise his mode of action and he began to move towards the desired goal.
On the above development, it is said:

This step of A^za#d was not an imitation of Cairo. He was respectful to Rashi#d Rad~a# or ‘Abduhu# but they were not to be blindly followed by A^za#d.¹⁹

In the same way, A^za#d also declined to treat the Qur’a#nic values as ‘Abduhu# did. Niz~a#mi# says that A^za#d at this stage believed:

Science can apprise us of the principles of physical determinism but cannot give us the consolation of faith which we need in life.²⁰

    Practically speaking, during the days of Al-Hila#l, A^za#d had turned into a person very close to God. In doing so, he however, discarded the formula of Sir Sayyid who favoured a system of education leading to creation of some English educated Muslim clerks as a means for modernisation. Sir Syyid stressed upon an overall reformation amongst the Muslim ‘Ulama# who were supposed to be the ultimate guide of the Muslim society. A^za#d gave up this method of modernising the Muslims of India and deliberately made religion as a basis for the progress of the society.
    Needles to say, A^za#d had started his life as a critic of the so-called traditional values of Islam. According to him, this was a kind of blind imitation. His ideas have been reflected clearly in at least two works namely (1) Wila#dat-i-Nabi#²¹ and (2) the famous Tajuma#n al-Qur’a#n.²² In the first one he nicely explains the importance of Prophethood and that, as he believes, a prophet comes to save the mankind in utter moral crisis. He also lays emphasis that it is the concern of God who sends a prophet to relieve the ru#h~ (soul) with heavenly bliss. Apparently, this idea of A^za#d sounds like an absolute theology, but he categorically emphasised this and stood for the same till his death.
    Frankly speaking, Islam and the Qur’a#n got a new interpretation in his hands. It is true that A^za#d was not a religious preacher as such, nor did he establish a school of religion in India. But what he did was to try to get the ball of Islam rolling. His superb idea in this respect has been fairly reflected in the interpretation of Su#rah al-Fa#tih~ah which he called Ummu’l Qur’a#n or the Core of the Qur’a#n. His division of the whole Su#rah into seven parts with a proper title, according to the significance of the verse, calls for his profound scholarship. As to the second part called Rubu#biya#t or ‘Divine providence’, Niz~a#mi# believes that ‘his discussion of the Rubu#biya#t is extremely fascinating and forms the basis of his approach to religion.’²³ Niz~a#mi# further observes:

It was Sir Sayyid who inculcated in him the spirit of rational interpretation of religion, but later on, when writing his Tarjuman al-Qur’a#n, he gave up that approach and said that any attempt to prove that religion is in harmony with the theories of Science is basically wrong.²⁴

It is said about him that religion to him was to ensure human service and not rigidity which might be a barrier to the progress of human society. In this regard, Su#rah al-Fa#tih~ah to A^za#d: ‘depicts a new type of mind which reflects the beauty and mercy of God or universal humanity which the Qur’a#n aims to build’.²⁵ Nothing can be as rational and positive as the interpretation of religion which A^za#d attempted. In this way, it seems, that A^za#d might have attempted to evolve a truth about religion which might be regarded as an eternal truth.
It is to be noted that A^za#d elaborates the main theme of the Qur’a#n which lays emphasis on Di#n (religion), and it is the Shari#‘ah (law of living) which differs. A^za#d did not mean religion as sum total of rituals and their various modes performances, but belief in God, His messengers, Day of Resurrection, Angels and above all good deeds. He even fought to establish that the principal underlying faith in God is brotherhood and unity of the human race, not differences and hatred. This was echoed in his writing in Al-Hila#l:

Islam does not command narrow-mindedness and racial and religious prejudices… It teaches us to believe that every man is good whatever his religion.²⁶

A^za#d was, however, equally concerned about the reason of differences enshrined in the Shari#‘ah of Islam which, according to him, creates doctrinal differences. In this question he is said to have propagated the truth that all prophets had preached the same religion or di#n but legal codes have differed from prophet to prophet and any difference arising out of it was due to misunderstanding of the actual goal of religion.²⁷ That A^za#d was quite aware of it, is known from his statement where he says:

Every religion in its outward form reflects the spirit of the age and country in which it was taught, and it suited the age and country.²⁸

But this proposition of religion, according to A^za#d, matters little, as he believed in the ‘basic oneness of di#n despite differences in religious law.²⁹ According to Maha#div Disa#i#, biographer of the Mawla#na# A^za#d had started his mission with a fundamental approach, viz., ‘that the roots or rather the root of religions is one, that every race and country and age had its own teacher and prophet and the cardinal principles that they taught were the same.’³⁰ Disa#i# further refers to A^za#d who alludes to the Qur’a#n order to define true religion. Thus ‘the Qur’a#n says’, to quote the Mawla#na#: ‘no matter what the country and what the age, all the prophets sent by God taught the same universal truth for the welfare of mankind, viz. Faith and Good works i.e., worship of one God and right conduct. Anything that is said in contravention of this is not true religion.’³¹
The aforesaid view of A^za#d shows a clear idea of ‘Divine Guidance’ and to quote Jama#l Khwa#jah:

It stands to demarcate the proper spheres of operation of instinct, perception, reason and revelation and to put forward the ideal of balanced and integrated conception of Islamic piety and of obedience to the Qur’a#n and the Sunnah. Neither the Qur’a#n nor the Sunnah is treated by A^za#d as a text book of law, politics, economics, physics or astronomy, but as the fount of spiritual and moral truths.³²

A^za#d also believed in the ‘Value of Beauty’ in all creations on the earth and he is said to have emphasised:

The value of beauty in all creation also controls the evolutionary process by putting brakes on natural selection and by imposing gradualism. This in turn is a source of checks and balances in man’s individual, moral and social life. This gradualism is also the law that governs the process of evolution by a chain of elimination and conservation.³³

All the more, A^za#d had always laid emphasis on the search for perfection which can only be achieved through the principle of setting all the things on earth in the right direction.
As to the understanding of the Qur’a#n, A^za#d also warned mankind regarding the conflicting forces of truth (H~aqq) and falsehood (Ba#t~il). He says:

To a certain extent these two conflicting elements are complementary in life, for this reason in certain cases Rah~mat overlooks or forgives the less serious acts of falsehood. It also allows man time for reflection and atonement.³⁴

A striking feature of A^za#d's religious views was his strong stand as a fighter in the cause of man’s intellectual emancipation and for this he had touched the deepest level of human intelligence by preaching the significance of truth. The style in which he endeavoured to free the mind in this respect was in the words of the Qur’a#n:³⁵

And Say: Truth has (now) arrived and Falsehood perished: For Falsehood is (by its nature) bound to perish. (17:81)

It is quite interesting that A^za#d stood for truth, fought for truth and preached nothing but truth. Throughout the whole essay called Wila#dat-i-Nabi# he appears to have been afraid of the whole mankind which was increasingly supposed to negate the truth (H~aqq) and this according to him leads to ruin.³⁶ And for this reason he has always directed mankind towards the ‘Straight Path’ (S~ira#t al-Mustaqi#m). He also laid emphasis on the true belief (I^ma#n) and advocated that only the believer can overcome all troubles on the earth. May we recall a famous saying of the Qur’a#n which he used to refer to justify this perception.³⁷ This goes as:

So lose no heart, nor fall into despair: For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in Faith. (3:139)

Lastly, A^za#d sought the victory of mankind, and for this he invited them to the path of God. He refers to another saying of the Qur’a#n³⁸ which says:

O ye who believe! If ye will aid (the cause of) God, He will aid you and plant your feet firmly. (47:7)

In fact, A^za#d occupies a place of his own regarding religion and his way of understanding and interpretation of Islam. In this respect, as some people think, perhaps Iqba#l could have made an impression on the thinking of A^za#d. Azi#z Ah~mad says and perhaps rightly emphasises that in understanding Islam and the Qur’a#n, A^za#d admired Iqba#l in many respects but did not bother to reject his views on many occasions.³⁹
Incidentally, Jama#l Khwa#jah has presented a comparative study of these two Muslim thinkers in respect of their religious views. Khawa#jah says:

A^za#d rejects Iqbal’s conception of Islam as a total guide to the good life without any distinction between the spiritual and the secular, and also ideal conception of the Islamic community (Ummah) as the primary and supreme determinant of group identity and loyalty. In these two aspects, A^za#d accepts the essentially secular and nationalist or rather humanist outlook of Sayyid Ah~mad.⁴⁰

More striking is that A^za#d differed from Iqba#l in respect of the approach to the Qur’a#n. It is said:

Iqba#l approaches the Qur’a#n equipped with dialectical methodology and the attitude of metaphysical speculation. A^za#d proceeds from the revealed word of God to the explanation of the phenomena of the universe and the physical and moral laws that bind humanity. In religious law, A^za#d is almost exclusively preoccupied with its primary source, the Qur’a#n, quoted the H~adi#th only when it suits him to fortify his own exegetical argument; while Iqba#l is concerned with all the four sources, and specially the last two, Ijtiha#d and Ijma#‘, which he regarded as the principal human (sic), as distinguished from revelation or H~adi#th …. Ijtiha#d as well as Ijma#‘ in the interpretations of Iqba#l bears the stamp of the twentieth century. A^za#d on the other hand, replaces the legal concept of Ijtiha#d by that of Ta’si#s (reconsolidation), … what he interprets as Islam’s fundamental verities which would externalise the perfection inherent in it.⁴¹

A^za#d was, above all, concerned with a single goal of life i.e. ‘Love of God can best be expressed through love of His creatures. This dual function of man’s love of God paves the way on the one hand of A^za#d’s monistic eclecticism, on the other for his humanism’.⁴² According to Khwa#jah, like Sir Sayyid, A^za#d also stood for ‘Islamic universalism as distinct from the Islamic communitarianism of Iqbal.’⁴³ He also says that, ‘A^za#d’s Islamic universalism made him full of sympathy and concern for the welfare of the human family rather than the Muslims alone’.⁴⁴ In the words of Rajmuhan Ga#ndhi#:

‘A^za#d saw himself as the Imam but there was more than self-regard or vanity in his call for an Ima#m’.⁴⁵

It is true that A^za#d had a religious approach to politics but unlike others he had the capacity to control its impact, if any, on it. Thus on one occasion he has been put on record saying:

Religion is like the mighty steam engine which needs to be in charge of a skilful and wide-awake driver. In the hands of an unworthy driver it can cause untold misery. To our great misfortunate religion has fallen into unworthy hands. They have turned it into irreligion and I do not know where we are going.⁴⁶

What A^za#d propagated was a channel to ensure unity of religion and to interpret the same in terms of human service. He believed that people may seek the truth in various ways, but the real purpose would be submission to God and virtuous deeds to all. He was ever consistent in his goal and this has been recently recognised by the modern researchers too.⁴⁷
Thus A^za#d, although thoroughly a religious man, was never a blind supporter of traditionalism and the so-called religion bereft of reason. He believed in the theory of supporting religious faith in order to survive on this earth. He had no faith in the so-called organised religious schools which breed communalism. His religion was to promote inner development vis-a-vis to search out the universal truth which might pay attention to the details of the social environment so as to promote a good life in this world. With his inquisitive mind he was a non-conformist and would accept customs or beliefs only if he found that they stood to reason⁴⁸. The purpose of his religion was to make one a good human being whom he called Mard-i-Mu’min, a man of faith in terms of his moral, ethical and spiritual qualities.⁴⁹ We cannot do much better than quoting W.C. Smith who once wrote about A^za#d:

A^za#d is a thoroughly profound scholar of Islam; his scholarship being liberal in the very best of sense. He has a place in the front rank of the classical theologians; he is also among the foremost of the moderns…. His Islam is humanitarian.⁵⁰

Home

^1. Articles of A. A. Fngineer such as "Distinguishing features of Mawla#na# A^za#d’s Religious Thought" (Occasional Paper No. 10, Vol. 5, Cot. 1989); "Liberelative Elements in Mawla#na# A^za#d’s Theory" (Occasional Paper No. 4, Vol. 6, April 1990) all published from Institute of Islamic Studies, Bombay; also a Bengali article entitled "Mawla#na# Azader Baktavya" (Sayings of Mawla#na# A^za#d) in Desh (A Bengali journal from Calcutta) by Ashin Dasgupta, dated 25.3.89; "Mawla#na# A^za#d and National Integration" by Sushila Nayyar in the Bulletin of the Indian Association of Social Sciences Institution (IASSI), July-Oct. Vol. 7, No. 233-1988.
^2. Ian Henderson Douglas, "Abu’l Kala#m A^za#d – An Intellectual and Religious Biography", edited by Gail Minault and C.W. Troll, Oxford University Press, 1988.
^3. S.C. Kashyap (ed.), "Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m A^za#d", New Delhi, 1989.
^4. "Synthetic Nationalism" (Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m A^za#d) in "Khila#fat to Partition by Mu‘i#n Sha#kir", Delhi 1983, p. 135.
^5. Ian Henderson Douglas, op. cit., p. 271.
^6. Muh~ammad Iqba#l – "The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam", Delhi, 1981, p.2
^7. Jama#l Khwa#jah, "Quest for Islam", 1977, p. xi.
^8. Loc.cit.
^9. A Bengali article published in Desh, a Bengali Journal published from Calcutta, 25.2.89, p. 26.
^10. Desh, p. 27.
^11. Tara#chand, "History of Freedom Movement in India", Vol. III, Delhi, 1983, p. 267.
^12. K. A. Niz~a#mi#, "Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m A^za#d and the Thirty Pages of the India Wins Freedom", Delhi, 1989, p. 13.
^13. Tara#chand, op. cit., p. 267
^14. Desh, p. 27.
^15. K. A. Niz~a#mi#, op. cit., p. 13.
^16. Cited in Sushila Nayyar’s article "Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m A^za#d and National Integration", IASSI Bulletiin, Vol. 7, Nos. 2,3 p. 3.
^17. Desh, p. 29.
^18. Loc. cit.
^19. Loc. cit.
^20. K. A. Niz~a#mi#, op. cit., p. 13
^21. "Wila#dat-i-Nabi#"; a collection of his articles published in the Al-Hila#l. Here, a Bengali translation of the same entitled "Visva Nabir Abhirchav" is referred, published from Dhaka, Bangladesh, 3rd edition.
^22. Translated by Sayyid Abdu’l Lat~i#f, 1981.
^23. Ibid., p. 14.
^24. Loc. cit. According to Mawla#na#, it is said that "Scientific theories change everyday while the values and verities of religion cannot be altered every now and then to conform to the concept of science".
^25. "Tarjuma#n al-Qur’a#n" (T.Q.) Vol. 1, 3rd edition (tr.) by Sayyid Abdu’l Lat~i#f, 1981, p. 194.
^26. Quoted in Muji#b’s "Indian Muslim", p. 548.
^27. Khwa#jah, op. cit., p. 57.
^28. Cited in Mawla#na# A^za#d Mahadiv Disa#’i#, 2nd edition, Delhi, 1946, p. 71.
^29. Khwa#jah, op. cit., p. 57.
^30. Disa#‘i#, op. cit., p. 69.
^31. Loc. cit.
^32. Khwa#jah, op. cit., p. 79.
^33. Azi#z Ah~mad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakistan (1857-1964), OUP, 2nd impression, 1970, pp. 179f.
^34. For details see T.Q. Vol. 1, pp. 64-72.
^35. Je Satter Mrittu Nai (Eternal Truth), a collection of essays by A^za#d in Bengali (tr.), published from Dhaka, Bangladesh, 1966, p. 15.
^36. The details of this philosophical observation are reflected in his book Bila#dat-i-Nabi# (Visua Nabir Avirbhav, Bengali translation). 31a. Bila#dat-i-Nabi#, p. 26.
^37. Visvanabir Avirbhav (Beladate Nabi), p. 48.
^38. Ibid., p. 50
^39. Azi#z Ah~mad, op. cit., p. 175.
^40. Khwa#jah, op. cit., p. 58.
^41. Azi#z Ah~mad, op. cit., p. 175.
^42. Azi#z Ah~mad, op. cit., p. 181.
^43. Khwa#jah, op. cit., p. 58.
^44. Loc. cit.
^45. Ra#jmuhan Ga#ndhi#, "Understanding the Muslim Mind", Penguin, 1986, p. 226.
^46. Disa#‘i#, op. cit., p. 83.
^47. In a recent Book review, ‘A%’ishah Jala#l points out that A^za#d’s thinking was marked by consistency rather than contradiction (vide Reviews of I.H. Douglas’ book, "Economic and Political Weekly", Vol. 25, No. 21, 1989).
^48. Subbas C. Kashyap (ed.), "Mawla#na# Abu’l Kala#m A^za#d", New Delhi, 1989, p. 43.
^49. Ibid., p. 45.
^50. W. C. Smith, "Modern Islam in India", p. 128.

(Courtesy: "Hamdard Islamicus")

Home