The following year in 1941, presumably at the request of the Jama’at which had been established in Lucknow under my supervision, he visited again. Before his arrival, as usual, he wrote a letter. I probably had requested him to prepare an essay for a lecture at the Lucknow University. His letter, dated September 29, 1941, is in response to this reads as follows.
“Mubarak Park, Poonch Road, Lahore – September 29, 1941 Respected and Honored Sir – AssalamuAlaikum
I had already responded to your first gracious letter, and later received your card. The topic ‘New World Order’ is not something new, it is quite trampled upon, and lately it has become somewhat fashionable for everyone to say something or the other about it. As a result, neither will my lecture have any specialty, nor will it attract any attention. Instead, a better topic for the lecture would be ‘The Economic (or Financial) Problem of Humanity and Its Islamic Solution.’ Please inform the Secretary of the University accordingly.
Yours sincerely, Abul A’la“
Maulana came to Lucknow and was warmly welcomed by the youth. He delivered his scholarly lecture at the Lucknow University Union on the given topic, which has been published in his articles. Along with this, he had also written an essay titled “The New Educational System” at my request for Darul Uloom Nadwatul Ulama, which was read at the student association ‘Al-Islaah’. My association with Maulana and the Jama’at continued. I participated in the Jama’at’s Amila (Executive Council) meeting, which was held in Lahore in February 1942. At this meeting, based on the opposition that had started against Maulana’s writings and certain views by some famous scholars and literati of India, the issue was whether at the time Maulana should step down from the leadership of the Jama’at, and Maulana Amin Ahsan Islahi should be elected as the leader. This was a very important phase in the life and history of the Jama’at. My vote was in favor of Maulana, based on the fact that it would be an artificial change that wouldn’t bring any significant benefit. The Jama’at’s existence occurred because of the influence of Maulana’s writings, and the affiliation and dedication would still remain directed towards him. That is what was decided, and the structure of Jama’at system remained as it was.
I participated in the Jama’at’s second administrative council meeting in Delhi in October 1942, and on this occasion, I accompanied Maulana to Aligarh and stayed at the Old Boys Lodge for a day or two. I assessed Maulana’s popularity in the university circle.
During that time, there was a strong demand for Maulana to launch an Arabic periodical that could represent the call and community. I mentioned the difficulties in this regard and it was agreed that for the time being, the translation of the articles into Arabic should be started and sent to the esteemed journals and magazines of the Arab world. Maulana wanted to entrust this task to me, but I suggested the respected Maulana Masood Alam Nadwi for this role, which Maulana approved. As a result, the organization ‘Darul Urubah’ was established, later shifting from Eastern Punjab, Jalandhar, to Western Punjab, Gujranwala, and the late respected Maulana Masood Alam Nadwi performed these responsibilities with such excellence that in the Arab world, Maulana’s and his call and movement’s introduction could not have been better, even if Maulana had personally written for Arabic journals regularly. These books became the cornerstone of Maulana’s popularity and introduction in the Arab world and paved the way for benefits to be reaped later. In the history of the community and movement, the services of the late respected Maulana Masood Alam Nadwi cannot be forgotten.
During a trip to the province of Sarhad (Frontier) and Punjab in March 1944, I had the chance to visit Darul Islam Pathankot (where Maulana was permanently settled and which was proposed to become the center of the movement), and I was fortunate to be his guest for some days. After that, for a long time, there was no opportunity for a personal meeting. In 1954, when I first went to Pakistan after the partition, during my stay in Lahore, I met Maulana in Lahore Central Jail. In that meeting, my dear friend and guide, Mr. Nasrullah Khan Aziz, was with me. The late respected Maulana Masood Alam Nadwi had recently passed away, and we both shared our condolences.
Later in June 1956, I met him when he came to Damascus at the invitation of our friend Dr. Sa’id Ramadan, to participate in the Islamic Conference session that he had organized. I had been in Damascus upon the invitation of Damascus University a month or two beforehand. On this occasion, from Pakistan, the late respected Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi and Maulana Zafar Ahmad Ansari were also present. In the conference, Dr. Muhammad Nasir, the former Prime
Minister of Indonesia, was elected as President, and Maulana and I were selected as Vice- Presidents. The conference continued for several days, and twice I had the opportunity to translate Maulana’s speech into Arabic, per his wish and insistence.
Then in 1962, when the establishment of the Islamic University of Medina was actualized and both of us were elected as members of its Shura Council, I had continuous meetings with him and participated in the committee. That year, during the Hajj season, the Muslim World League was established, and both of us were elected as founding members. Many times during the annual sessions of this league, I had the opportunity to meet and sit close to Maulana in the sittings – until joint pain stopped Maulana from traveling. Presumably, the last session in which we both participated was in 1967.
The last meeting took place on a date in July 1978 at Maulana’s mansion in Lahore. Maulana met me with great manners and warmth, and we discussed the current situation in Pakistan. I had arrived in Lahore after participating in the first Islamic Asian Conference held by Rabita in Karachi and briefly touring Pakistan. We both agreed that the ongoing revolution was a welcome and blessed one. Maulana said it was clear that those who are fond of religion should lead, their leaders should be supported, and they must not be allowed to fail. That was our last meeting.
I hadn’t been connected to the Jama’at systemically since 1943, but I maintained friendly and dear relationships with Maulana and the former comrades of the Jama’at, and there was no difference in our mutual respect and recognition. In March 1944, when I was a guest at Dar al-Islam, he was already aware of my mental shift and my unease with the Jama’at’s thinking, but it had no effect on our relationship or coordination. We also discussed Arabic da’wah literature, and Maulana reviewed and liked my Arabic article with the title ‘Da’wataynMutanafisatayn’ (Two Rival Da’wahs). He, along with all comrades, accompanied me to the station to see me off.
My impression and attachment to Maulana’s writings and the Jama’at’s literature were based on his scholarly and critical articles against Western civilization, its philosophy of life, and the current materialistic viewpoint, many of which were included in his collection ‘Tanqihat’. Herein lay the same difference as can be between an apprentice and an experienced author. I wasn’t particularly interested or in need of that modern interpretation and explanation of religion found in Maulana’s other books such as ‘Qur’an Majid ki Char BunyadiIstilahain’, ‘Tafhimat’, and ‘RasailwaMasail’, because my approach to understanding religion was completely different from an English-educated youth who gains concept of religion and understanding from Maulana’s or any other Muslim thinker’s books rather than the original sources (Quran and Sunnah, and religious environment and upbringing). Given my direct religious studies and benefiting from those early and some later scholars who had vast and deep knowledge of the Quran and Sunnah, and who demonstrated independent thought and depth, I found it hard to consider Maulana as a unique thinker of Islam, the like of whom is not found in centuries. I recognized and still recognize his real distinction in his intelligence, clarity and scope of mind, and distinctive capability and power of expression and understanding. However, after a while, I began to feel that the intellectual and critical aspect of the Jama’at related to Western civilization and current material philosophies could not be separated from that understanding and interpretation of religion, which, in the view of Maulana and the leaders of the Jama’at, held foundational and origin status. As my awareness matured and my study and experience expanded, the mental conflict within me grew. It reached a turning point when
I had more frequent interactions with the founder of the renowned Indian missionary movement, Maulana Muhammad Ilyas. Deeply impressed by his life, his spiritual states, and his call for faith and accountability, the mental divide deepened and widened, and I realized the temper and characteristics of the Prophetic call and its bearers, and how drastically it differs from a movement whose foundation rests on pure study, intelligence, and reaction to a philosophy or system… Once, writing from Lucknow to Maulana Maududi, I shared my mental conflict and the deep impression of Maulana Ilyas and my growing involvement in the missionary work, to which Maulana Maududi permitted and even advised me to fully engage.
I always exercised caution when expressing my dissatisfaction with the Jama’at and its reasons, and whenever proponents or opponents of the Jama’at inquired through correspondence about the reasons for my separation and my opinion on Maulana or the Jama’at, I always refrained from giving such answers that could be published for wrongful purposes. The reasons for dissatisfaction cannot be articulated as precisely as the rules of mathematics or Euclidean geometry. They can vary greatly, linked to education and upbringing, environmental differences, personalities that one is influenced by in their variety, personal experiences, hereditary and familial influences, mental development, and results of study. It is difficult to capture all these in the grip of words (especially in the form of brief letters). Usually, in response, I would suggest that they read my books ‘Arkan Arba’ah’, ‘Mansab Nabuwwat aur Us ke Aali Maqam Haamilin’, ‘TareekhDawat o Azimat’, and the Arabic ‘Rabaniyyah La Rahbaniyyah’ to understand this.
This series continued until I sincerely reached the conclusion that I should now write something about the understanding and interpretation of the religion by Maulana, which is based on his book “The Four Fundamental Terms of the Holy Quran” and which, like the elements of Euclid, is prevalent and effective in his thought and call. And I have seen the influence of this understanding and interpretation in a pronounced way in the thoughts and writings of the youth in the Indian subcontinent and Arab countries, who have derived their understanding of religion from Maulana and his renowned Arab admirers and my dear beloved friend, martyr Syed Qutb’s religious translations and interpretations, and understood the religious truths and objectives through them. I felt that the track of thought, action, and struggle is changing and I feared that it may gradually turn into a purely material political and organizational movement, which could come into existence for some noble and elevated purpose. I first briefly noted this in the third edition of my Arabic book “القرآن ضوء فی واألنبياء النبوة” and the second edition of its Urdu translation “Mansab Nabuwat Aur Us Ke Aali Maqam Hamelein”. Then, after considerable thought and prayer, I took the pen in Ramadan 1398 AH (August 1977) on this topic, considering it a religious duty, and felt it was necessary to acknowledge Maulana’s services and his individuality in writing while also expressing my concerns and fears, as a large number of those who join the Jama’at are indeed seekers of religion and desirous of serving it and exalting the word of Allah and will benefit from sincere advice in the light of the Book and Sunnah. It is because its constitution says, ‘Let no one elevate any human as the criterion of truth except the Messenger of God, consider no one beyond criticism, and do not succumb to anyone’s mental slavery.’ Also, Maulana’s literature, which is based on this principle, had shaped its mindset, which would rarely be done by a few parties in the present era. I read the manuscript of the book repeatedly with the thought that there should be no sentence or word of sarcasm that could be detrimental to this purpose and deleted any sharp word that I wrote accidentally.
I intended that after the book was printed, I would send the first copy to Maulana with my letter. I wrote this letter from Ahmednagar on October 30, 1978, but the journey of the person who was to send the book and the letter was postponed, and the book reached him a bit late. Maulana’s reaction to this book was very different from that seen among the general sympathizers and agreeable members of the Jama’at in India. My book probably reached Maulana in mid-January 1979, and on January 23, he wrote the following gracious letter in response.
Now that he is no longer in this world, I acknowledge, as an author, speaker, thinker, and preacher, his distinctive and individual characteristics and greatness with not only generosity but also pleasure and pride due to many common links and characteristics; and I pray that Almighty Allah rewards him fully for his Islamic services, overlooks his slip-ups – from which no human except the Prophet, who is infallible, is free – and guides and supports the Muslim Ummah rightly.
اللهم اغفر له ولا تفتنا بعده
“Zaildar Park Ichhra, Lahore, Pakistan Respect and Honor to you. Peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you.
Your gracious letter dated 5th Safar 1399 H was received, and with it a copy of your latest book “Understanding and Interpretation of Religion in the Present Age.” I am thankful that you critiqued what you thought was a cause of concern for me, and I invite you to freely critique further anything which you find to be harmful or a possible threat to the religion and its people. I have never considered myself above criticism, nor am I secretive about it. However, it is not necessary that I accept every criticism as valid and acknowledge the concerns and fears expressed by the critics as correct.
Yours sincerely, Abul A’la”