In an IlmSummit conference (annual intensive organized by Almaghrib Institute) last year, we had a guest presenter Shaykh Abdul Nasir Jangda, a Hanafi imam who presented hanafi fiqh and did a presentation on the Deobandi movement. In his handout for that session, he had Shaykh Nadwi on the list of prominent Deobandi personalities.

Abu Zayd

Regarding Shaykh Abul Hasan 'Ali an-Nadwi (ra) and identifying him with the Deobandi track of thought, even his own colleagues at the seminary of Nadwatul-Ulama, especially the more senior Nadwah graduates, used to taunt Shaykh Nadwi for making Nadwa through his influence more “Deobandi” than what it was at its founding.

So even the Nadwah grads saw Shaykh Nadwi as a Deobandi.

Regardless, he was indeed a Mujaddid!

No doubt I would definitely agree that one of his greatest virtues was he was able to transcend most if not all the sectarian rifts within Ahlus Sunnah, but being on good terms with many groups doesn't negate his personal identification with a specific group.

But his relationship with the Egyptian Ulama or the Saudi Ulama, the Ahle Hadith Ulama or any other group of scholars though might have been one of love and respect, it isn't the same as it was with the scholars of Deoband. In relation with the former groups he was like an outside scholar who gained their acceptance through his fine qualities including knowledge and piety, whereas with the Deobandis, given Maulana Nadwi's spiritual training and scholarly circles he belonged to, was naturally was seen as “one of us” right from the get-go.

The only reason why I bring up this issue is because i think that the Deobandi movement and its scholars, have recent years been unfairly looked down upon and criticized as being too rigid in their following and understanding of the the Hanafi school and seen as opposing a dynamic understanding of shariah and ijtihad as propounded by scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah and Shah Waliullah; in effect distancing them from the Shah's revivalist efforts. Before i get too lengthy i just wanted to point out that the Deobandi movement represents a plethora of ideas, views, and positions on just about all topics pertaining to religion. Because Maulana Nadwi doesn't fit into a particular stereotype of the Deobandi, it doesn't mean he's not of that group. Considering facts like him taking on a Deobandi shaykh for his spiritual refinement, making a point to travel to Deoband after already completing his formal Hadith studies at Nadwa to benefit from the knowledge of Hadith the Qasmi shaykhs had to offer, surrounding himself with Deobandi elders like Maulana Zakariyya Kandalawi its clear this relationship is more then him simply being on good loving terms with this group of ulama as he was with other groups of ulama. It wouldn't be a stretch to say he was a Deobandi as much as he was a Nadwi.

I feel that facts like this about such a personality should highlight that maybe the Deobandi stereotype isn't entirely accurate. So its a little disheartening when seeing the stereotype being reinforced by simply disassociating Maulana Nadwi with the Deobandi movement.

I apologize for steering the discussion away from the topic of this informative and beneficial piece. Though its a subtle issue and probably doesn't even matter when looking at the bigger picture I found it a little frustrating and thought i'd add my two cents regarding it.

ma'salaam

He even met Shaykh Abul A'la Maududi when he visited Pakistan (which was long after his fakll out with him) and the latter praised his new work, as mentioned in Shaykh Abul Hasan's autobiography Karawan e Zindagi. He was strongly influenced by Maulana Muhammad Ilyas, the founder of the Tablighi Jamat, and would consult Shaykh Muhammad Zakariya, the author of Fadhail al-A'mal and Maulana Ilyas' nephew before taking any major decisions. He visited Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibrahim Aal-ash-Shaykh, Shaykh Bin Baz's teacher, while the latter was in Egypt for treatment. In fact, Shaykh Bin Baz had invited Shaykh Nadwi to deliver lectures at Madina University and he himself used to be present in all of his lectures and would comment on them afterwards.

He met with Shaykh Abdur Rahman al-Banna, the father of Shaykh Hasan al-Banna, and enquired about the life of the life of his son. During one of his speeches in India, Shaykh Nadwi said about the Ikhwan “La yuhibbuhum illa mu'minun, wa la yabghadhuhum illa munafiqun” (Nobody loves them except the believer, and nobody hates them except the hypocrite).

And to top it all, on one of his visits to Pakistan, Maulana Ataullah Hanif Bhojiani (one of the top Ahle Hadith scholars of his time) organized a huge function in his honour at the Jamia Salafia, Lahore.

Shaykh Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi (1914-1999 – may the mercy of God be upon him) did, indeed, have strong links with Deoband. I would distinguish between Deoband and Nadwa – even if the difference is only slight – because Shaykh Abul Hasan did so himself. This is clearly articulated in his Western Civilization, Islam and Muslims – first published in Arabic in 1963, re-edited and published further, and the English edition received a fourth print in 1979. He identifies Deoband– along with al-Azhar, etc. – with the ‘old world’ and ‘outdated’, despite praising Deoband's scholarly rank, and he portrays Nadwa as the attempt to bridge the ‘old’ and ‘new’ ages; and it is clear where his sympathies lay.

Nevertheless, I don’t believe that Shaykh Abul Hasan would ever have wanted his analysis to lead to argumentation, blame and disunity. It was his attempt at a constructive contribution to Islamic revival. His life was characterised by such noble human relations – hence his firm links with what people would call ‘traditional/Sufi/tablighi’ groups, ‘Saudi salafis’ and revivalists. Therefore one sees – to re-iterate ustadh Suhaib’s comment – that Shaykh Abul Hasan was beyond simple name-calling, and he worked for the common good, even if he held academic disagreements with the same people. His stanch was not, and cannot be, some rather fake method of ‘unity’; but it must be true and based on sound principles. We have a great deal to learn from him.

Fi amanillah

Andrew Booso

Umer:

You make a very important point here. Scholarly transcendence is something few are blessed with. Looking back at the life of Sh. Abu Hassan al-Nadawi it become apparent that he kept pretty good relations with those who fell under the general scope of Ahl-Sunna. I asked my Sh. Soliman al-Nadawi about Sh. Abu Hassan's anger with Abu 'Ala Mawdudi and the strong things he had to say about him. The sheikh told me, “Yes, he was upset with him over a few of his books, but he still considered him a scholar and till this day Abu 'Ala's books are taught in al-Nadwa.”

May Allah grant us the maturity to move beyond labels and transcend the group rifts.

SDW

Though the following comment is besides the point of this article I felt i should mentiont that i think its somewhat disingenuous to portray the Maulana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi as a non-Deobandi scholar. Though he did complete his formal studies at Nadwatul Ulama (which in many discussions is grouped with the Deoband movement as opposed to the Brailvee and Ahle Hadith) looking at his life it's apparent that he immersed himself in the company of peers and elders from the Deobandi movement. He even studied Hadith and Quran there for a short time and was spiritually linked through baya with Sheikh Abdul Qadir Raipuri, a Deobandi scholar.