Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi and Shaikh Said Nursi are two notable reformers who aimed to change society through grassroots Dawah.
The two have remarkable similarities(and notable differences).
Both can be role models for Muslim Dawah initiatives.
Ahmad Sirhindi's uncompromising struggle against Akbar and his heretical Elites without ever raising a sword is exemplary while Nursi's early vision of uniting the diverse Muslim Communities against the West offers a blueprint for Muslims looking to overcome nationalism today.
Nursi heavily drew inspiration from Ahmad Sirhindi and built a unique form of Tasawwuf.
While Ahmad Sirhindi critiqued Wahdat Wal Wujood, Nursi on the other hand believed it was misunderstood and tried to re-frame it by putting emphasis on Taqwa and the absolute supremacy of Allah.
(Though I personally don't find it convincing)
Said Nursi notably subverted the tradition Sufi dynamics while maintaining the spiritual fundamentals of Tasawwuf and to me at least it seems like a good framework that is suitable for Urban contexts. It's why Abdullah Jahangir(a Salafi) really admired him.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Imam Tahawi and Imam Maturidi were contemporaries.
Maturidis say that he was Maturidi. Salafis say he was Salafi(i.e. Athari).
Which is actually the truth?
Tahawi's core text is said to be the documentation of the Hanafi Aqeedah which could be traced all the way back to Abu Yusuf, Muhammad Al Shaybani and Abu Hanifa himself.
Salafis use the commentary of Ibn Abi Al Izz to affirm that Abu Hanifa was in fact Athari(Salafi).
However there are a few issues.
I say this prefacing with the fact Ibn Abi Al Izz was a far greater scholar than I'll ever be and whatever was done to him by his opponents is utterly disgraceful and condemnable.
1. Razi still holds on to the basic Ashari positions on Sıfat.
2. No Ashari on this planet today or in the existence of history ever believed that their books are in any shape or form superior to the Quran. Because that would be heresy.
And here is the key part.
He doesn't explicitly forbid others from reading the works he apparently condemned.
The Wasiyya argument by the Hanabila while it has certain basis, does not tell us the whole story.
Another important article(Arabic) analyzing his Wasiyya.
Both the Asharites and the Hanbalites have their respective agendas when it comes to this issue.
Imam Razi is one of the most scholar oc prominent of all time.
There is good reason to believe Abu Hanifa censured Kalam because obstinate people were engaging in it for vain reasons.
Rather than establishing clarity it was becoming ego contests.
This is something that has been echoed by many scholars through the centuries.
Al Ghazali's Al Munqidh Min Dalal was directed at the misuse of not just Kalam but all other sciences.
Similarly Razi's repentance not an explicit condemnation of Kalam. Rather he laments the lack of time he dedicated to Ibadah.
Similar repentance tales are often directed at rulers like Aurangzeb by modernists who claim that Aurangzeb repented his religious zeal or that he was secretly impious.
These repentance tales are appeals to emotion. Not rooted in facts.