iloveislam
السلام عليكم

Wa alaykum salaam wa rahmatullah,

How are you bro? Havent spoken to you in a while. Go ahead and call me sometime.

As-Salaamu 'Alaikum brother,

How are you these days?

Assalaamu alaykum,
You got sometype of messenger service?

Yes, alhamdulillah, things are going well!

Cool, bro. Keep me updated. I might join in on it some time.

May Allah preserve you and grant you the best of this world and the hereafter.

As Salaamu 'Alaikum bro,

How goes the forum da'wah?

My main issue with some of his writings stems from his using phrases or concepts whose implications were close to the same conclusions reached by the Reformers. In his book "Revivalist Movement in Islam", he implied that Banu Ummaya were "atheists" (see the edition published in Kuala Lumpur, 1999, pp. 17-20, that was the reprint of the 1963 Lahore edition).

As you know, Sayyid Mawdudi (rahimahullah) was known for his tafsir, The Meaning of the Qur'an. Its format was excellent in its explanation of the verses. However, some of his words therein have bad connotations. In his explanation of the verses (2:179-182), Mawdudi asserted that "this Commandment was modified in two ways by the Prophet"(!) and denied abrogation (naksh). They are clear for all to see in the first volume (Lahore: 1967, p. 136).

Earlier in the same work, he spoke of a "long and bitter struggle between right and wrong, truth and falsehood" (ibid., p. 35). This is in contradiction to the Qur'an, which clearly states that falsehood is not even a force to be reckoned with and vanishes before the Truth. Rather, this is a dualistic notion that is common in the works of the Reformers.

It is my belief that, while containing much good, Mawdudi became influenced by these Reformers on many counts....eager as he was to strengthen the cause of the Muslims and revive their past glory. The Islamic revivalist movements had good intentions but operated from a premise which clouded their judgment and held them back from realizing their objectives. Wa Allahu A'lam.

Wa Alaykum as-Salaam,

Your questions on that thread initially escaped my attention. In reality, I found these quotes from multiple sources and not merely to the two web-sites. I included them so people could check on their own. I have also read some of these quotes in books, which examined his books and included the exact references.

I already stressed that my bringing attention to these statements must not be construed as taking away his rights. Did I not say that he still produced some good and that we should leave his affair with Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta'ala)? I tried to make my criticism balanced. Wa Allahu A'lam.