Journal of Islamic Studies 12:3 (2001) pp.

291±311
# Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies 2001

THE CENTENNIAL RENEWER:

´ ´ ´
BEDI UÈ ZZAMAN SAI D NURSI AND THE
TRADITION OF TAJDIÅD*

HAMID ALGAR
University of California

Some scholarly attention has ®nally been paid in recent years to

BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi (b. 1876 or 1877, d. 1960), one of the most
in¯uential ®gures in the twentieth-century history of Islam in Turkey.1
Over a period of thirty-®ve years and under the most unfavourable
of circumstances, he devotedly drew up a vast compendium of
re¯ections on essential themes of Islam, to which he gave the title
Risale-i Nur. It is this text that forms the basis of a movementÐ
popularly known as the NurcusÐthat has withstood state persecution
and internal division to survive down to the present. Studies of the
Nurcu movement tend to concentrate, however, on the perceived
impact of the Risale-i Nur on Turkish culture and society, often
applying to its study criteria and terms drawn from the analysis
of quite different movements elsewhere in the Islamic world.2 Few
scholars have engaged with the text itself, in all its opaque bulk and
complexity, a task essential for comprehending the highly distinctive
nature of BediuÈzzaman's claims and the response they received.
*
A preliminary version of this paper was read as the keynote address to the
Conference on BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi and the Renewal of Islamic Thought at the
Faculty of Islamic Studies, National University of Malaysia, Bangi, on 21 August
1999.
1
See Ursula Spuler, `Nurculuk: Die Bewegung des BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi in der
modernen TuÈrkei', Bonner Orientalische Studien, Wiesbaden, 27 (1973), 100±83;
ead., `Zur Organisationsstruktur der Nurculuk-Bewegung', Studien zur Geschichte
und Kultur des Vorderen Orients: Festschrift fuÈr Bertold Spuler, ed. H. R. Roemer
(Leiden, 1981), 423± 42; SËerif Mardin, Religion and Social Change in Modern Turkey:
The Case of BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi (New York, 1989); Camilla T. Nereid, In the
Light of Said Nursi: Turkish Nationalism and the Religious Alternative (Bergen,
1997); and The Muslim World, lxxiv. 3±4 (Jul.±Oct. 1999), a special issue devoted to
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi.
2
It should be added that some of these essays in interpretation have been
encouraged by one wing of the Nurcu movement. At its invitation, scholars have
gathered in international conferences on BediuÈzzaman who have studied Islamic
movements elsewhere in the Islamic world and are sympathetic to the Nurcus but lack
the requisite knowledge of Turkish.
292 h a m i d al g a r
Central to those claims was the assertion that the Risale-i Nur
ful®lled, for its own time, the function of centennial renewal (tajdõÅd)
derived from the well-known Hadith. The following is an analysis
of that assertion, necessarily preceded by a survey of the earlier
instances of tajdõÅd that formed a tradition which BediuÈzzaman sought
both to perpetuate and to modify.

****
Many are the traditions of the Prophet that are both well-known and
frequently invoked without due attention being paid to their precise
wording and implication. One such Hadith is that in which the
Messenger is reported to have said: `Certainly Allah will send to this
community at the beginning [or end] of every hundred years one
who will renew for it its religion.'3 Included by AbuÅ DaÅ]uÅd in his
Sunan on the strength of an isnaÅd that goes back through six
transmitters to AbuÅ Hurayra, this Hadith has generally been accepted
as authentic by Sunni traditionists; al-HaÅkim, for example, classi®es
it as sahõÅh in his al-Mustadrak.4 Ç
Ç Ç Ç
The wording of the Hadith clearly suggests a historical pattern of
regular decay that is arrested and repaired each hundred years,
resulting in an inde®nite prolongation for the life of the umma. It is
therefore remarkable that AbuÅ DaÅ]uÅd includes it at the very beginning
of his KitaÅb al-MalaÅhim, the segment of his Sunan devoted to
Ç
the slaughters and disorders that will come at the end of time, thus
contextually implying that the emergence of the mujaddid heralds
the last days. This placing has been taken to mean (although not
by Muslim scholars) that the notion of the renewer (mujaddid) must
originally have had apocalyptic implications, that it re¯ected the
expectations of a swift end to the world that were allegedly rife in
the early Islamic community.5 Alternatively, the juxtaposition of
tajdõÅd with `the signs of the hour' has been explained to mean that
at the beginning of every century Allah in¯icts a trial (mihna) on the
umma which He then counterbalances with the kindnessÇ (minha) of
Ç

3
See the text of the Sunan as included in Muhammad Shams al-Haqq
al-[AzõÅmaÅbaÅdõÅ, [Awn al-Ma[buÅd fõÅ Sharh Sunan AbõÅ DaÅÇ]uÅd (Madina, 1389/l969),
Ç
Ç The Hadith is not to be found in ÇShõÅ[õÅ collections, even with a narrator other
xi. 385.
than AbuÅ Hurayra, who is generally regarded as unreliable by ShõÅ[õÅ scholars.
Occasionally, however, lists of ShõÅ[õÅ renewers are to be found; see e.g. [AlõÅ DavaÅnõÅ,
VahõÅd-i BihbahaÅnõÅ (Tehran, 1362 sh/l983), 29±30.
4Ç
Al-[AzõÅmaÅbaÅdõÅ, [Awn al-Ma[buÅd, xi. 385.
5 Ç
See Yohanan Friedman, Prophecy Continuous. Aspects of AhmadõÅ Religious
Thought and its Medieval Background (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1989), 94 ±101.
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 293
sending a mujaddid.6 This seems a little arbitrary, for the numerous
trials that have beset the umma do not occur neatly and predictably
at the beginning of a century or at regular intervals of one hundred
years. Moreover, included in the KitaÅb al-MalaÅhim are events that
have already come to pass, such as the conquestÇ of Constantinople,
so that their occurrence must be regarded as the removal of one
obstacle to the coming of the Hour, but not necessarily as a sign of
its propinquity.7 The eschatological context in which AbuÅ DaÅ]uÅd
places the Hadith may perhaps be best understood with reference
to the concept of ineluctable decay that is presupposed by tajdõÅd: the
®nal consequences of that decay are in a sense delayed by the labours
of the mujaddids in each century, so that they act both as reminders
of the End of Time and as agents of its postponement. In any event,
it is only in collections of Prophetic tradition that the Hadith is cited in
the context of apocalyptic events; it otherwise stands independently
as the formulation of a pattern to be discerned in Islamic history. If
in relatively advanced times and particular geographical contexts
connections of various types have been established between the
mujaddid and the MahdõÅ, this must be attributed to the circumstances
of the times and places in question, not to the conditions under which
the Hadith ®rst entered circulation.
Also requiring clari®cation is the point of departure for reckoning
each hundred-year cycle. Four possibilities have been put forward:
the birth of the Prophet, the beginning of his mission, his migration
from Makka to Madina, and his death. The second of these might
seem to be the most appropriate, for the beginning of the Prophet's
mission marked the origin both of the umma and of its religion, so
that the ®rst repair of decay would fall due in about 92/710, some
eighty-one lunar years after his death. It is nonetheless the Hijra
(or rather the year in which it occurred) that has been regarded
almost universally as the time inaugurating the ®rst centennial cycle
of renewal.8 One might object that the choice of the Hijra as the
beginning of the Islamic era was the work of [Umar b. al-KhattaÅb,
and that the Prophet could not therefore have meant a century ÇÇ
of the HijrõÅ calendar when he spoke of `every hundred years'. The
traditional assumption, based on the account given by al-TabarõÅ,
that it was the second caliph who introduced the HijrõÅ calendar Ç
is, however, questionable: al-BalaÅdhurõÅ quotes a message from the

6
[AlõÅ al-Bajma[wõÅ, DarajaÅt MirqaÅt al-Su[uÅd ilaÅ Sunan AbõÅ DaÅ]uÅd (Cairo,
1298/1881), 182. Ç
7
Al-[AzõÅmaÅbaÅdõÅ, [Awn al-Ma[buÅd, xi. 401.
8
Ibid. 386.
294 h a m i d al g a r
Prophet himself that includes the date 9 ah in its text.9 In any
event, the convenience of tying the emergence of a mujaddid to
either the end or the beginning of each century of the Islamic era
must ultimately have been decisive for the discarding of competing
possibilities.
To propose these alternatives, `beginning' and `end', as translations
for ra]s may seem questionable. Although ra]s belongs to the category
of al-addaÅd, words that convey antonymous meanings, its occurrence
in the ÇHadith of tajdõÅd is almost always taken to mean `beginning'.
The choice between the two possible meanings may also appear
unimportant, for the end of one century is automatically followed
by the beginning of the next; whichever sense is assigned to ra]s, the
meaning will be the same, that a mujaddid will emerge at the turn
of the century. The question is nonetheless signi®cant, for it is con-
nected with the identi®cation of the mujaddids for at least the ®rst
and the second centuries of the Islamic era. The traditionist al-ZuhrõÅ
(d. 124/740) and ImaÅm Ahmad b. Hanbal are agreed that the mujaddid
of the ®rst century wasÇ [Umar Çb. [Abd al-[AzõÅz, who attempted
during his brief tenure of the caliphate to right some of the wrongs
committed by the Umayyads, and that the mujaddid of the second
century was ImaÅm al-ShaÅ®[õÅ. Now [Umar b. [Abd al-[AzõÅz died in
the year 101, and al-ShaÅ®[õÅ in the year 204, shortly after the beginning
of the second and third centuries respectively, so that their activity
of tajdõÅd must have taken place in the preceding centuries, the ®rst
and the second. If this identi®cation of the ®rst two mujaddids be
accepted, it follows therefore that ra]s in the Hadith under discussion
must mean `end,' not `beginning'.10 In accordance with this under-
standing of ra]s, the mujaddid has been de®ned as, inter alia, `a
scholar who is alive, well-known and referred to when a period of
one hundred years comes to an end'.11 Despite all of this, and the fact
that no alternative candidates for the title of mujaddid have been
proposed for the ®rst two centuries, the popular and sometimes
scholarly understanding has been that ra]s means `beginning' in
the Hadith of tajdõÅd. In any event, chronology is the supreme
criterion; birth substantially after the beginning of a new century or
death substantially before its ending would seem to prevent any
scholar, however distinguished or accomplished, from qualifying as
a mujaddid.
9
Al-BalaÅdhurõÅ, KitaÅb al-FutuÅh (Beirut, 1957), 80±1.
10
Al-[AzõÅmaÅbaÅdõÅ, [Awn al-Ma[buÇ Å d, xi. 386±7; JalaÅl al-DõÅn al-SuyuÅtõÅ, al-Tahadduth
bi Ni[mat AllaÅh, ed. E. Sartain (Cambridge, 1975), ii. 216. Ç Ç
11
Al-TõÅbõÅ, al-SuyuÅtõÅ, and Ibn al-AthõÅr, quoted in al-[AzõÅmaÅbaÅdõÅ, [Awn al-Ma[buÅd,
xi. 386. Ç Ç
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 295
There is consensus that the mujaddid must be a scholar (although
[Umar b. [Abd al-[AzõÅz does not ®t easily in that category and in
the tenth/sixteenth century some rulers with dubious scholarly
credentials were proclaimed mujaddids for reasons of dynastic
propaganda). In addition, some traditionists have held the view
that he must be from the Ahl al-Bayt, in view of the Hadith in
which the Prophet is reported to have said: `Allah will grant [or send]
the followers of His religion at the beginning [or end] of every
hundred years a man from the People of my Household who will
clarify for them the concerns of religion.'12 Among others, Ahmad
b. Hanbal accepted the validity of this Hadith, but proceeded Ç to
Ç Å
de®ne Al al-RasuÅl broadly enough to include both [Umar b. [Abd
al-[AzõÅz and al-ShaÅ®[õÅ.13 Considerations of sayyid status have not
®gured prominently or consistently in the identi®cation of mujaddids.
However, the possibility raised by the Hadith just cited that the
mujaddid must be from the Ahl al-Bayt suggests one possible reason
for the connection made in later centuries between his function and
the emergence of the MahdõÅ, who by universal agreement will indeed
have such exalted descent. For if the mujaddid is seen to be preparing
the ground for the coming of the MahdõÅ, it is surely appropriate
that like him he should belong to the lineage of the Prophet.
There is broad agreement that the function of the mujaddid is
the restoration both of correct religious knowledge and of practice,
and as its corollary the refutation and eradication of error; pure
erudition in the absence of moral suasion in society is inadequate.
Thus al-[AlqamõÅ de®ned tajdõÅd as `reviving any part of acting in
accordance with the Book and the Sunna that has fallen into
desuetude and enjoining its implementation.'14 Similarly, al-HaÅkim
reported, on the authority of AbuÅ l-WalõÅd HassaÅn b. Muhammad Ç
al-FaqõÅh, the utterance of an unnamed elderÇ that al-ShaÅ®[õÇÅ, in his
function of mujaddid, `made the Sunna manifest and put to death
inadmissible innovation (bid[a)'.15 This, according to the traditional
understanding, is the essence of tajdõÅd: the revival of Sunna and
the eradication of bid[a; it is not part of the responsibility of the
mujaddid to bring about comprehensive change on the political
plane. Admittedly, certain persons identi®ed as mujaddids have
been engaged in the political realm (most obviously [Umar b. [Abd
al-[AzõÅz), and it can certainly be argued that the revival of Sunna
and the eradication of bid[a necessarily have an impact on state and
12
Al-SuyuÅtõÅ, al-Tahadduth bi-Ni[mat AllaÅh, 216±17.
13
Ibid. Ç Ç
14
Cited in al-[AzõÅmaÅbaÅdõÅ, [Awn al-Ma[buÅd, xi. 386.
15
Ibid. 388.
296 h a m i d al g a r
society. It is, however, a strictly modern (not to say modernist)
expansion of the concept of tajdõÅd to have it include political activism
as a de®ning element.
As for the identi®cation of a mujaddid in each century, whether
at its opening or close, it is generally deemed possible that more than
one individual should qualify, irrespective of the precise chronological
criterion applied. The text of the Hadith can, after all, be read to
imply a plurality of renewers: man yujaddid could be either a sin-
gular or a plural. Furthermore, unanimity on the identity of the
mujaddid ceased to prevail in the fourth century, four candidates
being proposed for that cycle. Al-SuyuÅtõÅ therefore remarks that `the
mujaddid might be one person in the entire Ç world, as was the case
with [Umar b.[Abd al-[AzõÅz because of his exclusive possession of
the caliphate, _ or it might be two people or a group of people in the
absence of a consensus concerning a single person.'16 To this it
might be added that with the expansion of the Islamic world on the
one hand and its fragmentation on the other, few if any scholars were
in a position to exert a function of universal renewal. There is, then,
the possibility of legitimate plurality of opinion concerning the
identity of the mujaddid, but only among his contemporaries who
are directly aware of his accomplishments and his in¯uence. To cite
al-SuyuÅtõÅ once more: `The determination of the mujaddid takes
place by Ç means of the predominant opinion (ghalabat al-zann)
among the scholars contemporary with him, and by means of Ç the
bene®t that is had from him, from his companions, and from his
writings.'17 The mujaddid is therefore by de®nition successful in
his mission; a failed mujaddid is a contradiction in terms. Further-
more, no valid identi®cation of a mujaddid can be made after a lapse
of several centuries, even if the candidate comes to be regarded more
favourably by posterity than he was by his own contemporaries.18
Also excluded in view of the widely accepted formula of al-SuyuÅtõÅ
is an individual's self-proclamation as mujaddid. Despite his palp- Ç
ably high estimate of his own scholarly worth, the most that he
felt it permissible to write with respect to himself, at the end of his
discussion of tajdõÅd, was that `this indigent one requests of the divine

16
Al-SuyuÅtõÅ, al-Tahadduth bi-Ni[mat AllaÅh, i. 225±6.
17 Ç
Ibid. 226. Ç
18
MawlaÅnaÅ MawduÅdõÅ's identi®cation of Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1327) as a
mujaddid can be taken only as an indication of his own regard for him, not as a
sound estimate of his historical role or as a re¯ection of the opinion of Ibn Taymiyya's
contemporaries (MawduÅdõÅ, A Short History of the Revivalist Movement in Islam,
2nd edn., Lahore, 1972, 63±9).
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 297
favour that he might be the renewer of this century.'19 In expressing
such a hope, he had been preceded by al-GhazaÅlõÅ (d. 505/1111),
who overshadowed all other candidates as the mujaddid of the
®fth century. The great scholar and Su® was careful to tie his tent-
ative wish to precise chronological data. When he conceived the
intention of emerging from isolation to resume a life of teaching in
Nishapur, he ®rst sought the advice of `men of insight' (arbaÅb al-quluÅb
wa-l-mushaÅhadaÅt), and their counsel strengthened his resolve. Then
he realized that, `Allah decreed that this move should take place at the
end of the present century, and He had promised that His religion
would be revived at the end of each century. The wish was therefore
con®rmed within me _ Allah enabled me to set out for Nishapur
to undertake this task [the resumption of teaching] in the month
of DhuÅ l-Qa[da in the year 499 [July±August 1106].'20 Later Su®s
who regarded themselves or encouraged others to regard them as
centennial renewers frequently went beyond tentative and allusive
claims such as that advanced by al-GhazaÅlõÅ; they joined to an
explicit self-proclamation as mujaddid ecstatic claims with messianic
overtones.

****
Whatever may be seen as problematic or in need of interpretation
in the Hadith of the centennial renewer, there is no mistaking its
central promise: that at intervals of one hundred years, an individual
will be sent by Allah to renew the understanding and practice of
religion by the Islamic umma. This individual will not be self-
appointed (and, as can be deduced from al-SuyuÅtõÅ, ought not to be
Ç
self-proclaimed), for he is divinely sent; it is remarkable that the
same verb (yab[athu) is used for the mujaddid in the Hadith as is
used in the Qur]aÅn for the prophets.21 This surely implies that the
renewer enjoys divine authority, and that he should therefore be
sought out, regularly, assiduously, and as a matter of religious duty,
for the guidance he dispenses. The attention paid to the mujaddid
in Islamic history has, however, been remarkably uneven; it cannot
be said that even the pious have regularly attempted to identify
the mujaddid of their age at each turn of the century. For several
centuries, it was primarily the ShaÅ®[õÅs who were interested in
19
Al-SuyuÅtõÅ, al-Tahadduth bi-Ni[mat AllaÅh, 227.
20
Al-Ghaza ÇÅ lõÅ, al-Munqidh
Ç min al-DalaÅl (Cairo, 1303/1886), 43. Al-GhazaÅlõÅ's
Ç of his return to Nishapur at the end of the
mention of `revival' (ihyaÅ]) in the context
®fth century can be taken Ç as a sure indication that he saw his masterpiece, the IhyaÅ]
[UluÅm al-DõÅn, as testimony to his rank as mujaddid. Ç
21
See Qur]aÅn, 3: 164, 7: 103, 10: 74±5, 16: 36, 17: 15, 28: 59, 40: 34, 62: 2.
298 h a m i d al g a r
identifying mujaddids, and not surprisingly the candidates they
favoured belonged without exception to their madhhab. TaÅj al-DõÅn
[Abd al-WahhaÅb ibn al-SubkõÅ (d. 728/1326), compiler of the great
biographical dictionary, al-TabaqaÅt al-ShaÅ®[iyya, went so far as to
assert that the function of Çthe mujaddid includes the propagation
of the ShaÅ®[õÅ school.22 There have also been certain regions, such as
the BilaÅd al-SuÅdaÅn, where a particularly strong and recurrent
interest in recognizing the mujaddid of the age has been observable
andÐnot coincidentallyÐextraordinary importance has been
attached to the of®ce. Thus the celebrated Shehu Usumanu dan
Fodio (d. 1232/1817) of Hausaland claimed unambiguously to be the
mujaddid of the twelfth HijrõÅ century, having been appointed as such
by the Prophet, the Four Caliphs, and Shaykh [Abd al-QaÅdir GõÅlaÅnõÅ,
in a vision he experienced in 1209/1794. In addition, he con¯ated
the function and title of mujaddid with the twelve righteous
caliphs whose rule was foretold in Hadith, by proclaiming himself
to be both the last mujaddid and the last of the twelve caliphs;
immediately after him would come the MahdõÅ, whose path he was
preparing by a jihaÅd destined to last until the emergence of that
justice-dispensing saviour.23 To the scholarly functions of the
mujaddid were thus added a military mission and an apocalyptic
dimension.
Of greater relevance to BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi's own under-
standing and invocation of tajdõÅd was the Indian tradition of renewers
that was inaugurated by Shaykh Ahmad SirhindõÅ (d. 1034/1624),
known to his admirers as ImaÅm-i Rabba Ç Å nõÅ, or more signi®cantly
as mujaddid-i alf-i thaÅnõÅ, the Renewer of the Second Millennium.
SirhindõÅ was a major ®gure in the history of the NaqshbandõÅ tarõÅqa,
standing at the origin of an initiatic line known as Mujaddidõ Ç Å
in accordance with his claim to be the millennial renewer, and

22
Ibn al-SubkõÅ, al-TabaqaÅt al-KubraÅ, quoted in al-SuyuÅtõÅ, al-Tahadduth bi-Ni[mat
AllaÅh, 218. Given this Ç predominance of ShaÅ®[õÅs among Çthe early Ç mujaddids, Ella
Landau-Tasseron has argued that the Hadith of the centennial renewer was ®rst put
into circulation in order to justify the `innovations' of Imam al-ShaÅ®[õÅ in legal
methodology; her argument hinges on the dubious contention that tajdõÅd may in some
contexts be lexically equivalent to bid[a (`The Cyclical Reform: A Study of the
Mujaddid Tradition', Studia Islamica, 70 (1989), 79±117).
23
Usumanu dan Fodio also sought to buttress his claim to be the mujaddid in a
more temperate and traditional fashion by composing a book on the revival of the
Sunna and the uprooting of bid[a, the IhyaÅ] al-Sunna wa-IkhmaÅd al-Bid[a. On his
claim and the conclusions he drew from it, Ç see Muhammad Shareef's introduction to
his translation of this work (Revival of the Sunna and Destruction of Innovation
(Fair®eld, Calif., 1418/1998), pp. xii±xv, liii±liv), and Mervyn Hiskett, The Sword of
Truth: The Life and Times of the Shehu Usuman dan Fodio (New York, 1973), 66.
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 299
BediuÈzzaman made frequent mention of him in his work.24 For
SirhindõÅ, the advent of the second millennium of the Islamic era
endowed the function of the mujaddid with particular signi®cance.
`Let it be known,' he wrote, `that the centennial renewer is one
thing, and the millennial renewer something else; the difference
between them is as great as the difference between a hundred and a
thousand or even greater.'25 The passage of one thousand years
since the beginning of the Islamic era had, in his view, created
qualitatively new circumstances: `In previous ummas, the passage of
one thousand years required the sending not simply of any prophet,
but of a major prophet (payghambar-i uÅluÅ l-[Azm); what is needed at
Ç
the present time is a scholar and a gnostic of perfect accomplishment
who will take the place of the major prophets in previous ummas.'26
It is true that when discussing the role of the renewer of the
second millennium SirhindõÅ describes his own time as being `full of
darkness',27 but it appears that for him the emergence of that renewer
resulted as much from a process of maturation as from one of decay.
For the completion of the ®rst millennium now enabled him, as
the renewer of the second, to `borrow from the niche of lights of
prophethood'28 and to discover, among other things, `perfections of
prayer (kamaÅlaÅt-i namaÅz) _ that have come into existence after a
thousand years.'29 The function of the millennial mujaddid is thus
not simply to restore or correct what has been damaged or distorted
by the passage of time, but to expound matters that were previously
unknown, by uniquely direct access to the prophetic knowledge.
Two centuries later Usumanu dan Fodio connected the function of
mujaddid with the emergence of the MahdõÅ and thereby with the
future of sacred history; SirhindõÅ by contrast looked back to
the prophetic age and saw the millennial mujaddid as embodying a
belated and partial prolongation of prophethood itself. Using bold
metaphorical language, he suggested that he had some share in the
`residue' (baqiyya) of prophethood that was left over after the sealing
of the prophetic of®ce with the Messenger: `Although none other has
any share in the unique Muhammadan fortune (dawlat-i khaÅssa-yi
MuhammadõÅ), it stands to reason that after the formationÇ Ç and
Ç
perfection of the ProphetÐpeace and blessings be upon himÐsome
24
See my article `Su®sm and Tariqat in the Life and Work of BediuÈzzaman Said
NursõÅ', forthcoming in Journal of the History of Su®sm.
25
SirhindõÅ, MaktuÅbaÅt (Karachi, 1393/1973), ii. 21.
26
Ibid. i. 390.
27
Ibid.
28
Ibid. ii. 21.
29
Ibid. i. 454.
300 h a m i d al g a r
residue of that fortune should have remained; for does not a
surplus result from any banquet hosted by the generous, and is not
that remainder given to the servants?'30
SirhindõÅ does not himself provide any account of precisely how
or when the function of millennial renewer was vested in him, but
several hagiographers have compensated for his silence. Thus KhwaÅja
Muhammad IhsaÅn relates that on the night of RabõÅ[ al-Awwal 3, 1010
(13 ÇSeptemberÇ 1602) the Prophet came to SirhindõÅ, accompanied
by all the supreme angels and the awliyaÅ] and with his own hand
bestowed on him `an extremely splendid cloak, the like of which no
one had ever seen and which appeared to be pure light', declaring
`this is the cloak of the renewer of the second millennium.'31 The
bestowal of an actual cloak, albeit by non-miraculous means, played
a comparable role in BediuÈzzaman's emergence as a mujaddid in
his own view and that of his followers, as will be seen below.
Somewhat obscure is the relationship between Sirhindi as renewer
of the second millennium and the centennial mujaddids that were
to succeed him. However, it may be assumed that he presided over
them in some fashion, for it is asserted by NaqshbandõÅs of the
MujaddidõÅ branch that each subsequent mujaddid must belong to his
initiatic lineage, an echo, perhaps, of the monopolistic claim earlier
made by some ShaÅfõÅ[õÅs.32 Several claimants to the dignity of centennial
renewer emerged among the initiatic descendants of SirhindõÅ, most
notably perhaps ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh DihlavõÅ (d. 1176/1763). He reports
that, like SirhindõÅ, his appointment to the of®ce was signalled by the
divine bestowal of a `renewer's cloak' (khil[at al-mujaddidõÅya), at
the time he had completed his study of philosophy (daurat al-hikma).
This was followed by the gift of a second cloak, the nature ofÇ which
is not immediately apparent from the name given it by ShaÅh
WalõÅullaÅh, al-khil [at al-HaqqaÅniyya. Its effect, however, was that
he lost all speculative and Çintellectual knowledge, so that he began to
wonder how he might exercise his function as mujaddid. A particular
method was then displayed to him whereby he might combine the
resulting `unletteredness' (al-ummiyya) with the of®ce of mujaddid.
Despite these multiple divine favours, he had been granted, at the
time of writing, only a general understanding of tajdõÅd, consisting
of the ability to reconcile opposing views concerning questions of
30
Ibid. ii. 518±19.
31
KhwaÅja Muhammad IhsaÅn, Rauźat al-QayyuÅmõÅya, Urdu trans. IqbaÅl Ahmad
Ç
FaÅruÅqõÅ (Lahore, 1409/1989),Ç i. 158±9, 164, 170. Ç
32
He is even reported as sayingÐadmittedly by a late and not necessarily reliable
sourceÐthat the MahdõÅ himself will be a MujaddidõÅ (GhulaÅm Sarwar LaÅhuÅrõÅ,
KhazõÅnat al-As®yaÅ] (Lucknow, 1868) i. 613.
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 301
jurisprudence (al-mukhtalafaÅt) and the insight that independent
opinion (al-ra]y), although reprehensible in matters pertaining to
the Shari[a, was a blessing in judicial affairs.33 This somewhat
incoherent account of the matter goes together with other claims
of far-reaching type, some being reminiscent of the pretensions of
SirhindõÅ. He announced that perfections had been bestowed on him
that none before him had possessed, and that as mujaddid he was
the legatee (wasõÅ ) of the Prophet, a term more commonly encountered
Ç a SunnõÅ context.34 Also strikingly ShõÅ[õÅ in its
in a ShõÅ[õÅ than
connotations was his claim to be QaÅ]im al-ZamaÅn, the one divinely
entrusted with the welfare of the age.35 Furthermore, Allah caused
him to understand that the light of the names MustafaÅ and [IsaÅ was
re¯ected in him, so that `henceforth none will draw ÇÇ close to Me
without your having some share in his training, outwardly and
inwardly; it will be thus until JesusÐupon whom be peaceÐdescends
[anew to the earth].' By contrast with his African near-contemporary,
Usumanu dan Fodio, who saw himself as preparing the way for
the coming of the MahdõÅ, ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh believed that his own
exalted qualities had postponed that event inde®nitely. For Allah
informed him that `through you, it may be that the earth will
become so luminous that all oppression and injustice depart from
it; you will convey requests to the MahdõÅ and thereby postpone him
[i.e. his appearance] for a long time.'36
The immediate predecessor as mujaddid to BediuÈzzaman Said
Nursi, in his own view and that of his devotees, was another initiatic
descendant of SirhindõÅ, MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid BaghdaÅd, (d. 1242/1827),
celebrated by them as the renewer of the thirteenth HijrõÅ century.
He counts as a NaqshbandõÅ-MujaddidõÅ by virtue of his training at
the hands of ShaÅh [AbdullaÅh (also known as GhulaÅm [AlõÅ) DihlavõÅ
(d. 1240/1824), but having received from him unrestricted authority
to propagate the NaqshbandõÅ tarõÅqa in Western Asia, MawlaÅnaÅ
KhaÅlid became the originator Çof a distinct and extremely wide-
spread line of transmission known after him as the KhaÅlidiyya. There
is no trace of self-proclamation as mujaddid in the letters of
33
ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh DihlavõÅ, al-TafhõÅmaÅt al-IlaÅhõÅya, ed. GhulaÅm MustafaÅ QaÅsimõÅ
(Hyderabad (Sind), 1387/1967), ii. 160. ÇÇ
34
ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh DihlavõÅ, al-TafhõÅmaÅt al-IlaÅhõÅya, ii. 67. For a general equation of
the mujaddid with the wasõÅ, see ibid. 171.
35 Ç Å, FuyuÅd al-Haramayn, cited in Saiyid Athar Abbas
ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh Dihlavõ
Rizvi, Shah Wali-Allah and his Times Ç
Ç (Canberra, 1980) 216. These echoes of ShõÅ[õÅ
terminology are particularly remarkable in view of ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh's implacable
hostility to ShõÅ[ism, expressed most fully in his polemical work, Tuhfa-yi IthnaÅ
[asharõÅya (Istanbul, 1990). Ç
36
ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh DihlavõÅ, al-TafhõÅmaÅt al-IlaÅhõÅya, ii. 145.
302 h a m i d al g a r
MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid, which for the most part deal with organizational
matters concerning the diffusion of the tarõÅqa and show greater
interest in questions of kalaÅm than of Su®sm;Ç he was in general
in®nitely more sober than either SirhindõÅ or ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh. He
occasionally manifests a sense of crisis, but in purely political terms,
and the single reference that he makes to the signs of the times and the
proximate appearance of the MahdõÅ appears to have no great
signi®cance.37 There is only indirect and anecdotal evidence that he
may have regarded himself as the mujaddid or encouraged others to
do so. It is said that Halet Efendi (d. 1238/1822), primarily MevlevõÅ in
his af®liations while being linked to a non-KhaÅlidõÅ MujaddidõÅ lineage,
once denounced MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid in the presence of the Ottoman
Sultan MahmuÅd, whom he addressed on this occasion as al-sultaÅn
al-mujaddid. Ç This may indicate that MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid had acquired Ç
a reputation as the mujaddid and that Halet Efendi was seeking
obsequiously to assure Sultan MahmuÅd that he, the monarch, was
Ç
the true renewer of the age.38 In addition, calls for the meticulous
observance of the Sunna and the avoidance of bid[aÐessential
hallmarks of the mujaddid according to the classical understandingÐ
do occur with some frequency in MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid's letters to his
devotees.39
There can also be no doubt that he met fully one more of the
requirements set forth by al-SuyuÅtõÅ for the mujaddidÐthe exercise of
Ç

37
See MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid's letter to JalõÅzaÅde [AbdullaÅh KaÅkõÅ in Bughyat al-WaÅjid
fõÅ MaktuÅbaÅt MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid, a collection of his correspondence compiled and
annotated by Muhammad As[ad SaÅhibzaÅda (Damascus, 1334/1916), 161. How-
ever, one of his murõ Ç Åds, the poet and
Ç Ç statesman Izzet Molla (d. 1245/1829), did
proclaim the coming of the MahdõÅ to be at hand in a treatise he wrote advocating
governmental reform. Almost two centuries later, another KhaÅlidõÅ NaqshbandõÅ,
Osman CËataklõ of Istanbul, a khalõÅfa of the celebrated Mehmed Zahid Efendi
(d. 1980), is also said to regard matters so sombrely that the coming of the MahdõÅ must
be at hand (conversation with one of his followers, Istanbul, 1996). Another Turkish
NaqshbandõÅ, Iskender EvrenosogÆ lu, took the process a step further by proclaiming
himself the MahdõÅ in April 1996; his claim passed virtually unnoticed outside his own
narrow circle.
38
IbraÅhõÅm FasõÅh Efendi, al-Majd al-TaÅlid ® ManaÅqib MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid (Istanbul,
1292/1875), 45±6. Ç ÇThe same source reports that MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid entrusted the task of
punishing Halet Efendi for his impudence to his spiritual patron, JalaÅl al-DõÅn RuÅmõÅ,
with the result that not long after he was strangled in Konya by royal command. It may
be worth noting that another MevlevõÅ, the celebrated poet GhaÅlib Dede (d. 1213/
1799), had already addressed Sultan MahmuÅd's predecessor, Selim III, as mujaddid;
see the line of verse cited by Irfan GuÈnduÈz,Ç Osmanlõlarda Devlet-Tekke MuÈnasebetleri
(Istanbul, 1984), 130.
39
See e.g. his letter to three of his khalõÅfas in Baghdad, Bughyat al-WaÅjid, 111.
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 303
ascertainably wide in¯uence through his own person and his students
and followers.

****
In around 1940, when BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi was living in
the Turkish city of Kastamonu, he received from a certain Asiye
Hanõm the gift of a cloak that MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid had bestowed on
her grandfather, KuÈcËuÈk AsËõk, who had been one of his numerous
khalõÅfas.40 The gift was interpreted as coming directly from MawlaÅnaÅ
KhaÅlid himself, `across a gap of one hundred years,' and thus as
transmitting the function of centennial renewer to BediuÈzzaman.41 He
may not have been aware of the association between receiving a
cloak and assuming the of®ce of mujaddid that had existed in the
cases of SirhindõÅ and ShaÅh WalõÅullaÅh; this makes the parallel all
the more striking.
Continuity between MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid and BediuÈzzaman was also
implicit in a signi®cant utterance attributed to a KhaÅlidõÅ shaykh of
Isparta, BesËkazalõzade Osman Efendi. He is reported to have said in
1293/1876±7, which was the year both of his own death and of
the birth of BediuÈzzaman, that `the mujaddid who will save belief in
religion has just been born this year.'42 This awareness was evidently
preserved in the family, for, thirty-®ve years later, Osman Efendi's
youngest son, Ahmed Efendi, was asked, `Who is this mujaddid of
whom you constantly speak, and where is he?' He contented him-
self with replying, `Yes, he is now present, and he is thirty-®ve years
of age.' On another occasion he was asked whether it was true that
his father had predicted that one of his sons would meet and shake
hands with the promised mujaddid, to which he replied that such
was indeed the case, for he, Ahmed Efendi, had made contact with
the mujaddid.43
The transmission of tajdõÅd from MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid to BediuÈzzaman
seemed, moreover, to be mathematically con®rmed by a whole series
of striking chronological correspondences between the careers of the
40
For more details of this event, see my forthcoming article, `Su®sm and Tariqat in
the Life and Work of BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi'.
41
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Kastamonu Lahikasõ (Istanbul, n.d), 63.
42
Only the year of BediuÈzzaman's birth seems to be known, not the day or even the
month.
43
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Sikke-i Tasdik-i Gaybi (Istanbul, n.d.), 47. The source
for these statements of Osman Efendi and Ahmed Efendi appears to have been another
Su® of Isparta, Topal SËuÈkruÈ; see ibid. 9. Ahmed Efendi may not have met the promised
mujaddid in Isparta, for it was not until 1953 that BediuÈzzaman took up residence
there.
304 h a m i d al g a r
two men. A certain Ha®z SËamlõ Tev®k pointed out that BediuÈzzaman
was born exactly one hundred lunar Islamic years after MawlaÅnaÅ
KhaÅlid; that he came to the Ottoman capital, Istanbul, for the ®rst
time exactly one hundred years after MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid arrived in
the Moghul capital, Delhi, to begin `his struggle for religious renewal'
[tecdid-i din muÈcahedesi]; and that he quit Ankara for Van in disgust
at the political scene in the capital exactly one hundred years after
MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid had, for political reasons, left Baghdad for
Damascus. SËamlõ Ha®z Tev®k concluded that the function of the
Risale-i Nur as an agent of tajdõÅd was therefore proven, `according
to the clear text of the hadõÅth' (nass-õ hadisle), with its speci®c mention
of `every hundred years'.Ç 44
These links with MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlidÐand by implication with all
the centennial renewers who had preceded himÐwere clearly import-
ant for BediuÈzzaman. That he had, however, his own distinctive
interpretation of tajdõÅd and its functioning is apparent from the
following passage:
Those exalted servants of religion, the glad tidings of whose coming at
the head of every century have been proclaimed in a hadõÅth are not innovators
(mubtadi[) in the matter of religion, but obedientÇ followers. They do not
create anything new of themselves, nor do they proclaim any new ordinances.
Rather, by following the letter of the bases and ordinances of religion and the
Sunna of the ProphetÐpeace and blessings be upon himÐthey straighten
religion and make it ®rm; clarify its essence and true nature; refute and
disprove the absurdities which some have attempted to mix with religion;
repel and annihilate all attacks on religion; establish all the commands of
Allah; and proclaim and make manifest the nobility and sublimity of all
divine ordinances. However, at the same time, without in any way damaging
the fundamental nature of religion or violating its essential spirit, they
ful®l their duties [as mujaddid] by employing new methods of explanation,
new means of persuasion that are consonant with the age, and new forms of
detailed instruction.
These divinely appointed servants con®rm the mission entrusted to them
with their own deeds and conduct. They express in their persons the ®rmness
of their faith and the purity of their sincere devotion, actively demonstrating
the degree of faith they have attained. They act entirely in accordance with
the ethical model of the ProphetÐupon whom be peace and blessingsÐ
imitate his conduct and garb themselves in his attributes. In short, by virtue
of their conduct and character and their ®rm adherence to the Sunna, they
are models for the umma and examples for it to follow. The works that
they write interpreting the Book of Allah, or explaining and vindicating the
ordinances of religion in a manner suited to the understanding and degree of
knowledge prevailing in their time, are not the product of their own minds or
44
Ibid. 14±16.
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 305
exalted perceptions, the fruit of their own intelligence or knowledge. Rather
they are directly inspired and inculcated from the source of revelation itself,
the pure essence of the Prophet, upon whom be peace and blessings
´
[dogÆ rudan dogÆ ruya menba-i vahy olan Zat-õ PaÃk-i Risalet]in (A.S.M.)
manevõÃ ilham ve telkinatõdõr]. The JaljaluÅtõÅya, the MasnavõÅ-yi SharõÅf, the
FutuÅh al-Ghayb, and other similar books are all works of this type.45
Ç
The early part of this proclamation reaf®rms the de®nition of
tajdõÅd put forward by al-SuyuÅtõÅ: the revival of the Sunna and the
eradication of bid[a (or, as Bediu Ç È zzaman puts it, `the absurdities
which some have attempted to mix with religion.') Novel and
distinctive, however, is BediuÈzzaman's assignation to the mujaddid
of the task of `employing new methods of explanation, new means
of persuasion'. This formulation clearly re¯ects BediuÈzzaman's own
assessment of the times in which he lived and the mission he saw
himself called on to ful®l. The very foundations of belief had come
under attack, he noted, as a result of the spread to the Muslim
lands of European nineteenth-century rationalism: `In former
times the foundations of faith were secure; submission to them was
®rm _ Recently, however, misguidance has stretched out its hand
against the pillars and foundations of the faith.'46 The `new methods
of explanation and persuasion' employed by BediuÈzzaman in the
Risale-i Nur cannot be adequately examined here, for our purpose
in this article is primarily to situate him in the tradition of tajdõÅd.47
45
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, SËualar (Istanbul, n.d.), 670. The JaljaluÅtõÅya is a versi®ed
prayer with quasi-magical numerical properties apocryphally attributed to Imam [AlõÅ;
see ZiyaÅ] ad-DõÅn KumushkhaÅnawõÅ (= GuÈmuÈsËhaneli), compiler, MajmuÅ [at al-AhzaÅb
Ç
(Istanbul, 1311/1893), i. 499±531. BediuÈzzaman's inclusion of the MasnavõÅ of ÇJalaÅl
ad-DõÅn RuÅmõÅ and the FutuÅh al-Ghayb of [Abd al-QaÅdir GõÅlaÅnõÅ among the books
Ç
`directly inspired from the source of revelation' implies that their authors were the
mujaddids of their respective centuries, not a view that can be documented from
sources contemporary to them.
46
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Barla Hayatõ (Istanbul, n.d.) 68.
47
No study of BediuÈzzaman speci®cally as a mujaddid, based on a careful and
detailed reading of the Risale-i Nur, has yet been undertaken. In his `al-TajdõÅd wa
Badi [ al-ZamaÅn' (BadõÅ [ al-ZamaÅn Sa[õÅd al-NuÅrsõÅ fõÅ Mu]tamar [AlamõÅ hawl TajdõÅd
al-Fikr al-IslaÅmõÅ (Istanbul, 1417/1997), 201±14), Colin Turner contents himselfÇ with a
few generalities before concluding that he `does not know of anyone who deserves the
title of mujaddid more than BediuÈzzaman' (p. 212). John Voll, in his article `Renewal
and Reformation in the Mid-Twentieth Century: BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi and
Religion in the 1950s' The Muslim World, 89: 34 [Jul.±Oct. 1999], 245±57), after
much sociological lucubration, permits himself the remarkable conclusion that
BediuÈzzaman stood at the beginning of `a new post-modern Islamic paradigm' (p. 257).
Oliver Leaman has compared BediuÈzzaman's essays in what he calls `the ihyaÅ]
tradition' with those of al-GhazaÅlõÅ and, in more recent times, Muhammad IqbaÅl, both Ç
of whom he ®nds defective by comparison (`Nursi's Place in the IhyaÅ] Tradition', ibid.
Ç these authors have
314±24). It must be said that the interpretive efforts of all three of
306 h a m i d al g a r
Crucial, however, are his regular invocations of what has aptly been
called `the machinery of nature' and the claim that the Risale-i Nur
has for the ®rst time provided irrefutable, rationally convincing
proofs for all the major doctrines of Islam, thus enabling the
believer to advance from faith by imitation (taklidõÃ iman) to faith
by investigative certainty (tahkikõÃ iman).48 This has the ring of an
unmistakably modern objective.
It should not, however, be concluded that the Risale-i Nur, as an
essay in tajdõÅd, is simply an extended attempt to engage materialism
on its own rationalist terms. The `machinery of nature' appears in
it far less frequently than does traditional, Su®-derived material
such as dreams, visions, predictions, and abjad-based speculations on
Qur]aÅnic verses. In addition, BediuÈzzaman claims an extraordinarily
exalted status for his book as a whole by assigning its origins to a
realm that transcends all rational thought. All mujaddids, he af®rmed,
had ful®lled their mission in part by composingÐit might almost be
said, `receiving'Ðbooks of authoritative nature, but the Risale-i Nur
was unique:
As for the Risale-i Nur and its spokesman [or interpreter: tercuÈman, i.e.
BediuÈzzaman himself], this exalted work contains a sublime effusion [feyz]
and in®nite perfection that have never been encountered in any similar
book. It is manifest that it has inherited, in a fashion unattained by any other
work, the effusions [fuÈyuzaÃt] of the Qur]aÅn, which is a divine lamp, the sun
of guidance, and the star of felicity. It is therefore a truth as bright as
the sun that the foundation of the Risale-i Nur is the unmixed light of
the Qur]aÅn; that it carries the effusion of the Muhammadan Lights [feyz-i
envaÃr-õ MuhammedõÃ ] more than do the works of all preceding Friends of
Allah [EvliyaÃ]ullaÅh]; that the share in the Risale-i Nur of the immaculate
being of the ProphetÐpeace and blessings be upon himÐhis connection to it,
and the sacred in¯uence [tasarruf-u kudsõÃ ] that he has exerted upon it, are
also greater than in the case of those earlier works; and that the perfections
of the entity [manevõÃ zaÃt] in which that being becomes manifest and which
acts as its spokesman are accordingly exalted and incomparable.49

been vitiated by their lack of acquaintance with the full Turkish text of the Risale-i
Nur. Some of the relevant passages of the Risale-i Nur have been assembled and
analysed by Nevzat KosogÆ lu, BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Hayatõ, Yolu, Eseri (Istanbul,
1999), 249±67.
48
On `the machinery of nature', see SËerif Mardin, Religion and Social Change in
Modern Turkey: The Case of BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi (Albany, NY, 1989), 203±16.
49
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, SËualar, 670. The putative disjunction between
BediuÈzzaman and the Risale-i Nur inspired one of his admirers who suspected that
part of the text had been suppressed to cite the Qur]aÅn, 3: 187 (`Allah took a covenant
from the People of the Book to make it clear and known to mankind and not to conceal
it _') and revealingly to remark that `BediuÈzzaman was no doubt not a prophet but he
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 307
Despite the convoluted nature of this conclusion to BediuÈzzaman's
description of the mujaddid and his functionÐeven more evident
in the Turkish original than in the translation provided hereÐit is
plain that by `the entity' which acts as manifestation and spokesman
for the Prophet, BediuÈzzaman intended not himself, but the Risale-i
Nur, of which he in turn is not so much the author as the `spokesman',
`interpreter', or servant. The function and title of mujaddid have
thus been transferred from a person to a book. This deference to the
Risale-i Nur might be taken at ®rst sight as a token of sobriety
and extreme modesty on the part of BediuÈzzaman. However, the
inescapable corollary to his disavowal of conventional authorial
engagement with the text of the Risale-i Nur is an implicit claim to
being the chosen medium for its transmission, surely a privileged and
unique status. This is not to impute arrogance to BediuÈzzaman, but
to suggest that like al-SuyuÅtõÅ, an earlier aspirant to the rank of
mujaddid, he, too, was engaged Ç in `the proclamation of divine
favour' (al-tahadduth bi-l-ni[ma).50
Ç
BediuÈzzaman's attempted withdrawal from view of his undeniably
charismatic personality in favour of the book of which he was the
carrier might also be thought to have neutralized any messianic
associations surrounding his exercise of tajdõÅd. The matter, however,
was not that simple, for some of BediuÈzzaman's followers evidently
did regard him as the MahdõÅ. Thanks to the proclamations made by
persons such as BesËkazalõzade Osman Efendi, which made him the
heir to MawlaÅnaÅ KhaÅlid as mujaddid, BediuÈzzaman reports, some
of the `elite students of the Risale-i Nur (Nurun fevkalaÅde has
sËaÃkirdleri), had mistakenly ascribed him a rank `one thousand times
in excess of the truth' (bin derece ziyade hisse vermisËler). This view
of BediuÈzzaman as the MahdõÅ was not only erroneous but also
harmful to the cause of the Risale-i Nur, for it inspired anxiety among
`the worldly and the politicians' (ehl-i duÈnya ve ehl-i siyaset) and
provoked objections on the part of `some men of religion' (bir kõsõm
hocalar).51
He therefore sought to clarify the matter once and for all by
specifying that the MahdõÅ (or, as he calls him, `the one whose coming
at the end of time is awaited by the Umma') will have three principal
duties. `The most important, the greatest and most valuable' of

was the greatest of all mujaddids and he came with a book' ( Bilal Alikan, `Muhterem
AbduÈlkadir Badõllõ AgÆ abey!', Dava, 6: 62±3 [ Jun.±Jul. 1995], 24).
50
The title of al-SuyuÅtõÅ's schematic intellectual autobiography (see n. 8 above) is an
Ç 11 (`As for the favour of your Lord, proclaim it').
allusion to the Qur]aÅn, 93:
51
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Sikke-i Tasdik-i Gaybi, 9±10.
308 h a m i d al g a r
the three will be to `disseminate faith by investigative certainty (imaÅn-õ
tahkikõÃ ) and to save the believers from misguidance'. Next comes
the implementation of the Shari[a, a task that will require `great
material power and governmental authority'. Finally, the MahdõÅ
will (re)establish the Caliphate on the basis of a comprehensive
unity among all Muslims, and serve Islam by forging an alliance
´
with the `Christian priesthood' (IsevõÃ ruhanõÃleriyle ittafak edip).52
If BediuÈzzaman had mistakenly been identi®ed by some of his fol-
lowers with the MahdõÅ, it was because they realized that the Risale-i
Nur had accomplished the ®rst of these three tasks, `precisely and
completely' (aynen bitemaÃmiha). This being the case, BediuÈzzaman
continued, `that blessed personage who is yet to come will disseminate
and implement the Risale-i Nur as his programme' (bir program
olarak). Although a mere mujaddidÐor the bearer of an inspired text
to which the task of tajdõÅd has been assignedÐBediuÈzzaman thus
claims to have ful®lled the most important function of the MahdõÅ in
advance of his coming; all that will remain for him is essentially to
implement the ready-made programme furnished him by the Risale-i
Nur. It is true, BediuÈzzaman concedes, that the second and third
functions of the MahdõÅ seem to the masses (umum ve avaÃm) more
important than the ®rst, for their implementation will take place on a
spectacularly global scale, but this is only because the ignorant do not
understand the true nature and value of that primary function.53
By means of this remarkably bold and ingenious argument,
BediuÈzzaman at once distances himself from the potentially dangerous
consequences of a claim to mahdõÅ hood and, by explicitly preempting
what he identi®es as the most important function of the MahdõÅ,
positions himself as his inspired patron and ideologueÐin a word,
as his superior. In addition, there remains a sense in which it is
permissible to discern mahdõÅhood, if not in the person of BediuÈzza-
man, then in the book he conveyed. Tradition raises the possibility
of a multiplicity of what might be called `preliminary' or `interim'
mahdõÅsÐpersons whose divine mission of guidance is restricted to a
particular time and who serve to prepare the way for the ®nal and
universal MahdõÅ.54 According to BediuÈzzaman, these mahdõÅsÐlike
52
This reinterpretation of the goals of the MahdõÅ is connected to BediuÈzzaman's
belief in the necessity of Muslims and Christians making common cause against the
then-looming danger of Bolshevism. It can hardly be reconciled with the mission of
the MahdõÅ to spread Islam universally, to the obvious detriment of all other religions,
and still less with the prediction that he will smash cruci®xes wherever he ®nds them.
See Ibn Hajar al-HaythamõÅ, al-Qawl al-Mukhtasar fõÅ [AlaÅmaÅt al-MahdõÅ al-Muntazar
Ç
(Cairo, n.d.), 42. Ç Ç
53
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Sikke-i Tasdik-i Gaybi, 9.
54
On multiple mahdõÅs, see Ibn Hajar, al-Qawl al-Mukhtasar, 72, 74.
Ç Ç
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 309
mujaddidsÐcome once every hundred years; far from being incom-
patible with this type of mahdõÅ hood, the of®ce of mujaddid thus
comes close to being identical with it: `The Most Noble Messenger,
upon whom be peace and blessings, proclaimed, on the basis of
revelation, that a mahdõÅ would come in each century in order to
preserve the spiritual strength of the believers and to prevent them
from being cast into despair by disasters.'55
For BediuÈzzaman, near-synonymity exists not only between
mujaddid and mahdõÅ, but also across a wide range of other titles
and functions: God Almighty, out of His extreme mercy and in order
to protect the eternity of Islam, has sent in every age when the umma
has been af¯icted by corruption a reformer (muslih), a renewer
(muÈceddid), a glorious caliph (halife-i zõÃsËan), a supreme pole (kutb-u
aÃzam), a perfect guide (muÈrsËid-i ekmel), or a blessed personage that
counts as a kind of mahdõÅ (bir nevi mehdõÃ huÈkmuÈnde).56 It was in
conformity with this perspective that Mustafa HulusõÃ, a favoured
disciple of BediuÈzzaman, interpreted one of his dreams. He beheld
a young man dressed in green emerging from a white tent with a
book bound in red in his hand and proclaiming to all who would
listen, `this is an address that no imam has delivered ever before.' The
young man, he speculated, might be either [Abd al-QaÅdir GõÅlaÅnõÅ
or SirhindõÅ, but the red-bound volume was without any doubt the
Risale-i Nur, `which is a mahdõÅ and a mujaddid of the present time'.
That book is, he continued, the `vanguard and herald of the [Final]
MahdõÅ (Mehdi hazretlerinin pisËdarõ ve muÈjdecisi) for whom men
have been searching for one thousand years.'57
There remains, however, a difference between the `preliminary
mahdõÅ ' and the centennial mujaddid in that the former must belong
to `the luminous lineage of the Ahl al-Bayt', examples being [Abd
al-QaÅdir GõÅlaÅnõÅ (to whom BediuÈzzaman ascribes a HasanõÅ descent)
and ImaÅms Zayn al-[AÅbidõÅn and Ja[far al-SaÅdiq; byÇ virtue of this
lineage they foreshadow the MahdõÅ of the Last Ç Day more clearly than
58
does the mujaddid. When accused during his trial at Denizli of
claiming to be the MahdõÅ, BediuÈzzaman defended himself easily

55
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Mektubat (Istanbul, n.d.), 176.
56
Ibid. 415.
57
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Barla Lahikasõ, 138±9.
58
Idem, Mektubat, 176. This speci®cation that the `provisional mahdõÅ' must be a
sayyid somewhat undercuts the identi®cation of the Risale-i Nur as a mahdõÅ, unless it
be that BediuÈzzaman was after all a sayyidÐsee the next noteÐand transferred this
lineage, together with the title mujaddid, to his book.
310 h a m i d al g a r
enough by responding, `I am not a sayyid, whereas the MahdõÅ will be
a sayyid.'59
If the mujaddid is a species of mahdõÅ foreshadowing the Final
Mabdi, it follows that that ruler of the Last Days should also be
the greatest mujaddid; he will be both the heir of the renewers who
have preceded him and the one who transcends them all. The titles
thus ultimately collapse into each other: `During the last days, at
the time of the greatest corruption, Allah will of a certainty send a
luminous personage who will be the greatest mujaÅhid and the greatest
mujaddid, he will be a ruler and a mahdõÅ; a murshid and a supreme
pole (kutb-u aÃzam), and belong to the progeny of the Prophet.'60
At a lesser level, a similar interchangeability between mujaddid
and mahdõÅ applied to BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, at least in the view of
his followers. For ®ve of the most prominent of them saw ®t to
eulogize him with the following litany of honori®cs: `A supreme
mujaÅhid, a most exalted mahdõÅ (bir mehdi-i aÃzam), a most perfect
mujaddid (bir muÈceddid-i ekmel), an utterly unique individual
(bir ferd-i ferid) _'61

****
Irrespective of the claims he advanced for the uniquely inspired
nature of the Risale-i Nur, there can be little doubt that BediuÈzzaman
Said Nursi conformed fully to the key element in al-SuyuÅtõÅ's de®niton
of the mujaddid: palpable and broad in¯uence attested Ç by one's
contemporaries. His effect on a great number of Turkish Muslims
has been profound and lasting, resulting in the renewal of their faith
and commitment to Islam at a time of great danger and oppression.
He was, moreover, conscious of the tradition of tajdõÅd to which he
was heir and inscribed himself in it, even while modifying it in certain
respects.
BediuÈzzaman may turn out, indeed, to have been the ®nal
mujaddid, for it is a paradox of recent Muslim history that at a
time when more is being said and written about `resurgence',
`renewal', and `revival' than ever before, by Muslims and non-
Muslims alike, the concept of tajdõÅd in both its classical and Su®
59
AbduÈlkadir Badõllõ, BediuÈzzaman Said-i NursõÅ: Mufassal TarihcËe-i Hayatõ, 2nd
edn. (Istanbul, 1998), i. 51. The author of this work is nonetheless convinced that
BediuÈzzaman was a sayyid, at least in the sense of being spiritually linked to Imam
[AlõÅ; see i. 49±63.
60
BediuÈzzaman Said Nursi, Mektubat, 415.
61
Cited in Badõllõ, BediuÈzzaman Said-i Nursi, i. 54. This citation suggests that even
for the close followers, the devolution of the title mujaddid from person to book, from
BediuÈzzaman to the Risale-i Nur, was neither complete nor absolute.
 th e c e nt e nn i al r e n ew e r 311
formulations has fallen into obscurity. This is not to say that it
remains uninvoked, generally by or on behalf of persons whose
scholarly quali®cations range from the minimal to the non-existent,
but it is almost always confused with islaÅh, `reform', an imported term
with no grounding in the Qur]aÅn and Ç Ç Sunna which bears largely
on the socio-political plane and has little to do with the sciences of
religion. If any attempt is made to connect a candidate for the rank
of mujaddid with a given century, it is almost invariably the Christian
calendar that is used, even though this represents a disruption
comparable to ®xing RamadaÅn in December. This is not surprising,
Ç of the third Christian millennium was
given the fact that the beginning
far more widely noticed and celebrated in the Muslim world than the
beginning of the ®fteenth century of the Hijra had been twenty years
earlier. It may, in fact, be a sign of the times, in more senses than one,
that Muslims have forfeited their own measure of time in an age of
pseudo-tajdõÅd.