‘Positive action’ is the Risale-i Nur’s method of guidance, and is based on knowledge and learning, persuasion and conveying the teachings of Islam, and love and compassion. This way is the way shared by all regenerators of religion. They all received the same instruction from God’s Messenger (PBUH) and trod this path with the very greatest care according to the ages in which they lived. The Ghazzali’s, the Rabbani’s, the Geylani’s, the Mawlana’s, they were all travellers on this sacred road. The aim of all of them was to draw people within the bounds of God’s pleasure and to be the means to their eternal happiness.
Bediuzzaman held a special place among these great persons, and manifested to a high degree the meaning of the Hadith: “Scholars are the heirs of the prophets.”1 He held this position due to the terrible age in which he lived. He wrote in the piece entitled, Rüyada Bir Hitabe (A Vision Address) that in a vision he had, he was addressed as follows by a group of deputies representing all the centuries: “Man of the age of disaster and perdition, you have a vote too! Explain your ideas!”
The endeavours of the other regenerators of religion were directed against heedless wretches who wanted to make Islam deviate from its proper way and lead believers astray, away from the beliefs of the Sunnis. The age in which Bediuzzaman lived, however, was very different. In his time, the very pillars of faith were under attack, doubts had been sown in believers’ hearts with the question “why?”, and their belief put in danger. Also, on a worldwide scale and each in the form of a collective personality, disbelief, misguidance, and vice were persistently attacking belief, Islam, and morality.
Bediuzzaman undertook the duty of guidance and conveying the truths of Islam in the face of that corruption, never before witnessed in history on such a scale. On the one hand he gave instruction which effectively banished doubts and raised the faith of believers to being true and certain from being merely imitative, while on the other, he wrote the ‘Lahika’ Letters, which instruct Muslims how they should walk the rough, thorn-strewn, mined path so full of pitfalls.
Positive action, then, is the basic principle and rhythm of this elevated way.
Bediuzzaman merely responded with a wry smile to all the torments, Satanic machinations, and oppression inflicted on him with the intention of provoking him into negative action. With self-possession and without being shaken or resorting to enmity, he completed the sacred path he had embarked on in order to save the religious belief of all mankind, including those who had ill-treated him.
The last letter Bediuzzaman wrote, which may be seen as a summary of the principles of guidance he applied throughout his life, and in one respect recalls the Farewell Sermon of God’s Messenger (PBUH), starts with these sentences:
“Our duty is to act positively; it is not to act negatively. It is only to serve belief in accordance with Divine pleasure; it is not to meddle in God’s business. We are charged with responding with patience and thanks to all the difficulties we may encounter in this positive service of belief which results in the preservation of public order and security.”2
These sentences set out for us the most important of positive and negative actions.
To work solely for God’s pleasure is positive; to struggle hypocritically for self-interest and self-advertisement is negative.
Service of belief is positive; to work for unbelief, misguidance, sin, and vice is negative.
Reliance on God is positive; interfering in God’s business is negative.
The maintenance of public order is positive; causing conflict and differences, and disturbing public order and security is negative.
Patience and thanks are positive; impatience and rebellion, negative.
* * *
The literal meaning of ‘positive’ (müsbet) is ‘established,’ ‘proved,’ ‘affirmed.’ In the meaning of ‘positive’ it bears also the meaning of ‘repairing’ or ‘constructive.’ Negative, however, means destructive.
If you build a house on what was empty ground and then offer it for habitation, that is a positive act. But if you destroy it and make it uninhabitable, it would be negative.
Negative (menfi) means expelled, banished, denied, and negated. Nefiy means also claiming the non-existence of something, which is said also of someone who disbelieves. Such a person destroys his palace of belief. Similarly, we say of someone who destroys his palace of good morality that he is immoral. This is also a negative action.
A deaf person has no knowledge of the world of sounds; for him there is nothing called sound. If a compassionate doctor restores his hearing, the world of sound becomes established (sabit) for him. And what the doctor has done is a positive action. While to make an ear that hears deaf is a negative action.
The sense of sight is the same. A blind person’s knowledge of the world is restricted to what he can touch with his hands. If his sight is restored, his gaze will range over the stars, the sun, the moon, the mountains and plains, and his private world will be enlarged immeasurably.
Both positive actions and negative actions are innumerable. However, the most advanced of positive actions we find in these words:
“It is only to serve belief in accordance with Divine pleasure.”
The service of belief is the greatest assistance man can give to man; it is the greatest symbol of positive action. It is to displace unbelief from the heart, and replace it with belief.
If a person receives the bounty of belief as a result of such service, he is united with the Sustainer of all the worlds, whereas previously he had relations only with the things he could see; his mind that was submerged in matter finds the world’s Creator. He is saved from being without purpose, owner, or protector, and from the torment of not knowing what lies beyond death. He receives the pleasure of finding the All-Seeing One Who creates the sense of sight, the All-Hearing Who creates hearing, the Giver of Form Who gives things their shapes and forms, the Giver of Life, Who gives them their lives, and he believes in Him.
This assistance given to the man concerning his belief does not resemble the restoration of sight to the blind or the restoration of hearing to the deaf, it is an eternal gift, infinitely greater and more significant than any assistance offered for this transitory world. In Paradise there is neither blindness nor deafness, nor hunger, nor thirst. There is no place for pain or suffering. No deficiency, no lack, will touch that realm. But besides these unimaginable bounties, there is Hell with its unimaginable torments. The condition for gaining Paradise and being saved from Hell is belief. It is for this reason that the greatest service to humanity is the service to belief.
Thus, Bediuzzaman was a supreme guide, all of whose aspirations were concentrated on saving the belief of this nation; he was a physician of the spirit, an incomparable regenerator of religion. He stated succinctly as follows that positive action is the service of belief, while negative action is the current of disbelief:
“I am in the current of belief. Opposite me is the current of disbelief; I have no connection with other currents.”3
Just as belief is positive and disbelief is negative, so all instances of good and beauty are positive, while their opposites are negative. Forgiveness is positive, revenge is negative. Kindness is positive, insults are negative. To think well of things is positive, while to think unfavourably is negative.
When belief is firmly established in a heart, all varieties of good morals and elevated virtues will flourish. So whatever virtues and good morals we want to develop, whether in personal life or in the life of society, the way to do this is by establishing the truths of belief in people’s hearts in certain and verified fashion. This is the way Bediuzzaman took, on which he was successful.
* * *
In the event of a Risale-i Nur student conforming to all the principles of positive action and performing sincere service of belief, then not achieving the desired results in reforming people, the above-mentioned rule is concluded with: “Not interfering with God’s concerns,” so he does not become despondent. According to what we have learnt from the Risale-i Nur, “God’s concerns” means that God creates the results.
It is He that grants guidance, just as He provides sustenance. In respect of sustenance, we only plant the seed, and having tended it as necessary, we do not interfere in the question of its producing a tenfold, a hundredfold, or a thousandfold, crop. Just as we only await this from Divine power and mercy, so we do not interfere in the shoots produced by the seeds of truth we have sown in people’s hearts. Hearts are in the hand of God’s power, and it is only He Who bestows guidance. What we have read and explained produce shoots in the hearts of our listeners only through His grace, not through our wills. We turn on the switch, God creates the light. We strike the match, God creates the fire. And it is He Who makes the light of guidance shine in people’s hearts, and it is He Who lights the fire of love.
We take refuge in the grace of that Compassionate Sustainer; we supplicate Him and have recourse to Him. Both we and others are His servants. Seeking His pleasure for His servants, we call them to His way. More than that is beyond our will and outside our responsibility. In the Qur’an, our Sustainer says: Nothing is incumbent on the Prophet but delivering the message.4
The question occurs to one, why this dominical fact is the most important condition in positive action. The opposite of positive springs to life in our imaginations together with this question: negative...
We say that it means that those occupied with their own duties cannot find the time for negative action. Again we say that those who put aside their duties and concern themselves only with external events and social results first of all become nervous when they do not find what they hoped for, and finally lose hope and try to console themselves by acting negatively. They give up teaching religion and start gossiping, they give up trying to reform people and become destructive. They cease making things loved, and spread hatred.
They want to fill the vacuum in propagating Islam by means of teaching with their bullying. Whereas the Qur’anic commentators state that compulsion is not permissible in any matters, not only those of religion. And they expound the verse, Let there be no compulsion in religion as meaning that compulsion as a type of behaviour is not conformable with religion.5
There is no compulsion in religion because compulsion is not positive action. Man cannot attain to knowledge, intellectual or spiritual, or to good morality through compulsion. There can be no guidance through compulsion. One cannot make even a child do something by force, so how can one instill belief in a person’s heart by force? The heart cannot be forced. Only the body can be forced. Love cannot be implanted in the heart by force, nor hatred. On the contrary, compulsion only makes the person more stubborn, causing him to feel aversion at what you love, and love for what you dislike. The following proverb expresses this admirably: “You can take a horse to the trough but you can’t make it drink.”
* * *
Another important condition for communicating religion to others is to sow the seed in an appropriate manner. We see that Bediuzzaman made the following recommendation concerning this point: “The way followed by the Risale-i Nur is a mild, polite, and persuasive one.”6
If although we explain our cause in the best and mildest way, what we say has no effect, we should not lose hope. Because for the seed to produce the crop, the climate has to be favourable. Roses cannot be grown in arctic conditions, nor will you produce fruit from gravel and sand. Here, the inner world of the one you are addressing has importance.
It is God Who knows best who is rightly-guided.7
This verse is the greatest solace for those believers who carry out the duty of communicating religion properly.
* * *
Another basic sentence is this:
“We are charged to respond with patience and thanks to all the difficulties which we may encounter in this positive service of belief which results in the preservation of public order and security.”8
A Risale-i Nur student explained Bediuzzaman’s admonitions to be thankful like this: “While many people endure every sort of hardship for the sake of worldly, and even illicit, ambitions, should I not know it to be a Divine favour and offer thanks if I suffer persecution and oppression in proclaiming and upholding the cause of belief of God’s Messenger (PBUH), and his call to Divine unity, and good morality?” It is by way of patience and compassion that the truths of belief may be made to rule in people’s hearts and the commands of Islam reflected in their actions. There is no permission to act negatively! Anyway there may be no dispute or conflict internally. Have you come across anyone who hit you in the face? Have you seen anyone who ripped out your painful eyes from their sockets? Have you witnessed anyone who cut off your arthritic leg with an axe? Bediuzzaman gave the following true instruction about internal jihad:
“External aggression may be responded to with force, for the enemy’s property and families are like booty. But this does not apply internally. Internal action is to act positively, not ‘materially,’ in accordance with the true meaning of sincerity, against immaterial destruction. External jihad is one thing, internal jihad is something else.”9
The one who said this worked “with all his strength to preserve internal order and security so that harm would not come to ninety-nine innocents on account of ten per cent of irreligious atheists,”10 despite himself having suffered twenty-eight years of imprisonment and exile, having been poisoned on numerous occasions, and suffering endless persecution. For this reason too, he endeavoured to “instill ‘a prohibitor’ in everyone’s hearts through the lessons of the Risale-i Nur.”
* * *
Ustad Bediuzzaman set out a route of four steps taken from the Qur’an for Risale-i Nur students who wished to perform service to belief. These were “the way of impotence, poverty, compassion, and reflection.”11
Impotence and poverty are the basis of worship. Compassion brings one to the Divine Name of All-Compassionate, while reflective thinking takes one to the Name of All-Wise. Service to belief is a result of the manifestation of the Name of All-Compassionate.
God’s Messenger (PBUH) reflected this Name at the highest degree, as he did all the Names. The moment he came into the world, he exclaimed: “My community! My community!” and entreated his Sustainer for the belief, righteousness, and salvation of his community. His profound compassion will also show itself at the Last Judgement, when, as Bediuzzaman described, “everyone, even other prophets, are thinking of themselves, he will again say: ‘My community! My community!’” He will pray to God at the ‘Makam-i Mahmud ’ for the forgiveness of his community, its being saved from Hell and sent to Paradise.
Said Nursi, the Regenerator and Guide of “this age of disaster and perdition,” heard in the very depths of his spirit the cry of God’s Messenger (PBUH): “My community! My community!”, and tried to share his anxiety and distress. In a meeting he had with Esref Edib Bey, these fiery words poured from his tongue:
“Before me is a terrible conflagration, its flames are touching the skies. My children are burning within it, my belief has caught flame and is burning. I am racing to extinguish the fire, to save my belief.”12
These words are the most powerful echo of “My community! My community!” this century. In any case, the greatest share of this cry of the Prophet (PBUH) falls to this terrible century.
A father loves all his children, but he thinks most of one who is ill and fighting with death. His heart beats more for him. Thus, Bediuzzaman interpreted in the best possible way that greatest share of the cry of “My community!”, which falls to this century; with the one hundred and thirty treatises he wrote he strove to save the belief of the community of Muhammad (PBUH), and gave up everything for this sake, experiencing in his lifetime of striving, nothing but distress, suffering, being poisoned, courts, imprisonment, and exile.
“I have known nothing in my life of eighty years of the pleasures of this world. All my life passed on the battlefield, in captivity, or in the courts and prisons of this country. There is no oppression, not a torment, that I have not experienced.”13
It is to follow the practices of God’s Messenger (PBUH) to endure great suffering on the way of serving belief, and Bediuzzaman carried this out to the full.
God’s Messenger
(PBUH), who was sent as a mercy to all the worlds, did not curse those
who stoned him at Ta‘if wounding him in one hundred and fourteen places;
with his wondrous compassion he prayed for their guidance, saying:
“O my Sustainer! They do not know what they are doing.” His heir this
terrible century, Bediuzzaman, took the same path and said the following
“Due to the compassion
which is the basis of my way and that of the Risale-i Nur and which
has been a principle of my life for the past thirty years, so that
no harm will come to any innocents, I do not respond with curses even
to the criminals who persecute me, let alone bother them.”14 In another of
his writings, he describes how he and his students had suffered various
torments and undergone severe tests: “Our duty towards
them is only to seek their guidance. I recommend that none of my students
should nurture the very slightest desire for revenge against those
who have oppressed and tortured them; in the face of them, they should
work loyally and with constancy for the Risale-i Nur.”15 Another important
matter on which the great Regenerator of religion dwelt in respect
of positive action was the securing of unity between the Muslims who
serve Islam by different methods. He repeatedly stressed this important
point and exerted himself so that difference of ways should not lead
to conflict. By wway of example I want to include here the first three
of nine ‘commands:’ “1. To act positively,
that is, out of love for one’s own outlook, avoiding enmity for other
outlooks, not criticizing them, interfering in their beliefs and sciences,
or in any way concerning oneself with them. “2. To unite within
the fold of Islam, irrespective of particular outlook, remembering
those numerous ties of unity that evoke love, brotherhood and concord. “3. To adopt the
just rule of conduct that the follower of any right outlook has the
right to say, ‘My outlook is true, or the best,’ but not that ‘My
outlook alone is true,’ or that ‘My outlook alone is good,’ thus implying
the falsity or repugnance of all other outlooks.”16 Throughout his
life Bediuzzaman acted positively, which necessitated that he opposed
every sort of negative action. He wrote the Treatise On Sincerity,
in which he opposed the currents of disbelief, unbelief, associating
partners with God, and misguidance, as well as the calamities of hypocrisy,
ostentation, and self-advertisement. He wrote the Treatise On Brotherhood
to prevent the spread of calamities like enmity and hatred between
Muslims and backbiting. And he wrote the Third Topic of the Twenty-Sixth
Letter against racialism, the greatest enemy of Islamic Unity. In
short, with his discussions about belief in the Risale-i Nur, he produced
works which rendered all negative actions ineffective and were cures
for them. Of these, he dwelt
particularly on the question of ‘accusing of disbelief’ (tekfir
Ar. takfir), which is one of our social ills. Because of its
importance, I want to discuss it here. Taking as his
principle the rule ‘Thinking favourably (hüsn-ü zan) is essential
for Muslims,’ Ustad Bediuzzaman warned strongly against accusing people
of disbelief: “Those who know
Said know that as far as possible he avoids accusing people of disbelief.
Even if he sees explicit disbelief in a person, he will still try
to interpret it differently; he will not accuse him of disbelief.”17 It is contrary
to Sunni beliefs and a great crime to hastily accuse a sinful believer
of disbelief and expel him from the fold of Islam. According to the
Sunni view, those who commit serious sins are not unbelievers. Dispute
over this matter between the Sunni scholars and the Kharijite and
Mu‘tazilite scholars continued for centuries. The Kharijites stated
that those who committed grievous sins were unbelievers and would
remain in Hell for ever, while the Mu‘tazilites said that those who
committed grievous sins were neither believers nor unbelievers but
were between the two. Both groups deviated from the truth and fell
into misguidance. In recent history,
there was another ‘period between prophets’ (fetret) in which
many old superstitions and out-dated ideas again started to circulate.
To accuse of disbelief again became fashionable. But this time it
was not by the Kharijites; strangely, those that did it were neither
Kharijites nor Mu‘tazilites, in fact they did not really know what
‘disbelief’ meant, they had just memorized a few slogans. They had
a stamp died, and they stamped it on the foreheads of anyone who came
along. They knew nothing of the Hadith of the Prophet (PBUH) about
accusing of disbelief: “If someone calls
his brother a disbeliever, one of them has certainly become one. If
the one accused of being a disbeliever, is not, the accusation will
turn on the one who made it.”18 Everyone should
learn by heart the following succinct and satisfying lines from the
Risale-i Nur on this subject, and then apply them in their lives.
Otherwise, there is the possibility of their committing a serious
sin, and unknowingly driving those they accuse away from Islam. It
says in Sünuhat: “They said: this
is disbelief. That is, the attribute did not arise from belief; it
is disbelieving. It is said that due to such an attribute, the person
disbelieved. But the attribute was innocent and arose from belief;
similarly, since the person possesses other attributes which comprise
droplets of belief, it may not be said he is a disbeliever. Unless
it is known with complete certainty that the attribute arose from
disbelief. For it may have arisen from something else. There is doubt
concerning what the attributes indicate, while there is certainty
concerning the existence of belief. And doubt cannot quash the ruling
of certainty. Those who are bold enough to hastily accuse others of
disbelief should think of this!”19 This means that
a believer may have attributes which do not arise from belief and
may be nourished by ignorance, vice, or some other source. Such attributes
are termed “disbelieving” (kafire), but the believer also possesses
numerous innocent attributes arising from belief. Attributes such
as those prevent us calling the person a disbeliever. If he said something
which necessitates disbelief, or he performed some acts which did
not arise from belief but are more appropriate to disbelievers, according
to the above criteria, unless we know certainly that they arose from
disbelief, that is, that the man did them intending disbelief and
with the intention of denying Islam, we may not accuse him of disbelief;
we may not call him a disbeliever. The sentence “there is doubt concerning
what the attributes indicate” prevents us making a certain judgement.
That is, it is doubtful that it is evidence that the thing he did,
or what he said, or the attribute he has, is one of disbelief. We
do not know certainly if he did them intending disbelief, but we know
that he is a believer. If we were to ask him, he would say that he
is a believer and a Muslim. There is therefore certain evidence of
his belief. But there is doubt concerning his unbelief; there is only
surmise or supposition. Certainty cannot be nullified by doubt, so
we may not call the person a disbeliever. Sometimes, as
a result of ignorance or thoughtlessness, a Muslim may say something
that could be considered to be disbelief. Of course the responsibility
for this is great. Some scholars have even stated that all the past
good deeds of a believer are wiped out in such a case. But the poor
man is still a Muslim, he is not a disbeliever. I want to mention
here a fundamental judgement: just as belief is established by the
assent of the heart and confirmation of the tongue; so disbelief is
established in the same way. So in order to be able to call a believer
who utters words of disbelief, a disbeliever, he has to assent to
disbelief, the result of what he said, with his heart and affirm it
verbally. Bediuzzaman opposed
certain people who had deviated from the straight path, and quoting
the verse If any do fail to judge by [the light of] what God has
revealed, they are [no better than] unbelievers as evidence, accused
of disbelief the politicians who proclaimed the Constitution and constitutionalism.
He said that “the unfortunate did not know that ‘does not judge’ (lam
yahkum) has the meaning of ‘does not affirm’ (lam yussaddiq).”20
That is, the meaning of the condition, ‘if any do fail to judge by
what God has revealed’ is ‘if any do fail to affirm or assent to what
God has revealed.’ This explanation of Bediuzzaman expresses the Sunni
belief. For according to the Sunnis, a believer who does not conform
to a Divine command and does not act in accordance with it, is only
a sinner for so long as he fails to do so, not a disbeliever. In his Tafsir
al-Kabir, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi listed all the views put forward
about this verse and stated that the most apt was that of Ikrima,
who said: “God Almighty’s
statement ‘if any do fail to judge by what God has revealed’ includes
those who deny both with the heart and verbally. A person who knows
in his heart that it is God’s injunction then confirms it verbally,
then does something contrary to it, has judged in accordance with
what God has revealed, but has not acted in accordance with it. This
therefore does not necessitate that he included in what the verse
states.”21 We may conclude
this discussion of accusations of disbelief with the following fatwa
of Ahmad Ziyauddin Gümüshanevi: “If a person says
something that necessitates disbelief in many respects, but is saved
from disbelief in one respect, the Muftu has to choose the latter.
For to think favourably concerning Muslims is fundamental.”22 The following
gloss has been added to the fatwa: “However, so long
as the man’s intention is not disbelief he is Muslim. But if he intends
disbelief, the Muftu’s fatwa will not save him.” * * * I want to mention
in connection with this an ill of ours that the work Münâzarat
from the Risale-i Nur Collection diagnoses and cures. There may be
differences of opinion among Muslims concerning foreign policy, and
this is normal. It should be tolerated within the framework of freedom
of thought. Sometimes, however, arguments about this may get out of
hand. As soon as a person feels he has been defeated in argument,
he immediately accuses his opponent of disbelief. He may say: “You’re
supporting the Christians by holding such views, and it is disbelief.”
When you try to correct this misunderstanding, he starts to shout
and with perfect confidence quotes the Qur’anic verse about not taking
Jews and Christians as friends. The prescription
for this fearsome sickness is contained in the following few sentences: “This prohibition
from friendship with Jews and Christians is because they reflect Jewishness
and Christianity. Besides, a man is loved not for himself, but for
his attributes and skills.”23 That is to say,
the verse prohibits love for their Jewishness and Christianity. For
example, the prohibition would include loving a Christian country
because of its Christianity. But to love and admire its industry and
technology would be outside the prohibition. The above lines
are concluded like this: “If you have a wife from among the People
of the Book, of course you should love her.” That is, if a Muslim
has a wife from the People of the Book, that is, who is a Christian,
for instance, he should love her as his wife, but should not love
her for her Christianity. We pay a high
price for not applying this subtle measure. I have attempted
in this paper in so far as the alloted time has allowed, to show that
Ustad Bediuzzaman always acted positively and was opposed to every
sort of negative action. Of course it has not been possible in a single
paper or with a handful of examples to describe as it deserves the
positive action that was the unchanging principle of his fruitful
life. It will seen more clearly on studying the entire life of that
great guide, together with the one hundred and thirty parts of the
Risale-i Nur Collection, which he offered for the benefit of mankind. I refer you to
Ustad Bediuzzaman Said Nursi and the Risale-i Nur, and offer my respects. *
* * Prof.
Dr. ALÂADDIN BASAR Prof. Alâaddin
Basar was born in Erzurum in 1947, where he received his primary,
secondary, and university education. He graduated from the School
of Business Administration in 1969. In 1970 he was appointed Assistant,
in 1974 he received his doctorate, in 1978 he was appointed Assistant
Professor, and in 1988 Professor. He is at present Head of the Dept.
of Statistics in the Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences
in Erzurum. Alâaddin
Basar has four published books: Kadin Nedir? (What is Woman?),
Bir Kader Sohbeti (A Talk About Fate and Destiny), Bakis
Açimiz (Our Point of View), and Var Olus (Existence). He
is at present working on a book about the terminology used in the
Risale-i Nur, Nur’dan Kelimeler (Words from the Risale-i Nur).
He has also published numerous articles, especially in Zafer
magazine. *
* * FOOTNOTES 1. al-‘Ajluni
, Kashf al-Khafa’, No: 1745. 2. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Emirdag Lahikasi , Istanbul, Envar Nesriyat, ii, 241. 3. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Mektûbat, Istanbul, Sözler Yayinevi 1981, 66 / Bediuzzaman
Said Nursi, Letters 1928-1932 [Eng. trans.], Sözler Publications
1994, 93-4. 4. Qur’an, 5:99. 5. Yazir, Elmalili
Hamdi, Hak Dini Kur’an Dili, ii, 860. 6. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Lem’alar, Istanbul, Sözler Yayinevi 1986, 169 / The
Flashes Collection [Eng. trans.], Sözler Publications 1995,
232. 7. Qur’an, 10:56. 8. Risale-i
Nur Müellifi, Bediüzzaman Said Nursî, Hayati, Mesleki, Tercüme-i Hali
(Tarihçe), Envar Nesriyat, 652. 9. Emirdag
Lahikasi , ii, 242. 10. Tarihçe,
653. 11. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Sözler, Envar Nesriyat, 476 / The Words [Eng.
trans.], Sözler Publications 1992, 491. 12. Tarihçe,
629. 13. Ibid. 14. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Sualar, Envar Nesriyat, 372. 15. Emirdag
Lahikasi , ii, 80-1. 16. Lem’alar,
151 / The Flashes Collection, 203. 17. Sualar,
423. 18. Riyad al-Salihin,
No: 1764. 19. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Sünûhat, Sözler Yayinevi 1977, 20. 20. Nursî, Bediüzzaman
Said, Münâzarat, Sözler Yayinevi 1977, 69. 21. Fahruddin
Razi, Tefsir-i Kebir [Turkish trans.], Ankara, Akçag Yayinlari,
ix, 86. 22. Ahmed Ziyaeddin
Gümüshanevî, Ehl-i Sünnet Yolu, Istanbul, Bedir Yayinevi, 68. 23.
Münâzarat, 26. *
* *
The Reconstruction of Islamic Thought
in the Twentieth Century and Bediuzzaman Said Nursi
Copyright © Sozler Interactive