DIFFERENCES OF OPINION
The prominent Indian Muslim scholar Maulana Mahmood Hasan Deobandi (1851–1920) was an enthusiastic supporter of the Khilafat Movement. In contrast, his student, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanawi (1863–1943)—a noted scholar in his own right—openly opposed and criticized the movement. However, the teacher never took this “insolence” from his student in a negative way. Their sincere relationship remained intact until the very end.
In one conversation, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanawi mentioned his teacher and guide, saying: “His heart was not burdened in the slightest by my disagreement. Once, during the time of the Khilafat Movement, some people were sitting in his room saying negative things about me. Some of their words reached his ears. He came out, visibly upset, and said: ‘Be warned—never use such words again.’ He added, ‘Do I receive revelation that whatever I’m doing is definitely correct? I have one opinion, he has another.’ On one occasion he even said, ‘We take pride in the fact that a person who was not influenced by anyone across India, who cared for no one’s approval, still came from our own group.’” (Malfoozat, Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanawi, Idarah Talifat-e-Ashrafiyah, Multan, p. 114)
This is an example that shows what the approach of scholars should be when it comes to disagreement. In such cases, the same spirit should be at work as was expressed by Shafi’i, the renowned Muslim scholar, in these words: “My opinion is correct, though it may be wrong; the other’s opinion is wrong, though it may be correct.”
Such disagreements are generally in matters of interpretation (ijtihad), and in these, there is always room for more than one view. Therefore, the soundest approach is that one should, despite disagreement, avoid developing hostility toward the other side. A person may present their opinion with confidence, but they should maintain the mindset that there is always a possibility of error in their own view and a possibility of correctness in the others’. In other words, the matter should be seen as open to different perspectives—not as a case of absolute right versus absolute wrong.
