International Journal of Basic Sciences & Applied Research. Vol., 3 (SP), 190-195, 2014
Available online at http://www.isicenter.org
ISSN 2147-3749 ©2014
A Brief Review of Abul a’la Maududi’s Thoughts
Majed Sedghi1*, Fayyaz Zaahed2
2Associate
1Department
of History and Archeology, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Central Branch, Tehran, Iran
Professor of History and Archeology, College of Literature and Humanities, Islamic Azad University, Tehran Central
Branch, Tehran, Iran
*Corresponding
Author Email: [email protected]
Abstract
Abul a’la Maududi is one of the important thinkers of India Peninsula who made a long lasting
effect on thoughts and scholarly pursuits of other Muslims in and out of the peninsula. This
effect led to formation of groups and communities who believed that Maududi’s political
philosophy could form bedrocks of Islamic utopia. Many Islamic thinkers tried to promote and
export the ideas of the Maududi throughout the world. His effect was so prominent that some
argue that the root of armed Islamist groups can be traced back to the thoughts and ideas of
Abul a’la in areas such as “sovereignty of God”, “idiotism”, and “West Civilization”. Maududi
was the first Islamic thinker who brought in and supported the idea of uprising against the
tyrants and oppressors and introduced the concept of modern idiotism in the Islamic world.
He argued that being Muslim does not mean being immune to idiotism of society. Seyed
Ghotb was one of his followers in this regard. Nowadays, modernized version of his thoughts
and ideas has once again drawn the attention of contemporary thinkers. Maududi introduced
the first political ideology of Islamic government after Khilafat. He also barrowed the idea of
separation of state powers from Montesquieu. The job done by Rasid Reza on Montesquieu’s
idea before Maududi is not comparable with Maududi’s job regarding the depth of studies.
Abul a’la employs verses from the Holy Quran in his arguments and does not hesitate to
employ divine Hadiths to prove his perceptions. Some take a step forward and claim that
political Islam in post-revolution Iran is actually rooted in Abul a’la’s political thoughts;
although, there is a clear distinction between executive power and Vilaiat Faqih in Iran. The
main questions of the study are “what are the foundations of political thoughts of Abul a’la
Maududi?”, “what are the bases of these thoughts?”, and “whether these thoughts have been
successful in practice?”
Keywords: Maududi, Political thoughts, Islamic state, Modern idiotism.
Introduction
As one of the most effective and notable thinkers of the modern world, Abul a’la Maududi promoted his viewpoint of political
Islam over south and southeast of Asia and the Middle East, and they have been very welcomed. He was born when Mongols’ rule
in India was over and the Great Britain was the dominant force in the peninsula. Islamic thinkers adopted three different approaches
to these events: Some led a life of isolation away from political issues and others like Shah Valiallah focused on small issues – in
spite of holistic approaches of Islam- and put emphasis on differences between Muslims and Hindus. The third reaction was that
taken by old political elites who tried to find agreements between Islam and Modernity; this group introduced the idea of “modern
Islam.”What was sought after by Maududi as policy is a combination of religion and politics, which mirrors the glory of golden age of
the Holy Prophet and Kholafai Rashedin (the first four Khalifa of Islam).
Political thoughts of Maududi are rooted in variety of sources; traces of Enb Teimie, Mohammad Bin Abdolvahab, and Salafi’s
thoughts can be found in his ideas. Thus, his quest was actually to purify and modify the religion. On the other hand, he is under
influence of Shah Valiallh Dehlavi and Akhvan Alsafa’s thoughts. Although, Maududi is alike Seyed Ahmad Khan regarding
modernity and accepting Western Sciences, his similarities with Seyed Jamad Edin Asadabadi are undeniable. He argues, Like
Seye Jamal, that being follower of the holy Prophet and Muslims of the early days of Islam needs religious dynamic. He also follows
the same path as Seyed Jamal did by putting emphasis on the concept of Omat, Pan Islamism, and nationality so that there is no
tradeoff among them. He rather tries to achieve a settlement among these concepts and because of this Islamic community once
appears as a religious and holy organization and defends demands of Islamic Omat, and once appears as a political party to support
domestic needs of Pakistan. Maududi is also under influence of a mixture of Sheikh Mohammad Abdeh and Mohammad Rashid
091
Intl. J. Basic. Sci. Appl. Res. Vol., 3 (SP), 190-195, 2014
Reza’s thoughts concerning Khilafat. He avoids being solely dependent on “Ijtihad” Jurisprudence and enriches his thoughts by
literate and logical reasoning. Maududi actually opposes complete reliance on Ijtihad, appreciates modern science and distinguishes
between modernism and Westernization. He believed that modernization minus Westernization is possible and accused those who
opposed modern science of stupidity. He names the Holy Quran, Prophet’s tradition, Kholafa Rashidin’s behavior, and the rules and
verdicts by great jurists as references for inferring rules. Still, he remains silence about who are the great jurists and what should be
done regarding disagreement between the jurists. Regarding Islamic government, Maududi believes that the individual in Islamic
society may not reach prosperity in isolation. His version of Islamic government is democratic Khilafat or religious democracy. The
democratic characteristic of the government lies in the fact that the leader is selected through election. Rather than an exclusive
group (e.g. jurists), religious democracy is ruled by people. A key characteristic of the Islamic state is that the laws are based on
Holy Quran and Sonat (tradition).
Political philosophy of Maududi
For Maududi Islam is a comprehensive and universal system that covers every aspects of human life; so that it has an answer
to any issue the man may encounter with. In addition to guarantee prosperity and welfare of man, Islam redeems man from
hardships, diseases, problems, evil deeds, and tyranny. To realize the aforementioned objectives, Islam fights the corrupted systems
and replaces them. As proof for universality and comprehensiveness of Islam, Maududi takes the word literarily and refers to the
Holy Quran four times by stating that Islam is the definite religion, which is constituted of four elements:
 Sovereignty and control of the state represents sovereignty and control of God
 Respecting and recognizing the state means respecting God’s sovereignty
 Executive and theoretical systems of the state are constituted of religious codes, divine laws and foundations of God’s sovereignty.
 Punishment and rewarding or judgment system is implemented by God to distinguish between those who respect and those who
breach the laws (Maududi, 1965).
Maududi has made a great contribution to elaboration of political system of Islam within a religious framework. At first, he
elaborates on Islam’s ideology and then goes through political system of Islam. He tries to highlight that political system in Islam is
based on monotheistic ideology. The holy Quran and Sonat (tradition) are two sources that he uses to articulate and support his
arguments (Enayat, 2010). Maududi manages to develop a political and intellectual system that virtually faces with no serious
opposition from the religious scholars. He argues that in Toba God specifically names four meanings for the religion; a
comprehensive and complete system of man’s life that covers all social, moral, political, and practical aspects of life. The religion,
under this framework, is not limited to internal and moral affairs that rules the spiritual relationship between God and man, but rather
it is a social and civil system as well that dictates relationship between the religion and politics. He writes that by pondering on the
story of Mosses and Pharoha in the book one may argue that religion is about not only how to worship but also a social/political
system or a state with determined rules and bases to put the social life of man in order (Khosravi, 2011).
By breaking the dogmatic limits of Salafi thinking, Abul a’la Maududi brings in a fresh viewpoint to religions matters. He
criticizes some of Salafi’s beliefs and founds one of the earliest neo-Salafi movements. He defines pre-civilization as an era that
started before Bisat (the Prophet’s mission), and not limited to a specific age. By introducing theo-democracy and permitting uprising
against tyrant and oppressor – the idea that later used by Jamate Al Muslimin, Manzame Al Tahrir, and Tanzim Al Jihad in Egyptand a new structure of justice seeking attitude of the Prophet’s fellow, Maududi sheds light on theoretical foundation of a new Islamic
movement. The Islamic state the Maududi longed for requires an Islamic movement and revolution in the mind and ideology of the
public. He believes that Islam tries to bring order to social life based on religious principles and codes (Mahnaj et al., 2000).
Islamic state of Maududi
The issue of Islamic state and issues of Khilafat and Imamat have been an ongoing debate since Motaghademin (ears ages of
Islam) scholars. Four key characters of the 5th century have discussed the issue of Islamic state from Islamic rules viewpoint. These
four scholars are Ghazi Abubakr Mohammad Bin Baghlani in his book “Altamhid Fi Alrad Ali Al Molhedeh Al Mavateh va Al Rafezeh
va Al Khavarej and Al Motazele”, Abumansur Abdolghaher Baghdadi in his book “Osul Al Din”, Imam Al Haramein Abdolmalek
Majotini in his bood “Al Ershard Al Ghateh Al Delhe Fi Osul Al Eteghad”, and Hanafi Sarakhsi in his book “Al Mabsout.” It is worthy to
add to this list Abu Hamde Ghazali (505 HG) of the six century with two books “Fazayeh Albatenieh” and “Al Eghtesad Fi Al Etegad.”
There are also two distinguishable jurists of the fifth century who wrote about legal foundation of Islamic territories, responsibilities,
authorities of the rulers, and order; Ghazi Abul Hassan Mavordi and Ghazi Abu Ali Mohammad Bin Alfraa. The both scholars named
their books “Al Ahkam Alsotanieh.” The studies in similar topic were more popular in the six century.
Ebn Taghtaghi wrote about this in “Al Fakhri Fi Al Adab Al Soltanieh.” En Tiemeih wrote a description of this book. In his
several books Imam Mosuf discussed Khilafat and Imamat as theory and belief, authorities, responsibilities, and extent of jobs.
“Manhaj Al Sane”, “Al Siaseh Al Shariaa Fi Al Raei and Al Raei”, “Nezam Al Hasbeh Fi Al Islam”, and “Kitab Jihad” are some of the
notable books (Maududi, 1405). These books made a great contribution to development of Maududi’s thoughts. Thus, all ruling and
legislating systems except that of God are rejected by Maududi; so that sovereignty is the exclusive right of God. He argues that only
God has the right of legislating and this right is not shared with anyone. God is the only thing worthy of being worshiped and followed
(Maududi 1941). Kingdom, for Maududi, represents the power and sovereignty of God and oppression and tyranny make the state
worthy of failure. Moreover, fairness and justice guarantee survival of the state. Maududi believes that all territories belong to God
and God is the sole owner. He recognizes no individual, family, or tribe with natural right of sovereignty (Maududi, 1969). According
to the Holy Quran, as argued by Maududi, only sovereignty of God and the prophets is recognized and any eligible state need to be
090
Intl. J. Basic. Sci. Appl. Res. Vol., 3 (SP), 190-195, 2014
a representative of that exclusive right (Maududi, 1985). In his interpretation of Islamic state, he introduces theocracy (i.e. the rule of
God). What is known as theocracy in the West is the rule of clergies and the church on politics. To distinguish his theocracy from
that of the West, Maududi argues that authorities of the church in West found themselves right holders of sovereignty, which is
rejected in Islam.
The Islamic theocracy introduced by Maududi is never exclusive right of a specific class or group of people. Neither the
clergies nor the elites have such right, but the power is in hands of the Muslims and they rule their society and life according to
divine orders and the Prophet’s tradition. Surely, the best word to describe this type of state is “theocracy” or “God democracy”. The
state and its head are elected by the people and they decide if the authorities can keep their office. Any matter not explicitly
determined or clarified by the religion is within power of the Muslim republic’s authority. Interpretation of laws is not limited to a
specific social class but anyone with the required knowledge “Ijtihad” may interpret the law. With this introduction, Islamic state is a
hundred percent democracy. On the other hand, no power in the society not the people nor the jurists may challenge the orders,
which are explicitly introduced by God or the Prophet’s tradition. This is why we call this sate a theocracy (Maududi 1940). Maududi
introduced four legislation sources including the Holy Quran, the Prophet’s sayings, tradition of the first four Khalifa, and Jurists
Fatwas. on other words, he places logic in a key position in handling matters in the Islamic society. Maududi develops theories about
the issues of the state and brings in questions regarding the role of state, responsibilities and authorities, organs of the state,
purposes, and characteristics (Maududi, 1940).
Khalifa
Maududi borrows the word “Khalifa” to elaborate Islamic state and by this term, he finds the power of man as bliss from God
and, thus man is not an independent power but rather representative and Khalifa of God. Khalifat of man is eligible when it is in line
with the orders of the true ruler – God – and it is not eligible otherwise (Maududi, 1985). Leader or head of executive’s power is
nothing but a trust handed over by the people and the term Khalifa is only used to facilitate communication and addressing the ruler.
Therefore, Khalifa is not the exclusive right holder of ruling the society (Maududi, 1985).
Procedures of Islamic state
Maududi highlights the ways of electing Islamic ruler as follows:
 According to the Holy Quran the ruler is an individual to whom and to his approaches the Muslims trust. The ruler must rule in
accordance with the Holy Quran and the Prophet’s tradition (Maududi 1940).
 The ruler has no privilege and advantage to other Muslims and they must be treated as a citizen and based on the Islamic
constitution. The ruler is responsible for all their actions and probable breach of law they commit and the people can and must
criticize the ruler, as they possess the power to change the ruler (Maududi, 1941).
 The ruler must consult the affairs with an Islamic parliament of which the representatives are elected through voting; although this
is unprecedented, it is in compliance with the religion (Maududi, 1940).
 The bills submitted to the Islamic parliament require consent the majority of the parliament representative before being considered
as law. However, majority is not the criteria of telling good or wrong as God says “Allah made the Kaba, the Sacred House, as an
asylum of security for men, as also the Sacred Months, the animals for offerings, and the garlands that mark them: That ye may
know that Allah hath knowledge of what is in the heavens and on earth and that Allah is well acquainted with all things”. Thus, the
head of the administration is entitled to choose between the idea of the majority or minority of the representatives (Maududi, 1941)
 The position of the ruler or the representatives of the parliament shall not be taken by those who only try to achieve, but what
matters is religious competence of the candidates. The rulers may not employ the mass media to introduce themselves. In Islamic
state, an offense or breach of moral codes is not negligible let along the offender runs for the parliament or Khilafat (Mudodi,
1940).
 Representatives of the parliament are banned from establishing groups and fraction and each member must express their
viewpoint without hesitation. Islam condemns establishing front, groups, or bands and highest legislation authority must be free of
such banned behavior. The members of the parliament must support any idea and vote that is in compliance with principles of
Islam (Maududi, 1941). Like his predecessor Hassan Albana, Maududi opposed political parties and groups as he find it an idea
brought in to support interests of a small group of people.
 Judiciary and courts of law are under authority of the executive power Maududi, 1940). The ruling power of the state is entitled of
being obeyed while it does not breach the limits of God’s laws (Maududi, 1940).
Modern idiotism and what to do?
In “Mostalehat Al Arbae” Maududi highlights the fundamental change in belief system of contemporary Muslim so that meaning
of many terms in the Holy Quran and four words (Allah, worship, God, and Religion) in particular have changed from what was
meant in early years of Islam. When Islam was represented to Arab, they were quite familiar with meaning of Allah and Rab (God) so
that they knew what the Prophet meant by inviting them to worship God. However, Muslims of next the centuries gradually
developed different meanings of these terms. In particular, nowadays these terms are limited to ambiguous and illusive meanings,
which is due to two causes:
091
Intl. J. Basic. Sci. Appl. Res. Vol., 3 (SP), 190-195, 2014
Negligence of accurate Arabic language
 The next generations did not have the background that Arab population before Islam had about the terms such as Allah, Rab,
Worship, and Religion. Because of this, linguists and interpreters of the next centuries had no way but to describe such terms for
the new generations, which of course was different from the original meaning. For instance, they explained the term “Elah” as if it
is of the same nature of idol; Rab was defined as trainer and teacher; “Worship” was limited to “Tali, Tanasok, humbleness, and
pray”; religion was defined as sect and group; and Tyrant as evil. This led to misunderstandings regarding the true purpose of the
Prophet’s mission. For example, many thought that the order “not to worship anyone but God” only refers to idols and not many
other meanings of idols that people encounter with in daily life. Consequently, many things were being worshiped along with God
as people forgot to purify their religion (Maududi, 1930).
God in Maududi’s eye means necessity of rule of superior so that all the orders come from one conqueror source and no other
source has a role in giving orders. This due to the fact that God is the sole creator and nothing else is worthy to be recognized as
source of rule and order. This is also logically accepted (Mudodi, 1930). Maududi later classifies and theorizes sheer idiotism with
following characteristics:
 The root of politics is in man sovereignty whether in the form of individual or familial right or sovereignty of social classes or a
republic. The most outstanding emergence of such state is the commonwealth state where legislation power is surely in the hand
of public and the laws and regulations is naturally based on man’s wishes and desires.
 The social life is based on self-desire and sensuality and moral values are gradually faded away to facilitate realization of earthy
desires. In this system, morality is based on different criteria, which are nothing more than earthy joys, wasting, and seeking
physical needs.
 The state is based on the nature and its limitations so that customs, arts, skills, and industries are developed within the boundaries
of the nature.
 Economic life and livelihood of people is initially based on feudalism, which later develops into capitalism followed by uprising of
workers and dictatorship of workers. The point is that economic life never returns to straight and right path.
 The education system is aimed to train labor forces, and follows that same path as the economic system does. Expectedly, in
theory and practice, the education system fairly fits the ideological path of the state. Therefore, schools under this system are
empty of anything about the relation between man and God and place of man in creation (Maududi, 1915).
Contemporary society appears heterogeneous to Maududi, as he believes that it can be compared with the groups of animals.
He argues that Kaaba resembles heart of the society and the society remains alive while the heart is beating (Maududi, 1969).
However, this does not mean that the society is healthy. He criticizes the Muslims’ society for suffering vicious cycle of diseases. He
appears as a reformer who looks for solution and asks himself and his audience what should be done. His solution is to invite
Muslims to internal and public rise up. From his point of view, the superior revolution is the one free of national and regional
characteristics, which tries to change the whole world and this is the holiest and outstanding goal that Muslims should try to achieve
it. With this introduction, Maududi finds that source of hardships and sufferings of man are in finding himself independent and not
responsive to God; as if he is autonomous and actually another god on the earth. When man finds no need to be responsive or
liable, he turns into dictator, evil, oppressor, selfish, aggressor, and egotist character and becomes the cause of all hardships and
sufferings (Maududi, 1915). For Maududi, no improvement in man’s life is expectable unless he changes his way. In this way,
uprising against tyrant and oppressor is a religious task.
Maududi believes that all states in the world are tyrant even those in Islamic countries or those claim being an Islamic state
(Maududi, 1930). By arguing that any state has its roots in moral, ideological, and political order of the society and limited to these
boundaries, Maududi’s Islamic state is the only exception (Maududi, 1930). Like any other revolution such as France Revolution,
Communist Revolution, and Nazism Movement in Germany which evolved in proper social, moral, and ideological environment,
Islamic revolution also needs proper environment (Maududi, 1930). In this regard, realization of Islamic state is not possible while
spiritual and mental structures of members of the society are not in line with Islamic state. By introducing the issue of pioneers of the
society, Seyed Ghotb brings a similar idea. The question is, then, what are the characteristics of Maududi’s revolution? Arguably, the
concept of Maududi’s revolution is different from what is generally known in politics and sociology. The nature of Islamic revolution is
ideological, spiritual, and mental and based on Islamic trainings happens gradually and avoids physical violence as possible
(Khosravi, 2011).
Maududi and the West Civilization
For Maududi, the West civilization is materialistic, utilitarianism and completely logical and the claim of being Christian does
not mean that the West is not contaminated with atheism, polytheism, and paganism. He argues that the West does not believe in
the day of resurrection, after death life and supernatural world. These are the root of several pains, hardships, and problems of the
West, which is gradually draining its power until complete death (Maududi, 1968). Maududi argues that the source of the West
civilization is not, as it claims, logic and rational, but rather it is based on materialism and utilitarianism decorated with science and
being logical.
The modern science by sheer reliance on observation, examination, and replication has been blinded to supernatural matters;
and whatever not sensible by man’s senses is labeled as non-scientific and superstitious. The modern science represents the
secularism and anti-religious beliefs and tries to neglect the creator by focusing only on physical causes and effects. Discussions
about nature of the West civilization can be traced in many works of Maududi, He is very keen to survey and criticize trainings and
intellectual structures of the civilization. The environmental, mental, and educational setting he lived in have notable effect in
099
Intl. J. Basic. Sci. Appl. Res. Vol., 3 (SP), 190-195, 2014
adopting this approach (Maududi, 1989). He finds the bases of current approach of the West civilization in nationalism, secularism,
and democracy.
Nationalism
Maududi argues that nationalism is a reaction to oppression and tyranny of the Church, clergies and ceasars. In its early days,
this ideology relied on the right of sovereignty and that political power must come from the nations’ will. It was a potion to save the
nations from the control of tyrant political power of the Middle Age. What was new in nationalism is replacement of clergies by
people as the rulers, which gradually cut the hands of Church from the power and apposed presence of religion in social fields.
Maududi finds nationalism as a new form of idiotism with man at its center who accepts social and individual codes in absence of
God. The power is granted to human and people appear as legislators.
The basis of laws, regulations, decisions, measures, plans, and social/individual interactions are people desires and wills. In
addition, political strategies are set based on human and nation’s interests (Maududi, 1968). Still, Maududi opposes distinguishing
between national and nationalism with nationality. He rejects nationalism as love of motherland and intentional zeal regarding nation
and pure race or loyalty to the society. He believes that nationality is a natural matter, which accompanies man from birth to death.
Secularism
The ideology argues that religion and politics are separate and independent areas and religion as a key social foundation only
deal with private aspect of man’s life. Worshiping and following God’s order is limited to private aspects of life. Instead of divine
codes, public and social areas are based on interests, benefits, wishes, desires, and logic of man. Indeed, the social matters are
handed over to man reasons and interests. To oppose this approach, Maududi asks if there is a God or not? If yes, it cannot be
limited to spiritual matter and erased from public arena; if no, then there is nothing to discuss.
Democracy
Literally, democracy means the people or groups of people’s rule on people or groups of people. Accordingly, the right of
sovereignty is possessed by the public and no specific individual or social class has any privilege over others. Therefore, no one is
rightful to impose their will to others and complete freedom and independence of nations is recognized. This right for independence
and freedom is natural and cannot be denied. In this way, whatever the public desires is legal and legitimate and what is rejected by
the public is illegal and wrong.
In addition, support and consent of the public, instead of God’s will, is the only way to gain power as the public determines
whether something is right or wrong. Religion has no place in political and social decisions making. In fact, democracy requires
preventing religions from influencing social and political matters (Khosrave, 2011).
Discussion and Conclusion
It was argued that Maududi believes in a state based on ideal Khilafat and moral values. He argues that Islamic utopia is not
achievable by any state, unless it is based on rule of God. His prescription of the state is divine theocracy; where the representative
of the public, who also is a competent Muslim, is granted the power. Maududi believes in election, although, not as a conclusive
solution. He struggles to find agreement between free election and competent leader. Although he recognizes the majority vote, his
quest to propose a comprehensive model is fruitless. Another problem he tries to solve is to propose a model free of historical
idiotism. He holds that the human-centered and God-centered fronts have been around in the society since the holy Prophet. The
fight between these two fronts has enveloped Islamic society throughout the history and Maududi fails to bring in a solution for it. He
fails to introduce a qualitative and quantitative measure of merits of the ruler. The picture of the utopia he represents is limited to
concentration of virtue among the rulers and in ruling the society. He claims that all states in the history are symbols of idolatry, while
the term has an expanded meaning in his thoughts. He argues that states are either morally corrupted or in wrong path by focusing
on man’s will instead of the rule of Quran and prophet’s tradition. He does not miss criticizing dictatorships.
Speaking of political traditions, under the influence of the environment he lived in, he revives the idea of returning to the past.
Probably, his ties with the past lead him to bring the idea of ideal Khilafa. He proposes a sort of public and parliamentary democracy;
a type of state which is not practical. The merit of his idea probably lies with the fact that he does not limit idiotism and idolatry to
states but rather accuses Islamic society and cultural tradition of Muslim. He also relies, smartly, on moral trainings of societies; the
problem for which Maududi places Islamic societies and pagans societies in the same group as they act similarly regardless of their
religions nature. In conclusion, it is worthy to mention another point; the anti-western dominance tradition. Maududi finds criticizing
the West civilization and culture an age long mission; while he uses the same political model and method for religious society
reformation, which has been successfully practiced in the West to control and criticize the power; A tradition, which has followed by
other Islamic thinkers.
References
Enayat H, 2010. Islamic thoughts in Islam. 5rd edn. Tehran: Kharazmi Publication.
Khezri S, 1981. Philosophy of jihad in Islam. Tehran: Islamic Publications.
Khosravi Gh, 2011. Political thoughts of Islamic thinkers. Tehran: Cultural and Social Studies.
091
Intl. J. Basic. Sci. Appl. Res. Vol., 3 (SP), 190-195, 2014
Maududi A, 1970. Borders of beliefs or Islamic Ideology. Tehran: Enteshar Joint Stock Publication.
Maududi A, 1970. Islamic Revolution Program. Isfahan: Kherad Publication.
Maududi A, 1980. Political viewpoint of Islam or Islamic republic. Tabriz: Khorshid Publication.
Maududi A, 1981. Political order of Islam. Qom: Maktab Qom Publications.
Maududi A, 1985. Khilafa and Molokiat. Pave: Bayan Publication.
Maududi A, 1989. Our message. Delhi: Makazi Maktaba Islami Publication.
Maududi A, 2005. Islam and the West. Tehran: Publishing Association.
Maududi A, 1969. Islam and West Civilization in Abul a’la Maududi Speeches. Tehran: Ehsan Publication.
Moshir A, 1988. Islamic movement and tribal tendencies in India colony, Mashhad: Astan Qods Razavi Publication.
091