Some books deserve attention for what they say; others for the voices they recover. Idris Babur's edited volume, Recovery of Forgotten Scholarship: Writings of Abdullah Farooqi on Iqbal, belongs to the latter category. More than an anthology, it is an act of intellectual recovery. To appreciate the significance of this editorial project, however, it is useful to situate it within the broader discourse of indigeneity and literary decoloniality. In the contemporary era, indigeneity may emerge as the geopolitical as well as epistemic location from which literary decoloniality can be engendered.
In this context, Menon (2022), in his seminal work Changing Theory: Concepts from the Global South, observes: "The concept of indigeneity challenges the universal applicability of Western theoretical paradigms, urging scholars to engage with local epistemologies and contexts" (p. 15). His observation suggests that indigeneity should be understood not only as a marker of identity but also as an epistemic standpoint capable of generating theory from within local intellectual traditions. This understanding also distinguishes decoloniality from the postcolonial condition. While postcolonial criticism has compellingly exposed the legacies of colonialism, decolonial thought places greater emphasis on recovering and legitimizing indigenous knowledge systems. Walter D. Mignolo's (2007) notion of "epistemic delinking" advocates disengaging from the universalist claims of Western epistemology in order to think from other geo-historical and cultural locations. Literary decoloniality, in this sense, is not merely a critique of Western knowledge claims but an effort to recover, revitalize, and theorize local epistemologies on their own terms. It is within this conceptual framework that Recovery of Forgotten Scholarship becomes a significant intervention.
Against this theoretical backdrop, we encounter another significant work that mediates the dominance of intellectual imperialism by bringing indigenous knowledge claims into critical conversation. Idris Babur's edited volume, Recovery of Forgotten Scholarship: Writings of Abdullah Farooqi on Iqbal, is an excellent example of literary decoloniality emerging from the locus of indigeneity. The volume recovers the comparatively forgotten voice of an indigenous scholar whose contribution to understanding and revitalizing Iqbal's philosophical and epistemic vision deserves far greater recognition.
As Babur (2026) observes, Hafiz Abdullah Farooqi "remains a unique, and rather unusual scholar of his times. Unusual in the sense that despite his extraordinary knowledge and meticulous method, his own name is all but unheard of" (p. 5). The paradox of an extraordinary scholar fading into relative obscurity is precisely what makes this volume such a significant act of intellectual recovery. By reintroducing Farooqi's writings to contemporary readers, the book not only restores an overlooked intellectual legacy but also exemplifies the decolonial task of recovering indigenous traditions of knowledge that have remained on the margins of mainstream academic discourse. Although the essays collected in this volume were originally published nearly six to seven decades ago in scholarly journals such as Iqbal and Iqbal Review, this anthology seeks to recover an important body of forgotten scholarship for contemporary readers. In doing so, it not only revives Abdullah Farooqi's intellectual contribution but also reopens a rich engagement with Iqbal's philosophical thought. The collection reminds us of Iqbal, who, despite being celebrated as Ustad, the king of words, and the sultan of ideas, consistently preferred to identify himself as a faqeer and dervish. Interestingly, Farooqi appears to have embodied the same ideal of scholarly humility.
Editing is itself a creative and intellectual practice, requiring not only archival labor but also historical sensitivity and critical judgment.
Equally noteworthy is Babur's editorial methodology. In his editorial note, he makes it clear that he has preserved the originality of Farooqi's ideas, limiting his intervention to correcting typographical errors, removing unnecessary repetitions, and restructuring excessively long paragraphs for the convenience of contemporary readers. Such editorial restraint deserves appreciation, as it respects the historical integrity of the original writings while making them more accessible. Babur has also meticulously revisited and updated references that might otherwise confuse present-day readers. Many of the original citations belong to editions that are no longer readily available in libraries or archives. By identifying and, where possible, tracing these sources, the editor has performed an important scholarly service that significantly enhances the usefulness and reliability of the volume.
The anthology reflects the remarkable breadth of Farooqi's engagement with Iqbal's thought. The first part spans major dimensions of Iqbal's intellectual and philosophical project, including his philosophy of life, his views on education, the state, knowledge, and the problem of good and evil. The second part brings together Farooqi's essays on Iqbal's understanding of Zoroastrianism, Islamic socialism, Bergson's philosophy of time, Iqbal's estimation of Guru Nanak, and the influence of Khwaja Hafiz on his thought. The appendices further enrich the volume by including Iqbal's Pilgrimage to Eternity and his Statement on Palestine. Collectively, these writings reveal both the diversity of Farooqi's scholarship and the depth of his engagement with Iqbal's intellectual legacy. Beyond compiling Farooqi's essays into a single volume, Babur's contribution lies in his vision of scholarly recovery.
The anthology is not merely an act of preservation; it is an act of intellectual retrieval. By rescuing a neglected scholar from relative obscurity, Babur invites contemporary readers to revisit an indigenous tradition of literary and philosophical inquiry that might otherwise have remained inaccessible. His editorial work demonstrates that editing is itself a creative and intellectual practice, requiring not only archival labor but also historical sensitivity and critical judgment. What makes this volume valuable is not simply that it republishes forgotten essays. Its significance lies in demonstrating that indigenous intellectual traditions possess their own archives, debates, and theoretical resources that deserve recovery. In this sense, Babur's editorial project performs an act of literary decoloniality by restoring an indigenous scholar to the contemporary intellectual conversation.