Madrasas: Islamic or Sectarian?
By
Arshad Alam, New Age Islam
26 July
2021
Instead Of
Trying To Falsify Each Other, They Should Accept A Diversity Of Views
Main
Points:
• Sectarian
divisions run deep within madrasas.
• It
is reflected in hadith lessons, books and even legal arrangements.
• Common
Muslims need to rethink if they want to keep funding such sectarian agendas.
----
Talk to any
Alim about madrasas
and its contribution to Muslim life and he will tell you how fundamental the
role of this institution has been. For them, madrasas exist to maintain the
continuity of Islamic tradition; without them the light of Islam will very
nearly be extinguished. Such pious proclamations often hide the fact that what
the Ulama mean by Islam is itself a matter of contestation. Most Ulama are
aligned to one school of thought or another and their invocation of Islam should
rather be seen as the propaganda of a particular Maslak within Islam.
Normally
this should not be a problem: all religions have within them various
interpretative schools through which they appropriate the sacred. Diversity is
therefore an inbuilt feature of many religions. But this diversity takes on a
different connotation in Islam, especially in the South Asian variety. Here the
internal polemics are so sharp that one maslak does not believe in the
truthfulness of another; rather they all claim to be the only true
interpretation of Islam. When the Ulama speak of Islamic identity, they in fact
have this maslaki identity in mind.
Madrasas
are institutions established by the Ulama for the reproduction of their
worldview. It follows therefore that these institutions, while claiming to
speak for Islam, end up reproducing this sectarian worldview. Almost all
madrasas in India (barring some state funded ones) are established by private
donations and as such reflect the worldview of its founders. If the founder is
a Deobandi, the madrasa would reflect that worldview through its teaching and
allied pedagogical practices. If the founder is a Barelwi, the madrasa would
exist to trounce the ideology of the Deobandis. God forbid if the founder is an
Ahle Hadis, then the madrasa would rubbish the claims of the both the Deobandis
and the Barelwis. The historian George Makdisi perhaps rightly claims that
madrasas have been sectarian right from the very beginning: al-Azhar was
established by the Fatimids for the express purpose of transmitting Shia
ideology.
In the
Indian context, madrasas adopt various strategies to do so. For example, it can
be through a discussion on Ilm e Ghaib (knowledge of the unseen). The
Barelwis teach their students that Prophet Muhammad knew beforehand who would
go to heaven and who would go to hell. This becomes proof that from the
beginning to the end, the Prophet had knowledge of everything. But in the same
breath, the teacher will also tell his students that in opposition to this
‘truth’, the Deobandis believe that the Prophet did not possess this special
power. The same discussion within a Deobandi madrasa, however, will lead to
different results. There, students will learn that Ilm e Ghaib is possessed by
God alone and at times this knowledge was given to the Prophet only for some
time. The teacher would repudiate the Barelwi belief as nonsense.
Not just
the formal curriculum, but also the popular books for ‘self-study’ which are
used in madrasas end up reproducing a deeply sectarian worldview. For example,
within Barelwi madrasas, two of the most popular books are Zalzala
(Earthquake) and Dawat e Insaf (Invitation to Justice). The author of both
these books is Arshadul Qadri (1925-2002), a graduate of a prominent Barelwi
madrasa. Tariq Rahman informs us that both these books are not just popular in
India but also in Pakistan. These texts are written like a writ (Istigaza),
in which Qadri appeals to Muslims of the subcontinent to judge for themselves
what is right and what is wrong. These books plainly state that the Deobandis
are not ‘true’ Muslims since they ‘disrespect’ the Prophet. Through reading
texts such as these, students in Barelwi madrasas
learn that Deobandis are the ‘real’ enemy of Muslims and Islam. It is common
refrain within Barelwi madrasas that ‘since the Deobandis appear pious and
committed to Islamic precepts, they are even more dangerous, as one cannot
fault them on the basic tenets of Islam’.
On the
other hand, within Deobandi
madrasas, it is said with firm conviction that the Barelwis are too Hindu
to be called Muslims because they commit shirk by praying at shrines. Both
Deobandis and Barelwis cite a hadith, according to which Prophet Muhammad had
foretold that the most important danger to Islam would come from a community
who would act as Muslims and be steadfast in prayers, but in reality, would
spread confusion and sow discord. Barelwis generally identify this community as
the present day Deobandis whereas the latter think that the community in
question are the Barelwis.
Such deep
sectarian divisions are not just a matter of pedagogical rhetoric but so
significant that madrasas write this down even in their bye-laws. Consider the
apex Barelwi madrasa in North India, Ashrafiya Misbahul Ulum. Its’ Dastur
(Constitution), has a section called non-changeable laws (Ghair Mutabaddil
Usul) which clearly states that ‘members of this madrasa, from a humble
sweeper to the manager (Nazim e Ala), should all be the followers of Ahl
e Sunnat wa Jamaat’ (Barelwis). It further mentions that ‘if for any reason
this madrasa falls into the hands of a non-Sunni, then any Sunni (Barelwi) from
anywhere in India will have the right to move court in order to bring back the madrasa
into the hands of Sunnis once again’.
Moreover,
the working committee of this madrasa takes the following pledge: I am a true
Sunni Muslim and I believe in every word of Hussam al Haramain. Now, Hussam al
Haramain is a polemical text written in 1906 by Ahmad Riza Khan, the Barelwi
ideologue. It is basically a collection of fatwas against what it calls the
‘Deobandis’ and ‘Wahhabis’. It was in this work that Ahmad Riza had pronounced
the fatwa of Kufr on some of the Ulama of Deoband and by extension anyone
associated with the Deoband madrasa. It needs to be underlined that generally,
a Muslim is expected to take oath on the Quran, but here the pledge is taken on
a text which is deeply sectarian and divisive. This only tells us the level of
internalization of sectarian identity within these madrasas.
Should madrasas
then be called Islamic or should it be called sectarian institutions? Or are we
to believe that Islam can only be understood and experienced through a Maslak?
The common Muslim, who funds these madrasas may not be aware that his resources
are being utilised to further a sectarian ideology. Isn’t it time that madrasas
become ecumenical? Instead of rubbishing each other, why not start thinking
that there are many ways through which Islam can be understood and appreciated?
----
Arshad
Alam is a columnist with NewAgeIslam.com
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/islam-sectarianism/madrasa-sectarian-islamic/d/125128
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism