Barelvis Today: A Struggle Within
By
Mohammad Ali, New Age Islam
26
September 2022
The Followers
Of Ahmad Raza Demand Absolute Conformity With The Literal Understanding Of His
Fatwa And Forbade Anyone Within The Group To Contend With It. Consequently, the
Barelvis Started Applying Every Ruling Regarding How Muslims Should Treat
Non-Muslims to Deobandis and Ahl-e-Hadith
Main
Points:
1. This essay
argues that Barelvis are not a homogenous community
2. It points
out the ongoing struggle within the Barelvi School
-----
A couple of
days ago, the 104th Urs, the death anniversary, of the founder of the Barelvi
School, Ahmad Raza Khan was commemorated in Bareilly. Ahmad Raza is considered
to be one of the most influential Ulama, theologian-jurists, whose rulings and
writings shaped the religious demography of Muslims in South Asia, and continue
to do so globally through the South Asian Muslim diaspora across the world.
When we say Barelvi, it signifies a group of Muslim people who adhere to the
rulings of Ahmad Raza in theological and religious matters which are
contrasting, sometimes, from that of the scholars associated with the Deobandi
and Ahl-e-Hadith schools of thought. Ahmad Raza contended with their rivals on
various minor issues, i.e., the issues that do not make the foundations of the
faith. But his ruling that was issued in 1906, entitled Husām al Harmain alā
Manhar al-Kufr wal-Mayn, against four scholars Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi, Rashid
Ahmad Gangohi, Khalil Ahmad, and Ashraf Ali Thanvi, who were the founders and
father-figures of the Deoband seminary and the Deoband school, accusing them of
blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad, demarcated the distinction between the
Barelvi and other schools that began formation in the same period. Ahmad Raza’s
ruling in the Husāmul Harmain was conditioned by the sentence, ‘whoever has
doubts in their (i.e. the four scholars I just mentioned) Kufr and
damnation (caused by their kufr), then he/she has committed Kufr (as
well). This condition led the followers of Ahmad Raza to believe that every one
of those who subscribe to the Deoband or Ahl-e-Hadith school by virtue of
believing their leaders as Muslims automatically became kāfir. It is also worth
noting that Husām al-Harmain can be considered the most important creedal text
of the Barelvis with respect to asserting their sectarian identity.
The
followers of Ahmad Raza demand absolute conformity with the literal
understanding of his fatwa and forbade anyone within the group to contend with
it. Consequently, the Barelvis started applying every ruling regarding how Muslims
should treat non-Muslims to Deobandis and Ahl-e-Hadith. The corollary emanated
from the first position, i.e. one has to conform to the literal understanding
of the fatwa followed by the belief that only the followers of Ahmad Raza were
Muslims. And since the followers of the Deobandi and Ahl-e-Hadith schools do
not subscribe to the fatwa of Ahmad Raza, they are out of the fold of Islam.
This belief is ubiquitous among the informed Barelvis throughout the
subcontinent and among the Barelvi diaspora as well.
However,
this fact has been overlooked that Muslims in South Asia are not divided into
these specific sectarian lines. There are a number of people who do not
subscribe to any of these schools, such as the people associated with the
shrines in Ajmer, Makanpur in Kanpur district, Dewa in Barabanki district, etc.
These people are wrongly associated with the Barelvi School only because they
visit shrines and perform devotional practices. These practices have recently
been identified with the Barelvi School, regardless of the fact that they have
been existing long before the birth of the school. To distinguish these people
from the Barelvis, we can call them Khanqahis, meaning the people who do
not adhere to the Barelvi tradition but are part of the larger Sufi traditions
in India.
At this
point in time, we cannot assume that the Barelvis are homogenous in their
practice of following Ahmad Raza. The young generation has started revolting
against the anti-intellectual approach of viewing Ahmad Raza as the sole
authoritative figure in the school and the demand for absolute conformity to
his rulings, especially Husām al-Harmain. The reasons behind this revolution
can be many. However, significant among them are the authoritarian monopoly of
Ahmad Raza on ideas, and juristic and theological interpretations, plus the
marginalization of the Barelvis due to the separatism caused by the rulings of
Ahmad Raza. Today, the Barelvis can be divided into various groups with regard
to their view on the anathematization of the non-Barelvis. The first group is
the one that carries the traditional position by abiding by Husām al-Harmain in
its literal understanding and emanating reasoning, meaning all non-Barelvis are
Kafir. The second group is of those Barelvis who do not cede to the
previous group. Instead, it believes that a wholesale anathematization of a
group of Muslims is not allowed in Islam. They believe that takfir is a
sensitive issue and can only be charged against a specific person if their
blasphemy or heresy is established by thorough scrutiny and research. Ahmad
Raza is right in his ruling against the four scholars in his fatwa. But it
cannot be applied to their followers until it is not proved that each of them
has the same belief against which Ahmad Raza ruled. This group tends to limit
the effect of Husām al-Harmain. However, the problem is that this group is not
able to ascertain whether the followers of the Deobandi or Ahl-e-Hadith school
share the belief of their leaders or not. In this state of uncertainty, they
are not able to save themselves from the effects of Husām al-Harmain which
demand a similar treatment with the non-Barelvis to that which is prescribed to
non-Muslims.
The third
group of Barelvis argues that any legal ruling cannot demand absolute conformity.
They invoke their right to avoid or disagree with a jurist’s opinion if it
turns out to be contradictory to Islamic legal tradition, or if a better
opinion is available. Furthermore, if the problem, for example, ‘sentence A’,
is to be explained in a way that it is not a problem anymore, the decree of a
scholar regarding ‘sentence A’ which he issued seeing it as a problem, cannot
demand obedience. On the basis of these arguments, the people of the third
group hold, (a) the fatwa of Ahmad Raza in Husām al-Harmain, was his individual
opinion based on his own research, therefore, not binding for other scholars
and people, (b) the statements of Deobandi Ulama whom Ahmad Raza considered
blasphemous can be explained (Tawil) in a way that they no longer appear
to be blasphemous, which, as a result, exonerate these Ulama from the charge of
blasphemy. Such an explanation makes this group able to free themselves from
the shackles of an infinite takfīrī cycle. This contention not only tears down
the intellectual hegemony of Ahmad Raza Khan within his own school but also
answers the question of the intellectual and social crises that have crept into
the Barelvi School during the previous decades.
This third
group is represented by a large number of Ulama in the previous as well as in
the current century. Prominent among these scholars are Pir Mahar Ali Shah, Pir
Karam Shah Azhari, the scholars and Sufis of the Khanqah-e-Mujibiyya, Phulwari
Sharif, Patna. However, these efforts of being remained neutral or against this
sectarian conflict and extremism did not bear any visible fruit due to an
unorganized resistance. The Ulama associated with a madrasa, Jamia Arifia, in
Sayyid Sarawan in district Kaushambi, UP, are attempting to show an organized
resistance to the monopoly of the Barelvi School over the devotional practices
in Islam and refusing to fuel division over the pretence of abiding by a
century old fatwa. These Ulama are trying to put an end to the destructive
effects of the rulings that Ahmad Raza issued against their fellow Muslims. In
my conversation with Zeeshan Ahmad Misbahi, a teacher at the madrasa, their
objective to contend the rulings of Ahmad Raza is to stop the Takfiri culture
among the Barelvis and revive the Sufi culture of inclusiveness and tolerance,
an antidote to extremism and separatism.
-----
Mohammad Ali has been a madrasa student. He has also participated in a
three-year program of the “Madrasa Discourses,” a program for madrasa graduates
initiated by the University of Notre Dame, USA. Currently, he is a Ph.D.
Scholar at the Department of Islamic Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.
His areas of interest include Muslim intellectual history, Muslim philosophy,
Ilm-al-Kalam, Muslim sectarian conflicts, and madrasa discourses. He can be reached
at mohammad91.ali@gmail.
URL: https://newageislam.com/the-war-within-islam/barelvis-struggle-fatwa-muslims/d/128036
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