Now there number r increasing…they have controlled mosques and “fights” on mosques in order to kick deobandis/wahabies out…they have full support..financially they have been supported by memons and america and politically,MQM played a vital role in their spread of fitna…
most important thing abt them is the list of bidahs tht r inceasing day by day…
they have divided people and infact barelvi mullahs even dont allow their students even to do salam to any non barelvi and thts my personal experience…
i have become sick opf their atitudes…fighting on minor issues without any proof is their great quality…
whts ur people opinion regarding tht
I think you have got it wrong. At the time of independence (1947), by some estimates, 80%+ muslims in West Pakistan were so-called Barelvis. I think with passage of time, and the high influx of ahle-hadeeth teachings and funds in Pakistan (dars etc), and many of the younger generation not too keen on many of the barelvi rituals, their percentage has decreased amongst Pakistanis. In core numbers they may be growing, because of population.. but more and more urbanites I see are going for ahle-hadeeth thinking (simpler) instead of barelvi thinking (more complex).
As far as getting into "fighting", I don't think any group is devoid of this characteristic. I blame it on hot weather.. mizaaj mein garmi rehti hai :)
1 of all,in NWFP and balochistan,barelvis r in very very small numbers as deobandis r in majority…abt ahle hadith,i have to disagree as they r in very small number infact deobandis and tabligh jammat which have gained people attention..especially tabligh jammat is playing vital role…u must remember many called deobandis as wahabies so there r too much confusion..
barelvis r in big numbers in punjab area..but as tabligh jammat is becoming stronger,their number r decreasing…
abt salam and their idiotic atitude,we all r aware of tht…as barelvis r in complex and they dont even reply to salam …thts my personal experience
..another thing is the list of bidahs tht r increasing day by day…this sect is now a burden
The brother who started this thread should have known better then to try and get muslims to slag-off anothert group of Muslims, who in my experience, are quite a pious bunch.
my dear...u called them "pious" group...hmm
there r offcourse many good people in barelvis,i m here talking abt their fitna alims who have divided muslims into groups...making minor issues into big one...
barelvis called deobandis and wahabies non muslims and they still call them kafis...they were the one who fought on mosuqes...sectarian issue became worst as this barelvi fitna raised....reason for calling them fitna is their list of bidahs which r increasing day by day and dividing muslims....
i accept barelvis as muslims offcourse...i m totally against their alims s they r making people divide and introducing bidahs....they r really true follwers of ahmed raza khan
extremely minor differences...barelvis problem is tht they live in dreams....they created new beliefs in 1900,s....beac of iditoic atitudes of ahmed raza khan and afterwards,barelvis alim who could not prove their bidahs right,they started to give galis to deobandis....as barelvis number is decreasing day by day and tabligh-e-jamaat is getting popular...remember tabligh jamaat represents both wahabies and deobandis...
barelvis say tth Prophet had all the knowledge of unseen and deobandis is against it...
barelvis insists on bidahs like milads,worshiping sufies and deobandis r against it...there r some other issues too
This is a sure ground for intra sectarian strife. In my limited understanding,
These are two totally different groups, each considering itself to be the best and true followers of the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). Both trace their origin ( the Brelvis in particular) to the pre-partition subcontinent and from the areas now located in India.
Brelvis are Ahle Sunnat where as are Deobandis are Ahle Hadith, which is considered a puritan strand of Islam.
Sufism, spiritualism, visiting the graves of the deceased, their mentors in particular and saints etc are the main characteristic of the former ( a Bidaah and and innovation according to the Deo bandia) where as the latter are Wahabis.
Sunni Tehrik, Dawate Islami and Jamatae Ahle Sunat are some of the groups/political parties belonging to the Brelvi sect.
The 80's was a time period when we saw a proliferation of Deobandi-Wahabi madaris in Pakistan and since then the number of their adherents have increased.
Harkataul Mujahideen, Markaze Dawa Al Irshad and Lashkare Toiba are all Deobandi-Wahabi-Ahle Hadith.
As for Tabligi Jamaat, I believe it is also Wahabi-Deobandi in character but they are more peaceful in nature and believe in subtly doing their work, emphasis being on proselytisation and preaching.
Minerva, actually wahabis arent the same as deobandis, although the shared feature of both is extreme intolerance of 'innovation'. Deobandis and Barelvis are both Hanafi schools of thought, whereas wahabis/salafis do not identify themselves with any of the four schools of mainstream sunnism that I know of. they trace their religious philosophy mostly to Ibn Taymiyah who I believe was either maliki (?) or humblee.. definitely not hanafi..
Deo bandis can be considered as Wahabis or having a wahabi leaneage/tilt but you are right, Wahabis aren't the same. Infact, as I said above, deobandi is a purely sub-continental version of Wahabism. Waisay, Wahabi is considered a condescending term and those who follow the Hanabali (faith/sect?? ) and draw from the teachings of Ibni Tamiyah are strictly against being labelled as Wahabis. According to them they strictly follow the Quran and Sunnah and have nothing to do with any fiqh or sufi order.
Maybe some one more informed on such issues can shed some light on this.
hmm.. true they’re quite close. other differences between deobandis and wahabis would be that deobandi religious scholars follow, as in do taqleed of, one of the four major sunni imams, Imam Abu Hanifa, while wahhabis/salafis dont believe in taqleed (ibn taymiyah rejected it)
While we are at it, I guess the connection albiet loose between Wahabi and Deo bandi is due to the fact that the Saudi funded madhrasas were all Deobandis, that they believe in Quran and Sunnah and doing Jihad. But yes the latter takes after the Hanafi school of thought.
i think they prefer being called salafis. wahhabi used to be an insult, but now i guess the term has enough currency for people to have forgotten its original use as such. anyway, afaik honest to god salafis do not believe in taqleed and are thereby not humbli, shafii, maliki or hanafi.
Roots of Wahabism can be traced to the Kharaji group which emerged in the day's of the fourth Caliph. Azraqite tribe believed that all muslims must follow their beliefes and those who do not cannot be called muslims and they, their families can be killed or taken as slaves. Even though the Caliph had differences with their thinking he never labeled them as non-muslims. This practice of calling other muslims as muyshriqeen or non-believers was started by the kharajis and their traditions were followed by Ibn Taymmia and Ibn Wahab.
Unfortunately, we Muslims do not have access to historical records because of the heavy Saudi funding which has literally censored all literature which may contradict their mode of thinking. It is a historical fact that forces of Wahab were responsible for killings of thousands of Muslims in Taif and Hijaz for their beliefs. Their biggest crime was to attack the resting place of our Prophet (PBUH), had intervention from other muslim leaders not taken place, they would have succeeded in their nefarious designs.
Wouldnt it be better for all muslims if they made the effort to investigate before they pass judgement on other faiths. There is tremendous amount of literature available which can support Barelvi school of thought, all based on Quranic interpertations and Hadeeths. Its easy to make populist accusations, but very difficult to accept others viewpoint.
With all due respect this is one big leap of judgment. The “Wahabis” are doing some thing that was also done by the Kharajis is not a valid dalil to establish the root of Wahabism.
The Saudi monarchy came in place in early 1940’s Islamic literature and books were available before that and are available even at this time in bulk from Cairo and Damascus and Beirut. Its a false claim that the Saudi’s have literally censored Islamic literature. Sir, you are giving to much importance to the Saudis and their wealth.
Its historic fact that the Saudi and Wahabi movement was supported by the Akhwan (mostly Sahfia) to establish the monarchy, and then betrayed. But havent heard about the killings by Wahab in Hijaz and Taif
About the attack on Madinah can you provide some links or proof please, when and how it happened in pre and post Saudi govt.
I lack the knowledge to care about the religious basis for any argument, that is not my intention. It is my intention to show you all that such in fighting and secetarianism is undermining the stability of Pakistan, and that all people, inc those who like to use this forum to rant, are best served if the issues of religion are left in the scholastic sphere, whilst we normal people are better off concerning ourselves with the day to day businesses of life.
In a time when the world's muslims are at our lowest ever ebb in terms of political power, that some of you see it as just to seek to further exacerbate such tensions, which weaken the ummah further, is unbelievable.
I ask that this thread, and any threat which aims to divide the Pakistani and more broadly Muslim community be banned. In the interest of calm and peace on this forum, and the general brotherhood of Muslims the world over.