Barelvi call anyone who challenges them; Wahhabi, deobandi - I didn’t know I am either until a few months ago.

"Odysseus" wrote:

"(*_Shazan" wrote:

Barelvi call anyone who challenges them; Wahhabi, deobandi - I didn’t know I am either until a few months ago.

So which would you say you are today?

Neither I’ am Muslim. And don’t affiliate myself with any group that oppressors Muslims and non-Muslims.

That article you posted is why they make me laught.

Deoband and bareli are both names of places.

Both started revivalist type movements. But both took diferent sides to a theological debate that had been going on for centuries.

The issue was of the knowledge of the unseen.

Now both sides believe God can give knowledge to anyone he wants however he wants.

The deobandi's do not called the transfered knowledge knowledge of the unseen. The barelwi's do.

I must here say that it is not onyl deobandi's who hold to their position, and not only barelwi's who hold to their position. At the heart of the matter is one of definition.

And the split is not over the position on the theological debate, but rather on the respect shown in the debate.

The Barelwi's think some deobandi scholar insulted the prophet by comparing his ability to some animal. Insulting the Prophet they say takes you out of the foldof Islam.

Now the deobandi's counter that knowledge of the unseen is only with Allah (swt), so the Barelwi's are calling those with knowledge of the unseen to be associating the people with Allah (swt). So they call them Mushrik. Or polytheists.

[size=24]Both sides have made mistakes[/size]

One by passing judgement due to one badly worded example over a whole body of people. The other by not even looking at how both sides define the terms in the debate.

TuQ does not consider himself a barelwi. Many Barelwi's consider him a 'wahaabi' a collective term to admonish those they disagree with. And the others call him a barelwi.

I would come under neither group, becasue simply put I understand the debate, and also many fatwa's I have come across by Imam Ahmad Raza of Bareilly.

Apart from that one definition of knowledge of the unseen BOTH SIDES HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME BELIEFS. Howeer,m they are not content with that, so take opposing sides in debates to other debates ,while the leading scholars know the debates are just farcical.

Like Mawlid. Both sides believe that if someone wants to celebrate it, it is ok, but if they do not, that is also ok. However the deobandi's take the position that you cannot celebrate it, the Barelwi's that you MUST celebrate it. Either side, go high enough to the scholars and they will give the same fatwa that it is permissible to celebrate it or not.

"Odysseus" wrote:

So Shazan do I understand you correctly that deobandis and barelvis are aggressive toward Muslims and non-Muslims?

No. Barelvis are the aggressor in most cases, because they are people whom are backwards. Notice how they celebrate August 14?

Barelwis have been accused of many innovations , they can be classified as a cult have deviated from the deen. Have limited appeal to me, they often bore me with their new ideas.

brewli/deobandi conflicts are usually carried out by the sectarian ones

they dont claim to "follow" or be affliated with anyone but they are quick to diss the group they know that they are against

sectarian debates are carried out by the backwards ones-the ones who have too much time on their hands

u get extreme ones in each side-the extreme ones are quick to put the fatwa of kufr and kafir on the other

according to sterotypes "brewli's" are the halwa loving/grave worshippers" and "deobandis" are the bin ladin lovers

much of what they accuse each other off is slander

EDIT: ur poll needs a "neither" option-I aint with any group and i know for a fact that most of the MQ lot dont consider themselves brewli's even though they often are accused of being so

i dont think anyone would call themselves a brelvi as such i call myself one because my friends brother who says he is a wahabi said i was one and when i looked into the matter i realised i agreed with Ahmed ridha Khan Brelvi

yes as Admin says deoband and brelvi are places in India where these organisations started.

i think it would be really nice if we each of us from differing schools of thought could write something of what we believe and what our faith means to us - criticising each other at this stage is not going to enlighten anyone.

ie for example Kamilah and shazaan disagree with a lot of people here - why dont they tell us what they believe, leaving out the mud slinging - its too easy to bash one another

most of us when someone asks us what we believe we dont go into a frenzy of what we[b] dont [/b]believe and who we hate

"(*_Shazan" wrote:

No. Barelvis are the aggressor in most cases, because they are people whom are backwards. Notice how they celebrate August 14?

When you participate in the blame game, you are a part of the problem, not the solution.

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding between the two. The great Arab 'ulama such as Shaykh Al-Yaqoubi and the late teacher of Shaykh Tahir-ul-Qadri, Sayyid Muhammad bin 'Alawi Al-Makki considered both D's and B's as Ahl as-Sunnah though both consider each other as deviants. One has to also be wary that many of the things both are assumed to have taken from their founders are not so.

One thing I will say is that many of the things that Barelvis' are accused of innovating are beliefs also held by the vast majority of Arab scholars. Here is one example:
http://www.livingislam.org/maa/ktda_e.html

Assalamu Alaikum /peace,

Good morning people.

I will only contribute to this thread on the issues of Barelwism and Bid'ah.

the issue isnt about deobandi's vs Barelwi's....

The issue is lies on the evils of Bid'ah on the whole, barelwi ideologies are under the scrutiny of many muslims groups around the globe.

I would urge members to refrain from personally insulting me and accuse me of doing so also.

I will be stating FACTS InshaAllah, (as I have in my previous posts)

If you have something constructive to say by all means do so,
however, please provide the necessary evidences and refute my [b]points[/b] rather than slander me.

I shall return later in the late afternoon InshaAllah.

wassalam.

"(*_Kamilah*" wrote:

If you have something constructive to say by all means do so,
however, please provide the necessary evidences and refute my [b]points[/b] rather than slander me.

Sunhaanallah.

That is the spirit I like. I do not mind people discussing facts aslong as it does not become a slagging match.

why do we need such a thread?

brelwis and deobandis are sects which create the most fitna in this world....

they both hate each other, and accuse each other of kufr, shirk and bidah....

med is a deobandi and accused everyone else of bidah and shirk...

shazan is very quick to attack brelwis, since he is TJ, he shud know that all TJ big ulema follow the deoband school of thought, so that makes them and Shazan deobandi.... contemporary deobandis are influenced by salafi doctrine...

today the sad reality is that anyone who celebrates mawlid is called a brelwi, anyone who believes in tawassul is brelwi etc etc when these beliefs and practices have been carried out in teh last 1000 years by classical scholars.

at the same time anyone who doesnt celebrate mawlid are called wahabbis... so both are bad as each other....

deobandis call mowlana ashraf ali thanvi, mowlanan ilyas, mowlana nanothvi, molawna gangohi as greats, mujaddids, auliya....when brelwis call them either kafir or gustake-e rasul...

at same time brelwis call ahmad raza khan as mujaddid and great scholar when deobandis call him kafir....

this whole mess is what the kuffaar want...and yet we have all fallen for it...

now i celebrate mawlid ...i will be called brelwi
i dont kiss my hand and place them on my eyes when the name of the Prophet is mentioned- now i am called wahabbi

now we have great scholars out there wrongly accused of being brelwi, deobandi when they are infact ahlus sunnah wa jamaah

so we have petty issues but big fatwas....

most brelwis and deobandis i know are very sectarian, very strict, rigid, backward and not aware of the reality.... and love to accuse each other of kufr, shirk, bidah....

reality is this will always happen... until muslim youth look beyond this....

when it comes who I would trust, it would be the deobandi scholars of this time, to be perfectly honest, i'm not very comfortable with scholars with other lines of thought.

thats not to say, I would not attend one of their lectures, or download one of their mp3s from aswat al islam. but when it comes down to issues that divide the ummah such as Miald un Nabi.. I feel the views from the deobandi scholars make sense.. I used to do milad myself when i was younger things like "Ya nabi salamalaika".. but after listening to both sides.. the deobandi's we're more convincing that attributed the word "Ya" before the Rasulullah (s.a.w), should not be done.. "Ya Allah", thats all good. According to the Deobandi's that would be Biddah, some would even go to the extent of calling it shirk.

thats just one example.. for us men of limited understanding who do have not studied to the level of aalim or moofti, its difficult for us to choose who's right and who's wrong.

i chose to look at it this way.. if i'm not sure about a ruling of whether its shirk or bidah, I would refrain from it. In the above example refraining from saying "Ya Nabi" is a better choice. For saying it which 'could' result in a Muslim committing a major sin.. but if you refused to say it.. you will not be punished.. just becuase u dont say it, does not mean you love the prophet s.a.w any less.

All in all on most of the issues I have come across, the mindset I have described above, go in sync with the views of the deobandi scholars.

you do realise the 'ya' issue is just plain stupid?

After all you say it every prayer. 'Ya Ayyu Han Nabiyyu' during the jalsa.

The results from the poll have shown that 100% of the members on this forum are of the Barelwi sect.

Do you even know what the barelwi ideologies are?

honestly people, I suggest you seriously look into it the history and doctrines of Barelwi's

Excuse me?

1 person has voted thats just 1 not the enitre forum, so i dont kno how you can say that every1 here is from the barelwi sect.

I dont see myself as either coz both are just religous schools in india which orginally had very similar viewpoints but over the years the Bs have gone a little hardcore whilst the deos have gone towards wahabism a little.

Ive been to Brelvs type centres and been to deobs ones in the past. I stopped going to the deobs beacuse i didnt feel the love of prophet muhammed saw there. At the brelvs i saw love and lots of it but the brothers there have gone a lil hardcore on 1 or 2 issues.

So now i only go to minhaj ul quran organised events or if there are some middle eastern sunni scholers who come to england ill go there. If i have to pick between the brelvs and deobs then ill have to pick the brelvs coz they have more similarities with the scholers from around the world.

May i add that the deobandi scholer molvi ashraf ali thanvi refered to the prophet muhammed saw as ya rasullalah so the brother who thinks it wrong obviously must think the deobandies are wrong.

I think this thread is just gona cause too much divide so it should really be locked

"Tushu" wrote:

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding between the two. The great Arab 'ulama such as Shaykh Al-Yaqoubi and the late teacher of Shaykh Tahir-ul-Qadri, Sayyid Muhammad bin 'Alawi Al-Makki considered both D's and B's as Ahl as-Sunnah though both consider each other as deviants.

You've hit the nail on the head.

This Deo v Barelwi debate is actually a manifestation of nationalism (and tribalism). Note how it is confined only to the Subcontinent.

"(*_Kamilah*" wrote:

The results from the poll have shown that 100% of the members on this forum are of the Barelwi sect.

Do you even know what the barelwi ideologies are?

honestly people, I suggest you seriously look into it the history and doctrines of Barelwi's

Are we looking at the same poll? :?:

There are 750 members registered in this forum. 3 people seleted the option, "brewli"

I'm pretty thick when it comes to maths...however, I'm sure that 3 out of 750 members doesnt mean that 100% of the members in this forum are brewli.

bg

"Beast" wrote:

"Tushu" wrote:

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding between the two. The great Arab 'ulama such as Shaykh Al-Yaqoubi and the late teacher of Shaykh Tahir-ul-Qadri, Sayyid Muhammad bin 'Alawi Al-Makki considered both D's and B's as Ahl as-Sunnah though both consider each other as deviants.

You've hit the nail on the head.

This Deo v Barelwi debate is actually a manifestation of nationalism (and tribalism). Note how it is confined only to the Subcontinent.

I was going to ask about that.

Do these groups exist outside of the Indian subcontinant?

It does seem that the Muslims of that region are prone to caste-ism, tribalism and multiple, intricate schisms.

"latifah" wrote:

Do these groups exist outside of the Indian subcontinant?

I doubt it.

ah man im so sick of the deobandi-brelvi crap.

"latifah" wrote:

Do these groups exist outside of the Indian subcontinant?

What ne has to realise as I have earlier mentioned is that many of the things B's are accused of innovating are practicied amongst the majority of non-Asian Muslims from Africa and the Arab world.

Would one consider Shay Abu Bakr (Sudanese), Shaykh Habib 'Umar(Yemen), Shaykh Nuh Ha Keller (Jordan) Barelvi as they do pot have an issue with the practices SOME D's have a problem with. Mufti Al-Kawthari is a student of Taqi Uthmani, a bigtime Deobandi scholar wh upn visiting the Arab lands has actually disagreed with his Deo counterparts on issues which some consider bid'a even shirk.

Kamilah I suggest you first read Al-Muhannad By Shalil As-Saharanpuri. After reading this book which supposedly clarifies the belief of Deobandi 'ulama you'll Inshallah have a different outlook.

"Admin" wrote:

you do realise the 'ya' issue is just plain stupid?

After all you say it every prayer. 'Ya Ayyu Han Nabiyyu' during the jalsa.

im dont think it is plain stupid. not a very constructive method of speaking from an admin.

im not gna get into an argument about it, as I do not know the ins and out of the Arabic, but I never say "[b]Yaa[/b] Ayuhan Nabiyyu" in every prayer.

I will have to check out the arabic for attahiyatu.. but I've always read it like this..

Quote:

At-tahiy-yatu lil-lahi was salawatu wat-tay yibatu. As-salamu 'alayka ay-yuhan-nabiy-yu wa rahma tullahee wa baraktuhu as-salamu 'alayna wa'ala 'ibadil-la hi-saliheen. Ash hadu anla ilahah illal lahu wa ash hadu an-na Muhammadan 'ab-duhu wa rasuluh

may Allah forgive me if its my error's. May He understand that since the issue isn't as black and white to me as it is to some, since I choose to reserve the word "Ya" only before Allah, does not mean I love our prophet any less. Rather the intention of my choice is for the fear of Allah.

Deobandi scholars may have used Ya nabi before.. since their not here, I can't comment on why they had used it.

Its pointless me having this debate, as I do not know. But I will definatly raise these points with a scholar from the deobandi line of thought.

"khan" wrote:

"Admin" wrote:

you do realise the 'ya' issue is just plain stupid?

After all you say it every prayer. 'Ya Ayyu Han Nabiyyu' during the jalsa.

im dont think it is plain stupid. not a very constructive method of speaking from an admin.

My apologies. I did not mean to insult you.

Quote:

im not gna get into an argument about it, as I do not know the ins and out of the Arabic, but I never say "[b]Yaa[/b] Ayuhan Nabiyyu" in every prayer.

I will have to check out the arabic for attahiyatu.. but I've always read it like this..

Quote:

At-tahiy-yatu lil-lahi was salawatu wat-tay yibatu. As-salamu 'alayka ay-yuhan-nabiy-yu wa rahma tullahee wa baraktuhu as-salamu 'alayna wa'ala 'ibadil-la hi-saliheen. Ash hadu anla ilahah illal lahu wa ash hadu an-na Muhammadan 'ab-duhu wa rasuluh

Once more you are right (I think). Ayyu is a transformation of ya, so I just said it twice in my words previously.

Quote:

may Allah forgive me if its my error's. May He understand that since the issue isn't as black and white to me as it is to some, since I choose to reserve the word "Ya" only before Allah, does not mean I love our prophet any less. Rather the intention of my choice is for the fear of Allah.

Deobandi scholars may have used Ya nabi before.. since their not here, I can't comment on why they had used it.

Its pointless me having this debate, as I do not know. But I will definatly raise these points with a scholar from the deobandi line of thought.

Ok. Sorry about forcing a debate. My bad.