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