The Perils of Separatism among Barelvis in India

By Mohammad Ali, New Age Islam January 6, 2022 Sunni Muslims In The Indian Subcontinent Are Divided Into Barelvi, Deobandi, And Ahl-E-Hadith Schools Of Thought Main Points: 1. This essay discusses the causes of Barelvi separatism in India 2. It briefly elaborates on the repercussions that have resulted from this separatism 3. And how Barelvis have maintained to sustain this separatism among their community ----- Sunni Muslims in the Indian subcontinent are divided into Barelvi, Deobandi, and Ahl-e-Hadith schools of thought. Fissures between them started appearing during the nineteenth century when some Ulama believed that the decline of Muslim political power and society in the subcontinent was due to the corruption of faith which they found in Muslims’ indulgences in rituals like seeking intercession from the Prophet and dead saints and associating with them supernatural powers that, the reformist Ulama believed, could only be associated with God. This corruption of faith had seeped into their behaviour and made it immoral and unresponsive. ---------------------------------------------------------- Also Read: Beyond the Moderate and Radical in Indian Islam ---------------------------------------------------------- Therefore, they strove to restore the purity of faith by reinstating God as the most supreme being, and that his qualities like the knowledge of the unseen, forgiver of sins, etc. could not be shared with any creation, whether it be a prophet or a saint. Among the Ulama who resisted the reformation of Islam into a puritanical one, Ahmad Raza Khan of Bareilly emerged as the most prominent one. He wrote extensively against the reformists and criticized their arguments as un-Islamic. Ahmad Raza believed that God has endowed the Prophet Muhammad, and through him, saints with some miraculous powers and has allowed them to intercede with Him on behalf of sinners. This should be clear that seeking intercession from the Prophet Muhammad and visitation of shrines were age-old practices among Muslims, which Ahmad Raza defended against the reformers. Furthermore, he charged the founders of Darul Uloom Deoband, Qasim Nanotavi, Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, Khalil Ahmad, and Ashraf Ali Thanvi, who also advocated for religious reforms, with blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and declared them as Murtad, meaning by committing blasphemy against the Prophet they ceased to be Muslims. He published his verdict in one of his fatwas, Husamul Harmain, published in 1906. Some of these Ulama were dead already, but who were alive, they along with their followers resisted the fatwa of Ahmad Raza. And they succeeded in doing so, but only in the circles of their followers. The followers of Ahmad Raza continued believing in his fatwa. ---------------------------------------------------------- Also Read: Making Barelvis Count: The Sufi Conference in Delhi ---------------------------------------------------------- To make the matter worse, Ahmad Raza inserted a ruling into the fatwa declaring that whoever does not believe in the apostasy of these Ulama would be considered among them, i.e., Murtad, thereby, extending the fatwa not only to those Ulama but the generations after them who did not and do not believe in Ahmad Raza’s fatwa and considered/considers those Ulama as Muslims. Declaring the entire community of Muslims as Murtad was unprecedented in Muslim history. The followers of Ahmad Raza, the Barelvis, took the fatwa literally and anathematized everyone who dared to refuse to believe in Ahmad Raza’s fatwa. Since Ahmad Raza regarded these Deobandi Ulama and their followers as Murtads, he decreed that they are worse than non-Muslims and any social transaction with them is haram/forbidden. I will not engage with the theological underpinnings of the fatwa and arguments of Ahmad Raza here. I only like to discuss the repercussions of Ahmad Raza’s fatwa that have created a separatist and an uneasy extremist life for his followers. Early repercussions of Ahmad Raza’s fatwas started appearing in the form of separatism during the colonial period. Since Ahmad Raza believed that social intercourse was haram with these Murtads, he opposed the movements such as Nadwatul Ulama, Khilafat, and Jamiat ul Ulama-e-Hind. These movements were all-Ulama movements. The presence of Deobandi Ulama and the Ulama who considered Qasim Nanotvi, etc. as Muslims did not allow Ahmad Raza and his followers to participate in these movements. So, he opposed them and their policies. Unfortunately, this separatism resulted in the marginalization of Barelvis in colonial India and in Independent India as well. This fatwa of Ahmad Raza not only stopped them from participating in those mass movements along with the Deobandis and other non-Barelvi Muslims but also did not allow them to engage with them on other levels, i.e., teaching, daily business, community building, etc. This could be illustrated by an incident that I heard in a Taqrīr (religious speech) of a Barelvi ‘Alim, who to demonstrate how compassionate Mustafa Raza Khan, the younger son of Ahmad Raza, was said that once he went to meet one of his disciples whom other disciples had boycotted only because he had been dealing with Deobandis. When Mustafa Raza met him, he convinced him to come back to his circle and reproached his disciples for abandoning him. However, he did not approve of his dealings with Deobandîs. However, the biggest problem of this fatwa resulted in the emergence of a hypocritic behaviour in Barelvis. Because it is really difficult for a common Barelvi to live his life without ever engaging with Deobandîs and non-Barelvis on social levels. Sometimes these engagements demand respect and lead to relationships. Being a Barelvi and respecting a Deobandi is contradictory. For example, there are hundreds of graduates from Barelvi madrasas who are studying in universities. Because of their separatism, Barelvis have a very low representation in universities. As a result, these Barelvi Ulama are left with no choice except to study with the non-Barelvi teachers in universities, which means they need to deal with them, respect them, greet them, and so on. But this contradicts with their Barelvi creed: dealing with non-Barelvi Murtads is forbidden. However, they compromise here with their belief out of compulsion. But when they are in their own circle, they show that they are still true to the teachings of Ahmad Raza and curse those who have violated those teachings, sometimes publicly. ---------------------------------------------------------- Also Read: Bizarre Response of a Section of Indian Muslims to the Historical Sufi Declaration of Peace, Pluralism and Moderation ---------------------------------------------------------- I know some Barelvi scholars who are teaching at Jamia Hamdard along with their Deobandi and Ahl-e-Hadith colleagues, with whom they deal, eat, have developed cordial relationships. But when, as Ulama, they address religious gatherings, they tell people that social interactions and dealings with non-Barelvis are forbidden. This is so hypocritical. Barelvis are Muqallids of Ahmad Raza in his fatwa against the Deobandi Ulama, meaning they do not allow any fresh thinking in these matters. This is also unprecedented. Because in the entire Islamic history, no scholar forced others to believe in his fatwa of apostasy against a certain person. For example, Ulama differed on the issue of declaring Yazid, the Umayyad Emperor, as Kāfir. Those who declared him Kāfir did not condemn other Ulama for not declaring Yazid as Kāfir. Because, to them, declaring someone Kāfir is a delicate matter and requires thorough research. However, Ahmad Raza reduced this matter to Taqlid only, meaning that after his declaration, no fresh research and difference of opinions are allowed in this matter. This Taqlid of Ahmad Raza by Barelvis has elevated him to an extraordinary scholar and imam to an extent that no one can disagree with him in any jurisprudential or theological matters. Whatever he said is considered the final ruling. This behaviour is reflected in extreme levels, like declaring dissidents as Kāfir. Recently, Barelvi Ulama have anathematized an entire Khanqah, Khanqah-e-Arifia at Sayyid Sarawan, Allahabad, and its associates for disagreeing with the fatwa of Ahmad Raza. Even though their disagreement is a result of fresh research and noble intent, that is, they want to reduce the differences among the Sunni Muslims in India. ---------------------------------------------------------- Also Read: Who and What is a Deobandi? ---------------------------------------------------------- Barelvis have maintained the status quo for almost a century. But voices of dissents have started emerging within the group. However, to break the status quo, there is a need for a robust interpretation of the issues which have been a bone of contention among the Barelvi and non-Barelvi groups and that should function as a bridge for overcoming differences. This should also curb the potential of extremism which is embedded in the Barelvi separatist ideology. ----- Mohammad Ali has been a madrasa student. He has also participated in a three years program of the "Madrasa Discourses,” a program for madrasa graduates initiated by the University of Notre Dame, USA. Currently, he is a PhD 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, madrasa discourses. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/islam-sectarianism/perils-separatism-barelvis-india/d/126104 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