la madhabiyyah vs Barelvis, Who forms the bigger threat to Shariah

Discussion in 'Bickering' started by Layman, Mar 31, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Layman

    Layman Banned

    The reason for difficulty in understanding your post was because you were and are accusing me of sleight of hand and that is a lie upon me, hence the need to seek clarification

    Here read my comment in context
    noori: only your free thinking without basic/proper knowlege and adab, and that too only for your self.
    noori: Let's say la madhabiyyah are not the biggest threat, tahir ul qadri is in our time; so, would you choose la madhabiyyah over ASWJ?

    layman: Brother its not about choosing. Its just a discussion on the subject.

    I dont envisage changing sects. Shaykh Asrar says we need to go solo to an extent, not blindfollow. That is why i'm free thinking

    Do you have any honest reflections on topic?
    [end quote]

    Now can you show me where I equated the "blind following" of fiqh and that of matters of belief? I didn't
    Secondly I didn't even define the term 'Shariah' for the same reason since it would infringe with those whose definitions of it are broader then what is regarded as just fiqh
    hence your sleight of hand comment is wrong

    Otherwise some of your points are appreciable inputs into the discussion. I will need time to reflect over those points

    CHISHTI Well-Known Member

    ..i'm not one to use nuance based language so i'm at a loss as to why you're having difficulty understanding my seems pretty blatant and self explanatory..

    ...the "sleight of hand" was in reference to you equating the "blind following" of fiqh and that of matters of belief. Shaykh Asrar has never taught that muslims should "go it alone" in either discipline..he simply teaches that in terms of belief you should study and know what you're believing in as opposed to just believing something because your parents did..and has even brought to our notice what great ulema of the past have said regarding the iman of people who can't explain exactly what they believe in. Shaykh Asrar, on many occasions, has promoted the sanusi creed as a guide for the laymen to understand the fundamentals of belief..which is a far cry from him promoting the go it alone method.

    The salafis have taken an axe to the shariah..their whole manhaj is replete with lies, half truths and errors..having dismantled the traditional understanding of the ulema they have put in its place their own deviancy and forwarded them as correct positions to the masses. When Shaykh Asrar talks of pirs controlling imams..he talks of localised problems..not a problem with the way of Ahlus Sunnah (known in the indo/pak as berelvis)..basically they are the exception to the rule and can be be refuted by the very construct they claim to be members of (the Ahlus Sunnah)...but the salafis are rotten from top to bottom..their whole approach and way is invalid and far more dangerous than a controlling, local pir.

    ..."So are you saying that because Hanafi Madhab is superior in wisdom (through cross checking of qualified Ulema) it means ghair muqallid are automatically a bigger threat to Shariah?" seem to have answered your own question there..

    As for me mentioning Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan..he is the most well known/knowledgeable representative of "berelvis" (although the noble Shaikh denies this title) from Bereli Shareef and is a staunch follower of shariah and even a cursory glance at his work shows the emphasis he places on learning and following it..he can't be held accountable for the wrong actions of others who claim to be sunni (berelvi) but can only teach us what is the correct position...but the salafi "shayookh" can be held responsible for the actions of their adherents because their manhaj is totally corrupt and they themselves are teaching this corruption. for irreligiousness I meant specifically the salafi ulema..not the masses...irreligiousness meaning their stubborn refusal to look at the history of Islamic scholarship and see that their own approach is heterodox...the fact that they are incapable of making a speech without mentioning the positions/books of the great ulema, who all made taqleed of one of the four schools of fiqh and were in the schools of either Imam Maturidi or Imam Ashari, yet they go on to call taqleed as haram and even shirk and the schools of both Imams as being wrong and against the understanding of the salaf !!'s this dilemma and their inability to deal with it that makes them irreligious..if they were true to their call they would have to discard most, if not all, of the books of ahadeeth as most of their compilers were followers of the shafi school!!

    To even place "berelvis" and salafis together in the same sentence, when talking of a threat to shariah, is reprehensible and makes you look like a member of neither group but of a third party posting on here to create misunderstanding and division..i hope I'm wrong.

    Read Shaykh Ramadhan Bootis' (rahmatullah Aley) work a few more times is my advice...
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2017
    Brother Barry, Ghulam Ali and Aqdas like this.
  3. Layman

    Layman Banned

    Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan has an amazingly noorani face, and its pretty obvious that they have spent a lifetime studying and contemplating. I'm sure their pictures have been taken without permission.

    Much of Alahazrats lineage uphold the prohibition of pictures. SubHaan Allaah
    I must admit i highly respect those who hold this position in todays age

    If they come to the Uk please notify the board as to where we can sit in their company
  4. Layman

    Layman Banned

    *copy paste error in previous post unintentional
  5. Layman

    Layman Banned

    Brother i was hoping you'd reply I do not see a sleight of hand...hence there is a slight accusation on you

    Shaykh Asrar said aqeedah (not fiqh) and my language covered this ''I dont envisage changing sects. Shaykh Asrar says we need to go solo to an extent, not blindfollow. That is why i'm free thinking'' This was slightly an off topic reply to a curious question

    I don't see the sleight of hand in the question.

    The question is
    la madhabiyyah vs Barelvis, Who forms the bigger threat to Shariah

    So whilst you can cite having a superior fiqh (a madhab) and blindly taking in fiqh, it is just one factor in your possible reply. Even a ghair muqallid can cite being a 'real student of deen' who can show xx number of opinions on same issue and hence you both have a prospective.

    So are you saying that because Hanafi Madhab is superior in wisdom (through cross checking of qualified Ulema) it means ghair muqallid are automatically a bigger threat to Shariah?

    Some would ask how Hanafi is for a religious leader not knowing how to recite al Fatiha sharif, and for him to have followers. Shaykh Asrar blamed both the peers and their followers, Shaykh Asrar said our awaam have fallen pray to fake peers, heretical practices and he said scholars can't speak because their livelihood depends on the fake peers. So we have the awaam and scholarly classes are both implicated.

    This situation might be not be ascribed to Hanafi Madhab but to be fair neither is the question.

    Brother is wanton irreligiousness not in barelvis?
    Please provide more details on Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan's call to Shariah, also is he a lone voice?
  6. Layman

    Layman Banned

    That is a part of my concerns, remarkably accurate, however the Ayat which often comes to the mind is verse 39 of Surah at-Tauba
  7. izz al-Din

    izz al-Din Well-Known Member


    Salam e masnun

    Perhaps, the brother is trying to point out the following nuances? :

    Imam 'Imad alDin ibn Kathir alDhimisqhi, Rahmat Allahi Ta'ala 'alayh:

    رَبَّنَا لَا تَجْعَلْنَا فِتْنَةً لِّلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا ...

    Our Lord! Make us not a trial for the disbelievers,

    Mujahid said,

    "It means, `Do not punish us by their hands, nor with a punishment from You.' Or they will say, `Had these people been following the truth, the torment would not have struck them'.''

    Ad-Dahhak said something similar.

    Qatadah said,

    "Do not give the disbelievers victory over us, thus subjecting us to trials by their hands. Surely, if You do so, they would then think that they were given victory over us because they are on the truth.''

    This is the meaning that Ibn Jarir preferred.

    Ali bin Abi Talhah reported from Ibn `Abbas:

    "Do not give them dominance over us, lest we suffer trials by their hands.''

    Allah's statement,

    ... وَاغْفِرْ لَنَا رَبَّنَا إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ ﴿٥﴾

    and forgive us, Our Lord! Verily, You, only You, are the Almighty, the All-Wise.

    means, `cover our mistakes from being exposed to other than You, and forgive us for what (sin) is between us and You.'

    أَنتَ الْعَزِيزُ (Verily, You, only You, are the Almighty), `and those who seek refuge in Your majesty are never dealt with unjustly,' الْحَكِيمُ (the All-Wise), `in Your statements, actions, legislation and decrees.'

    [60:3, Tafsir alQur'an al'Adhim]
    Layman likes this.
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    what kind of a danger/threat from which groups?

    what is an umbrella?
  9. Layman

    Layman Banned

    That's all true as far as i know

    So is there any danger/threat to Shariah from groups under the Ahlus Sunnah umbrella?
  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    for those who ask with humility and as a learner. those with arrogance (even if they don't realise it) and talk condescendingly, they will be treated as they should.

    those who are laymen have no business discussing topics above their level. learn aqidah and basic fiqh - read books of tasawwuf. that suffices for you. if you have a specific question, ask in the manner of a seeker. don't proffer your opinions and ask us to validate them.
  11. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    don't bother.

    the Sunnis (ahle Sunnah) are the saved sect, and they will always remain on the truth; they will always prevail, with Allah's grace. this nation will never unite on error; even if a few learned men fall prey to worldly matters, there will always be upright, brave and erudite scholars who will lead this nation; and among such great men, Allah ta'ala sends one Reviver, every one hundred years.

    it is the others, the la-madhabiyah, and the sulleh kullis, the misguided, that are the threats to religion.
    Ghulam Ali and Layman like this.
  12. Layman

    Layman Banned

    I possess below average intelligence and just above the average knowledge for a layman. Can't the sleight of hand be explained to me with a little bit of brotherly patience and wisdom?

    I am not a student of Shaykh Asrar but he, like other speakers, teach through their talks. Shaykh Asrar said our awaam have fallen pray to fake peers, heretical practices and he said scholars can't speak because their livelihood depends on the fake peers.

    So we have the awaam and scholarly classes are both implicated as being threats to the Shariah. This is just one example

    Hence i'll put it you, and other brothers, who accused me of sleight of hand or asking loaded question that the question is perfectly valid to be asked

    You have posted excellent information about the problems with la madhabiyyah shariah and the incorrectness of how it is derived, we need you to look at the reality of Sunnis

    Then you can answer the question with a conclusion

    I am not saying the answer is sunnis represent a bigger threat, it is just a question

    JazakAllahu Khairan
    Last edited: Mar 22, 2017
  13. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i apologise on behalf of brothers who accused you of sleight of hand. it would require intelligence and knowledge to do so, and you seem to possess neither.
  14. Layman

    Layman Banned

    What sleight of hand? I don't understand
  15. Layman

    Layman Banned

    I might qualify as a troll tbh (my posts are against the flow)
    ...but Shaykh Asrar teaches us, so positivity or negativity after what he teaches is part of having genuinely taken his efforts seriously. Nothing wrong with this

    Shaykh Asrar has embarked on 'reform' of some aspects of how we view the deen. This is what i can gather from his posts

    Are you from Manchester, njm? I'll come say salam next time I visit so you can see the actual person behind the posts
  16. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    Subhan Allah, one line, but speaks volumes about la madhabiyyah. Only deep and strong foundation can enable such wisdom.
  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the question 'la madh'habiyyah vs. barelwis (meaning ahl al-sunnah, aka sufis in the arab world).' who forms the bigger threat to shariah?" is a loaded question.

    it assumes that barelwis are a threat to shariah, and la madh'habiyyah as well. the question asks which is bigger.

    barelwis AKA sunnis or sufis, i.e. ahl al-sunnah are the followers and upholders of shariah, as done by our elders for the past 1400+ years. after the 5th century, almost every major imam followed a madh'hab. even those claimed to be mujtahid muTlaq such as ibn taymiyyah belonged to a madh'hab. ibn taymiyyah in his works mentions 'the four madh'habs' often.

    as for la madh'habiyyah, they are biggest threat to islam because they encourage free thinking without any knowledge or reflection. which is worse than atheist and mulHid freethinking.

    free-thinking, admired in the west, and which is fashionable nowadays isn't entirely free. they expect it to be within the bounds of their frames of references with regards to their own definitions of humanity, justice, fairness and what they deem to be independent of authority and purely according to what they admit as reason.

    a freethinker will not admit the opinion of an illiterate in issues related to knowledge, and particularly in issues that require domain knowledge. for example, which court would admit an illiterate or even a college dropout to represent someone in court? representing oneself is also not without danger:

    as the lawyer in the above article says:

    Unless you find yourself in the Arctic wilds with an enlarged appendix, or trapped beneath a boulder in a national park, you wouldn't operate on yourself with a Swiss pocket knife, however well you whittle a stick or hold your cutlery. Why would you then stand up in a court of law, however eloquent you are, or disarmingly amusing in dinner-table conversation, and conduct your own representation in a trial of real importance?

    something we have been saying for ages. one cannot turn up with a bunch of law books - well, even a graduate with a degree in law cannot represent someone until they obtain a license. check this opinion:

    and here from the law dictionary:

    the relevant passage that every moron who calls himself a laa-madh'habi should read and shudder is highlighted below:

    Unfortunately, there are no circumstances under which you'll be able to represent your accused acquaintance without first passing the bar exam in your state. In fact, individuals who have not been admitted to a state bar are explicitly banned from practicing law within that jurisdiction. This prohibition extends to laypeople as well as bar-certified lawyers from other areas. Despite his or her obvious legal experience, there is no guarantee that a seasoned lawyer who has been cleared to practice law in Oregon will be permitted to represent a client who stands trial in Texas. Although many states have "reciprocal" arrangements that permit lawyers with "outside experience" to practice law within their borders, this occurs on a case-by-case basis. Further, non-lawyers are not permitted to take advantage of such arrangements.

    In fact, practicing law without a bar license is a crime. If you attempt to represent an acquaintance without a license, you'll probably find yourself in one of two unpleasant situations.

    what about medicine? check:

    this wikipedia article is a good start to identify professions that require licenses:

    would you hire a person with no previous plumbing experience to fix your toilet? would you allow a technician without basic knowledge of receivables/payables and debit/credit to manage the accounts of a company? would you ask a delivery boy, who has experience in only riding motorcylcles to drive the bus or run your trains? would you ask a chartered accountant without a pilots license to fly the commercial airliner, even if he has thousands of hours clocked on a flight simulator?

    but hey, no!

    for the qur'an and hadith - it is open. anyone can interpret it. attend a nouman ali khan course for a few months and become capable of doing tafsir! even if prominent mufassirin spent a lifetime mastering two dozen subjects before penning a translation or tafsir. but morphology and grammar is sufficient for a translation and tafsir. laa Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.

    a taxi driver who cannot speak his mother tongue properly, or a tea-vendor incapable of pronouncing words in his mother tongue, can become an expert in the qur'an and deriving aHkam from qur'an and hadith, without any previous training. a teacher who spent the better part of his life in worldly activities and after retirement found religion (as he has nothing better to do) suddenly becomes an expert in doling out ahkam and commenting on opinions of experts.

    abu hanifa* was a man, and i am a man. he had an opinion and so do i.

    essentially la-madh'habi is the islamic equivalent of practising law without a license. it is a crime.

    Allah ta'ala knows best.
    Umar99, Ghulam Ali, CHISHTI and 7 others like this.
  18. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Apples and oranges.

    - leaving taqlid is an attack on the shariah.
    - Muslims who don't practice are sinners.

    It's a bit like these two people:

    1. Doesn't pray because he doesn't consider it fard. He's a kafir.

    2. Doesn't pray out of laziness but agrees on its being fard. He's a major sinner but not an innovator or kafir.

    Who's worse?

    So, yes, it's a sleight of hand. It's comparing innovation to being sinful. No comparison.
    Ghulam Ali likes this.

    CHISHTI Well-Known Member be fair... a sleight of hand there...Shaykh Asrar talks against "blind following" in aqeeda..not in the schools of fiqh..this is often an "on purpose" misquote from the ghair when they misquote Imam Al Azams "throw my opinion to the wall" (if you find it going against Quran and Sunnah)...the noble Imam wasn't empowering every muslim to "go it alone" but talking to mujtahid ulema and real students of the Deen..but it's used by the ghair muqallids as a proof against taqleed

    ...they are the most dangerous because, as can be seen, their wanton irreligiousness has allowed them to throw out following of the ijtihaad of qualified ulema and also to discard the Ashari/Maturidi schools of belief..and have filled the huge vacuum left with their ignorant and deviant pronouncements.

    ...because they are not shia...a lot of sunnis consider them, by default, sunni..which means their maslak is somehow valid..which is why they are so dangerous.

    ...and also if you check with Ulema like Mufti Akhtar Raza Khan all you will find is a call for Shariah to be implemented.
    Umar99, Ghulam Ali and Aqib alQadri like this.
  20. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    that is the problem with free thinking. How do you know that my question to you is dishonesty? yet your questions are a reflection of your honest free thinking.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page