Nasiha to Barelwis

Discussion in 'Multimedia' started by Abdullah Ahmed, Sep 4, 2022.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    As for Shaykh Asrar talking about istighathah, please correct me if I'm wrong:

    We should call upon Allah most of the time. We are Ahl al-Sunnah, we don't deny calling on prophets and awliya. But just because it is permitted doesn't mean that's all we do.

    Call on Allah. Say Ya Allah. O Allah, help me.

    Sunnis don't believe prophets and saints assists us independently so even if they do say Ya RasulAllah ﷺ or Ya Ghawth, it is fine.

    But we can't do it so much that people begin forgetting Allah. That could lead to exaggeration, ghuluw. There could even be some ignorants who start believing incorrect things.

    Even when we say Ya RasulAllah or Ya Ghawth, the real helper is Allah. So call on Him directly mostly.

    We can call on others but that is a type of tawassul. We should call on them much less than we call on Allah.

    Shaykh Asrar isn't wrong, imho.
    Nissaar and AlialHanafi like this.
  2. hamza1

    hamza1 Active Member


    While we’re on the subject, I think it’s still relevant that it be discussed: What is a “Barelwi” and who should it be used for? I know that there was another thread for this, but I’ll just place it here for now.

    These are simply some thoughts being shared without being under delusion that they necessarily carry weight.

    There is some inconsistency in people’s usage of the term “Barelwi” which has become obvious with people’s (valid) discomfort in the way Shaykh Asrar has worded or explained things.

    A few weeks ago, when an Imam expressed via a “geography lesson” in a clip that he simply wanted to refer to himself as Sunni, people were vocal and quick to insist the narrative of “Barelwi means Sunni and Sunni means Barelwi. They are synonymous.” In the recent talk of Shaykh Asrar, people are upset with his usage of “Barelwi” negatively, referring to ignorant/jahil/goofi people. But hang on, I thought Sunni and Barelwi were synonymous?

    Unless deviance is involved, an ignorant/jahil Sunni who does Haram is still Sunni. A sinful Sunni, but a Sunni nevertheless. So, wouldn’t it follow then that they could also be referred to as sinful/ignorant/jahil Barelwis? But no, people are now (correctly) saying “no, no, they are not ‘true Barelwis’”. Not that I disagree, but it shows inconsistency in the word’s usage. Now, in the context of this speech of Shaykh Asrar’s, the narrative has changed from “Barelwi and Sunni are synonymous” to “how dare you refer to ignorant people as Barelwis. True Barelwis are against this.”

    Sorry, but you can’t pick and choose, in some cases insisting that they’re synonymous when it’s about something positive and encouraging every average Joe commoner Sunni (such as myself) to proudly call themselves Barelwi, and in other cases reserving it for only learned people when it’s about something negative. Either you include all Sunnis as Barelwi, including the Sunnis committing Haram or you don’t. (Obviously, deviants are not included at all).

    Also, if “Barelwi” refers to all Sunni Ulama, then you can’t say “Shaykh Asrar is speaking against Barelwis” when according to your definition he’s a Barelwi himself (even though he doesn’t use it for himself).

    On the flip side, Shaykh Asrar too must use the term “Barelwi” consistently and should not generalise. If he believes it refers to those who have a chain to Alahazrat, or Ulama from Bareilli, or even more broadly referring to Ulama from Indopak, then he should use it as such and not include laity, jahils, or goofis. When referring to the latter, he should label them as goofis, ignorant, jahil, or prefix “pseudo”, “false”, or “fake” in front. It seems as if Shaykh has taken the hint to word his explanations a little better. No doubt, unfortunately, some people having a prolonged moment of madness will now use Shaykh Asrar’s speech as ammunition to further their agenda.

    I think it was obvious to all of us, within the context of the speech, Shaykh Asrar was referring to Indopak Muslims specifically. Additionally, the talk, as I interpreted, was not just addressing the jahils, commoners, goofis, and laity, but also addressing people of influence to not be complacent when dealing with these issues, whether they be scholars, students, authorities, caretakers of the shrines, clued-on Sunnis, etc. So, the talk was about the state of the Indopak Sunni community and getting our priorities straight and whathe used as an example was Dua and Tawassul/Istighatha. At least that’s what I took from it. A similar talk was given here:

    I do wonder if people would express the same outrage and discomfort if the title was “Nasiha to Sunniyat”. Self-criticism and self-reflection is needed to improve our state. So, Shaykh Asrar is actually calling for more action to help eradicate these bad practices beyond “X scholar in Y book has written against this” (as if the people doing these things even read those works in the first place) and getting our priorities straight as a community. At least that’s what I took from it.

    Regarding media available in English:

    I’m mentioning this because I believe it links to what Shaykh Asrar was attempting to convey regarding priorities and taking action. You can do a search on YouTube. Naat recitals are available in abundance. Where is all the media covering the etiquettes of grave visitation for example? (Obviously, some will exist but I’m sure you’ll agree the ratio could be miles better.) Like it or not, technology and media dominate our lives. The average commoner Sunni isn’t reading tons of books, he’s scrolling through social media. (Of course every individual is obligated to learn Fard Ayn). Sunni media on Naats, Mawlid, Tawassul, and “reminders” are plentiful, but where is all the other stuff? (Yes, the other stuff exists but is it as plentiful?) Wahabi and Deobandi propaganda can only be blamed to a certain extent, but effort has to be put in to counter their work which, ironically, Shaykh Asrar has contributed tons to in the English-speaking world.

    Wouldn’t a lot of false ascriptions, misconceptions, myths, and lies be eradicated if “Barelwi” was only used for learned people, specifically those from the Indopak community?

    We need to refine the usage of the term “Barelwi”.

    I hope the way this was written doesn’t offend people or get taken the wrong way. My lowly opinions don’t carry weight, but since this is an open forum, I have put my 2p in.
    AlialHanafi likes this.
  3. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Questions to anti-Barelwis

    Is there anyone who stays away from the following more than Barelwis:

    Sulh kullis
    Tahir ul
    Christmas doers

    Anyone who is more vocal against all the above (except maybe perennialism¹) than Barelwis?

    Anyone you sit with who is more strict against heresy than Barelwis?

    If not, when will you recognise the orthodoxy of Barelwis?

    ¹ as it's more a Western problem
    shahnawazgm, Noori and Abdullah Ahmed like this.
  4. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    honestly speaking, not understanding who is a Barelvi and how is not cast doubts on his scholarly standing and reach. Every sunni who has little knowledge of Sunni creed, knows Ala Hazrat alihi rahmah a bit and knows some aqidah disputes knows this difference very well. Apart from DI,SDI, now the followers of Allamah Kadim Hussain Rizawi rahimahullah know it very well who is a real brelvi/sunni whether the person is a scholar, peer, or common folk.

    I hope that his criticism is not to counter some recent disputes among UK scholars.

    It is never late to accept one's mistake. May he see his mistake, and May Allah Ta'ala keep him steadfast on the right path.
    Abdullah Ahmed likes this.
  5. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    al-Hamdu lillah.
    Nissaar, Abdullah Ahmed and Shadman like this.
  6. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

  7. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    1. In defence of Shaykh Asrar

    I know where Shaykh Asrar is coming from when he says people in the subcontinent commit bidahs.

    Many subcontinental laypeople believe in jahil pirs.
    Many subcontinental ulama entertain such pirs.
    Many subcontinental laity commit bidahs such as growing knots on their head, men growing long hair, free mixing at mausoleums, prostrating to pirs, women hugging pirs, pirs doing Christmas, etc.

    We support Shaykh Asrar in speaking against bidahs. He is absolutely right to condemn them. He is also correct that our ulama should not hobnob with dodgy pirs.

    Shaykh Asrar: we are with you in this.

    2. Shaykh Asrar's usage of the term Barelwi

    How does Shaykh Asrar define a Barelwi?

    He says Sunnis shouldn't identify as Barelwis. But then why does he deride all the people mentioned above as Barelwis, even if they themselves don't? So he himself uses the term when it suits him.

    Why do Sunnis suddenly become 'Barelwis' in the eyes of Shaykh Asrar when it comes to bidah and ignorance?

    Sunnis in the subcontinent are knows as Barelwis. Sometimes, even those non-wahabis who commit bidahs are labelled Barelwis, even if they have nothing to do with Alahazrat.

    The contradiction in Shaykh Asrar is, when it comes to the bidahs of the subcontinent, he attributes them all to Barelwis. But on the other hand, he says, 'there are many parts of Pakistan where they don't even know the term Barelwi.'

    But if they don't even know the term, how come they are called Barelwis by you when it comes to their bidahs?

    Now, if you define Barelwi as 'any Sunni of the subcontinent', then, yes, there are bidahs. But the reason why this labelling by Shaykh Asrar is unfair is because on one hand, he refuses the label for himself, which means he doesn't define Barelwi as 'any Sunni of the subcontinent', but on the other hand, when it comes to bidahs, suddenly the whole subcontinent becomes Barelwi!

    So he needs to clarify his definition of Barelwi. He can't use both as and when it suits.

    3. Why shouldn't he use the term so loosely?

    Deviants, sulh kullis and pseudo-sufis already have a negative view of Barelwis. For a few reasons:

    1. They also jump between definitions when it suits. When it's to identify the local clean shaven guy who never goes to masjid and is often at the bookies and knows nothing of the dīn, he's a Barelwi, just because he isn't a wahabi.

    2. Barelwis refute them.

    3. Alahazrat refuted their innovations.

    So, already, anyone who is dodgy has a negative view of Barelwis.

    So what is the responsibility of Sunni ulama? To not add fuel to the fire and correct the record.

    Refute the innovations. But word your criticism carefully.

    The mistake Shaykh Asrar keeps making is to attribute anything negative to Barelwis. He's only making deviants and sulhs happy.

    Instead, a scholar of his standing and reach should say:

    'Some people commit bidahs. These are nothing to do with my beloved imam, the mujaddid and polymath, Alahazrat. These people are NOT Barelwis. True Barelwis refute these innovations with force and are the biggest voice in the subcontinent against deviance and bidah. If you want to know true Barelwis, read Alahazrat, his khulafa and those who followed their way.'

    This is how Shaykh Asrar should respond. Not throw us under the bus and make sulhs happy.

    Does he generalise so generously with any other group? Why only us?

    Why doesn't he say:

    Barelwis kept the subcontinent Sunni.
    Barelwis wrote extensively.
    Barelwis have Dawat e Islami.
    The like of the imam of Barelwis wasn't seen in two hundred years.
    Barelwis are strict adherents to the sunnah.

    If he says that not all Barelwis are strict adherents so I won't generalise, why does he generalise when it's negative?

    Shaykh Asrar:

    Judge us by our leaders. Those who truly represent Alahazrat.

    Think about the future. Already, most if not all dodgy people use Barelwi pejoratively. Then what about 10-20 years from now? If someone like you keeps kicking Barelwis, by 2040, followers of Alahazrat WILL certainly be seen as a cult and that only aids sulhs and deviants.

    You should give a positive perception of Barelwis too. That 'many people hate Barelwis but they are in fact true Sunnis.'
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2022
  8. Adham12

    Adham12 Active Member

    Very sad state.

    I think the agenda is more clearer than ever.

    Let’s wait for another clarification clip then bury the issue and move on? So then what’s next?

    Isn’t this actually pushing people away from Ahlesunnah Wal Jamat aka bareilvis?
  9. AbdalQadir

    AbdalQadir time to move along! will check pm's.

    Video is unavailable now, at least embedded in the forum post.
  10. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    He says 'Shaykh Nasir'. I would prefer 'Albani'.

    But people know Shaykh Asrar's view on salafis. They won't be interested in following them because apart from calling him 'shaykh', the lecture is against Albani.
    AlialHanafi likes this.
  11. Ibrahim

    Ibrahim New Member

    @Aqdas don't you think proferring niceties may lead to sunnis being interested in following albani and the bozo?
    barelwi and Adham12 like this.
  12. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    He isn't. He just proffers niceties in order to appeal to salafis.

    Unfair. He will never attack Alahazrat, ان شاء الله.

    He just makes the mistake of attributing all the wrongs of the subcontinent to Barelwis, even though he knows Alahazrat is the greatest voice against innovation.

    For him to correct the record, he has to define two types of "Barelwis": the ones he refers to and the true ones.

    He has to say, the ones he refers to may be known as Barelwis but they have nothing to do with Alahazrat. Meaning, those who commit bidahs and the extremist trigger happy fatwa givers who declare everyone a sulh kulli at the drop of a hat.

    Then he has to say, who are the true Barelwis and make it clear that they are amongst those closest to the sunnah in our era.
    AlialHanafi and Noori like this.
  13. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    Shaykh Asrar should now do a dedicated talk about true Barelwis.

    That Alahazrat and his khulafa led the charge against deviants and those who stick to the way of Alahazrat are true Sunnis, who are sometimes known as Barelwis.

    He should highlight that the greatest voice against deviants, innovations and sulh kullism are Barelwis.

    He should tell his listeners, true Barelwis are the most objective of groups. They have no problem criticising their own.

    He should say, true Barelwis like DWI and SDI are rectifying millions.

    He should introduce Barelwis properly to his crowd: Barelwis wrote tafsirs, shuruh of hadith, translations, fiqh manuals; even if they were kept busy for the last hundred years by devbandis.

    He needs to say, Barelwis are the true Sunnis of the subcontinent and if it weren't for Alahazrat, even the Kashmiris would be devbandis today.

    He should add, Barelwis don't blind follow. They will take to task their biggest names if and when they err. Go check Sunniport for when they refuted Mufti Nizamuddin, Mufti Muti, Mawlana Yaseen Akhtar. This is the barakah of Alahazrat that Barelwis aren't scared to refute anyone.

    He needs to redress the balance.
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2022
    Noori, Unbeknown and Nissaar like this.
  14. Ikhwaan

    Ikhwaan New Member

    I can understand where Sh Asrar and Mawlana Abu Hasan both are coming from and I think both have a valid point to a certain extent.

    Sh Asrar should not use the term Barelwi in such a casual manner such that it gives the impression that all those with the term barelwi affiliated to them are indulging in Bida'h. It is like saying that the Maturidiyyah must stop assimilating with the wahhabi creed just because the deobandis claim to be maturidis but then break every rule in the book.

    On the other hand it is necessary to recognise that those who are esteemed within the Barelwi circles many times fall far shorter than their expectations. For example, Pir hassen Din shah sat with chuff chuff and said I give guarantee for what he does. Pir haseen din i believe is now with the irfan shah group but this was long before that. Likewise Owais Qadri (whom i respect a lot as he has made the kalaam of Alahazrat Radi Allahu Anh common amongst the masses) is many times seen with the likes of Haseebi and naqeebi. Yes, he is not a scholar but he is a central figure to the Barelwis in this age. This gives credence to the pseudo-barelwis whether they intend to do that or not. This is a reality which if ignored or not refuted will further tarnish the term Barelwi.

    There should be a middle path where such juhaal are refuted as well and the term Barelwi is purified from such individuals who try and use it to further their career interests.

    Allah knows best.
  15. Ibrahim

    Ibrahim New Member

    Shaykh Asrar has been going on tangents for a very long time now.

    It seems that he thinks he can appeal to salafis and deos by ripping into his own people and embarrassing them. What a shame. Because wobblers and deos label him as a Barelwi it eats him up inside and he just wants to be a sunni now.
    Adham12 likes this.
  16. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    sound bites to just absolve oneself is not enough.
    if he is sincere about the 'REAL barelwism' he should qualify the rest that he criticises and scorns as: 'PSEUDO barelwism'.

    barelwis are sunnis. period.
    Umar99, Unbeknown and Abdullah Ahmed like this.
  17. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    first of all shaykh asrar refuses to be identified as a barelwi - and i have reiterated that it not a problem. criticising those committing bid'ah is also fine. i am not against that either. but what is the rationale to call any bidati in the subcontinent as barelwi? or even those committing bid'ah near graves as 'baraylawis'?

    henceforth, we should start calling salafis in the UK as "friends of asrar rashid".

    WHY? for the same reason asrar rashid labels any extremist or bidyi as a baraylawi.

    spot on.

    this was a lie introduced by deobandis and that scoundrel ihsan ilahi - alayhi ma alayhi. shaykh asrar is promoting this. and we don't like it a bit.

    i have been reading sh.nuruddin itr's books for more than a decade. some 8-10 years ago, a reliable syrian scholar told me that he (sh.nuruddin) disliked alahazrat. and the love i had for him vanished from my heart. i still consider him a sunni scholar and respect him; may Allah forgive him, he was a good academic and has written beneficial notes on hadith works. but i cannot find the love i have for awliya, like his noble uncle sayyidi abdullah sirajuddin raHimahullah.

    WHY did shaykh nuruddin dislike alahazrat (if it is indeed true)? mostly because of the canard spread by our enemies - "baraylwis this, baraylwis that". even though, his own shaykh and uncle, mawlana abdullah sirajuddin rahimahullah said and did almost all the things that deobandis criticise alahazrat for!

    taqi usmani in his fatawa lied that alahazrat did takfir of deobandi elders because they prohibited bidah practices!

    in such an environment, it is the duty of sunnis to clear this name instead of joining our enemies in sullying this nisbat. as i have said earlier, such sunni ulama should learn from the kafirs the art of standing together with one's own. after the paris attacks, many people became parisians.

    no, there is no reason to criticise barelwis just because the awaam ka'l an'aam commits bid'ah.

    take mawlana asrar sahib's own stance in going to deobandi mosques. his heart is so big that he will forgive them for their ignorance, even though he himself does not pray behind the deobandis. the awaam are excused. BUT if the same awaam go to qawwali and commit other bid'ah, our beloved shaykh sahib will slam the 'barelwis' without hesitation. suddenly they have become baraylawi, while those going to mosques were not even hanafi/shafiyi by virtue of their being awaam!


    but on what basis does he class the juhala of pakistan/india as 'barelwis'?

    shaykh asrar sahib is not responsible for those followers who hang around him and he is not responsible for their posts on social media. he cannot control them and he cannot be criticised for their actions. can we call them asraris? no. but "barelwis"? anyone committing bid'ah can be casually termed a 'baraylawi'. is this fair?

    alahazrat was a baraylawi by domicile. it is his appellation. bukhari, maturidi are all identifiers. whether you like it or not, a group of people in the subcontinent affiliated to alahazrat are identified as baraylawis. and they are the true sunnis - those who refute wahabis and salafis and hold fast unto the manhaj as articulated by imams of ahl al-sunnah.

    insiders or outsiders - no one has the right to throw dirt on that term just because it is convenient for them to do so. it is not fair.

    if you have problems with those who call themselves 'baraylawis' deal with them as you wish. but don't say that 'baraylawis' are this or that.

    if a few british scholars are sell-outs to the israel lobby, can we say: "british muslim scholars are all israeli apologists".

    brother, why generalise?
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2022
    Noori, barelwi, Umar99 and 7 others like this.
  18. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i still consider shaykh asrar as a sunni scholar.

    but how does it feel when clubbed with deviants? how does it feel if we begin to refer to salafis as "sh.asrar's friends"? [even that is lesser than what he accuses 'baraylawis' of].

    jam' karte ho kyun raqibon ko
    ik tamasha huwa gila na huwa

    why doesn't he call them ash'aris? or damascenes? or moroccans? or even plain sunnis?
    why does sh.asrar use the term 'barelwi' freely to describe any deviant bida'h act?

    not you brother.

    fair enough. but please don't term any bid'ati you wish to denounce as a 'barelwi'. i don't mind if someone does not want to call themselves a barelwi. but do not call every bid'ah act in the subcontinent as the 'doing of barelwis'.

    the circumambulation of graves, the chuff-chuff peers, the 1001 bid'ah acts are all wrong. no barelwi aalim - howsoever ignorant he may be or incompetent assembly-line muftis that you scorn - i do not think any of them will praise those actions or deem them right. then why defame the 'barelwis'? isn't this the habit of the deobandis and the ahl-hadith?

    you can apologise for sh. asrar, but he has deliberately inserted the term 'barelwi' to mean 'extremists' and 'ignorants' and 'bidyis'.

    i don't know why people cannot see this.

    most people do not read and they do not have historical context or have an idea of the geography.

    before alahazrat's time, sunnis were mostly the ulama of khayrabad, bada'un and delhi. in alahazrat's time, sunnis were mostly identified as the scholars of bareilly, badaun and rampur. this was not because sunnis didn't live in other places - it was just incidental that the ulama living in these cities were the most vocal and active; writing books, refuting heresies and so forth.

    thereafter, people aligned towards two broad terms: barelwi and deobandi.

    those who supported the sunni manhaj - the same thing which shaykh asrar ostensibly espouses by listing down a dozen names of arab scholars - i.e. tawassul, istigatha, following a madh'hab, doing mawlid etc. came to be known as baraylawis (barelwi, barelvi).

    those who opposed mawlid, called tawassul/istighatha as shirk, venerated ibn abdul wahab najdi and ismayil dihlawi were the 'wahabis' a broad term to include madh'hab following wahabis such as deobandis, and laa-madh'habi wahabis such as the ahl-hadith.

    our ulama (i.e. ulama aligned to the manhaj/maslak of alahazrat) commonly referred to themselves as sunnis. and in fact, it is still the predominant usage. sunnis/tablighis; sunnis/deobandi; sunni/ahl-e-hadees are still prevalent. deobandis on the other hand often used the term: ulama-e-deoband.

    the devbandi munazirs began to term us as raza-khanis, to create an impression that we were a sect, but it did not catch on.

    Allah's damnation is upon liars - and one filthy liar was ihsan ilahi zaheer. this -alayhi ma alayhi - scoundrel slandered alahazrat in his book "al-baraylwiyyah."

    after all, a person without shame can do whatever he wishes. so he lied, accused, reviled to his heart's content in his shameless work. and this brought the term 'baraylawi' to a new phase.

    those associated with alahazrat were termed as baraylawis/barelwis. and since they couldn't find muck to stick upon alahazrat, they conflated the term to describe the numerous khurafat/heresies in the subcontinent. and deflected this upon alahazrat.


    first: they associated the term 'baraylawi' barelwi with alahazrat.

    second: they associated the term 'barelwi' with all the bid'ats that happen in the subcontinent: going around graves, the false sufis, those who do not pray etc.

    third: they did not clarify that alahazrat or his (true) followers never permitted these khurafat/evil innovations. obviously, why would our enemies hell-bent on defaming and slandering alahazrat care to point out the distinction or clarify? one does not expect justice from them.

    fourth: they condemn 'baraylawis' for all these bidah acts. of course, baraylawi ulama also condemn the bid'ah acts of the awaam.

    fifth: people abul hasan nadwi and ihsan ilahi zaheer and taqi usmani shamelessly lied in their books and insinuated and attributed positions to alahazrat which he never held and used the term 'baraylawi' to give an impression that alahazrat created a sect and those who admire him or follow him belong to that 'sect'. i.e. the 'baraylawi'.

    sixth: a person who has no idea of the scholarship of baraylawis, nor any idea of their history, their contribution or their books now equates the bid'ah of the awam as somehow encouraged or abetted by 'baraylawi' scholars.

    HOWEVER, when we criticise deobandis, we criticise their scholars, their books, the aqidah they espouse - and repeat in fatawa, speeches, and books.

    وإلى الله المشتكى

    i do not know of any sunni scholar - aka baraylawi - who encourages or abets these bid'ah. there are people who claim affiliation but if you attribute the aqidah to a group, it should be THAT which is described, explained and written in the books of the leaders of that group.

    seventh: they kept promoting a lie that sunnis/baraylawis do nothing other than meelad and na'at khwani (gathering of nashid parties) while deobandis write books and have seminaries and etc. etc.

    it is these reasons why the term baraylawi is broadly used to describe people committing bid'ahs. even when those accused of being baraylawis refused to be termed this. take tahir jhangvi - deos and salafis term him 'baraylawi', even though he himself refuses to be known as a baraylawi?

    indeed, justice has flown to brutish beasts and men have lost their reason.

    our enemies help perpetuate these lies. unfortunately, our so-called friends are buying it from our enemies and distributing among our friends!

    it is like the time when the mutazilahs were termed as hanafis by non-hanafi scholars. just because mutazilis claimed affiliation to imam abu hanifah, they were lazily termed as hanafis. and some towering hanafi ulama were unfairly accused of being mutazilis - and the charge repeated without critical examination by the likes of imam dhahabi.

    shaykh asrar is doing the same mistake. if you have a problem with bid'yis, refute them without generously awarding them with the title of 'baraylawis'. and in this talk, he extends the term to mean extremists, ignoramuses or heretics wherever in the world!

    hum aah bhi karte hain to ho jate hain badnaam
    woh qatl bhi karte hain to charcha nahin hotaa.

    if shaykh asrar does not want to be called a barelwi, it is fine. no one started an online campaign to force him to use this appellation.
    if shaykh asrar wants to refute heresies, call out the many bid'ahs - let him. it is his duty and we support him, but for the love of Allah, why does he call the 'undesirables' as baraylawis? what affiliation do these heretics and juhala have with alahazrat?

    who are the baraylawis?

    baraylawis are ulama who wrote fatawa, translated hadith books, translated tasawwuf works, translated books of usul, wrote commentaries, built schools and seminaries. people who merely claim to be baraylawis will not become the identifiers of the group.

    dawat e islami and SDI are two of the major grassroots baraylawi movements which emphasise on salat and sawm. why don't you count their contribution of building mosques, teaching basics to millions of muslims?

    why doesn't shaykh asrar call THEM as baraylawis and instead reserve the term only to describe THOSE who cannot be called baraylawi in any way?


    then why should sh. asrar use that word to describe people in pakistan or damascus or his latest accusation: 'in every country'?

    if one does not want to use baraylawi to describe sunnis, then why be so generous to extend it for heretics, ignoramuses and illiterate folk?
    [not you AQ; but those who do].

    aata hai ek parah e dil har fughan ke saath
    taar e nafas kamand e shikaar e asar hai aaj


    wAllahu a'alam.
    barelwi, Adham12, Aqdas and 7 others like this.
  19. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    well ofc there are.

    Sayyid Muhammad bin Alawi Maliki was one. Don't believe me? Ask taqi usmani.
    abu Usman and Umar99 like this.
  20. Abdullah Ahmed

    Abdullah Ahmed Veteran

    Ultimately, doing such a thing makes it easier for wahabis and deobandis to recruit ppl in to their ranks.

    After hearing Shaykh Asrars talk, an uninformed person will automatically associate Barelwis with bidaa and negativity.

    And then later when this same individual comes across actual Deos and wahabis criticizing Barelwis and Ala Hazrat, he will then makes this assumption that Barelwis are a fringe group to stay away from.
    Unbeknown and Khanah like this.

Share This Page