These Rishis evolved a culture of harmony, fellow feeling and community welfare in the Valley. Further they did not proselytize and rarely engaged with theology. Hence they were never at the centre of controversies. They practiced the values of Islam and for them most mystical practices of every religion lead to the same goal. The God of all religions is same for them and religions are different paths that lead to the same goal. It was their inspiring lives and moral characters that drove hordes of men to their hospices that still continue to be the centres of attraction even centuries after their death. Most of these hospices had a madrasa, boarding, lodging facilities and a free community kitchen associated with them. But now those are relics of past as most shrines and hospices have now been rendered as dens of nepotism, sectarian hatred and money minting institutions for those who control them.

Most of the Rishis spoke against this clergy and priestly class of Islam using derogatory term (Mullah) against them. The poetry of Sheikh ul Alam better known as Alam Dar e Kashmir (torch bearer) or Nund Rishi is full of criticism against this priestly class. Unfortunately, this message of Nund Rishi has been distorted by clergy class who has co-opted and annexed his hospice and now is indulging in the same acts against which Nund led a crusade during his whole life and was even incarcerated by the nefarious designs of the mullahs of his times.

Most Kashmiris have a deep faith in transcendence and the divine reality of God. The shrines and hospices were revered but with the advent of Islamic revivalist movements in the mainland India, the reverence of shrines and hospices came to be disputed. The puritanical, exclusivist Ahle Hadith or Salafi movement started a tirade against the shrines that they described as institutes of grave worship. So in order to behold and save Muslims they started a venomous campaign against shrines, describing them as bastions of shrik.

To supplement them Deobandis too jumped in the bandwagon and reinforced their efforts, though unlike Salafis they had a soft corner for Sufis and were not as vociferous in their criticism and campaigns against the Sufis, shrines and hospices. As a reaction to their efforts, the mullahs who have economic interests associated with shrines started supporting the Barelwis, who started owning the Sufis, describing themselves as their real inheritors and piling up wrong evidences for every economic activity conducted at shrines being in spirit with real Islam.

All these discourses of Salafis, Deobandis and Barelwis are quite alien to Kashmir. All these schools of thought are extremist in their outlook and rabidly sectarian and if provided with hospitable environs violent too. These groups have carried out violent acts against each other and different other sects in the recent past. Earlier they engaged with each other through writing diatribes, pamphlets and books denouncing each other and describing them as deviated and charging them with heresy. The sectarian mosques were used to hold debates against each other. Also the co-option and annexation of shrines by Barelwis who wrongly masquerade as Sufis has done a severe damage to the syncretic and plural message of Kashmiri Rishis.

The distortion of Sufism by Barelwis is another challenge that needs to be met. Now the fault lines between these sects are evident even among the common masses that are caught up in non ending diatribes because social media and internet has made it possible for masses to have a peek into these debates. Literary rebuttals against each other were confined to a refined section but now the videos of the sectarian mullahs are available for mass public consumption, thus widening the divide. Add to it the crisis in Middle East particularly Syria that has opened the Pandora’s box of Shia-Sunni violence. It has its impact on the Muslims of subcontinent too. Although we do not hear about violence between Shias and Sunnis in India but with each passing day the fault lines are widening. To add insult to injury some deobandi mullahs in Kashmir like Noaman Nowsheri and Muzaffar Qasmi are openly attacking the other sects. The show-boy Noaman Nowsheri is being elevated as the Manazir e Islam (Debater of Islam) as he claims to have defeated many Salafis, whereas Salafi mullahs like Abdul Latif Al Kindi and Abid Salafi are refuting him and others.

Many mosques and madrasas have been retrograded into debating theatres and in some cases physical abuses have taken place too. These repugnant debates are streamed live to score points over the opponents. In Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)’s era Masjid e Zaraar was established by certain Muslim hypocrites to carryout nefarious designs against Islam and Muslims. Prophet (pbuh) ordered the mosque to be demolished. These sectarian mullahs are retrograding every mosque to Zaraar, their designs need to be fought against and a social boycott of these sectarian mullahs needs to be orchestrated. They are vilifying the real message and values of Islam for cheap publicity and earning few bucks.

M.H.A.Sikander is Writer-Activist based in Srinagar, Kashmir

Courtesy: New Age Islam

The post Of Salafis, Deobandis and Barelwis in Kashmir appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Photo credit: The Nation

In light of the recent commotion created by some Barelvi clerics, which the federal government bungled up with its characteristic incompetence, it is time that someone speaks out the truth about the Pakistan movement and its ideology. Let me say without mincing words: Pakistan was created in negation of principles of secular democracy.

Barelvi clerics had spearheaded the All India Muslim League’s campaign for Pakistan ahead of the 1945-46 general elections. A handful of Deobandis led by the followers of Ashraf Ali Thanvi (who died in 1943) including Shabbir Ahmed Usmani also supported the demand for a separate state for Indian Muslims. However, the main Deobandi party, Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, led by Hussain Ahmed Madani advocated a vision of wataniyat or nationalism that was fore grounded in territory, rather than religious identity.

Madani warned that even if the Muslim League manage to win a separate state, it will inevitably be a state dominated by some sect of Islam — there could be no such thing as a Muslim or Islamic state of all Indian Muslims because the latter were notoriously divided into sects and sub-sects. Another prominent religious scholar, Abdul Kalam Azad also shared similar sentiments. His speeches are available on YouTube on the question of Muslims’ in a post-British India.
In my opinion, those who say that Pakistan, as it exists today, is not Jinnah’s Pakistan, are missing the point. Jinnah may not have anticipated that his two-nation theory would lay the foundation of a state in which the organic relationship between Islam and the state would result in the rule of the ulema. However, he could not have been unaware of the fact that the religious establishment, including Barelvi clerics, saw the state he demanded and won as having been established in the name of Islam.

Read more on Daily Times, Pakistan.
 

The post While most Deobandis opposed the idea, Barelvi clerics spear-headed the movement for Pakistan appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The recent data released by the National Investigating Agency (NIA) regarding cases of terrorism in 2016 took the national media by surprise. One of the ‘surprising’ elements that came out of the NIA briefing was the only about 20% madrasa graduates had been found to be involved in terror related cases. The majority of Muslim youth who are implicated in terror cases by the NIA are graduates of regular colleges, some even having engineering degrees. But why is it surprising at all. It fits the pattern of overall association of modern educated Muslims and their fascination for aligning with terrorism.

In majority of the cases of terror related activities, university and college educated Muslim youth far outnumber madrasa graduates. After all, Osama was not a madrasa graduate, neither were Muhammad Atta and others who made 9/11 a possibility.

While this must come as a huge relief to madrasas who are always under the scanner of intelligence agencies and have been accused of being involved in promoting terror, it should not be made out that nothing is wrong is with these madrasas. But we will come to that later.

The traditional focus on madrasas as a site of jihadi extremism should thus be jettisoned in favour a broader focus on the lure of Islamism, the existing pedagogical practices within Islam and the Muslim-Kafir dichotomous worldview which many readings of Islam today provide.

The simple reason in the Indian context why madrasas are not knee deep in terror is because they just do not have the capacity to do so. The sophistication that is required for arms training and the knowledge that accompanies such training simply eludes a madrasa graduate.

Within their madrasas they are too engrossed in literal textual hair splitting and in repeating a knowledge system which has absolutely no relationship with the present world. When an average madrasa graduate in India cannot locate USA on the world map, then it is too much to expect from him to be involved in the obliteration of America. When average madrasa graduate is taught that it is the Shia and the Ahmadias who are the enemies of Islam, then it is natural that their energy will be channelized in countering them rather than thinking about waging jihad against the Hindus.

When an average Barelwi madrasa student is too busy learning that Deobandis are spreading kufr, then there is no way he can be planning in terms of destroying India. The simple argument therefore is that madrasas do not have the time to think of Christians or Hindus to paint them as the enemy. They are too busy and consumed by the internal enemies of Islam, that countering them becomes the first priority. It is therefore not a surprise that madrasas are not in any position to produce graduates who would be willing to wage a jihad against India.

The more troubling part of course that came out in the NIA brief was the involvement of AhleHadis in terror related activities in India. Now it will be a long shot to call the AhleHadis a terrorist organization but there will be some questions asked if this pattern continues that members of AhleHadis are found to be involved in such activities. Similar allegations have been thrown at them in the context of Kashmir militancy. In the valley it is not just acts of terror but also their involvement in the anti-Sufi tirade has long been commented on. It is time perhaps that the AhleHadis in India comes out with a categorical statement making its stand clear in relation to Islamic terrorism in India.

But perhaps the most surprising part of the NIA brief was the involvement of TablighiJamaat. Owing allegiance to Deoband, the Tablighi Jamaat has been understood as a movement of piety which shuns violence. Its parent body, the Deoband, has denounced terrorism in categorical terms. Some policy pundits have gone to the extent of calling the TablighJamaat as the role model for Muslims across the globe to follow. So what has gone wrong with this quietist movement? The answers will always be complex and of course a lot will depend upon the individual biographies of members who are involved in such activities. But what can be said is that no one is immune from the murderous charms of Islamism. And denouncing terrorism does not mean that one has denounced the worldview which gives rise to such acts in the first place.

The fact the no Barelwis where found to be involved in such activities should also be taken with a pinch of salt. Just because so far there has been no involvement of the Barelwis so far does not mean that concepts like jihad, kufr and kafir have become redundant for them. Before the liberal camp starts celebrating this face of moderate Islam, they will do well to remember that the killer of Salman Taseer was a Barelwi and that till his eventual hanging, he was utterly convinced that killing the infidel Taseer was a divine Islamic commandment.

The traditional focus on madrasas as a site of jihadi extremism should thus be jettisoned in favour a broader focus on the lure of Islamism, the existing pedagogical practices within Islam and the Muslim-Kafir dichotomous worldview which many readings of Islam today provide.

(Arshad Alam is a NewAgeIslam.com columnist)

This article was first published on New Age Islam.
 

The post Why the terror trap lures educated Muslims more than madrasa products appeared first on SabrangIndia.