Betrayed, Arabized

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

Assalam alaikum

Omer bhai yes we need to make dua for Muhammad bin qasim and ppl alike him who brought us this gr8 gift of islam ALLAH UN KO JANNA MAY JAGA DAIN OR HUM KO BHI AMEEN
see many north africans think that i m from there and when they ask me why u pick this nickname ( TARIQ BN ZIYAAD ) i tell them coz he was a hero

i asked a question earlier can somebody answer it, is it tawassuf or tasawwuf ? am i confused or u ppl?

TARIQ

 

[muse]

what i understand is that you are saying that the contradicting ideologies of deobandi and barailwi are dividing pakistani people?

Yes, but there is more, because the conversation is not about just differing religious ideologies, there are also conflicting cultural clashes with regard to history or the claim to history, clashes as to the meaning of Pakistan.

For 30 plus years the islamist have ridden a tide, now this tide has become a ripple and great many changes are coming to Pakistani society - no doubt about that. When we discuss "arabization", this took place in a particular, unique CONTEXT, that context itself has changed.

See, all these articles we discuss and debate and laugh and cry and call each other names over, all of them by are Pakistanis - that is why it does not help to think in terms of a paradigm of a static society - change has already happened and the most unfortunate thing about this whole experience, and also the most exciting, is the loss for idea of Islam, of the sacral, and the possibility of reform of course.

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

I think 75 percent of Quranic verses warned against munfiqeens...Another note if we are good muslim why we need us to affiliate ourselves with Arabs....We should be proud what we are...

Assalam alaikum

Bhai did u read quran?

TARIQ

 

[Vinod2070]

Sufism spread through present day Pakistan into present day India. Sufism is many many many centuries old. Barelvism was a movement meant to counter Deobandism (the ideology of the Taliban today) started in Deoband UP in 1866, which wanted to revise & reform the controversial elements of Sufism. Barelvism started in the 1880s, & spread through present day Pakistan after that. Hence, it became deeply rooted in Pakistan, because it aspired the same values as Sufism, which was native to the land of Pakistan. In fact, in 1947, it was the Barelvis in India that wanted independence, & the Deobandis did not. Barelvism aspired similar values of Sufism, but wasn't the same thing as Sufism. I don't see any contradiction here.

Typical confused state of mind?

This is not the Islam of the Saudis (Salafi) or of India (Deobandi), but of the Barelvis & the Sufis

Barelvi is as much from India and Deobandi is.

 

[Subramanian]

The funny thing is, Hinduism is just as foreign to present day India as Islam is, considering the fact that the Vedas were written in present day Pakistan, & Hinduism originated from there. But that isn't the topic at hand, so I won't really go into great details.

No,but hinduism didn't change the original belief systems,it accepted them as they are and integrated them into it and didn't try and destroy any practice.

You can still find many local and tribal beliefs existing,hinduism never tried to push itself down anyone's throat.

 

[JonAsad]

They didn't. They were limited to Sindh for a comparatively small time and beaten back by the Rajputs. They never came back.

Yes, they were beaten by Hindu Rajputs. Read some history.

Who is responsible for the over whelming numbers of Muslims in Hindustan- explain your logic- i am listening?- Most probably you will say afghanis?- then as your self who brought islam there- now post-

 

[muse]

Are you saying that Wahabis (Saudis) Are only displaying Islam to the public while inside they are not Muslims?? I will not comment on this except "When you point a finger at someone, three points back at you"

Look, this is legitimate- we cannot be in a position to imagine that no fingers are pointing towards us. What we can do is to make our case - - I would again offer that what you are seeing and experiencing is a ripple of social change - aspects of Pakistani society will become even more liberal, and aspects even more insular - both of these responses are leading to a clash, in fact TTP are a reflection of this clash, a tip of the iceberg if you will - and I think a more insular Pakistan is one that will not be allowed to survive, it will be a grave danger to itself and others.

 

[53fd]

Typical confused state of mind?

This is not the Islam of the Saudis (Salafi) or of India (Deobandi), but of the Barelvis & the Sufis

Barelvi is as much from India and Deobandi is.

You seem to be unable to distinguish Sufism from Barelvism, so it is futile to go on further. Sufism has been around for many many many centuries, whereas Barelvism is a product of the 1880s, & Deobandism is the product of 1866 in India.

I have explained how the Sufis gained inner purification through mysticism: verses, poetry, music, architecture, geometry, dreams etc. Qawaali is a product of Sufism. The shrines all over Pakistan are as well. The Barelvis merely acted as the safeguards of Sufism against the attacks of the Deobands.

 

[muse]

I am sorry man, just getting frustrated here watching every other person twisting the topic to turn it into an inflammatory debate on religion. That is why I restricted myself to reading the posts of a few members, and ignored all others. Your posts I always read, and seeing religion again becoming the point of debate kind of ticked me off. I apologize for coming at you like that.

El Presidente - read between the lines - the language or the idiom maybe of religion, but it is social change that is being negotiated

 

[Safriz]

Whereas some argue that Abdul Wahab was thrown out of the seminary and that it was his father and brother who were graduates of the seminary - it is indeed interesting that it is claimed he was a "Mujjadid", especially since others who claimed such were put to the sword, but abdul wahab had a sword of his own.

the trouble is that we pass judgements on.people from a different era by comparing them to different circumstances...our frame of reference is wrong so we come up with wrong results.
what imam abdul wahhab did was the best thing to do according to the prevailing circumstances of his era.and by doing what he did he managed to revove islam in its purer form.
we dont need to follow him as thats not required...he didnt come up with a "fiqah" . it was just a religio political movement he lead for the best interest of islam and muslims...
but we do need to realize that the divine being we beleive in Allah can hear us and grant our wishes even without referrences .
but if we choose to go to a saint and ask them to.pray for us..we should realize that Allah will give .. not the saint..but this saint is a better person than me and his/her prayers are more likely to be heard.
being arrogant and hard nosed as barailwi or wahabi is a persons own action and he/she as individual is to be blamed...not barailwiism or wahabiism (if tevhnically these two isms do exist)

 

[Vinod2070]

You seem to be unable to distinguish Sufism from Barelvism, so it is futile to go on further. Sufism has been around for many many many centuries, whereas Barelvism is a product of the 1880s, & Deobandism is the product of 1866 in India.

I have explained how the Sufis gained inner purification through mysticism: verses, poetry, music, architecture, geometry, dreams etc. Qawaali is a product of Sufism. The shrines all over Pakistan are as well. The Barelvis merely acted as the safeguards of Sufism against the attacks of the Deobands.

Don't try to weasel out by going inane.

This statement of yours was clear and obviously and patently false.

This is not the Islam of the Saudis (Salafi) or of India (Deobandi), but of the Barelvis & the Sufis

 

[53fd]

Don't try to weasel out by going inane.

This statement of yours was clear and obviously and patently false.

This is not the Islam of the Saudis (Salafi) or of India (Deobandi), but of the Barelvis & the Sufis

Ok, made the necessary changes:

This is not the Islam of the Saudis (Salafi) or of India (Deobandi), but of the Sufis

Happy now? Geez!

 

[muse]

the trouble is that we pass judgements on.people from a different era by comparing them to different circumstances...our frame of reference is wrong so we come up with wrong results.
what imam abdul wahhab did was the best thing to do according to the prevailing circumstances of his era.and by doing what he did he managed to revove islam in its purer form.
we dont need to follow him as thats not required...he didnt come up with a "fiqah" . it was just a religio political movement he lead for the best interest of islam and muslims...
but we do need to realize that the divine being we beleive in Allah can hear us and grant our wishes even without referrences .
but if we choose to go to a saint and ask them to.pray for us..we should realize that Allah will give .. not the saint..but this saint is a better person than me and his/her prayers are more likely to be heard.
being arrogant and hard nosed as barailwi or wahabi is a persons own action and he/she as individual is to be blamed...not barailwiism or wahabiism (if tevhnically these two isms do exist)

I encourage you to please do more research - especially with regard to how much blood was shed to make Abdul Wahab the "Mujjadid" some claimed him to be -- and if that is "good", I want no part of it. When you say individuals should be blamed not the ideology, let me ask you if you will grant the same exceptions to communists and communism??

I know that you cannot grant such an exception - so why do you seek it for those for whom you have a soft spot?

 

[Mosamania]

being arrogant and hard nosed as barailwi or wahabi is a persons own action and he/she as individual is to be blamed...not barailwiism or wahabiism (if tevhnically these two isms do exist)

One of the things that pains me is watching silently people making these new (isms) in Islam from out side of the Muslims world and then inject it into many people's heads. I said it once and I will say it again "Muhammad (PBUH) brought only one message, one Qur'an and one religion. He did not bring these many sects or schools of thought. Our duty as Muslims is to believe that God's message is perfect and should not be tampered with. Do we have higher knowledge than God making our own rules in religion to worship him? Is God's message not perfect enough?"

 

[muse]

One of the things that pains me is watching silently people making these new (isms) in Islam from out side of the Muslims world and then inject it into many people's heads. I said it once and I will say it again "Muhammad (PBUH) brought only one message, one Qur'an and one religion. He did not bring these many sects or schools of thought. Our duty as Muslims is to believe that God's message is perfect and should not be tampered with. Do we have higher knowledge than God making our own rules in religion to worship him? Is God's message not perfect enough?

"

Great post - When will ever read an arbi saying that this applies to Wahabism? When will we read an arbi saying that it pains him to see what this ideology of wahabism has done to the lives of so many innocent people in so many countries?

My guess, we will not read any arbi let alone Maso make this statement - because his conscience belongs to the state, if the state says a wrong is a right, Maso will fall in line ---- Go ahead, make me liar, I will happily accept that.