Wahabization-Salafization of Pakistan and Muslim Ummah

[Hyde]

Let's be frank guys. A poor country like Pakistan which is having trouble moving up in the progression line will not be able to pull off an enormous task such as implementing, enforcing, spreading Islamic law throughout the land.

Pakistan simply does not have the money, time, and effort to make itself an Islamically propelled state.

My dear innocent brother in Islam,

Learn the History of Islam first before i can tell you the basic requirements of setting a Shariah Law. Was Prophet Muhammad S.A.W very rich among his peoples? that he preached his teachings among its peoples through his money? Did he require like billions of dollars to spread the teachings of Islam among its peoples? Did other Sahabas were that rich that they changed the whole system of Arab and sorrounding countries with $$$?

Regarding time and efford "Himmatay Mardaan Madd-a-de Khuda"

Allama Iqbal said it himself CLEARLY that there will be absolutely no religious rule in Pakistan. Then why can we not accept the fact that even if Pakistan was made to be an Islamic ruled country[which it wasn't], it cannot be one?

i never heard that in my whole life. Can you please provide me any proof?

 

[EjazR]

Another misinformed article about what has caused extremism and related militancy among muslims.

The wahabbis aka salafis in saudi arabia DO NOT advocate killing of innocent non-muslims or muslims the way AQ TTP or other secretarian groups do.

The main issue is with the politcal Islam ideology that cuts across any school of thought. The Deobandi or Salafi connection has nothing to do with it except that it was mainly students of this school of thought who were brainwashed and trained in terror tactics in the 80s. Infact, most of these madrassas did not even teach proper Deobandi ciricculum and focussed exclusively around "Jihadi motivation"

Here is a relevant link for further reading
The Wahhabi Myth - Salafism, Wahhabism, Qutbism

And even on this forum this thread discussed the reason why extremism and takfeeri ideology emanating from the politcal Islam ideology must be tackled.
http://www.defence.pk/forums/curren...wered-questions-case-pakistan.html#post550583

Just wanted to add that that Deobandi and Salafi also have differences as well and that Deobandi school of thought has a strong tradition of tasawuf (sufism) unlike salafis who completely oppose the spiritual aspect of Islam or tasawwuf.
Also note that not all Saudis are salafis. There are plenty who follow other schools of thought as well.

 

[Xtremeownage]

Depends upon what I feel is innovation. I wouldn't pray for a promotion by asking from a baba ji's mazaar, I won't even address the Prophet Muhammad and ask him for favors, I wouldn't bow down to a false prophets and gods.

However unlike Saudis I would protect heritage, old houses, buildings and graves.

My religion is simple and without a lot of mumbo jumbo and I denounce all Mullahs since I feel they are out to achieve the same thing - power. Wahabis just managed to sway the militant type people towards them. I'm not a sectarianist, and hate the concept of sects. So my condemnation is to all extremists - not just the wahabis. All.

Absolutely ludacris accusations. You yourself are following the doctrine of the Wahabis, which proves your bias.

Firstly, as Muslims there are no false prophets or gods, you can't be a Muslim if you believe in those.

And the concept of Wasila is a fundamental Islamic aspect! What you say about Mazar and Prophet (S) is completely false and un-Islamic.

The only innovation here is with Wahabis, and those who follow the belief and aqeedah of Wahabis.

To Seek the Wasila of the Holy Prophet (Salallaho Alaihi Wasallam)

To Seek the Wasila of the Holy Prophet (Salallaho Alaihi Wasallam) Jamat-e-Ahle Sunnat Pakistan

By Admin

Some persons believe that it is not permissible to seek a Wasila (mediation) when making Dua to Allah Taala. They say that you should make Dua directly to Almighty Allah.

The Aqeeda of the Ahle Sunnah wal Jama’at is that to seek the mediation of Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) is permissible or allowed by the Shariah.

The following verse proves that one can seek a Wasila when approaching Allah Taala. Allah Ta’ala states in the Holy Quran: “O ye who believe! Fear Allah and search for a Wasila (mediation) towards Him and strive in His path on that hope that you will gain refuge.” (Part 6, Ruku 10)


The following verse proves that one can seek a Wasila by approaching the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). Allah Ta’ala states in the Holy Quran: “And if when they do injustice unto their souls, then O Beloved! They should come to you and then beg forgiveness from Allah, and the Messenger should intercede for them, then surely, they would find Allah most Relenting, Merciful.” (Part 5, Ruku 7)


Hazrat Abdullah ibn Abbas (radi Allahu anhu) states that when the Jews wished to gain victory over their enemies they would make this Du’a: “O Allah! We ask to you through the mediation of the unlettered Prophet that You may grant us victory over those Polytheists.” (Tafseer Durre Manthur)

Hazrat Imam ibn Jureer Tibri (radi Allahu anhu) writes that the Jews also made this Du’a: “O Allah! Send down that a Prophet who will make justice between us and the people and those people used to gain victory and help against the others through his mediation.” (Tafseer ibn Jareer)


Hadrat Uthman bin Haniff (radi Allahu anhu) says that a blind man came to the court of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) and said, “O Messenger of Allah! Pray for me that I may regain my sight.” The Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said, “Go and perform ablution and read two Raka’ats of Nafil Salaah and read this Du’a: ‘O Allah! Verily I ask of You and towards You I use the mediation of Nabi-e-Rahmat, Muhammad Mustapha (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). O Muhammad! Verily I turn through your Wasila to Your Creator for my needs so that my needs may be fulfilled. O Allah, accept the intercession of Muhammad (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) for me”. (Ibn Maja; Shifa Shareef)


With regards to this Hadith Shareef about the blind man being asked to make Dua with the Wasila of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), Hazrat Allama Abdul Ghani Delhwi (radi Allahu anhu) says, “It proves the permissibility of mediation and that of the Prophet’s (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) intercession. This command is that during his life, but also after his demise.” (Misbahus Zijaja Bar Hashia ibn Maja) Thus, one is allowed to seek the Wasila of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) even after his demise.

When Hazrat Adam (alaihis salaam) ate from the forbidden tree, he made Du’a to Allah Ta’ala through the mediation of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) in this way: “O Allah! Forgive me with the Wasila of Muhammad Mustapha (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam).” (Tibraani; Muwahibul Ladaniyah)


The Ambiya are Wasilas (mediators) for their Ummah in every form and the Wasila of the Ambiya is the Holy Prophet Muhammad (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam). Hence, the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) is the Wasila of all mediations, even the Wasila for Hadrat Adam (alaihis salaam). (Tafseer Saadi)

Hazrat Aisha Siddiqa (radi Allahu anha) says that the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said, “O Allah! Grant Islam respect through Umar ibn Khatab.” (Ibn Majah)


The Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Abdaals will be in Syria. They are forty men. When one of them passes away, then Allah Ta’ala puts another in his place. Through their blessings it rains. Through them victory is gained over enemies and through their blessings punishment is moved away from the people of Syria.” (Mishkaat; Ash’atul Lam’aat)


Hazrat Umar Farouk (radi Allahu anhu) sent troops towards Kasra and he made Hazrat Sa’ad bin Ka’ab Waqqas (radi Allahu anhu) the commander of the troop. Hazrat Khalid bin Walid (radi Allahu anhu) was the chief commanding officer. When they came close to the Dajla, there were no ships or boats to cross the river. Hazrat Khalid bin Walid (radi Allahu anhu) and Hadrat Sa’ad bin Ka’ab (radi Allahu anhu) went forward and spoke to the river, saying: “O River! You are flowing through the Command of Almighty Allah. Thus, we are giving you the Wasila of the justice of Rasool (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) and the Khalifa of Rasool (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), Hazrat Umar Farouk (radi Allahu anhu). Do not become a stoppage between us and our crossing.” Suddenly, the river gave way. Then the troops crossed the river with their horses and camels. They reached the other side of the land in such a manner that their (horses and camels) hooves did not even get wet. (Ar Riyaadhun Nadhra)

In the above narrations one sees that the Sahaba-Ikraam used various forms of mediation as solutions to their problems.

Hazrat Abdul Haq Muhadith Delhwi (radi Allahu anhu) writes the following: “According to the Ijma of the Ulema, to use the Wasila of the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) to gain assistance both with verbally or physically is said to be confirmed to be desirable.” (Jazbul Quloob)

 

[Xtremeownage]

Extremism started from Wahabi and Saudis? my dear friend, you are talking about a nation who killed three out of four of its first caliphs; who did not even spare the family of its Prophet (PBUH).

Those were the Kharjis you were talking about!

Wahabism originates in the 1800's by a Najdi man named Abdul Wahab, who was predicted in a hadith, here is the translation:

The Messenger of Allah, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said,

"O Allah bestow your blessings on our Shaam. O Allah bestow your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Messenger of Allah, and our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam, said, "There (in Najd) will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations, and from their appears the Horn of Satan."

Reported in al-Bukhaaree [Book of Trials, Chpt. 'The afflictions will come from the East' 9/166 no. 214 Eng. Trans]

The Wahabi movement of the 1800's is a REVIVAL of the beliefs and practices of the Kharjis, who killed the Sahaba and holy family of the Rasool (SAW)!

The Wahabi doctrine talks about Bidah and Shirk, yet doesn't understand the concept of it, and in turn are one of the biggest proponents of Bidah and Shirk themselves!

Allama Iqbal (one of Pakistan's founding father) clearly speaks against Wahabis and Qadianis here:

 

[EjazR]

^^^^
Regardless of difference of opinion on various issues.

They do not advocate killing of innocent people the way AQ, TTP e.t.c. are doing. That's the point of the article and that is wrong. During the 80s Saudis and Pakistanis were at the forefront of fighting Communists in collaboration with the West. The west included bosted the poltical Islamists and other non-state actors to wage war against the soviets in Afghanistan. Large number of time and money was spent on training them in making bombs and other terror tactics. Now Saudi Arabia is turning its clock back against Qutb's ideology and the traditional Islamic scholars who opposed that in the beginning are now being heard.
the same needs to be done in Pakistan. Having difference of opinion is ok as long as you don't try to impose it on others violently or force others to follow it. There should be dialouge and discussion on other pov.

 

[FreekiN]

My dear innocent brother in Islam,

Learn the History of Islam first before i can tell you the basic requirements of setting a Shariah Law. Was Prophet Muhammad S.A.W very rich among his peoples? that he preached his teachings among its peoples through his money? Did he require like billions of dollars to spread the teachings of Islam among its peoples? Did other Sahabas were that rich that they changed the whole system of Arab and sorrounding countries with $$$?

Regarding time and efford "Himmatay Mardaan Madd-a-de Khuda"

True, but the scenario was totally different then. I know the history but you must know the current condition of the country TODAY. Back then education was not a necessity, monetary motivation did not take the place of religious motivation, and religion was not used to commit terrorism as we see almost every day.

They had a different culture, a different mindset, and a different way of life.

Besides, the first strict islamic law system came into existence around 200 years after the Holy Prophet's pbuh death.

i never heard that in my whole life. Can you please provide me any proof?

[[3d]] Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim states will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such states. I have already indicated to you the meaning of the word religion, as applied to Islam. The truth is that Islam is not a Church. It is a State conceived as a contractual organism long before Rousseau ever thought of such a thing, and animated by an ethical ideal which regards man not as an earth-rooted creature, defined by this or that portion of the earth, but as a spiritual being understood in terms of a social mechanism, and possessing rights and duties as a living factor in that mechanism. The character of a Muslim State can be judged from what the Times of India pointed out some time ago in a leader [=front-page article] on the Indian Banking Inquiry Committee. "In ancient India," the paper points out, "the State framed laws regulating the rates of interest; but in Muslim times, although Islam clearly forbids the realisation of interest on money loaned, Indian Muslim States imposed no restrictions on such rates." I therefore demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim State in the best interests of India and Islam. For India, it means security and peace resulting from an internal balance of power; for Islam, an opportunity to rid itself of the stamp that Arabian Imperialism was forced to give it, to mobilise its law, its education, its culture, and to bring them into closer contact with its own original spirit and with the spirit of modern times.

Presidential Address, annual session of the All-India Muslim League, Allahabad, December 1930, by Sir Muhammad Iqbal

This quote is thanks to EjazR. I knew that [little something you learn everyday] would come in handy.

 

[qsaark]

Nor should the Hindus fear that the creation of autonomous Muslim states will mean the introduction of a kind of religious rule in such states.

Things have to be taken in proper context. Please pay attention on the words marked in bold. This statement was made when the AIML (All India Muslim League) was struggling for the autonomy in the states with overwhelming Muslim majority within Indian federation. This statement was made so that the Hindus living in those states would not find this proposal (Muslim rule in the Muslim majority states) offensive or dangerous. However, once the Muslims got their own sovereign country, the above statement becomes irrelevant.

 

[EjazR]

@Xtremeownage

You are not going to believe some prejudiced youtube videos now are you?

First of all Iqbal himself had said that he was against the Pakistan scheme so where does the question of Qadiyanis or Deoband opposing the Pakistan scheme come when he himself had said so. Even the 1940 resolution did not have the name Pakistan and Iqbal passed away in 1938.

Moreover, some Deoband scholars like Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi and Shabbir Ahmed Usmani e.t.c. had supported Pakistan schme in the worsening enviroment post 1940s.

Moreover, Qadiyanis were loyal to the British and supported ML in supporting the Britihs war effort. They instructed their followers to vote for ML in the 1946 elections. Although some of their leaders were opposed to a partition because their community was spread out across India. Despite that the majority of their followers where in Lahore.

And despite having politcal diffrences of opinion with Deoband scholars, have a read of what Iqbal had to say.

The following piece has been edited by Maulana by Abu Zaynab and taken from the inside cover of a 1984/1405 edition of a South African Muslim journal called “Awake to the Call of Islam!” The extracts were taken by the editors of the journal from a book called “History of Darul Uloom Deoband”.

Deobandiyat is neither a creed (mathab) nor a sect – terms by which its antagonists try to incite the masses against it – but it is a comprehensive picture and a complete edition of the tack of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah in which all the offshoots of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah are seen joined with their root.What a fine and succinct sentence the Poet of the East, the late Dr. Sir. Muhammad Iqbal – and, it beseemed him alone – had spoken about Deobandiyat.

When someone asked him:

‘What thing is the Deobandi, a creed or a sect?’ He replied: ‘It’s neither a creed nor a sect; Deobandi is the name of every rationalist religious man.

Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal said:

Let these madressahs be in this very condition; let the children of poor Muslims read in these madressahs. Should these mullas and Dervishes be not there, do you know what will happen? Whatever will happen I have come after seeing with mine own eyes. If the Muslims of India are deprived of the influence of these madressahs, it will happen exactly like it happened in Andalusia (Spain) after eight hundred years of Muslim rule there. Today, except the relics of the ruins of Grenada and Cordoba and Al-Hamra, no trace is found there of the followers of Islam, and the Islamic civilisation. In India, too, save the Taj Mahal and the Red Fort of Delhi, no trace of the Muslims’ 800-year rule and their civilisation will be available.

(Extracts from a “History of Darul Uloom Deoband”, Vol.1, 1980)

http://zakariyya.wordpress.com/2007/05/15/the-poet-of-the-east-allamah-iqbal-1837-1938-on-deobandis/

 

[FreekiN]

Things have to be taken in proper context. Please pay attention on the words marked in bold. This statement was made when the AIML (All India Muslim League) was struggling for the autonomy in the states with overwhelming Muslim majority within Indian federation. This statement was made so that the Hindus living in those states would not find this proposal (Muslim rule in the Muslim majority states) offensive or dangerous. However, once the Muslims got their own sovereign country, the above statement becomes irrelevant.

You see, if there are no quotes which say he DID want religious rule in such 'states,' then he must have meant it when he said there will not be religious rule.

 

[EjazR]

@Zaki

The idea is that there should be no "enforcement" of Islam top down. It should be bottom up. This is what Iqbal's vision was. This is how the Prophet SAW built the muslim society.

You can't "force" people to pray, be honest and give zakat e.t.c. all the time. Besides, if they do that out of fear of punishment by the govt. then their good deeds are not accepted because they are not doing it for Allah and there is no ikhlas. So yes individually at a personal level, rich or poor everyone should try to inculcate Islamic values and encourage others to do so.

however, grabbing politcal power in the name of Islam and then enforcing so called "sharia" top down is wrong and will always result in problem as we have seen in the past 3 decades and with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

 

[qsaark]

You see, if there are no quotes which say he DID want religious rule in such 'states,' then he must have meant it when he said there will not be religious rule.

Cant you appreciate the difference between Muslim majority states within Indian federation and a sovereign Muslim country? Besides, Iqbal was not the only one who struggled for the Muslim States. From the Quran and Haidth, its more than clear that under which rule Muslims should live.

 

[FreekiN]

Cant you appreciate the difference between Muslim majority states within Indian federation and a sovereign Muslim country? Besides, Iqbal was not the only one who struggled for the Muslim States. From the Quran and Haidth, its more than clear that under which rule Muslims should live.

No, I cannot. I don't want to see Pakistan fall under the darkness of this wahabi-ism and whatnot. Saudi Arabia is a gigantic failed example of this. This Sharia law stuff may have worked 1000 years ago, but it will definitely not work today and it definitely isn't working for those who are trying to make it work.

The government shouldn't waste its time and money on deciding what is Islamic and what isn't, especially for Pakistan. That duty belongs to the Muslim himself. Bangladesh and [i think] Egypt have recognized this and have opted for a secular government.

They probably realized that you cannot force someone to be a good Muslim even if you threaten to chop their hand off. A good Muslim... or even a good person, comes from the heart, not a whip.

 

[alirulesall123]

only thing that matters is that we are Muslims.

Wrong. At the end of they day, the only thing matters is that we are Pakistanis

All Pakistanis are equal, no matter they're religion or race. Pakistan was created for all minorities of Hindustan, not just muslims.

Death to wahabism, Death to salafism.

Cant you appreciate the difference between Muslim majority states within Indian federation and a sovereign Muslim country? Besides, Iqbal was not the only one who struggled for the Muslim States. From the Quran and Haidth, its more than clear that under which rule Muslims should live.

Right...

Which is why you live in the USA right?

 

[alirulesall123]

My dear innocent brother in Islam,

Learn the History of Islam first before i can tell you the basic requirements of setting a Shariah Law. Was Prophet Muhammad S.A.W very rich among his peoples? that he preached his teachings among its peoples through his money? Did he require like billions of dollars to spread the teachings of Islam among its peoples? Did other Sahabas were that rich that they changed the whole system of Arab and sorrounding countries with $$$?





i never heard that in my whole life. Can you please provide me any proof?

If you actually knew something about history, then you would know that during the first few years of Islamic Expansion, Muhammad did not try to convert conquered peoples, because they would have overthrown him within seconds.

 

[FireFighter]

This is yet another sectarian based thread initiated by those who can't comprehend tolerance or difference of opinion in the Islamic traditions. no ikhlas nor kholoos for other muslims, aqeeda is always hell bent on demonizing the other party because they're losing control and influence over the Mosques due to personal incompetence and ignorance in spiritual matters.

These same people love using Iqbal's quotes when it favours them, but demonize him when he doesn't.


in the words of a great leader, these rats are "2 taga ke maulvi's"

hypocrites.