Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 23:02, 26 September 2007

In case, cogent reasons are not there for existence of two pages for the same topic with different spellings, pages should be merged by creating a redirection link. --Bhadani 15:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

• Merge Merge is appropriate. Lots of other spellings for this group, Brelvis, Bareilawis, etc.

• Merge, but merge TO this article. Most of the English-language works that mention Barelwis use this spelling; Brelvi is a close second. BTW, we need much fuller descriptions of Barelwis and Deobandis and the rivalry between them. Zora 12:57, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

• Merge, but it needs much deeper description (not only diferences wuth Deoban) Abdullah mk 00:10, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

• This page includes less facts about Barelwies and more Wahhabi propoganda. It is full of POV by Wahhabies. While the Fatwa by Barelwies against Wahhabies is shown as their bigotry, the fatwa of Wahhabies against them is shown as some kind of a fact. The main disagreement between Wahhabies and Barelwies is celebration of Maulood and my news link of Wahhabi suicide bomber killing Barewlies celebrating maulood is removed by a Wahhabi editor.Hassanfarooqi 19:14, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• Removed vandalism by User:ItaqallahHassanfarooqi 05:13, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

you may wish to worry about your own vandalism first, such as on my user talk page which was accompanied by a personal attack. if you continue like that in the future, although you have a long history of personal attacks and incivility, you will be reported. you should cease tendentious editing and attempting to purge all criticism from this page except when using pejorative terms to describe opposition. ITAQALLAH 17:50, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

You reap what you sow. If you continue to vandalize pages that do not confirm to Wahhabi ideology, then you will be called a vandal.Hassanfarooqi 22:40, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

if "vandalsm" equates to undoing blatant whitewashing, then yes i am a vandal, as are the majority of Wikipedians. you may wish to tone down your aggressive rhetoric before you are reprimanded for it. ITAQALLAH 22:54, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Oil power speaks, I have been reprimanded. Congratulations for your victory. You got to remember the history. You people had hijcked Islam before and it was temporary. This time again you have won but time will agains show a Nejdi victory against Hejaz as temporary againHassanfarooqi 01:57, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

• Had to remove Wahhabi propoganda by User:Itaqallah once again. He seems to be fanatically obsessed against Barelwis. Retains his propoganda links though Hassanfarooqi 23:03, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

• Defence of peacful schools of thought against Wahhabi jihad continues. Quote from Allama Shami's Radd-ul-Mukhtar about the first Wahhabi wave, "The state of the followers of Ibn Abdul Wahhab was like this, they rose from Nejd and attacked our holy cities Mecca and Medina in Hejaz. They killed everyone who did not confirm to Ibn Abdul Wahhab. Then Allah send the Armies of Muslims to push them back to Nejd". Rest assured it seems until oil runs dry in Saudi Arabia, the second wave of violent Wahhabi jihad against peaceful muslims would continue.Hassanfarooqi 01:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

so much for that secularism you claim to uphold.. :/ ITAQALLAH 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I think User:Itaqallah's version is more NPOV as it clearly states what each side thinks of the other. The links need classification though. Right now, it's an amorphous mass of pro and anti sites.--Nkv 17:15, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

The article is still full of Wahhabi POV and anti-Barelwi propoganda. It has very little secular information for the readers about the Barelwi movement. Watch out for the POV words like "Self Proclaimed".

Perhaps you should edit them out then? --Nkv 19:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Do you see much words in the article "Wahhabism"?

In spirit, yes. "The Wahhabis claim to hold to the way of the Salaf as-Salih, the pious predecessors..." which is self proclamation. Perhaps it's more mildly worded.--Nkv 19:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

No way, all reference that I made about Wahhabies coming into power with the help of British was removed without giving any reason. Those references were from western pro Arab historians/biographers like David Holden. See his book "The House of Saud".

Reinstate them and if you have concrete references, we'll put them in there. --Nkv 19:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not talking about anti-Wahhabies like Stephen Schwartz or Pipes. Also watch quotation marks around words blasphemous when quoting Barelwis. These quotes do not appear around words coming from Wahhabies.

I see quotes around the work Shirk in the Wahabi page. But really, I think you're overreacting. Let's separate concerns. I can't stand Wahabi ideology one bit but in the interest of keeping wikipedia accurate, let's just state everyones views as accurately as possible (using the talk pages to resolve disputes) and leave it at that rather than accusing people of editorial slant. --Nkv 19:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I tell you man, Wahhabies are brain washed to not tolerate any Non-Wahhabi. They can not be secular. It is against their very basic training.170.35.208.22 13:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

No "religious" person can be "secular". I expect the wahabi minded editors on wikipedia to defend their points of view on all articles and I expect the non wahabis (traditional sunni muslims if you prefer) to defend theirs. There will be a little ruckus and then things will settle down to something which both parties (perhaps grudgingly agree upon). --Nkv 19:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with what you have said so far except this one. I have been with people of many religions and found their intellectuals are always secular in research e.g. Jehovah's witness are very very fundamentalist Christians. However their research about Islam is very secular as printed in their paper. Their conclusion is not secular ofcourse. Then you can read "Christian Science Monitor" which is also a very fundamentalist organization's paper. You can not point a finger on their secular research. Again, their POV appears seperately. I am a staunch fundamentalist Muslim (fundamentalist meaning sticking to fundamentals as foundation and building over it, not sticking to fundamentals and destroy all construction over it). However I am certified in studies of Old Testament and the new Testaments and have done a lot of faith sharing to form my own knowledge about Jews and Christians, not what the Mullah told me when I was a kid.Hassanfarooqi 19:48, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

With respect to this article, can you list down all the items which you think compromise it's NPOV? We'll then work on them one by one and try to come up with a neutral and good article. If you do this, I'll invite ITAQALLAH to take part in the discussion. Above all, let's try to keep a cool head and just neutrally state the facts as best we can. Wassalam. --Nkv 19:33, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Here is a perfect example. You have categorized AFSA people as Barelvies. It is because you consider all non-Wahhabies as Barelvies. AFSA people are by no means Barelvies. Shaikh Hasham probable can not even tell where in the world Bareli is!Hassanfarooqi 15:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

The User who is removing Concepts and Aqedda links should Know that he may be Blocked from Editing wikipedia.! shabiha

Aqeeda definition

The Aqeeda Which i have added is Correct.becaus We Know What is Our Aqeda more than any other Person We are Barelwi (Sunni) .this page has been a medium of Practical in the Hands of Wahabis . Shabiha

Chisti, Suhrawardi etc. are Tariqas. They are Madhabs of Tasawwuf. These are distinct from Aqida. Please recategorise what you're adding or stop doing it. --Nkv 10:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The Aqeeda of all Sunnis is the same, Barewis DO NOT have a distinct aqeeda from Shafis, Malikis etc, we all Sunnis have the same Aqeeda, that is the least common denominator between all Sunnis. You are mixing up the lazy and inaccurate general use of the word Aqeeda linguistically by (again) Indian subcontinentals who use it to refer to more general and divisive issues, and incorrectly applying that use in a strictly technical sense here. Please provide one reliable source which defines Aqeeda as other than the basic, fundamental foundational qati'i creed/Iman established with conviction without any thunn or Shaq. If you don't speak Arabic, or if you don't quote arabic sources you are hardly qualified to define the term Aaliyah Stevens 15:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

New Edits

I am adding some useful and relevent information about Barelwis by the Heading :

• Barelwi follows the following Sufi Tariqas
• Points of Dispute with Others
• Organizations

These heads may be modified in to some other relevent one if needed .I am trying to provide a full fledge information on this topic . Shabiha 06:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)shabiha

Neutrality/Accuracy Tag

Tagging of this article seems bias ness ha ben done . What was wrong with the Aqaid Section When I Add a Link To That Barelwi Considers their Prophet as Noor / Hazir o Nazir /Capable of Telling Ghaib(Unseen Power)and he will Intercede on the day of Qiyamah .

This is a belief that many schools have. The Barelwis are a Hanafi group who follow the Maturidi school of Aqida who consider Ahmad Raza Khan as their leader. That's it. There's no charter anywhere that says "If you have to be of the Barelwi school, you should consider the Prophet as Noor". --Nkv 13:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

What is wrong if This is Our Aqaid and WIKIPEDIA testifies it . Hundreds of References may be given to Prove this Point . On =WIKIPEDIA= You will Find

What was the fate of Muhammad's soul after his death?

Sufi views Sufi's believe that Muhammad is alive his spirit pervades the world and can be reached by true seekers.

For the Barelvis, the holy Prophet knows ilm -ul-gaib and he sees all the deeds by his Ummah and also he has been given all theknowledges by his Lord.; he is Hazir (witness); he is Bashar as well as Nur (light). It has been stated in the Hadith: "Verily, Almighty Allah has made it Haraam upon the earth to eat the bodies of the Ambiya". It has also been stated that Ambiya and Aulia are alive and are blessed with Sustenance from Almighty Allah(God provides food for them in their graves). http://en.wikipedia.org/Islamic_views_of_Muhammad#Sufi_views

Please Reply soon ....

I just don't think it's advisable to turn an article into a badly edited one with lots of transliterated Urdu terms. I think that the only thing the article needs is a statement that Imam Ahmad Raza founded the school, that it's largely restricted to India, that they differ on many points from the Deoband school and some links to disputed subjects. Anything more is prosletysation since it is a group largely restricted to India. --Nkv 13:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Shabiha 09:39, 1 May 2007 (UTC)shabiha

Barlewi is not a School but a Movement

The Barelwi School as You are Saying is not a School or Sect. It is the Name Given by the People having Purinitical Wahabi Ideology in the Indian SubContinent to Oppose the Defending oftraditional Sufism by Imam ahmed Raza Khan . The People of Kahmir to Kanya kumari and Kabul to Dhaka were Traditional Sufism Practising people Who Find the Defence of their Aqaids or Ideology in the writings of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan, a Great sufi Scholar . It has been researched By Columbia University Scholar Usha Sanyal :Ahle Sunnat Movement and Imam ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi .Total 25 Ph D's in Various University of the World have been Completed On him . Any way people Read the British Islam You will Know the Truth . All the Sunnis Who are known as Barelwis by others have same Ideology Except with Deobandis and Wahabis . Shabiha 14:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)shabiha

From all the research that has been conducted in Universities of the world on the works and efforts of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi, has anyone ever found a single quotation from Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi, in which he distinguishes any movement to be followed by his followers as a new school of thought and for his followers to label themselves as Barelwi ?

On the contrary, Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi was a staunch orthodox Muslim with undying belief in his love for the Holy Prophet of Islam (SAW) as being his salvation. He was Qadri in his Spiritual following and allegiance to an unbroken spritual chain leading upto the well known Saint and Sufi Scholar Hadrat Abdul Qadir Jilani (RA) , and stood out in his time for his strong willed and often unparralleled rebuttal of new ideas and beliefs which were infiltrating the Muslims of the Indian Sub Continent. At about this time there were various claimants to the title of "Authentic & Mainstream Muslims" from within the Indian Sub-Continent. Amongst these you will find the works of the Ahl-e-Hadith group and in particular the book written by Ehsan Elahi Zaheer "Bareilawis History & Belief" (translated into English by Dr Abdullah 1985). This book aims to isolate the efforts and works of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi as a new Sect with ideoligy and practices out of the empit of Islam and innovatory to the extent of creating an Unlawful Innovation or series of Unlawful Innovations. The label of the Book was aimed at isolating Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi, and promoting the title Barelwi or Bareilawi, as an identifiable sect.

The ideology of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi is the same as the prevailing majority not only in the Indian Sub-Continent but throughout the Muslim world. Therefor the followers of Imam Ahmed Raza Khan Barelwi are neither a Sect nor an identifiable School, they are mainstream authentic Mulims. Muftian 14:16, 13 May 2007

Removing tagline of Disputed character

All the Content Must be Discussed here. This page is Not property of Any One . MSOAMU

Unreferenced numerical claims

Recently, a user wrote claims in the introductory paragraph that Barlwis make up the majority of Muslims in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and the United Kingdom. I inspected the referencs to confirm and almost laughed, and then almost cried. The "references" were as follows:

• For India, the link was an internal Wiki link to the article in Islam in India. And all it said was that Barelwis make up a "large number" of Muslims in India, not the majority. That article itself also did not provide a reference.
• For Pakistan it was the same, a simple link to the Wiki article on Pakistan. And again no mentioned that Barelwis are the majority, just that there are many of them.
• For Bangladesh it was again the same thing, link to the Wiki article which itself didn't say that make up the majority.
• The United Kingdom references were a trip. The first was a link to the Wiki article, which does claim that Barelwis make up the majority but only after the same user who inserted these claims here edited it, in addition to putting more information (into the Islam in the United Kingdom article) that was very culturally biased toward South Asians. The second reference was a news story about the Terrorism Act of 2006 in the UK, which was just confusing. The last was a link to a PDF file from some evangelical Christian group saying that Barelwis make up the majority of Hanafi Muslims in Northern England and, surprise surprise, not providing any references for claiming so.

This is just not acceptable for an encyclopedia. Many people read Misplaced Pages for information and to have blatantly unbacked claims paraded around as fact is wildly irresponsible. I hope we can all be mature and objective with our edits in the future. MezzoMezzo 21:35, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Sunni Tehreek

Sunni Tehreek is a Barelvi organization based in Karachi, Pakistan and is working for the cause of sunnis through peaceful measures. But this Organization is subject to atrocities from government, Wahabi Jihadi organizations and ruling political party. All of its founding leadership have beem martyred, including Chief and Founder Maulana Saleem Qadri, and Central Leaders Saleem Raza, Abudul Waheed Qadri, Second Chief Maulana Abbas Qadri, Maulana Iftikhar Ahmad Bhatti, Akram Qadri and hundreds of workers. Currently it is working under the leadership of Sarwat Ejaz Qadri to preach the teachings of Imam Ahmad Raza Khan, which are real Islamic Teachings opposed to extremist Wahabi Islam.

Huh?

Do we relly need to mention this loser sect or whatever movement in Misplaced Pages? and these guys can be called mis guided Hanafis--Yu5uF 16:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

It is a significant Islamic movement within South Asia, and as can be demonstrated both by the references and the external links is notable enough to warrant an article. Please show respect to the religious beliefs of others and do not refer to other beliefs as "losers". MezzoMezzo 18:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Frustrated Wahabi ! You Must know that this is the Right Path .

121.247.138.56 16:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Sunni Soldier of Islam

two recent things with points have beeen added

i have added barelwis fatwa about salman khan and their presence in United kingdom . oneshould discuss them before editing .121.247.138.34 10:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Shabiha

The notability of that specific fatwa was not substantiated in the link, only that it was made. There are literally hundreds of fatawa out there, and since Misplaced Pages is not a collection of indiscriminate information there is no reason to include it. In addition, the POV charged information about Deobandis has absolutely no relevance to this article whatsoever. MezzoMezzo 16:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

This information has once again been added, despite it not being relevant. Please do not edit war. MezzoMezzo 09:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Stop mezzo mezzo ...HELP IS NEEDED OF NEUTRAL EDITORS

Salman Khan 's fatwa is very much in the news and first google salman news what i do is Blatant POV and u do is all correct. Either remove abdul mannan's news or other wise don't delete Times online news about moderate majority . Actually u wish to show this Movement in Bad Image whereas u r Always deleting links which shows that DEOBANDIS ARE HARDLINER AN BARELWIS ARE IN MAJORITY IN BRITAIN N ARE MOERATE. ARE THESE MY PERSONAL VIEWS?

Shabiha 23:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)