Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Is the Akhbari movement rising?


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Do we have any Akhbari on here? Surprisingly online there seems to be a stem of Neo-Akhbaris. Discussing this with my friend he told me that Afghan Shi’as living in Germany and Holland are disillusioned with Iran and are adopting more Akhbari beliefs (also add in the fact that Hassan Allahyari holds many of the same viewpoints as them). 
 

I also hear in South Asia particularly Pakistan Akhbarism is rising, with extremely devoted Pakistanis adhering to all the hadiths attributes to the Ahlulbayt ((عليه السلام)).

 

Im just wondering if this is just a trend online or if the movement is actually rising?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As an outsider, I can confidently claim to be neutral in this dispute. I believe the Akhbaris make more sense when they criticize the concept of Wilayat al Faqih as usurping the exclusive functions of the Imam Ma'sum, and likewise, the concept of the Marja usurping those functions too. I recently viewed Ammar Nakhshwani's first majlis on the subject of Wilayat al-Faqih. I will, in sha Allah, want to discuss the concept of Wilayat al-Faqih from a Sunni perspective on this forum. In that majlis, Nakhshwani mentioned seven functions of the Imam Ma'sum's Wilayah which have been transferred to and inherited by the Wali al-Faqih. In my mind, that justifies the Akhbari criticism that the role of the Imam Ma'sum has become superfluous in light of such concepts. The Akhbari movement is strong in the place of my origin (Hyderabad, India). It was revived by a certain Sayyid Riyadh ud-Din Haydir Ja'fari, and now under the leadership of Wahid ud-Din Haydir Ja'fari. This latter individual wears ear rings and has dozens of bangles and red threads tied around his wrist, which seems overly feminine to me. Nakshwani himself has tattoos that are visible on his hands and arms. I suppose the Shi'ah don't regard our Sunni Ahadith which forbid this kind of thing, but it's still a shock to see preachers on the Minbar with tattoos and ear rings, as these things are just not associated with Muslims, especially Ulama and Khutaba. The Akhbaris of Hyderabad also openly believe in Tahrif al-Quran, and they are extremely sectarian, wanting nothing to do with Sunnis whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
15 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

the concept of Wilayat al Faqih as usurping the exclusive functions of the Imam Ma'sum, and likewise, the concept of the Marja usurping those functions too.

I want you to Disregard the Title/word/term "Wilayat al-Faqih" and Iran. ( so to keep it Conceptual)

Do you disagree with the Government of the Jurist/The most Qualified/Learned in Islam among the people of that community/nation/state.? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
45 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

The Akhbaris of Hyderabad also openly believe in Tahrif al-Quran, and they are extremely sectarian, wanting nothing to do with Sunnis whatsoever.

This is in fact what I meant when I mentioned that many have grabbed the label of akhbari without actually demonstrating any understanding of the background and origins of akhbarism.

In the indian subcontinent it's particularly amusing to see people promoting themselves as akhbari or akhbari leaders when they struggle with the most basic notions of the arabic language.

Generally these groups are more oriented towards ghuluw, and have most likely adopted the akhbari label to avoid having to comply with guidelines of the ulema. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Development Team

If you think being Akhbari is bad then you are wrong. Akhbaris believe in khabar (ahadith) and they reject Taqleed (following non-Ma'soom). If you know Arabic language/grammar and have knowledge in required fields and can deduce Jurisprudential issues then you can be Akhbari. Some of our great scholars in the past were Akhbari. Present day Akhbari laymen although they say do not do Taqleed but they end up following someone. They have more similarities with malangs than actual Akhbaris. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators
2 minutes ago, Sirius_Bright said:

They have more similarities with malangs than actual Akhbaris. 

I agree with what you said brother. The funny thing is that even the term 'malang' has somewhat been hijacked. 

I think in general people who want to pick and choose religion tend to hide behind labels such as malang or akhbari to try and shield themselves from the known guidelines of shariah. 

At a more global level among muslims, some have used the cover of tasawwuf/sufism for this purpose. These days some are also hiding behind the term Quranist (but still praying according to one school or another).

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guest Pschological Warfare said:

I want you to Disregard the Title/word/term "Wilayat al-Faqih" and Iran. ( so to keep it Conceptual)

Do you disagree with the Government of the Jurist/The most Qualified/Learned in Islam among the people of that community/nation/state.? 

Not in principle. But I don't regard it as necessary either

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Basic Members

I’ve only met a few Akhbari people online and they were not part of a larger community. I think it’s fine to be critical of “Wilayatul Faqih” as in Iran’s interpretation, but this is not synonymous with rejecting all Mujtahids. Taqlid doesn’t affect our daily lives in an extreme way, and personally I don’t look at it as something central to faith. Realistically most of us will not reach the same level of knowledge as Ulemaa who have dedicated their lives to studying Islam and have a proper grasp of Arabic. 

I do think it’s beneficial for all of us to dedicate more time to reading the words of the Ahlul Bayt to incline our hearts towards All-h (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) which should be our ultimate goal, no matter what you want to label it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It is honestly ridiculous to expect that every layman has the capacity and the time to come up with a professional, academical and Islamic conclusion to lifes every question mark. 

Most muslims dont even know the history of Islam, most muslims dont even care to know, now they are expected to derive Islamic verdicts on different topics?

Imagine how many million versions of islam would exist if it was up to every layman to find out and make his own laws.

In any other field in life we always direct our question to the ones most knowledgeable, I dont understand why it would be any different when it comes to something so important as Islamic jurisprudence. I guess some people refuse to follow others, even if it would be best for them to do so. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Wrfare
2 hours ago, Cherub786 said:

Not in principle. But I don't regard it as necessary either

Correct me if I am wrong. Your convoluted/Agnostic answer implies- In short "Religion" is not a way of life for you.  Religion is a set of rituals ( prayer/Fasting, Hajj etc..) Personal relationship with god and Politics/Worldly life is separate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guest Pschological Wrfare said:

Correct me if I am wrong. Your convoluted/Agnostic answer implies- In short "Religion" is not a way of life for you.  Religion is a set of rituals ( prayer/Fasting, Hajj etc..) Personal relationship with god and Politics/Worldly life is separate. 

That conclusion is a bit of a leap, and rather a simplistic understanding of my position. Btw, how did you conclude this is my approach to Religion simply because I answered that I don't consider government of the jurist necessary?

Religion is definitely a way of life for me, it is meant to inform every aspect of my life, not just my worship and personal relationship with God. It sets out guidelines and rules on how I must behave in society, how to deal with people, how to conduct business and financial transactions, what I am allowed to eat and drink, personal hygiene, manners of speech, dress, sexual ethics and morality, encouragement of charitable behavior and compassion, protecting and defending the weak and vulnerable, respect for elders, and so on and so forth.

However, the Five Pillars of Islam make it clear that our Religion is centered on what you call rituals, i.e., acts of worship meant to bring us closer to God in both personal and communal relationship.

As for politics, Islam also has important principles, guidelines and rules pertaining to that sphere too. But just as it cannot be said that Islam is a system of hygiene though it has rules and principles regarding Taharah, likewise, it cannot be said that Islam is a political system though it has rules and ethical principles regarding how politics is to be conducted. It is my contention that Islam has not prescribed any particular or specific form of government or political system for the Ummah or humanity at large.

I flatly deny the concept that some Muslims have innovated into our Religion that Islam is a political system, and that Islam cannot be actualized without the establishment of a state and government. In other words, I am not what is known as an "Islamist". If according to you, this is tantamount to denying that Religion is a Way of Life, then so be it.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
28 minutes ago, Cherub786 said:

It is my contention that Islam has not prescribed any particular or specific form of government or political system for the Ummah or humanity at large.

You follow Rituals or not in your home has no bearing of the Society. Its between you and your god.

I will conclude and you can correct my understanding. It is not a Complete Social System. As it lacks Governance or any template for it. Yet we know that Environment is the key to Everything. Otherwise individuals can choose to follow or not - To allow Anarchy is not a goal of a Complete Social System. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Guest Pschological Warfare said:

You follow Rituals or not in your home has no bearing of the Society. Its between you and your god.

I will conclude and you can correct my understanding. It is not a Complete Social System. As it lacks Governance or any template for it. Yet we know that Environment is the key to Everything. Otherwise individuals can choose to follow or not - To allow Anarchy is not a goal of a Complete Social System. 

Islam is not a complete social system or a complete political system. Islam is a complete Religion, nothing more and nothing less. It does not follow from that that Islam wants or allows anarchy. On the contrary, Islam has given man freedom to conduct his political affairs and governance, under basic ethical guidelines, and encouraged him to do so through mutual consultation (Surah 42:38). Islam also regards tyranny preferable to anarchy, but both are not ideal, what is ideal is establishment of law, order and justice, in society. But Islam has no prescribed any specific system or political structure to accomplish that. It is from the ikhtiyar (freedom of choice) of man to determine this according to the constantly changing circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
7 hours ago, Guest Pschological Warfare said:

Do you disagree with the Government of the Jurist/The most Qualified/Learned in Islam among the people of that community/nation/state.?

We, the nation, did not obey the Imams when they had the government, who can be more qualified and learned than them. We almost comprehensively abandoned them ("save a few") and so they abandoned the govt. As Morgan Freeman puts it, people just want to watch TV and eat cheese burgers. And these are just jurists (no matter how much qualified). However the ratio of obeying to the disobeying has changed for the better. Probably has to do with the certainty that Zionism and West will not stop until every community falls and every believer is either dead or dirt poor, homeless and as powerless as a goat. I think this is one of the reasons some choose to support the regime resisting the onslaught spanning the last three decades. And its only wise to do so.

 

7 hours ago, Muhammed Ali said:

Pseudo-Akhbaris

Its very sad. The young "Neo-Akhbari" masses commonly found on facebook and other places where moderation is difficult, they display their absence of akhlaq, and their obvious purpose is to bad mouth the figures and beliefs of both other Shia and Sunni. Impossible to learn their point of view in the face of constant insults and baseless accusations, hence very unfortunate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rise of what you call the "neo-Akhbari" movement is part of a broader trend of rising anti-clerical movements in the world of Islam, which is in large part due to the failure and incompetence of the traditionally educated Ulama. Specifically, their failure to address contemporary intellectual challenges to Islam, their failure to engage the people beyond a superficial level, and truly facilitate a moral and spiritual transformation in the Muslim laity.

The Ulama who actively participate in politics are further criticized for going against the fundamental moral and ethical principles of Islam. It is now well known that such Ulama are not really interested in creating an Islamic society of justice and morality, but merely enriching and empowering themselves as a specific class and as individuals. This is particularly true of the Ulama of Iran, who are the most politically powerful Ulama in the world. They have control over a state, but have only used that control and power to enrich and empower themselves as a class, while Iranian society remains irreligious and corrupt (as evident by Iran's extremely low mosque attendance rate as one example).

Furthermore, much of the traditionally educated Ulama have merely acquired their education and position of scholars to establish money-making careers, and they are not really interested in doing any worthwhile service for the Religion. The Madaris in Pakistan, for example, are basically factories that are churning out hundreds of thousands of maulanas on an annual basis. They are basically religious functionaries whose purpose is to lead prayers, consecrate marriages, offer funeral rites, and give weekly sermons. The fact that they offer these religious services in exchange for money is the root of their corruption. The Ulama are supposed to be the heirs of the Prophets, but not a single Prophet ever took a salary or earned a livelihood for his ministry of prophesying.

In the Arab world, the Ulama are state functionaries, they earn their livelihoods from the state coffers, which further compromises their independence and integrity. They merely serve to rubber stamp State policy and lack the moral courage to condemn corruption and tyranny.

We have millions of Ulama in the Muslim world today, each aalim is supposed to have vast knowledge of the Religion, yet they have failed to utilize that knowledge to propagate Islam or at the very least defend our Religion from intellectual attacks both within and without. Because the Ulama are not effectively doing anything on that front, the responsibility is taken up by the laity, and they too are not effectively able to do the work because they lack deep knowledge of the Religion, but at least they have the passion and motivation to defend Islam, whereas the Ulama seem like they just want to read some Du'as and get their reward in cash and halwa.

In short, there is much more serious criticism that can be leveled against the Ulama. But their incompetence and inability to adapt to modern day circumstances is the reason for why alternative, non-clerical religious movements are popping up throughout the world of Islam.

Edited by Cherub786
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me continue my thoughts on how the corruption of the mainstream, traditionally educated Ulama has served to inadvertently facilitate the rise of anti-clerical, alternative religious movements in the world of Islam, including, apparently, the neo-Akhbari movement.

First, I would like you to consider the fact that the spiritual and moral condition of our mainstream Ulama today so perfectly matches that of the Jewish Ulama in the time of the Messiah عليه السلام. Look what he reportedly said about them, and reflect on how he may as well have been describing our own Muslim Ulama:

Quote

The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long;

Many elements within our Ulama and religious leaders are all about displaying their outer piety, they wear large turbans, lengthy cloaks, carry large rosaries, but are they really as pious and mindful of Allah as they appear to be? Are they not the worst offenders when it comes to riya - showing off?

Quote

they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.

This also perfectly describes much of our Ulama. They are always given VIP treatment and seem to enjoy it. They love being addressed and called with such pretentious titles "Hujjat al Islam" "Ayat Ullah" etc. They are entitled to the best seats in the Mosque at the front, we have to call them "Mawlana sahib" or "Fadilat ush Shaykh"

Quote

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.

All the fatawa of takfir and declaring others who disagree with them misguided, doomed to Hell

Quote

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.

Notice those who are closely associated with the Ulama develop the same narrow minded attitude

Quote

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.

Perfect description of our Ulama, they are so meticulous about the minutia of Fiqhi rulings, but neglect greater matters like having compassion and serving the weak, vulnerable segments of society which is more dear to Allah

Quote

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.

Look how our Ulama are so strict about the rules of Taharah and Najasah when it comes to utensils and clothing, but they don't bother to remove the Najasah within their hearts of greed and piling up wealth from their majalis and lectures they are paid to do

Quote

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.

How many Ulama outwardly seem very pious, with their long beards, flowing robes, large turbans, holding rosaries in their right hand, but isn't it all just an act? What about their inner condition, they are like wolves in sheep's clothing

Quote

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

How perfectly this describes that faction of Muslims whose ancestors were responsible for the murder of the great Imams and Saints of our Ummah, like Imam Husain رضى الله عنه, but whose descendants have built marvelous tombs and shrines for those Imams and Saints whom their predecessors murdered. They even engage in ritual acts of self-flagellation to supposedly atone for the great sin of their ancestors who betrayed the Imams and Saints, even directly participated in their murder!

Quote

You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?

Looks like our Ulama are in big trouble!

But of course, it's not just the Ulama, but the religious leadership of this Ummah in general, which includes mystics and Sufi shaykhs, so many of whom are fake, using their position as religious leaders to enrich and empower themselves, not really serving to bring people closer to Allah, or morally rectify them

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Posted (edited)

The cure for akhbarism is to simply read about akhbarism and see how actual akhbarism is completely untenable in the modern world. The akhbari position a la Astarabadi is that unless you have a text from an infallible that gives a certain ruling about something you must practice precaution. Just think about how that would work in the modern world when there is no texts regarding cars, the internet, etc. If one is curious about actual akhbarism read الفوائد المدنية by Astarabadi (رضي الله عنه) if you can read Arabic or Scripturalist Islam by Robert Gleave if you cannot. Nothing convinces me of the veracity of taqlid more than just talking to lay Muslims about fiqh. if you want to be akhbari just do taqlid of Shaykh Yusuf Al-Bahrani (رضي الله عنه) as he allowed taqlid of the dead and was certainly the greatest akhbari jurist in history although his akhbarism is a more moderated form of it. 

Also if someone doesn't like politics or Iran they can just follow a marja' who isn't aligned with Iran or politically active, I would argue our most knowledgeable scholars are like that anyway. 

 

Edited by baseball_fan_313
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Pschological Warfare
On 8/23/2020 at 8:03 PM, Cherub786 said:

Islam is not a complete social system or a complete political system. Islam is a complete Religion, nothing more and nothing less. It does not follow from that that Islam wants or allows anarchy. On the contrary, Islam has given man freedom to conduct his political affairs and governance, under basic ethical guidelines, and encouraged him to do so through mutual consultation (Surah 42:38).

A way of Life ( Personal,Economic, Political, - Everything that is included in a 'Society" /Community. You have said the same thing, in your initial post so there is not difference in your position. That is the end of this matter.

Regarding Consultation- History does not validate this thesis. as you can see from Saqifa, Appointment and group of six to decided among themselves. But that is your understanding, I am going to leave it at that for this conversation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

Assalamu Aleikoum,

i don't know a lot things about the Akhbari Twelvers, but i know only that they reject Ijtihad and institution of the Marja'.

Akhbar means in Arabic ,,a message", so they probably follow the Qur'an, 14 Masoomeen, Hadiths and no one else.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
Guest Haydar
On 10/15/2020 at 4:39 PM, Labbayka said:

Allahyari has done 17+ hours on lectures on why Taqlid is haram, I think it’s pretty interesting 

Until you do Taqlid of him. Agreed Taqlid is not good but every "scholar" is fighting to have the biggest posse. They all mix haqq with batil trust me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 8/23/2020 at 4:05 PM, Labbayka said:

Do we have any Akhbari on here? Surprisingly online there seems to be a stem of Neo-Akhbaris. Discussing this with my friend he told me that Afghan Shi’as living in Germany and Holland are disillusioned with Iran and are adopting more Akhbari beliefs (also add in the fact that Hassan Allahyari holds many of the same viewpoints as them). 
 

I also hear in South Asia particularly Pakistan Akhbarism is rising, with extremely devoted Pakistanis adhering to all the hadiths attributes to the Ahlulbayt ((عليه السلام)).

 

Im just wondering if this is just a trend online or if the movement is actually rising?

Akhbarism in the Indian sub-continent atleast (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh) is ghulu. I call it fitna. They give rise to sectarism and try to exploit main stream Shiism also. They do ghulu and also curse anyone who doesn't agree with them. They abuse Marja e Taqleed from mimber (Astaghfirullah) and add all their flawed logics to promote their deviant ideas. They lie blatantly from the mimber. Unfortunately due to a terrific amount of illieteracy among the muslims in the sub-continent, these thoughts are causing trouble. 

Actual Akhbarism is really interesting. The scholars who were a part of it have done some great works in history. If anyone studies the foundation, thr background, the reason behind Akhbarism; it is fascinating. 

Though, I don't follow it but no one can become a scholar without reading them. For instance, Allama Majlisi (رضي الله عنه), Mulla Amin Astarabadi (رضي الله عنه) etc. How can anyone become a scholar without reading Bihar ul Anwar!!!! It's huge and probably the greatest works among the Shii scholars. But the idea of Akhbarism is not right in itself. Taqleed is something you cannot ignore anytime. It is, as if, an athiest cannot ignore the idea of God though he might not accept it. 

Edited by Zainuu
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It's obligatory on each and every one of the followers of ahlulbayt (عليه السلام) to familiarise themselves with our hadith corpus compiled by our great classical scholars and try to follow the teachings of the ahlulbayt (عليه السلام). With that said, it's also recommended to refer to present day scholars on matters we aren't sure about and need clarification on. That's why I feel Tab'eedh is better than just plain taqleed to one marja'. With tab'eedh, you get a few different viewpoints on a particular issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...