In the chapter on religion, all groups of Ahl al-Tradition recognize the need to renew the tradition and make it compatible with their era, but this recognition has not been translated into a serious strategy till date. Extremism in religion, spread of innovation and renewal of religion was given by Sharia himself. This meaning has been mentioned in various hadiths. He said, “Allah will send a Mujaddid for this Ummah at the end of every hundred years who will renew this religion.” The meaning of renewal is not to bring out something new in religion or to make such unique interpretations in the chapter of religion that no one has done till date. The meaning of renewal is to present the religion in its original form by removing the distortions in the religion and to present the religion in harmony with its covenant. Today, modernists and intellectual deviants associated with them believe that reformation is the name of modernization. According to them, only the beliefs are eternal, the rest of the religion is contemporary and temporary. In other words, according to them, Shariat is a child’s plaything. This is not a renewal, it is a renewal, and the renewal is misguided and misguided.
First of all, the people of tradition do not understand the need for renewal, and if there is an understanding, then practically no steps are being taken for it. For example, today’s religious tradition is divided into different masaliks and different parties within these masaliks. If we talk only about the Sunni sect, there are two more sects in it, Deobandi and Barelvi. Then more groups are seen in these two sects. For example, if we talk about the Deobandi sect, there are only three or four groups active in it regarding the end of prophethood. Similarly, various organizations are active for the defense of companions. In the last thirty to forty years, more than half a dozen groups have existed under the name of Jihad. There are separate congregations and circles for preaching and preaching. Many parties are also active in the field of politics. This is the situation of Barelvi religion. There are also various parties and platforms for the end of Prophethood, politics and preaching. Are these many parties performing the duty of renewing religion? Let’s try to find the answer to this question.
There are three to four groups in the Deobandi school of thought only regarding the end of Prophethood. First of all, the existence of more than one party is a question mark that why more than one party is needed on the issue of end of prophethood? The end of Prophethood is related to the chapter of beliefs, and in the chapter of beliefs, all the verses are on the same point. Then what is the meaning of existence of three or four parties in the name of end of Prophethood within a religion? It is possible to prove the existence of more than one party by an argument. But did these parties make any serious progress on the issue of end of prophethood? Intellectual training of workers. Have produced any serious and intellectual literature. The objections raised on the blasphemy law have been answered. Prepared lawyers who can point out the error in the recent decisions regarding the Qadianis in the court? Who can respond to criticism from various quarters on social media? Only Shaban Khatman Nabubat has a fund of crores of rupees collected every year, has any intellectual and intellectual personality been prepared from the fund of crores? I have some information about Shaban’s preaching department. There are around 30 to 40 preachers in Punjab, each preacher has been made the Ameer of a district. There is hardly anyone among these preachers who is aware of the recent decisions regarding Qadianism and their background. Hardly anyone has visited the Supreme Court website and downloaded the original judgments from it to read and understand. Who is aware of criticism on social media and can respond to them. Same traditional literature and methodology. In the modern class, the ability to speak and the style of language and expression are totally lacking. Every year in the month of Shaban, an eight-ten-day Khatnam Nabubat course is organized from the platform of Shaban. This time for a few hours I also had the opportunity to participate in this course as an audience. On my way back I had tears in my eyes and heart ache. A crowd of around 1,000 was gathered in the name of the course. Seriousness was replaced by banality. There was excitement instead of consciousness. It was quantity rather than quality. Instead of intellectual and intellectual conversation, it was an oratorical tune. Instead of thinking, there were slogans. There was unconditional obedience rather than questioning. The language was painful. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani’s Tatikhan were slogans of death. He was fond of urinating on his grave. There was a demand to write the book of the death of the dog. The word “dishonor” and “kafir” was frequently used, and Man Sab Nabiyyah Fakatluwa was mentioned.
I kept looking there and regretting it. This ten-day activity and the investment of lakhs of crores of rupees could have resulted in nothing but excitement. The argument that these students were exposed to the problem of end of Prophethood is a question in itself that whether the students of religious schools also need to be exposed to the problem of end of Prophethood. It would have been much better if a few people had been prepared to advance the problem of the end of Prophethood in a modern way. This is only the performance of Shaban Khat Nabubt. The recent problems that arose regarding the irresponsibility of the World Assembly are also in front. For what the performance of the World Assembly, Majlis Ahrar and other parties can be, it is enough to say that Shaban came into existence because other parties were not working and to establish a youth party to work in the field. There was a need. If this is the nature of Shaban’s work, you can guess the first parties. The painful attitude of the parties working for the defense of companions has also come to light in recent elections and the situation of political parties is also not happy.
As for the religious schools, the situation is not good here either. Apart from harmonizing the tradition with their era, they are not able to understand the tradition properly. Except for a few Madrasahs, only superficialities are being considered. This is the scenario that has provided the modernists with an opportunity to mock tradition and the people of tradition and encouraged them to present their modernist ideas as a religion in the society. Modern renewal can only be fruitful if such people are born from among the people of tradition. The modernists can criticize and mock the traditionists, but this Ummah is not ready to accept their modernism as a renewal. This relationship and credibility with tradition and people of tradition is a treasure of ordinary Muslims and people of tradition should consider their obligations before breaking this relationship and credibility. They must rethink their attitudes, strategies, work arrangements, personnel and priorities. What I have written is not a taunt or slander of someone else, but it is one’s own sorrow.