al-milad al-nabawiya

Re: Mawlid

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...37134733&hl=en

Shaykh Salek bin Siddina (may Allah preserve him) ---translated by Shaykh Rami Nsour (may Allah preserve him)

Allahuma sali wa salim wa barik `alayhi wa `ala alihi

 

as-salamu `alaikum

Ok JazakumAllahu khayran that is exactly what I wanted to confirm and seeing as you have checked it direct from the Persian original then that is very useful. shukran jazilan.


Sh. Buti [may Allah preserve him]:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEkdSDou9FQ&feature=related

 

Assalamulikum WR WB,

Sidi Faqir. The original persian scans for the quote have been posted on marifah. Sidi Abu Hasan's translation has been verified by others.
And his translation is the FULL reply by Imam-i-Rabbani (rah). Some people have purposely misquoted Imam-i-Rabbani (rah) to make it appear that he was against the mawlid.

Walikum as Salaam.

 

Sidi faqir, I can clearly read Imam Sirhindi Naqshbandi's original writing in persian,

aH's translation from the urdu version to english is, as far as I can see accurate, and to the exact meaning, and as promised in context. the one you quote is highly manipulated with words and meanings out of no where (wahabi tampering?)

..and no, the first part is also the response of the shaykh.

 

i sense anger, frustration from muzammil

 

as-salamu `alaikum sidi.

I do celebrate the mawlid.

I have a question about this quote of shaykh Ahmad al-Sirhindi:

It has been mentioned elsewhere that, in fact, the first part of your translation of the quote from the Maktubat is in actual fact the question posed to him and not the Shaykhs response.

Shaykh Ahmad al-Sirhindi is supposed to have actually answered to the question with the following which you translated similarly:

"This poorling is of the opinion that unless this practice is completely given up, the interested persons would not cease taking advantage of it. If the practise is declared lawful, it would gradually lead to finding justification for other innovations also. Even a small mistake becomes a prelude to grave errors"


I was wondering if you agree.....

http://www.hakikatkitabevi.com/display.asp?DID=2&KID=32&SID=427

was-salam

 

the arabic link which was kindly provided has a nice footnote. the translation is the same, vol.3, page 144.

translation of the footnote:

know that the imam has prohibited mawlid absolutely in various letters, and his intention is - may Allah sanctify his secret - as he has explained in this letter. that is, the prohibition is on account of the [prohibitive] conditions mentioned above.

this is not an evidence for the wahabiyah to prevent [the mawlid]; may Allah ta'ala humiliate them and those who follow them in their footsteps.
​

i say: aameen yaa rabb!

update: muzammil is fretting that i missed the 'mutlaqan' in my translation of the footnote. it is ironical coming from those who wantonly impute meanings to elders crafted from imagination and translate things that don't exist (as in the quote cited by faqir); but still, we are not like them and do not need to hide behind mistranslations. it was a mis-step, but if i had run through the translation once again i would have certainly added it, of my own accord.

nevertheless, i have repaired it above - all i did was add 'absolutely'. muzammil has made his last post and any post in this thread will be deleted. if he does not refrain, he will be banned.

i have a feeling that posting this footnote was a mistake. muzammil will now go hunt for these quotes in the maktubat and present THOSE at the next opportunity. al-iyadhu billah.





===

 

i was surprised when the person conceded that he was wrong about imam rabbani's quote. from the post which i have now deleted, he says:

at the outset, it looks reasonable; but looking closer, it is the same old subversion. he then switches to the definition of bid'ah and quotes from here and there giving the impression that all of these quotes are about the same thing.

arguing with such people is a waste of time. moreover, he had already posted his last post in this matter.

 

i was just listening to the late mawlana pir nasiruddin nasir's tazmeen:

ihtiram e nabawi dakhil e aadat na sahi
sheer e madar meiN aseeloN ki najabat na sahi
ghar meiN aadab e risalat ki riwayat na sahi
aur tum par merey maula ki inayat na sahi
najdiyo kalimah paRhaney ka bhi iHsan gaya?
​

 

whereas ibn al-Haaj was criticising certain prevalent practices. just like imam rabbani's quote below there is plenty of dishonesty here.

in short: imam suyuti in his Husn al-maqsid listed ibn al-Haaj's opinion and praised it as an excellent statement proving the permissibility of mawlid! after copying ibn al-Haaj's statement, he further elucidates it.

 

i will not be surprised if these people claim that alahazrat was also against mawlid. after all, he refuted singing and money-taking practices (not unlike ibn al-Haaj or imam rabbani).

so the next thing you can expect from these bashful beings with their tremendous modesty is that alahazrat was against mawlid.

see his fatwa here.

 

a false position was attributed to imam rabbani below. it was claimed that imam rabbani was against mawlid. a few sentences were taken out-of-context to deceive the common public. once again the deobandi's kayd is outed.

----
here is the correct translation of the maktub/letter [see the image below]:

and then you have asked about reciting the mawlid. if it is only recitation of the holy qur'an or praise of the prophet or awliya [na'at, manqabat] in a good voice, what is wrong with it? [1]

that which is prohibited is to alter the letters of the qur'an.[2] and to convert the recitation such that it is according to the rules of singing and to recite [the qur'an] like songs and to accompany [such recitation] with the clapping of hands - which is anyway not permitted even when reciting ordinary poetry [3]

if one recites the mawlid such that words of the qur'an are not altered [4] and recite odes which are not according to the conditions aforementioned [5], and even that is accompanied by good intention, where is any obstacle [in it being permitted]? [6]

my master!

a thought occurs to this poor man that if we do not close this door totally, those given to their desires will not restrain themselves. if you permit them little, this will grow into more. it is a well-known saying that 'little gives way to more'. [7]

wa's salam.
​

---------------------------------------------

1. the idiom means: there is nothing wrong with it.

2. to recite the qur'an in tunes such that they alter the correct pronunciation of the verses.

3. clapping hands and singing is not permissible for ordinary poetry too; as for qur'an, it is all the more prohibited.

4. such that tajwid of qur'an is maintained.

5. no clapping of hands etc.,

6. imam rabbani quddisa sirruh, clearly says that there is no obstacle (rukawaT) if the mawlid is recited properly.

7. anybody without prejudice can clearly see that imam rabbani is criticizing the wrong way of celebrating mawlid and those who turn qur'an into singing.

 

i must however point out the dogged subversion of the deobandi.

----

excuse me, i was pointing out your quote. regardless, if you want to impute meanings to the shaykh and claim what suits your whims, how can i stop you? after all, you have done it so shamelessly with imam rabbani as we shall see below.

do you guys believe in judgement day? and that you will be held accountable for what you say? going by the audacity you display, there is little assurance that you do.

----

can you read english? imam suyuti wrote a detailed exposition of what ibn al-Haaj said and he categorically stated that 'he was not against mawlid per se.' but you simply insist on peddling your own delusions.

----
i have copied the relevant part from imam rabbani's maktubat attached here as an image. i took it from the pdf YOU provided in the link and since it was a bit poor-quality image, i scanned it also from my own copy.

you say:

perhaps, you cannot read urdu. or if you can, you probably do not understand it. and if you understand it, and still make the false assertion above, there is little i can do about it.

there was no such distinction but yet, you conjured up these 'categories'. and to fit your categories, you threw responses which are mere figments of your imagination.

i am least bothered in convincing a liar that he is lying. my post is for onlookers.

 

the issue is closed. you show a remarkable lack of comprehension which is among the distinct traits of deobandits. other trademarks and patents are deception and subterfuge.

congratulations. you have just made your last post in this regard.

 

Uthman dan Fodio's analysis is one of balance and tolerance within the Maliki madhhab. He addresses this from the Maliki-Shafii divergence elucidated above, and sticking within the Maliki mode of thinking, he writes:

I say: That is a reprehensible innovation if it is free of every disobedience (ma`siyya)

The part you quote is not his personal view, but a view that he accepts as a secondary legitimate point of dispute. Likewise ibn al-Hajj, despite agreeing to the merit of Rabi al-Awwal and paying it due respect, clearly dismisses the organised celebration of mawlid as a reprehensible bid'a.

Further, shaykh Ahmad al-Sirhindi also rejects the mawlid in Letter 72 of the third volume in his Maktubat; at its conclusion he writes:

"This poorling is of the opinion that unless this practice is completely given up, the interested persons would not cease taking advantage of it. If the practise is declared lawful, it would gradually lead to finding justification for other innovations also. Even a small mistake becomes a prelude to grave errors."

See the Urdu translation p. 196 here: http://www.maktabah.org/attachments/062_Maktubat%20Vol-3%20Part-1.pdf

Shaykh Ahmad al-Sirhindi, unsurpisingly, also belongs to the second "Maliki" category of scholars (above) opposed to the concept of bid'a hasana and preferring a shar'i/lughwi distinction instead.

If you are to say this quote is about the mawlid then you should accept ibn al-Hajj was opposed to it as Uthman dan Fodio immediately writes after this: The former decision was the opinion of the author of the al-Madkhal because he said, "If food is prepared only and one intends by that to recognize the Mawlid and the Muslim brothers are then invited even when it is free of every disobedience - it is still an innovation because of the intention only. This is because that is making increase in the religion and it is not among the behavior of the early community (as-Salaf). For following in the footsteps of the Salaf is paramount, rather it is obligatory."

Should not legitimate disagreements be valued as a rahma for the Muhammadan Umma, as opposed to being suppressed?

 

don't worry brother, that won't be for long. the deobandis always love to disrupt the remembrance of the habib SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam. the zeal with which they try to find even the weakest of proofs to subdue the mawlid is mind boggling.

 

perhaps you did not understand what dan fodio was saying. like other lies, uthman dan fodio was not against mawlid; nor was ibn al-Haaj. also you insinuate (which might have been inadvertent) that ibn aTayillah or ahmed zarruq or ghazali were against the mawlid. your sentence:

take out the last colon please when you post elsewhere and post it like this:

With regards to Uthman dan Fodio, who died in 1817: he wrote a book named ihya al-sunna al-muhammadiyya wa ikhmad al-bida' al-shaytaniyya in which he quotes profusely from Sidi Ahmad Zarruq, al-Ghazali, Qadi Iyad and ibn Ataillah. dan fodio says in this book:
​

below is the quote from your own quoting:

so which part did you not understand? uthman dan fodio might accept that mawlid is acceptable when it is according to shariah, but you will insinuate that he did not.

the deobandis, either cannot read or they intentionally mix up various issues to confuse the public; to either exonerate their own pitiful selves or to poison the pond.

zikr rokey, fazl kaatey, ayb kaa juuyaaN rahey
phir kahey mardak ke huN ummat RasulAllah ki? (sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam)
​

 

those who were against the mawlid are a minority and in today's world they are usually those with the wahabi element. if you look at al-fakihani, he was at a time when celebrating mawlid was relatively new and hence his reaction. [the king of irbil, who is known to have initiated it abu sayid passed away in 630AH] but later scholars recognized it and there was no sunni who called it reprehensible until the najdi came forth and his counterparts in india, deobandits and the followers of ismayil, the ugly created this confusion by castigating mawlid as a bid'ah.

ahlu's sunnah scholars cornered them, and they adamantly refused. but nowadays they have changed tack by claiming it to be 'difference of opinion.'

your justifications are not new; these are old excuses and as i said, standard deobandi/wahabi fare. when they are utterly defeated in their cause to oppose mawlid, they want to project it as a difference of opinion. the tactics of slithering away.

----
i am annoyed by the fact that all of these objections - whether you came up with them on your own or whether you are copying it from someone else - are taken from imam suyuti's 'husn al-maqsid fi amal al-mawlid' wherein he explained the issue well.

is it not ironic - and intellectual dishonesty - that you pick only the objections from a treatise that is an answer to the objections? why do you do away with the explanations and cite the objections directly?

or if you have seen any source of al-fakihani's fatwa other than a citation from al-suyuti's treatise, (which he quotes before refuting it) i would like to see it.

-------------
al-fakihani is quoted thus:

i don't know any basis in the kitab or sunnah for this action of mawlid
​

and al-suyuti replies:

not knowing something does not necessitate that it does not exist. imam al-hafiz abu'l faDl ahmed ibn Hajar [al-asqalani] has proven a basis for it [mawlid] from the sunnah. and i have recognized a second proof derived from the sunnah - which i shall mention presently.
​

or perhaps, ibn Hajar al-asqalani was weak in hadith or did not understand the hadith properly? go ahead make your claim.

---
after listing ibn al-Haaj's opinion, al-suyuti says:

'and the result of his speech [ibn al-Haaj]: he did not decry mawlid per se, but only denounced the forbidden and reprehensible actions that [people] include in the mawlid.
​

----
as for denouncing unlawful activities, that should be done anyway - whether during a mawlid or during salat al-jum'ah.

 

muzammil, its a very nice game you are playing here, good luck

 

With regards to Uthman dan Fodio who died in 1817, he wrote in his ihya al-sunna al-muhammadiyya wa ikhmad al-bida' al-shaytaniyya, in which he quotes profusely from Sidi Ahmad Zarruq, al-Ghazali, Qadi Iyad and ibn Ataillah:

If you were to say, "What is the legal judgment concerning what the people do during the month of Rabi` 'l-Awwal on the day of Prophet's birthday (al-mawlid) or on the seventh day of the mawlid where people gather together for remembrance of Allah (dhikr) and the food which is prepared for that purpose?" I say: That is a reprehensible innovation if it is free of every disobedience (ma`siyya). It is said that the answer is that the practice of the Mawlid of the noble Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace is a highly recommended good innovation (bid`a hasana manduuba) when it is free of every disobedience. As for what the people have made a habit in these times where men and women mix freely, Allah forbid that any scholar would make that permissible. It says in the al-Madkhal, "Generally what the people have invented from innovation is their false belief to be among the momentous acts of worship (akbar 'l-`ibaadaat) and manifesting the rites of Islam is what they do during the month of Rabi` 'l-Awwal from the Mawlid of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant hi peace. This has been included among the innovations (bid`a) and the forbidden things (muharramaat)." He continued, "It is necessary that when this noble month comes that it be honored, ennobled and respect it with deserving respect. This is by following the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace in that he used to single out times of blessing by increasing in performing acts of righteousness and generosity."



If you were to say, "What is the legal judgment concerning those who prepare food only on the day of the mawlid. He intends by that the recognition of the mawlid and invites his Muslim brothers to eat along with that being free of every disobedience?" I say, This is a reprehensible innovation or an allowed innovation. The latter is the preferred decision (al-mukhtaar). The former decision was the opinion of the author of the al-Madkhal because he said, "If food is prepared only and one intends by that to recognize the Mawlid and the Muslim brothers are then invited even when it is free of every disobedience - it is still an innovation because of the intention only. This is because that is making increase in the religion and it is not among the behavior of the early community (as-Salaf). For following in the footsteps of the Salaf is paramount, rather it is obligatory.

http://www.siiasi.org/ihya's-sunna%20wa%20ikhmad'l-bid`a_2_.pdf p. 189 (the appendices list his chains to Imam Bukhari, Imam Malik and Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani in the Qadiri silsilas)