i hold shaykh asrar in high regard as a young, sunni scholar; however, I found the assertions forwarded in this clip to be illogical, incongruent and inconclusive. i made some passing notes whilst listening: an attempt to understand the logic and rhetoric of the clip. ---------- [0:06/7:51] calling for a dialogue and a discussion; a revaluation of actual, and non-actual, issues of dispute given that the clip is concerning the Mawlid Nabawi Sharif, and the way the rest of the clip pans out, we can safely say that a liberal dousing of equivocation* has peppered the shaykh’s words. that is, the issue of Mawlid Nabawi Sharif is, by its very nature betwixt sunnis and salafis, an issue of ‘dispute’; the only way it wouldn’t be, and both parties could arrive at some mutual ground concerning it, is if it was: a. a religious obligation – like the 5 daily prayers or an emphasised sunnah b. expressly forbidden evidently it is neither, so the shaykh is mistaken in suggesting that mawlid isn’t, or at least shouldn’t be, an issue of dispute. one side must relent, either the salafis adopt the practice or the sunnis abandon the practice; there is no 'radical middle way'. [0:20/7:51] some people are stuck on whether lights at the time of Mawlid are permissible or not this is a very vague allusion to either ‘our salafi brothers’ or to sunnis. If the former, their gripe isn’t with ‘lights’ but with gathering to extol the Best of Creation (SallaAllahu alaihi wa sallam); and if the latter, you can’t surmise that 10 generations of scholars who wrote on the Mawlid did so to detail whether lights are permissible or not; in fact, no sunni today reduces the grand matter of the mawlid down to the permissibility or impermissibility of lights. [0:30/7:51] the Saudis should use the money spent on anti-mawlid literature on anti-zionist literature instead then in the spirit of finding common ground with ‘our salafi brothers’, given that the mawlid –according to the shaykh – is a ‘non issue’, the argument turns on itself: sunnis who spend 10,000s on mawlid gatherings should utilise the funds for anti-zionist literature (a greater priority). by the shaykh’s logic, condemning and condoning ‘non issues’ are equally useless and divisive. [1:14/7:51] we had sunni scholars who opposed mawlid, like imam fakihani ‘scholars’; who are they? citing fakihani’s fatwa is an appeal to an irrelevant authority, presenting the idiosyncratic view of a lone, anti-mawlid scholar concerning the mawlid. we are under no obligation to accept fakihani’s fatwa, neither are we bound to acknowledge that his opinion is a valid opinion. his fatwa was based upon personal incredulity, and we say he was mistaken. and when asked, ‘who are you to say fakihani was mistaken?’ we admit we are nobodies, but imam suyuti’s refutation of fakihani is too marvellous to ignore: http://www.ridawipress.org/wp-content/uploads/sublime-aspiration.pdf here's the salafis' ultimate compendium of anti-mawlid literature: https://archive.org/download/remnremn/remn.pdf there is not a single sunni's work against the mawlid included other than fakihani's. -- in fact, rather than finding common ground, why not render their masters' words upon them and make them reevaluate their principles: [2:00/7:51] rubric [?] of belief and jurisprudence then lets abstain from every gathering held in masajid other than the prayers, for they would all fall under the ‘rubric’ of fiqhi non issues. [2:30/7:51] hold gatherings reciting madH of the Messenger of Allah (SallaAllahu alaihi wa sallam) and seek blessings through his blessed relics this is merely redefining the parameters of conventional definitions of the mawlid. why not just say, ‘leave your stubborn asses of leaders, and come celebrate the mawlid.’ the shaykh himself concedes that they refuse to do what he is asking of them. see, it’s not just about lights. [3:15/7:51] innovating poets & poetry firstly, who are these innovators who wrote poetry? and is their poetry in circulation amongst the masses, such that ‘our salafi brothers’ must remain on guard against them. secondly, the shaykh’s applied some more of that equivocation he opened with; what is deplorable to them is not deplorable to us. what we deem to be madH, they deem to be shirk. so is this a license for them to avoid the Burdah Sharif like the plague? for their hatred of the Burdah Sharif entails an express rejection of matters that are from the necessities of Faith and the necessities of the Ahl al-Sunnah. [4:50/7:51] the vast majority of sunnis commit innovations in Mawlid gatherings that’s a bit of a hasty generalisation. so most muslims who celebrate the blessed mawlid are in fact participating in gatherings of innovation? proof? and please, a better sample than pir x or pir y’s annual mehfil. in fact, this stinks of najdi logic; arguing from consequences: 1. Sunnis say Mawlid is permissible and an expression of love for the Messenger of Allah (SallaAllahu alaihi wa sallam) 2. Some pirs use these gatherings to commit Haram 3. Haram acts are never good or permissible 4. Therefore, the Mawlid must be impermissible [6:00/7:51] if we stuck to the Sunnah we wouldn’t have any fraction amongst Muslims which element of Mawlid gatherings, that the likes of Imam Suyuti, Imam Nawawi, Imam Abu Shamah, Imam Asqalani, Imam Haytami participated in, stray from the practices you mentioned? and why must the burden of unity always be upon the celebrators of the Mawlid; why don’t the salafis put their pens and tongues to rest, and acknowledge that it is merely a ‘non issue’? [6:30/7:51] ‘Mawlid’, lets not use the term No, lets. if it is good enough for Imam Suyuti, it is good enough for me. ---------- you get the idea; I’m too tired to write reams on every point. i'm convinced this was just a lapse on the part of the shaykh, and an ill advised decision to make a youtube video. we ask Allah to keep him firm on the way of the Ahl al -Sunnah. ---------- * Equivocation: A logical fallacy which uses the same term to mean different things within the space of a single discourse; it needn't be intentional or with ill intent.