Some thoughts on Mawlid

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Nawazuddin, Feb 10, 2015.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    Yes, somehow I suspected something fishy because the question was a direct one about mawlid but the reply was a bit vague. Anyway, Shaykh when you have time, please do write here about what exactly he said about Mawlid Sharif in Barahin e qatia and is there room for us to convince unsuspecting layman deobandis about the permissibility of Mawlid.
  2. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    shah ji, you should ask your dear friend faraz rabbani - who gave input to kelliar, who wrote such a pathetic apology for devbandis in his IKT. i am trying to find a video in which faraz released after his shaykh released IKT, in which faraz said that alahazrat made a mistake.

    apparently faraz and his mate hamza karamali helped translate the passages for keller.

    i don't know about this world, but in sha'Allah, i will grab keller on judgement day and ask him these questions; and on that day, he cannot flee, nor can he give lame excuses. and we will see on that day, who is kazzab al-ashirr.

    Rumi786, Ghulam Ali and CHISHTI like this.
  3. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    because devbandis have an aqidah for a season, and a book for an occasion.

    apparently, khalil ahmad retracted from 'erroneous' aqayid in muhannad - according to senior devbandi munazirs. besides, his barahin e qaTiah was written to refute mawlid and fatiHah, and precedes muhannad. so this nifaq in muhannad to gain some signatures of sunni ulama, to show unsuspecting muslims and their foolish followers - to make a false claim that it is an answer to husam.
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2015
    Ghulam Ali and CHISHTI like this.
  4. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    Though I am not an expert on deobandism, I wonder what they say about their elders fatwa on the permissibility of Mawlid Sharif. The scholars of Mecca and Medina questioned the scholars of deoband on 26 issues relating to creed and disputed matters, khalil ahmed saharnpuri (d. 1346) in 1325 gave a written reply in the form of a book called al-muhannad ala al-mufannad. 24 prominent deobandi scholars approved these answers, including, mahmud al-hasan deobandi (d.1330), the grand mufti of dar al-ulum deoband, mufti aziz al-rahman (d. 1347), Ashraf ali thanvi (d. 1362) and Aashiq ilahi mirathi, amongst others. These 24 scholars endorsed the following text, stating that it was in accordance to their creed and creed of their predecessors. In this book, question 21 is about Mawlid. They were asked:

    أ تقولون إن ذكر ولادته صلى الله عليه و سلم مستقبح شرعا من البدعات السيئة المحرمة أم غير ذلك ؟
    Do you maintain that relating the Prophet’s (saw) birth is a blameworthy innovation and prohibited according to the Shariah or not?


    حاشا أن يقول أحد من المسلمين فضلا أن نقول نحن : إن ذكر ولادته الشريفة عليه الصلاة والسلام ، بل و ذكر غبار نعاله و بول حماره صلى الله عليه و سلم مستقبح من البدعات السيئة المحرمة ، فالأحوال التي لها أدنى تعلق برسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ذكرُها من أحب المندوبات و أعلى المستحبات عندنا ، سواء كان ذكر ولادته الشريفة أو ذكر بوله و برازه و قيامه و قعوده و نومه و ينهته ،
    كما هو مصرح في رسالتنا المسماة ب‘البراهين القاطعة’ في مواضع شتى منها

    Far be it that any muslim should say, let alone ourselves, that relating the Prophet’s blessed birth, rather mentioning the dust of his blessed sandals or urine of his donkey, is a reprehensible innovation. The recollection of anything which has the slightest connection with the Prophet (saw) is according to us amongst the most beloved deeds and the highest commendable action, regardless of whether it be the remembrance of His birth or the mention of his blessed excretion, his standing and sitting or his state of sleep and wakefulness-as is clearly stated in several passages in our treatise entitled al-Barāhīn al-qāṭi`a. (al-muhannad, pages 60-61)

    now, I wonder why deobandis are still adamant that it should not to be celebrated???
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2015
  5. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    Janabe Shaykh! mein ne kabhi inkaar nahin kiya, haan sukut kiya tha :)
  6. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    at last, you have acknowledged it.
  7. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    :) well dear brother, I have been banned here atleast three times but I come back with a different name. I suggest you do the same.
  8. kattarsunni

    kattarsunni Veteran

    Shah Ji, you are allowed to post on here yet we are banned from yanabi website. So much for open minded dialogue.
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  9. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    3. Bid`ah

    There is a huge body of work in our literature about innovation and its division. So I would just cite a single significant opinion from the earliest of our unanimous Imam, namely, al-Shafi` (d. 204). He divides innovation into two types as stated by al-Dhahabi, the student of ibn taymiyya, and Imam al-bayhaqi, Imam Abu Nuaym, al-Suyuti, etc.:

    المحدثات من الأمور ضربان: ما أحدث يخالف كتاباً أو سنة أو أثراً أو إجماعاً، فهذه بدعة ضلالة.وما أحدث من الخير لا خلاف لواحد من هذا، فهذه محدثة غير مذمومة.قد قال عمر في قيام رمضان: "نعمت البدعة هذه

    Newly begun matters are of two types: the first is that which contravenes the Qur’an and Sunnah, the reports of companions or the consensus of the community; this is the misguided innovation (bid`ah dalala). The other is the newly begun matter which is based on good and does not contravene any of these mentioned sources; this is the non-blameworthy innovation (bid`ah ghayr madhmuma). Umar said that about the night vigil in Ramadan, i.e., tarāwīḥ prayers, what an excellent innovation this is.”

    Furthermore, the following hadith will clarify the true meaning of bid`ah. Ummul momineen Ayesha(r) narrates in Sahih Muslim: من احدث في امرنا هذا ما ليس منه فهو رد

    If someone invents in our Deen something which does not belong to it, it is rejected.

    The word invents (ahdatha) ‘which does not belong to it’ (ma laysa minhu) are worthy of attention. In general practice the word ‘invents’ ahdatha means introducing new practice into religion whilst the words which does not belong to it ma laysa minhu further clarify that this refers to innovating something that is not part of Islam. The question arises that if the word ahdatha implies establishing a new matter then why what was the need for saying ma laysa minhu which has no root in it? This is because if that thing was from religion, i.e., it constituted part of it, then cannot be called a new thing (muhdatha), as a new thing is called such when it has no existence in the religion in the first place. In other words, the conclusion it is rejected cannot be applied only on ‘which does not belong to it’ nor on the word ‘invents’ rather it has to be applied in the situation when both come together. Only then the action is rejected. Because it is a new action and has no basis in religion,devoid of any evidence in shariah.

    In light of this discussion mawlid contains no such feature that opposes the Quran and Sunna. On the other hand it consists of many virtuous and commendable deeds. The formative constituents of mawlid are holding gatherings and congregations, relating the Prophet’s biography and excellences, reciting odes and poems in praise, sending salutations and invoking peace and blessing!

    Some such innovations are constructing mosques, second adhan before Friday prayer, compilation of the Quran, tarawih prayer, holding seerah conferences, rallies, etc.

    And finally we see that all muslim terrorists consider mawlid a reprehensible activity because of their literalist methodology that has led to the consequences of indiscriminate killings, etc., It is their interpretive framework that prohibits mawlid and by application of same method also justifies terrorism and killing of the innocents. It is the same principle of interpretation about Mawlid prohibition that makes other prohibitions! Mawlid is also a blessing for Muslims that it prevents them from terrorism.

    syed hasnain bukhari
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2015
  10. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    2. Textual Evidence

    In hadith literature we find that Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is religiously significant event and as you know that Rasul Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم himself fasted on Mondays to show gratitude to Allah(swt). To express gratitude is a theme in the Quran and Sunnah and there are many ways in which one can express her happiness and joy. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم expressed it through fasting, He also sacrificed animals to express gratitude for His Birth. Al-Bayhaqī in his sunan, al-Nawawi in his Asma wa l-lughāt, al-asqalanī in his fath al-Bārī state a sahih hadith:

    انّ النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم عقّ عن نفسه بعد ما بعث نبياً

    The Prophet performed aqīqa for himself after he was raised as a Prophet.

    And we know as reported by Imam Ibn hibban, Ibn askair, Imam Ibn abd al-barr, etc., that when the prophet was born Abd al-Muttalib did aqiqa of a ram for the Prophet.

    It is common knowledge that aqiqa or sacrifice of an animal for the child is done on the 7th day and it is only done once in a lifetime as reported in Jami al-tirmadi, etc., so one may ask: why would the prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم delay His aqīqa for 40 years? Which aqīqa did the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم perform? As the aqīqa is not repeated twice. The answer is that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم sacrificed an animal as an expression of his gratitude for His birth and he arranged a feast for this happiness.

    Some people may say that this was only an aqīqa which was performed by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. If we were to ask what is an aqīqa? It is an expression of happiness and show of gratitude for the birth. Imam al-Suyutī (d. 911) in his book ḥusn al-maqaṣid, p64-65, at this juncture entertains an objection that what if people say that since His صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم aqīqa was done in the times of jahilīyya therefore He repeated it even though His grandfather had already done it on the 7th day of His birth. Imam al-Suyutī responds that this objection has no valid basis because if we accept it then we would have to concede that the Prophet’s marriage to Khadija (s) would also have to be repeated-the mahr of which was paid by Abu Talib. The reason this objection fails is because any permissible action which took place in the days of ignorance is accepted by Shariah. In Quran 4:22 it says that ‘but that which has passed (before this command is forgiven)’. Any wrong action that took place during the days of ignorance is forgiven. There is no need to make repentance. Likewise, all praiseworthy actions such as marriage, aqīqa, and oaths, for example, remain intact and are not nullified. This is why there is no need to repeat aqīqa because there is no legal requirement in shariah. So it can be concluded from this discussion that after declaring His prophethood, the noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم sacrificed an animal as an expression of happiness and gratitude for His Birth.

    Furthermore, it is agreed upon by all that a disbeliever is not benefitted in hereafter for his good deeds. The privilege of recompense only belongs to the believers. However, in Sahih Bukhari it says that Abu Lahab at the Birth of the Noble Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم freed a female slave after she gave him the good news of the Birth of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلمas an expression of happiness on the birth by pointing his finger to free her. It is in Sahih Bukhari and also the complete hadith is mentioned by Imam al-Suhaylī (d. 581) in his al-Rawd al-Anaf (3/99) and mentioned in the commentary of the sahih bukhari by imam al-Asqalani in his fath al-bari:

    أن العباس قال: مكثت حولاً بعد موت أبي لهب لا أراه في نوم، ثم رأيته في شر حال، فقال: ما لقيت بعدكم راحة إلا أن العذاب يخفف عني كل يوم اثنين، وذلك أن رسول الله – صلى الله عليه وسلم- ولد يوم الاثنين، فبشرت أبا لهب بمولده ثويبة مولاته، فقالت له: أشعرت أن آمنة ولدت غلاماً لأخيك عبد الله فقال: اذهبي، فأنت حرة، فنفعه ذلك، وهو في النار

    Al-Abbas the Uncle of the Prophet saw abu lahab in a dream after his death and asked him what happened to you? He replied that I am under severe punishment, day and night, but on Mondays my punishment is slightly alleviated as I receive some water from my fingers which bring me some ease and the reason for this is that I pointed with these two fingers to free Thuwayba as a gesture of expressing happiness at the birth of my brother’s son.

    This report has been accepted by the notable Hadith Masters including Imam Bukhari as he reports it in his sahih and many other prominent authorities have accepted it though it is mursal. A mursal report is that when a link at the top of the chain is missing. However, In the usul al-hadith book called nuzahat al-nazr by al-Asqalani, he states on page 37 that a mursal is accepted according to one report from imam ahmed and according to malikis and Hanafi jurists and according to Imam al-Shafi if it can be supported from a different chain then regardless of whether they are connected or mursal. Also the list of muhadithin who accepted it goes back to the classical times such as al-Hafiz shams al-Din al-Jazari, etc.,

    Now, the obvious objection is that why a definite disbeliever’s punishment lightened when the Quran and Sunnah state otherwise? The great Sunni Imams have replied to this objection. Imam al-Bayhaqi says that هذا ايضا لان الاحسان كان مرجعه الى صاحب النبوة فلم يضع

    “And also that this act of benevolence is in reference to the Prophet and this why it is not wasted” (shu`ab al-imān, 1:281)

    The point is that abu lahab’s punishment on Mondays in not alleviated because of his freeing Thuwayba but rather he expressed happiness on the Holy Prophet’s birth.

    The great Imam al-Baghawi (d. 561) in his sharh al-sunnah, 9: 76 says that: هذا خاص به اكراماً له

    “This exclusive to the Prophet and is done out of his honour”

    Also Imam al-Qurtubī (d. 671) says that: هذا التخفيف خاص بهذا و بمن ورد النص فيه

    “ the lightening of the punishment is exclusive to this and whoever the texts have mentioned”

    The commentator of Bukhari the Imam al-Ayni says in umdatul qari, 20: 95: “ it is possible that whatever is performed in connection to the Prophet (saw) is exclusive in that respect”

    There are many more but this much is sufficient for approval of the hadith and its interpretation. From these explanations it is clear that the staunchest disbeliever like abu lahab on account of the unintentional happiness he expressed at the Prophet’s birth,is rewarded in the next life and that this among the excellences of the Prophet’s honour and specific to Him.

    Some people object that this incident took place in a dream and that Abbas had not yet accepted Islam when he saw this dream. The reply is that our basis is the statement of hazrat al-abbas(r) and when he related this dream he was a muslim and a companion of the Prophet (saww) therefore it can be relied upon.

    This narration is also reported by the Teacher of Imam al-Bukhari, Imam Abd al-Razaq al-Sanani (d. 211) and also by Imam al-Marwazi (d. 294), Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458), Ibn Sa’ad (d. 230) and a host of other sunni imams and they have all relied upon it.

    This much is sufficient to state that the significance of Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم has basis in Shariah and if we look at sahaba after the passing away of Rasul Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم we see that it was extremely painful for the sahaba and our books of hadith are full of their grief about it and human nature does not allow openly expressing joy during the times of sadness but as time passed joy slowly began to prevail over grief, etc.

    syed hasnain bukhari
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2015
  11. Nawazuddin

    Nawazuddin Veteran

    1. Historiographical Argument

    Historically when we study the collective celebration of Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلمfrom contemporaneous sources, chronicles and travelogues, we see that for about 300 years Muslims in the central Islamic lands such as Mecca, Medina, Egypt, the Levant, Yemen, the Maghreb and in the Muslim lands from east to west have been expressing happiness and commemorating collectively the Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم yet the first person in the history of Islam to consider it as a reprehensible act was Shaykh al-Fākahānī (d. 734 AH) and we are reminded of this by our Wahabī brothers in their treatises on the issue. However, for their information, the same Shaykh also says that it is permissible to seek help from the dead saints! The other person who arguably also considered the Mawlid as a reprehensible bidah is Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728). I do not generally cite Ibn taymiyya as he was a literalist and had animosity towards Imam Ali(a). For example, in his famous book minhāj al-sunna, volume 8 and page number 230:

    وعلي يقاتل ليطاع ويتصرف في النفوس والأموال فكيف يجعل هذا قتالا على الدين

    Ali fought for his nafs and money, how can that be considered fighting for the Dīn?

    However, the point is that there were hundreds of prominent Sunni Imams who issued their fatwas in favour of the Mawlid celebration albeit one does not commit ḥarām in doing so. These `Ulamā were experts in Islamic sciences hence Qur’ān and Sunnah. Furthermore, Those who vehemently oppose the commemoration of Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلمalso glorify ibn taymiyya and his students but what we find here is that three of Ibn Taymiyya’s prominent students also deemed it permissible to celebrate Mawlid. For example, Imam Ibn Ḥajr al-Asqalānī (d. 852 AH) the famous author of Fath al-Bārī commentary on Saḥīḥ al-Bukharī states in his book al-durar al-kāmina about Ibn Kathir (d. 774) : in the last days of his life, he wrote a book entitledMawlid Rasul Allahwhich was spread far and wide. That book mentioned the permissibility and recommendability of celebrating the Mawlid.

    This above mentioned book has been edited and published by Dr. Ṣalaḥ al-Dīn al-Munjid. Also Ibn Taymiyya’s other student, Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751) in his book Madārij al-Sālikīn on page 498:

    والاستماع إلى صوت حسن في احتفالات المولد النبوي أو أية مناسبة دينية أخرى في تاريخنا لهو مما يدخل الطمأنينة إلى القلوب ويعطي السامع نوراً من النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - إلى قلبه ويسقيه مزيداً من العين المحمدية

    “Listening to a good voice celebrating the birthday of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم or celebrating any of the holy days in our history gives peace to the heart, and gives the listener light from the Prophet (saw) to his heart, and he will drink more from the Muhammadan spring (`ayn al-Muhammadiyya)”

    So here you have from the prominent scholars whom our wahābī brothers revere also sanctioning the Mawlid Sharīf. This also lends to the interpretation of the oft quoted passage of ibn taymiyya in which he seems to be saying that Mawlid can be a rewardable act as these two students along with al-Dhahabī stating that Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم is permitted in sharīah. However, the point of the above discussion is the following. We have from primary sources such as chronicles, travelogues and history books from and during the 300 years prior to the FIRST ever fatwa in Islamic scholarship penned by al-Fakahānī (d. 734) advocating a prohibition; in which almost the entire Ummah from East to West as mentioned above were celebrating the Mawlid collectively. Now, the Big Question is this: It is stated in the unanimously agreed sahih hadith by all Sunni Muslims of all stripes that Rasūl Allah صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said: لا تجتمع أمتي على ضلالة

    “My Ummah will not agree upon an error.” No need for a reference for this one as it is agreed by all sunnis. Furthermore, another hadith authenticated by Ibn Kathir, etc. Which states:

    ما رآه المسلمون حسناً فهو عند الله حسن وما رآه المسلمون قبيحاً فهو عند الله قبيح

    Whatever all the muslims consider as good, it is also good according to God amd whatever the Mulsims consider as repulsive is also repulsive according to God.

    Therefore, may I ask: It has been established that for 300 years the entire Ummah, both, Sunni and Shiah collectively celebrated the Mawlid al-Nabī صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم but Not a single Imam or scholar issued a fatwa about its prohibition whereas there were great Imams living in the regions and are regarded as an authority in the knowledge of Qur’an and Sunnah by all. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said my ummah will not agree on an error and we do not have a SINGLE dissenting voice saying that Mawlid is prohibited for 300 years? The practice was prevalent and surely they were closer to the times of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم than those who came later. In Fact we have the opposite. There were numerous Imams that wrote on the legality of the Mawlid. It was the duty of Ulama of Haq to write against it if it contravened the boundaries of shariah yet we have a total silence by the most learned Imams about its prohibition. This is an argument from historiography and establishes a tacit agreement by all for 300 years and proves that indeed the Ummah did not agree upon an error.

    syed hasnain bukhari
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2015

Share This Page