part 1
The night of the 15th of the Islamic month of Sha`bn is known as “Shabb-e-Bar’at” (Shabb = night in Persian) or “Laylatul-Bar’at” (Layl = night in Arabic) and is mentioned with the words “Laylat min Nisfush-Sha`bn” in Hadths. It is known as “bar’at [Arabic: freedom]” because by worshiping during this night one can free themselves from the torments of Hell and gain forgiveness from Allah from the burden of their sins.
Many Hadths about the virtues of this night have been related on the authority of many Sahba (companions of the Prophet), such as `Abdullh ibn `Amr ibn al-`s, Mu`dh ibn Jabal, Ab Hurayra, Ab Tha`laba, `Awf ibn Mlik, Ab Bakr as-Siddq, Ab Ms al-Ash`ar, Ummul-Mu’minn `’isha Siddqa, `Al ibn Ab Tlib and `Uthmn ibn Abil-`s (radiyallhu `anhum ajma`n).
It is known from the sayings and practices of the righteous Salaf and authorities of the past that it was from their habit to worship on this night. Some in this era are quick to label worshiping, making dhikr, listening to lectures and making gatherings on this night, to be an innovation of misguidance. However one cannot say this, as there are Hadths regarding the special merits available during the blessed night.
It is related on the authority of `Abdullh ibn `Amr (radiyallhu `anhu) that the Messenger of Allah (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam) stated:
“Allah observes His creatures on the middle night of Sha`bn. He would forgive the sins of His servants excepts for two people, the quarrelsome and the murderer.”
(Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad, 2:176)
Imam Abu Bakr Al-Tartushi al-Maaliki-may Allaah have mercy upon him-said in his book “Al-Hawadeth wal-Bida’” [Events and Heresies]: -Ibn Waddah, based on Zaid ibn Aslam, said : “We have never come up with anyone of our sheikhs or jurisprudents who made a special meritorious consideration to the mid-Sha’ban Night, or even took into account the saying of Makhoul"
as for the reports of this night
Ibn Abi Mulaikah was told that ziad Al-Numairi had said the recompense for the mid-Sha’ban Night is as much as that of the Night of Power (Qadr), but Ibn Mulaikah commented: should I have heard him and had a stick in my hand I would have beaten him. Ziad was a storyteller.
Imaam ash-Shawkaani says the following in several of his works
In “
Al-Fawa’id Al-Majmou’ah” (Collected Benefits) he says
"a tradition: O Ali! Whoever performs a hundred-raka’at prayer in the mid-Sha’ban Night, and reads in each rak’ah the opening Chapter of the Quran and the Chapter of Al-Ikhlas ten times, Allaah shall provide for all his needs…etc". It is a spurious tradition, and such is its declared version with the credit its doer gets, that no sensible man can doubt its spuriousness, especially that its informants are unknown. It has been transmitted in a second and third version the purport whereof is entirely fictitious, let alone the unknown nature of its transmitters.
In “
Al-Mukhtasar” (The Synopsis):
"The tradition on the mid-Sha’ban prayers is untrue. According to Ibn Hibban out of the speech of ‘Ali, “Let yourself keep vigil in the mid-Sha’ban Night, and let yourself keep fasting on its daytime”. This is a problematic (shadh) saying:
He also said in his work “Al-La’ali” (The pearls):
"A hundred rak’at in the mid-Sha’ban Night, with reading Ikhlas Chapter ten times a rak’ah, and so forth. This tradition, narrated by Al-Dailamy and others, is spurious. Furthermore, most of its transmitters in the three versions are anonymous as well as feeble. He also said: the tradition of performing twelve rak’at with reading Ikhlas Chapter thirty times a rak’ah is spurious as also the tradition of performing fourteen rak’at. Such was the so-called tradition that it beguiled a group of jurisprudence as the author of ”Al-‘Ihya’” (Revival of Religious Sciences-by al-Ghazaali) and others, as well as so many exegetists. The prayers of the Night, that is the mid-Sha’ban Night have been reported in various respects, all of which are untrue and fictitious.
Haafidh al-Iraaqi says about this topic
"the tradition on the mid-Sha’ban prayers is trumped up against the Messenger of Allah (salallahu alaihi wa sallam), quite as it is a lie fabricated against him.
Shaykhul-Islam abu Zakariyyah an-Nawawee ash-Shaafi'ee destroys the heresies of this idea in his fatwa.
here are two fatwas
he was asked
Question: What is said by the leading scholars, the imaams of the religion (radiallaahu anhum) regarding Salat al-Ragha'ib and the Salat Nisf al-Sha'ban which are commonly practised by the people now. Did the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) pray them or anyone from the Companions (radiallaahu anhum ajma'een), or did any of the well-known for Imaams pray them, I mean, the Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam al-Shafi'i, and Malik and Ahmad bin Hanbal, or did they make any indication towards praying either of these (prayers). And is anything related about them from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? And are they in agreement with the intent (muraad) of the Shariah or not? And is it better to perform them or abandon them. And is kindling fire on these two nights above and beyond what is customary unlawful or disliked or permitted? Please answer us, rewarded in your endeavour.
Answer:
All praise is due to Allaah. These two prayers were not prayed by the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and nor anyone from the Companions (radiallaahu anhum), and nor any of the aforementioned four Imaams (rahimahullaah), and nor did any of them hint at it, and no one who is worthy of being followed has practiced it, and nothing is authentically related from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) at all, and nor from anyone who is worthy of being followed. Rather, it was introduced in the later times, and praying them both is from the rejection innovations, and the futile newly-invented matters. And it is authentically related from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) that he said: "Beware of the newly-invented matters, for every innovation is misguidance", and in the two Sahihs from Aa'isah (radiallaahu anhaa) who said: The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, "Whoever introduced into this affair of ours that which is not from it will have it rejected", and in Sahih Muslim that the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, "Whoever does an action which is not upon our affair will have it rejected."
And it is desirable for everyone to prohibit this prayer, warn from and and make [the people] flee from it, to render its performance as repugnant, reprehensible, and to spread its prohibition everywhere (amongst the people). For it is authentically related from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) that he said, "Whoever amongst you sees an evil, let him change it with his hand, and if he is not able, then with his tongue, and if he is not able then with his heart."
And it is upon the Scholars to warn from it, and to turn away from it more so than it is upon others because they are taken as a model to be followed. And no one should be deceived by the fact that it is common, being practised by the common-folk, and nor by their doubts, for indeed, following (in guidance) is only done through the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), not through what he himself has prohibited and warned against.
As for lighting fire and burning a lot of oil over it in the way that is done, then it is from the evils and repugnant prohibitions. And it is authentically related that the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) prohibited from wastage of wealth, and its meaning is to spend it upon other than the angle from which it is permitted to spend, and this action is from that, [Allaah said], "Let those beware who oppose his (the Messenger's) command that a tribulation should afflict them or a painful torment should afflict them" (24:63). May Allaah protect us from the innovated matters and protect us from falling into the oppositions, and Allaah knows best."
Allahu Akbar
Again, another fatwa
The Shaykh of Islam al-Nawawi was asked about the well-known Salat al-Ragha'ib performed on the first Friday night of Rajab, whether it is bid'ah or sunnah?
The Answer:
It is a repugnant, rejected innovation, with the most severe rejection, it comprises many evils, hence it is specifically designated to abandon it and turn away from it and to show rejection againt the one who does it. And it is upon the ruler (one in authority) - may Allaah grant him success - to prevent the people from doing it, for indeed he is a shepherd and every shepherd is responsible for his flock. The scholars have written books in rejection and rebuke of it and declaring those who perform it as fools. One should be not deceived by the abundance of those who perform it in many of the cities, and nor that it is mentioned in [the books] Qut al-Qulub, or Ihya Ulum al-Din and their likes, for it is a futile innovation. And it is authentically related from the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) that he said, "Whoever introduced into this affair of ours that which is not from it will have it rejected." And in the Sahih (of Muslim) that he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, "Whoever introduced into this affair of ours that which is not from it will have it rejected," and in Sahih Muslim and others that he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, "Every innovation is misguidance." And Allaah the Exalted has ordered us to return to His Book whenever there is a dispute, so He, the Exalted said, "And if you dispute regarding any matter then return it back to Allaah and His Messenger" (4:59), and He did not ordder the following of the ignoramuses, and nor being decieved by the errors of those who have erred, and Allaah knows best."
Allahu-Akbar
an-Nawawee clearly delineated that these were reprehensible innovations and he also attributes the invention of these innovations to Imaam al-Ghazaali himself or other authorities who have erred in their judgment in importing these heretical innovations as "sunnah".
The same and the likes of these stances are as well the views of Shaykhul-Islam ibnul-Qudamah, Shaykhul-Islam ibnul-Taymiyyah, Haafidh al-Khataabi, Haafidh Abu Bakr al-Khateeb, etc.
There are so many mistakes in this, I don't know where to start.
I could say the same for you brother.
To start with, you have contradicted yourself by saying that Milad is not allowed because the Holy Prophet (s) did not do it. You forget that he (s) did not:
- perform Tarawih prayers more than 3 days in a row which is why `Umar called it "ni`mal-bid`a - very good bid`a". Now do you understand the meaning of the word bid`a better than `Umar?
No, rather we understand the meaning of bida in the view of Umar as Umar viewed it. For Umar was speaking about Bid'a that has no relation to the shar. That is WHY Umar said it is a good bida, because it has nothing to do with the shar.
You need to learn the difference between Bid'a Haqiqiyyah and Bida Idaafiyyah.
- The Qur'an was NEVER compiled into a 1 volume book by the Prophet (s) but it was a bid`a that was accepted.
bida idaafiyyah and has nothing to do with the shar
- The Prophet (s) NEVER put vowels (dots) on any Qur'anic letter. It was done later and hence was a bid`a hasana.
bida idaafiyyah and has nothing to do with the shar of some newly conjured guidance for mankind.
Our Prophet (s) taught us that good bida` are accepted and bad ones rejected and this is the understanding of Islam given by all of the classical scholars of Islam before the Saudi American ones.
al-muhdathaat fi deen are innovated matters and every innovation in deen is misguidance, and this was the understanding of the Imaams of Sunnah from time immemorial. All the ulema ruled bida to be haraam by default and it shifts from being haraam based on its linguistic import based on four masaail
1. is itself meritous
2. falls within masaalih al-mursalah
3. sought as a means to an end and not the end in and of itself.
4. has PRECEDENT in the shariah.
when a bida entails one or more of the above four ends, it does not entail a muhdath in the religion.
Wrong again! Tarwh existed but Tarwh in congregation for more than 3 days did NOT exist and this is why `Umar (radiyallhu `anhu) called it a bid`a! Now is our understanding of bid`a better than `Umars? Are you daring to accuse `Umar of lying?! This is the entire Hadth:
your failing to comprehend the hadeeth of the Messenger of Allah.
al-Bukharee records
the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) led his companions in prayer (Taraweeh) for several nights, then on the third or fourth night he did not come out to them. When morning came he said: “
Nothing prevented me from coming out to you except the fact that I feared that it would be made obligatory for you.”
[Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1129]
Muslim has the wording
"But I feared that night prayers would be made obligatory for you and you would not be able to do them.” [#761]
So what does these statements mean. It means that establishing the taraweh prayers for THE ENTIRE MONTH OF RAMADHAAN was established as the intent of the Prophet BUT he was cut off from his intent by the fact that he feared that by his presence and performing them, Allah would make it obligatory on the people. Thus the Prophet was only detereded from implementing what he already intended to do (of performing taraweh for the rest of the month) on the basis of his reasoning that he gave above.
Thus while performing taraweh prayers was not performed through execution until Umar executed it, Umar also knew that it was already the prerogative of the Prophet salallahu alaihi wa sallam to execute it.
This is fundamentally why it is baseless to validate religious muhdathaat fi deen using this riwaayah to validate heresies in the religion.
- This is the narration in question and displays that it is the teaching of the Holy Prophet (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam) and the methodology employed by his blessed companions to accept “good innovations” and reject “bad” ones.
ﻥﺒ ﺮﻣﻋ ﻊﻤ ﺕﺠﺭﺨ :ﻞﺎﻘ ﻪﻧﺃ ﻱﺭﺎﻗﻠﺍﺪﺒﻋ ﻥﺒ ﻥﻣﺤﺮﻠﺍﺪﺒﻋ ﻦﻋ
ﺍﺬﺈﻔ ،ﺪﺠﺴﻤﻟﺍ ﻰﻟﺇ ﻥﺎﻀﻤﺭ ﻲﻓ ﺔﻠﻴﻠ ﻪﻨﻋ ﷲ ﻲﺿﺭ ﺐﺎﻂﺧﻠﺍ
ﻞﺠﺭﻠﺍ ﻲﻠﺻﻳ ﻭ ،ﻪﺳﻓﻧﻠ ﻝﺠﺭﻟﺍ ﻲﻠﺼﻴ ﻥﻭﻗﺮﻔﺘﻣ ﻉﺍﺯﻭﺃ ﺲﺎﻧﻟﺍ
ﻯﺮﺃ ﻲﻧﺇ :ﻪﻨﻋ ﷲ ﻲﺿﺭ ﺭﻤﻋ ﻝﺎﻗﻔ ،ﻃﻫﺭﻟﺍ ﻪﺘ ﻼﺻﺒ ﻲﻠﺼﻴﻔ
ﻡﺯﻋ ﻢﺛ ،ﻝﺜﻤﺃ ﻥﺎﻛﻠ ﺪﺣﺍﻭ ﺀﻯﺮﺎﻘ ﻰﻟﻋ ﺀﻻﺆﻫ ﺕﻌﻣﺟﻭﻟ
ﻮ ﻯﺮﺨﺃ ﺔﻠﻴﻠ ﻪﻌﻣ ﺕﺠﺭﺨ ﻡﺜ ،ﺐﻌﻜ ﻦﺒ ﻲﺒﺃ ﻰﻠﻋ ﻡﻬﻌﻤﺠﻔ
ﻢﻌﻧ :ﻪﻨﻋ ﷲ ﻲﺿﺭ ﺭﻤﻋ ﻞﺎﻗ ،ﻡﻬﺋﺮﺎﻗ ﺓﻼﺼﺒ ﻥﻭﻠﺻﻳ ﺲﺎﻧﻠﺍ
ﺪﻴﺭﻳ ،ﻦﻭﻤﻭﻘﻴ ﻲﺗﻟﺍ ﻥﻣ ﻞﺿﻔﺃ ﺎﻬﻧﻋ ﻦﻮﻣﺎﻨﻴ ﻲﺘﻟﺍﻮ ،ﻩﺫﻫ ﺔﻋﺪﺑﻠﺍ
.ﻪﻠﻭﺃ ﻥﻭﻣﻮﻗﻴ ﺲﺎﻨﻠﺍ ﻥﺎﻛ ﻮ ،ﻞﻳﻟﻠﺍ ﺭﺧﺁ
“`Abdur-Rahmn ibn `Abdul-Qr narrates that he went into the mosque with `Umar ibn al-Khattb in the month of Ramadn. There he saw the people praying individually by themselves or in small groups. `Umar (radiyallhu `anhu) said: 'By Allah! It would be better for you to gather behind a single reciter (qr, meaning imm).' He then gathered them behind Ubayy ibn Ka`b. Then on another night, `Umar (radiyallhu `anhu) saw that the people had gathered themselves behind one imm. `Umar said: 'What a good innovation this is (ni` matil-bid`atu hdhih [and a slightly different wording but with the same meaning from al-Bukhr's Sahh: ni`mal-bid`atu hdhih]). And the time people go to sleep in, i.e. tahajjud time, is better than the one being performed (i.e. the tarwh)' and the people read (the tarwh) at the early part (of the night).”
(Bukhr, as-Sahh, Kitb Saltut-Tarwh, #1906 Mlik, Muwatta, 1:114, #250 Bayhaq, as-Sunanul-Kubr, 2:394, #4379 Bayhaq, Shu`abul-mn, 3:177, #3269 Zayla`, Nasbur-Rya, 2:152, #118 Ibn Qudma, al-Mughn, 1:455)
This is essentially absurd because the this is virtually the same hadeeth that gives reference to the context of what happened. taraweh had already been established in congregation by the Prophet sallalahu alaihi wa sallam and MORE IMPORTANTLY, the Prophet as well intended to complete the entire month in congregational taraweh had it not been for his fear. Thus Umar commanding the people to do what the prophet already established for the people and INTENDED to establish for the people has nothing to do with the baseless theory you are tying to advocate with regards to newly invented concepts and practices in the fulfillment of religious worship.
There is ijm` on the acceptance of Mawlid for 1000 years.
Imaam Ahmad said the one who claims ijmaa is enough for us to know he is a liar.
It is best that you remain quite and speak a word that is undoubtedly true.
Ab Shmah said: the first person to do that in Mosul was Shaykh 'Umar ibn Muhammad al-Mal, one of the well-known righteous people. Then the ruler of Irbil and others followed his example.
Hfidh Ibn Kathr said in al-Bidyah wa'l-Nihyah (13/137), in his biography of Ab Sa'd Kawkabri: "He used to observe the Mawlid in Rab' al-Awwal and hold a huge celebration on that occasion … some of those who were present at the feast of al-Muzaffar on some occasions of the Mawlid said that he used to offer in the feast five thousand grilled heads of sheep, ten thousand chickens and one hundred thousand large dishes, and thirty trays of sweets … he would let the Sfs sing from Dhuhr until Fajr, and he himself would dance with them."
Ibn Khalikn said in Wafiyt al-A'yn (3/274): "When it is the first of Safar they decorate those domes with various kinds of fancy adornments, and in every dome there sits a group of singers and a group of puppeteers and players of musical instruments, and they do not leave any one of those domes without setting up a group (of performers) there.
The people give up work during this period, and they do no work except going around and watching the entertainment. When there are two days to go until the Mawlid, they bring out a large number of camels, cows and sheep, more than can be described, and they accompany them with all the drums, songs and musical instruments that they have, until they bring them to the square… On the night of the Mawlid there are performances of nashds after Maghrib in the citadel."
This is the origin of this celebration on the occasion of the Prophet's birthday. More recently idle entertainment, extravagance, and wasting of money and time have become associated with an innovation for which Allh has not sent down any authority.
What Muslims should do is to revive the Sunnah and put an end to bid'ah (innovation); they should not do any action until they know the ruling of Allh concerning it.
The Classical Imaams who warned against Eid Milaadu-Nabi
Imaam al-Faakihaanee or al-'Allaamah Taajud-Deen al-Maaliki [ Umar bin Ali bin Saalim bin Sadaqah al-Lakhmee (654-734AH, famously known as al-Iskandaree (d.734H) - rahimahullaah -said in Al-Mawrid fi 'Amalil-Mawlid: "Celebrating his birthday has no basis in the Book nor the Sunnah, nor is this action recorded from any one of the Scholars of this Ummah; those who are taken as examples to be followed and who cling to the narrations. Rather it is a bid'ah (innovotion), which was introduced by the (deviated) Battaaloon sect (pp.21-22)(The Battaaloon: they are one of the deviated Baatiniyyah sects from the Faatimids - as al-Maqreezee says in al-Khatat (1/490))
Ibn Al-Haaj Al-Maaliki states in his "Al-Madkhal" regarding the Mawlid, specifically in regards to when it is devoid of any evil actions which contradict the Shari'ah (for those who claim it is permissible if nothing haram or evil is carried out as part of the celebrations), "Even if none of the aforementioned evil or haram actions take place, it is still in and of itself a bid'ah (innovation) because of the same intention only. This is because that is making an increase in the religion and also it is was not from the conduct of the pious predecessors (As-Salaf). It has not reached us that a single one of them ever celebrated it nor intended to do so. Thus following in the footsteps of the Salaf is paramount, rather it is obligatory."[Al-Madkhal 2/312]
Haafidh As-Sakhaawi Ash-Shaafi'i states, "The celebration of the Mawlid has not reached us from any of the pious predecessors of the three blessed generations rather only being introduced a long time after."[Quoted by Sheikh Muhammad bin Yusuf As-Saalihi Ash-Shaami in his book "Subul Al-Hudaa War-Rashaad fi Seerati Khayril 'Ibaad" 1/439]
Naseer Ad-Deen Al-Mubarak better known as Ibn At-Tabbaakh states, "This (the Mawlid) is not from the Sunnah."[Quoted by Sheikh Muhammad bin Yusuf As-Saalihi Ash-Shaami in his book "Subul Al-Hudaa War-Rashaad fi Seerati Khayril 'Ibaad" 1/441]
Qaadhi Shihabu-Deen Dolat Abadi al-Hanafee (d 849 h) said:
وما يفعله الجهال على رأس كل حول وشهر ربيع الأول ليس بشىء ويقومون عند ذكر مولده صلى الله عليه وسلم ويزعمون ان روحه يجيء و حاضر فزعمهم باطل وهذا الاعتقاد شرك
On the start of year and in the month of Rabi ul Awwal in the name of Mawlid (salallahu alaihi wa sallam), ignorants (juhaal) do something which is nothing (i.e these things have nothing to do with Islam). They claim that his (salallahu alaihi wa sallam) soul comes and that he (sallalaahu alaihi wa sallam) is present. This is False and this creed is shirk. [Majmoo Fatawa Qazi Shahab ud din 1/27]
Note: He was on of the great muftis of ahnaf, and he was Judge as it can be seen in the books سبحة المرجان فى آثار هندوستان page no: 39 and نزهة الخواطر
Imaam Abu Ishaq ash-Shaatibi al-Maaliki (720 h) said
" فالبدعة إذن عبارة عن طريقة في الدين مخترعة ، تضاهي الشرعية ، يقصد بالسلوك عليها المبالغة في التعبد لله سبحانه ... ومنها التزام الكيفيات والهيآت المعينة ، كالذكر بهيئة الاجتماع على صوت واحد ، واتخاذ يوم ولادة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عيدا ، وما أشبه ذلك .
ومنها التزام العبادات المعينة ، في أوقات معينة ، لم يوجد لها ذلك التعيين في الشريعة ، كالتزام صيام يوم النصف من شعبان ، وقيام ليلته "
Bid'ah (innovation) refers to something that is newly invented in matters of religion that appears similar to that which is prescribed, by which people intend to go to extremes in worshipping Allaah, may He be glorified. That includes adhering to certain forms of worship, such as reciting dhikr in a group, in unison, or taking the day of the Prophet's birth as Eid, and so on.
That also includes adhering to certain acts of worship at certain times, for which there is no evidence in sharee'ah, such as always fasting on the fifteenth of Sha'baan (al-nusf min Sha'baan) and spending that night in prayer. [al-I'tisaam (1/37-39).]
I wonder if Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab travelled back into time and infected all of these Imaams, and millions of others like them among ahlul-hadeeth wal-athar, with his poisonous ideological deviations.
Man, those wahhabis are so dangerous, they even poluted Islamic thought centuries before Ibn Abdul-Wahhab
Oh yeah, the cream of the crop on this topic comes from Imaam Maalik who ultimately told us that "whatever was not part of the religion in their time (the time of the sahabah) cannot be considered part of the religion at any time"
The Sahba and Tbi`n not arranging such gatherings in the form that we do does not mean that it is prohibited.
According to the orthodox sunni Imaams, this is exactly what it means.
Someone who knows the language of the fuqaha will automatically understand that when a faqeeh says
"the sahaaba nor the tabi'een have done this" or "this was unknown in their time", then in the language of legal theory, it means that the action itself has no basis in the shariah and thus entails prohibition. Only someone who is bereft of any fiqh would be unable to conclude this fact.
Their methodology was to accept good innovations and reject bad ones and this is the guideline that has been adopted by later generations of Muslim scholarship.
Their methodology was that as a general default rule, bida was a reprehensible innovation and as an exception, it escapes this ruling when it is merely a linguistic, idaari bida that has nothing to do with religious guidance.
There are literally hundreds of types of gatherings held in our time, which were never done during the eras of the early generation of Muslims. Examples of these are, Shaykh Muhammad bin `Abdul-Wahhb Week (organised in Saudi Arabia), Khilafa Conference, Anti-war rallies, Anti-Voting ralies [?!], Centenary (100 year) Anniversary of the opening of Darul-`Ulum Deoband (arranged in India, in which flowers were thrown, slogans were made, decorations were put up and Indira Gandhi was the main guest), Celebrating the creation of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, India which take place every year on exactly the same day etc and the hundreds of talks, exhibitions, concerts, conferences for the hundreds of Islamic issues that effect Muslims which take place in mosques, centres, colleges, universities etc.
people can observe injustice when people intermingle different topics under the same lime light. You are comparing apples and oranges in this single quote.
1. a seminar or a conference is one thing and has nothing to do with religious innovation.
2. Rallies on the other hand are political maneuvers which affect the fiqh of a slave between himself and the state, which has a different ruling altogether and has nothing to do with bid'a.
3. as for celebrating anniversaries, then this is likewise a heresy. if it is a heresy, as established by the orthodox Imaams above, that celebrating the most noble of creation in his birthday is heresy, then anything less worthy of celebration is likewise a heresy.
4. as for celebrating a "national holiday" of a creation of a country, then the topic likewise changes because now the topic is not just centralized to it being a heresy of celebrating an eid other than the two established eids that ijmaa is settled upon. Rather now the topic enters eman and kufr because what is incorporated into the discussion is allegiance to a nation-state, or to a state that implements the shariah of Allah. Thus people involved in this polemic are not busy with themselves about merely "celebrating the holiday" of a nation-state, but are now discussing the aspects of whether it is from kufr of apostasy or not to do so.
5. As for the Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab week. You must be ignorant of this. This was held once, and was an acdemic seminar, not a religious celebration to worship Allah.
Shaikh Abdel Aziz Aal Abdel Latif:
Question: Why does Saudi Arabia permit celebrating the commemoration of Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab in a conference, paying hundreds
of thousands for it, and it is not allowed for us to celebrate the commemoration of the mawlid of the Messenger of Allah -Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam-?
Who is more deserving of that: the Messenger of Allah -Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam- or Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab?
This is a question that some of the people of knowledge of Damascus ask, please give us an answer.
The Answer:
All praise be to Allah alone, and Salat and Salam be upon the Messenger of Allah
The week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab was only an academic conference held in 1400 Hijri, under the supervision of the Islamic
University of Imam Muhammad bin Sa'ud in Riyadh, it consisted for a number of researches regarding the dawah of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel
Wahhab in terms of its emergence and its affects, and the doubts created surrounding it with its refutation. In addition to that, the works of
shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab were printed after compiling and organizing it.
The difference between that conference and the celebration of the Prophetic Mawlid is obvious, as the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel
Wahhab was not an act of worship itself, what was meant by it is to inform about this dawah and to do justice to its reviver; also, the week of the
shaikh does not reoccur or return as is the case with the ones who celebrate the Prophetic Mawlid, tending it every year; while this week was
held about a quarter century ago, and has ended.
Shaikh Ibn Uthaimeen -rahimahullah-:
The shaikh was asked: What is the difference between what is called "The week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab" -Rahimahullah, and
the celebration of the Prophetic Mawlid, as the second is condemned, while the first isn't?
So he answered:
"The difference between them -according to our knowledge- is from two sides:
The first is: the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab -Rahimahullah Ta'ala- was not done as a means to get closer to Allah -Azza wa Jal-, it is only meant for removing doubts that are in the hearts of some people towards this man, and to show what Allah has blessed the
Muslims through this man.
the second is: the week of shaikh Muhammad bin Abdel Wahhab -Rahimahullah- does not reoccur and return (every year) as is the case with
'Eids; it is something that has been clarified to the people, things were written in it, and the truth regarding this man, that was not known before,
was shown to many people, then it ended."
Source: Majmu' Fatawa wa Rasael Shaikh Muhammad Saleh al-Uthaimeen, volume 16 - Prayer of the two Eids.
one must have 'itidaal in discussing issues and it destroys the ways to correctness and amplifies the modes of deception when people confuse various matters into a single platform.
The list is huge but strangely objection seems only to be made against gatherings in remembrance of the birth of the Holy Prophet (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam) which has been organised for over 1,000 years unbroken.
yeah, it has been organized heretics of the baatinis and then adopted by gullible sunnis. The first Imaam of the sunnah to have used a deplorable ijtihaad to validate the milaad of nabi was as-Suyootee, and the basis for his ijtihaad was on a narration by which every haafidh in Islam has utterly rfuted the despicable nature of such a spurious report. Im not going to go into depth with what has been said, but it suffices that this practice found its way into popularity much much later.
To make any gathering about the Holy Prophet (saw) which consists of only halal activities, whether it is the birth of the Prophet, his migration, his talking, his walking, his greeting people, his meeting people, his miracles, his battles, his ascension (mi`raj), the revelation to him etc all of these are permitted.
Imaam Ibnul-Hajj disagrees with you. he says in his "Al-Madkhal" regarding the Mawlid, specifically in regards to when it is devoid of any evil actions which contradict the Shari'ah (for those who claim it is permissible if nothing haram or evil is carried out as part of the celebrations), "
Even if none of the aforementioned evil or haram actions take place, it is still in and of itself a bid'ah (innovation) because of the same intention only. This is because that is making an increase in the religion and also it is was not from the conduct of the pious predecessors (As-Salaf). It has not reached us that a single one of them ever celebrated it nor intended to do so. Thus following in the footsteps of the Salaf is paramount, rather it is obligatory."[Al-Madkhal 2/312]
Not all considered commemorating the Mawlid to be a bid`a. They used the following as one of many sources in Hadth literature for commemorating the Mawlid.
So first you went from "ijmaa on celebrating the birthday of the prophet", which by default means that NO one has said otherwise. Now you say "not all considered it a bida", which essentially implies that "some actually did". ajeeb
It is related in a Hadth of Sahh al-Bukhr:
فَلَمَّا مَاتَ أَبُو لَهَبٍ أُرِيَهُ بَعْضُ أَهْلِهِ بِشَرِّ حِيبَةٍ قَالَ لَهُ مَاذَا لَقِيتَ قَالَ أَبُو لَهَبٍ لَمْ أَلْقَ بَعْدَكُمْ غَيْرَ أَنِّي سُقِيتُ فِي هَذِهِ بِعَتَاقَتِي ثُوَيْبَةَ
“After Ab Lahb died, someone from his household saw him in a dream in a bad condition. They asked him, ‘What condition are you in?’ Ab Lahb replied, `I am in severe punishment which I can never escape from. I get a lessening [in the punishment] for freeing my slave girl Thuwayba.”
(Bukhr, as-Sahh, 5:1961, Kitbun-nikh, #4813 `Abdur-Razzq, al-Musannaf, 7:478, #13955 Bayhaq, as-Sunanul-Kubra, 7:162; Bayhaq, Shu`abul-mn, 1:261; Bayhaq, Dal'ilun-Nubuwwa, 1:150; Suhayl, ar-Rawdul-unf, 5:192; Ibn Kathr, as-Sratun-Nabawiyya, 1:224; Ibn Dayba` Shaybn, Had'iqul-Anwr, 1:134; Baghaw, Sharhus-Sunna, 9:76, #2282 Zayla`, Nasbur-rya, 3:168; `Asqaln, Fathul-br, 9:945; `Ayn, `Umdatul-qr, 20:95; `mir, Bahjatul-mahfil, 1:41; Muhaddith Dehelw, Madrijun-Nubuwwa, 2:19)
The great Hadth scholar, Hfiz Ibn Hajar al-`Asqaln (rahmatullhi `alay) states with reference to Imm Suhayl (rahmatullhi `alay):
أن العباس قال لما مات أبو لهب رأيته في منامي بعد حول في شر حال فقال ما لقيت بعدكم راحة الا أن العذاب يخفف عني كل يوم اثنين قال وذلك أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولد يوم الإثنين وكانت ثويبة بشرت أبا لهب بمولده فاعتقها
“`Abbs said:
‘When Ab Lahb died, I saw him one year later in a dream in a very bad state. I heard him say, ‘After separating from you, I have had no rest what so ever and am gripped in a severe punishment. But the punishment is lessened every Monday.’.’
[The reason for this is that] the Holy Prophet (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam) was born on a Monday. His punishment is lessened because of [Ab Lahb's slave girl] Thuwayba giving him [Ab Lahb] the glad tidings and him setting her free out of happiness for his birth (mawlid).”
(`Asqaln, Fathul-br, 9:145)
Such a deplorable methodology to adopt
1. Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani is merely quoting what was stated Suhayli and is thus not his statement
2. The narration of Suhayli does not constitute a legal judgment.
why?, because the commentary is based on a report from al-Abbass regarding a dream that al-Abbass had. In usoolul-Fiqh, the mujtahid Imaams have clearly laid out as a matter of usool that dreams are not a source to derive rulings, which is exactly what your are trying to do here.
3. what really puts the cherry on top is the fact that this commentary has nothing to do with
EID milaadu-Nabi. Allah it explains is that Abu Lahab has been given a fadl, and that fadl is that his punishment is lessened EVERY monday (that means every monday till the day of judgment, and not every YEAR to the day in which the Prophet salallahu alaihi wa sallam was born)
In other words the narration is about the fadl and mercy of the prophets birth on that day, just as there is mercy and fadl on every jumu'ah.
4. Furthermore, Imaam suhayli is merely giving a commentary. He could be right or he could be wrong. Thwere is no indication in the shariah as to why Abu Lahabs punishment is lessened on Mondays. Thu as-Suhayli is merely offerin an opinion. And it is an opinion that I could agree with, but even at that juncture, it has nothing to do with legalizing the celebration of the prophet's birthday
5. another reason why this cannot be used as a proof to validate a third eid in Islam on miladu-nabi is because it is a mursal narration. Of course there is ikhtilaaf as to what irsaal hadeeth can be used or not.
Thus your attempt to use this as a valid legal extraction for a judgment in the shariah regarding the validity of celebrating a third eid in Islam is simply religious malpractice on your part may Allah guide you and me towards His Pleasure.
An interesting quote is the following statement of Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhb Najd, who wrote:
“Ab Lahb was seen in a dream after his death and he was asked, `What condition are you in?' He replied, `I am in fire except on every Monday when there is a lessening of the punishment.' He then began gesturing with his fingers and said, `Water comes from between these two fingers of mine which I drink and as a result of this, there is a lessening in the punishment [I receive]. I freed Thuwayba when she gave me the good news of the birth of the Holy Prophet (saw).”
(Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhb an-Najd, Mukhtasar Sratur-Rasl (Lahore: Matb'a Maktaba `Ilmiyya, 1979/Lahore: al-Maktabatus-Salafiyya, 1979), 13)
Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhb Najd then quotes Imm Ibn Jawz (rahmatullhi `alay) stating:
“If this is the state of such an unbeliever as Ab Lahb whose accursed nature has been revealed in the Holy Qur'an. That he receives a reward (of a lessening in the punishment). Then what would be the state of a Muslim from his Umma who believes in the Oneness of Allah and who shows happiness at his Mawlid?”
(Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhb an-Najd, Mukhtasar Sratur-Rasl (Lahore: Matb'a Maktaba `Ilmiyya, 1979/Lahore: al-Maktabatus-Salafiyya, 1979), 13)
So would Imm Ibn Jawz (rahmatullhi `alay) be approving of something reprehensible or against Islam? Would Muhammad ibn `Abdul-Wahhb Najd quote something that was against Islam?
everyone quotes something against Islam. It is called "quoting". Quoting means exactly that, quoting. Quoting does not mean "I validate and endorse what I am quoting".
1. This is not what Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab did. If one knows history, it was the son of Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab who quotes Ibnul-Jawzi and not Ibn Adbul-Wahhab himself.
2. Imaam Isma’il bin Muhammad Ansari notes the objections that I have provided in my previous quote prior to this statement of your by saying :
The narration of Urwa regarding Abu Lahab and his slave girl cannot be used to prove the gatherings of Mawlid because, firstly, it is Mursal. Secondly, even if it is Muttasil, it cannot be used as proof because it is an occurrence of a dream. Thirdly, it mentions that Abu Lahab released Thuwayba before she suckled the Prophet sallAllahu 'alaihi wasallam. This is against what the biographers write, that is, Abu Lahab released her a long time after she suckled. Fourthly, the Mursal of Urwa, which Nasir al-Din Dimashqi and ibn al-Jazari have used to prove the gatherings of Mawlid; it is against what is apparent from the Qur’an.
[al-Qawlul-Fasl p. 84-87]
Shaykhul-Islam Imm Jalluddn Suyt (rahmatullhi `alay) mentions a similar statement but from Hfiz Shamsud-dn al-Jazr.
Regarding the evidences for the spiritual dance, there are many Hadths from which 2 will be quoted from Imm Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s Musnad:
Imm Ahmad ibn Hanbal (radiyallhu `anhu) narrates the following two narrations:
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الصَّمَدِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادٌ عَنْ ثَابِتٍ عَنْ أَنَسٍ قَالَ كَانَتْ الْحَبَشَةُ يَزْفِنُونَ بَيْنَ يَدَيْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَيَرْقُصُونَ وَيَقُولُونَ مُحَمَّدٌ عَبْدٌ صَالِحٌ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَا يَقُولُونَ قَالُوا يَقُولُونَ مُحَمَّدٌ عَبْدٌ صَالِحٌ.
Anas ibn Mlik (radiyallhu `anhu) said that the Abyssinians (Habashs) danced in front of the Messenger of Allh (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam); dancing (yarquSn/raqS) while saying “Muhammad is a Righteous Servant (Muhammadun `Abdun Slih)” (in their dialect/language). Allh’s Messenger (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam) asked, “What are they saying?” And they responded, “Muhammadun ‘Abdun Slih!”.
(Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad (Cairo: Mu’assasat Qurtuba), 3:152, #12562)
This has been narrataed with a chain of transmission all of whose narrators are those of Bukhari except Hammad ibn Salama, who is one of the narrators of Muslim.
Related to this, Imm Ahmad ibn Hanbal also reports the following in his Musnad:
قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ دَاوُدَ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ يَعْنِي ابْنَ أَبِي الزِّنَادِ عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ عُرْوَةَ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنْ عَائِشَةَ قَالَتْ وَضَعَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ذَقْنِي عَلَى مَنْكِبَيْهِ لِأَنْظُرَ إِلَى زَفْنِ الْحَبَشَةِ حَتَّى كُنْتُ الَّتِي مَلِلْتُ فَانْصَرَفْتُ عَنْهُمْ
“`’isha stated that Allh’s Messenger (sallallhu `alayhi wa sallam) put her cheek on his shoulder while looking at the Abyssinians (Habashs) dance.”
(Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Musnad (Cairo: Mu’assasat Qurtuba), 6:116, #24898)
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal (rahmahullh) himself said about the Sfs: "I don't know people better than them." Someone said to him: "They listen to music and they reach states of ecstasy." He said: "Do you prevent them from enjoying an hour with Allh?" (Muhammad ibn Ahmad as-Saffarn al-Hanbal (died 1188) who related in his Ghidha' al-albab li-sharh manzumat al-adab from Ibrahim ibn `Abd Allah al-Qalanasi) (Cairo: Matba`at al-Najah, 1324/1906)
This is our Islamic tradition, not Pakistani tradition!
I guess the issue has now shifted to dancing.
Imaamul-Haramayn Ibnul-Juwaynee says
والرَّقْص ليس محرَم العين، وإنما هو حركات على استقامة أو اعوجاج، ولكن كثيره يَخْرِم المروءة،
i.e.
dancing is not prohibited by itself as it is movements; staright and twisted ones. However, the much of it is a defect in the chracter of one's manhood" [Source: Nihayet al-Matlab: 12138].
Sultan al-Ulema al-Izz Ibn Abdu-Sallaam says
الرَّقْصُ لَا يَتَعَاطَاهُ إلَّا نَاقِصُ الْعَقْلِ، وَلَا يَصْلُحُ إلَّا لِلنِّسَاءِ.
i.e.
"Only those with defects in their minds who dance, and it is only suitable for women"
ash-Sharbini said: "most of those who dance do not dance due to an overwhelming state of heart due to dhikr. That is why Ibn Abdul salam said.... (the part above)." [Mughni al-Muhtaaj: 6/350].
Moreover The classical Sunni Scholars have explained these riwayaat differently than what the heretics have tried to deduce for them or those who have erred in their judgments .
Haafidh Ibnul-Jawzi said regarding the meaning of Hajal in Talbees Iblees 1/230
زفن الحبشة نوع من المشى يفعل عند اللقاء للحرب
Regarding Raqs of habashis, it refers to one step which is performed at times of war when meeting the enemy
Hafidh Ibn Hajar al Asqalani rahimahu Allah said:
وَاسْتَدَلَّ قَوْم مِنْ الصُّوفِيَّة بِحَدِيثِ الْبَاب عَلَى جَوَاز الرَّقْص وَسَمَاع آلَات الْمَلَاهِي ، وَطَعَنَ فِيهِ الْجُمْهُور بِاخْتِلَافِ الْمَقْصِدَيْنِ ، فَإِنَّ لَعِب الْحَبَشَة بِحِرَابِهِمْ كَانَ لِلتَّمْرِينِ عَلَى الْحَرْب فَلَا يُحْتَجّ بِهِ لِلرَّقْصِ فِي اللَّهْو ، وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ .
And some Sufis used the hadeeth of this chapter as proof for the permissibility of dancing and listening to musical instruments.
However, the majority of scholars criticized this (deduction), because the two matters have different purposes. For, the playing of the Ethiopians was for the purpose of practicing for war. So, one cannot use this hadeeth as proof for the permissibility of dancing for entertainment purposes. And Allah knows best.
[Fath al Bari, Kitab al Manaqib (Virtues), Chapter Qisat al Habash (the story of the Ethiopians)]
Shaykhul-Islam Imam Nawawi said in commentary of hadith of Aisha ra in sahih Muslim that is
(. - قولها : ( جاء حبش يزفنون في يوم عيد في المسجد )
ومعناه يرقصون ، وحمله العلماء على التوثب بسلاحهم ولعبهم بحرابهم على قريب من هيئة الراقص لأن معظم الروايات إنما فيها لعبهم بحرابهم ، فيتأول هذه اللفظة على موافقة سائر الروايات
The meaning is RAQS by the Scholars is that it means Jumping with weapons and Playing with Spears that is near the Kafiyah of RAQS, So in many narrations there Playing of spears is mentioned so commentary of this word should be done with other narrations.
Imaam al-Qurtubee refers to a judgment made by
Imaam Abu bakr at-Tartushi in his tafseer. The statement from Imam Tartushi came when he was asked:
The Question: What does our knowledgeable master say about the madhab of the Sufis?
And know – May Allah preserve your time – that a group of men gather, and then increase in the mentioning of Allah the Exalted, and the mentioning of Muhammad peace be upon him, after which they hit with a rod on an Adeem, and some of them stand up and dance andYatawajad, until he falls unconscious, and then they get something to eat.
Is attending with them permissible or not?
Answer us, May Allah have mercy on you.
The Answer:
May Allah have mercy on you, the madhab of the Sufis is that of Batalah (wastefulness), Jahalah (ignorance), and Dalalah (misguidance). Islam is but the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His messenger.
As for the dancing and the Tawajud, the first to perform this are the companions of Al-Samiri, when he founded for them an image of a calf that had a sound, so they started dancing around it and Yatawajadoon, thus [this action] is the religion of the Kuffar (unbelievers), and the worshippers of the calf.
As for the [hitting with the] rod, the first to adopt this action are the Zanadiqah (disbelieving heretics), to distract Muslims from the Book of Allah the Exalted.
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him used to sit with his companions, as if birds were standing on their heads from their dignity [tranquility and stillness]. That is why the Sultan and his assistants are required to stop [these people] from gathering in Masjids and in any other place.
It is not permissible for anyone that believes in Allah and the Hereafter to attend with them, and to assist them in their evil and wastefulness, and that is the Madhab of Malik, Abu Hanifa, Ash-Shafi'ee, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and others from the scholars of the Muslims, and from Allah we seek success
Ibnul-Hajj al-Maaliki is one of the scholars who Haafidh Ibn Hajar transmitted a lot [of his views] in his book Fath Al-Bari.
He said [May Allah have mercy on him] in his book “Al-Madkhal” (3/99) while talking about Sufis and the innovation of singing and dancing, the following:
"It was mentioned that some people asked for a fatwa in the year 661 H, and sought and collected the opinions of the four Mazhabs in this matter, and its wording is:
“What is the opinion of the masters of Fiqh, the Imams of this Religion, and the Scholars of the Muslims – May Allah grant them success to His obedience, and assist them in what Pleases Him – in a group from among the Muslims, who arrived to a city and headed to the Masjid, and started clapping, singing, and dancing, once with their hands and in another time using Doufs and Shababah. Is such an act Islamically permissible in a Masjid, answer us – May Allah the Exalted reward you and have mercy on you?
The Shafi’is said: Samaa’ (Listening [to the above mentioned]) is a Detested form of play which is similar to Batil (Falsehood), and whoever says by it (i.e. agrees on it and accepts it), his testimony would be rejected (Turad Shahadatuh), and Allah knows best.
The Malikis said: The rulers and the ones responsible should restrain and prevent them [from this], and eject them (expel them) from the Masjids until they Repent and Return [to Allah], and Allah knows best.
The Hanbalis said: Whoever does this, one should not pray behind him, and his testimony should not be accepted, and his ruling should not be accepted even if he was a judge/ruler, and if he performs a marriage ‘Aqd (contract) then it is Fasid (Void), and Allah knows best.
The Hanafis said: The rug that they dance on is not to be prayed on until it is washed, and the earth that they dance on is not to be prayed on until its sand is dug and thrown away, and Allah knows best.”
Imaam at-Tahaawi says
"Doing Raqs (dancing), Clapping, making voices aloud, playing harmonium, shrieking and to play bugle; all these things which you find in the habit of Sufis are Harram with Consensus (Ijma). Because it is the way of Kuffar (Disbelievers)"[ Hashiyatal Tahawi Ala Mawaqi Al-Falah 183 ]
