> Sunni Response Celebrating Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) Birthday?

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Salam05

وعليكم السلام No bro. you are the second person who gt confused in this regard. (smile) Tho i m also present in Multaqa as a member. BTW, what happens to multaqa?? Its not opening.

haha sorry

the multaqa i believe is chainging some technical issues regarding php or something like that wallahul-alim asalamu alaikum

[al-boriqee]

Did Ibn Katheer Author a Book Endorsing the Mawlid?

Source: Al-Qawal al-fasl fee al-Ihtifaal bi Mawlid Khayr al-Rusul

(trans. Abu Rumaysah)

From ‘al-Qawal al-fasl fee al-Ihtifaal bi Mawlid Khayr al-Rusul’ (pg. 110+) of Shaykh Ismaa’eel al-Ansaaree:


As for the claim of the author of the letter published in the magazine ‘al-Mujtama’ (no.559), while listing the authors who considered the celebration of the Mawlid to be permissible and their works (concerning this), that the author of ‘Kashf al-Dhunoon fee Usaamee al-Kutub wa al-Funoon’ mentioned on page 319 that al-Haafidh ibn Katheer authored a number of treatise concerning the noble Mawlid. From amongst them: ‘Jaami al-Aathaar fee Mawlid al-Nabiyy al-Mukhtaar’ in three volumes, ‘al-Lafdh al-Raa’iq fee Mawlid Khayr al-Khalaa’iq’ and it is succinct. And his claim that ibn Fahd mentioned that ibn Katheer authored a book which he entitled, ‘Mawrid as-Saadee fee Mawlid al-Haadee.’ And his saying that al-Haafidh as-Sakhaawee had a book concerning the Mawlid entitled, ‘at-Tibr al-Masbook fee Dhail as-Sulook’ – then all of this is a grievous error having no basis for being correct.


As for ‘Jaami al-Aathaar fee Mawlid al-Nabiyy al-Mukhtaar’ then we looked up ‘Kashf al-Dhunoon’ to ascertain the truth of his words and we found it under the letter ‘jeem’ (pg.533) and the text is, ‘Jaami al-Aathaar fee Mawlid an-Nabiyy al-Mukhtaar of Shams ad-Deen Muhammad bin Naasir ad-Deen ad-Dimishqee, died in the year 842, being in three volumes commencing with the words, "all praise is due to Allaah Who displayed Muhammad as the most purest of the Universe…"


And we found under the letter ‘laam’ page 1559 the words, ‘al-Lafdh al-Raa’iq fee Mawlid Khayr al-Khalaa’iq’ a short booklet by al-Haafidh Shams ad-Deen Muhammad bin Naasir ad-Deen ad-Damishqee who died in the year 842.’


And we found under the letter ‘meem’ page. 1910 the words, ‘al-Haafidh as-Sakhaawee mentioned in his ‘Daw al-Laami’ a group who wrote concerning the Mawlid of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) from amongst them al-Haafidh… ibn Naasir ad-Deen ad-Damishqee who authored in this regards ‘Jaami al-Aathaar fee Mawlid an-Nabiyy al-Mukhtaar’ in three volumes and a booklet ‘al-Lafdh al-Raa’iq fee Mawlid Khayr al-Khalaa’iq’ and it is shorter than the one mentioned before it…’




As for ‘Mawrid as-Saadee fee Mawlid al-Haadee’ then the claim of the author of that article that ibn Fahd attributed it to ibn Katheer is without basis for ibn Fahd said in ‘Lahdh al-Alhaadh bi Dhail Tabaqaat al-Huffaadh’ (pg. 320-321) under the biography of ibn Naasir ad-Deen ad-Damishqee, ‘he authored, and some of them concerned the Mawlid of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) and it is ‘Jaami al-Aathaar fee Mawlid al-Mukhtaar’ in three volumes, and ‘Tawdeeh al-Mushtabah’… and ‘Mawrid as-Saadee fee Mawlid al-Haadee’…..’


And this which is mentioned by ibn Fahd is declared with certainty by as-Sakhaawee and ash-Shawkaanee….


So it becomes clear with all of this that the claims of the author of that article published in ‘al-Mujtama’ magazine has no basis.


Then what ibn Katheer mentions in the section on the Prophetic biography in his ‘Bidaayah wan Nihaayah’, and in his lengthy ‘Seerah’ and in the sections of ‘Ikhtisaar Seerah ar-Rasool’, and in his stand alone treatise on the Mawlid published with the tahqeeq of Salaah ad-Deen al-Manjad, and in his revision to the Mawlid of his shaykh Kamaal ad-Deen Abee Ma’aalee Muhammad bin Alee al-Ansaaree contained in the section detailing ‘Dalaa’il an-Nubuwwah’ in his ‘Bidaayah wan Nihaayah’ – he does not present anything in these concerning the celebration of the Mawlid of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) and neither of the evil practices that have occurred amongst the later generations with respect to the Mawlid. Therefore as long as the matter is like this then we cannot accept the claim of the author of that article.


[Note: and what Muhammad bin Alawee al-Maalikee vainly thinks in his work ‘al-Ihtifaal bi Mawlid an-Nabawiyy ash-Shareef’ (pg. 38) that the ‘Mawlid’ of al-Haafidh ibn Katheer is from those works that present celebrating the Mawlid of the Prophet is not correct.]



As for the saying of the author of that aricle that as-Sakhaawee authored a book about the Mawlid entitled ‘at-Tibr al-Masbook fee Dhail al-Sulook’ then this is also incorrect… as-Sakhaawee said in his autobiography contained in ‘Daw al-Laami li A’yaan al-Qarn at-Taasi’ (8/17) while listing his works, ‘and ‘at-Tibr al-Masbook fee Dhail alaa Taareekh al-Maqreezee as-Sulook’ containing the events and deaths (of scholars) since the year 45 to this day in 4 volumes’ so this is what as-Sakhaawee himself clarifies and it is clear that the subject matter of the book is not the Mawlid even though it may contain things connected to the Mawlid.

[al-boriqee]

Shaikh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah on the Mawlid

Ibn Taymiyyah says, "…because the Eeds are legislated laws from amongst the laws, so it is necessary to follow them, and not to innovate them, and the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) had many lectures, treaties, and great events that happened on a number of (documented) days such as the Day of Badr, Hunain, al-Khandaq, the Conquest of Mecca, the occurrence of his hijrah, his entry to Madeenah…and none of this necessitated that these days be taken as days of Eed. Rather this sort of thing was done by the Christians who took the days in which great events happened to Jesus as eeds, or by the Jews. Indeed the Eed is a legislated law, so what Allaah legislates is followed, otherwise do not innovate in this religion that which is not part of it. And like this is what some of the people have innovated, either in opposition to the Christian celebration of the birthday of Jesus, or out of love for the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) and in honour of him. And Allaah will reward them for this love and ijtihaad, but NOT FOR THE BID’AH of taking the day of the birth of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) as an eed - this along with the difference of the people as to when he was born. For indeed this (celebration) was not done by the salaf, despite the existence of factors that would necessitate it and the lack of any factors that would prevent them from doing so if it were indeed good. And if this was genuinely good or preferable then the salaf, may Allaah be pleased with them, would have more right to doing so then us, for they had more severe love and honour of the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) in following him, obeying him, and following his command, and reviving his sunnah inwardly and outwardly, and spreading that which he was sent with, and performing jihaad for this in the heart, with the hand and upon the tongue. So indeed this was the way of the Saabiqeen al-Awwaleen from the Muhajiroon and the Ansaar, and those that followed them in good. And you will find the majority of these (who celebrate the birthday) in ardent desire of these sort of innovations - alongwith what they have of good intention and ijtihaad for which reward is hoped for - but you would find them feeble in following the command of the Messenger, that which they have been commanded to be eager and vigorous in, indeed they are of the position of one who adorns the Mushaf but does not read what is in it or reads what is in it but does not follow it. Or the position of one who decorates the mosques but does not pray in them, or prays in them rarely… And know that from the actions are those that have some good in them, due to their including types of good actions and including evil actions such as innovation etc. So this action would be good with respect to what it includes of good and evil with respect to what it contains of turning away from the religion in it’s totality, as is the state of the hypocrites and faasiqeen. This has what has afflicted the majority of the ummah in the later times. So upon you is two manners (of rectification):

1. that your desire be to follow the sunnah inwardly and outwardly, with respect to yourself specifically and those that follow you, and you enjoin the good and forbid the evil.
2. that you call the people to the sunnah in accordance to ability, so if you were to see someone doing this (celebration) and he were to not leave it except for an evil greater than it, then do not call him to leaving the evil so that he may perform something more evil than this….[a page omitted in which he explains this principle]

So honouring the mawlid, and taking it as a festive season (mawsam) which some of the people have done, there is a great reward in it due to the good intention and the honouring of the Messenger (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) because of what I have previously stated to you - that it is possible that something be good for some of the people and be denounced/considered to be ugly by the strict believer. This is why it was said to Imaam Ahmad about some of the leaders, that he spent 1000 dirhams upon the mushaf or similar to this. So he replied, ‘leave them, for this is better than them spending it on gold (jewellery).’ This despite the fact that the madhhab of Imaam Ahmad was that it is abhorrent to decorate the mushafs, and some of the companions (of Ahmad) interpreted this to mean that the money was spent in renewing the pages and writing. But this is not the intent of Ahmad here, his intention here was that this action had a benefit in it, and it also contained corruption due to which it became abhorrent. But these people, if they did not do this, would have substituted this for a corruption that contained no good whatsoever, for example spending upon one of the books of evil…" [Iqtidaa Siraat al-Mustaqeem 2/618+ my copy has the tahqeeq of Shaykh Naasir al-Aql] He says in another place of the same book, "there is no doubt that the one who practices these - i.e. the innovated festive seasons - either the mujtahid or muqallid will have the reward for his good intention and the what the action contains of legislated actions, and will be forgiven for what it contains of innovation if his ijtihaad or taqleed contains one of the excuses (that would lift this sin from him)…." He continues: "But this does not prevent one from detesting and prohibiting it and to replace it with a legislated action containing no bid'ah.... Just as the Jews and Christians may find benefit in their worship because it is possible that their worship includes an aspect of what is legislated but this does not necessitate that you perform their actions of worship or you report their words because all of the innovations contain evil that outweighs their good, this due to the fact that if their good outweighed the evil then why would the Sharee'ah have disregarded it? So we depend upon the fact that it's sin is greater than it's benefit and this necessitates forbiddance." He continues: "And I say: it's sin is removed from some of the people due to the reason of ijtihaad or other than it, as the sin of usury and alcohol (from dates) which has been differed about (by the salaf) is removed from the salaf (who allowed it), then despite this it is necessary to explain it's condition and not to follow those that considered it permissible.... So this is sufficient evidence in explaining that these innovations include corruptions of belief or condition contradicting what the Messenger (sallallaahu `alaihi wasallam) came with, and that what benefit they contain is marjooh (not to be relied upon) and it not correct to use for objection" He continues: "As for what they contain - i.e. these innovated festive seasons such as the Mawlid - of benefit then they are opposed by what they contain of the corruption of innovations that outweigh the benefit, alongwith with what has preceded of the corruptions of belief and state - that the hearts become content with it at the expense of a large number of Sunnahs to the extent that you find that the elite and the general masses preserve this in a way that they do not preserve the Taraaweeh's or the five prayers...." mentioning many more cases.
[al-Qawl al-Fasl (pg. 102) of Shaykh Ismaa’eel al-Ansaaree] A number of points can be seen here:

1. Ibn Taymiyyah regards the mawlid as a bid’ah which the strict believer is not allowed to follow.
2. he allows it only for those who would leave this bid’ah for a greater bid’ah.
3. he states that those practising this, either out of taqleed or ijtihaad, will get reward for their good intentions, but they will get no reward for their practising it.
4. that they will not get the burden of the sin of the innovation if their taqleed of ijtihaad contains the excuses that would lift this from them.

[al-boriqee]

A Refutation of some of the Arguments used by those who advocate this Innovation.

Discussion of the hadeeth The Prophet (SAW) performed Aqeeqah for himself after his Prophethood.

As-Suyutee said,

"Another primary text has occurred to me by which the legitimacy of the Mawlid can be derived, namely what is reported by al-Bayhaqee from Anas that "the Prophet (SAW) performed Aqeeqah for himself after his prophethood."And it occurs that his grandfather Abdul Muttalib performed the Aqeeqah for him when he was a child of seven years, and the aqueeqah is not repeated a second time. So therefore this is to taken to mean that what the Prophet (SAW) did was to openly manifest gratitude for Allaah making him the mercy for the universe and to legislate this for his ummah, just as he used to do by his sending salaam upon himself. Therefore it is recommended for us that we openly manifest gratitude for his birth." (‘Husnul Maqsad’ of as-Suyutee contained in his ‘Haawi lil Fataawi’)

These words were also quoted by the commentator to ‘al-Muwaahib al-Laduniyyah’ (1/140) - az-Zarkaanee.


The reply to this hadeeth:

1.When Imaam Maalik was asked about this hadeeth he replied, "do you see the Companions of the Messenger of Allaah (SAW), for whom the aqeeqah was not performed in the days of Jaahiliyyah, performing Aqeeqah for themselves in Islaam? This is from the rejected (narrations)" [quoted from him by ibn Rushd al-Maaliki in the ‘Book of Aqeeqah’ of his work ‘al-Muqaddamaat al-Mumahhadaat’ 2/15]

2.Abu Dawood said in his ‘Masaa’il Imaam Ahmad’ his work in which he reports from him "I heard Ahmad….so Ahmad said, ‘Abdullaah bin Muharrar from Qataadah from Anas that ‘the Prophet (SAW) performed Aqeeqah for himself’. This hadeeth is munkar (rejected) due to the weakness of Abdullaah bin Muharrar’" [This was report was also mentioned by ibn al-Qayyim in his ‘Zaad al-Ma’aad’ and ‘Tuhfatul Mawdood bi Ahkaamil Mawlood’ (pg.51)]

3.Ibn Hibbaan said in his ‘Kitaab al-Majrooheen’ (2/29) in the biography of Abdullaah bin Muharrar, "he reported from Qataadah from Anas that ‘the Prophet (SAW) performed Aqeeqah for himself after Allaah had sent him as a Prophet.’…he (ibn Muharrar) used to be from the best of the servants of Allaah, except that he was from those that would lie without knowing it, and reverse (the meanings) of the narrations without understanding…..Abu Ishaaq at-Taalaqaanee said, ‘I heard ibn al-Mubaarak saying: if I was given the choice of entering paradise or accuse Abdullaah ibn Muharrar. I would choose to accuse him and then enter Paradise. For when I saw him I found dung to be more beloved to me than him.’ [this report is also narrated by Imaam Muslim in the introduction to his saheeh]. I (ibn Hibbaan) heard ad-Daarimee saying, ‘I heard Yahyaa bin Ma’een saying: Abdullaah bin Muharrar is not trustworthy and precise (thiqah)’"

4.al-Bazzaar said, "….from Abdullaah bin Muharrar from Qataadah from Anas that the Prophet (SAW)….Abdullaah bin Muharrar was alone in reporting the hadeeth and he is severely weak, one would find written from him what is not found with other than him." [‘Zawaa’id al-Bazzaar alaa Kutub as-Sitta’ in the chapter ‘Qadaa al-Aqeeqah’]

5.al-Bayhaqee said, "Abdullaah bin Muharrar reported a munkar (rejected) hadeeth concerning the Prophet’s performing Aqeeqah for himself …[quotes the hadeeth]…..Abdur Razzaaq said, ‘indeed they (scholars of hadeeth) abandoned Abdullaah bin Muharrar due to the state of this hadeeth and it is reported from another perspective from Qataadah and yet another perspective from Anas and it is nothing." [‘Sunan al-Kubraa’ (9/300) of al-Bayhaqee. Chapter: ‘al-Aqeeqah Sunnah’] This is the reference from which as-Suyutee quotes the hadeeth, yet it is strange that he did not quote the rest of al-Bayhaqee’s words.

6.an-Nawawee said, "as for the hadeeth that he -i.e. ash-Shayraazee - mentioned concerning the Prophet’s performing Aqeeqah for himself, then it was reported by al-Bayhaqee with his isnaad from Abdullaah bin Muharrar from Qataadah from Anas…[hadeeth]…and this hadeeth is false (baatil). Al-Bayhaqee said: this is a rejected hadeeth…(quoting previous words of Bayhaqee)….and Abdullaah ibn Muharrar is da’eef, being agreed upon to be so by the memorising scholars. He (Abdullaah ibn Muharrar) is abandoned." [‘Majmoo’ Sharh Muhadhdhab’ (8/330) of an-Nawawee chpt: ‘Aqeeqah’]

7.al-Mizzi in his biography to Abdullaah ibn Muharrar endorses the above words of Abdul Razzaaq. [‘Tahdheeb al-Kamaal’ of al-Mizzi]

8.adh-Dhahabee said during the course of presenting the biography of Abdullaah ibn Muharrar, "Ahmad said: the people have abandoned his hadeeth. Al-Jawzajaanee said: destroyed. Ad-Daaruqutnee and a group (of scholars) said: abandoned. Ibn Hibbaan said: he used to be from the best of the servants of Allaah except that he would lie without knowing it, and reverse (the meanings) of the narrations without understanding…." [‘Meezaan al-I’tidaal’ of adh-Dhahabee]

9.ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee said, "his saying - i.e. ar-Raafi’ee - it is reported that he (SAW) performed Aqeeqah for himself after his prophethood by al-Bayhaqee from the hadeeth of Qataadah from Anas. He (ibn Hajr) said: it is munkar, it contains Abdullaah bin Muharrar and he is severely weak. Abdur Razzaaq said…[the words previously quoted]. I (ibn Hajr) say: as for the other perspective from Qataadah then I have not found it as a hadeeth of the Messenger (SAW), all that is reported is in this regards is that Qataadah used to pass rulings on this as related by ibn Abdul Barr. Rather al-Bazzaar and others were certain that Abdullaah bin Muharrar is alone in reporting this hadeeth from Qataadah. As for the other perspective still from Anas then it is reported by Abu ash-Shaykh in ‘al-Adaahee’ and ibn Ayman in his ‘Musannaf’ via the route of Abdullaah bin Muthnaa from Thamaamah bin Abdullaah bin Anas from his father. An-Nawawee said in ‘Sharh Muhadhdhab’: this hadeeth is false." [‘Talkhees al-Habeer’ 4/147 of ibn Hajr chpt: ‘al-Aqeeqah’]

10.Likewise in Fath al-Baree he declares the hadeeth from all of it’s various perspectives to be da’eef. [Sharh Baab Imaatatul Adha]

11.Therefore az-Zarqaanee in his ‘Sharh Muwaahib’ (1/140) follows up his quote by quoting the verdicts of ibn Hajr and an-Nawawee on this hadeeth and then saying, "therefore to use it to derive the legitimacy (of the Mawlid) is not correct."
[Taken from 'al-Qawl al-Fasl' of Shaykh Ismaa'eel al-Ansaaree with summary]

[al-boriqee]

This is a unique post that is virtually nowhere in the net from my searching so I decided to post it here

Who Invented The Mawlid?

By Ibn Hajr and Ibn Kathir on the Inventor of the Mawlid

As regards the celebration of the birthday of the Messenger (sallalahu 'alayhi wa sallam), the scholars have clearly stated that the person who first introduced this innovation (bid’ah) was Muzaffar ad-Din ibn Zain al-Din, the ruler of Irbil. "He was a prodigal monarch. He commanded the scholars of his time to follow the conduct based on their own derivation and independent thinking (ijtihaad), and that they should not follow any school of law of any master except their own. A group of scholars and a body of the servants inclined towards him. He used to celebrate the birthday and the first monarch to introduce this practice among the Muslims"[1]

He used to spend one hundred thousand (dirhams) on the celebration of the birthday of the Messenger (sallalahu 'alayhi wa sallam) every year. [2]

His assistant and helper in this innovation was Abdul Khattab Umar b. Dihya. "He was employed in the Maghrib, then travelled to Syria, then to Iraq, and then went to Irbil in 604 A.H. and found its monarch Muzaffar al-Din b. Zain al-Din who took keen interest in celebrating the birthday of the Messenger (sallalahu 'alayhi wa sallam). He composed a book for him al-Tanwir fi Maulid al-Siraj al-Munir and recited it to him. He rewarded him with one thousand dinars."[3]

Ibn Kathir has reported on the authority of al-Sabt about Ibn Dihya: "Ibn Unain used to defame the Muslims and disparage them. He would make additions in his report and exaggerate. So the people gave up narrating traditions from him and falsified him. Kamil was favouring him. When his conduct was disclosed to him, he withdrew Dar-al-Hadith from him and disgraced him."[4]

We give below the resume of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani's comments on him: "He was a liar, lied frequently, and a fabricator. He often slandered the scholars and the jurists of the past, used evil tongue, self-conceited, lacked insight in religious matters, and looked down upon religion. This has been reported from al-Hafiz Diya. He further says: Ali b. al-Hussein Abul Ali al- Isbahan narrated to me - it is enough to mention his name as an authority - when Ibn Dihya came to us in Isbahan, he stayed with my father in the hospice. He honoured and respected him very much. One day he came to my father with a carpet. He kissed it and placed it before him saying, "I offered such and such thousand rak'ahs of prayer on this carpet, and recited the whole Qur'an in the Ka'ba." He said: My father took it, kissed it, placed it on his head, and accepted it from him with a great pleasure. At the end of the day an inhabitant of Isbafian came and began to talk to us. During his conversation he said by chance: The faqih of Maghrib who is staying with you has purchased a beautiful carpet today for such and such a price. Thereupon my father ordered to bring the carpet. Seeing it the man said, "Yes by Allah, this is the same." My father kept silent, and the eyes of Ibn Dihya fell down. [5]

1. Ahmad b. Muhammad el-Misry, el-Qawl el-Mu'tamad fi 'amal al-Mawlid
2. Al-Dhahabi, Duwal al-Islam, Vol.11 p.102
3. Ibn Kathir, al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya, Vol.I3 pp.144-146
4. Ibid
5. Ibn Hajar el-Asqalani, Lisan al-Mizan, VoL 4 p. 295

[Abd al-Muhsin al Hindy]

AsSalaamu alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barkaatuhu,

A Great Book :

The ruling concerning Mawlid an-Nabawi by Shaikh Saaleh al-Fawzaan.
Translated by Shawana Aziz.

http://www.qsep.com/books/mawlid_qsep.com.pdf

About the Book

In this book, Shaikh Saleh al-Fawzan has enumerated several reasons behind the prohibition of celebrating the Mawlid, and explicitly clarified the major doubts raised up by the proponents of Mawlid; and this includes the claims that …

Celebration of Mawlid is honouring the Prophet.

Mawlid is celebrated by a large number of people in many towns and cities

Commemorating Mawlid renews the memories of the Prophet

Mawlid is a Bidah Husna (good innovation) because it is a means of showing gratitude towards Allah for sending the Prophet.

The saying of Umar, ‘What a good Bidah is this?’

Celebration of Mawlid an-Nabawi is out of love for the Prophet and an expression of one's love, which is permissible.

Additional quotes by Shaikh Muhammad ibn Ibraheem Aal-Shaikh have been added to further clarify these issues.

The booklet has two valuable appendixes

Appendix 1:

An explanation of the Hadeeth, “He, who establishes/initiates a Sunnah Husna (good Sunnah) in Islam, he will have the reward of those who perform it after him until the Day of Judgment.”, in the words of Shaikh Saleh al-Fawzan (hafidhahullah) and Shaikh Saleh al-Uthaimeen (rahimahullah). And this hadeeth is often brought forth in defense of innovations.

Appendix 2:

A Dialogue between Shaikh al-Albaani (rahimahullah) and a proponent of Mawlid concerning, “Is the celebration of Mawlid a good deed (Khayr)?”



I ask Allah to make us amongst those who follow the Qur’an and the Sunnah upon the understanding of the Sahabah (radiallahu anhum). Ameen

Shawana A. Aziz


AsSalaamu alaykum wa Rahmatullah.

[loony toons]

Some people claim that Ibn Taymiyyah was for the mawlid and as ‘evidence’ they produce the following paragraph from his words:

“And similarly what some people innovate by analogy with the Christians who celebrate the birth of ‘Eesa (Jesus), or out of love for the Prophet (saw) and to exalt him, and may Allaah reward them for this love and effort, not on the fact that it is an innovation…“

[Taken from "Majmoo' Al-Fataawa", Vol.23 p.163, and "Iqtidaa' As-Siraat Al-Mustaqeem", p.294-295, Section entitled, "The innovated festivals of time and place."]

From the above words is seems as if this great Imaam, Mujaahid & Scholar of Islaam, was for the mawlid and saw it as something legitimate and rewardable.

However, this is a false interpretation of his words. Here is what Ibn Taymiyyah actually said along with a better translation of the text:

و كذلك ما يحدثه بعض الناس إما مضاهاة لنصارى في ميلاد عيسى عليه السلام و إما محبة للنبي صلى الله عليه و سلم و تعظيما له و الله قد يشيبهم على هذه المحبة و الاجتهاد لا على البدع

“And like that, what some people have innovated, be it out of analogy to the Christians in the birth of ‘Eesa or be it out of love for the Prophet (saw) and honor for him and Allaah, they may be rewarded for this love and ijtihaad, not for the innovation.“

So it is clear that Ibn Taymiyyah claaed it an innovation, and saw no reward for the deed.

For more information please refer to “The Erroneous & Invalid In Muhammad Hisham Kabbani’s Mawlid”, By Abu Khaliyl, ‘Dar Al-Kitab Wal-Hikmah’ publishing. Pp. 30-32

Source: Was Ibn Taymiyyah For The Mawlid (Celebration Of The Prophet’s Birthday (saw))? � The Authentic Base

[Moin Khan]

Debate between Albani and Milad Supporter

Shaikh al-Albanee: Is the celebration of Mawlid an-Nabawi Khayr (good) or evil?
The opponent: Khayr.

Shaikh al-Albanee: So, were the Messenger of Allah r and his Sahabah unaware of this Khayr (good)?
The opponent: No.

Shaikh al-Albanee: I am not convinced with your saying, 'No' because it is impossible that this Khayr (i.e. the celebration Mawlid) if it is Khayr
- be concealed from the Prophet r and his Sahabah since we do not know Islam and Eeman except through Prophet Muhammad r. So, how do we know a Khayr (good deed) that he did not know of? This is impossible.
The opponent: Establishing Mawlid an-Nabawi is reviving his r memories and is a tribute to him r.

Shaikh al-Albanee:This is a philosophy that we know of, and have heard from many and read in their books, but when Allah's Messenger r invited the people (to the Deen of Allah), did he call them to Islam as a whole or he invited them to Tawheed?
The opponent:Tawheed.

Shaikh al-Albanee:First, he invited them to Tawheed, next prayer was made obligatory, then fasting, later the obligation of Hajj, and so on. So, you follow this Sunnah of the Sharee'ah, (and talk about the issue under discussion) step-by-step.
We have now agreed that it is impossible that there could be a Khayr with us which the Prophet r did not know of. (Because) we know all the Khayr through the Messenger r... and I believe that anyone, who doubts in this matter, is not a Muslim.
From the Ahadeeth of Allah's Messenger r that support this statement is, "There is nothing that will take you closer to Paradise but that I have enjoined it upon you, and there is nothing that will take you closer to Hell but that I have warned you of it." [Musnad ash-Shafa'ee and others]
So, if Mawlid was Khayr and something that could bring us closer to Allah, then Allah's Messenger r would have guided us to it. Right or wrong
I don't want you to agree with me except if you are convinced of every word I say. You have complete freedom to say, "Please, I do not agree with this point." So, do you stop at some point from what I have just said, or are you with me completely?
The opponent:I am with you totally.

Shaikh al-Albanee:Jazak Allah Khair.
We say to everybody who approves of this celebration – Mawlid is Khayr in your opinion, so did the Messenger of Allah r guide us to it or did he not. If they say, "He guided us to it." We say to them, "Produce your proof if you are truthful." [Soorah al-Baqarah (2): 11] and they can never bring a proof of it... they have no proof or argument except (saying), "This is a Bidah Husna (a good innovation)!!"

All - those who approve of Mawlid and those who forbid it - are in agreement that this (celebration of) Mawlid neither existed at the time of Allah's Messenger nor at the time of the Sahabah...
However, the supporters of Mawlid say, "What is in Mawlid? It is just remembering the Prophet r , sending blessing upon him and similar acts."We say, "If it was Khayr, there would have been precedence in it (by the Salaf as-Salih). You know the Hadeeth of Allah's Messenger r, "The best of my ummah is my generation, then those who come after them, then
those who come after them." This is an agreed upon Hadeeth.
The Prophet's generation was in which he r and the Sahabah lived, then those who followed them were the Tabi'oon, and then those who followed them were the followers of Tabi'oon. This again is an agreed upon matter.
So, do you think that there could be any Khayr in which we could excel them in terms of knowledge and actions? Is it possible?
The opponent:Concerning knowledge - if the Messenger had informed someone at his time that the earth rotates.



Shaikh al-Albanee:Please no divergence (from the issue under discussion). I asked you about two things; knowledge and action. As a matter of fact, this divergence of yours has been helpful to me. So, (to say in a more clear way), my question is in terms of the Sharee'ah
knowledge and actions. It is not concerning (the knowledge of) medicine for example.
The doctor today is more knowledgeable than Ibn Seena in his age because he was born after a long time and various experiments(were) carried out (during this period) but this does not increase him (in status) in the sight of Allah nor does he achieve precedence over the
best generations. Rather he possesses a superior status in the field of knowledge he possesses. We are however, speaking about the Sharee'ah knowledge Barak Allah Feek (may Allah bless you).
So, you have to keep this in mind. When I tell you, do we believe that we can be more knowledgeable, it refers to the Sharee'ah knowledge not the experimental knowledge like Geography, Astronomy, Chemistry and Physics. In this time of ours, a disbeliever is more knowledgeable than the other people in these secular sciences - does this bring him closer to Allah?
The opponent:No

Shaikh al-Albanee: So, now we are not talking in terms of worldly knowledge but we are speaking about knowledge with which we seek nearness/closeness to Allah.
Just a little while ago, we were speaking about the celebration of Mawlid. The question again is and please reply openly without another divergence.
Do you think with the mind and intellect bestowed upon you (by Allah) that it is possible for us, in this later time to be more knowledgeable than the Sahabah and the Taba'een with regards to the Sharee'ah knowledge and be hastier in performing actions and that we be closer to Allah than the Salaf as-Salih?
The opponent: Do you mean the Tafseer of the Qur'aan by the knowledge of the Sharee'ah?

Shaikh al-Albanee: They are more knowledgeable than us in Tafseer, they are more knowledgeable than us in the Ahadeeth of Allah's Messenger - consequently they are more knowledgeable than us in the Sharee'ah of Islam.
The opponent: Perhaps today in our time (we are more knowledgeable) concerning the Tafseer of the Qur'aan, for example the Qur'aanic verse, "You will see the mountains and think them solid, but they shall pass away as the passing away of the clouds. The Work of Allah, Who perfected all things. Verily! He is Well-Acquainted with what you do." [Soorah an-Naml (27): 88]
If the Messenger of Allah r had informed someone in his time that the earth rotates, would he have believed him? Nobody would have believed him.

Shaikh al-Albanee: Do you want us to write down another divergence in your record?
Brother, I am asking about the totality and not some part, we are asking a common question - who is more knowledgeable as a whole about Islam?
The opponent: Obviously Allah's Messenger r and his Sahabah.

Shaikh al-Albanee: This is (the answer) we want from you, Barak Allah Feek.
The Tafseer, which you keep repeating, has no relation with actions. It relates to thinking and intellect. Those who mention this verse in order to conclude that the earth rotates are mistaken because the verse relates to the Day of Judgment, "On the Day when the earth will be changed to another earth and so will be the heavens, and they (all creatures) will appear before Allah, the One, the Irresistible.' [Soorah Ibraheem (14): 48]
(However,) We are not discussing this subject. I accept that that the later people are more knowledgeable about secular sciences than the Sahabah, the Taba'een and others - but this has no relation with righteous actions. For example, today the disbelievers are more knowledgeable in the sciences of astronomy but will it benefit them in any way? No. So, we don't have to plunge into this subject, we are to speak about everything that brings us closer to Allah. We have to discuss about Mawlid an-Nabawi.

We have so far agreed that if there was any Khayr then the Salaf as- Salih and at their head Allah's Messenger r would have been more knowledgeable about it than us and enthusiastic in performing that action. Is there any doubt in it?
The opponent: No, no doubt.



Shaikh al-Albanee: Do not restrict this to experimental sciences it has nothing to do with closeness to Allah or righteous deeds. So, Mawlid was non-existent during the time of Allah's Messenger r - as agreed upon by everybody. So, this Khayr was non-existent during the time of Allah's Messenger r, his Sahabah, Taba'een and the Imams. How could this Khayr be concealed from them? We have to say one of the two things; They knew this Khayr like we know (because) they were more knowledgeable than us.
OR
They did not know this Khayr, then how did we know it? So, if we say, they knew - and this saying is more in favor of those who approve the celebration of Mawlid - so, why did they not act upon it?
Are we closer to Allah then they were?!
Why did not even one of them perform this act - a Sahabi, a Taba'ee, a knowledgeable or even a common person?
Does it suit your mind that nobody ever acted upon this Khayr although there number was in millions, they were more knowledgeable than us, righteous than us and closer to Allah than us?
You know the saying of Allah's Messenger r, "Do not revile my companions. By (Allah) in Whose Hand my soul is, if any one of you spends gold (piled up) like (mount) Uhud it will not equal a pint of any one of them, nor its half." [Agreed upon]
Do you see the difference between them and us? They struggled in the path of Allah with the Prophet r. They took the knowledge 'gaddan taryan' (fresh and anew) without these many mediums that are between us and the Prophet r.
Allah's Messenger r pointed towards a similar meaning in the Saheeh Hadeeth, "Whoever wants to read the Qur'aan as gaddan taryan as when it was revealed, then let him read according to the recitation of Ibn Umm Abd (i.e. Abdullah ibn Mas'ood)."
We cannot imagine that these Salaf as-Salih and at the head of them the Sahabah were ignorant of something that would bring one closer to Allah and we know of it.
If we say that they knew it like we know then we cannot imagine that they ignored this Khayr.
Insha'Allah, this issue has been made clear to you after I have repeatedly mentioned it. If the celebration of Mawlid was Khayr then it would have been from Islam.
The opponent: al-Hamdulillah.

Shaikh al-Albanee: Jazak Allah Khair.
One more thing. There are numerous verses and Ahadeeth which explain that Islam has been completed/perfected. I believe you are well-aware of this and firmly believe in it – both a scholar and a common man know this truth that Islam is complete and it is not like the religion of the Jews and Christians in which there is alteration and modification every day.
I remind you of the saying of Allah, "This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed my Favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." [Soorah al-Maidah (5):3]
So here comes the question and this is another way to prove that the celebration of Mawlid is not Khayr. If the celebration of Mawlid wasKhayr then it would have been from Islam. So are we all - those who approve of the celebration of Mawlid and those who disapprove of it - agreed upon this issue like our agreement upon the issue that the celebration of Mawlid was non-existent during the time of Allah's Messenger?
Are we agreed upon now that if the celebration of Mawlid was Khay then it would have been from Islam and if it was not Khayr then it is not from Islam?
"This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed my Favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." [Soorah al- Maidah (5):3]
The day when the above verse was revealed, there was no celebration of Mawlid. So do you think the Deen would have been complete (without this celebration)?
Please be frank with me, do not think of me as those scholars who quiet their students and common people saying, 'Be quite, you do not know and you don't understand.'
Use your freedom to speak as if you were speaking to a person of your age and knowledge. If you are not convinced say, 'I am not convinced.'
So, if the celebration of Mawlid was Khayr then it would have been from Islam and if it was not Khayr then it would not have been from Islam and we are agreed upon that Mawlid was non-existent when this verse was revealed.
I base my argument upon the saying of Malik Ibn Anas, who said, "He, who innovates a Bidah in the religion of Islam and he considers it to be Khayr then he has maligned the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad r that he r betrayed the Message (i.e., did not completely convey the message)."
Notice that Malik Ibn Anas says one Bidah and not many Bidah.
So, this is a dangerous matter. What is the proof, O Imam?

Imam Malik said, "Read if you wish, 'This day I have perfected your religion for you,ncompleted my Favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.'" [Soorah al-Maidah (5):3]

So, something that was not from the Deen that day is also not from the Deen today."
When did Imam Malik make this statement?
In the 2nd century after Hijrah - one of the generations that was promised goodness. So, how about the 14th century?!
This statement of Imam Malik should be carved with letters of gold. But we are ignorant of the Book of Allah and the Ahadeeth of Allah's Messenger r, and from the saying of the scholars whom we claim to follow, between their example and ours is a distance equal to the distance between east and west.
Imam Malik speaks in clear Arabic, 'something that was not from the Deen that day, is not from the Deen today.'
If it was not so then there would have been no controversy or dispute among the scholars who adhere to the Sunnah and those who defend the Bidah.
How can the celebration of Mawlid be from the Deen, when it was not so during the time of Allah's Messenger, the Sahabah, the Taba'een and their followers?!

Imam Malik was from the followers of the Taba'een and was included in the Hadeeth, "The best of my ummah is my generation, then those who come after them, then those who come after them." [Agreed upon]
Imam Malik said, "The affairs of the later part of this ummah can never be corrected except with that which corrected the affairs of the early
generations of this Ummah."
With what were the first part of the Ummah corrected?
By innovating in the religion and (seeking to) achieve closeness to Allah with that which Allah's Messenger r did not prescribed??!
Allah's Messenger r said, "There is nothing that will take you closer to Paradise but that I have enjoined it upon you, and there is nothing that will take you closer to Hell but that I have warned you from it." [Musnad ash-Shafa'ee]

Why did Allah's Messenger r not order us with the celebration of Mawlid?
This is a question and it has an answer, (because) there exists a legislated celebration of Mawlid an-Nabawi in contrast to the unlegislated celebration of Mawlid an-Nabawi. The legislated celebration existed during the time of Allah's Messenger r in contrast to the unlegislated one.

There are two big differences between these two celebrations;
1) The legislated celebration is a form of worship and is agreed upon by all the Muslims (in contrast to the unlegislated one, which is neither legislated nor a worship and is not agreed upon by all Muslims)
2) The legislated celebration comes once every week and their celebration of Mawlid comes once a year. I do not say this without a proof, I will relate to you a Hadeeth from Saheeh Muslim,
Abi Qatadah al-Ansaree related, "There came a man to Allah's Messenger r and said, 'O Messenger of Allah, why do you fast on Mondays?" He r replied, "That is the day on which I was born and the day on which I was entrusted with the Mission or when I was first given Revelation." [Saheeh Muslim]
What is the meaning of this statement?
The Prophet r is saying, why do you ask me this while on this day Allah gave me life and revealed the Qur'aan upon me?! Which means that it is required to fast on Mondays as a gratitude to Allah for His creating me and revelation of the Wahy.

This is similar to the fast of Aashoorah. The fast of Aashoorah was made obligatory upon every Muslim before the month of Ramadaan. It has been related in the Ahadeeth that when Allah's Messenger migrated to Medina, he found the Jews fasting the day of Aashoorah and inquired about it. They replied saying this is the day when Allah saved Moosa u and his people from Fir'awn and his army. So we fast on this day in thankfulness to Him.Allah's Messenger r said, "We have more right upon him than you." So,he fasted and ordered fasting on this day and it was made obligatory until Allah revealed this verse, "The month of Ramadan in which was revealed the Qur'aan, a guidance for mankind and clear proofs for the guidance and criterion (between right and wrong)." [Soorah al-Baqarah (2): 185]

The obligation of fasting on the day of Aashoorah was abrogated later and it became a Sunnah.
It is evident from this that Allah's Messenger r participated with the Jews in their fasting on the day of Aashoorah in thankfulness to Allah for saving Moosa u from Fir'awn. So, the door of Shukr (thankfulness) has been opened - even for us - in the form of fasting on Mondays because it is the day when Allah's Messenger r was born and on this day the Wahy (revelation) came down upon him.
Now I ask, 'These people who celebrate Mawlid, do they fast on Mondays?'
No, they do not fast on Mondays. But most of the people celebrate Mawlid an-Nabawi every year! Is this not altering the facts?
For these people, the following verse is true with regards to Jews (alone), 'Would you exchange that which is better for that which is lower?' [Soorah al-Baqarah (2): 61]

The fast which is agreed upon by all the Muslims on Mondays is Khayr although majority of the Muslims do not fast this day!!
There are a very few people who fast on these days. So, do they know the reason behind this fast? No, they don't.
So, where are the scholars who defend Mawlid, why don't they enlighten the people that fasting on Monday is the legislated celebration of Mawlid (i.e., birthday of Allah's Messenger)? And why don't they encourage the people to it instead of defending the unlegislated celebration?
Allah truly says, "Would you exchange that which is better for that which is lower?" [Soorah al-Baqarah (2): 61]
The Messenger truly said, "They will follow the ways of those who came before them, handspan by handspan, cubit by cubit, until even if they entered a lizard's hole they will follow them." We said, "O Messenger of Allah, (do you mean) the Jews and Christians?" He said, "Who else?" [Agreed upon]
So, we have followed in the footsteps of the Jews, they chose that which was less over that which was Khayr, like we have chosen the celebration of Mawlid an-Nabawi that comes once a year and is baseless - over the Khayr i.e., celebration (of Mawlid an-Nabawi) every Monday.
It is a legislated practice that you fast while keeping in mind the motive behind it which is being thankful to Allah for His creation of Allah's Messenger r on this day and the revelation of Wahy...
The opponent: Isn't reading the Seerah (biography) of Allah's Messenger an act of honoring him?

Shaikh al-Albanee: Yes
The opponent: In it is reward - this is Khayr from Allah.



Shaikh al-Albanee: All of it is Khayr, there is no benefit (for your stance) in this question so I interrupt you with a question, 'Does anybody stop you from reading his r Seerah?'
Let me ask you a question, 'If there was a legislated worship, but Allah's Messenger r did not assign a specific time or specific manner for it. Is it allowed for us to set a specific time and manner for it from ourselves? Do you have an answer?'
The opponent: No, I don't have an answer.

Shaikh al-Albanee: Allah says, "Or have they partners with Allah, who have instituted for them a religion which Allah has not allowed." [Soorah Shurah (42): 21]
Similarly, Allah says, "They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam, while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded to worship none but One Ilah (Allah) La ilaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshiped but He). Praise and glory be to Him, (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)." [Soorah Tawbah (9): 31]

Narrated Adee Ibn Hatim t that he heard the Prophet of Allah r reciting the verse: (above verse), he (Hatim) said "We didn't worship them." The Messenger of Allah r, "Did they not make Haraam what Allah made Halaal and you all made it Haraam, and they made Halaal what Allah made Haraam and you all made it Haraam?" He replied, 'Certainly.' The Prophet of Allah r said, "That is your worship to them." [at-Tirmidhee, vol. 3, p. 56. no. 247]

This shows the danger of innovating in the Deen of Allah.

Courtesy:- www.Moinkhan.webnode.com