مفهوم البدعة فى الشرع

February 1, 2016

مفهوم البدعة فى الشرع

كثير من الناس يعترضون على علماء ديوبند وأكابرهم، كمولانا رشيد أحمد الگنگوهي ومولانا التهانوي وغيرهما، لإنكارهم على عمل المولد، بمعنى الاحتفال الخاص على ولادة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم الذي يقام به سنويا في شهر الربيع الأول. قد أنكروا على هذا الاحتفال الخاص في هذه المناسبة الخاصة وسموها بدعة ومكروهة

ينبغي لمن يريد إدراك وجه قولهم (رحمهم الله) هذا أن يدقق في معنى البدعة فى الشرع ومفهومها، لا سيما لدي هؤلاء الأكابر

فمعنى البدعة عندهم – ولهم دلائل وسلف – أن مفهوم البدعة هو

معاملة أمر – سواء كان عقيدة أو فعلا أو تركا أو قولا – ليس له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين (أي لا يقصد فى الدين لذاته) – إما في أصله أو في وصفه – كمعاملة ما له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين

وعكسه داخل في مفهوم البدعة أيضا، أي: معاملة ما له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين كمعاملة ما ليس له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين

وتعبير ((ما له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين)) يشير إلى ما يعرف بتعبير ((أمر تعبدي)) فى اصطلاح الغير

وهذه المعاملة إما مبني على الاعتقاد وإما مبني على الالتزام بأمر ما على هيئة توهم هذا الاعتقاد، والأول بدعة حقيقية والثاني بدعة حكمية

فمثال أمر ليس له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين في أصله صوم السكوت، فلو صام أحد صوم السكوت واعتقد أن له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين بحيث يثاب عليه ويطلب هو لذاته، فهو ارتكب بدعة حقيقية

ولو صام جماعة من المسلمين هذا الصوم مع أئمتهم ومقتديهم – مع أنه ليس له وجه عادي ظاهر – بحيث يوهم هذا الفعل أن هذا الصوم له أصل فى الدين، فهو بدعة حكمية لو لم يعتقدوا أن له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين

ومثال أمر ليس له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين في وصفه فالمولد النبوي، بمعنى الاحتفال الخاص سنويا فى المناسبة الخاصة، فإن أصل فعل المولد من ذكر ولادة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وإظهار الفرح على ظهوره ثابت شرعا، ولكن هذه الهيئة المخصوصة له من فعله على التكرار في كل سنة في تاريخ معين مع الأئمة والمقتدين وتسميته ((عيدا)) ليس له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين، أي لا يطلب هذه الهيئة المخصوصة لذاتها فى الدين، فإنه لو كان مقصودا لذاته لكان الصحابة والسلف عليه حريصا ولسبقونا إليه، ولم يثبت هذه الهيئة المخصوصة منهم، وإن ثبت أصل ذكر الولادة الشريفة

فلو اعتقد أحد أن هذا الوصف لهذا الفعل له قيمة ذاتية فى الدين – بحيث يثاب على هذه الهيئة والوصف لذاتيهما إضافة إلى ثواب الأصل المشروع – فهذا بدعة حقيقية، ولو لم يكن هذا اعتقاد المحتفلين به فهو عند علماء ديوبد لا يزال بدعة بدعة حكمية (لا حقيقية) لأن كثيرا من العامة لا يرون الهيئة المذكورة المخصوصة شيئا عاديا أو انتظاميا فقط، بل تدين بهذه الهيئة المخصوصة، وصورة الفعل توهم وتؤيد هذا الاعتقاد الباطل فإنه يقام به كما يقام بشيء تعبدي، بالالتزام به والإنكار على من لا يحضر وبمشاركة الأئمة والمقتدين واتخاذه شعارا للاسلام وعيدا إلى غير ذلك

فهذا هو الأصل في إنكار علماء ديوبند عمل المولد على الهيئة المذكورة المعروفة بين الناس، وهو أن كل ما يفعل على رؤوس الأشهاد مع الأئمة والمقتدين بحيث يوهم هو أن هذا الأصل أو هذا الوصف ثابت فى السنة وله قيمة ذاتية فى الدين – مع أنه ليس كذلك – فهو بدعة سيئة منكرة

وإليكم بعض النقول لإثبات هذا الأصل

روي عن الشعبي أن عمر بن الخطاب رضي الله عنه كان يضرب ((الرجبيين)) الذين يصومون رجب كله، فوجه الإمام ابن وضاح فعله هذا بقوله: ((إنما معناه خوف أن يتخذوه سنة مثل رمضان)). (البدع والنهي عنها، دار الصفا، ص٥١

أقول: لا شك أن التطوع بالصوم من أفضل الأعمال، وأن فيه سعة فمن شاء فله أن يكثر منه ومن شاء فله أن يقلل منه، لكن تخصيص يوم أو شهر للتطوع بالصوم على هيئة الاجتماع – مع أنه لم يثبت تخصيص هذا اليوم أو الشهر من الشارع – يوهم كون هذا اليوم أو الشهر مطلوبا لذاته، وهذا وجه المنع

سئل الإمام النووي عن فعل بعض المصلين في صلاة التراويح من قراءة سورة الأنعام جملة فى الركعة الأخيرة من التراويح فى الليلة السابعة من شهر رمضان، فأجاب: ((هذا الفعل المذكور ليس بسنة بل هو بدعة مكروهة ولكراهتها أسباب. منها: إيهام كونها سنة، ومنها تطويل الركعة الثانية…فينبغي لكل مصل اجتناب هذا الفعل وينبغي إشاعة إنكار هذا فقد ثبتت الأحاديث الصحيحة فى النهي عن محدثات الأمور، وأن كل بدعة ضلالة، ولم ينقل هذا الفعل عن أحد من السلف)) (فتاوى الإمام النووي، ص. ٢٥-٦

أقول: فأحد وجوه المنع عند الإمام النووي إيهام هذا الفعل بسنيتها

قال الإمام عز الدين ابن عبد السلام في إنكاره على صلاة الرغائب: ((العالم إذا صلى كان موهما للعامة أنها من السنن فيكون كاذبا على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بلسان الحال ولسان الحال قد يقوم مقام لسان المقال)) وقال: ((صلاة الرغائب بخصوصياتها توهم العامة أنها سنة من سنن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كما هو الواقع)) وقال: ((وأما حديث أنس وعتبان بن مالك رضي الله عنهما: فالفرق بينهما وبين صلاة الرغائب أن الاقتداء في صلاة الرغائب توهم العامة أنها سنة وشعار فى الدين بخلاف ما وقع في حديث أنس وعتبان رضي الله عنهما فإنه نادر فلا يوهم العامة أنه سنة بل يوهم الجواز)) (النقول من: مساجلة علمية بين الإمامين الجليلين العز بن عبد السلام وابن الصلاح حول صلاة الرغائب المبتدعة

أقول: فكل ما يوهم العامة أنه بخصوصيته سنة ومطلوبا لذاته أو شعارا فى الدين مع أنه ليس كذلك لا يجوز عند الإمام العز بن عبد السلام

قال الإمام الشاطبي: ((كل عمل أصله ثابت شرعا إلا أن في إظهار العمل به أو المداومة عليه ما يخاف أن يعتقد أنه سنة فتركه مطلوب فى الجملة من باب سد الذرائع)) (الإعتصام، ج٢ ص٣٣٣

قال خاتمة المحققين عند السادة الحنفية الإمام ابن عابدين رحمه الله: ((وقد صرح بعض علمائنا وغيرهم بكراهة المصافحة المعتادة عقب الصلوات مع أن المصافحة سنة، وما ذاك إلا لكونها لم تؤثر في خصوص هذا الموضع فالمواظبة عليها فيه توهم العوام بأنها سنة فيه)) وقال: ((ولذا منعوا عن الاجتماع لصلاة الرغائب التي أحدثها بعض المتعبدين لأنها لم تؤثر على هذه الكيفية في تلك الليالي المخصوصة، وإن كانت الصلاة خير موضوع)) وقال الحصكفي فى الدر عن سجدة الشكر بعد الصلاة المكتبوبة: ((لكنها تكره بعد الصلاة لأن الجهلة يعتقدونها سنة أو واجبة وكل مباح يؤدي إليه فمكروه)) ونقل ابن عابدين عن الطحطاوي في شرح هذه العبارة: ((فمكروه الظاهر أنها تحريمية لأنه يدخل فى الدين ما ليس منه)) (النقول من رد المحتار للشامي

وقال الإمام برهان الدين الحنفي البخاري من أئمة القرن السادس عن سجدة الشكر: ((وجه الكراهة على قول النخعي وأبي حنيفة رضي الله عنهما على ما ذكره القدوري أنه لو فعلها من كان منظورا إليه وظن ظان أنه واجب أو سنة متبعة عند حدوث نعمة فقد أدخل فى الدين ما ليس منه وقد قال عليه السلام: من أدخل فى الدين ما ليس منه فهو مكروه)) (المحيط البرهاني

ومن المنقول عن أئمة المذهب (أبي حنيفة وأصحابه) أنه يكره اتخاذ شيء مخصوص من القرآن لركعة خاصة من الصلوات، ووجهه على ما قاله الإمام أبو بكر الجصاص من القرن الرابع: ((ويكره أن يتخذ شيء من القرآن لشيء من الصلوات، وذلك لأنه لو أبيح ذلك لم يؤمن على مرور الأوقات أن يظنه الناس مسنونا أو واجبا كما قد سبق الآن إلى ظن كثير من الجهال في مثله)) (شرح مختصر الطحاوي، دار السراج، ج٨ ص٥٢٥

أقول: صيغ الأذكار المأثورة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم (ك: سبحن الله، والحمد لله إلخ) والأعداد المأثورة عنه فى الأوقات الخاصة يتعبد بها، ويطلب هذه الصيغ وهذه الأعداد لذاتها لأن لها قيمة ذاتية فى الدين، أما لو استعمل صيغ غير مأثورة أو أعداد غير مأثورة فلا بأس به من حيث أن الذكر أمر عادي بمعنى أنه معقول المعنى، أي: المقصود منه: حضور ذكر الله فى القلب، ولك أن تقيس عليه باختيار ما يساعدك فيه، ففيه سعة، ولكن لا يتعبد بصيغ وأعداد غير مأثورة، أي: لا يطلب هي لذاتها، وهذا هو وجه منع عبد الله بن مسعود رضي الله عنه جماعة من التابعين الذين اختاروا أعدادا مخصوصة غير مأثورة وحملوا الغير على هذه الأعداد، فإن هذا الحمل يوهم كون هذه الأعداد مطلوبة لذاتها، فأنكر عليهم ابن مسعود أشد الإنكار. أنظر: سنن الدارمي، دار المغني، ج١ ص٢٨٧

أقول: ومن المعلوم أنه ما ليس فيه هذا الإيهام ليس ببدعة ، كأمر له سبب عادي معلوم ظاهر عند العامة والخاصة، مثل نشر العلم فى المدارس وتعيين بعض الكتب للدراسة والتدريس، لا يوهم العامة أن هذه الأشياء مطلوبة لذاتها فى الدين، بل هي أسباب ووسائل عادية، وكذلك تدوين العلم وغير ذلك، ومنها التداوي والصدقة وحفظ الشرع والرقية والتعويذ، كل هذه الأمور مما هو مطلوب في أصله وله معنى معقول، فبناء على المعنى المعقول لك أن تختار وسيلة وصورة تدخل في عموم هذه الأشياء ما دام في حدود الشرع، أما لو اتخذ هيئة وصورة خاصة من هذه الأشياء على وجه يوهم العامة أنها مطلوبة لذاتها فى الدين فممنوع من هذا الوجه، لا في أصل العمل

وبهذا التقرير اندفع كثير من الإشكالات في هذا الباب، وحاصله: أن التعبد بشيء (سواء كان ذلك الشيء أصل أمر أو وصفه)، بمعنى جعل ذلك الشيء أمرا مطلوبا لذاته فى الدين، مع أنه ليس كذلك، من البدع المنكرة، وهذا إما من حيث الإعتقاد وإما من حيث المعاملة معه بحيث يوهم العامة والجهال كونه مطلوبا لذاته

فهذا هو سبب إنكار علماء ديوبند عمل المولد على الهيئة المعروفة بين الناس، فإن هذا العمل وفعله على الدوام في كل سنة في تاريخ معين يوهم العوام بكون هذه الهيئة مطلوبة لذاتها فى الدين

وهذا الرأي مما ينبغي أن يحترم ويعتبر، وله سلف من أئمة أهل السنة

قال الشيخ العلوي المالكي رحمه الله دفاعا عن عمل المولد ((إن الإجتماع لأجل المولد النبوي الشريف ما هو إلا أمر عادي، وليس من العبادة في شيء، وهذا ما نعتقده وندين الله تعالى به)) ثم قال: ((ونحن ننادي بأن تخصيص الإجتماع بليلة واحدة دون غيرها هو الجفوة للرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم)) انتهى

فأجاب عنه المفتي محمد تقي العثماني: ((ولا شك أن ذكر النبي الكريم صلى الله عليه وسلم وبيان سيرته من أعظم البركات وأفضل السعادات إذا لم يتقيد بيوم أو تاريخ، ولا صحبه اعتقاد العبادة فى اجتماع يوم مخصوص بهيئة مخصوصة، فالإجتماع لذكر الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم بهذه الشروط جائز فى الأصل، لا يستحق الإنكار ولا الملامة. ولكن هناك اتجاه آخر ذهب إليه كثير من العلماء المحققين المتورعين، وهو أن هذا الإجتماع، وإن كان جائزا في نفس الأمر، غير أن كثيرا من الناس يزعمون أنه من العبادات المقصودة، أو من الواجبات الدينية، ويخصون له أياما معينة على ما يشوبه بعضهم باعتقادات واهية وأعمال غير مشروعة، ثم من الصعب على عامة الناس أن يراعوا الفروق الدقيقة بين العادة والعبادة. فلو ذهب هؤلاء العلماء – نظرا إلى هذه الأمور التي لا ينكر أهميتها – إلى أن يمتنعوا من مثل هذه الإجتماعات رعاية لأصل سد الذرائع وعلما بأن درء المفاسد أولى من جلب المصالح، فإنهم متمسكون بدليل شرعي فلا يستحقون إنكارا ولا ملامة. والسبيل في مثل هذه المسائل كالسبيل فى المسائل المجتهد فيها، يحمل كل رجل ويفتي بما يراه صوابا ويدين الله عليه، ولا يفوق سهام الملامة إلى المجتهد الآخر الذي يخالفه في رأيه.)) انتهى

تكملة

هناك من الأسباب العديدة الظاهرة التي توهم العامة بأن لشهر الربيع والليلة الثاني عشر منه فضيلة خاصة للاحتفال بمولد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولفعل غيره من الأعمال الصالحة، بحيث يطلب هذه الأيام لذاتها فى الدين، أذكر بعض الأمثلة

يقوم كثير من المحتفلين به ببيان فضائل الربيع وفضائل ليلة المولد، لا أعنى الربيع الوحيد الذي وقع فيه الولادة الشريفة أو فضيلة تلك الليلة الخاصة منه، بل كلما تكرر هذا الشهر وتكرر هذه الليلة فى السنة تثبت هذه الفضيلة عندهم، مع أنه ليس له دليل شرعي، بل الدليل خلافه، فإن ترك عمل يقصد لذاته مع ثبوت الدوافع وعدم الموانع في زمن السلف دليل المنع

فعلى سبيل المثال: قد حض أحد علماء المغرب الناس بأن يكثروا من الصلوات على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في يوم المولد (أي: ١٢ ربيع الأول) من كل سنة فإن هذا العمل ((في هذا اليوم المعظم تعدل عبادة الثقلين كلها)) (كتاب شراب أهل الصفا). ولا يزال المحتفلون به يذكرون فضائل هذه الليلة وهذا اليوم، والناس لا يفهمون منه إلا كون هذا اليوم أفضل من غيره لحصول الثواب والتقرب عند الله تعالى، وقد سمعت بأذني في محضر عالم عربي مشهور فى الغرب يتكلم فى مسجد كبير يقول: إن هذه الليلة مما يحتفل به أهل السماء أيضا، فضلا عن أهل الأرض! ومقصده كما ظهر للسامعين: ليلة المولد من الربيع في كل سنة. فهذا مما يتسبب في إيهام العوام بأن هذا الشهر وهذا اليوم مطلوب لذاته فى الدين. وأما اجتماعات التبليغ فلا يذكر أحد – فيما أعلم – فضيلة يوم خاصة لها فى الدين

ومع ذلك يتخذ هذا اليوم عند كثير من الناس ((عيدا))، وعيد شعار من شعائر الإسلام، ولو كان قصد أول مسميه به معناه اللغوي أو العرفي لا يفيده فإنه من الواضح أنه يتسبب في اعتقاد الناس أن هذا اليوم له فضيلة خاصة فى الدين ويطلب لذاته. ولذلك أدخل الشاطبي ((اتخاذ يوم ولادة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم عيدا)) في جملة البدعة، وقال: ((إقامة المولد على الوصف المعهود بين الناس بدعة محدثة وكل بدعة ضلالة)) انتهى

Advertisements

Maliki Fuqaha on Mawlid

January 15, 2014

Citing al-Turtushi’s silence as his approval of the mawlid is nothing short of desperate. Despite what al-Suyuti says, we have al-madkhal before us and we have the intelligence to read Ibn al-Hajj’s own opinion (al-Suyuti himself considers ibn al-Hajj’s exposition contradictory, indicating he did not fully agree with it); aside from the paragraph quoted above of his clear rejection of organised “intentional” mawlid even if free from all sinful acts, he writes elsewhere:

وبعضهم- أي المشتغلين بعمل المولد- يتورع عن هذا- أي سماع الغناء وتوابعه- بقراءة البخاري وغيره عوضاً عن ذلك، هذا وإن كانت قراءة الحديث في نفسها من أكبر القرب والعبادات وفيها البركة العظيمة والخير الكثير، لكن إذا فعل ذلك بشرطه اللائق به على الوجه الشرعي لا بنية المولد، ألا ترى أن الصلاة من أعظم القرب إلى الله تعالى، ومع ذلك فلو فعلها
إنسان في غير الوقت المشروع لها لكان مذموماً مخالفاً، فإذا كانت الصلاة بهذه المثابة فما بالك بغيره

Tr: And some of them – i.e. those participating in the mawlid – are weary of these (i.e. sama and ghina etc.), and read from al-Bukhari and other such (books) instead of these. And although reading hadith in itself is from the greatest acts of nearness (to Allah) and worship since it contains great blessing and abundant good, but when this is done it should be done with its suitable condition according to the way the Shariah (has prescribed it) and not with the intention of the mawlid. Do you not see that the Salah is from the greatest acts of nearness to Allah and despite this if one were to perform it outside of its prescribed time it would be blameworthy and opposed? Since this is the case with Salah, the same is the case with other acts.

I ask: how does this fit in with the universal methodology of bid’ah?

Since al-Wanshrisi was mentioned, he quotes Abd Allah al-Haffar in his collection of Fatawa (al-mi’yar al-mu’rib) as saying the following concerning the mawlid (in a similar fashion to Ibn al-Hajj):

وليلة المولد لم يكن السلف الصالح وهم أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم والتابعون لهم يجتمعون فيها للعبادة، ولا يفعلون فيها زيادة على سائر ليالي السنة، لأن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لا يعظم إلا بالوجه الذي شرع فيه تعظيمه، وتعظيمه من أعظم القرب إلى الله، لكن يتقرب إلى الله جل جلاله بما شرع، والدليل على أن السلف الصالح لم يكونوا يزيدون فيها زيادة على سائر الليالي أنهم اختلفوا فيها، فقيل إنه صلى الله عليه وسلم ولد في رمضان وقيل في ربيع، واختلف في أي يوم ولد فيه على أربعة أقوال، فلو كانت تلك الليلة التي ولد في صبيحتها تحدث فيها عبادة بولادة خير الخلق صلى الله عليه وسلم، لكانت معلومة مشهورة لا يقع فيها اختلاف ولكن لم تشرع زيادة تعظيم …

ولو فتح هذا الباب لجاء قوم فقالوا يوم هجرته إلى المدينة يوم أعز الله فيه الإسلام فيجتمع فيه ويتعبد، ويقول آخرون الليلة التي أسري به فيها حصل له من الشرف ما لا يقدر قدره، فتحدث فيها عبادة، فلا يقف ذلك عند حد، والخير كله في إتباع السلف الصالح الذين اختارهم الله له، فما فعلوا فعلناه وما تركوا تركناه، فإذا تقرر هذا ظهر أن الاجتماع في تلك الليلة ليس بمطلوب شرعا، بل يؤمر بتركه

Tr: The pious predocessors (salaf al-salih), that is the Companions of Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) and the Successors, did not congregate for worship on the night of the mawlid, and they would not increase (acts of devotion) therein over the rest of the days of the year, because the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) is not glorified except in the manner in which his glorification has been legislated (in the Shariah); and his glorification is from the greatest acts of nearness to Allah, but one should seek proximity to Allah with what has been legislated (in the Shariah). The proof that the Salaf did not increase (in acts of devotions) on that (night) than the rest of the nights is that they differed over it(‘s date); so it has been said he (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) was born in Ramadan and it has been said in Rabi, and the day on which he was born has been disputed on four different views. So were it so that the night on which he was born in the morning, worship was invented therein in (celebration of) the birth of the best of creation (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), it would have been specified and well-known containing no controversy. But increased glorification has not been legislated…if this door is opened, some people will say the day of Hijra is a day in which Allah honoured Islam so they would gather therein and increse in worship and others will say in the night of Isra he attained immeasurable honour so they invent worship therein, and this will have no boundary. And all good is in following the Pious Salaf for which Allah has selected them; so whatever they do, we do and whatever they left we leave. When this is realised, it becomes clear gathering on this night is not legally required, rather one is ordered to leave it.

See volume 7 of al-mi’yar al-mu’rib (pp. 99-100) – the file was too large to attach but can be dowloaded from here


The Ruling in the Hanafi Madhhab of Persistence on a Mustahabb Practice in a Specific Form

December 18, 2013

 

Always Shaking Hands after the Congregational Fard Prayers

Ibn ‘Ābidīn al-Shāmī (d. 1252 H) writes in his Radd al-Muhtār:

وقد صرح بعض علمائنا وغيرهم بكراهة المصافحة المعتادة عقب الصلوات مع أن المصافحة سنة، وما ذاك إلا لكونها لم تؤثر في خصوص هذا الموضع فالمواظبة عليها فيه توهم العوام بأنها سنة فيه

“Some of our [Hanafī] scholars and others have stated explicitly the detestability of the customary handshake following the salawāt, although shaking hands is sunnah. And that is only because it has not been transmitted [from the early generations] in this specific place [i.e. after the salawāt] – thus, continuity on it in this [specific place] gives the false impression that it is sunnah therein.” (Radd al-Muhtār, Dār ‘Ālam al-Kutub, 3:141)

Salāt al-Raghā’ib

He continues:

ولذا منعوا عن الاجتماع لصلاة الرغائب التي أحدثها بعض المتعبدين لأنها لم تؤثر على هذه الكيفية في تلك الليالي المخصوصة، وإن كانت الصلاة خير موضوع

“This is why they forbade gathering for Salāt al-Raghā’ib which some worshippers invented because it has not been transmitted in this form in those specific nights, even though Salāh is the best institution.” (ibid.)

Sajdat al-Shukr on a Particular Occasion

Al-Haskafī (d. 1088 H) writes in al-Durr al-Mukhtār:

لكنها تكره بعد الصلاة لأن الجهلة يعتقدونها سنة أو واجبة وكل مباح يؤدي إليه فمكروه

“But it (sajdat al-shukr) is detestable after Salāh because the ignorant believe it is sunnah or wājib (i.e. after Salāh), and every permissible action leading to it is makrūh.” (Al-Durr al-Mukhtar/ Radd al-Muhtār, Dār ‘Ālam al-Kutub, 2:598)

Ibn ‘Ābidīn explains that this statement was transmitted from al-Zāhidī (d. 658 H) in his commentary on Qudūrī.

The karāhah (detestability) mentioned here refers to makrūh tahrīmī (prohibitively disliked) for which a person is sinful, as mentioned by Ibn ‘Ābidīn, quoting Tahtāwī:

 فمكروه الظاهر أنها تحريمية لأنه يدخل فى الدين ما ليس منه ط

“It is apparent that it is makrūh tahrīmī because he inserts into religion what is not from it.”

Imām Burhān al-Dīn al-Hanafī (d. 616 H) writes:

وجه الكراهة على قول النخعي وأبي حنيفة رضي الله عنهما على ما ذكره القدوري أنه لو فعلها من كان منظورا إليه وظن ظان أنه واجب أو سنة متبعة عند حدوث نعمة فقد أدخل فى الدين ما ليس منه وقد قال عليه السلام: من أدخل فى الدين ما ليس منه فهو مكروه

“The reason for the karāhah based on the view of al-Nakha‘ī and Abū Hanīfah (may Allah be pleased with them), according to what al-Qudūrī mentioned, is that if one who was observed (by people) was to practise upon it, and a supposer wrongly imagined that it is sunnah or wājib adhered to at the instance of blessing, then indeed he has inserted into religion what is not from it, and he (upon him peace) said: Whoever inserts into religion what is not from it, it is detestable.” (al-Muhīt al-Burhānī, Dār al-Kutb al-‘Ilmiyah, 5:323)

Fixing a Sūrah to a Rak‘ah

Abū Bakr al-Jassās (d. 370 H) writes in explaining another Hanafī ruling:

قال أبو جعفر: ويكره أن يتخذ شيء من القرآن لشيء من الصلوات

وذلك لأنه لو أبيح ذلك لم يؤمن على مرور الأوقات أن يظنه الناس مسنونا أو واجبا كما قد سبق الآن إلى ظن كثير من الجهال في مثله

“Abu Ja‘far [al-Tahawi] said (quoting the imāms of the Hanafī madhhab): It is makrūh (prohibitively disliked) to adopt a part of the Qur’ān for a specific part of the prayers.

“And that is because if that was to be permitted, it would not be assured that with the passage of time people will believe it is sunnah or wajib; as has occurred today in the understanding of many of the ignorant people in the like of it.” (Sharh Mukhtasar al-Tahawi, Dār al-Sirāj, 8:525)

Note: This was in the 4th Islamic century! How then can we claim our ignorant and common people are immune from this misunderstanding?

Summary

In short, we have two rulings from the founders of the Hanafī madhhab, the basis of the prohibition mentioned in them being that it leads the common and ignorant people to believing that a particular form of an originally acceptable practice is sunnah. These two rulings are: performing sajdat al-shukr on a particular occasion; fixing a sūrah to a particular rak‘ah of Salāh. Moreover, we have the verdict of later Hanafī jurists in a couple of other rulings, based on the same principle. These are: shaking hands persistently after the fard prayers; and Salāt al-Raghā’ib in the fixed way and time it is performed.

All of this points to one conclusion:

In the Hanafī madhhab, repeatedly, persistently and continuously performing a religious practice, originally regarded in the Sharī‘ah as permissible or mustahabb, publically, in a specific manner that has not been transmitted from the Prophet (peace be upon him) or Sahābah, such that a false impression is created in the minds of the ignorant that this particular form (e.g. in terms of its date, procedure) is sunnah or wājib, renders that act prohibitively disliked (makrūh tahrīmī) and the act will be considered an insertion into religion or bid‘ah.

Conclusion

We can safely say, looking at the condition of Barelwis and other psuedo-traditionalists of today, the formal/popular (murawwaj) Mawlid of today, falls in this category, and is hence, makrūh tahrīmī in the Hanafī madhhab.

Also see: https://barelwism.wordpress.com/2013/11/08/consistency-of-the-deobandi-akaabirs-view-on-mawlid/

Update: Someone raised the objection: does not madaris fall under this prohibition, as within them, the mustahabb practice of teaching and learning are repeatedly done in a fixed and regulated way that was not transmitted from the Sahabah? For the perceptive person, the difference between the above examples, including Mawlid, and madaris is clear. The purpose of the regulated and fixed manner of teaching and learning in madaris is purely based on organisational and pragmatic reasons. Common people are not susceptible to the mistaken belief that the madaris themselves are objectives, or desirable elements, of religion. On the other hand, repeated handshakes after Salah, if done openly, commonly and continuously, does make the common people susceptible to the view that to shake hands at that time is a desired practice of religion. Similarly, the Mawlid of Rabi’ al-Awwal makes the common people susceptible to the belief that making this commemoration at that time of the year is superior. This is not only theory; many people really do believe that to celebrate the birth in the month of Rabi al Awwal is more rewarding and superior than doing so in any other time of the year. It is not regarded merely as something organisational. The same applies to the other examples, of fixing a surah to a particular rak’ah of Salah and doing Sajdat al-Shukr after every Fard prayer.


Consistency of the Deobandi Akaabir’s View on Mawlid

November 8, 2013

Source: http://reliablefatwas.com/consistency-deobandi-akaabir-regarding-mawlid/

The Deobandi view on Mawlid consists of the following ingredients:

1. To discuss, commemorate and mention the birth of Rasulullah (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is in itself rewarding and recommended just as commemorating any other aspect of his person (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam).

2. The commemoration that is observed at the time of Rabi’ al-Awwal is customarily attached to, and inseparable from, a number of innovated or unlawful conditions, like specifying it to the date of the 12th and narrating fabricated reports.

3. In principle, it is these conditions, and not the birth-commemoration itself, that make the Mawlid functions impermissible, bid’ah or makruh.

4. As this commemoration-with-unawful+innovated-conditions is the common and widespread (murawwaj) form of Mawlid functions held in Rabi’ al-Awwal, a general fatwa of impermissibility ought to be given, based on the principle of preventing the ‘awamm (common people) from falling into evil. This is known as “Sadd adh-Dharaa’i” (blocking the means), a principle proven from rulings of Hanafi fiqh.

Such a position is self-consistent. There is nothing inherently contradictory in this position. If all these ingredients are kept in mind, then one will be able to make sense of all pronouncements on mawlid made by the Akabir of Deoband.

It is often insinuated by Barelwis that Deobandis are inconsistent, or even coy and deceptive, in their views about Mawlid. For instance, it is claimed that there is a contradiction between what Mawlana Khalil Ahmad as-Saharanpuri wrote on the Mawlid in al-Muhannad (in 1325 H/1907), after the death of Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, to the Arabs, and what he wrote in al-Barahin al-Qati’ah (in 1304 H/1887 CE) with the approval of Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, to the Indians.

In fact, what was mentioned in Muhannad is almost identical to what is found in al-Barahin al-Qati’ah.

On p. 8 of al-Barahin al-Qati’ah, it clearly states:

نفس ذكر ميلاد فخر عالم عليه السلام كو كوئى منع نہیں كرتا بلکہ ذكر ولادت آپ ص كا مثل ذكر دیگر سير وحالات مندوب ہے چنانچہ يہ امر فتوی مولوی احمد علیصاحب محدث سہارنپوری میں صراحۃ مذکور ہے

We do not consider commemoration of the birth of the Pride of the World, upon him peace, itself, prohibited. Rather, commemorating his birth, just like commemorating his other conditions and states, is praiseworthy. Thus, this matter is mentioned explicitly in the fatwa of Mawlawi Ahmad ‘Ali Sahib Muhaddith Saharanpuri.” (Al-Barahin al-Qati’ah, p. 8)

In Muhannad, he says, reiterating this same message: “Commemorating the states which have the least connection with the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) is from the most desirable of recommended acts (ahabb al-mandubat) and the greatest of preferable acts (a‘la l-mustahabbat) according to us, whether it is the commemoration of his noble birth or commemoration of his urine, faeces, standing, sitting, sleeping and waking as is stated clearly in our treatise called Al-Barahin al-Qati‘ah at various junctures therein.”

He also refers to the fatwa of Mawlana Ahmad Ali Saharanpuri in Muhannad. The fatwa states that if the commemoration of the birth is free of impermissible activities, like narrating fabricated narrations, missing obligatory prayers, introducing polytheistic and innovated practices, giving it greater importance than it has, restricting its timing, then it is a rewardable practice. Mawlana Saharanpuri adds to the impermissible activities: free-mixing, extravagance and the belief in its obligation.

However, in Muhannad, he adds that the mawlid gatherings of India are rarely found to be free of these impermissible practices. Therefore, based on the principle of Sadd adh-Dhara’i, , the fatwa will be of general impermissibility. For details on this, one may refer to the 2nd and 3rd principles discussed here: http://www.deoband.org/2010/02/fiqh/miscellaneous/mawlid-deoband-and-hanafi-fiqh/ and this article: http://www.deoband.org/2011/12/general/principles-of-fiqh/the-principle-of-blocking-the-means/.

The Hanafis have put a stop to acts which are originally mubah or mustahabb if it is feared they will lead to innovated or impermissible ends. For example, the Hanafis regard specification of a particular Surah to a particular rak’ah impermissible, as it may lead to the ‘awamm believing that that Surah is masnun in that rak’ah. And there are other such examples. Al-Halabi mentioned a general principle in Sharh al-Munyah, based on these rulings, that every mubah that leads to the ignorant people (juhhal) believing it is Sunnah or Wajib, renders that act makruh tahrimi. And it is certainly a reality that many juhhal believe that to commemorate the Prophetic birth on the specific date of the 12th of Rabi’ al-Awwal is sunnah or even necessary. Hence, the fatwa would be of general impermissibility.

Al-Barahin al-Qati’ah says:

البتہ امور غير مشروعہ جو اس کے ساتھ ضم ہو گئے ہیں اس كي وجه سے حكم مجموعہ پر بدعت ومنكر  ہونے كا يا شرك وحرمت كا لگايا جاتا ہے اور يہ حكم باعتبار ان قيود غير  مشروعہ کے ہے نہ بوجہ  نفس ذكر کے

However,  due to the unlawful things that have become attached to them (the Mawlid functions), a ruling is given to the combination of it being bid’ah and abomination, or of shirk and prohibition. And this ruling is by consideration of those unlawful restrictions, not because of the commemoration itself.” (p. 8)

Keep in mind that these are passages from al-Barahin al-Qati’ah, the book written by Mawlana Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri and approved by Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi.

It is clear from this passage from al-Barahin and the answer in al-Muhannad, that there is essentially no difference in what they say.

From reading all of Mawlana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi’s fatwas on this issue, and not looking at only some of them selectively as Barelwis usually do, we get the same message. Thus, in one fatwa, he explicitly says:

نفس ذكر ولادت مندوب ہے اس مين كراهت قيود کے سبب آئي ہے

The birth-commemoration itself is recommended, and its reprehensibility is a result of the [innovated] restrictions [in the general Mawlid functions].” (Fatawa Rashidiyyah, p. 258)

Furthermore, in several places of the Fatawa, Mawlana Gangohi clearly qualifies the prohibition with the “widespread” (murawwajah) Mawlid functions. For example, on p. 174, he says: “The widespread mawlud function is bid’ah, and because of being mixed with reprehensible matters it is prohibitively disliked.” On p. 270, it explicitly states that because most mawlid and ‘urs functions are not free of bid’ah (innovated restrictions) and unlawful practices, all of them should be avoided.

There are other fatwas that give the general ruling of impermissibility. This is not a contradiction as one who understands the above-mentioned principles will appreciate. This ruling reflects the general condition of the Mawlid functions of that time for which the fatwa of impermissibility was given, regardless of whether the unlawful aspects are present in the specific function in reference or not. Those that are free of the impermissible activities are not excused from the fatwa for the principle of blocking the means (sadd adh-dhara’i’); that is, to prevent the public from falling into the impermissible aspects that such functions could could lead to.

Hence, there is no inconsistency between what is found in Fatawa Rashidiyya, al-Barahin al-Qati’ah and al-Muhannad on the issue of the Mawlid, if all are read in context.

In sum, Barahin and Fatawa Rashidiyyah clearly state that the essence of the birth-commemoration is permissible and desirable. Mawlana Gangohi’s fatwas in general opposition are based on the principle that even those gatherings free of the impermissible activities that have become associated with them could eventually lead to them.

There is, therefore, no contradiction in the Deobandi view regarding the Mawlid as expressed by Mawlana Gangohi and Mawlana Saharanpuri.

One may summarise the Deobandi position in one sentence as follows:

The birth-commemoration in its essence is praiseworthy, but because the Mawlid functions held in Rabi’ al-Awwal have become inseparable from impermissible and innovated aspects, the fatwa is given of general impermissibility, to prevent the masses from falling into sin and to block the means to these evils.


Names of scholars who were against mawlid

January 28, 2013

 Names of scholars who were against mawlid: 

1. Mujaddid Alf-i-Sani Shaykh Ahmad Sirhindi

2. Imam Shatibi al-Gharnati al-Maliki

3. ‘Allamah Qadi Shihab al-Din Dolatabadi Hanafi, Sahib Tafsir Bahr al-Mawaj

4. ‘Allamah Muhammad bin Fazal Jonpuri

5. ‘Allamah Qadi Nasir al-Din Gujrati

6. ‘Allamah Taaj al-Din Fakhani al-Maliki

7. Hafiz Abul Hassan ‘Ali bin Fazal Maliki

8. Shaykh Ibn al-Haaj Maliki

9. Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah

10. Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahman Maghribi

11. Imam Nasir al-Din Shafi’i

12. ‘Allamah Sharf al-Din Hanbali known as Qadi Jabal.

13. Shaykh Nur al-Din Sharalmsi in Sharh Mawahib al-Laduniyyah

14. ‘Allamah Hassan bin ‘Ali

15. Shaykh Ahmad bin Muhammad Maliki

16. ‘Allamah Abul Qasim ‘Abd al-Rahman Maliki

17. Shaykh ‘Usman Dan Fodio Maliki

18. Shaykh Muhammad bin Abu Bakar Makhzumi Maliki

19. ‘Allamah ‘Alu al-Din ibn Isma’il Shafi’i

20. Hafiz Abu Bakar known as Ibn Nukta Baghdadi

21. Shaykh ibn Rajab Efindi, Sahib Sharh Tariqah Muhammadiyyah

22. ‘Allamah Fakhr al-Din Khurasani

23. Shaykh ‘Abd al-Wahhab Sha’rani

24. Sahib Nur al-Yaqin

25. Sahib Tariqah Muhammadiyyah

26. Imam Anwar Shah Kashmiri

27. Imam Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi

28. Hakim al-Ummah Mawlana Thanwi

There are some scholars who allowed mawlid but were againt qiyam during the mawlid and considered it bid’ah.

1. ‘Allamah Muhammad bin ‘Ali Dimishqi – student of ‘Allamah Suyuti

2. Hafiz Ibn Hajar Makki

Source: Marwajah Milad


Ashgal of Sufiya and Bid’ah

May 31, 2012

 Allamah Shah Muhammad Isma’il Shahid

Translated by Shaykh Muhammadullah Khalili Qasmi

Fourth Issue

  • To engage oneself in ‘ulum aliyyah (auxiliary sciences) like learning the Arabic sciences to a necessary extent which help understand the apparent meaning of the Qur’an and Sunnah;
  • similarly, to engage oneself in Sufi practices and litanies (ashghal wa adhkar) to a necessary extent, for example, causing motion in the six lata’if through silent dhikr, or for example, yad dasht which is also called pas anfas, and always concentrating one’s attention on the heart, which is beneficial in acquiring the reality of ihsan, and this ihsan is established by the outward of the Qur’an and Sunnah;
  • likewise, training with martial weapons like artillery, gun, pistol, etc. which can be used in fighting against the disbelievers;

all these are not from the category of bid‘ah, because although these things are invented and originated, but they are not from the category of religious matters. Thus, if anyone practices them considering them as religious matters, these will certainly be bid’ah with respect to him. Considering them matters of religion means that, instead of considering them a means and path to jihad [and the other objectives], one determines those very things as commendable religious practices.

The explanation of this synopsis is that there are two types of means and paths to religious matters:

  1. The first category are those that are themselves recommended by the Shari‘ah and are commendable acts of religion. For example, although acquiring the quality of purity from wudu and ghusl are from the means and conditions of Salah, but they are themselves acts which the Shari‘ah has praised, as the Lord Almighty says: “Verily, Allah loves those who turn to Him constantly and He loves those who keep themselves pure and clean” (2:222) and the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: “Purity is half of faith.” Likewise, although the recitation of the Qur’an is a means of deliberation, contemplation (fikr) and pondering (tadabbur), but that itself is a great act of worship. And although engaging in the study of hadith and Prophetic biography is a means to practicing and following the Sunnah, but in and of itself that is a praiseworthy act in the Shari‘ah.  Similarly, although i‘tikaf is a means and path to catching the congregational prayers and dedicating one’s time to the remembrance of Allah, but it is also itself is a type of obedience.
  1. The second type of means are those that are themselves absolutely not from the category of worship, but if performed with the intention of a means to an [established] act of worship, they will be included in worship (‘ibadah) indirectly. For example, traveling for Hajj, going to the market with the intention of going to the mosque, drawing water from a well with the intention of wudu, writing commendatory letters or requests to the rulers on behalf of the needy, and likewise adopting any handicraft ‎ and work to use the income for helping religion or the poor. Thus, traveling and touring cities and countries, walking in markets, drawing water from a well, getting expertise in writing letters and recommendations and other occupations and handicrafts like blacksmithing, dyeing, tailoring, etc, are not themselves worship, rather they are either included in sports and futile play or works for livelihood; that is, putting a lot of effort into them or immersing oneself in it beyond limit makes the hearts hard and the soul heedless and creates estrangement towards the transcendent realm. Thus, all the aforementioned things are contained in the second category and not the first category. So, anyone who counts it among the first kind, these acts will become actual and real bid‘ah (bid‘ah asliyyah haqiqiyyah) with respect to him.

It should also be known that means and paths [to religious matters] are of two kinds:

  1. The means of the first kind are those that if help is taken from them, the objectives are made complete, meaning if the mentioned objectives are achieved through those means, this creates such beauty and perfection in the sight of the lawgiver that would not be created if those means are not utilized. For example, bathing, wearing new clothes, applying perfume for Jum’ah and ‘Id prayers; to climb an elevated place for giving adhan; giving adhan and iqamah and preparing a mosque for congregation; making congregation for Salah and joining the congregation and by straightening the row making it perfect; performing wudu for the remembrance of the divine and reciting the Qur’an; and generating a beautiful voice for the recitation of the Qur’an; and reciting the Qur’an for contemplation; electing an imam (leader) for jihad and obeying him. Like these, there are countless other acts the purpose of which is to perfect original acts of worship, and due to the absence of these means, some deficiency permeates the original acts of worship in the eyes of the lawgiver.
  1. The means of the second kind are those that are used on the basis that its doer is in need of it, or he is deficient in understanding the main objective of the act of worship or he does not have the ability to understand it, and if the objective is achieved without any means or medium, it neither affects the beauty and perfection of the objective nor decreases the grade and status of the doer, i.e. the status and grade of one who performs this worship without using these means and mediums is in no way lesser than one who does so using these means and mediums. For example, drawing water from a well for wudu, as one who performed wudu sitting at the bank of a river, his cleanliness and purity is in no way less than the purity and cleanliness of the one who drew water from a well and performed wudu. The same is the case with one who has a weak eyesight and uses spectacles or one who is uneducated and because of this searches for a Qur’an with vowels. Teaching alphabets to children also falls in the same category. The same applies to the weapons which are used in wars from a distance like arrows, rockets, artilleries, guns and other such weapons which are used to attack an enemy from a distance.

The sign and mark of such means is that once the objective is achieved, it will be considered nonsense and futile to use the means. Or if there arises any other means to achieve the objective, it will be foolish to delay the objective and wait for the means [used previously]. Likewise, upon acquiring the objectives, in the situation where one is praised [for those objectives], mentioning those means which were used as an aid to attain those objectives is a kind of idiocy. It will also be silly if based purely on using those means one is given preference over another. For example a person has excelled in the recitation of the Glorious Qur’an, so now for him to recite by spelling [each letter and vowel] is futile. Similarly, if a Muslim is standing in the row of jihad with an Indian sword while a disbeliever comes within the reach of his sword, it will be mere folly to delay killing the enemy and to wait for an arrow, gun or Isfahani sword.

A similar example is that Zayd and ‘Amr both recite the Glorious Qur’an while looking in the mushaf, but ‘Amr used glasses due to weak eyesight, so it will be outright stupidity to mention his glasses while praising his recitation, e.g. somebody says thusly: “Glory by to Allah! How respectfully ‘Amr recites the Mighty Qur’an that he performs fresh wudu and sitting with complete humility and concentration in the mosque, opening the Glorious Qur’an and wearing his glasses, he recites…” or he explains thusly: “Although Zayd and ‘Amr are equal in the excellence of the recitation of the Qur’an, pronouncing the letters with tajwid, in humility and concentration, and also in penetration and pondering and the sweetness of voice, but ‘Amr is better than Zayd in recitation since he recites after wearing glasses” or he says thusly: “‘Amr recites from the Glorious Qur’an with vowels [and is thus superior].”

Once this introduction has finished, it should be known that the abovementioned acts, i.e. ‘ulum aliyyah (auxiliary sciences), the Sufi practices and litanies and modern invented weapons are all related to the second type because the need for the utilization of these means arises because the people of our time are unable to achieve the real goal without these means. These matters are not related to the first type that they perfect the Qur’anic sciences or by means of them the stages of ihsan are accomplished or that these are the desirable acts of jihad.

If anyone counts the abovementioned acts from amongst the first type and mentions them while describing the merits and virtues of the pious ‘ulama and mujahidin and based on these matters he gives preference to one person over another and to prove greater right of imamate he cites those matters and sciences, then all these matters will turn into real bid‘ah with respect to him.

It should also be known that getting training of weapons and arms used in wars is more important than all the above mentioned means, and it is more appropriate relative to the other abovementioned means to spread and promote, because they are from the means and paths of jihad, and the basis of jihad is spreading and promoting [these weapons].

Next [in importance] are ‘ulum aliyyah (auxiliary sciences).

The Sufi practices remain. It is appropriate to keep them hidden since there are [Sufi] sayings [that impress on this] which state: “The hand is [engaged] in work and the heart in the remembrance of the Beloved,” and: “Seclusion [with the Divine] while in a gathering.” Therefore, making khanqahs for them [i.e. the Sufi practices] and gathering people for them and inviting them is not good and a work worthy of praise. These are low in the levels of preserving religious matters. Rather, what should be done is during the instruction and teaching of the Book and Sunnah, those principles of the objectives of ihsan are poured into the hearts, and they should be taught to the students without considering the specific practices of the Sufis of a tariqah, and without observing a particular formality, and without distinguishing any one tariqah from the other tariqahs, and without calling to this specific tariqah, so that along with occupation in one’s worldly and otherworldly works, those [practices] are also exercised. Thus, if someone does not observe and preserve the abovementioned levels [of the different means], these abovementioned means will be descriptive bid‘ah (bid‘ah wasfiyyah) with respect to him [and not “real bid‘ah”].

It also ought to be known that there should be a certain belief that such-and-such a thing is from the foundational objectives and another is from those acts which complete them and another is from their necessary means. Although this is a hidden matter [since belief is in the heart], and the basis of anything being Sunnah and bid‘ah revolves around this, yet some outward matters also come within the [parameters of] “belief” in this issue. For example, counting the auxiliary sciences amongst the sciences of Shari‘ah, and based on the auxiliary sciences issuing praise, and being happy at the one skilled in these sciences that he will be included in the group of those  scholars whose praise is due to [knowledge of] the Book and Sunnah, or to give good news to another about him being included in the group of those scholars, and to give him that respect and honor which is given to scholars of religion, and to lower and criticize those who are not talented in these [auxiliary sciences] even though by listening to the scholars of religion or by reading the translation of Qur’an and hadith he has acquired knowledge of religious rulings[1]. For example, a person called Zayd has complete skill in the auxiliary sciences [like Sarf, Nahw, etc.] but has no knowledge of the rulings of religion. On the other hand, a second person called ‘Amr, in the abovementioned way [i.e. by listening to scholars and reading translations], has good knowledge of religious laws but is unaware of the auxiliary sciences. Thus, counting Zayd amongst the scholars and ‘Amr amongst the ignorant, meaning in the occasions of respect and honor, or the credibility of the speech [of either of them] on the occasion of commanding good or issuing fatwa, or on the occasion of choosing an imam for Salah, or if Zayd opens his mouth in a debate on religious laws or has a discussion on them it will be considered respectful and courteous and if it was the other way round and ‘Amr discussed religious laws he will be counted amongst the irreverent and disrespectful; these examples regarding the aforementioned matters will be counted amongst effectual bid‘ah (bid‘ah hukmiyyah) The practices of the Sufis should be analogized to this.

Idah al-Haq al-Sarih[2], p.137-146


[1] A hadith states: “Knowledge [‘ilm] is [restricted] to three, and all that is besides them is excess: a decisive verse [i.e. Qur’an], an established Sunnah [i.e. Hadith] and a fair obligation [i.e. Fiqh].” (Abu Dawud)

[2] Imam Anwar Shah Kashmiri, praised the work Idah al-Haqq al-Sarih for its academic worth in refuting innovations in his well-known Fayd al-Bari.  He wrote, “Bid‘ah is what its founder invents with a good intention and it becomes mixed up with the Shari‘ah. Refer for this Idah al-Haq al-Sarih by Shah Isma‘il and Kitab al-I‘tisam by Al-Shatibi.”(Fayd al-Bari, 5:540) ‘Allamah Sayyid Yusuf Banuri mentions in the preface of Urdu translation that some parts of this book are superior to Al-I’tisam of Imam Shatibi.


Innovation of Celebrating the Mawlid

February 8, 2012

Shaykh Uthman Dan Fodio stated:

If you were to say, “What is the legal judgment concerning what the people do during the month of Rabi` ‘l-Awwal on the day of Prophet’s birthday (al-mawlid) or on the seventh day of the mawlid where people gather together for remembrance of Allah (dhikr) and the food which is prepared for that purpose?” I say: That is a reprehensible innovation if it is free of every disobedience (ma`siyya). It is said that the answer is that the practice of the Mawlid of the noble Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace is a highly recommended good innovation (bid`a hasana manduuba) when it is free of every disobedience. As for what the people have made a habit in these times where men and women mix freely, Allah forbid that any scholar would make that permissible.

It says in the al-Madkhal, “Generally what the people have invented from innovation is their false belief to be among the momentous acts of worship (akbar ‘l-`ibaadaat) and manifesting the rites of Islam is what they do during the month of Rabi` ‘l-Awwal from the Mawlid of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant hi peace. This has been included among the innovations (bid`a) and the forbidden things (muharramaat).” He continued, “It is necessary that when this noble month comes that it be honored, ennobled and respect it with deserving respect. This is by following the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace in that he used to single out times of blessing by increasing in performing acts of righteousness and generosity.”

If you were to say, “What is the legal judgment concerning those who prepare food only on the day of the mawlid. He intends by that the recognition of the mawlid and invites his Muslim brothers to eat along with that being free of every disobedience?” I say, This is a reprehensible innovation or an allowed innovation. The latter is the preferred decision (al-mukhtaar). The former decision was the opinion of the author of the al-Madkhal because he said, “If food is prepared only and one intends by that to recognize the Mawlid and the Muslim brothers are then invited even when it is free of every disobedience – it is still an innovation because of the intention only. This is because that is making increase in the religion and it is not among the behavior of the early community (as-Salaf). For following in the footsteps of the Salaf is paramount. No, rather it is obligatory.

Source: http://siiasi.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/ihyas-sunna-wa-ikhmadl-bida_2_.pdf (Ihya al-Sunna by Shaykh Uthman Dan Fodio, p. 189)