The Sunni Definition of Bid`a, Good or Bad

The Sunni Definition of Bid`a
As Either Good or Bad
GF Haddad - Shawwâl 1423



chapters:

I. Al-Shâfi`î's Definition
II. Ahl al-Sunna's Division
Al-Bayhaqî comment
Al-Ghazzâlî's Definition
Ibn al-`Arabî al-M's Definition
Ibn H.azm's Definition
Ibn al-Jawzî's Definition
Ibn al-Athîr explanation
Ibn `Abd al-Salâm's Final Classification
Al-Nawawî's Endorsement
Ibn H.ajar's Endorsement
Agreement of the Schools
Notes

This article is in two parts:
I. Al-Shâfi`î's definition of bid`a as either good or bad;
II. The division of bid`a into good and bad among Ahl al-Sunna and others.


I. Al-Shâfi`î's Definition of bid`a
as Either “Good” or “Bad”
A major contribution of Imâm al-Shâfi`î (ra) in the Foundations of Jurisprudence (us.ûl al-fiqh) is his division of innovation (al-bid`a) and innovated matters (al-muh.dathât) into “good” and “bad” depending on their conformity or non-conformity to the guidelines of the Religion. This is authentically narrated from al-Shâfi`î from two of his most prestigious students in the latter period of his life, the Egyptian h.adîth Masters H.armala ibn Yah.yâ al-Tujaybî and al-Rabî` ibn Sulaymân al-Murâdî:

H.armala said, “I heard al-Shâfi`î (ra) say:


'Innovation is two types (al-bid`atu bid`atân):
approved innovation (bid`a mah.mûda) and disapproved innovation (bid`a madhmûma). Whatever conforms to the Sunna is approved (mah.mûd) and whatever opposes it is abominable (madhmûm).'
He used as his proof the statement of `Umar ibn al-Khat.t.âb (ra) about the [congregational] supererogatory night prayers in the month of Ramad.ân: “What a fine innovation this is!”[1] This shows that al-Shâfi`î never interpreted `Umar's words figuratively the way the "Salafi" over-interpreters (mu`attila) do.

Al-Rabî` said, “Al-Shâfi`î said to us:
'Innovated matters are of two kinds (al-muh.dathâtu min al-umûri d.arbân):
one is an innovation that contravenes (mâ uh.ditha yukhâlifu) something in the Qur'ân or the Sunna or a Companion-report (athar) or the Consensus (ijmâ`): that innovation is misguidance (fahâdhihi al-bid`atu d.alâla).
The other kind is the innovation of any and all good things (mâ uh.ditha min al-khayr) contravening none of the above, and this is a blameless innovation (wahâdhihi muh.dathatun ghayru madhmûma).
`Umar (ra) said, concerning the prayers of Ramad.ân: What a fine bid`a this is! meaning that it was innovated without having existed before and, even so, there was nothing in it that contradicted the above.'”[2]

Thus al-Shâfi`î set forth the essential, indispensable criterion for the determination of true bid`a, as defined, among others, by Imâm al-Haytamî, Qâd.î Abû Bakr Ibn al-`Arabî, and Imâm al-Lacknawî respectively:


“Bid`a in terms of the Law is everything innovated in contravention of the Lawgiver's command and the latter's specific and general proof.”[3]
“Only the bid`a that contradicts the Sunna is blameworthy.”[4]

“Bid`a is all that did not exist in the first three centuries and for which there is no basis among the four sources of Islâm” i.e. Qur'ân, Sunna, Ijmâ`, and Qiyâs.[5]

Consequently, it is not enough for something merely to be novel to be a bid`a; it must also contradict the Religion.


Al-Bayhaqî commented on al-Rabî`s report thus:

“Similarly, debating with the people of innovations - when they make public their innovations or bring up their insinuations - to refute them and expose their fallacies: even if this is an innovation, nevertheless, it is a praiseworthy one because it consists in refuting what we just mentioned. The Prophet was asked about Divine foreordainment (al-qadar) and so were some of the Companions, and they replied with the answers that were narrated to us from them. At that time, they contented themselves with the words of the Prophet and, thereafter, with the reports to that effect. However, in our time, the innovators do not content themselves with such reports nor do they accept them. Therefore, it is necessary to refute their insinuations - when they make them public - with what they themselves consider proofs. And success is through Allâh.”[6]
This is a clear-cut defense of the necessity and Sunna character of kalâm in the defense against innovators on the part of Imâm al-Bayhaqî. Something similar is reported from Ibn `Asâkir, Ibn al-S.alâh., al-Nawawî, Ibn al-Subkî, Ibn `âbidîn, and others of the great Imâms we cited [hier 3a 3b]


II. Division of Bid`a into Good and Bad
among Ahl al-Sunna and Others


Al-Ghazzâlî's Identical Definition
H.ujjat al-Islâm al-Ghazzâlî said in his discussion of the adding of dots to the Qur'anic script:


“The fact that this is innovated (muh.dath) forms no impediment to this. How many innovated matters are excellent! As it was said concerning the establishing of congregations in Tarâwîh. that it was among the innovations of `Umar (ra) and that it was an excellent innovation (bid`a h.asana). The blameworthy bid`a is only what opposes the ancient Sunna or might lead to changing it.”[7]

Ibn al-`Arabî al-Mâlikî's Identical Definition
The Qâd.î Abû Bakr Ibn al-`Arabî said in his discussion of bid`a:


“Know - May Allâh grant you knowledge! - that innovated matters are two kinds (al-muh.dathâtu d.arbân).
1.) An innovated matter that has no basis other than lust and arbitrary practice. Such is categorically invalid. And
2.) An innovated matter understood to correspond to something [established]. Such is the Sunna of the Caliphs and that of the eminent Imâms. Innovated matters and innovations are not blameworthy merely for being called muh.dath and bid`a nor because of their meaning! Allâh Most High has said, { Never comes there unto them a new (muh.dath) reminder from their Lord }(21:2) and `Umar (ra) said: “What a fine bid`a this is!” Rather, only the bid`a that contradicts the Sunna is blameworthy and only the innovated matters that invite to misguidance are blameworthy.”[8]

Ibn H.azm and Ibn al-Jawzî's Identical Definition
Ibn H.azm al-Z.âhirî said:


“Bid`a in the Religion is everything that did not come to us in the Qur'ân nor from the Messenger of Allâh , except that one is rewarded for some of it and those who do this are excused if they have good intentions. Of it is the rewardable and excellent (h.asan), namely, what is originally permitted (mâ kâna as.luhu al-ibâh.a) as was narrated from `Umar (ra): “What a fine bid`a this is!” Such refers to all good deeds which the texts stipulated in general terms of desirability even if its practice was not fixed in the text. And of it is the blameworthy for which there is no excuse such as what has proofs against its invalidity.”[9]
Ibn al-Jawzî speaks in similar terms in the beginning of his Talbîs Iblîs:

“Certain innovated matters (muh.dathât) have taken place which do not oppose the Sacred Law nor contradict it, so they [the Salaf] saw no harm in practicing them, such as the convening of the people by `Umar (ra) for the night prayer in Ramad.ân, after which he saw them and said: 'What a fine bid`a this is!'”
[hier 4]

Ibn al-Athîr al-Jazarî's Identical Definition
The lexicographer Ibn al-Athîr said in his masterpiece, al-Nihâya fî Gharîb al-H.âdîth wal-Athar:


“Bid`a is two kinds: the bid`a of guidance and the bid`a of misguidance (bid`atu hudâ wa-bid`atu d.alâla). Whatever contravenes the command of Allâh and His Messenger : that is within the sphere of blame and condemnation. And whatever enters into the generality of what Allâh or His Prophet commended or stressed: that is within the sphere of praise. Whatever has no precedent such as extreme generosity or goodness - such are among the praiseworthy acts. It is impermissible that such be deemed to contravene the Law because the Prophet has stipulated that such would carry reward when he said: “Whoever institutes a good practice in Islâm (man sanna fîl-islâmi sunnatan h.asana) has its reward and the reward of all those who practice it.” And he said, conversely, “whoever institutes a bad practice in Islâm (waman sanna fîl-islâmi sunnatan sayyi'atan) bears its onus and the onus of all those who practice it.” [10] Such is when the act goes against what Allâh and His Messenger commanded.... It is in this sense that the h.adîth “every innovation is misguidance”[11] is understood: he means, whatever contravenes the bases of the Law and does not concur with the Sunna.”[12]

Ibn `Abd al-Salâm's Final Fivefold Classification
Shaykh al-Islâm, Sult.ân al-`Ulâmâ' Imâm al-`Izz Ibn `Abd al-Salâm similarly said:


“There are different types of innovations (bida`). The first type is whatever the Law indicated as praiseworthy or obligatory and the like of which was not done in the first period of Islâm. The second type is whatever the Law indicated as forbidden or disliked, and which was not done in the first period of Islâm. The third type is whatever the Law indicated as indifferently permitted and which was not done in the first period of Islâm.”[13]
Elsewhere he states that the categories of bid`a are five, identical to the jurists' classification of deeds:
“obligatory” (wâjib),
“forbidden” (h.arâm),
“recommended” (mandûb),
“disliked” (makrûh), and
“indifferently permitted” (mubâh.).[14]


Al-Nawawî's Endorsement of the Fivefold Classification
Shaykh al-Islâm, Imâm al-Nawawî said:


“Al-Bid`a in the Law is the innovating of what did not exist in the time of the Messenger of Allâh and is divided into “excellent” and “bad” (wahya munqasimatun ilâ h.asana wa qabîh.a). The Shaykh, the Imâm on whose foremost leadership, greatness, standing, and brilliance in all kinds of Islamic sciences there is consensus, Abû Muh.ammad `Abd al-`Azîz ibn `Abd al-Salâm - Allâh have mercy on him and be well-pleased with him! - said toward the end of his book, al-Qawâ`id [al-Kubrâ]:
“Innovation is divided into 'obligatory' (wâjiba), 'forbidden's (muh.arrama), 'recommended's (mandûba), 'offensive's (makrûha), and 'indifferent's (mubâh.a).
The way [to discriminate] in this is that the innovation be examined in the light of the regulations of the Law (qawâ`id al-sharî`a). If it falls under the regulations of obligatoriness (îjâb) then it is obligatory; under the regulations of prohibitiveness (tah.rîm) then it is prohibited; recommendability, then recommended; offensiveness, then offensive; indifference, then indifferent.”[15]


Ibn H.ajar's Endorsement of the Fivefold Classification
The H.âfiz. Ibn H.ajar said:


“The root meaning of innovation is what is produced without precedent. It is applied in the law in opposition to the Sunna and is therefore blameworthy. Strictly speaking, if it is part of what is classified as commendable by the law then it is a good innovation (h.asana), while if it is part of what is classified as blameworthy by the law then it is blameworthy (mustaqbah.a), otherwise it falls in the category of what is permitted indifferently (mubâh.). It can be divided into the known five categories.”[16]

Agreement of the Schools over the Fivefold Classification
Agreement formed in the Four Schools around the fivefold classification of bid`a as illustrated by the endorsement of the major later authorities in each School.

(1) Among the H.anafîs: al-Kirmânî, Ibn `âbidîn, al-Turkmânî, al-`Aynî, and al-Tahânawî.[17]

(2) Among the Mâlikîs: al-T.urt.ûshî, Ibn al-H.âjj, al-Qarâfî, and al-Zurqânî, while al-Shât.ibî attempts a refutation and claims that the fivefold classification is “an invented matter without proof in the Law”![18]

(3) Consensus among the Shâfi`îs.[19]

(4) Reluctant acceptance among later H.anbalîs, who altered al-Shâfi`î and Ibn `Abd al-Salâm's terminology to read “lexical innovation” (bid`a lughawiyya) and “legal innovation” (bid`a shar`iyya), respectively - although inaccurately - matching al-Shâfi`î's “approved” and “abominable.[20] This manner of splitting hairs has become the shibboleth of Wahhâbism in every micro-debate on bid`a although the correct way - as usual - is patently that of the Jumhûr.

Shaykh Muh.ammad Bakhît al-Mut.î`î said: “The legal bid`a is the one that is misguidance and condemned; as for the bid`a that the Ulema divided into obligatory and forbidden and so forth, such is the lexical bid`a which is more inclusive than the legal because the legal is only part of it.”[21]

Al-Shawkânî concluded in Nayl al-Awt.âr that the foundational division of innovations into “good” and “bad” is the soundest and most correct position.[22]

It is enough that a major Mujtahid Imâm of the Salaf said so on the basis of the Qur'ân and Sunna regardless of the argumentations of later centuries - whether from a would-be murajjih. like al-Shawkânî or a would-be censor like al-Shât.ibî - in light of the concurrence of the Jumhûr around al-Shâfi`î's explanation and the Divine and Prophetic injunctions to follow the path of the Believers and to stay with their greatest mass.


And Allâh knows best.



Notes
[1] Narrated from H.armala by Abû Nu`aym with his chain through Abû Bakr al-âjurrî in H.ilyat al-Awliyâ' (9:121 #13315=1985 ed. 9:113) and cited by Abû Shâma in al-Bâ`ith `alâ Inkâr al-Bida` wal-H.awâdith (Ryadh 1990 ed. p. 93), Ibn Rajab in Jâmi` al-`Ulûm wal-H.ikam (p. 267=Zuh.aylî ed. 2:52= Arna'ût. ed. 2:131 s.ah.îh.), Ibn H.ajar in Fath. al-Bârî (1959 ed. 13:253), al-Turt.ûshî in al-H.awâdith wa al-Bida` (p. 158-159), and al-Shawkânî, al-Qawl al-Mufîd fî Adillat al-Ijtihâd wa al-Taqlîd (1347/1929 ed. p. 36). `Umar's report is narrated by Mâlik in al-Muwat.t.a' and al-Bukhârî in his S.ah.îh..

[2] Narrated from al-Rabî` by al-Bayhaqî in his Madkhal and Manâqib al-Shâfi`î (1:469) with a sound chain as stated by Ibn Taymiyya in his Dâr' Ta`ârud. al-`Aql wa al-Naql (p. 171) and through al-Bayhaqî by Ibn `Asâkir in Tabyîn Kadhib al-Muftarî (Kawtharî ed. p. 97). Cited by al-Dhahabî in the Siyar (8:408), Ibn Rajab in Jâmi` al-`Ulûm wal-H.ikam (p. 267=Zuh.aylî ed. 2:52-53=Arna'ût. ed. 2:131 s.ah.îh.), and Ibn H.ajar in Fath. al-Bârî (1959 ed. 13:253).

[3] Al-Haytamî, al-Tabyîn fî Sharh. al-Arba`în (p. 32).

[4] Ibn al-`Arabî, `ârid.at al-Ah.wadhî (10:147).

[5] Cf. al-Lacknawî, Iqâmat al-H.ujja (p. 12).

[6] Al-Bayhaqî, Manâqib al-Shâfi`î (1:469).

[7] Al-Ghazzâlî, Ih.yâ' `Ulûm al-Dîn (1:276).

[8] Ibn al-`Arabî, `ârid.at al-Ah.wadhî (10:146-147).

[9] Ibn H.azm, al-Ih.kâm fî Us.ûl al-Ah.kâm (1:47).

[10] Narrated from Jarîr ibn `Abd Allâh al-Bajalî by Muslim, al-Tirmidhî, al-Nasâ'î, Ibn Mâjah, Ah.mad, and al-Dârimî. Also narrated with a similar wording from Abû Hurayra by Ibn Mâjah and Ah.mad; from Abû Juh.ayfa by Ibn Mâjah; and from Hudhayfa by Ah.mad.

[11] Narrated from al-`Irbâd. ibn Sâriya by al-Tirmidhî (h.asan s.ah.îh.), Abû Dâwûd, Ibn Mâjah, Ah.mad, al-Dârimî, Ibn H.ibbân (1:178-179 #5 s.ah.îh.), al-H.âkim (1:95-97=1990 ed. 1:174-177) - declaring it s.ah.îh. while al-Dhahabî confirmed it - and in al-Madkhal ilâ al-S.ah.îh. (p. 80-81), al-âjurrî in al-Sharî`a (p. 54-55 #79-82=p. 46 s.ah.îh.), Ibn Abî `âs.im in al-Sunna (p. 29 #54 s.ah.îh.), al-T.ah.âwî in Mushkil al-âthâr (2:69=3:221-224 #1185-1187 s.ah.îh.), Muh.ammad ibn Nas.r al-Marwazî in al-Sunna (p. 26-27 #69-72 s.ah.îh.), al-H.ârith ibn Abî Usâma in his Musnad (1:197-198), al-Rûyânî in his Musnad (1:439), Abû Nu`aym in H.ilyat al-Awliyâ' (1985 ed. 5:220-221, 10:115), al-T.abarânî in Musnad al-Shâmiyyîn (1:254, 1:402, 1:446, 2:197, 2:298) and al-Kabîr (18:245-257), al-Bayhaqî in al-Sunan al-Kubrâ (10:114), al-Madkhal (p. 115-116), al-I`tiqâd (p. 229), and Shu`ab al-‘mân (6:67), al-Baghawî who declared it h.asan in Sharh. al-Sunna (1:205 #102 isnâd s.ah.îh.), Ibn al-Athîr in Jâmi` al-Us.ûl (1:187, 1:279), Ibn `Asâkir in al-Arba`în al-Buldâniyya (p. 121), Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhîd (21:278-279) and Jâmi` Bayân al-`Ilm (2:924 #1758) where he declared it s.ah.îh., and others.

[12] Ibn al-Athîr, al-Nihâya (1:79 entry b-d-`).

[13] Ibn `Abd al-Salâm, al-Fatâwâ al-Maws.iliyya (p. 129).

[14] Ibn `Abd al-Salâm, al-Qawâ`id al-Kubrâ (2:337-339) cf. al-Nawawî in al-Adhkâr (Thaqâfiyya ed. p. 237) and Tahdhîb al-Asma' wal-Lughât (3:20-22), al-Shât.ibî in al-I`tis.âm (Beirut ed. 1:188), al-Kirmânî in al-Kawâkib al-Darârî (9:54), Ibn H.ajar in Fath. al-Bârî (13:253-254), al-Suyût.î, introduction to H.usn al-Maqs.id in al-H.âwî lil-Fatâwâ; al-Haytamî, Fatâwâ H.adîthiyya (p. 150), Ibn `âbidîn, Radd al-Muh.târ (1:376) etc.

[15] Al-Nawawî, Tahdhîb al-Asmâ' wal-Lughât (3:20-22).

[16] Ibn Hajar, Fath. al-Bârî (1959 ed. 5:156-157=1989 ed. 4:318).

[17] Al-Kirmânî, al-Kawâkib al-Darârî Sharh. S.ah.îh. al-Bukhârî (9:54), Ibn `âbidîn, H.âshiya (1:376, 1:560); al-Turkmânî, al-Luma` fîl-H.awâdith wal-Bida` (Stuttgart, 1986, 1:37); al-Tahânawî, Kashshâf Ist.ilâh.at al-Funûn (Beirut, 1966, 1:133-135); al-`Aynî, `Umdat al-Qârî in al-H.imyarî, al-Bid`at al-H.asana (p. 152-153).

[18] Al-T.urt.ûshî, Kitâb al-H.awâdith wa al-Bida` (p. 15, p. 158-159); Ibn al-H.ajj, Madkhal al-Shar` al-Sharîf (Cairo, 1336/1918 2:115); al-Qarâfî, al-Furûq (4:219) cf. al-Shât.ibî, al-I`tis.âm (1:188-191); al-Zurqânî, Sharh. al-Muwat.t.a' (1:238). Al-Shât.ibî's I`tis.âm was recirculated by two Wahhâbîs: Rashîd Rid.â then Salîm Hilâlî. A third Wahhâbî, Muh.ammad `Abd al-Salâm Khad.ir al-Shuqayrî - Rid.â's student - authored al-Sunan wal-Mubtada`ât al-Muta`alliqa bil-Adhkâr wal-S.alawât which he filled with unverifiable tales which he proceeds to denounce with much ado.

[19] Abû Shâma, al-Bâ`ith `alâ Inkâr al-Bida` wa al-H.awâdith (Riyad: Dâr al-Raya, 1990 p. 93, Cairo ed. p. 12-13) as well as those already mentioned. Note: “consensus” (ijmâ`) is more inclusive than “agreement” (ittifâq), and binding.

[20] Ibn Rajab, al-Jâmi` fîl-`Ulûm wal-H.ikam (2:50-53), and Ibn Taymiyya's section on bid`a in his Iqtid.â' al-S.irât. al-Mustaqîm Mukhâlafat As.h.âb al-Jah.îm. This is also the position of Ibn Kathîr: see his commentary of the verse: (The Originator of the heavens and the earth!) (2:117) in his Tafsîr. He followed in this his teacher Ibn Taymiyya.

[21] Bakhît, Fatâwâ H.adîthiyya (p. 205).

[22] Al-Shawkânî, Nayl al-Awt.âr (4:60).

The Marriage of `Umar ibn al-Khattab with Umm Kulthum bint `Ali (Allah be well-pleased with them)

The Marriage of `Umar ibn al-Khattab with Umm Kulthum bint `Ali (Allah be well-pleased with them)
Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim


by GF Haddad - Muharram 1425

The marriage of `Umar with Umm Kulthum al-Hashimiyya (6 - 49) the daughter of `Ali and Fatima took place on the year 17 of the Hijra. `Ali gave her away to `Umar upon his request although he was afraid at first that `Umar might not accept her due to her youth and because he wished her to marry one of her cousins among the sons of Ja`far ibn Abi Talib. But `Umar said, “Marry her to me for I swear I have toward her more dedication to excellent companionship than any man on the face of the earth.”

`Umar gave her a dowry of 40,000 dirhams in honor of her lineage to the Messenger of Allah, upon him blessings and peace.

He came to the Muhajirun among the Companions as they sat between the Grave and the Pulpit – their usual place for meeting `Umar to discuss news: “Felicitate this newlywed!” Then he told them he had married `Ali's daughter Umm Kulthum and said: 'I heard the Messenger of Allah say upon him blessings and peace: “Every lineage and means will be severed on the Day of Judgment except my lineage and my means.” I have kept company with him and wished to add this also.' Later he again said, on the pulpit: 'Do not disparage me [for marrying a young girl], for I heard the Prophet say upon him blessings and peace: “On the Judgment Day every means will be cut off and every lineage severed except my lineage.”

It is well-known that our liege-lord `Umar ibn al-Khattab Allah be well-pleased with him, had a particular veneration for the Prophetic Household (Ahl al-Bayt) as illustrated by the following additional reports:

(a) Ibn Sa`d narrated from al-Sha`bi and al-Hasan that al- `Abbas had some need of `Umar one day and said to him: "Commander of the Believers, suppose the uncle of Musa, upon him peace, came to you as a Muslim, how would you treat him?" He replied, "I swear by Allah that I would treat him well!" Al-`Abbas said, "Well, I am the uncle of Muhammad the Prophet - upon him and his House blessings and peace!" `Umar said, "Abu al-Fadl, and what do you suppose? By Allah, your father [`Abd al-Muttalib] is certainly dearer to me than my own father!" He said, "By Allah?" `Umar said, "By Allah, yes! Because I know that he [`Abd al-Muttalib] is dearer to the Messenger of Allah than my own father, therefore I prefer the love of the Messenger of Allah to my love."

(b) A man disparaged `Ali ibn Abi Talib in the presence of `Umar whereupon the latter said: "Do you know the dweller of this grave? He is Muhammad ibn `Abd Allah ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. And `Ali is the son of Abu Talib ibn `Abd al-Muttalib. Therefore, do not mention `Ali except in a good way for if you dislike him you will harm this one in his grave." Narrated by Ahmad with a good chain in Fada'il al-Sahaba (2:641 #1089).

(c) After `Umar saw al-Husayn ibn `Ali ibn Abi Talib waiting at his door he said to him: "You are more deserving of permission to enter than [my son] `Abd Allah ibn `Umar! You see the goodness that was placed on our head; [therefore] first Allah then you [the Prophetic Household]" and he placed his hand on his head as he spoke. Narrated by Ibn Sa`d, Ibn Rahuyah, and al-Khatib.

(d) `Umar distributed garments to the Companions but found nothing appropriate for al-Hasan and al-Husayn so he sent a message to Yemen and had a kiswa sent, which he offered them. Then he said, “Now I am content.” Narrated by Ibn al-Jawzi in Manaqib `Umar (p. 97).

Umm Kulthum bore `Umar Zayd al-Akbar, known as Ibn al-Khalifatayn (= 'Son of the Two Caliphs' i.e. `Umar and `Ali) who became renowned for his great beauty, and a daughter, Ruqayya.

After `Umar died she remarried, upon `Ali's order, with `Awn ibn Ja`far ibn Abi Talib. When `Awn died `Ali remarried her with `Awn's brother Muhammad ibn Ja`far. Ibn Sa`d and al-Daraqutni claim that when the latter also died young, she remarried with his brother `Abd Allah ibn Ja`far who was widowed of her sister Zaynab bint `Ali – an anachronism since Zaynab outlived Umm Kulthum and was present at Karbala – where her two sons from `Abd Allah, Muhammad and `Awn [both named after their uncles], were killed.

Zayd al-Akbar died a young man, childless, from a stone throw in the time of Mu`awiya. Umm Kulthum died at the same time and Sa`id ibn al-`As ibn Sa`id or Ibn `Umar prayed over them, Allah have mercy on them.

Sources: Ibn al-Jarud, al-Muntaqa [an entirely sahih book] (p. 142); al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar, al-Muntakhab min Azwaj al-Nabi SallAllahu `alayhi wa-Sallam (p. 30-31); al-Dulabi, al-Dhurriyat al-Tahira (p. 62); Ibn Sa`d, Tabaqat (8:337-340=8:463-464); al-Siyar wal-Maghazi (p. 248); Tarikh al-Ya`qubi (2:260); Ibn Shabba's Tarikh al-Madina (2:654); Nasab Quraysh (p. 352); `Abd al-Razzaq, Musannaf (3:465); al-Nasa'i, Sunan (4:71) and Sunan Kubra (1:641); al-Bukhari, Tarikh al-Saghir (1:102); Ibn Qutayba, Ma`arif (p. 107, 122); al-Tabari, Tarikh (4:199 and 5:335); al-Daraqutni, Sunan (2:79); al-Bayhaqi, Sunan Kubra (4:33); Ibn `Abd al-Barr, Isti`ab (4:490-491); al-Nawawi, Tahdhib al-Asma' wal-Lughat (2:267 #1219); al- Dhahabi, Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' (Dar al-Fikr ed. 5:22-24) and Tarikh al- Islam (4:58-59, 4:137-139, 4:227, 5:21); al-Dimyati, Nisa' al-Rasul (p. 128); Ibn Hajar, Isaba (4:492 #1481); Ibn al-Athir, Usd al-Ghaba (7:387-388) and al-Kamil fi al-Tarikh (3:54, 4:12); al-Suyuti, al-Hawi lil-Fatawa (2:179); etc.

The following is a reply to various claims and inaccuracies posted at the following site as of March 1, 2004:

http://www26.brinkster.com/sdolshah1/umtu.htm Umme Kalthum's Marriage To Umer

In Mishkat Shareef, it is reported that when Abubakr and Umar asked the holy Prophet for his daughter, Lady Fatima[sa]'s hand the Prophet replied she is too young to marry. If this is correct then think rationally over the fact that, Umme Kulthum[sa] whose mother was too young to marry these people, marries these same personalities, does this make sense?

Observe in the above lines the jump from the hadith "she is too young to marry" to the spin that she "was too young to marry these people".

Rather, as Sharh al-Mishkaat states (Dar al-Fikr ed. 10:476-477), she had been asked at an early time and the Prophet waited, upon him blessings and peace, for specific heavenly revelation concerning Fatima, period.

This is confirmed by the other version of the proposal of the Two Shaykhs of Islam - Allah be well-pleased with them - Abu Bakr and `Umar, in which the Prophet replies upon him and his Family and Companions blessings and peace: "The qada' [concerning this decision] has not been revealed yet."

Secondly, Umer's daughter, Hafsa was a wife of Prophet Muhammad . This makes Hafsa the Step-mother of Hz Fatima and the Step-Grandmother of UmmeKalthum, the daughter of Ali and Fatima. Do you know what this means? It makes Umer the Step-Great Grandfather of UmmeKalthum. The sunnis claim the daughter of Ali married her Great Grandfather? Is such sort of marriage allowed in Islam, please prove from the Quran.
It also makes Hadrat Umar - Allah be well-pleased with him - the step- grandfather of Fatima whom he did ask in marriage and the Prophet upon him blessings and peace, did not reply "This is not allowed in Islam"!

The reason is, this sort of marriage is definitely allowed in Islam and this *is* proven from the Qur'an. Read again the verses defining who is mahram from who is not in Surat al-Nisa'!

Umm Kulthum was the daughter of Ali Ibne Abi Talib. Sunni Historical evidence shows that the marriage of Umm Kulthum and Umar took place in the year 17 Hijri when Umm Kulthum was 5 or 4 years of age. This would put her date of birth to 12 or 13 Hijri. History of Abul Fida, vol I p 171 - al Farooq by Shibli Numani, vol II p 539
The above is a deceptive way of quoting because the sources only mention the date of the marriage as the year 17. They do not say Umm Kulthum was 5 or 4 that year nor anything about her date of birth. This is your own claim inserted as an historical premise, followed by your own conjecture.

Besides, the "History of Abul-Fida" is by the king of Hama, Isma`il ibn `Ali ibn Mahmud (d. 732) and Nu`mani is a contemporary. Surely, they must have an earlier transmitted basis for whatever they supposedly say. However, they did not say anything other than the date of marriage as the year 17.

Ibn Kathir's Tarikh states the year 16 for the marriage of `Umar with Umm Kulthum; so she was between 10 and 12 since her date of birth is mentioned by al-Dhahabi in Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' as around the 6th year after the Hijra. Allah knows best from where the claim that she "was 5 or 4" comes from.

Among the Shi`i sources that narrate the fact of this marriage from Imam Muhammad al-Baqir with the statement "Umm Kulthum bint `Ali ibn Abi Talib died at the same time as her son Zayd ibn `Umar ibn al-Khattab" and the narration from Muhammad ibn al-Hasan that "`Umar ibn al-Khattab married Umm Kulthum bint `Ali `alayhi al-Salam with a dowry of 40,000 dirhams":

1- Agha Burzug al-Tahrani's al-Dhari`a (5:184). 2- `Ali ibn Muhammad al-`Alawi's al-Mujdi fi Ansab al-Talibiyyin (p. 17). 3- Al-Fadil al-Hindi's Kashf al-Litham (2:312). 4- Al-Hurr al-`Amili's Wasa'il al-Shi`a Al al-Bayt (15:19, 17:594, 21:263, 26:314). 5- Muhammad ibn Habib al-Baghdadi's al-Munammaq fi Akhbar Quraysh (p. 301). 6- Al-Muhaqqiq al-Ardabili's Majma` al-Fa'ida (11:530). 7- Al-Muhaqqiq al-Naraqi's Mustanad al-Shi`a (19:452). 8- Al-Muhaqqiq al-Sabzawari's Kifayat al-Ahkam (p. 307). 9- Al-Sayyid Muhammad Sadiq al-Rawhani's Fiqh al-Sadiq (24:496). 10-Al-Shahid al-Thani's Masalik al-Afham (13:270). 11-Al-Shaykh al-Amini's al-Ghadir (6:136-137). 12&13- Al-Shaykh al-Tusi's al-Mabsut (4:272) and Tahdhib al-Ahkam (9:362-363). 14-Al-Shaykh al-Jawahiri's Jawahir al-Kalam (39:308).

Historical evidences show that Hazrat Fatima ( May Allah bless her ) passed away 6 month after the demise of his father,
Her father – Allah bless him and greet him.

and thus her date of death was in the year 11 Hijri, and that Umm Kulthum, daughter of Ali was born in the year 9 Hijri. Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English Version, Tardition 5.546 - Anwarul Hussania, v3, p39
The above reference to al-Bukhari contains nothing about Umm Kulthum. Rather, al-Bukhari narrates in his Tarikh al-Saghir (1:102) - like everyone else - that Umm Kulthum had married `Umar. As for her date of birth is it is 6 Hijri as cited above.

Then how is it possible for Umm Kulthum to be born after the death of Hazrat Fatima (as) if the Sunnis claim that she was married to Omar in the year 17 Hijri at an age of 4 or 5 years, that would put the date of birth as 12 or 13 Hijri, which is long after the death of her mother?!
The Sunnis do not claim that she was 4 or 5 in the year 17 but 11 or 12.

Sunni historical evidence shows that Umm Kulthum (the so-called wife of Umar) died before 50 Hijri, since Imam Hasan (as), Abdullah ibn Umar and Sa'ad bin Abi Waqs offered the funeral prayers.
Not Sa`d ibn Abi Waqqas but Sa`id ibn al-`As (2-59) and he was the imam as the (universally respected) governor of Madina who had dearly wished to marry Umm Kulthum but desisted when he learnt of al-Husayn?s disapproval. It is also possible that he let Ibn `Umar be the imam. In the congregation there was also Abu Qatada (d. 54). This is agreed upon in BOTH the Sunni sources and the 14 Shi`i sources cited above. Some narrations in Ibn Sa`d, al-Bukhari, and al-Bayhaqi state that al-Hasan (d. 49) was part of the congregation, which brings the terminus ante quem for Umm Kulthum?s death to 49.

Also it is worthy to note that Imam Hasan (as) was martyred in the year 50 Hijri. [sources deleted]
Or 49.

But then other references show that Hazrat Umm Kulthum ( Blessings on her, the daughter of Imam Ali and Fatima Az Zahra ) were present in Kerballa during the year 61 Hijri.
ONLY SOME non-Sunni sources that stand out for their unreliability, such as Muruj al-Dahab by the Mu`tazili chronicler (akhbaari) al-Mas`udi (d. 345); Sharh al-Akhbar fi Fada'il al-A'immat al-At-har (3:198) by the ex-Maliki apostate (murtadd cf. Siyar, Fikr ed. 12:284), al-Qadi al-Nu`man ibn Muhammad ibn Mansur al-Maghribi (d. 363); Muthir al-Ahzan by Ibn Nama al-Hilli (d. 645); and Bihar al-Anwar by Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (d. 1111) among other similarly unscrupulous sources.

However, that claim is not found in the 14 Shi`i sources cited earlier nor in the Sunni sources.

The Siyar (Fikr ed. 4:418) among other Sunni sources only name the following Ahl al-Bayt women as present at Karbala' and taken prisoner:

- Zaynab and Fatima the daughters of `Ali; - Fatima and Sukayna the daughters of al-Husayn; - al-Rabab al-Kalbiyya the wife of al-Husayn and mother of Sukayna; - Umm Muhammad the daughter of al-Hasan ibn `Ali.

Sukayna is the one that spoke the famous words to Yazid, "Have you taken prisoner the daughters of the Messenger of Allah??" which words are spuriously attributed to Umm Kulthum bint `Ali in some of the non-Sunni accounts such as al-Raghib al-Asfahani's Maqatil al-Talibiyyin (p. 79) and the above-cited sources.

The only Umm Kulthum present in the whole episode of Karbala' was Yazid's own wife, Umm Kulthum bint `Abd Allah ibn `Amir.

Long after the incident of Kerballa Hazrat Zaineb binte Ali ( blessings on her ) died, then it was that Hazrat Abdullah bin Jafer Tayyar were married to Hazrat Umm Kulthum binte Ali (blessings on her ).
It is more likely that `Abd Allah ibn Ja`far (d. 80), unlike his two brothers `Awn and Muhammad [he also named his sons thus], was never married to Umm Kulthum (d. <49) at all but only to her sister zaynab (d. 61).

There is no contradiction to the fact that before Umm Kulthum binte Ali (blessings on her), Hazrat Zaineb (blessings on her ) were married to Abdullah bin Jafer ( blessings on him ).
The marriage of Zaynab to `Abd Allah ibn Ja`far is unquestioned.

Also it is true that till the year 61 Hijri (incident of Kerballa ) Hazrat Zaineb were alive, and that Umm Kulthum binte Ali were married after the year 61 Hijri to Hazrat Abdullah bin Jafer.
Incorrect: Zaynab was at Karbala' but Umm Kulthum had died before 49.

But where does the contradiction lie ? With respect to the first references, the lady married to Omar by the name Umm Kulthum died in the year before 50 Hijri, as Imam Hasan ( as ) had offered her funeral prayers. This leaves us to believe that the Umm Kulthum married to Omar were in fact some other lady and NOT the daughter of Imam Ali (as). Roza tul Ihbab Volume 3 page 585 - Al Bidayah wa al-Nihayah - Tareekhe Khamees Volume 3 page 318
This nonsense is definitely not in the latter two references nor even in the 14 Shi`i sources other than the few discrepant sources I've identified.

The Sunni scholar Ibn Qutaybah in his book "al Maarif " mentioned that all the daughters of Imam Ali(as) were married to the sons of Aqeel and Abbas with a few exceptions, but he did NOT mention the claim that Umm Kulthum (May Allah bless her) were married to Omar. The exceptions were for Ummul Hasan binte Saeed and Fatima. al-Maarif, Ibn Qutaybah, p 80
Wrong.

Ibn Qutayba said in al-Ma`arif (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-`Ilmiyya, 1987) p. 122:

"THE DAUGHTERS OF `ALI IBN ABI TALIB: As for Zaynab the elder the daughter of Fatima, she was [married] with `Abd Allah ibn Ja`far and gave him children whom we already named. As for Umm Kulthum the elder, also the daughter of Fatima, she was [married] with `Umar ibn al-Khattab and gave him children we also already named. When `Umar was killed Muhammad ibn Ja`far ibn Abi Talib married her. He died before her then `Awn ibn Ja`far ibn Abi Talib married her and she died before him. The rest of `Ali's daughters were married off to the sons of `Aqil and the sons of al-`Abbas except Umm al-Hasan -- she was married to Ja`da ibn Hubayra al-Makhzumi -- and except Fatima -- she was married to Sa`id ibn al-Aswad of Banu al-Harith ibn Asad."

The same Ibn Qutayba also says in the same book (p. 107):

"THE CHILDREN OF `UMAR IBN AL-KHATTAB FROM HIS BLOOD AND THEIR DESCENDENTS: .... also Fatima and Zayd, their mother being Umm Kulthum the daughter of `Ali ibn Abi Talib from his union with Fatima the daughter of the Messenger of Allah upon him blessings and peace. It is also said that Umm Kulthum's daughter from `Umar was named Ruqayya...."

For those who claim that such marriage happened; kindly answer the following questions.

What was the age for Omar at the time of the marriage ?

Approximately forty-seven. Umm Kulthum was between 10 and 12.

When Omar died what was the age of Umm Kulthum ?
Between 17 and 19. `Umar was fifty-four or five.

Could you briefly state the names of the wives of Omar?
1. `Atika bint Zayd ibn `Amr al-`Adawiyya. 2. Fukayha who gave him offspring. [Mulk al-yamin] 3. Luhayya al-Yamaniyya who gave him `Abd al-Rahman al- Asghar or al-Awsat, the latter known as Abu Shahma whom `Umar whipped for drunkenness. [May have been mulk al-yamin] 4. Mulayka bint Abi Umayya al-Khuza`iyya who may have given him `Ubayd Allah. 5. Qariba bint Abi Umayya al-Makhzumiyya [in Jahiliyya]. 6. Subay`a bint al-Harith al-Aslamiyya. 7. Umm `Asim Jamila bint Thabit al-Awsiyya who gave him `Asim. 8. Umm Hakim bint al-Harith al-Makhzumiyya who gave him Fatima. 9. Umm Kulthum bint `Ali al-Hashimiyya who gave him Ruqayya and Zayd al-Akbar but Ibn Qutayba in the Ma`arif names them Fatima and Zayd. 10. Umm Kulthum bint (`Amr ibn) Jarwal al-Khuza`iyya who gave him Zayd al-Asghar and `Ubayd Allah [in Jahiliyya] and whom al-Waqidi also calls Mulayka bint Jarwal, followed in this by Ibn Qutayba, Ibn Kathir, and Ibn al-Athir. 11. Zaynab bint Maz`un al-Jumahi who gave him `Abd Allah, Hafsa, and `Abd al-Rahman al-Akbar [in Jahiliyya and Islam].

Could you assert to the truthfulness of the character of the person who narrated this story ?
There are so many that it is mutawatir (mass-transmitted) including from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt such as Ja`far al-Sadiq, from his father.

( I am talking about Zubair bin Bakar ) ?
He is "thiqa thabt" (extremely trustworthy) according to al- Baghawi and al-Khatib while al-Daraqutni, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar and others simply grade him thiqa, which is the highest grade of reliability.

Do you know how many children were born of Umm Kulthum with the marriage to Omar ?
Two: a boy and a girl.

Who was this Umm Kulthum then ?
The daughter of `Ali and Fatima, raghima anfuk.

It would be appropriate to mention the other wives of Omar at this juncture, not only during his pagan days but also after embracing Islam. His first wife was Zainab sister of Uthman b. Mazun. His second wife was Qariba, daughter of Ibn Umait ul Makzami, and sister of the Holy Prophet's wife Umm Salma ( May Allah be pleased with her ). She was divorced in 6 A.H after the conclusion of the Truce of Hudaibiya. His third wife was Malaika, daughter of Jarul al Khuzai, who was also called Umm Kulthum, also she did not embrace Islam and was divorced in 6 A.H. On arrival at Medinah he married Jamila, daughter of Asim b. Thabit who was high placed Ansari and had fought at Badr. Jamila first name was Asia which the Holy Prophet changed to Jamila on her conversion to Islam. Omar divorced her also for some unknown reason. Omar also had other wives namely, Umm Hakim, daughter of al Harith b. Hisham al Makhzumi, Fukhia Yamania and Atika, daughter of Zaid b. Amr b. Nafil. Al Faruq - Volume II by Shibli Numani English Translation
See the list I gave.

... There was another Umm Kulthum who had been his wife but Historians make a clear distinction between the two ...
.... Yes, and they assert that he married both....

Now I would like to pose the following questions: Who is this other Umm Kulthum that has been mentioned in the historical references ? Is she the same Umm Kulthum that was divorced ( Malaika the third wife ) in 6 A.H ?
According to al-Waqidi, yes.

We also know that there were ' two ' Umm Kulthum's as Shibli Numani writes above, correct ?
Definitely.

Or is she the same Umm Kulthum that is the daughter of Abu Bakr ? If yes then why doesn't the author point out so ? What is the clear distinction then ?
The distinction is clear as day, they were two different persons. Move on.

There were at least nine Companions named Umm Kulthum. Add the Umm Kulthums of Jahiliyya and those of the Tabi`in. The fact that it was a popular proper noun might be confusing to some.

Here is the answer by from the historical documents: After the death of Abu Bakr a daughter was born to him that was named Umm Kulthum. Please refer to the following Sunni references to confirm this fact. [deleted]
This fact is undoubted and irrelevant.

Please also do bear in mind that Abu Bakr died in the year 13 A.H as mentioned in the following Sunni book of reference. [deleted]
Ditto.

This would imply that the original claim made by the first references I gave for the age of Umm Kulthum at the time of marriage of 4 or 5 years would stand correct.
Actually, you gave no references to that effect but conjectured the age yourself, which we established was completely inaccurate. However, Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr al-Siddiq might well have been 3 or 4 at the time.

Since for Umm Kulthum binte Abu Bakr to be born in 13 A.H and married in 17 A.H would give her an age of 4 years. Since Aisha was the elder sister of Umm Kulthum binte Abu Bakr, for this reason Omar had sent for Umm Kulthum hand's to Aisha, and Aisha had accepted this. Tareekhe Khamees Volume 2 page 267 - Tareekhe Kamil Volume 3 page 21 - Al Istiab by Ibn Abdul Barr Volume 2 page 795
Except that the same sources state that Umm Kulthum bint Abi Bakr *adamantly rejected* `Umar's proposal, after which `A'isha supposedly consulted `Amr ibn al-`As who supposedly dissuaded `Umar from pursuing the matter and supposedly persuaded him to ask for `Ali's daughter instead.

However, the same sources all agree with the remainder of the sources to the fact that `Umar ibn al-Khattab married the daughter of `Ali and Fatima, Allah be well-pleased with all of them, as referenced above.

Nor is there any contradiction between the two incidents supposing the proposal to Abu Bakr?s daughter actually took place and fell through.

This leaves us no doubt to believe that Umm Kulthum who was the daughter of Abu Bakr was married to Omar and NOT Umm Kulthum the daugher of Imam Ali (AS) !!!
I have not seen this incoherent claim earlier than in the pages of al-Anwar al-`Alawiyya wal-Asrar al-Murtadawiyya (p. 436) by an ignoramus named al-Shaykh Ja`far al-Naqdi (d. 1370) who had the gall to introduce this fantasy with the words: "I say, I saw in a book whose title I do not remember at the moment, that of the Imams of guidance said, upon them peace....." A lie, no transmission chain, and no source -- Shi`ism in a nutshell.

Rather, as all of the above Sunni and Shi`i sources already showed, there is no doubt that the wife of `Umar was Umm Kulthum the daughter of `Ali.

In addition:

When `Ali was struck down by Ibn Muljam, Umm Kulthum said: "Ma li wali- Salat al-ghadat, qutila zawji Amir al-mu'minin salata al-ghadah, wa-qutila abi Salata al-ghadah! - What does the morning prayer want with me? My husband the Commander of the believers was killed at the morning prayer and my father was killed at the morning prayer!"

Narrated from al-Asbagh al-Hanzali by Ibn `Asakir in Tarikh Dimashq (42:555) cf. al-Dhahabi, Tarikh al-Islam (3:648-649) and Ibn Kathir, Bidaya (8:14).

Perhaps it was another `Ali, another Ibn Muljam, another Umm Kulthum, another Commander of the believers? Like they come up with another Tabari, another Ibn Qutayba......

Khateeb in his Tar'eekh even mentions that she tells her father that he called me, kissed me and then grabbed my ankle and said, "tell you father that I am pleased!
Yes, at the time `Ali himself had sent her to `Umar, and that report does state that he had dressed her up. `Abd al-Razzaq's version of the same report in his Musannaf (6:163 #10353) specifies that `Ali had previously told `Umar: "I shall send her to you and, if you agree, then she is your wife and I have married her to you."

Narrated in al-Khatib's Tarikh Baghdad (6:182), entry on Ibrahim ibn Mihran ibn Rustum al-Marwazi, with a fair chain according to Dr. Khaldun al-Ahdab in his book Zawa'id Tarikh Baghdad (5:209-214 #901). Allah knows best.

Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad
[Tue, 02 Mar 2004]

Mufti Taqi Usmani's fatwa on mawalid

Mufti Taqi Usmani's
Fatwa on Mawlid
Comments on His Fatwa
by Sh. G. F. Haddad

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim
{ Obey Allah, and Obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. }

"None of you is a believer until he loves me more than his own soul." (Sahih al-Bukhari)

On http://www.albalagh.net/taqi.shtml, a page in English devoted to Mufti Taqi Usmani says verbatim that "[He] is one of the leading Islamic scholars living today. Author of more than 40 books, he is an expert in the fields of Islamic law, Economics and Hadith. For the past 35 years, he has been teaching at the Darul-Uloom in Karachi that was established by his father Mufti Muhammad Shafi, the late Grand Mufti of Pakistan. He also holds a degree in law and is a Judge at the Sharia Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. He is a consultant to several international Islamic financial institutions and has played a key part in the move toward interest free banking and the establishment of Islamic financial institutions. He is the deputy chairman of the Jeddah based Islamic Fiqh Council of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC)."

On http://www.albalagh.net/general/rabi-ul-awwal.shtml another page in English features Mufti Taqi Usmani's fatwa on Mawlid.

From the latter page I've excerpted the following statements as they were posted verbatim as of 11 July, 2000, in their order of appearance in the text. I've numbered them for easier perusal and reference. After each excerpt, I've added a few comments according to need, in conformity with the duty enjoined on us by the Prophet of Nasiha - sincere faithfulness to Allah and sincere, faithful advice to the Muslims.

These comments were written in the light of what I have learnt through the immense mercy of Allah Most High at the hands of our Sunni Naqshbandi Shuyukh - may Allah grant them long life and health - at their forefront Mawlana al-Shaykh Nazim al-Haqqani, shedding much-needed light on the numerous misconceptions and misrepresentations of this fatwa.

It is left to the Muslim reader to verify firsthand to what extent such a fatwa by Mufti Taqi Usmani is based on fact and on the sources of Islam which are Qur'an, Sunna, Ijma` and Qiyas. And may Allah send uninterrupted blessings and peace on the first and foremost subject of these lines, Sayyidina Muhammad, and grant him the Wasila and Highmost Station of Intercession for Mankind, and upon his Family and all his Companions. Amin.

Mufti Taqi Usmani said:


1. "Rabi'ul-Awwal is the most significant month in the Islamic history, because humanity has been blessed in this month by the birth of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam."
Comment: This is true, yet the author further down (item #17) annuls the benefit of his own statement by denying the validity of any specific day of that month as an appropriate or preferable date for celebrating Mawlid and goes so far as to condemn the choice of that date as a reprehensible innovation. Then he castigates the highlighting of that month to celebrate Mawlid as well!


2. "Thus the birth of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was the most significant and the most remarkable event in human history."
Comment: This is a confession by Mufti Taqi `Usmani that the night of the Mawlid Sharif is of greater significance and merit than Laylat al-Qadr which is the position of some of the Maliki Imams as cited by Abu al-`Abbas al-Wansharisi (d. 914) in his encyclopdia of Maliki fatwas titled _al-Mi`yar al-Mu`rab wa al-Jami` al-Mughrib fi Fatawa Ahl Ifriqya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib (11:280-285).

Similarly, the Maliki Hadith Master and Imam, al-Sayyid al-Sharif Muhammad ibn Ja`far al-Kattani stated in his book _al-Yumn wa al-Is`ad bi Mawlid Khayr al-`Ibad_ (p. 21): "The two nights of the distinguished noble birth and the magnificent Prophetic Ascension appear to be the very best of the nights of the world without hesitation nor doubt... and if this is the case then such as these two nights [ MAWLID and MI`RAJ] deserve to be taken henceforth each as a recurring festival among other recurring festivals (`Eid min al-A`yad) and as a seasonal celebration (mawsim) among other seasonal celebrations devoted to good deeds and striving. Therefore those dates should be respected and venerated, the Book of Allah should be recited in them, and in their honor deeds should be performed that indicate joy and happiness at their immense merit as well as thankfulness to Allah Most High for His blessings and favors in them. This the Law in no way denies nor condemns, and no reprimand nor prohibition can be directed at those who perform this whatsoever."


3. "Had there been room in Islamic teachings for the celebration of birthdays or anniversaries, the birthday of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, would have undoubtedly deserved it more than the birthday of any other person. But that is against the nature of Islamic teachings."
Comment: This is a Wahhabi misconception of Usul which was refuted notably by the Ghumari Shuyukh (see item #23), namely, that Tark (not doing something) is NOT a proof that something is condemned or that it is not praiseworthy, as the Prophet did not, in his lifetime, do absolutely everything that was praiseworthy or permissible. The same goes for the early generations. Rather, the criteria for judging if something belongs on the accepted side of Shari`a and is endorsable by the Sunna or not, is to evaluate it in the balance of the Qur'an and Sunna: whatever is confirmed by them is part of them and whatever violates them is rejected.


4. "That is why, unlike Judaism, Christianity, and Hinduism, there are very few festivals in Islam, which provides for only two Eids (Eidul-fitr and Eidul-Adha) during the whole year."
Comment: There are only two `Eids that are sanctioned by the Law as of a required character, but this is not to mean that it is not allowed to have other `Eids metaphorically speaking. For one, the Prophet himself named Jumu`a a `Eid.

Among educated Muslims there is a verse of poetry that goes,


"The day of Jumu`a, the day of `Eid, and the visit of a beloved friend: These are three `Eids for which I thank our Most High Lord."
In fact, every highlighted date in the Islamic calendar is a `Eid, for example the first ten days of Dhu al-Hijja, the Day of `Arafa, the Day of `Ashura, Laylat al-Qadr, and the night of Mi`raj which is the greatest mu`jiza of the Prophet after the Glorious Qur'an. But the Mawlid of the Prophet looms larger and more important than all of the above including the two prescribed `Eids in Islam. Sayyid Muhammad al-Maliki said in his fatwa _Hawl al-Ihtifal bi Dhikra al-Mawlid al-Nabawi al-Sharif_ (p. 8-9): "How many times did we say that the day of the Mawlid of our Master Muhammad is not a `Eid, nor do we consider it a `Eid, because it is BIGGER THAN THE `EID AND GREATER AND NOBLER. A `Eid only comes once a year, as for the celebration of his Mawlid and the consideration of his remembrance and Sira, they must be permanent and not restricted to a particular time nor place!"


5. "The dates of these two Eids do not correspond to the birthday of any of the outstanding persons of Islamic history, nor can their origin be attributed to any particular event of history that had happened in these dates."
Comment: As shown above, it has never been a condition for `Eid that it correspond to a birthday, nor, inversely, does the nature of birthday preclude a day from being considered a `Eid. Secondly, it is patently false that the origin of the two `Eids cannot be attributed to any particular event of history that had happened on these dates as the books of Tafsir are replete with the story of the sacrifice of Ibrahim (as) with his son Isma`il (as) on the occasion of which was offered a huge ram as stated in the Holy Qur'an.


6. "The first event is the completion of the fasts of Ramadan and the second event is the completion of Hajj, another form of worship regarded as one of the four pillars of Islam."
Comment: We already said that the `Eid that takes place at the completion of Hajj has historical connections according to the authorities of Tafsir. We might say also that the `Eid that takes place at the completion of the month of Ramadan, was also given an historical dimension by Allah Most High when He said that fasting is prescribed for us { just as it was prescribed for those before you} . All this shows that Allah Most High did not place these two Pillars in a vacuum but in a historical whole of which Muslims are eminently supposed to be aware and observant, just as the Prophet said in reaction to the Jewish celebration of `Ashura': "We have more right of remembering Musa" i.e. of commemorating the historical circumstance of his deliverance. Most of the Ulema who wrote fatwas on Mawlid adduce this report as a proof of the desirability of the celebration of Mawlid and its licit character in the Law.


7. "The manner prescribed for the celebration of these two Eids (festivals) is also different from non-Islamic festivals. There are no formal processions, illumination or other activities showing formal happiness."
Comment: The manner prescribed for the celebration of these two `Eids falls into two categories: the requirements prescribed in the Law and the customs followed by the people. The latter do *not* have a fixed form and *may* include everything that does not violate the guidelines of the Law. Processions, illumination or other activities showing formal happiness do *not* in themselves violate the guidelines of the Law.


8. "Islam has not prescribed any festival for the birthday of any person, however great or significant he may be. The prophets of Allah are the persons of the highest status amongst all human beings. But the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, or his noble companions never observed the birthday or anniversary of any of them. Even the birthday of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, which was the most happy day for the whole mankind was never celebrated by the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, himself, nor by his blessed Companions."
Comment: Regarding the first phrase: It is true that "Islam has not prescribed any festival for the birthday of any person" but nobody claimed it did. On the other hand, it is untrue that Islam has prescribed NOT to commemorate the birthday of any person, yet this is being claimed by the opponents of Mawlid. As for the rest of the paragraph I am sorry to say it is a blatant lie, the Prophet expressly commemorated his own birthday - as did the early Umma in his wake - by fasting every Monday. He and they treated his birthday as the cause and driving factor (`illa) for this act of devotion as shown in the Sahih and as illustrated by the commentators of those narrations, among them Ibn Khuzayma and his student Ibn Hibban, each one of them in his Sahih. And this suffices as evidence for those endowed with sight.

"[Subheading:] Mention of the Desirability of the Fast of Yawm al-Ithnayn BECAUSE (li'anna) on that Day was Born Rasulullah and on that Day Descended upon Him the Beginning of Revelation." Sahih Ibn Hibban (Arna'ut ed. 8:403).

"Chapter of the Desirability of the Fast of Yawm al-Ithnayn SINCE (idh) the Prophet was Born on Yawm al-Ithnayn and on that Day Revelation Came to Him and on that Day He Died." Sahih Ibn Khuzayma (A`zami ed. 3:298).


9. "In fact, commemorating the birth of a distinguished person has never been prescribed by any religion attributing itself to divine revelation. It was originally a custom prevalent in pagan communities only. Even Christmas, the famous Christian feast commemorating the birth of Jesus Christ finds no mention in the Bible or in the early Christian writings."
Comment: Here we find three errors. First, and this is the gravest error, the author denies that the commemoration of the birth of a distinguished person was ever prescribed by any heavenly religion as if he never heard that the Prophet was ordered to dismount from the Buraq during Isra' and pray at the spot where `Isa (as) was born precisely for that reason and no other. The narration goes, "Then he reached a land where the palaces of al-Shaam became visible to him. Gibril said to him: 'Alight and pray.' He did so and remounted, then the Buraq continued his lightning flight and Gibril said: 'Do you know where you prayed?' He said no. Gibril said: 'You prayed in Bayt Lahm, where `Isa ibn Maryam was born.'" Narrated as part of a longer hadith from Anas by al-Nasa'i with a sound chain and from Shaddad ibn Aws by al-Bayhaqi who declared it sound in Dala'il al-Nubuwwa (2:355-357), and by al-Tabarani in al-Kabir and al-Bazzar with a sound chain as indicated by al-Haythami in Majma` al-Zawa'id and Ibn Hajar in Mukhtasar Zawa'id Musnad al-Bazzar (1:90-91 #32). Secondly, the prescription of the commemoration of the birth of Christ *was* prescribed in the early Christian Church, even if its chronological proximity to the pagan commemoration of the winter solstice was co-opted by the political authorities as a means to recycle prevalent social customs in certain regions including those of pagan origins. Thirdly, what flimsier way to adduce evidence is there than to cite tampered Scriptural texts in order to infer or disinfer a Shari`a ruling? Is Mufti Taqi `Usmani a Christian or Jew addressing Christians or Jews??


10. "In original Islamic resources, also we cannot find any instruction about the celebration of birthdays or death anniversaries. Many Companions of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, passed away during his life-time. His beloved wife Sayyidah Khadijah, Radi-Allahu anha, passed away in Makkah. His beloved uncle Sayyidna Hamzah, Radi-Allahu anhu was brutally slaughtered during the battle of Uhud. But the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, never observed their birthday or their death anniversaries, nor did he ever advise his followers to celebrate his own birthday in Rabi'ul-Awwal."
Comment: The above again shows strange or rather tragic (for such a celebrated author) ignorance of the Sunna. We already established beyond doubt that the Prophet celebrated his birthday by fasting. As for death anniversaries, the Prophet definitely visited his wife and uncle's graves on a regular basis as well as his mother's. Al-Bayhaqi narrates that the Prophet used to visit the graveyard of the martyrs of Uhud annually and punctually - "`ala ra'si kulli hawl". Al-Bayhaqi also narrated in Shu`ab al-Imaan (6:201 #7901) that the Prophet said: "Whoever visits the grave of his parents or the grave of one of them every Friday, he will be forgiven and [his name will] be written among the pious sons." (Man zaara qabra abawayhi aw ahadihima fi kulli Jumu`ah, ghufira lahu wa kutiba barran). And he is without the shadow of a doubt the most pious of all pious sons. Also, al-Bazzar narrates that the Prophet visited the Jannat al-Ma`la graveyard in Makkah, where his dear wife Sayyidah Khadijah was buried and called the whole place a blessed graveyard: "Ni`ma al-Maqbarah Hadhihi." Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq narrated with his chain from al-Hasan ibn `Ali that Fatima the daughter of the Prophet used to visit every Jumu`a the grave of her uncle Hamza ibn `Abd al-Muttalib - may Allah be well-pleased with all of them! - which she had marked with a rock in order to recognize it, and she used to pray and weep there as narrated by `Abd al-Razzaq in his Musannaf, al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan, al-Hakim in his Mustadrak and he declared its chain sahih, and Ibn `Abd al-Barr in al-Tamhid.


11. "The reason for abstinence from such celebrations is that they divert the attention of people from the real teachings of Islam towards the observance of some formal activities only. Initially, these celebrations may begin with utmost piety and with a bona fide intention to pay homage to a pious person."
Comment: The above is speculation and has no place here. As for the latter sentence, it seems to come verbatim from the deviant book of Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab titled al-Tawhid.

Comment [from Brother Ahmad I on msa-ec mail list, 11 July 2000]: The Ulama of Deoband celebrated their hundred years anniversary of Darul Uloom Deoband in which they called Indhira Ghandi who was dressed in a Sarrie. She was seated on the stage while hundreds of Ulama were seated on the ground. Was this Islamic? Early Muslims did not celebrate hundred years establishment of Islam which was far more important that the establishment of Darul Uloom Deoband. According to you, our Nabi (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) did not celebrate birthdays and anniversaries. If the Ulama-e-Deoband claim to be true followers of the Sunnah, why then did they celebrate the hundred year anniversary of Darul Uloom Deoband? Was this not a Bid`at?


12. "Yet, the experience shows that the celebration is ultimately mixed up with an element of merrymaking and rejoicing and is generally confused with secular festivals and the secular, and often sinful, activities creep into it gradually. [Next paragraph:] The example of Christmas will again be relevant."
Comment: All this shows how far from the principles of the Shari`a one ends up when free rein is given to speculation and personal or regional pretexts such as the bad things one has experienced or seen in one's province. Has Mufti Taqi Usmani never heard of "merrymaking and rejoicing" in the authentic Sunna? The Sahaba and the Prophet definitely were not, as he seems to imagine, staid officials of rigid and censorious manners although they were the most dignified generation of human beings ever to walk the earth. They knew laughter, merriment, and good humor.

Nor is his harping on "the example of Christmas" when referring to Muslims acceptable. One well-known contributor on the newsgroup soc.religion.islam, `Abd al-Rahman Lomax, said in a thread titled "Re: Al-Mawled ( 6/7 ) : Even

worse!" Date: 22 Sep 1996: "I remember my first 'Eid al-Fitr, in Tucson. This was a largely student community, with a few older Muslims including professors at the University of Arizona at Tucson. My clearest memory is of the sub-teen daughters of some of these families getting up on the tables and dancing to the encouragement of nearly everyone, with drum music coming over the P.A. system. This was not mawlid, this was 'Eid ul-Fitr! Times have changed. But it is not clear to me that the more sober 'Eids I have seen in recent years are closer to the actual sunna than that first 'Eid. I'll leave it to someone else to cite the relevant hadith; suffice it to say that the Prophet did, it appears, encourage having *fun* on 'Eid, and that dancing and at least some form of music were actually encouraged." Following Mufti Taqi Usmani's reasoning in the above paragraph, if enough "bad" displays such as the above had been witnessed on `Eid, then `Eid celebrations should have been banned, either in absolute terms or in temporary and local terms. But isolated incidents are never a proof in ruling for or against something.


13. "The Holy Qur'an has clearly pronounced on the occasion of the last Hajj of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam: "Today, I have completed the teachings of your religion." [Al-Maida 5:3] [Next paragraph:] It means that all the teachings of Islam were communicated to the Muslims through the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. No one is allowed after it to add any thing to them as a part of religion. What was not a part of religion during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, can never become part of it. Such additions are termed by the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, as Bid'ah or innovation."
Comment: This is the weakest paragraph in the entire fatwa as it is entirely borrowed from the Wahhabi conception of bid`a, which violates the principles and methods of the Jumhur of Sunni `Ulema as to what constitutes bid`a and what does not. The Ulema have clarified this major methodological innovation in many useful publications which we have summarized elsewhere and there is no space nor need to reproduce this material here. Suffice it here to quote the words of Sayyid Muhammad al-Maliki - Allah keep him and all our impeccable Ulema and true Teachers - in one of his fatwas on Mawlid: "There is no doubt that such singing, dancing, reciting of poetry, and banging the drum [as narrated in the authentic Sunna] was for joy at being with the Prophet , nor did he condemn nor frown upon such displays in any way whatsoever. These are common displays of happiness and lawful merriment, and similarly to stand up at the mention of the birth of the Prophet is an ordinary act that shows love and gladness symbolizing the joy of creation: it does not constitute worship, nor law, nor Sunna!"

It is also ironic that the verse they quote: { This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favor unto you} (5:3) was revealed on a Monday, the day of his Mawlid - Allah bless and greet him and his Family - according to some reports narrated by Ibn `Asakir as mentioned by al-Salihi in _Subul al-Huda_ (1:401).


14. "Thus, the observance of the 12th of Rabi'ul-Awwal as a religious feast is not warranted by any verse of the Holy Qur'an or by any teaching of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam."
Comment: Al-Hamdu lillah, the falsehood of the above statement is by now evident on the basis of what was already replied.


15. "Had it been a part of the religion it would have been clearly ordered or practiced by the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and his blessed companions or, at least, by their immediate pupils. But no example of the celebration of the occasion can be traced out in the early centuries of the Islamic history."
Comment: This is a needless repetition and stands refuted (see paragraphs #3 and again #23).


16. "It was after many centuries [Albalagh Note: According to Maulana Yusuf Ludhinavi it was in the year 604 A.H.] that some monarchs started observing the 12th of Rabi'ul-Awwal as the birthday of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, without a sound religious basis, and the congregations in the name of Maulood or Milad were held where the history of the birth of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, used to be narrated."
Comment: As stated by al-Sayyid Muhammad al-Maliki in his Fatwa _Hawl al-Ihtifal bi Dhikra al-Mawlid al-Nabawi al-Sharif_ (10th ed. p. 15): "The first to observe the celebration of the Mawlid was the Prophet himself by fasting on Mondays because it was the day of his birth as narrated in Sahih Muslim. This is the soundest and most explicit textual proof for the licitness of commemorating the Noble Prophetic Mawlid."

In the light of such a proof what does it matter that "after many centuries some monarchs started observing the 12th of Rabi'ul-Awwal" as the Mawlid date, and who can believe such a lie as to claim that such observance was "without a sound religious basis"? Is this what the reliable authorities say, or is it just the opinion of some latecomers unfamiliar with the differences of the Ulema and the principles of the Shari`a?

When the critics are unable to disprove the lawful on the basis of the foundations of the Religion, they turn to vacuous opinion unaware that in the field of opinion there are plenty of more trusted sources than themselves. Imam al-Dhahabi wrote in his Siyar A`lam al-Nubala' (Arna'ut ed. 22:335-336): He [Muzaffar the King of Irbil] loved charity (sadaqa)... and built four hospices for the poor and sick... and one house for women, one for orphans, one for the homeless, and he himself used to visit the sick... He built a madrasa for the Shafi`is and the Hanafis... HE WOULD FORBID ANY REPREHENSIBLE MATTER TO ENTER INTO HIS COUNTRY... As for his celebration of the Noble Mawlid al-Nabawi, words are too poor to describe it. The people used to come all the way from Iraq and Algeria to attend it. Two wooden dais would be erected and decorated for him and his wife... the celebration would last several days, and a huge quantity of cows and camels would be brought out to be sacrificed and cooked in different ways... Preachers would roam the field exhorting the people. Great sums were spent (as charity). Ibn Dihya compiled a 'Book of Mawlid' for him for which he received 1,000 dinars. He [Muzaffar] was modest, a LOVER OF GOOD, AND A TRUE SUNNI who loved scholars of jurisprudence and scholars of hadith, and was generous even to poets. He was killed in battle according to what is reported."

Similarly, Ibn Kathir said in al-Bidaya wa al-Nihaya (Beirut and Riyadh: Maktabat al-Ma`arif & Maktabat al-Nasr, 1966 ed. 13:136-137): "He [Muzaffar] used to celebrate the noble Mawlid in Rabi` al-Awwal and organize huge festivities for it. He was a wise king, brave, a fierce fighter, intelligent, learned, and just. May Allah have mercy on him and ennoble his grave. Shaykh Abu al-Khattab ibn Dihya compiled for him a book on the Mawlid of the Prophet and named it al-Tanwir fi Mawlid al-Bashir al-Nadhir ("The illumination concerning the birthday of the Bringer of glad tidings and Warner") and the king rewarded him with 1,000 dinars for it. His rule lasted until he died in the year 630 [Hijri] as he was besieging the French in the city of Acca [Acre, Palestine] after a GLORIOUS AND BLAMELESS LIFE."

From the above excerpts one can judge the shameless audacity of the statement of Majlis al-`Ulama or rather al-Juhala' which said:


"MAINTAINING A CUSTOM WHICH WAS ORIGINATED BY IRRELIGIOUS PERSONS. It has already been explained elsewhere in this article that the originators of Meelad custom were irreligious persons. Six hundred years after our Nabi (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam), the irreligious ruler of Irbal, assisted by irreligious learned men, invented and established this custom. Thus, those who organize Meelad functions and those who participate in them are in reality assisting to establish a practise introduced by evil men. They are aiding and abetting in the fostering of a custom which is in total conflict with the Shari'ah of Islam. It is a great crime to maintain and encourage customs and practices which were brought into being by those who had no connection with the Deen, more so, when these customs and practices are a conglomeration of un-Islamic elements".
Observe how they begin with a lie and end with a greater lie, progressing from calling King Muzaffar and the Ulema of the Umma as "irreligious" until they end up saying they "had no connection with the Deen"! Is not the curse of Allah on the heads of the liars?

More importantly, Ibn Kathir himself composed a text on Mawlid, made of hadiths, invocations of blessings on the Prophet , and poetry in praise of him. It is entitled Mawlid Rasulillah sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, and was edited and published by Salah al-Din al-Munajjid (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-Jadid, 1961).


17. "The observance of the 12th of this month as the birthday of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, is not only an innovation having no basis in the Islamic teachings, but the accuracy of this date as the real birthday of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, is also very much doubted."
Comment: Here the author contradicts what he had said in the first paragraph: "Rabi'ul-Awwal is the most significant month in the Islamic history, because humanity has been blessed in this month by the birth of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam." Does this not constitute "a basis in the Islamic teachings" since this Mufti deems himself one such basis and these are his words? As for the specific date of the 12th, it is enough to quote Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali on the matter in his book Lata'if al-Ma`arif (p. 185): "The VAST MAJORITY hold that he [the Prophet, Allah bless and greet him] was born on the Second Day of the Week (al-Ithnayn = "Monday") 12 Rabi` al-Awwal... in the Year of the Elephant."

So it is a good date for such a celebration because there is greater readiness for it in the hearts and minds of the people at that time; and, at

the same time "we do NOT claim that it is Sunna to do celebrate the Mawlid on a specific night and whoever claims this has committed innovation in the Religion, because we should remember him at all times... although the reason to do so becomes stronger in the month of his birth due to the turning of people to that event and their gatherings and their feelings [at that time]." Al-Sayyid Muhammad al-Maliki, Mafahim (10th ed. p. 317).


18. "There are different dates suggested in different traditions, and the majority of the authentic scholars is inclined to hold that the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was born on the 9th of Rabi'ul-Awwal."
Comment: This is another half-truth in the light of Ibn Rajab's report that the vast majority of the authorities settled on the twelfth. This is also stated in al-Salihi's Subul al-Huda (1:403). Furthermore, by his words "the majority of the authentic scholars" the author apparently only means three contemporaries: Dr. Abu al-Hasan `Ali al-Nadwi, the Egyptian astronomer Mahmud Basha, and Muhammad Sulayman al-Mansur Furi, the latter two footnoted in al-Nadwi's _al-Sira al-Nabawiyya_ (p. 99).

Nor has it been the adab of the true Ulema to scorn what the majority of the Ulema concur on as true and correct, as illustrated by the refined, scholarly style of our teacher Dr. Nur al-Din `Itr in mentioning both dates in his Mawlid book, al-Nafahat al-`Itriyya fi Sirat Khayr al-Bariyya (p. 5-6): "He was born on the ninth of Rabi` al-Awwal according to the verification of some of the Imams or on the 12th according to the most famous position (al-mashhur) in the Umma." The Moroccan Shaykh of Tanalt (Great Atlas chain in South Morocco) al-Dadisi Muhammad al-Ghali did not even mention the 9th in his Sira compendium _Laft al-Anzar ila Qurrat al-Absar fi Sirat al-Mushaffa` al-Mukhtar_ (p. 38-39): "On the day of al-Ithnayn in the most radiant month, on the 3rd or the 12th or the 8th of Rabi` al-Awwal." Nor does the hadith master al-Salihi mention the 9th at all in his encyclopedia of all Siras, Subul al-Huda wa al-Rashad fi Sirat Khayr al-`Ibad (1:403) but only, in order of strength among the Ulema: the 12th, 8th, 10th [preferred by al-Dhahabi in the Siyar (1:21) after his teacher Abu Muhammad al-Dimyati], 2nd, 17th, 18th, or 1st of Rabi` al-Awwal.

The date of the 12th was also given precedence over all other dates by Dr. Muhammad Abu Shuhba in his 1,400-page _al-Sira al-Nabawiyya_ (1:173), while Dr. Sa`id Ramadan al-Buti mentions the 12th exclusively of any other date in his _Fiqh al-Sira al-Nabawiyya_ (10th ed.). Where, then, are the irresponsibly-claimed "majority of the authentic scholars" or are all the above scholars frauds?

Furthermore, the author himself categorically stated at the beginning of his fatwa (item #1) that "Rabi'ul-Awwal is the most significant month in Islamic history because humanity was blessed in this month by the birth of the Holy Prophet " although there are also other months reported in the Sunna for the event of his noble birth, such as Safar, Rajab, Ramadan, and Rabi` al-Thani, cf. Ibn Rajab, Lata'if (p. 184) and al-Haytami, al-Minah al-Makkiyya (1:181). If the author does not know this discrepancy in relation to the month then perhaps there are gaps in his knowledge of the facts in relation to the day and other aspects as well. And if the author does know this discrepancy in relation to the months then why does he speak in categorical terms to affirm the month of Rabi` al-Awwal then turns dubious when it comes to the day of the 12th?


19. "This difference of opinion is another evidence to prove that the observance of the birthday is not a part of the religion, otherwise its exact date would have been preserved with accuracy."
Comment: Another wholly original and innovative speculative analogy leading to a false proof without firm basis in the Religion, what is more, couched in unscholarly terminology - "not part of the Religion" - to avoid stating clearly once and for all if such an observance is permitted or not. There has been, many times, a difference of opinion in our times on the exact date of the beginning of the months of Ramadan and Dhu al-Hijja, but does this have any bearing whatsoever on the fact that fasting and pilgrimage are part of the Religion?!

In fact, not only the day, month, and (most emphatically) year of the Mawlid are generally agreed upon but the specific time of day when he was born can also be known: according to the Ghawth Sidi `Abd al-`Aziz al-Dabbagh in al-Ibriz, the Prophet was born in the last third of the night, and this is supported by al-Hakim's narration from `A'isha and al-Tabarani, al-Bayhaqi, and Ibn al-Sakan's from Fatima bint `Abd Allah al-Thaqafiyya; although the Hadith Master Zayn al-Din al-`Iraqi in his _al-Mawrid al-Hani fi al-Mawlid al-Sani_ adduces from the Siyar evidence that it took place in the daytime; and the Sunan state at noon - mursal from Sa`id ibn al-Musayyib - as well as Ibn Dihya and al-Zarkashi in his _Sharh al-Burda_, but Allah Almighty knows best and the Prophet knows best.


20. "The narration of his pious biography (the Seerah) in itself is a pious act, which invites the divine blessings, but the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah have not prescribed a particular time or method for it. This pious act should be performed in all the months and at all the times."
Comment: According to Usmani's own criterion, the above advice is an invitation to bid`a because conferences and talks about the Sira have no precedent in the Sunna nor in the practice of the pious early centuries! Rather, the Sunna shows that the Sahaba would stand and declaim/sing poetry in praise of the Prophet and that he would reward them lavishly as he did with Ka`b, `Abd Allah ibn Rawaha, Hassan ibn Thabit, Qurra ibn Hubayr and many others.

As for the assertion that "this pious act should be performed in all the months and at all the times" its absurdity is evident for all to see in light of the prohibition of the same act in the month of Rabi` al-Awwal and specifically the 12th of that month, although these two times fall within the time frame of "all the months and at all the times"!


21. "The month of Rabi'ul-Awwal has not been designated by the Shariah as a special season for holding such congregations to commemorate the birth or life of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam."
Comment: If someone repeats a false statement enough times, it might in the end pass for true among those whom Allah wishes to mislead, but not among those to whom He grants discernment.


22. "It is thus an innovation (Bid'ah) to restrict the Seerah meetings to the month of Rabi'ul Awwal only, or to believe that the meetings held in this month are worthy of more reward than the meetings held on any other date during the year."
Comment: As was just replied, the Seerah meetings themselves are a bid`a according to this man's own criterion. This new, imposed condition that such meetings must not be restricted to a particular month, shows that he readily considers those meetings a part of the Shari`a when he himself said that Allah has completed the Religion, and such meetings were neither revealed to the Prophet as part of it nor practiced by the early generations! And what is the status of someone who declares the belief of the vast majority of the Muslims a bid`a? Allah is our recourse and help against the entanglements of would-be legislators who break the ranks of Sunni unity and ask the people to follow them in their errings.


23. "In fact, the Companions of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, used to commemorate the life of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, throughout the year, not only by studying and conveying his message to others, but also by following his way of life and acting upon his teachings in each and every branch of their activities, and this is exactly what a Muslim is required and supposed to do."
Comment: The above shows that Mufti Taqi Usmani admits that the principle of commemorating the life of the Holy Prophet was alive and well among the Companions and therefore not an innovation. However, he neglects to mention - or does not seem to know - that the Companions not only "studied" and "conveyed his message to others," but also *recited and sang poetry* in his honor both in his lifetime and after!

As for the often-heard claim of would-be censors that "the Prophet and the Companions never celebrated the Mawlid as it is celebrated today", this never formed proof for the undesirability or prohibitiveness of anything in the Law, Mawlid or otherwise. This was demonstrated at length by al-Sayyid `Abd Allah al-Ghumari in his epistle _Husn al-Tafahhum wa al-Dark li Mas'alat al-Tark_ ("Right Comprehension and Understanding the Issue of 'Not Doing Something'") reprinted by Dar al-Awqaf in Dubai, United Arab Emirates.


24. "By this we do not mean that the Seerah meetings should not be held in the month of Rabi'ul-Awwal. The point is only that they should not be restricted to it, nor should it be believed that the Shariah has laid any kind of emphasis on holding such meetings in this particular month."
Comment: Let those who wish hold them in Rabi` al-Awwal and let those who wish hold them in any other month. { And for this let all those strive who strive for bliss} (Q 83:26).


25. "It is often observed, especially in the Western countries, that the people hold the Seerah meetings where men and women sit together without observing the rules of hijab prescribed by the Shariah. The teachings of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, are obviously against such mixed gatherings. How can a Seerah meeting bring fruits where such fundamental teachings of the Shariah are openly violated?"
This never invalidates the ruling of desirability that applies to the principle.

Comment [from Brother Ahmad I on msa-ec mail list, 11 July 2000]:

Allama Shaami (radi Allahu anhu) states: "One must not leave visiting the graves just because some illegal activities are taking place, for example, inter-mingling of sexes. Mustahabbaat (recommended acts) should not be left out because of this type of illegal activities. It is necessary for the people to visit the graves *and* stop the Bid`a". (Fatawa Shaami: Kitabul Jana'iz - Discussion on visiting the graves)

Allama Shaami (radi Allahu anhu) has stated categorically that inter-mingling of sexes will not make any Mustahab act Haraam or avoided. There were idols in the Kaaba before Makkah was conquered, but Muslims did not leave out performing the Tawaaf (circumbulation) or Umrah because of the idols. Yes,when Almighty Allah gave them the power, they eventually destroyed the idols.

When people go for Haj, there is inter-mingling of sexes at the airport, in the plane, during Tawaaf,at Mina and at Muzdalifah, yet no one puts a stop to Hajj. In Meelad gatherings, at least men and women sit separately and women are with Hijab. In the Nikah assembly, inter-mingling of sexes occurs and most of the women do not come with Shar`i Hijab. Will the Majlisul Ulama issue Fatwas condemning Nikah gathering to be Haraam? If not, why then is your entire effort spent to make Meelaad functions Haraam?


26. "In some meetings the Na'ts (poems) in the memory of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, are recited by the women before the male audience, sometimes with music, which is totally against the instructions of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. It is clearly prohibited by the Shariah to hold such meetings or to participate in them, because it is not only a violation of the Shariah rules, but it is an affront to the sanctity of the Seerah of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam."
Comment: This has already been answered in the previous paragraph but we might add that the Prophet on so many public and private occasions heard female singers and did not stop them from their activity as long as what they were reciting was approved by the law, namely Na`at! { Truly it is not their eyes that are blind, but their hearts which are in their breasts} (22:46).


27. "All other activities, often practiced on the twelfth of Rabi'ul-Awwal, like holding processions, constructing the mock tombs of the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and illumination of the buildings and the roads are not warranted by any rule of the Shariah. Rather they are based on conscious or unconscious imitation of certain other religions. No example of such activities can be traced out from the earlier Islamic history."
Comment: It seems that in this single fatwa the author multiplies the indications that his knowledge of Islamic history, the Sunna, the Sira, and the principle of the Shari`a is full of gaps. Following are examples of the public celebration of the Mawlid from the sixth to the tenth centuries, some of them comprising most of the elements that Usmani claims were never present in earlier Islamic history:

- Ibn Jubayr (540-614) wrote in his Rihal ("Travels"), p. 114-115: "This blessed place [the house of the Prophet] is opened, and all men enter it to derive blessing from it (mutabarrikin bihi), on every Monday of the month of Rabi` al-Awwal; for on that day and in that month was born the Prophet."

- The 7th-century historians Abul `Abbas al-`Azafi and his son Abul Qasim al-`Azafi wrote in their unpublished Kitab ad-Durr al-Munazzam: "Pious pilgrims and prominent travellers testified that, on the day of the mawlid in Mecca, no activities are undertaken, and nothing is sold or bought, except by the people who are busy visiting his noble birthplace, and rush to it. On this day the Ka`ba is opened and visited."

- The famous eighth-century historian Ibn Battuta relates in his Rihla (1:309 and 1:347), that on every Friday, after the salat, and on the birthday of the Prophet, the door of Ka`ba is opened by the head of the Banu Shayba, the doorkeepers of the Ka`ba, and that on the Mawlid, the Shafi`i qadi (head judge) of Mecca, Najmuddin Muhammad Ibn al-Imam Muhyiddin al-Tabari, distributes food to the shurafa' (descendants of the Prophet) and to all the other people of Mecca.

- The historian Ibn Zahira al-Hanafi in his al-Jami` al-Latif fi Fadl Makka wa Ahliha, p. 326; Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami in his Kitab al-Mawlid al-Sharif al-Mu`azzam; and the historian al-Nahrawali in al-I`lam bi-A`lam Bayt Allah al-Haram, p. 205 said that each year on the 12th of Rabi` al-Awwal, after the salat al-Maghrib, the four qadis of Mecca (representing the Four Schools) and large groups of people including the fuqaha' (scholars) and fudala' (notables) of Mecca, shaykhs, zawiya teachers and their students, ru'asa' (magistrates), and muta`ammamin (scholars) leave the mosque and set out collectively for a visit to the birthplace of the Prophet, shouting out dhikr and tahlil (LA ILAHA ILLALLAH). The houses on the route are illuminated with numerous lanterns and large candles, and a great many people are out and about. They all wear their best attire and take their children with them. Having reached the birthplace, inside a special sermon for the occasion of the birthday of the Prophet e is delivered, mentioning the miracles (karamat) that took place on that occasion. Hereafter the du`a' for the Sultan (i.e. the Caliph), the Emir of Mecca, and the Shafi`i qadi is performed and all pray humbly. Shortly before the salat al-`Isha', the whole party returns from the birthplace of the Prophet e to the Great Mosque, which is almost overcrowded, and all sit down in rows at the foot of the Maqam Ibrahim. In the mosque, a preacher first mentions the tahmid (AL HAMDULILLAH) and the tahlil, and once again the du`a' for the Sultan, the Emir, and the Shafi`i qadi is performed. After this the call for the Salat al-`Isha' is made. After the salat, the crowd breaks up.

- A similar description is given by al-Diyarbakri (d. 960) in his massive Sira titled Ta'rikh al-Khamis fi Khabar Anfasi Nafis.


28. "What is really important with regard to the Holy Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, is, first, to follow his teachings, and second to make his pious Seerah available to every Muslim, to preserve it in the hearts of the Muslims from the very childhood, to educate the family members to run their lives according to it and to hold it as the most glorious example of the human conduct the universe has ever witnessed -- and all this with utmost love and reverence, not manifested by some formal activities only, but also through actual behavior of following the Sunnah."
Comment: There is nothing in the principle of Mawlid gatherings, Qur'an and Na`at recitation, and distribution of food and sweets except what follows the Prophetic teachings, increases knowledge of his Sira among the Muslims, stimulates love for him in their hearts, and encourages them to educate their families according to Islamic principles from the cradle to the grave, "with utmost love and reverence, not manifested by some formal activities only, but also through actual behavior of following the Sunnah"!


29. "This cannot be done by merely holding processions and illuminating the walls. This requires constant and consistent efforts and a meaningful program of education and training."
Comment: No-one disagrees with the above while the rest of the fatwa is mostly wrong and should be ignored.

Blessings and peace on our Master the Messenger of Allah, his Family, and all his Companions, and praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the worlds.

Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©

Live Long Maslake Alahazrat

Speech delivered by Munazir e Islam Allama Saeed As'ad Sahib Topic : Hazir and Nazir.**Supporting evidence given from Wahabi/Deobandi references!!**

Debate : Manazara about Hadrat Amir Muawwiyah (Radi Allahu anhu)