An
Abridgment of The
Treatise
on the Ruling of Celebrating the Prophet’s Birthday
رسالة في حكم المولد
th
By
الإمام محمد بن علي الشوكاني
Imaam
Muhammad bin ‘Alee ash-Shawkaanee (d. 1170H)
Edited
by Shaykh Muhammad Sahbee bin Hasan Hallaaq
With
Comments From
Shaykh
Saaleh bin ‘Abdullah al-‘Usaymee
Teacher
in the Prophet’s Masjid, al-Madeenah
Edited and Compiled by
Ariff bin Abee Bakr Olla
بسم
الله الرحمان الرحيم
Praises are for the One Who Sent the Bringer of Glad Tidings
and the one who came as a Warner. The illuminating lantern with a Sharee’ah
which is clear and pure. A monotheistic religion which has wide-spread
acceptance, predominant and inviting in its message. Its people are the carries
of the Sunnah, irradiating its radiance removing by it all traces of darkness
and despondency.
To proceed from:
The humble servant, Muhammad bin ‘Alee ash-Shawkaanee
- may Allaah Forgive his and his father’s sins - was asked about the
celebrating of the Prophet’s [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him]
birthday.
He said:
I say: thus far, I have not found affirmative evidence from
the Book, nor for the Sunnah, nor from scholarly consensus (Ijmaa’), nor from
al-Qiyaas (analogy with pre-established rulings in the Sharee’ah), nor from
al-Istidlaal (the process of derivation)
to support the Mawlid. Rather, there is scholarly consensus that celebrating
the birthday of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] was not
present at the time of the best generation (i.e. the Companions – may Allaah be
Pleased with them all), nor those after them (i.e. the students of the
Companions - may Allaah have Mercy on them all) nor those after them (i.e. the
times of the four Imaams and those like them – may Allaah have Mercy on them
all). Scholars throughout the generations have all agreed that celebrating the
birthday of the Prophet is an innovation which was invented by Sultaan
al-Muthhafar Aboo Sa’eed Kawkboonee bin Zayn ad-Deen ‘Alee bin Sabaktayn,
in a place called Irbil.
Therefore, the first time such a celebration was practiced
was some six hundred years after the Hijrah of the Prophet in the seventh
century, thus none of the scholars have denied the Mawlid being an innovation.
Based on these facts, the person who believes it to be
permissible to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of
Allaah be upon him], knowing it to be an innovation and that all forms of
innovation are misguidance, then they have become misguided by the very
statement of al-Mustaphaa [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him]. They are
only introducing something which will oppose his purified Sharee’ah.
The only proof they may perhaps rely on is the fact that
some scholars have divided innovations intro various types, however, this again
has no real tangible proof to help establish it. Therefore, I cannot accept the
opinion of those who hold it permitted to innovate such a practice (or use
innovated principles to try to support it), except until they are able to
present clear proof to authenticate such an innovation.
As for taking the opinion of such-and-such scholar or
such-and-such individual then this is not academic. The truth is greater than
the statement or opinion of any scholar. If we were to make rulings based on
the statements of scholars (alone, without any evidence) then in actual fact we
will be basing our rulings on hearsay and anecdotes. So none can permit such an
innovation except those who have anomalies from the Muslims.
As for what is pure and noble (i.e. the way of the Salaf)
and those who follow them, then one will not be able to find from them a single
utterance to support this innovation. Rather, their statements are all in
agreement that anything invented into the religion is an innovation. It is from
the most contemptible vices which lead the Sharee’ah becoming eroded to
corruption. For this reason, you will see this land (Yemen in the time of the
Shaykh) baring the fruits of it being purified from the cult of the Soofees,
those who practice wicked actions introduced into the religion, and all Praises
are due to Allaah.
After its introduction, eventually the practice of Mawlid
under the caliph al-Mahdee ad-Deen al-‘Abbaas bin al-Mansoor [may Allaah have
Mercy on him], was eradicated. He banned the Mawlid and he ordered that tombs
and shrines that the people had become devoted to, be destroyed and leveled. He
returned the nation back to Allaah, the Most High, and to follow the path of
the Salaf as-Saaleh (the pious predecessors).
Sparks of innovation spread like wildfire, especially the
innovation of the Mawlid, because the masses from the common folk are always allured
to innovation and at times gain a passion for it. Most laypeople only follow
that which leads to degeneracy and they take up all paths to achieve its aims.
They divulge in whatever is Haraam (prohibited) until they end up falling into
immorality, similar to the implications found with the celebration of the
Mawlid.
So whoever is able to attend these celebrations, from the
people of knowledge and that their word will be accepted by them, then he
should explain to them their wrongdoing – even though it may seem like they are
doing something commendable. He must preach to laymen and those who are misguided.
He must try all means to distance them from this innovation and show rejection
of it, and by this, they can advise the general masses to leave the opinions of
the person they are (blindly) following. Some of even believing that their
pious saints visit them during these celebrations.
Where is the honour of our religion? If the religion
disappears then where would our modesty, piety and intellect go? Do they not
realise that laypeople will accept these practices which will lead to all forms
of immorality. They will adopt any measure to celebrate this event in the name
of enjoyment.
From this, we realise the mistake that some have fallen into
when they claim that these celebrations are only a praiseworthy event of Dhikr
and sharing of food between Muslims. There is no harm in this, they claim. Just
because we are celebrating the Mawlid it doesn’t mean anything Haraam will take
place, they say.
We say: celebrating the Mawlid is an innovation, this is
something you admit to, and thus innovations can only increase a person in what
is foul and immoral. It is a means to corruption.
Rather, saying the Mawlid is prohibited involves both gatherings where you
think nothing wrong will happen with gatherings which are clear in its
misconducts.
A principle known as “Blocking the Means” (سد الذرائع) is a principle which takes the objectives
of the Sharee’ah and thwarts all means that lead to whatever that is not
permissible. This principles is extremely important to which the majority of
the scholars have agreed to and adopted.
If all of this becomes clear to you, and if you have a shred
of justice within you, you will not disagree to what is being said here. We
have explained above that none of the People of the Household of the Prophet
[Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] ever permitted the Mawlid,
and it is likewise upon you (if you are just) to know the evidences and
arguments presented by those who reject such a celebration.
So we say to you (supporter of the Mawlid), you have agreed
with us that there is scholarly consensus that the Mawlid is an innovation. It
was introduced by kings in the seventh century and it was only after then did
people believe it to be a part of the religion and adopted by religious
personalities. After it became apparent, the scholars authored books in
rejection for such an innovation. From them include:
Al-Mawrid fee al-Kalaam ‘ala ‘Amal al-Mawlid by the Faqeeh
Taaj ad-Deen al-Faakihaanee al-Maalikee (d. 734AH).
In this treatise he describes and exposes its wickedness.
In the above book there is also a Fatwaa by al-Faakihaanee’s
Shaykh, al-Allaamah, the Imaam - Ibn Daqeeq al-‘Eed (d. 702AH) prohibiting the
Mawlid.
Imaam Aboo ‘Abdillah bin Haaj, the Faqeeh of Egypt in his
time (d. 737AH) wrote a book called al-Madkhal fee ‘Amal al-Mawlid.
Imaam Muhammad bin ‘Abdillah al-Jazaree ash-Shafi’ee (d 660)
wrote a book called at-Ta’reef bil Mawlid ash-Shareef.
Imaam and Haafidh Shams ad-Deen bin Naasir ad-Deen
ad-Dimishqee wrote Mawrid al-Saadee fi Mawlid al-Haadee.
Al-Allaamah as-Suyootee also wrote a book called Husn al-Maqsid
fi ‘Amal al-Mawlid.
Some of these book clearly describe the prohibition of the
innovation of the Mawlid, whilst some of them seek to permit it, despite the
fact that all those who authored books on this topic are all in agreement that
the Mawlid is an innovation. They admit that there is no direct evidence to
support the Mawlid.
Some of them try to use the following evidences:
The Hadeeth where the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah
be upon him] came to al-Madeenah and he found the Jews fasting the Day of
‘Aashooraa, so he asked them about it. They replied by saying, “We are fasting
this day because it is the day in which Allaah drowned Fir’awn and saved
Moosaa. So we fast out of thanksgiving to Allaah, the Most High (i.e.
specifying special acts of worship in thanks to Allaah for the birth of the
Prophet).”
Ibn Hajar and others also used the Hadeeth in which it
states that the Prophet [Peace and
Blessings of Allaah be upon him] gave ‘Aqeeqah for himself after he became a
Prophet.
This Hadeeth is also used by Suyootee also in trying to
prove the validity of the Mawlid.
However what is strange is that these two scholars are now guilty of supporting
innovation.
In summary, those who seek to permit the Mawlid have
anomalies in their opinion and their arguments, compared to the vast majority
who prohibit it. The majority have prohibited whilst those who permit it have
only made the exception to celebrations which only entail Dhikr and sharing of
communal food between Muslims. However as we have stated above, all paths to mischief
must be blocked as a principle agreed to be all scholars. None of the scholars
have differed on this point.
Even if we were to argue that Mawlid is merely eating and
Dhikr, then we know that now the celebrations of the Mawlid are not reduced
just to eating and Dhikr. The Mawlid today entails many acts which are
prohibited, which would lead to an agreement in its prohibition between the
scholars.
This is the answer the question and I think what has been
said is sufficient.
However, it is important to expose some of the practices
that happen during such events. I have been informed that some laypeople take
the Mawlid as an occasion where they supplicate or seek blessings from the
deceased or even stones in some cases.
There is no doubt that all of this is disbelief, even worse
of those who worship idols. Idol-worshippers (especially at the time of the
Prophet) maintained that they are
worshipping Allaah and only worshipped these idols in order to gain closer to
Allaah in times of difficulty. However, grave-worshippers worship supplicate
and seek the inhabitants of the grave during all measures – in times of
difficulty and ease. So what Kufr can equate to this!? What act of criminality
is greater? How can they leave al-Qaadir (the All-Able, Allaah) and take their
affairs to anything else, and then claim to be a believer? Your Muslim brothers
who have practices this have fallen into clear acts of Kufr, and to Allaah we
belong and to Him we will return.
So may Allaah have Mercy on al-Mahdee ad-Deen al-’Abbaas bin
al-Mansoor who put a stop to such practices, as much as he was able.
End of abridged Fatwaa of Aboo ‘Alee Muhammad bin ‘Alee
ash-Shawkaanee – may Allaah have Mercy on him.
May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon His Messenger,
his family and companions.
Written Rabee’ al-Awwal, 1206 – 1784 Gregorian.
Shaykh Saaleh bin ‘Abdullah al-‘Usaymee [may Allaah Preserve him] said about
him: He is the Shaykh, al-Allaamah Aboo ‘Alee Muhammad bin ‘Alee Shawkaanee
(1170-1250). He is also known as Shaykh al-Islaam of Yemen, so if the scholars
of Yemen (post 1250AH – 1834 Gregorian) use Shaykh al-Islaam then they are referring
to him. He is also known as the Shawkaanee - the Father, as his children were
also scholars.
TN: the very origin of celebrating has many reservations. The Encyclopedia
Americana (1991 edition) states: “The ancient world of Egypt, Greece, Rome, and Persia
celebrated the birthdays of gods, kings, and nobles.” Authors Ralph and Adelin
Linton reveal the underlying reason for this; in their book The Lore of
Birthdays, they write: “Mesopotamia and Egypt, the
cradles of civilization, were also the first lands in which men remembered and
honoured their birthdays. The keeping of birthday records was important in
ancient times principally because a birth date was essential for the casting of
a horoscope.” So, there is a direct connection between the Pagan practice of
birthday celebrations and shirk i.e. astrology (horoscopes and
fortune-telling). Even the early Christians deny celebrating birthdays: The
World Book Encyclopaedia states: “The early Christians did not celebrate His
[Christ’s] birth because they considered the celebration of anyone’s birth to
be a pagan custom” [Volume 3, page 416]
Shaykh Saaleh bin ‘Abdullah al-Usaymee [may Allaah Preserve him] explains: the
scholars differed on who initially innovated this practice. Some of the
scholars said it was innovated by Sultaan al-Muthhafar as Shawkaanee is saying
here.
Others said it was his son, and
this is the opinion of many of scholars like as-Suyootee in his book on the Mawlid.
Others said it was the
‘Ubaaydiyoon also known as the Faatimids in Egypt (these were a group of
Raafidah (Shia) who had despicable beliefs and practices) as stated by Ibn
Katheer and adh-Dhahabee. This is the correct opinion as stated by our Shaykh
Ismaa’eel al-Ansaaree [may Allaah have Mercy on him].
TN: even if it be a well-respected and firmly grounded scholar, humans are
bound to make mistakes and one’s correctness is judged against the proof he
brings. Imaam Ibn Munthir said in al-Awsat, “It is
not possible for all of the Sunnah to exist in one man (besides the Prophet).”
[al-Awsat fee as-Sunnan wa al-Ijmaa’ wa al-Ikhtilaaf (1/469)] Shaykh Muhammad Ameen
ash-Shinqeetee said in Adwaa al-Bayaan (adapted from 7/341): that the whole of
the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and the meanings within them is gathered in the
opinion of their chosen Imaam to follow. Nothing is hidden from its meanings from
him. So if he had an opinion on an issue which went against either of the texts
from the Qur'aan or the Sunnah, then they defend their blind following by
perceiving that his contradictory opinion has been based on his understanding
of the texts. Based on this, the texts and all of the correct meanings can be
found in the opinions and judgments of this given Imaam. However, this is
obviously something false and a clear lie, without any shadow of a doubt. End
quote with slight adaptations.
Shaykh Saaleh al-’Usaymee [may Allaah Preserve him] in exposing the evidences
brought forward by as-Suyootee and Ibn Hajar [may Allaah have Mercy on them
both].
In response we say that the
scholars are agreed that there is no Qiyaas in acts of worship. Therefore, acts
of worship must be legislated by divine evidence otherwise known as at-Tawqeef.
Also, the very fact that the
Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] forbade going into extremes
in worship, warned against worshipping him and taking his grave as a place of
worship, shows that he forbade us from returning to the ways of Jaahiliyyah. If
we take these points then we can see that Qiyaas and Istidlaal to say it is
prohibited is stronger than Qiyaas and Istidlaal to say it is permitted.
Shaykh Saaleh as-‘Usaymee summarises:
There is a difference of opinion
between the scholars which can be summarized by the following:
-Some said it is permitted on the
condition that it doesn’t lead to anything that is prohibited in the Sharee’ah
(such as grave worship, worshipping of saints, abandoning of the Salaat, music,
intoxication, free-mixing between genders etc.) like as-Suyootee.
-Some said it is Makrooh and not
Haraam.
-The majority have said it is
Haraam and this is the correct opinion based on the evidences. All innovations
are prohibited in the religion. Also, small sins lead to big ones, so if one
starts off with a meaningless innovation now, undoubtedly it will spiral and be
abused. Lastly, the date of the Mawlid has not been agreed upon or set by the
scholars. Some said he was born in the beginning of Rabee’ al-Awwal, others
said in the middle of the month such as the 10th or 12th
and others said he was born in Rajab, a complete separate month altogether!
Therefore there is no proof to set the date. All of this shows its falsehood.
Shaykh Saaleh al-‘Usaymee [may Allaah Preserve him] pointed out that this point
mentioned here by ash-Shawkaanee is proof that their Taqleed (blind-following)
is not only of their so-called perceived pious saints, but also of the people
of Shirk. They make up special acts of worship by specifying certain innovated
times and places.
