Food and Gifts on the Days of Their Festivals

Follow @AhleDhikr

Question: Is it permissible for a Muslim to eat the food that is distributed by the Kuffaar or the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) on the days of their festivals? Also, is it permissible to accept gifts that may be distributed during their festivals?

Answer: It is not permissible for a Muslim to eat from what has been made by the Jews and Christians or the Mushriks on the days of their festivals. It is not permissible for a Muslim to accept gifts distributed by them. This is because if one does this, then they will be cooperating and honouring symbols and their false beliefs, and this cooperating is a sign that one is happy for them during these days.

It could also lead to the Muslims incorporating their festivals with our festivals (days of ‘Eid). Or at the very least, it could lead to the Muslims taking their days of celebration as well as ours as a day when we can exchange food and gifts between us and them.

All of this is Fitnah (discord) and an innovation into the religion. 

It is affirmed that the Messenger of Allaah [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, “Whoever innovates into our religion then it will be rejected.” [Narrated by al-Bukhaaree (2550) and Muslim (1718)]

Likewise, it is not permissible to give gifts to them in celebration of their festivals (i.e. gifts that which are specific to their festivals).

And Allaah is the Source of all Strength. May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family and his companions.

Permanent Committee of Scholars for Research and Iftaa (Fatwaa No. 2882)

President: Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez bin Baas

Vice President: Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razaaq al-‘Afeefee

Member: ‘Abdullah bin Qa’ood

Impermissibilty of Using the Names of the Festivals of the Kuffaar

Follow @AhleDhikr

Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [May Allaah have Mercy on him]:

‘Alee bin Abee Taalib (May Allaah be Pleased with him) even forbade the Muslims from using the same names (i.e. that it is not permissible to use names like Christmas/Eve, Boxing Day, New Years' Day/Eve, Mother’s Day, April Fool’s Day etc.) that the Kuffaar do for their religious festivals (and special occasions), so how about those who participate on these days as they do?

[Iqtidaa’ as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem (1/516)]

So How Bad is the Parent Who Exposes his Children to this, Oh Muslim!?

Follow @AhleDhikr

Imaam adh-Dhahabee [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Verily, Muslim children participating in such festivals are also effected. Love for these festivals is placed in their hearts because they find enjoyment in them, dressings up, eating nice food etc.

So how bad is the parent who exposes his children to this, Oh Muslim!? If you don’t forbid your children then you and they will be destroyed. They will gain a Kaafir identity (by partaking and gaining love for their religion).

So it is not permissible for us to partake in celebrating their festivals and this is something that the Shaytaan has instilled in many people through their ignorance, to the extent that even the scholars have become negligent even though they have knowledge, rather, their knowledge is something harmful to them (i.e. a sin).

[Adapted from Tashbeeh al-Khamees bi ahl al-Khamees (pg. 10-12)]

Tafseer: And Those Who Do Not Witness Falsehood

Follow @AhleDhikr

“And those who do not witness falsehood, and if they pass by some evil play or evil talk, they pass by it with dignity.” [al-Furqaan 25:72]

‘Umar bin al-Khattaab [May Allaah be Pleased with him] said, “Do not mix with the Mushriks in their places of worship on the days of their festivals, this is because define punishment is upon them.”

[Narrated by ‘Abdur-Razaaq in his al-Musannaf (1609); Bayhaqee in as-Sunan al-Kubraa (9/18640) and quoted by Ibn al-Qayyim in Ahkaam Ahl adh-Dhimmah (3/1247) and Ibn Muflih in Adaab ash-Sharee’ah (3/417)]

Ibn al-Qayyim [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said in Ahkaam Ahl adh-Dhimmah (3/1244):

(From the Salaf – May Allaah be Pleased with them all) Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ad-Dahaak said, “witness falsehood” means the festivals of the Mushriks. Sa’eed bin Jubayr said it refers to ‘Palm Sunday’.

Ibn Taymiyyah [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

The festivals of the Mushriks is a time when doubts (i.e. false ideas and beliefs), desires and falsehood is gathered. There is no benefit any of this because of the sweetness one may taste (because of the celebrations) will only be followed with punishment and pain. Therefore, it is has been described as ‘witnessing falsehood’ (cf. 25:72), meaning going to such place and witnessing them.

[Iqtidaa’ as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem (1/183)]

Imaam adh-Dhahabee [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Whoever goes to the places of their festivals or witnesses their celebrations then this person is sinful and obnoxious. This is because the person is voluntarily going to witness sinful activities and he is in no position to forbid them.

The Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, “If any one of you see a sin then stop it with your hand (if you have the authority to do so) otherwise stop it with your speech (if you are able) and if you can’t, then  at least hate it in your heart, and that is the lowest form of Emaan (i.e. obligatory upon everyone who believes to hate what Allaah has Forbidden).” [Narrated by Muslim (78)]

So how great (of a sin) is it to witness the festivals of the Jews and the Christians? To do as they do? Buying the same products they buy in order to celebrate their festivals? This, in actuality, is giving life to the worship of the cross, innovating new festivals into our religion, and assisting and imitating the Mushriks in their festivals.

…

But a person may say, ‘But I don’t intend to imitate them in this celebration’.

I say: Being a part of their celebrations and imitating them is Haraam. The evidence for this is where the Messenger of Allaah [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said after forbidding the Muslims from praying at the time when the sunrises and sets, “Verily it rises in between the horns of the Shaytaan and a time when the Kuffaar prostrate at this time because of this.” [Narrated by Muslim (832)]

The praying person doesn’t have the same intention as they do, however he is still prohibited from praying because he will then be like them and be considered as cooperating with them, thus it is Haraam.

[Adapted from Tashbeeh al-Khamees bi ahl al-Khamees (pg. 10-12)]

Look How We Make the Ayaat Clear to Them, Yet Look How They are Deluded

Follow @AhleDhikr The Messiah ['Iesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary), was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him. His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddiqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books (see Verse 66:12)]. They both used to eat food (as any other human being, while Allah does not eat). Look how We make the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to them, yet look how they are deluded away (from the truth). [al-Maa’idah 5:75]

The Messiah ['Iesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary): the Aayah starts with informing us who he was, even though he was given miracles, he was only a man.

…was no more than a Messenger; many were the Messengers that passed away before him: meaning, he was a man like the messengers that came before him, they were all sent with the purpose of conveying a message - so if ‘Esaa was a god then we would be obligated to say that all the messengers were gods. Thus this refutes their false doctrine.

His mother [Maryam (Mary)] was a Siddiqah [i.e. she believed in the words of Allah and His Books (see Verse 66:12)]: This is descriptive of Maryam, that she is a Siddiqeeqah [TN: i.e. that she was a servant that excepted (Sidq) the scriptures, and she was not divine].

They both used to eat food (as any other human being, while Allah does not eat): meaning, they were both born and had to be given an upbringing, just like any other child. They both used to eat food, food that was created, therefore they were like the rest of creation none being able to survive without food and other necessities needed to exist. So how can it be that something that needs and upbringing and needs something created to exist be something that is divine and a deity?

They (the Christians) argue that ‘Esaa only ate because he was in human form but his essence remained divine. As a result, as long as he was in a human state he needed to operate like the rest of mankind. 

However this argument is false; a deity cannot be defined as being a deity if it mixes itself with what necessitates living for the creation. 

Furthermore, if we say this in relation to 'Eesaa, then what stops it being the case with other messengers?

Some of the Mufassireen explained their need to eat and drink to proves that they were also in need to defecate and urinate. This also adds proof to affirm that they were humans and thus created. 

Look how We make the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) clear to them, yet look how they are deluded away (from the truth); meaning, look at the clear evidences that have been revealed and likewise look how they turn away from the truth after it has been explained. 

[Jaami al-Ahkaam al-Quraan by Imaam al-Qurtoobee 6/185-186]

The Heavens are Almost Torn, and the Earth is Split Asunder, and the Mountains Fall in Ruins

Follow @AhleDhikr 88. And they say: "The Most Beneficent (Allah) has begotten a son (or children).
89. Indeed you have brought forth a terrible evil thing.
90. Whereby the heavens are almost torn, and the earth is split asunder, and the mountains fall in ruins,
91. That they ascribe a son (or children) to the Most Beneficent (Allaah).
92. But it is not suitable for (the Majesty of) the Most Beneficent that He should beget a son (or children).
93. There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the Most Beneficent as a slave. 

[Maryam 19:88-93]

88. And they say: "The Most Beneficent (Allah) has begotten a son (or children)”: meaning the People of the Book believe this (i.e. the Jews taking Uzayr as a son with Allaah or the Christians with ‘Esaa) as well as those who believe that the Angels are the daughters of Allaah (some of the Mushriks of Makkah believed this).

89. Indeed you have brought forth a terrible evil thing: Ibn ‘Abbaas [May Allaah be Pleased with him] said that this means they have invented a terrible lie.

Qataadah, Mujaahid and Muqaatil [May Allaah have Mercy on them] said this means that they have said something which is extremely calamitous[1].

90. Where-by the heavens are almost torn, and the earth is split asunder, and the mountains fall in ruins: Naafi’ [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said that ‘almost’ means it is, i.e. that heavens ARE torn apart by their false attribution. This is similar to the account given when the Last Day will begin:

1. When the heaven is cleft asunder.
2. And when the stars have fallen and scattered;
3. And when the seas are burst forth;
4. And when the graves are turned upside down (and they bring out their contents)

[Surah al-Infitraar 82:1-4]

91. That they ascribe a son (or children) to the Most Beneficent (Allaah): meaning, these things happen (or almost happen based on the difference of opinion between the Mufasireen) because of what they have invented (in their false claims). The heavens, the earths, the mountains and everything within the creation, except for the man and the jinn, are almost torn apart because of this false statement.

92. But it is not suitable for (the Majesty of) the Most Beneficent that He should beget a son (or children): meaning, it is not befitting for Him to have a son or even be attributed with one.

93. There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the Most Beneficent as a slave: meaning, the creation in its entirety will be subdued and submissive on that Day, all of them being enslaved and nothing from their affairs will be hidden. They will be brought by themselves and none can avail them on that Day.

[Tafseer Ma’aalim at-Tanzeel by Imaam al-Baghawee (5/257-259)]

---

[1] A principle in Tafseer is that there may exist two different wordings to an interpretation but both are deemed as being correct.

Shaykh Sa’d bin Naasir ash-Shithree [may Allaah Preserve him] explained: “If there are multiple Tafseers for one word (such as a word that is known as a Mushtarak word) we explain the Aayah with all the possible meanings as long as they do not contradict each other, this is the opinion of the majority like Imaam Ahmad and others, opposing the view of Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee who believed that the Tafseer can only have one meaning. (If they contradict, then this is subject to further discussion which will be discussed in a separate post, In Shaa Allaah).” [Adapted from Sharh Minhaaj al-Wusool, Tape 6 (107-19mins)]