Celebrating The Maulid

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
All praises are due to Allah, may His blessings and peace be upon our noble Prophet Muhammad, his family and companions.
The issue of celebrating ‘Maulid’ (what some call the birthday of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam), in later generations up till this age of ours, has been viewed differently by many people, scholars and commoners alike. Many writings have been excellently presented on the subject by eminent scholars to the effect that this celebration has no basis from the teachings of the Prophet (sallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam) thereby calling upon Muslims to desist from participating in it. But despite that you find many Muslims – viewing the matter from a purely sentimental and emotional perspective – still endulge in such practice and view any opposite opinion to be wrong. Some find it difficult to believe that the practice is alien to Islam, considering the fact most of the Muslim Ummah in almost all countries observe it or that some famous scholars known for their sincere service to Islam were reported to have been observing the Maulid.
This piece is a response to a brother with such a view. In an exchange between me and him on the issue he asked why is it that some scholars condemn the observance of maulid while we find some great scholars like Ibn Hajar (Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Hajar Al-‘Asqalaani, d. 852 a.h.) and Suyuti are reported to have been observing or attending the maulid congregation. In my response to him on an internet forum I wrote the following confirming that Ibn Hajar and Suyuti did not only endorse and observe the maulid but also presented some arguments in an effort to give it a legal bearing from some texts of the Qur’an or the Sunnah, then followed it with responses from the scholars especially from the Maliki Mazhab.

The stand of Ibn Hajar regarding maulid is clear and he had really endorsed its observance without any doubt. But this is not found in any of his books, or to be more precise I could not lay my hands on his justification for celebrating maulud and the arguments on which he based that from his own books, but his student Suyuti (‘Abdur Rahman ibn Abi Bakr As-Suyuti, d. 911 a.h.) quoted him. This I suppose he took directly from Ibn Hajar in one of his lessons.

I will therefore begin by quoting the complete text of Ibn Hajar’s statement and then follow it with the relevant responses. Suyuti states in his Husnul Maqsid Fi ‘Amalil Maulid from his Al-Haawi Lil Fataawi (vol.1 p.302-303):
((Shaikhul Islam, Abul Fadl Ahmad ibn Hajar was asked about celebrating the Maulid, and he answered with the following words:

((Originally celebrating Maulid is an innovation (bid’ah) which has not been reported from any of the pious predecessors ‘As-Salafus Salih’ from the first three generations of the Muslim Ummah. But all the same it contains some good and some bad things. So whoever pursues the good things in performing it, and avoids its opposite, it will be considered a good innovation (bid’ah hasanah). Otherwise it will be (a bad bid’ah).
It appears to me that celebrating the maulid can be deduced from an established source, that is the authentic hadith in al-Bukhari and Muslim that the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) came to Madina and saw the Jews fasting the day of Ashuraa’. He asked them about that. They said: “this is the day on which Allah Ta’aala drowned Pharaoh and rescued Musa. So we fast it to show our gratitude to Allah Ta’aalaa”.
This infers that one can show gratitude to Allah for a favour He bestows on him, whether that favour is in the form of a blessing He granted him or for rescuing him from a hardship or trouble on a specific day. And that he repeats that celebration on the return of the like of that day every year. Thanking Allah can take the form of various types of ibadaats like prostration, fasting, voluntary alms and reciting (the holy Qur’an). And what kind of blessing is greater than the advent of this Prophet - the prophet of mercy – on that day?
Based on this, the exact and specific day ought to be pursued for the observance of maulid in order to correspond to the story of Musa on the day of Aashuuraa. He who does not take note of this will not care to observe the maulid on any day of the month. Some people even widened the matter and claim that the maulid should be observed on any day of the year. This of course entails some meanings that are unbecoming. This is as far as its initial observance is concerned.
But as regards what should be done in observing the maulid, people should confine themselves to what really gives the impression of showing gratitude to Allah. Like the aforementioned things: reciting the holy Qur’an, feeding the needy, voluntary alms giving and the recitation of some poems intended to praise the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) or that encourages religious devotion (zuhd), and that draws the mind towards the performance of good deeds. But as for the things which follow that, like the (sufi) samaa’ (songs joined with beating drums) and other types of entertainment, what we ought to say is that there is nothing wrong in permitting whatever is lawful from those activities such that it enhances happiness in respect of that day. And to prohibit whatever is known to be unlawful or disliked or is known to be non-preferable (khilaaful awlaa)) Unquote.

This is also mentioned by Al-Zarqaani in Sharhul Mawaahibil Laduniyyah vol.1 p.140, and As-Sharqaawi in his Hashiyah vol.7 p.423.

There are certain things to be noted from the above statement

1. That Ibn Hajar confesses that maulid is bid’ah;
2. And that non of the pious predecessors observed it;
3. That what made him permit it is that it entails some good things;
4. He endorses the categorisation of bid’ah into good and bad;
5. The basis of his stand is that he drew an analogy between maulid and the observance of the fasting of the day of Aashuraa;
6. That he was the first to draw this analogy;
7. The reason common between maulid and the day of Aashuraa is that both are a way of showing gratitude to Allah;
8. That maulid contains some negative and bad activities which, if avoided, it will be a good bid’ah.
9. That the exact date of the birth of the prophet should be pursued in observing the maulid. And this is something impossible, for one thing not known by many people (I don’t mean Ibn Hajar) is that the exact date of his birth is not known, at least through an authentic narration. There are several views on this date. Some say it was on the 2nd of Rabi’ul Awwal, while most of the scholars of hadith say it was on the 8th. Other views are that it was on the 10th or 12th or 17th or 18th. Some even claim that it was in the month of Ramadan and there is no authentic narration from the prophet himself (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) to support any of these views. The only thing established is that it was on Monday as mentioned by the prophet himself. But it is also established that he (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) died on the 12th of Rabi’ul Awwal. That is why Ibnul Haaj (a famous Maliki scholar said: “The most surprising thing is that how can they rejoice with drumming and other means of happiness because of his birth in this month (Rabi’ul Awwal) while he (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) died in the same month, and the ummah was inflicted with a great calamity not comparable with anything. Why didn’t they weep over his death…. Even though if they did that and continue to observe it every year it will all the same be a bid’ah.” Al-Madkhal vol.2 p.16-17. (See on the issue of the difference of opinion on this date Al-Mawahibul Laduniyyah 131-132 and Al-istee’aab by Ibn Abdil Barr, and Al-Bidayah Wan Nihayah by Ibn Katheer.

There are of course more to deduce from his statement.
The Aaashuuraa hadith is not the only proof on which the maulid is based. Rather the proponents of maulid have other arguments to support their claim of its lawfulness. I will briefly mention them here together with what other scholars said in response to those claims.

Two
Suyuti, immediately after quoting the above argument from Ibn Hajar said: “And it appears to me that celebrating maulid can be deduced from another established source. And that is what Al-Baihaqi reported from Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) performed an ‘aqiqah for himself after becoming a prophet, even though it was reported that his grandfather Abdul Muttalib had done that for him on the seventh day of his birth. And it is known that it is not a normal practice to repeat the ‘aqiqah. This should therefore be taken to mean that the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) performed that to express his gratitude to Allah Ta’aala for creating him and making him a mercy to the world. It should also be regarded as a legalization of that same action to his ummah, just as the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) used to recite the salatun Nabiyy. So it is recommended that we also express our gratitude over his birth, by joining up in congregations, feeding the needy and other types of ibadaat to demonstrate our happiness.” (Husnul Maqsid Fi ‘Amalil Maulid from vol.1 p.303 of Al-Hawi lil Fataawi).

Three
Another argument forwarded by Ibnul Jazariy in his book ‘Urfut Ta’reef Bil Maulidis Shareef’ and Shamsuddeen Ibnu Naarisriddeen Ad-Dimashqi in his ‘Mauridus Saadii Fi Maulidil Haadi’ is that Abu Lahab was seen in a dream and was asked about his situation in Hell. He replied: ‘I am in the hell fire. But the torment is lightened on me every Monday night and I suck some water from the tip of my finger. And this is because I freed Thuwaibah when she announced to me the good news of the birth of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) and for suckling him’. This is also mentioned by Suyuti in the aforementioned reference.

Four
The saying of Allah Ta’aala: ((Say: In the bounty of Allah and in His mercy therein let them rejoice. That is better than what they amass (of wealth)) Yunus: 58.
They say: To be happy with the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) is demanded by the Qur’an, as seen in this verse. Therefore Allah orders that we rejoice in His mercy, and the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) is the greatest mercy. See Al-Maulidur Rawiyy Fil Maulidin Nabiyy by Alawi Al-Maliki p.10.

These are the strongest arguments, at least which are traceable to the Qur’an and Hadith. There are others drawn from a more distant point of view, and others based on the fact that many people amongst whom some ulama participate in the observance of the maulid. Some of these are:
1. That the first person to innovate the maulid was a renowned just ruler;
2. That Ibn Batuta, in his travels, praised Muhammad ibn Muhiyiddin al-Tabari, one of the judges in Makkah at his time, for his observance of the maulid;
3. That the maulid is a way of remembering the most important personality ever created;
4. That the maulid is recommended by many ulama and that it is one of the good things introduced in Islam;
5. That it is a congregation of alms giving and praising and extolling the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam).
In addition to the various hadiths with some ambiguous meanings they cling to. Some of these are:
1. “Man sanna sunnatan hasanatan…”;
2. Ibn Mas’uud’s saying “Maa Raahul Muslimuna Hasanan fahuwa indallahi hasan” (Whatever the Muslims consider good is good in the sight of Allah);
3. The categorisation of bid’ah by some ulama into good and bad or into wajib, mustahab, mubah, haram and makruh;

Before responding to all these arguments, I think it is important we note some points.
1. The term ‘ibadah’ (worship) is defined as anything loved and pleased with by Allah, either in the form of a saying or action, explicit or implicit.
2. The term ‘bid’ah’ (innovation) denotes anything that possesses the following qualities:
Being an innovation
(One) Claimed to belong to the deen of Islam
(Two) Not having any legal origin. This is in line with the hadith of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) : “Man Ahdatha Fii Amrinaa Hadha Ma Laisa Minhu Fa Huwa Raddun” (Whoever innovated into this affair of ours (Islam) what does not belong to it, will not be accepted). (See Jaami’ul Uluumi Wal Hikam by Ibn Rajab vol.1 p.177). By this definition, worldly affairs like scientific and technological advancements, are not considered as ‘bid’ah’ even though they are innovated.
3. The hadith of the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) ‘Kullu bid’atin dalalah’ (Every innovation is a bid’ah) is a generalisation comprising all kinds of bid’ah as far as the aforementioned definition is concerned. So there is no bid’ah that is good in Islam.
4. Drawing near to Allah through any ibadah must be in line with the shari’ah in two basic points:
(One) Establishing the origin of that ibadah by authentic legal evidence. Therefore it should not be deduced from a false hadith or based on the saying of someone whose saying or action is not a binding ‘hujjah’.
(b) Preserving the original mode of performing the ibadah as taught by the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam).(See Qawaa’idu Ma’rifatil Bida’ip.66).
5. Any act of worship originating from mere reasoning, desire or sentiment, like the saying of an alim, some devoted Shaikhs, or customs of some countries or communities, or some tales or dreams, is considered a bid’ah. (See Al-’itisaam by As-Shatibi vol.1 p.212-219).
6. Any act of worship abandoned by the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam), that is, he did not perform it, even though the factors necessitating its performance were established to prevail, and all obstacles preventing the performance were nonexistent, the performance of that act by somebody else is a bid’ah. E.g. the outward expression of the ‘niyyah’ (intention) to enter into prayer, pronouncing the call to prayer (al-adhan) in prayers other than the five daily prayers and praying two rak’aats after performing the sa’ayi between Safa and Marwa. (See Al’itisaam vol.1 vol.361-364).
7. Any act of worship not performed by the pious precessors (As-Salafus Salih) of the first three generations, that is the Sahabah, the Tabi’een and the At-Ba’it Taabi’een or not reported by them, or not written in their books, or not mentioned by them in any of their gatherings, even though the factors necessitating its performance prevailed and there were no obstacles to prevent the performance, is considered a bid’ah on the part of later generations to perform that act. This is clear in the saying of the famous companion of the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) Hadhaifa ibnul Yamaan (may Allah be pleased with him), when he said to some of the Taabi’een: “Any ‘ibadah’ not practiced by the companions of the prophet, do not practice it. The first did not leave any saying for the last. So fear Allah O you people, and cling to the path of those before you”. See Al-Amr Bil ittibaa’I 62, and Bukhari narrated something near in meaning in hadith No. 7282.
Examples of these acts are the performance of the prayer known as ‘Salatur Raga’ib’ performed by some people in the month of Rajab, and the observance of maulid. This is because the factors necessitating the performance of these acts were not only found in the days of those predecessors, but were even more effective and powerful, and there were no obstacles to prevent them from performing these ibadah. (See At-Targhib an Salatir Ragha’ib al-Maudu’ah p.9, and al-Ba’ith ‘ala Inkaaril Bida’I Wal Hawadith by Abu Shamah p.47 and Iqtidaaus Siraatil Mustaqim vol.2 p.614). Ibnul Haaj, in his al-Madkhal says: “If the maulid will be free from Samaa’ and what it entails and is confined to feeding relatives and friends, it is all the same a ‘bid’ah’ from its mere intention. Because that is an addition to the deen and it is not among the works of the past Salaf. And following the Salaf is better, nay more incumbent than introducing an intention contrary to their own, because they are the best in following the sunnah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam), best in honouring and extolling him and his sunnah. They precede the whole mankind in embarking upon his sunnah. It has not been reported from any of them that he intended performing the maulid. And we follow their steps. Whatever sufficed them should suffice us…” Al-Madkhal vol.2 p.11-12. And see him on page 26 of the same volume where he says that some people substitute the samaa’ and other activities performed in the maulid, with the reading of Sahihul Bukhari. He said: “Even though the reading of hadith is in itself a great act of bringing one near to Allah, and an act of ‘ibadah’ in which there is blessing and much goodness, one should perform that according to its laid down rules, but not in the name of maulid. Don’t you see that the prayer is one of the greatest means of getting near to Allah, but if one will perform a prayer before its specified time he will be blamed and be considered as violator of the law. So if this is the situation of prayer, what would be of something else.” For information, Ibnul Haaj is one of the famous Maliki scholars. Shaikh Uthman dan Fodio depended intensively on his writings especially this Madkhal. This is known to anyone conversant with the writings of Dan Fodio (rahimahullah). See for example Bayaanul Bida’I and Ihyaaus Sunnah Wa Ikhmaadul Bid’ah. Another Maliki scholar Al-Fakihaani wrote on the subject of maulid in his Al-Maurid fi amalil Maulid, when he was asked about it. He out-rightly condemned it in totality. Suyuti quoted it completely and tried to refute it but in vain. See Al-Hawi Lil Fatawi (vol.1 p.294).
8. The deen of Islam had been completed totally by Allah before the death of our noble Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). No ibadah is left out without being explained by the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). Allah Ta’aala says: ((This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion)). Al-Maa’idah:3. In elaborating this meaning, Imam Malik says: “Whoever innovates a bid’ah which he considers good, has really accused Muhammad (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) of betraying the message given to him. Because Allah Ta’aala says: ((This day I have perfected your religion for you…)). So whatever is not part of the deen at that time, will not be part of the deen today” See Al-‘itisaam vol.1 p.49). As-Shatibi also reported that Al-Qaadi Abu Bakr Ibnul Arabi narrated from Az-Zubair ibn Bakkaar that he said: “I heard Malik ibn Anas, when someone came to him and asked: ‘O Abu Abdullah, from where should I enter my state of Ihram? He said: “From Dhul Hulaifah (the Miqaat of the people of Madina) from where the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) entered his state of Ihram. The man said: ‘I want to do it from the mosque’. Imam Malik said: “Don’t do that! The man said: ‘I want to do it from the mosque, from the grave of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam)’. Malik said to him: “Do not do that, for I am afraid that a fitnah may afflict you”. He said: ‘What fitnah is in this? It is just some miles I am adding.’ Malik said: “What fitnah is more than to consider yourself ahead of the Prophet in attaining a virtue he could not reach? I heard Allah Ta’aala saying: ((And let those who oppose the Messenger’s commandment beware, lest some Fitnah should befall them or a painful torment be inflicted on them)). An-Nuur:63. (Al-‘itisaam vol.2 p.52-53, and Al-Wanshareesi in al-Mi’yaar Al-Mu’rib vol.11 p.116. Ibn Battah reported something near in meaning in his Al-Ibaanah Al-Kubraa vol.1 p.261-262).
As-Shatibi, after quoting this story, said: “The fitnah mentioned by Imam Malik in explaining the verse is true of all Ahlul Bid’ah, and it is their base on which they erect their building. For they view that what Allah mentioned in his book and what the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) enacted in his sunnah is less (in quantity or quality) than what their reasoning leads them to. That is what Ibn Mas’uud said when he met some people performing dhikr in congregation and in one tune: “You have really been guided to what your Prophet was not guided to, or that you have clung to a violation and a dalalah (going astray).
Having laid down this, let us return to the above arguments and take them up one after the other.
One: On Ibn Hajar and the Aashuuraa hadith
1.Ibn Hajar’s explanation of maulid based on the Aaashuuraa hadith after confessing that it is a bid’ah is something that cannot be put together. Shaikh Rasheed Ridaa (the famous student of Muhammad Abduhu) in his Fataawaa (p.2112-2113) dismissed this assertion. He said this is enough evidence to render the maulid unlawful, because how can Ibn Hajar affirm that it has not been reported from any of the salaf, and then claim to have an origin. Imam Malik says: “Nothing will reform the later generation of this ummah but what reformed the first generation”.
Had the Aashuuraa hadith been a proof to the observance of the maulid, the first generation of this ummah would definitely have deduced that from the text of the hadith. But having been abandoned by them, even though the factors necessitating the performance of maulid were found at that time, that is their love for the Prophet, their love for honouring him, their love for feeding each other and for dhikrullah, it is not proper for someone in the later generations to use that same text in a meaning different from what they understood from it. As-Shatibi has spoken comprehensively on this qaa’idah (general rule), that is, whatever interpretation to a text not established to have been practiced by those early generations, should not be practiced by later generations in any form of worship. This is because their abandonment of this practice is a consensus that the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) did not mean that by the text, and it is not proper to violate an ‘ijmaa’. As-Shatibi said: “Whatever is practiced by later generations from this type, is really against the ijmaa’ of the first generations. And whoever violates an ijmaa’ is in clear error, for the ummah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) will never agree collectively on anything astray. So whatever they practiced or abandoned is the sunnah, and is what ought to be given consideration, nay it is real guidance. There are only two things: something right and something in error. Whoever go against the salaf is in error, and this is enough. This is also true of the weak hadith with which the ulama did not work. That is why the claim of the Rafidah (Shi’ite) that the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) explicitly said in a clear text that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) should be the Khalifah immediately after him, was not entertained. Because the practice of the whole Sahabah was against this claim and shows its falseness, for the Sahabah will never be collectively and as a whole astray” Al-Muwaafaqaat Fi Usulis Shari’ah vol.3 p.71). He further said: “Many at times you find the people of bid’ah and dalalah use the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah to forcefully make them bear their ‘mazhabs’. And they use the ambiguous words contained in those texts in the presence of the general public, assuming that they have something to cling to (in respect of their bid’ah). This has many examples…” He then cited some examples relevant to the matter. One of those examples is the claim of some people of the lawfulness of reciting the Qur’an and saying the dhikr in congregation by the saying of the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) “Maj tama’a qawmun fi baitin min buyutillahi…” (No group of people will join up in a mosque, reciting the Qur’an and taking lessons from it …, unless the angels surround them…”, and the hadith: “Maj tama’a qawmun yadhkuruunallah…”. Another example is the claim of the lawfulness of dancing in the mosque based on the hadith that the Ethiopians once played with shields and spears in the mosque of the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). And the claim of everyone who innovated or endorsed a bid’ah that the salaf also innovated some things not in existent in the days of the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) like putting the Qur’an in the form of a book, writing different books on various subjects, keeping records in registers and so forth. He said: “All this is an error to this deen and an imitation of the path of the deviated”. He further explained that what these people mention is mostly part of ‘al-Masaalihil Mursalah’. And it is known that al-masaalihil Mursalah has no connection whatsoever with ‘ibadaat’ (acts of worship). See the aforementioned reference. It is really important for those of us versed in the arabic language to read this from the book itself, that is Al-Muwaafaqaat. See also his other book Al-itisaam on this subject vol.1 p231 upwards. He had treated this matter in detail and with perfect scholarship. Shatibi is also one the famous Maliki scholars who served the course of Islam profoundly. May Allah reward him and have mercy on him.
2. Shaikh Rasheed Ridaa added that the good things contained in the maulid as mentioned by Ibn Hajar that if pursued, maulid will be a good bid’ah, are not in itself bid’ah. The bid’ah is the special congregation in that special mode and style, in the specified time, and considering that to be part of the ‘Sha’aaril Islam” which is never established but with a nass from the Qur’an or Sunnah.
3. He also said: “that observing the maulid reached a stage where those who abstained form performing it are considered infidels. This makes it one of the basic foundations of aqeedah necessarily known from the deen, and this is clearly an addition to the foundations of Islam. And any additions to the foundation of Islam nullifies that particular addition and renders it alien and disowned by the Islam brought by the seal of the prophets (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam)…” Fatawaa Shaikh Rasheed Ridaa.
Shaikh Rasheed Ridaa was asked about some people in the Jawa area of Indonesia who claim that whoever does not attend the maulid is a kafir, and whoever does not stand up on hearing the word ‘Marhaban’, at the time of reading the story of maulid is a kafir. And if someone asks them: Is this ordered by Allah and His Messenger?, they say: You are a kafir. Shaikh Rasheed Ridaa answered to all these questions with the aforementioned statement.
One other thing of this nature is the claim of ahlul maulid that it is haram for one to fast on the day of maulid. Al-Hattab in his ‘Mawahibul Jalil’ quoted an event that occurred in respect of one Ibn Abbaad who said that he came out on the day of maulid and met one Alhaj Ibn ‘Aashir and some other men, and they brought some dishes of varieties of food. And when they invited him he told them that he was fasting. The man (Alhaj Ibn Aashir was very much annoyed to hear that and ordered him to break the fast, and told him that it was a day of eid, so it is unlawful to fast.

Two: Suyuti’s argument with the hadith of Aqiqah
This is simply refuted by the fact that the hadith is not authentic. When asked about whether the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) really performed aqiqah once more for himself, Imam Malik answered: “Tell me about the Sahabah for whom the aqiqah was not performed in Jahiliyyah, have they done that themselves after embracing Islam? This is sheer false” See Ibn Rushdin’s Al-Muqaddimaatul Mumahhidaat vol.2 p.15.
The hadith in question is reported through one Abdullahi ibn al-Muharrar, who is termed by many scholars of hadith as: ‘Da’eef Jiddan’, ‘Munkarul Hadith’ or ‘Matruuk’. See Al-Musannaf by AbdurRazzaaq As-San’aani (d. 211 h) vol.4 p.325, and Al-Majruuhin by Ibn Hibban vol.2 p.29. He said in respect of Abdullahi ibn Muharrar: “He was one of the most devoted people but he used to tell lies without knowing, and used to twist narrations without understanding”.
An-Nawawi states: “As for the hadith mentioned by As-Shiraazi that the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) performed aqiqah for himself, it is reported by Al-Baihaqi through Abdullahi ibn al-Muharrar that the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) … . This is a false hadith” (Al-Majmuu’ by An-Nawawi vol.8 p.330, see also: At-Talkhisul Habeer by Ibn Hajar vol.4 p.147).
One surprising thing is that Al-Baihaqi himself after quoting the hadith stated that it is Munkar, but all the same Suyuti dwelled on the hadith to legalise ‘maulid’ without mentioning the ruling of Baihaqi on it. See As-Sunanul Kubra by Baihaqi vol.9 p.300.
But Az-Zarqaani in his sharhul Mawaahib after quoting Suyuti’s deduction from the hadith commented: “An-Nawawi said this hadith is false. So deducing (maulid) from it is out of place” Sharhul Mawahibil Laduniyyah vol.1 p.140.

Three: On the story of Abu Lahab
1. The text as narrated by Al-Bukhari is not as Ibnul Jazari and Ibn Nasirid Deen claimed. Al-Bukhari narrated from Al-Hakam ibn Nafi’ from Shu’aib from Az-Zuhri, he said Urwatu ibnuz Zubair told me that Zainab bint Abi Salama told him that Umm Habiba bint Abi Sufyan said: “I said: O Allah’s Messenger, marry my sister, the daughter of Abu Sufyan’. The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) said: “Do you like that? I replied, “Yes, for even now I am not your only wife and I like that my sister should share the good with me”. The Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) said, “But that is not lawful for me”. I said: “We have heard that you want to marry the daughter of Abu Salama”, He said: “You mean the daughter of Umm Salamah?” I said, “Yes” He said, “Even if she were not my step-daughter, she would be unlawful for me to marry as she is my foster suckling niece. I and Abu Salama were suckled by Thuwaiba. So you should not present to me your daughters or your sisters (in marriage)”. Urwah said: “Thuwaibah was a freed slave woman of Abu Lahab. Abu Lahab freed her, and she suckled the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). When Abu Lahab died he was seen in a dream by one of his relatives in a terrible situation in hell. He said to him: “What did you meet? Abu Lahab said: I did not meet (anything but torment), except that I was given water in this (in Abdur Razaq’s narration: He pointed to a dot on his finger) for freeing Thuwaibah”. (Sahihul Bukhari together with Fathil Bari vol.9 p.48 hadith No. 5101).
From this text you will find that:
(a) The part of the text containing the issue of freeing Thuwaibah is from the saying of Urwah without mentioning who told him that. This is what the scholars of hadith call ‘hadith mursal’, and it is part of the weak hadith which is not accepted. (See Fathul Bari vol.9 p.49).
(b) There is no mention that the reason for freeing Thuwaibah is that she brought Abu Lahab the good news of the birth of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam).
(c) There is no mention of the word ‘every Monday’ as asserted by Ibnul Jazari and As-Suhaily (See Suhaili’s assertion in Fathil Bari vol.9 p.48).
(d) Moreover what is confirmed by the scholars of Sirah (Biography of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) is that Thuwaibah was not freed until after the Hijrah of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). Ibn Sa’ad (d 230 h) says: “When the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) was at Makkah he used to send her (Thuwaibah) some gifts, and Khadijah also used to be generous to her. At that time, she was a slave to Abu Lahab. Khadijah made some efforts to buy her from the hands of Abu Lahab so as to free her, but Abu Lahab refused that. But when the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) migrated to Madina Abu Lahab freed her” At-Tabaqaatul Kubraa by Ibn Sa’ad vol.1 p.108. This is confirmed by Ibn Abdil Barr in his Al-istee’aab vol.1 p.12, and Ibnul Jauzi in his Al-Wafaa Bi Ahwaalil Mustafaa vol.1 p.106-107, and Al-Muhibb At-Tabari in his Dhakhaairul ‘Uqbaa Fi Manaaqibi Dhawil Qurbaa p.259, and Ibn Hajar in Al-Isaabaah Fi Tamyeezis Sahaabah vol.4 p.250.
(e) One other thing is that a kafir will never benefit in the hereafter from any deed he performed in this world, for Allah Ta’aala says: ((And We shall turn to whatever deeds they did, and We shall make such deeds as scattered floating particles of dust)) Al-Furqaan:23. That is because the condition for accepting a deed is that it should be with a perfect intention, and this not found in the case of a kafir. So freeing Thuwaibah by Abu Lahab as shown in this mursal hadith is insignificant. This is not like the case of Abu Talib which is established by an authentic hadith. See Fathul Baari by Ibn Hajar vol.9 p.49.
(f) Moreover this case is based on a dream we do not know who saw it. And even if we know it is known that legal rulings such that prohibit or make something lawful are never based on dreams.
Four
The argument based on the verse of Suratu Yunus, is also out of place. That is because interpreting the ‘mercy’ mentioned in the verse to mean the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) is something none of the scholars of the first generation of Muslims claimed. And we have mentioned from the saying of Shatibi, when discussing Ibn Hajar’s deduction of maulid from the Aashuuraa hadith, that any meaning not mentioned by the salaf in their interpretation of the Qur’an, is not accepted, especially when that interpretation is meant to buttress the validity of an innovated ‘ibadah’.
Al-Imam At-Tabari, in his voluminous exegesis of the Qur’an and the best in that field, quoted eighteen separate narratives from the Salaf on interpreting this verse. None of them interpreted ‘mercy’ to mean the person of the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam). Shatibi is not the only alim to make this bold warning. Al-Imam At-Tabari who is known to be the author of the best and more comprehensive book of Tafsir, even though he lived in the last part of the third century and died in the beginning of the fourth century of Hijrah, he denied himself the right to interpret the Qur’an contrary to the interpretations narrated from the salaf. In his Tafsir vol.15 p.188, when interpreting the verse: ((And offer your prayer neither aloud nor in a low voice, but follow a way between)) Al-Israai:110, he preferred the saying of Ibn Abbas on the meaning of ‘prayer’, ‘aloud’ and ‘in a low voice’. He then mentioned another interpretation of his own, but said: “If not for the fact that I have already mentioned the sayings of scholars of tafsir and I do not consider it permissible to oppose what is reported from them, I would have said that it is good to interpret the verse as follows…. But we do not regard it proper, because the consensus of the masters of tafsir is contrary to that”. In his commentary on another verse he said: “I have preferred this interpretation because it is in agreement with the interpretation of the Sahabah and Tabi’een, because we do not allow going contrary to what is reported from them”. Tafsirut Tabari vol.16 p.151.
But this is not to say that the prophet is not a mercy because this is confirmed by an independent verse. Allah says: ((We have not sent you but as a mercy for the whole creation)). But in this verse there is nothing to necessitate this interpretation. And moreover the word ‘rahmah’ independently or in the genitive form came in the Qur’an about 116 times, and no reasonable person will claim that it means the person of the prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam) in all these places and in its different contexts. The fact is therefore that the proponents of observing the maulid festival only cling to this particular verse because of the mention of the word: ‘fal yafrahu’ (let them rejoice), and this is exactly what Shatibi outlined previously that one of the methodologies of the people of bid’ah is that they cling to some words with ambiguous meanings to claim the validity of their mazhab. This affirms the need to go back to the interpretation of the first generations. May Allah guide us all.
As regards the other arguments mentioned, I don’t think they deserve our time and energy. The only thing that remains is the issue of categorizing bid’ah into good and bad or wajib manduub mubah etc. and the hadith : Man sanna sunnatan hasanatan… I hope I will have the time to write on that. But for a detailed and more erudite information on this issue one should read the book ‘Al-Qaulul Fasl’ by Shaikh Isma’il Al-Ansari.

Wa sallallahu wa sallama wa baaraka ala Nabiyyina Muhammad wa ala aalihi wa sahbih.

Wassalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh

Abubakar Muhammad Sani

Islamic University Madina

Rabee’ul Awwal 1422