A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF Ibn Hajar’S VIEW on Celebrating Maulid
By
Dr. Abubakar Muhammad Sani
absani@gmail.com,
08033286646
Islamic
Studies Section
Department
of Arts and Social Science Education
Faculty
of Education
Ahmadu
Bello University, Zaria
ABSTRACT
The
issue of celebrating ‘Maulid’, 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 from all quarters, some of them condoning while other condemning it. Many Muslims view the matter from a purely
sentimental and emotional perspective, as such, they consider 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. Ibn Hajar (Ali bin Ahmad bin Hajar al-‘Asqalani,
d. 852 a.h.), and Suyuti (Abdurrahman ibn Abi Bakr as-Suyuti d. 911 a.h.) are
among the scholars whose observance of the Maulid attracted the
attention of many and in this paper effort was made to confirm 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. This was followed with responses from the
scholars especially from the Maliki school of law. This paper did not include the arguments
presented by the likes of Ibn Taimiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim or Ibn Abd al-Wahhab but
was restricted to the scholars of the Maliki Mazhab.
Introduction
Ibn
Hajar al-Asqalani is one of the great names Muslims the world over revere for
the eminent service he rendered to Islam especially in the field of sciences of
hadith. His name is Ahmad ibn 'Ali ibn
Muhammad ibn Muhammad 'Ali al-Kinani al-Asqalani. His great grandparents lived
in Ashkelon (Arabic: Asqalan) having entered it in the year 583H. The word
Hajar is the name of one of his grandfathers. His kunya is Abu al-Fadl
and his laqab is Shihab al-Din.
This
city of Asqalan is found in Palestine in Gaza. Ibn Hajar was born on the 12th
of Sha'ban, 773H. He was an orphan. His father who was a great scholar and
merchant died in the year 777H (making Ibn Hajar only four years old). His
mother passed away before that and so he was an orphan from both of his
parents. (al-Sakhawi n.d. 2: 36-40).
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.
Suyuti
states in his Husn al-Maqsid Fi ‘Amal al-Maulid from his al-Hawi Li al-Fatawi (2004.
1: 221-223)
“Shaikhul
Islam, Abul Fadl Ahmad bn Hajar was asked about celebrating the Maulid, and he gave
the following response:
((Originally celebrating Maulid is an innovation (bid’ah)
which has not been reported from any of the pious predecessors ‘al-Salaf al-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
(S.A.W) came to Madina and saw the Jews fasting the day of Ashura’. He
asked them about that. They said: “this is the day on which Allah Ta’ala
drowned Pharaoh and rescued Musa. So we fast it to show our gratitude to Allah Ta’ala”.
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 ibadat like prostration, fasting,
voluntary alms and reciting (the 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 ‘Ashura. 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 (S.A.W.) or that encourages religious devotion, 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 Khilaaf
al-Awlaa).
This is also mentioned by Al-Zurqani
(d. 1122H) (1996: 1: 140).
From
the above quote, one may infer the following:
1.
That Ibn Hajar confesses that Maulid is bid’ah;
2.
That none of the pious predecessors observed it;
3.
That what made him permit it is that it entails some good things;
4.
That he endorses the categorisation of bid’ah into good and bad;
5.
That stand is based on analogical deduction (Qiyas) between Maulid and
the observance of the fasting of ‘Ashura;
6.
That he was the first to draw this analogy;
7.
That Maulid and the day of ‘Ashura share a common feature, i.e. both are
ways of showing gratitude to Allah;
8.
That Maulid contains some negative and bad activities which, if avoided, will
be a good bid’ah.
9.
That the exact date of the birth of the Prophet (S.A.W) 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’ al-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 (S.A.W.)
to support any of these views. The only thing established is that it was on
Monday as mentioned by the pProphet himself. But it is also established that he
(S.A.W.) died on the 12th of Rabi’ al-Awwal. That is why Ibn al-Haaj (a
famous Maliki scholar (1981. 2: 15-17) 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’ al-Awwal) even
though he (S.A.W.) 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 do that and continue to observe it every year
it will all the same be a bid’ah.”
There
are of course more to deduce from his statement.
The
Ashura Hadith is not the only proof on which the Maulid is based. Suyuti
(2004), on his part has other arguments to support the claim of the lawfulness
of Maulid. After quoting the aforementioned argument from Ibn Hajar, he 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 (R.A.) that the Prophet (S.A.W.) 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 (S.A.W.) performed that
to express his gratitude to Allah Ta’ala 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 (S.A.W.) used to recite the salat al-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 Ibadat
to demonstrate our happiness.”
Another
argument forwarded by Ibn al-Jazari in his book ‘Urf at-Ta’reef Bi al-Maulid
as- Shareef’ and Shamsuddeen Ibn Nasir ad-Deen al-Dimashqi in his ‘al-Maurid
as-Sadi Fi Maulid al-Hadi’ 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 (S.A.W.) and for suckling him’.
This is also mentioned by Suyuti in the aforementioned reference.
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,
is yet another argument.
Al-‘Alawi
al-Maliki (n.d.: 10) says:
To
be happy with the Prophet (S.A.W.) is demanded by the Qur’an, as seen in this
verse. Therefore Allah orders that we rejoice in His mercy, and the Prophet (S.A.W.)
is the greatest mercy.
These
are the strongest arguments, at least which are traceable from 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; he was
al-Malik al-Mudhaffar Abu Sa’id Kaukabri bn Zain al-Din, one of the so-called
Fatimid rulers in the seventh century of the hijrah, as mentioned by Ibn Kathir
(1986. 3:136), and al-Suyuti (2004)
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; (Suyuti:
2004).
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; (Suyuti: 2004).
5.
That it is a congregation of alms giving and praising and extolling the Prophet
(sallallaahu alaihi wa sallam).
In
addition to the various Ahadith with some ambiguous meanings they cling to.
Some of these are:
1.
“Whoever initiates a good sunnah (practice), he will be rewarded for that and
will be rewarded with the same reward gained by anyone who follows him…”;
(Muslim: 1334H).
2.
Ibn Mas’uud’s saying (Whatever the Muslims consider good is good in the sight
of Allah); (Ahmad, 1983. 1:367).
3.
The categorisation of bid’ah by some scholars into good and bad or into Wajib,
Mustahab, Mubah, Haram and Makruh;
Before
responding to all these arguments, It is imperative 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.
(Ibn Taimiyyah (d. 728H) (2005: 44).
2.
The term ‘bid’ah’ (innovation/aberration) denotes anything that
possesses the following characteristics:
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 (S.A.W.) : (Whoever innovated into
this affair of ours (Islam) what does not belong to it, will not be accepted).
(Bukhari & Muslim). (See Ibn Rajab: 2001.1: 177). By this definition,
worldly affairs like scientific and technological advancements, are not
considered as ‘bid’ah’ even though they are innovated. For, even though, they
are innovations, but they are not centred at gaining reward from Allah in the
name of Ibadah. Bid’ah
only concerns aspects of Ibadah
3.
The Hadith of the prophet (S.A.W.) (Every innovation is a bid’ah)
is a generalization 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:
(a) 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 (S.A.W.).(al-Jizani.
2004: 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.
(al-Shatibi. 1992: 1:.212-219).
6.
Any act of worship abandoned by the Prophet (S.A.W.), 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’ats after performing the sa’ay
between Safa and Marwa. (al-Shatibi 1992. 1:.361-364).
7.
Any act of worship not performed by the pious precessors (al-Salaf al-Salih)
of the first three generations, that is the Sahabah, the Tabi’in
and the At’ba’ al-Tabi’in 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 (S.A.W.) Hudhaifa ibn al-Yaman (R.A), when he said to
some of the Tabi’in: “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:
Suyuti 2006: 62), and (Bukhari).
Examples
of these acts are the performance of the prayer known as ‘Salat al-Raga’ib’
performed by some people in the month of Rajab, and the observance of Maulid in
the month of Rabi’ al-Awwal. 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 there were no obstacles to prevent them from
performing these Ibadat. Ibn al-Haaj (1981: 2: 11-12), said:
“If
the Maulid will be free from Samaa’ (Sufi songs and drumming) and
what that 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 (S.A.W.), 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…”
He
further said that some people substitute the samaa’ and other activities
performed in the Maulid, with the reading of Sahih al-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, Ibn al-Haaj is one of the famous Maliki scholars. Shaikh Uthman
dan Fodio depended intensively on his writings especially this al-Madkhal. This
is known to anyone conversant with the writings of Dan Fodio (rahimahullah).
See for example Bayan al-Bida’ and Ihya’ al-Sunnah Wa Ikhmad al-Bid’ah.
Another Maliki scholar al-Fakihani (d. 734H) (1998) wrote on the subject of Maulid.
When he was asked about it, he out-rightly condemned it in totality. Suyuti (2004:
1: 294) quoted it completely and responded to the arguments raised but in vain.
8.
The deen of Islam had been completed totally by Allah before the death of our
noble Prophet (S.A.W.). No ibadah is left out without being explained by the
Prophet (S.A.W.). Allah Ta’ala 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-Ma’idah: 3.
In
elaborating this meaning, Imam Malik (d. 179H) in al-Shatibi (1992: 1: 49) says:
“Whoever innovates a bid’ah which he considers good, has really accused
Muhammad (S.A.W.) of betraying the message given to him. Because Allah Ta’ala
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”.
As-Shatibi
(1992: 2: 52-53) also reported that al-Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi narrated from
al-Zubair bn al-Bakkar 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 (S.A.W.) 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 (S.A.W.)’. 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’ala 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.
As-Shatibi,
after quoting this story, said: “The fitnah mentioned by Imam Malik in
explaining the verse is true of all Ahl al-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 (S.A.W.) enacted in his Sunnah is less (in
quantity or quality) than what their reasoning leads them to. That is what Ibn
Mas’ud 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 deviation”.
Another
Maliki scholar of great repute, al-Wansharisi (d. 914) (2003: 11: 116) also strongly
rejected the idea of celebrating the Maulid.
He says:
"My
master Ahmad al-Qabbab was asked about the lightening of candles on the
occasion of the Maulid al-Nabiyyi and gathering children to recite the Salat
al-Nabiyyi, and some of the children with beautiful voices and tunes would
recite some parts of the Qur'an (one-tenth) and read out some Qasa’id
(poems) in praise of the Prophet (S.A.W.), and men would mix up with women in
the congregation for this purpose. Are the candles received by the teacher
lawful?....."
In
his answer the scholar (Ahmad al-Qabbab) said : ((All that you described is
among the muhdathat) innovated bid'ahs which must be discarded. Whoever
performs this or helps in performing it or pursues its perpetuation, is really
a pursuer of bid'ah and deviation. He assumes, with his ignorance, that with
this action he honours and extols the Prophet (S.A.W.) by observing his
birthday, while he is really contradicting his Sunnah, committing what the Prophet
prohibited, boastfully and openly doing that, and innovating into the religion
what is alien to it. Had it been he really extols the Prophet (S.A.W.) he would
have obeyed his orders and would not have introduced into the religion what is
not part of it, and would not have subjected himself to what Allah warned
against in His saying : ((And let those who oppose the Messenger's commandment
beware, lest some Fitnah (trials and afflictions) shall befall them or painful
torment be inflicted on them)) Al-Nur:63. …”
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 Ashura
hadith
1.Ibn
Hajar’s explanation of Maulid based on the Ashura hadith after
confessing that it is a bid’ah is something that cannot be put together. Shaikh
Rashed Rida (n.d. 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 ‘Ashura 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 (1997: 3:71) has spoken comprehensively on this
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 (S.A.W.) did not mean that by the
text, and it is not proper to violate an Ijmaa (consensus). As-Shatibi
(1997: 3: 71) 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 (S.A.W.) 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 goes 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 (S.A.W.) explicitly said in a clear text that Ali
(may Allah be pleased with him) should be the Caliph 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”.
He
further said:
“Many
at times you find the people of bid’ah and deviation 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 (S.A.W.) (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 (S.A.W.).
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 (S.A.W.)
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-Masalih
al-Mursalah. And it is known that al-Masaalih al-Mursalah has no
connection whatsoever with Ibadaat (acts of worship).
2.
Shaikh Rashid Rida added that the good things contained in the Maulid as mentioned
by Ibn Hajar are not in themselves bid’ah, but 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’a’ir al-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 abstain
from 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 addition to the
foundations of Islam nullifies that particular addition and renders it alien
and disowned by the Islam brought by the seal of the Prophets (S.A.W.)…
This
statement from Shaikh Rashid Rida was a response he gave when he was asked
about some people in the Jawa area of Indonesia who claimed that whoever does
not attend the Maulid is a kafir, and whoever does not stand up on hearing the
word ‘Marhaban’ (welcome), at the time of reading the story of Maulid is
a kafir. And if they were asked whether this order is from Allah and His
Messenger? They say: You are an unbeliever.
The
proponents of Maulid are of the opinion that it is haram for one to fast on the
day of Maulid. Al-Hattab (d. 954H) (1992: 2: 407) quoted an event that occurred
in respect of one Ibn Abbad who said that he came out on the day of Maulid and
met one Alhaj Ibn ‘Ashir 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 Ashir 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 (S.A.W.) really performed aqiqah once more for
himself, Imam Malik in Ibn Rusd (n.d. 2: 15) 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”.
The
Hadith in question is reported through one Abdullahi bn al-Muharrar, who is
termed by many scholars of hadith as: ‘Da’eef Jiddan’, ‘Munkarul
Hadith’ or ‘Matruk’. Ibn Hibban (1396H. 2:.22-23) 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
(n.d. 8: 431) 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”.
One
surprising thing is that al-Baihaqi (1344H. 9: 300) 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.
But
Az-Zarqaani (1996. 1: 140) after quoting Suyuti’s deduction from the Hadith
commented: “al-Nawawi said this Hadith is false. So deducing (Maulid) from it
is out of place”.
Three:
On the Story of Abu Lahab
1.
The text as narrated by Al-Bukhari (n.d. 9: 48) is not as Ibn al-Jazari and Ibn
Nasir al-Deen put it. Al-Bukhari narrated from al-Hakam ibn Nafi’ from Shu’aib
from al-Zuhri, he said Urwatui bn al-Zubair told me that Zainab bint Abi Salama
told him that Umm Habibah bint Abi Sufyan said: “I said: O Allah’s Messenger,
marry my sister, the daughter of Abu Sufyan’. The Prophet (S.A.W.) 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 (S.A.W.) said, “But
that is not lawful for me”. I said: “We have heard that you want to marry the
daughter of Abu Salamah”, 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 Salamah
were suckled by Thuwaibah. 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 (S.A.W.). 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”.
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. (Ibn Hajar (n.d. 9 : 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 (S.A.W.).
(c)
There is no mention of the word ‘every Monday’ as asserted by Ibn al-Jazari and
as-Suhaili (Ibn Hajar (n.d. 9 :.48).
(d)
Moreover what is confirmed by the scholars of Sirah (Biography of the
Prophet (S.A.W.) is that Thuwaibah was not freed until after the Hijrah of the
Prophet (S.A.W.). Ibn Sa’ad (d 230 h) says: “When the Prophet (S.A.W.) 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 (S.A.W.) migrated to Madina Abu Lahab freed
her” (Ibn Sa’ad 2001. 1 : 88). This is confirmed by Ibn Abdil Barr (1992 1: 28),
Ibn al-Jauzi (n.d. 1: 61), Al-Muhibb At-Tabar (1356H: 259) and Ibn Hajar (n.d. 4
: 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’ala 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. (Ibn Hajar 1379H:.9 :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 Surat Yunus, is also out of place. That is
because interpreting the ‘mercy’ mentioned in the verse to mean the prophet (S.A.W.)
is something none of the scholars of the first generation of Muslims claimed.
And we have mentioned from the statement of al-Shatibi, when discussing Ibn
Hajar’s deduction of Maulid from the ‘Ashura 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
al-Tabari, (2000: 15: 105-110) quoted eighteen separate narratives from the Salaf
on interpreting this verse. None of them interpreted ‘mercy’ to mean the person
of the Prophet (S.A.W.). al-Shatibi is
not the only alim to make this bold warning. Al-Imam al-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 (2000:
15 :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 statements 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 (2000: 16: 151) on another verse he said: “I have
preferred this interpretation because it is in agreement with the
interpretation of the Sahabah and Tabi’en, because we do not
allow going contrary to what is reported from them”.
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 the verse under discussion, 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 (S.A.W.)
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 al-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.
Conclusion
Celebrating the Maulid has not been the practice of
the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.) or his companions or those that came after them
among the first three generations. It
was initiated by some Muslims in later generations in a sincere effort to show
reverence and love to the person of our noble Prophet and Messenger (S.A.W.),
even though this effort, being an aspect of Ibadah needs to be substantiated by
strong evidences from the Qur’an and Sunnah and the practice of the pious
predecessors. Having failed to have this
support, later generations of ‘ulama did really try to give the Maulid a
legal bearing from ambiguous texts of the Qur’an and the Sunnah, but
those texts are of no help to the idea. This is not to say that those scholars
have gone astray and can be condemned in person. Rather our discussion only concerns the
practice of celebrating the Maulid and from the foregoing statements of the ulama
this practice has no basis in the teachings of the Prophet (S.A.W.)
References:
References:
Al-‘Alawi al-Maliki, al-Maurid ar-Rawiyy Fi
Maulid an- Nabiyy
Al-Baihaqi,
Abu Bakr Ahmad bn Husain (d. 458H), al-Sunan al-Kubra, Haidar Abad 1344H
Al-Bukhari,
Muhammad bn Isma’il (d. 256H), al-Jami’ al-Sahih al-Musnad in Fath
al-Bari
Al-Fakihani,
Abu Hafsa Taj al-Deen, al-Maurid fi ‘Amal al-Maulid 1998
Al-Hattab,
Shamsuddin Muhammad bn Muhammad bn A Rahman al-Tarabulusi, Mawahib al-Jalil
Fi Sharh Mukhtasar Khalil, Dar al-Fikr 1992
Al-Jizani,
Muhammad bn Husain, Qawa’id Ma’rifat al-Bida’, Dar Ibn al-Jawzi, 2004
al-Muhibb
al-Tabari, Muhibb al-Deen Ahmad bn Abdillah (d. 694H), Dhakha’ir al-‘Uqba Fi
Manaqib Dhawi al-Qurba, Dar al-Kutub al-Misriyyah 1356H
Al-Nawawi,
Yahya bn Sharaf (d. 676H), al-Majmu’ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, Dar al-Fikr
(n.d.).
al-Sakhawi, Shams adl-Din, Muhammad bn ‘Abd
al-Rahman bn Abi Bakr, al-Dau’ al-Lami’ Li Ahl al-Qarn al-Tasi’. Dar
Maktabat Dar al-Hayah, Beirut, Lebanon, n.d.
Al-Shatibi,
Ibrahim bn Musa (790H), al-I’tisam, Dar Ibn ‘Affan, 1992
Al-Shatibi,
Ibrahim bn Musa, al-Muwafaqat, Dar Ibn ‘Affan 1997
al-Suyuti, Abd ar-Rahman bn Abi Bakr, Husn
al-Maqsid Fi ‘Amal al-Maulid, included in his al-Hawi li al-Fatawi,
Dar al-Fikr 2004
Al-Suyuti,
Abdurrahman bn Abi Bakr, al-Amr Bi al-Ittiba’ Wa al-Nahy ‘An al-Ibtida’,
Al-Tabari,
Muhammad bn Jarir bn Yazid bn Ghalib (d. 310H), Jam’i al-Bayan ‘an Ta’wil
Aay al-Qur’an, Edited by Mahmud Shakir, Mu’assasat al-Risalah Beirut, 2000
Al-Wansharisi,
Ahmad bn Yahya bn Muhammad al-Tilmisani, al-Mi’yar al-Mu’rib Wa al-Jami' al-Mugrib
'An Fatawa Ulama Ifriqiyyah Wa al-Andalus Wa al-Magrib, Ministry of
Endowments, Morocco 2007
al-Zarqani, Muhammad bn A Baqi bn Yusuf, Sharh
al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah, Dar al-Kutub al-Ilmiyyah, Beirut 1996
Ibn
Abdil Barr, Abu Umar Yusuf bn Abdillahi (d. 463H), al-Isti’ab Fi Ma’rifat
al-Ashab, Dar al-Jil Beirut, 1992
Ibn al-Haaj, Muhammad bn Muhammad bn Muhammad
al-‘Abdari, al-Madkhal, Dar al-Fikr Beirut 1981
Ibn
al-Jauzi, Abdurrahman (d. 597H), al-Wafa Bi Ta’rif Fada’il al-Mustafa,
Dar al-Ma’rifah (n.d.)
Ibn
Hajar, Ahmad bn Ali al-‘Asqalani, al-Isabah Fi Tamyiz al-Sahabah
Ibn
Hajar, Ahmad bn Ali al-Asqalani, Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari,
Dar al-Ma’rifah 1379H
Ibn
Hanbal, Ahmad bn Muhammad, Fada’il al-Sahabah, Mu’assasat al-Risalah
1983
Ibn
Hibban, Muhammad bn Hibban al-Busti (d. 354H), Kitab al-Majruhin Dar
al-Wa’y Aleppo 1396H
Ibn Kathir, Abu al-Fida Isma’il bn ‘Umar bn Kathir
al-Dimashqi, al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah, Dar al-Fikr, 1986
Ibn
Rajab, Abdurrahman al-Hanbali, Jami’ al-‘Ulum wa al-Hikam, Mu’assasat
al-Risalah Beirut 2001
Ibn
Rush, al-Muqaddimat Wa al-Mumahhidat
Ibn
Sa’ad, Muhammad bn Sa’ad bn Muni’ al-Zuhri, al-Tabaqat al-Kubra al-Khanji
Press 2001
Ibn
Taimiyyah, Ahmad bn A. Halim, al-‘Ubudiyyah, al-Maktab al-Islamiyy,
Beirut 2005.
No comments:
Post a Comment