#458: Clarification on Celebrating the Birth of the Rasūl -Salallāhu Alayhi Wa Sallam – 04
If we had wanted to refer to a comprehensive list of all the Imāms and Scholars who condemned the Mawlud Celebrations, we would bore ourselves and count hundreds. But we will suffice with what we have already mentioned and remind all that statements of scholars are not evidences.
Ulamā of Usul al-Fiqh used to say:
((كلام العلماء يحتج له ولا يحتج به))
“The Statements of the Ulamā is not used as evidence but evidences are gathered to strengthen them”
Haven said that, I proceed to state that the claim that was made by a previous writer here that Imām Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Al-Qayyim supported the Mawlud celebration is falsely quoted and misunderstood.
It is true that Ibn Taymiyya said that those who celebrated Id al-Mawlud with the intention of loving the Rasūl – salallāhu alayhi wasallam – will be rewarded for their love of the Rasūl. This does not, in anyway mean he supports it as there is difference between condemning the act and overlooking the failure to follow the sunnah of the Rasūl -salallāhu alayhi wasallam. The same goes to the claim that because in Madāriju As-Sālikin Ibn Al-Qayyim mentioned that Ibn Taymiyyah said something about the Night of Mi’raj, the day of Mawlud, and the Day of Badr in a way of goodness, it means they both support it. This is a wrong way of reading scholarly statements.
Likewise, the quotation attributed to Imām Ibn Kathir – rahimahullāh. Ibn Kathir only mentioned the evidences of those that support it without passing any judgement categorically on it in the article referenced by the writer.
The Imām that gave the most cogent thesis for the permissibility of the Mawlud Celebration is Imām As-Suyuti but unfortunately, he based his reference of countering the statement I had earlier referred to of Imām Al-Lakhmi – rahimahullāh – above. He claimed that Al-Lakhmi was merely condemning the harām practices that are carried out during its celebration. This is not the case as he particularly mentioned that taking the day itself for mere remembrance is a bid’a (Al-Mawrid Fi Amal Al-Mawlid 1/8) . Imām Ibn Al-Hāj mentioned same in the Madkhal.
No wonder Ibn Qayyim was quoting his teacher Imam Ibn Taymiyyah in Ighāthah: “Misunderstanding of text, if it is caused by the wrong understanding of the listener and not by the carelessness of the speaker in the use of words, then there is no problem.
It is not a condition upon the Ulamā that whenever they want to speak about Ilm matters that nobody should misunderstand them among the people of misunderstanding who misplace their words and understand them in other than their intentions.
Instead, people have since been misunderstanding the statements of people and taking their words to mean other than what they meant.”
This is exactly what these writers have done in misunderstanding the words of Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Al-Qayyim and Ibn Kathir.
We do not dispute the knowledge of the respected scholars that differed with us on this matter such as Hāfidh As-Suyuti, Allāmah Ibn Āshur, Al-Allusi, Al-Jazari, and among the contemporaries, Shaykh Abdullāh bn Bayyah, Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradāwi, etc. They are indeed people of Ilm and esteem but we are not obliged to follow men but to follow their evidences.
There is no shred of evidence in all what they have advanced short of quoting scholarly statements. The Hadith about prohibiting yearly celebrations other than that sanctioned by the Rasūl -salallāhu alayhi wasallam – is clear and cannot be debunked unless with a strong Hadith clearly adding the Mawlud to those sanctioned by the Rasūl – salallāhu alayhi wasallam.
Somebody mentioned that Shaykh Al-Albāni – rahimahullāh cannot stand Shaykh Ādam Al-Ilory – rahimahullāh.
Unfortunately, this must be coming from a Jāhil of the rules of debate in Islām, a Jāhil of knowing the worth of Scholars and a Jāhil of the reality of Shaykh Al-Albāni – rahimahullāh.
You should know that most of the Ulamā of the time have surrendered the Imamship of the science of Takhrij (Hadith checking and Verification) in Hadith, the science of Tashih and Tad’if (declaring a Hadith to be sound or weak) and Al-Jarhu Wa At-Ta’dil (Qualifying the reliability of Narrators) of this era to Shaykh Al-Albāni – to include Shaykh Ādam himself. While Shaykh Ādam is known to be an expert in Māliki Fiqh and the science of Al-Arud in West Africa. Their fields of study are different and they are both well-rooted scholars of their respective times.
And who told you that salafiyya is measured by who died first even if they lived the same era? Please try to learn your Dīn more.
Closing Remarks:
Whosoever, after reading this article still has more to discuss, if he has evidences to prove otherwise, I will be more than ready to take up the challenge.
These lines were written with a faulty keyboard. We May ask Allāh to forgive our shortcomings. Āmīn.
Bārakallāhu Fīkum
Jazākumullāhu Khayran.
By: Abū ‘Āsim.
📚 IslamNode
