Read on Twitter
Deobandis certainly have a problem with Mawlid, a huge problem.
A Sunni scholar Mawlānā Ábd al-Samīý wrote Anwār al-Sāţiáh in 1302/1884, proving the validity of mawlid and fātiĥah, which were being scorned by mainly Ismāýīl’s followers. https://twitter.com/hafizfarook/status/1266328356657623040
A Sunni scholar Mawlānā Ábd al-Samīý wrote Anwār al-Sāţiáh in 1302/1884, proving the validity of mawlid and fātiĥah, which were being scorned by mainly Ismāýīl’s followers. https://twitter.com/hafizfarook/status/1266328356657623040
Khalīl Aĥmad wrote its refutation in 1304/1886 named Barāhīn al-Qaţiáh álā Żalāmi al-Anwār al-Sāţiáh.
Has any prominent Deobandi written any book defending Mawlid as a praiseworthy practice and refuted those who call it a reprehensible bidáh?
Has any prominent Deobandi written any book defending Mawlid as a praiseworthy practice and refuted those who call it a reprehensible bidáh?
Of course not, as they consider it bidáh and impermissible in any form.
In this book Khalīl Aĥmad states,
“Thus, repeating the birthday [of the Prophet ﷺ] is similar to the gathering (1) of hindus, celebrating the birthday of Kanhaiya (2);
![Of course not, as they consider it bidáh and impermissible in any form.In this book Khalīl Aĥmad states, “Thus, repeating the birthday [of the Prophet ﷺ] is similar to the gathering (1) of hindus, celebrating the birthday of Kanhaiya (2);](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZL14fuWAAQ-4c-.png "Of course not, as they consider it bidáh and impermissible in any form.In this book Khalīl Aĥmad states, “Thus, repeating the birthday [of the Prophet ﷺ] is similar to the gathering (1) of hindus, celebrating the birthday of Kanhaiya (2);")
In this book Khalīl Aĥmad states,
“Thus, repeating the birthday [of the Prophet ﷺ] is similar to the gathering (1) of hindus, celebrating the birthday of Kanhaiya (2);
or similar to the Rafidis who enact the story of the martyrdom of Ahl al-Bayt every year; [we seek Allah's refuge] ma'adhAllah! This would be identical to play-acting
[sāǹg] the birth of the Prophet ﷺ, and this ugly act is in itself worthy of blame, forbidden and sin [lawm,
[sāǹg] the birth of the Prophet ﷺ, and this ugly act is in itself worthy of blame, forbidden and sin [lawm,
ĥarām, fisq]. Rather, these people are worse than those communities (3) because, they do it on a specific date, and here they have no restriction - they do these innovations whenever they like. There is no example of such a thing in the sharīáh,
that is to take a hypothetical basis and act upon it in reality; rather this is ĥarām in sharīáh... ”
(1) sāñg means a play, a show. sāñg banānā means: to arrange a play for entertainment. Hindus make such tableaux and plays, commemorating the birth of Krishna -
(1) sāñg means a play, a show. sāñg banānā means: to arrange a play for entertainment. Hindus make such tableaux and plays, commemorating the birth of Krishna -
who according to their mythology was born in a dungeon and known as Kanhaiya.
(2) Krishna, a mythical figure, whom Hindus consider as their god.
(3) It is worse than Hindus celebrating and Rāfiđīs.
(2) Krishna, a mythical figure, whom Hindus consider as their god.
(3) It is worse than Hindus celebrating and Rāfiđīs.
Let us leave the verbose, convoluted passages of Barāhīn and reach for short and straighforward fatāwā elsewhere.
In Fatāwā Rashīdiyyah:
“Question: Gathering of mawlid, standing up during mawlid, to burn incense and aloe; put carpets and benches;
In Fatāwā Rashīdiyyah:
“Question: Gathering of mawlid, standing up during mawlid, to burn incense and aloe; put carpets and benches;
to fix a date and other such things which are famous in our times: is it permissible to celebrate mawlid in this fashion or not? If it is permissible, what is the proof, and the proof should be from the four categories.”
“Answer: This kind of a gathering was not present in the time of the Pride of the World [RasūlAllāh ﷺ] nor during the times of companions رضي الله عنهم, nor their followers or their followers and the mujtahid imāms.
This was innovated six hundred years later by a king about whom most historians write that he was corrupt, a transgressor [fāsiq]. Therefore this kind of a gathering is a heretical innovation [bidáh đalālah].
The author of Madkhal and others have written against its permissibility and many books and fatāwā are being written even to this day. There is no need to look further for evidence;
the sufficient proof for its impermissibility is in the fact that nobody has celebrated it in the righteous centuries; if you want to see more about its corruption, you can look up lengthy fatāwā [against it]. Allāh táālā knows best.”
Khalīl Aĥmad’s attestation: “The answer is correct.”
This fatwā makes no pretense or splits hairs – it clearly says that it was a reprehensible innovation of a corrupt king.
This fatwā makes no pretense or splits hairs – it clearly says that it was a reprehensible innovation of a corrupt king.
In another fatwā, which specifies celebration of mawlid without qiyām.
“Question: Arranging a gathering to celebrate a mawlid without qiyām, and with only authentic narrations; is it permissible or not?”
“Question: Arranging a gathering to celebrate a mawlid without qiyām, and with only authentic narrations; is it permissible or not?”
“Answer: Arranging a gathering to celebrate mawlid is impermissible in any manner; and to invite people for a
recommended action is not allowed.”
This is reiterated here:
“Question: Is it permissible to attend a gathering of mawlid in which only authentic narrations are retold;
recommended action is not allowed.”
This is reiterated here:
“Question: Is it permissible to attend a gathering of mawlid in which only authentic narrations are retold;
where there is no frivolity, nor mention of fabricated and false narrations?”
“Answer: It is not permissible, due to other reasons.”
“Answer: It is not permissible, due to other reasons.”
