Moulood and the Shariah

[Majlisul Ulama of South Africa]



IBAADAT (WORSHIP) IN ISLAM is  restricted to only ritual acts, practices and customs of worship  which were taught by Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and  practised by his noble Companions and the illustrious  personalities of Islam in the  initial three eras of Islam known  as Khairul Quroon (Noblest Ages).

Irrespective of the appeal and  beauty any act/practice of  apparent worship may possess, it  will not be Ibaadat in Islam if it  has no basis in the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) – and the concept of  the Sunnah is what was known, understood, practised and  propagated by the Sahaabah,  Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen in  the period known as Khairul  Quroon. Thus, if anyone insists  on performing Salaat at sunrise,  midday (Zawwaal) and sunset, it  will not be said that such performance is Salaat. It will be a  haraam bid’ah (innovation)  notwithstanding its external  form of Salaat. If someone fasts  on the Days of Eid, such fasting will not be Ibaadat, but will be  haraam bid’ah, the consequence  of which is nothing but the Fire  of Jahannum. Since these acts  which are in conflict with the teachings of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), they  will not be classified as Ibaadat notwithstanding their external  forms of worship.

If someone performs four raka’ts ‘Fardh’ for Fajr instead of the  commanded two raka’ts, such  performance will not be Ibaadat  irrespective of the beauty of the external form of the act. It will be  a haraam bid’ah.

The customary practices of  Moulood/Meelaad have to be  examined on this criterion of the  Shariah. Did Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  teach the observance of  Moulood? Did the Sahaabah, the  Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen  observe Moulood? If they had  observed the custom,  undoubtedly, it will be classified  as Ibaadat. If they did not, it will  not then be Ibaadat. This article  will show that with the  accompaniment of many evil and  haraam factors, the custom of Moulood is haraam and bid’ah. It  has no support in the Qur’aan  and Hadith. It is an utterly  baseless custom which has no  relationship with Islam.


(O  Believers! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger…)
THE SOURCES OF ISLAMIC Law  (the Shariah)  are  four,  viz.,

I. The Qur’aan
II. The Sunnah
III. Ijmaa’ or the Consensus of  opinion of the Jurists
IV. Qiyaas or the Analogical  reasoning process of the Jurists  of Islam.

The abovementioned four  PRINCIPLES constitute the basis  of Islamic law. If any act or  practice is substantiated or  proved on the firm foundations  of the abovementioned four  Principles of the Islamic Shariah  then such an act or practice  constitute ISLAMIC LAW and as  such is the DIVINE LAW of ALLAH, and no member of the  Ummah has the right to reject  such an act or practice. On the  other hand if any act, practice or  custom conflicts with the four  abovementioned Principles or if  any act or practice cannot be substantiated on the basis of the  four Islamic Principles of the  Shariah then it will stand  condemned in the Eyes of the  Shariah and as such it will have  to be rejected as a bad  innovation. . . an evil introduction  into the Deen of Allah.

The custom of Meelaad as  celebrated nowadays cannot be  substantiated on the basis of the  four Principles of Islamic Law. It  is an absolute necessity to prove  conclusively that this custom of  Meelaad in its present form of prevalence is sanctioned by any  of the Principles of Islamic Law  before it (this custom) could be  accorded an Islamic status.  Insha’Allah, in this article it shall  be proved that the prevailing  customary celebrations of  Meelaad have no Islamic status  whatsoever and these constitute  gross transgression of Allah Ta’ala’s Law because they (these  forms of Meelaad celebrations)  have been innovated into the  Deen of Islam.

Allah Ta’ala says in the Holy  Qur’aan:
“Then, We have established you on a Shariah (Law-Path) with regard to affairs. Therefore follow it (this Shariah) and do not follow the desires of those who do not know.”  

Allah Ta’ala commands in this  verse of the Holy Qur’aan total  submission to His Law. This verse  of the Holy Qur’aan emphatically  prohibits the following of  any  practice or custom which is not  sanctioned by the Shariah. Any  custom which has no basis in the  Shariah is described by Allah  Ta’ala in this verse as “the desires of those who do not know.”  Further in this article it shall be shown that these Meelaad  celebrations of today have no  sanction in the Shariah of Allah  Ta’ala.

Elsewhere in the Holy Qur’aan  Allah Ta’ala states:
“What! Have they partners who have ordained for them such things of which Allah has not granted permission?”  

This verse of the Holy Qur’aan  clearly deprecates any  introduction of practices and  customs within the Deen. Only  such customs and practices have the favour of Allah for which  there exist Divine Sanction.  Insha’Allah, it shall be shown  that the customary Meelaad  celebration was not ordained by  Allah or His Rasool (Sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), but was an un-Islamic innovatory practice which crept into the Ummah with the  aid of such persons who had no  love for the Deen.

In another verse of the Holy Qur’aan Allah Ta’ala says: “Whatever the Rasool brings to  you, accept it. And, whatever he  (the Rasool) forbids you of,  abstain from it.”  

Insha’Allah, it shall be proved  that this custom of Meelaad was  not given to us by our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  nor was it ever practised by the  beloved Sahaabah of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).  Furthermore, it shall be proved  that this custom did not exist  among Muslims for a full six  centuries after the demise of our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

Muhaddith Hadhrat Qaadhi  Thanaa-ullah (rahmatullah alayh)  narrates the following Hadith: “Verily, a statement is not  accepted if not practised upon  it. And, a statement and a  practice are not accepted without a sincere intention. And, the  statement, the practice and the  niyyat (intention) are not accepted if they are not in  accord with the Sunnah.”   [IRSHAADUT  TAALIBEEN]

Hadhrat Gauthul Azam Sayyid  Abdul Qadir Jeelani al-Hanbali (rahmatullah  alayh) states:
“A statement without practice is  not accepted. Nor a practice  without sincerity and without the  correct Sunnah (method).” [FATHE  RABBAANI]

Hadhrat Sufyaan Thauri  (rahmatullah alayh) states:
“A statement, an act and an intention is only in order if these  are in conformity with the  Sunnah.” [TALBEES IBLEES]

Hadhrat Ahmad Bin Abul Hawari  (rahmatullah alayh) said: “The  deed of a person is null if he  practises it without following the Sunnah.”  [AL-I’TISAAM]

From the aforegoing statements  it will be clear that an action will  be described as Islamic only if it  is executed in conformity with  the Sunnah of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  and the Sunnah of his Sahaabah  (radhiyallahu anhum). We have included here the Way of the  Sahaabah in the Sunnah because  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), himself described  the Way of the Sahaabahs as ‘the Sunnah’, and commanded strict  obedience to the Sunnah of his  Sahaabah  (radhiyallahu  anhum).  Hence, the Holy Messenger of  Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  said:
“Regard my Sunnah and the  Sunnah of my righteous Khulafaa  as obligatory upon you.”  

With regard to the Sunnah of  Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Sahaabah, the  Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“Those who live after me will  witness much controversy.  Therefore, my Sunnah and the  Sunnah of the pious and  righteous Khulafaa are incumbent upon you. Hold firmly  onto it. Cling to it (the Sunnah) with your jaws. Beware of  innovation. Every new thing (i.e.  new practice introduced as part  of the Deen) is an innovation  (Bid’ah). And every Bid’ah  (innovation) is error  manifest.”  [TIRMIZI,  IBN  MAJAH,  ABU  DAWOOD]

In explaining this Hadith, Mullah  Ali Qaari (rahmatullah alayh) said  that Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) commanded obedience  to the Sunnah of the Khulafaa  after him because they  (Rasulullah’s Khulafaa) only acted  in accordance with the Sunnah of  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). This is stated in  Mirkaatul Mishkaat.

Now, this custom of Meelaad is  not to be found anywhere in the  Holy Qur’aan. Allah Ta’ala has not  commanded this customary  Meelaad celebration. Neither can  any substantiation for it be  found in the Hadith of our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), nor in the practices of the noble  Companions of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). No one can deny the great and true  love which the Sahaabah had for  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Is there any person  who can claim greater love for  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) than the Sahaabah?  Can any person claim that he has  understood the Qur’aan and the  Ahaadith better than the great  and learned Sahaabah of our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? Can any person claim that the Sahaabah did not know how to manifest their love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and that Muslims of nowadays know how to manifest love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? Now let us ask: What  is the reason for celebrating Meelaadun-Nabi? Whatever  answer the upholders of the customary Meelaad will give we shall say that, that very same reason existed during the time of the noble Sahaabah. Yet, despite  its existence the Sahaabah of our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not keep Meelaadun Nabi  celebrations. The love of the  Sahaabah for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is  indisputable. The Sahaabah had  greater cause for rejoicing at the  birth of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). The Sahaabah  had greater cause than us for the manifestation of their love for  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). The Sahaabahs had  greater cause to commemorate  the Holy Birth of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) than  us. Yet, not a single Sahaabi ever  initiated or celebrated Meeladun  Nabi. This custom was unknown  to the Sahaabah, and it was  unknown to the Tabieen (the  followers of the Sahaabah). The  great Jurists of Islam did not   initiate this practice. They  celebrated no Meelaadun-Nabi. In  fact for a full six hundred years  after our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) this custom was not in  vogue among Muslims. Surely if  this custom had any merit in it  the great and beloved Sahaabah  of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) could not have  overlooked it. If this custom had  any Islamic significance surely, the great Fuqahaa (Jurists) and  the Muhadditheen would not  have shunned it. How is it  possible that a custom which was  originated and introduced into  the Deen six centuries after our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  could be accorded Islamic status  and assigned the category of  near-compulsion)?



The History of Islam is fourteen  centuries old. But the history of  Meelaad celebration is seven  centuries old. The Golden ages of  Islam  – the era of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam),  of  the  Sahaabah, of the Taabieen, and of the Tabe-Taabieen (Quroone Thalaathah) had long passed, yet the custom  of Meelaad was not initiated. Six  centuries after our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) an  irreligious ruler initiated this custom in the city of Mosul.  Imaam Ahmad Bin Muhammad  Bin Bisri Maaliki (rahmatullah  alayh) writes in his Kitaab, AL-QOULUL MU’TAMAD:

“Allaamah Muizzuddin Hasan  Khwaarzimi (rahmatullah alayh)  states in his Kitaab:
‘The Ruler of Irbal, King Muzaffar  Abu Saeed Kaukari, was an irreligious king. He ordered the  Ulama of his time to act  according to their opinions and  discard the practice of following  any of the Mathhabs. A group  among the learned men inclined  towards him. He (this king)  organized Moulood sessions  during the month of Rabiul Awwal. He was the first of the  kings to have innovated this  practice.’” [AL-QOULUL  MU’TAMAD]

This irreligious ruler squandered  vast sums of public funds in the  organization and upkeep of these  celebrations which had no  sanction in Islamic Law. Allaamah  Zahbi (rahmatullah alayh) – died  748 Hijri- says:

“Every year this ruler spent three  hundred thousand (from the  Baitul Maal) on Moulood celebrations.” [DOULUL ISLAM]

So, this practice of Moulood was  originated by irreligious people.  In the year 604 Hijri this king,  Muzaffaruddin Koukari, introduced this custom with the aid of some learned people whose  purpose was to gain the wealth  and honour of this world. A  notable and a prime instigator in  the origination of this custom was one Molvi Amr Bin Dahya Abul Khattab who died in the year 633 Hijri. He was a great supporter of the worldly and  irreligious king of Irbal who  introduced this custom. The evil  character of this irreligious learned man is  a fact upon which  there exists unanimity among the  great and pious learned men of  Islam. Hafiz Ibn Hajar Asqalaani  (rahmatullah alayh) says about  this Molvi who was responsible  to a great extent for the  innovation of Moulood customs:

“He was a person who insulted the Jurists of Islam and the pious learned men of former times. He  had a filthy tongue. He was ignorant, excessively proud,  possessed no insight in matters pertaining to the Deen and he was extremely negligent as far as  the Deen was concerned.” [LISAANUL MIZAAN]

Hafiz Ibn Hajar Askalaani  (rahmatullah alayh) further adds: “Allaamah Ibn Najjaar (rahmatullah alayh) said: ‘I have  witnessed unanimity of opinion  among the people as to him (this  irreligious Molvi), being a liar and  an unreliable person.’” [LISAANUL  MIZAAN]

Every unbiased Muslim will realise  from the aforegoing discussion  that the Moulood custom was  introduced by evil men and given  prominence by evil men. Islamic  History bears testimony to this  fact. Right from its inception all the great and pious Ulama and  Jurists of Islam have condemned  this innovation and have warned  against participation in these un-Islamic functions. There exists  consensus of opinion among the  true learned Ulama of Islam that  the customary Meelaad functions  are not permissible. Our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has  warned against the introduction  of customs into the Deen of Islam. Said our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam):

“Whoever introduces into this  Deen of ours something which is  not of it, is condemned.”  

The Sahaabah of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) had  great detestation for any new  custom which tried to raise its  head in the Deen. The Sahaabah  did not tolerate in the least bit any new form of worship or  custom which anyone desired to  bring into the Deen. We shall  illustrate the detestation for  innovation which the Sahaabah  had, with  a  few  examples:

1) A man sneezed in the presence  of Abdullah Ibn Umar  (radhiyallahu anhu) and said:
Alhamdulillah Wa salaamu alaika ya rasulallah

Abdullah Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu  anhu) immediately rebuked this  person and said that our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) taught us to recite: Alhamdulillahi ‘Alaa Kulli Haal when we sneezed. 

This Hadith has been narrated by  Tirmizi. The point which we have  to ponder here, is Abdullah Ibn  Umar’s rebuke because this man  recited Wa salaamu alaika ya rasulallah after the words  Alhamdulillah. In reality the  recital of the sentence: Assalaamu alaika ya rasulallah is an act of merit. The more we remember Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) the more thawaab we get. In fact, we have been commanded to constantly  offer salutations to our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).  However, despite this, Hadhrat  Abdullah Ibn Umar (one of the  great Sahaabah) rejected this  form of recitation after one has  sneezed. And, the reason as  explained by Hadhrat Abdullah  Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was that this formula was not taught to us by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

2) “Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Masood  (radhiyallahu anhu) was informed  of a group of people who sat in  the Musjid after Maghrib Salaat.  One among them would say:  ‘Recite Allahu Akbar so many  times; recite Subhaanallah so  many times; and recite  Alhamdulillah so many times!’  The group would then do as was  instructed (by its leader). Abdullah Ibn Masood  (radhiyallahu anhu) arrived at the  Musjid and when he heard what  they were reciting he said: ‘I am  Abdullah Ibn Masood. I take  oath by Allah besides whom  there is no object of worship,  that you have innovated a dark  Bid’ah, or you are regarding  yourselves superior to the  Companions of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).’” [AL-’ITISAAM  and  MAJAALISUL  ABRAAR]

The point to note here is that  these people were merely reciting Takbeer and glorifying Allah  Ta’ala with Tasbeeh and Tahmeed.  Now we ask: What is wrong in  reciting Alhamdulillah? What is  wrong in reciting Subhaanallah? Why did Abdullah Ibn Masood  (radhiyallahu anhu) who was  among the great Sahaabah of  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) describe the reciting  of Takbeer, Tahmeed  and Tasbeeh of this group as a  “dark  Bid’ah”? The only reason is that  the form, the manner in which  this group was reciting the  greatness of Allah was not taught by our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). The Sahaabah  did not recite the praises in the  way this group did, hence it was  regarded as a dark and evil  innovation by such a great and  learned Sahaabi as Abdullah Ibn  Masood (radhiyallahu anhu).

3) “Ibn Masood (radhiyallahu  anhu) heard that some people  gathered in the Musjid and were  reciting Laa-ilaaha ilallah and  Durood Shareef aloud. He went  to them and said: ‘This (way of recital) was non-existent during the  time of the Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). I regard you as  innovators’. Ibn Masood  (radhiyallahu anhu) repeated this  over and over until these people  were ejected from the Musjid.”  [FATAWA QADHI KHAN]

It must be noted here that these  people were only reciting Laa-ilaaha il-lal-lah and Durood Shareef, and both these are acts  of Ibaadat of a very high order. Despite this, Hadhrat Ibn Masood  (radhiyallahu anhu) had these  people ejected from the Musjid  and described them as innovators  because they were reciting these  two forms of Thikr in a manner  not taught by our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and in a manner not practised by the  noble Sahaabah of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).  Further, Hadhrat Ibn Masood  (radhiyallahu anhu) said:

“This method was not in vogue  during the time of Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)”.

This statement of Hadhrat Ibn  Masood (radhiyallahu anhu)  clearly means that if a form of  worship was not instructed by  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) then it will be a Bid’ah.  If the Sahaabah did not entertain  any new systems or new ways of worship then we have no right  whatsoever of introducing into  Islam any new way or form of  worship.

4) “Mujahid says that Urwah Bin  Zubair and himself entered the  Musjid and saw Abdullah Ibn  Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) sitting  near to the room of Aishah  (radhiyallahu anha). Some people  in the Musjid were performing  the Dhuhaa prayers (the Salaat  which is performed sometime  after sunrise). We asked Ibn  Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) about  the Salaat being performed by  these people. He replied that it was a Bid’ah innovation.” [BUKHARI – MUSLIM]

It should be remembered that  Salaatud-Duhaa has been  narrated by many Sahaabah. It is  an act of Ibaadat which carries  considerable reward. We are encouraged to perform this Salaat. The great pious men of  Islam hardly omit this Salaat.  However, despite this fact,  Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) described the  Dhuhaa Salaat of this particular  group of people as Bid’ah. The  reason for branding it as Bid’ah is  the fact that these people originated a new method of  performing this prayer. They  congregated and performed this  Salaat conspicuously in the  Musjid, and this method of performing it in congregation  form was not instructed by our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

Many such examples could be cited to illustrate the dislike  which the Sahaabah of our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) had  for innovation. If the practice of  innovation was tolerated in Islam  there would be no pure Islam left.  However, Allah Ta’ala has blessed  this Ummah with righteous and  steadfast Ulama who diligently  defended the pure Deen of Allah  through this long corridor of fourteen centuries against the  onslaught of innovation.


The Islamic Law Books state  unambiguously that to regard  something which is either Mubah  (permissible) or Mustahab  (preferable and meritorious) as Waajib (compulsory) is in fact  Bid’ah Say-yiah or an evil  innovation which has to be  shunned. To assign anything to a  category other than prescribed  for it by the Shariah is  tantamount to rejection of the  Law of Allah, for Allah has assigned to an act, e.g. to the  category of Mustahab and the  servants of Allah give it a  different classification. For  example, should someone argue  that because Salaat is a high  form of Ibaadat we shall perform  four rakaats Fardh in Fajr instead  of the ordained two; the washing  of limbs in Wudhu thrice is Sunnat, but we shall now make it  Waajib, etc., then needless to say  such transgressions will be Bid’ah Say-yiah and the perpetrator of  these will be condemned as he is  rejecting the stipulations  and  classifications  assigned  by Allah  Ta’ala to the various Islamic rules  and laws. Similar is the case of  the innovators of the Moulood  functions. Nowhere has Allah  Ta’ala commanded this practice;  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not instruct or  advise the Sahaabah about this custom; the Sahaabah after the  demise of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not  introduce this custom; the great  Imaams of Islamic Law like  Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Malik,  Imaam Shaafi and Imaam Ahmad  Bin Hambal did not practise this custom, nor did they advise  anyone about it. Yet today this  customary Meelaad celebration is  regarded as an integral part – a  compulsory part of the Deen.  Those who indulge in this  practice of Meelaad generally  regard this function to be more  important than even the  compulsory Salaats.

The very fact that those who  organize and participate in these  functions degrade and revile  those who do not take part in  them is ample proof that these  functions are regarded as  compulsory. In many places in  India we see blood flowing  because some refuse to take part  in these functions. Those who do  not participate in Meelaad  customs are branded as Kaafirs  and Heretics. Yet it is not  permissible to brand even one  who neglects his compulsory Salaats as a Kaafir. The attitude  and the actions of those who are  in the forefront of this custom  clearly indicate that this practice  is regarded as compulsory. This is  a notoriety and a great falsehood  committed against the Deen of  Allah, for Allah Ta’ala and His  Holy Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not accord the  customary Meelaad function any Islamic status. In fact it was non-existent for centuries after  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) as mentioned  previously. Besides this aspect  there are many other evils  attendant to the customary  Meelaad functions which we shall  discuss, Insha’Allah, in the  ensuing lines.


There are many wrongs and evils  attendant to the present forms  of celebrating Meelaad. These are  as follows:

1)  The Compulsory Nature  assigned to Meelaad by its  votaries.

2)  The practice of Qiyaam or  standing in reverence when the  Salaami or Salawaat is recited.

3)  Meelaad functions regarded  as being of greater importance  than Salaat and performance of  Salaat in Jamaat.

4)  Qawwaali – Music at Meelaad  functions.

5)  Reciting of verses which  transgress the limits of  legitimate praise, thus assigning  a position of Divinity to our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

6)  The congregation of various  types of people such as Fussaaq  (open and rebellious sinners),  immoral people with evil  intentions, etc.

7)  Singing at these functions by young boys and girls.

8)  Intermingling of the sexes at  such gatherings.

9)  Salaat and its performance by  Jamaat neglected on a mass scale.

10)  Abstention from the  Command of Amr Bil Ma’roof  Nahy anil Munkar when these  become necessary  at  these  functions.

11)  Israaf or waste of  money in unnecessary ventures.

12)  Soliciting public funds for  the upkeep and organization of  these functions.

13)  Tashab’buh Bil Kuffaar.

14)  Maintaining a custom which  was originated by irreligious  persons.

15)  Reviling and branding as  unbelievers and heretics those  who do not participate in these  functions.

16)  Regarding the distribution of  sweetmeats as essential to these functions.

17)  The belief that the Soul of  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) presents itself at these functions.

The un-Islamic factors  mentioned above accompany  Meelaad functions. Sometimes all  these are present in a single  function, and sometimes all are  not present. Nevertheless, even if  all these factors are not present  at once in a single Meelaad  function, the function will still be  un-Islamic because of the presence of at least several of the  enumerated un-Islamic elements.

We shall now proceed to discuss  these factors which are  responsible for the customary  Meelaad functions being un-Islamic and as such to be  shunned.


It has already been stated  previously that it is a crime to  accord any act or practice a  status other than that accorded  to it by the Shariah. If even a Mustahab act is regarded as  compulsory it becomes necessary  to forgo that act and rectify  one’s belief and attitude with  regard to this particular act. Now when the Shariah does not even  permit a Mustahab act being  regarded as compulsory, it  stands to reason to say that an  act which has no sanction in the Deen will be condemned to a  much greater extent when it is  regarded as compulsory. And, the  attitude and manner of the  votaries of Meelaad clearly indicate that this practice of  Meelaad is regarded as a  compulsory Islamic duty. The  customary Meelaad practices do  not even qualify to be classified  in the Mustahab category for it  was completely unknown to the  Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and his noble  Sahaabah (radhiyallahu anhum)  and the great Jurists and Ulama  of Islam. On the assumption if all  the malpractices prevalent and attendant to the present-day  Meelaad function could be  eliminated then too, it could not  be accorded a compulsory or a  Sunnah status because this  practice did not exist in Islam for  the first six hundred years of  Islamic History. In other words  this customary Meelaad function  just does not have any basis in Islamic Law.


The practice of standing during  the recitation of the Salaami is  without any Islamic foundation.  This practice could not be  established on the basis of any statement or practice of our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), of  the Sahaabah (radhiyallahu  anhum) and of the Jurists of  Islam. But the votaries of  Meelaad claim that it is Fardh (Compulsory) to make Qiyaam  (stand) during these Meelaad  functions. They proceed further  to commit an act of extreme  gravity by branding as Kaafir the one who does not make this  Qiyaam of the Meelaad  celebration. Yet, it could never  ever be substantiated that one  who does not make the Qiyaam is  a Kaafir. The Kitaabs written by  the votaries of Moulood  unambiguously state that the  one who does not make the  Qiyaam is a Kaafir. Now, what is  the basis of making such a grave  statement? Our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not like  people to stand in his respect  even when he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was alive, leave alone  after his (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) death. It is a proven  fact that our Holy Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  detested people standing for him  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).  Read the following Hadith and  you will see the light dispelling  the darkness which enshrouds  this practice. Hadhrat Anas  (radhiyallahu anhu), one of the  closest of Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Sahaabah  narrates the following Hadith:

“There was none whom the  Sahaabah loved as much as  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). When they saw  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) they did not stand  because they knew that he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  detested this (practice of standing).” [TIRMIZI-MUSNAD  AHMAD]

The above-mentioned Hadith  which all the learned men of  Islam accept as being authentic,  proves that our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) disliked  standing for him. Who can question the love which the  Sahaabah had for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)?  However, despite the burning  love and the total submission  which the Sahaabah offered Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) the Sahaabah did not  stand in respect of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) for  the simple reason that Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  disliked such a practice. Now  when this was the case during  the very lifetime of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam),  then reason demands that the  dislike of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) for this practice  of Qiyaam will be greater after  his (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  death and in his (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) absence.

If this Qiyaam was necessary whenever we talk or discuss or mention the Holy name of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) then surely Qiyaam (standing) would have been incumbent upon us on the  following occasions:

(a) During Tashah-hud (i.e. when  sitting in the second rakaat of  any Salaat). In this sitting  posture of Salaat we recite At-tahi-yaat, and during this recital  the following salutations for our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  occur: “Salaams upon you, O  Nabi.”

However, no one ever stands up  during his Salaat when he recites  the above salutations in Tashah-hud.

(b) If we happen to be sitting and  the Muath-thin during Athaan  call out: Ashadu Anna Muhammadur Rasulullah then we do not stand up.  Even though Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Holy name is mentioned in the Athaan ten  times a day no one stands at the  mention of Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) name, if he happens to be  seated.

(c) During a lecture when the  lecturer speaks about the Holy  Birth of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) or when he  mentions the name of Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), no one stands in reverence at the  mention of Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Holy name.

(d) When we recite the Kalimah then  we do not stand at the mention  of the Holy name of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

(e) Allah Ta’ala has instructed us to  recite Durood Shareef on  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). But when anyone  recites Durood he does not stand  when mentioning the Holy name  of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

(f) During the Khutbah on Friday the  name of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is mentioned  several times, but everyone  remains seated. No one stands up  when the Imaam who recites the  Khutbah says: Allahumma Salli ‘Alaa Muhammad

(g) In the Holy Qur’aan the name of  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is mentioned on several  occasions, but when we recite  the relevant verses containing the  name of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) we do not stand,  and we are not commanded to  stand by Allah Ta’ala.

(h) In the Holy  Qur’aan Allah Ta’ala says:

Verily, Allah and His Malaa-ikah  send salaat upon the Nabi, O you who believe send salaat and  salaam upon him.  

However, despite Allah Ta’ala commanding us in the abovementioned verses to recite salutations on our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) we  do not stand at the recital of  Durood because we are not  commanded to do so. Allah Ta’ala  only commands the recitation of  salutations and not Qiyaam  or  standing when we recite these  salutations.

Thus, it is abundantly clear that  the Shariah does not command  or exhort us to stand when the  Holy name of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is  taken. If it was necessary to stand  in respect of the name of  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) then it would be a  greater necessity to stand in  respect when the Glorious Name  of Allah Ta’ala is mentioned. But  no one ever stands when the  Name of Allah Ta’ala is mentioned  or when glorifications unto Allah Ta’ala are recited.

The fact that people stand only when  Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) name is sung in the Meelaad Salaamis is ample proof  that they do not stand in respect and reverence at the mention of our Nabi’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) name. If they did in reality stand for the respect of  our Nabi’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) name then they would  have stood whenever the Holy  name of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was mentioned.  But in that case life would become very difficult for the  votaries of Meelaad because if  the lecturer happens to deliver a  lecture on the life of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and  he mentioned the name of our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  a hundred times, our supporters  of Meelaad would have to jump  up every time the name of our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is mentioned. Hence, it is clear  that people stand during the  recital of Salaamis not because of reverence for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), but  because of force of custom. They  stand because it is customary to  stand when these Salaamis are  recited. They stand because the  crowd stands. And, this standing  or Qiyaam was the invention of irreligious persons. Nowhere in  the  Shariah could this Qiyaam be  established. Thus the majority of  people stand because it is a  custom (made compulsory by the  innovators of the Meelaad) of  these functions.

Others again stand because of a  reason which is much more  dangerous than the reason for  which the majority of people  stand. Some cherish the belief that the Soul of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  presents itself at these sessions  of Meelaad, hence it is necessary  to stand in respect. This is a  fallacious and a highly misleading  belief. This belief leads to Shirk  or association with Allah Ta’ala in  an attribute which is exclusive in  Divinity. Let us assume that A  holds a Meelaad function in his  home, B does the same in his  home, C also has a Meelaad  celebration and D does likewise;  also Meelaad functions are taking place in various Musaajid all over  the world. Now let us assume  that these functions happen to  take place at the same time and  the Salaami is being recited at  these various venues at one and  the same  time. A is under the impression that Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Soul  is present at his function, B, C, D  and the people in the various  Musaajid all over the world are  under the same impression. We  have assumed that the Salaami is  being recited at the same time in  the various places, hence it will  follow that our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is present at the  place of A, B, C, D, etc., at one  and the same time. In other  words this belief means that our  Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  is present here, there and  everywhere at one and the same  time. This is bestowing the  Divine Attribute of Omnipresence upon our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Thus this belief  assigns to our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Divinity by way of according Omnipresence to  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). This is in reality the  commission of Shirk which is a  capital crime – a crime most  heinous in the Eyes of Allah.


Whenever these functions take  place in places other than  Musaajid wholesale neglect of  Salaat occurs. People are more  concerned with the Meelaad celebration than with their  Salaat. They are ostensibly  gathered to remember MUHAMMAD, RASULULLAH (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), but  they very conveniently overlook and transgress the MESSAGE  and the LAWS brought and  taught to us by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). If  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was present today,  what would he (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) say at this wholesale  massacre of Salaat – the most  important Pillar (as far as practice  is concerned) of Islam – and  especially so by those who claim  to sing his (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) praises and make  claims to being the sole  repositories of his (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) love! The  Meelaad function proceeds while  the time for Salaat passes by.  What kind of love – what kind of  demonstration of love for  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is this?

Those who participate in these  functions do not make any  special preparations to perform  Salaat in Jamaat which is  Sunnatul Muakkadah, yet they  see that elaborate and special  preparations are made for a  custom which has no origin in  the Shariah of Islam – for a  custom which contains many  innovations.


There exists no difference of  opinion among the Fuqahaa (the  Jurists of Islam) like Imaam Abu  Hanifah, Imaam Maalik, Imaam  Shaafi, Imaam Hambal,  etc, on  the prohibition of music. We  shall content ourselves at this juncture to say that MUSIC is  strictly and unanimously  prohibited in Islam. At some of  these functions qawwaali with  the accompaniment of music  takes place. This, indeed is an  open and a flagrant violation of  the law of Allah. Its evil is  emphasised when it takes place  at a function ostensibly organized in honour of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).


Many a time such poetry is  composed and sung at these  functions, which are blasphemous. Much of the  subject matter of these verses is  unsubstantiated, much is mere  figments of the composer’s  imagination, and some verses go  so far as to deify our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). This,  needless to say, amounts to the  capital crime of SHIRK.


People of all types frequent and  gather at these functions.  Audacious and rebellious sinners,  people of immoral characters  merely attend these functions to  listen to the sweet voices of  young boys and girls singing, and  for casting surreptitious and evil  glances at members of the  opposite sex – and this too is strictly forbidden in Islam.


Seclusion and separation of the  sexes is a compulsory law in  Islam. Islam demands the  strictest separation of the sexes.  The Law of Islam is categoric in banning women from coming  even to Musaajid for purposes of  Salaat. Salaat is the greatest  practical obligation imposed  upon the Believers by Allah Ta’ala,  yet Allah Ta’ala did not decree the  performance of Jumu’ah Salaat  on women. The performance of  Salaat in Jamaat has not been  ordained by Shariah for women.  Our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) in fact said that  woman’s noblest and best Salaat  is her Salaat performed alone in  the darkest corner of her home.  Now when it is not even  permissible for females to come  to the Musjid for Salaat purposes,  how can it be permissible for  them to attend these Meelaad functions? Their presence at  these Meelaad functions is a very  strong factor establishing the  prohibition of these functions.  Wherever intermingling of sexes  takes place Shaitaan is present to  plunge man into the tentacles of immorality. Our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said so. Even if it  is possible to screen the females completely from the men, then  too, it is not permissible for them  to emerge from their homes to  attend these functions for the  simple reason that the Shariah  has decreed that they may not  emerge from their homes for  even Salaat in the Musjid.


When evil and sin occur it is the  duty upon a Muslim to either  speak out against it if he is able  to do so, or alternatively, he must  withdraw from the place wherein  the un-Islamic practices are being  carried out. Now at these celebrations many of the wrongs  listed on above take place, but no  one will speak out against these  even though convinced of it  being un-Islamic. They will not  speak out against the crimes  committed against Allah nor will  they leave the venues where such  wrongs are being perpetrated in  the Holy Name of Islam. They  choose to be silent compatriots  in these evils. In so doing they are  inviting Allah Ta’ala’s Wrath upon  themselves by shunning the  extremely important Islamic  Injunction of Commanding what  is good and prohibiting what is  evil.


Great sums of money and  considerable time in labour are  squandered in organizing these  customs which have no Islamic  origin or sanction. Money which  could be utilized for the poor, the  needy, the widows and the  orphans are squandered in  preparing elaborate Meelaad  celebrations. Money is spent unnecessarily in the hiring of  tents, halls, cooking utensils,  eating utensils, for the  preparation of foods, for  engaging the qawwaal, etc. In  short this whole affair becomes a  mere frivolous party attendant  with wrongs and evils.


Many a time the organizers  engage in public collections in  order to accumulate funds to  organize such functions. Charity  is extracted from the public  under the pretences of  organizing an “Islamic” function.  Rich and poor eat the food  prepared of this charity. The  Muslim public who attend these functions indulge in merrymaking at the expense of the charities collected.


The celebration of birthdays and  anniversaries has no connection  with Islam. This is an exclusive  custom of the Kuffaar. Our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did  not celebrate birthdays and  anniversaries. Nor did the  Sahaabah or the great learned  Jurists of Islam. Such celebrations  have no basis in the Shariah. In  upholding these innovatory  customs Muslims are in fact  imitating the Kuffaar and this our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  has strictly forbidden.

The Hindus have customs of  celebrating the anniversaries of  the death or the birthdays of  their holy people, and so have  the Christians as well as the Rawaafidh sects which have gone  astray. In reality Muslims too  have imitated the Kuffaar in the  introduction of  these  customs.  The Sahaabah of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)  never celebrated the birthday of  our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) nor did the great  learned Jurists and Ulama of  Islam. In fact the Muslim innovators have resorted to a greater ignorance than their non-Muslim counterparts (in custom  and innovation). The non-Muslim  celebrate the birthdays and  death anniversaries of their holy  men on a fixed day each year.  But, the Muslim innovators celebrate the birthday of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) on various dates throughout the  year. They do so on different  dates yet they call these various  celebrations MEELAAD or  MOULOODUN-NABI which means  the BIRTH of the NABI (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).


It has already been explained  elsewhere in this article that the  originators of the Meelaad  custom were irreligious persons.  Six hundred years after our Nabi  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) the  irreligious ruler of Irbal assisted  by irreligious learned men invented and established this  custom. Thus, those who organize Meelaad functions and those who participate in them are in reality assisting to establish a practice introduced by evil men. They are aiding and abetting in the fostering of a custom which is in  total conflict with the Shariah  of  Islam. It is a great crime to  maintain and encourage customs  and practices which were brought into being by those who had no  connection with the Deen, more  so, when these customs and  practices are a conglomeration of  un-Islamic elements.


One of the vilest of habits which  exists in those who desire to  establish these un-Islamic  customs is to brand as Kaafir or  unbeliever whoever does not agree with their views or do not  participate in these Meelaad  functions. Indeed, these  innovators have not shied from  even branding as Kaafir great Ulama, Auliya and pious men of  Islam. At every corner they  produced Kaafirs. It seems that  their only function is to maintain  innovatory customs and to brand  Muslims as Kaafir. The votaries of  these customs have written in their books that those who do  not make the Qiyaam, etc. are  Kaafir. They have written that to  make Qiyaam at these ceremonies is FARDH (Compulsory). What blasphemy they utter! They seem to be totally unconcerned of the Allah, the Greatest, the most  High, hence they  proceed without any hesitation to  pronounce as Kaafir the great  Auliyaa and Ulama of Islam. This  factor of reviling the non-participants is a very strong  reason for the non-permissibility  of this innovatory practice.


This too, is a further  transgression committed against  the Law of Allah. This custom of  distributing sweetmeats at these  functions is regarded as compulsory. A gross falsity  perpetrated in the name of Islam.


This factor has already been  explained under the section  dealing with Qiyaam, and it was  shown there how the crime of  Shirk is resultant on this belief.


Imaam Ahmad Bin Muhammad  Bin Bisri Maaliki (rahmatullah  alayh) states:

“And, the Ulama of the four Math-habs (Hanafi, Shaafi, Hambali and Maaliki) are unanimous in condemning this practice (i.e. Moulood).” [AL-QOULUL  MU’TAMAD]

“Imaam Abul Hassen Ali Bin Fadhl  Muqeddisi (rahmatullah alayh) states in his Kitaab,  JAAMIUL  MASAA-IL: 
‘The practice of Moulood was not  of the practices of the great,  pious predecessors (SALFE  SAALIH). It was introduced after  the QUROONE THALAATHAH (the  three periods following our Nabi  –– which he––  described as the  “best of times”). It (Moulood) was  innovated during the age of evil  (i.e. of evil people). We do not  follow a practice introduced by  later people, if the pious  predecessors did not practice it.  It suffices for us to follow the  Salfe Saaliheen. And, we have no need to innovate new customs.” [AL-QOULUL MU’TAMAD]

Imaam Ibnul Haaj states:
“Among the Bid’ahs (innovations) which these people have introduced is the practice of Moulood during the month of Rabiul Awwal. They believe that  the Moulood is among the great  acts of Ibaadat (worship) and the  customs of Islam. This practice  consists of Bid’ahs and Haraam  acts.  [MUDKHAL]                                                                  
Imaam Shamsul A-immah Taajud-din Faakahaani says in his  Risalah:
“I know of no basis for this  practice of Moulood as regards  the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. It  has not been reported from any  of the greet Ulama and Imaams  who were the Leaders of the  Deen and who held on firmly to  the ways of the greet  predecessors. In reality, this practice of Moulood is a Bid’ah  innovated by evil people who  were followers of lust  …”

Allamah Abdur-Rahman Mughzi  (rahimahullah) states in his  Fataawa:
“Verily, the practice of Moulood is  a Bid’ah. The Messenger of Allah (salpallaahu alayhi wasallam) did  not order or practise it, nor did  his Khulafaa (his representatives)  or the Jurists of Islam.” [SHARATUL ILLAHIY-YAH]

Besides the abovementioned  opinions and statements of the  Jurists of Islam there are many  other references on the subject.  The true Ulama and the Jurists of  Islam have condemned and  branded this practice as  forbidden right from the very  time it was introduced as part of  the Deen of Allah, i.e. 600 years after our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). In every age the true  and uprighteous learned men of Islam have opposed and rejected  this practice. Shaikhul Islam Ibn  Taimiyyah Hambali (rahmatullah  alayh) rejected this practice in his  Fataawa. Imaam Jasiruddin Shafi  (rahmatullah alayh) condemned  this practice in Irshaadul Akhyaar,  and so did Hadhrat Mujaddid Alfe  Thaani (rahmatullah alayh) (See Maktoobaat, PartV).

The discussion of these pages is  sufficient, in fact more than  sufficient for the unbiased seeker  of the Truth to arrive at the right  – the Islamic conclusion, that the  customary Moulood practices are  not permissible in terms of the Shariah. Never mind what the  votaries of these innovatory  practices say, just remember that  this custom of Meelaad was not  ordered by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam); it was not  practised by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam); it  was not practised by even one  Sahaabi of our Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) – the Sahaabah  did not practise it; the great  Imaams and Jurists of Islam did  not practise it. It (Meelaad) was  introduced in Islam by men who  loved this life and its pleasures  –  it was innovated 600 years after Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). These are facts which  even the votaries of Meelaad do  not refute. May Allah save us and  all Muslims from all un-Islamic  customs, Aameen.


The protagonists of the custom  of Moulood/Meelaad or the  celebration of the birthday of  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) present a number of  spurious and baseless arguments  in support of their un-Islamic  practice. Qur’aanic verses and Hadith narrations totally  unrelated to their innovated  practice are cited, distorted and  falsely interpreted to deceive  those who lack Islamic knowledge. Among their spurious  arguments is their statement:

“Man must thank and show his  appreciation to the Almighty for  the bounty in the person  of  the  Holy Prophet (peace be upon  him).”  

According to the upholders of  Moulood the purpose for this  innovation is to thank Allah. It is  thus a thanksgiving day. For  offering thanks to Allah Ta’ala for  the great bounty in the form of  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), a day is set aside in  the year when praises are sung  and food is eaten and  merrymaking is adopted. But,  what is the Islamic proof for  setting aside a day in the year to  offer thanks in this way for this  wonderful Bounty? From whence  did these people obtain their  direction for celebrating the  birthday of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? Did the Sahaabah not love Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)?  Were the Sahaabah unaware of  the birthday of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? Did  the Sahaabah not realize that  they had to offer thanks on a  special day for the great bounty?  The Bounty had come to them in  the first instance. The Bounty  had extricated them from the  dregs of kufr and barbarism. How  is it that they did not see it fit to  set aside a day for Moulood  celebration? Were they then  deficient in their love for  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? The innovation of  Moulood does in fact imply that  the Sahaabah-e-Kiraam were  unaware of the way in which to  manifest their love for Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and  that this ‘favour’ was conferred  centuries after the Sahaabah to  the innovators who had  introduced the Meelaad custom  which is in fact an inheritance  acquired from irreligious persons.


The upholders of the customary  Moulood celebration contend  that this is their day of Durood,  hence they claim:

“….praises are sung in his honour,  blessings and salutations of  Peace are showered upon him,…”  

It is indeed peculiar for those  who raise the slogan of Hubb-e-Rasool (love for the Rasool) to appoint a short time in a day per year for reciting Durood on Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). A Muslim is supposed  to recite Durood daily. If a Muslim one who claims to love Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) – recites Durood daily as he should, then what is the meaning of a  special day for singing praises  and showering blessings and  salutations? This a Muslim does  daily or should do daily, not once  a year in a function of  merrymaking where violations of  the Shariah are perpetrated. Their claim is utterly meaningless.

Who taught the Ummah about the recitation of Durood? How  did the Sahaabah recite Durood?  Surely they did not have a day in the year for this important act of  Ibaadat and demonstration of love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)! The Sahaabah  recited Durood and so did the  Ummah thereafter. When Durood constitutes part of the Muslim’s  daily Thikr, then of what purpose is the fixation of a day for Durood  and singing of praises? What Shar’i proof do these people have  for their innovation? Nothing at  all! Muslims are required to recite  Durood the way the Sahaabah  recited Durood, not in the new  fangled way innovated by  irreligious persons.


Attempting to substantiate their  innovation of Meelaad, the votaries of this custom seek to draw support from the ways of  the kuffaar, thus they say:

“All the religions of the world, at some or other time, celebrate certain days of the year since time  immemorial.” “In Islam these days  have a special significance;…”  

Why look askance at the ways of  non-Muslims when Islam has  clear directions for the Ummah? What is the need for this comparison? The need is there to eke out miserable support for the  baseless suppositions and baatil customs of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah. A Muslim should not refer to the  method of the kuffaar. Our days  of celebration have been clearly explained and enumerated by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Islam’s Days of Celebration do not include Meelaad/Moulood. Islam does not know of any ‘Prophet’s Day  Celebration’ as the Meelaad-preachers are dubbing of recent.  If this custom had significance  whatsoever, the Sahaabah would  have been the very first persons to have  celebrated  Meelaad.  After  all, days of celebration – existed “since time immemorial”.  The Sahaabah with their over-brimming love for the Rasool (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did  not require the advice of anyone  regarding  the  fixation  of  a specific day for Durood and  praise-singing. They did not  require anyone to remind them of the birthday of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). But, their deliberate and conscious  abstention from innovating a day  of celebration which in Islam is in  fact not a day of celebration, is  ample testimony for the claim  that Meelaad-day  has  neither  origin nor sanction in the  Shariah, nor is there any significance in it. On the contrary, the Wrath of Allah Ta’ala descends on the innovators of  baatil customs.


Further arguing their baseless  case, the supporters of Meelaad  say:

“The aim is the remembrance of  those great souls who sacrificed themselves in contributing to the upkeep of Islam and in so doing bring home to the future  generations the responsibilities  they have to bear as far as Islam  is concerned.”

Irrespective of any aim and any  benefit, no one has the right to  innovate a practice and assign it  a religious status. The aim, no  matter how laudable, does not  justify bid’ah which changes the  purity of the Sunnah. Furthermore, the Sahaabah were well aware of such laudable aims.  Did they not understand the kind of aim expressed in the aforementioned statement? The  welfare of Islam and the Ummah  and the love of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) were  foremost and uppermost in their  minds and ingrained in their hearts, but they never considered  the need to celebrate a day for the “remembrance of great souls” who had sacrificed themselves for the “upkeep of Islam”. This is indeed a baseless claim in support of the bid’ah of Moulood.
If there was any Islamic validity and need for the enactment of  days of celebration in remembrance of great souls who had sacrificed for the sake of Islam, the Sahaabah would have been the first to have initiated  this process. But, Islamic history bears testimony that no such days of remembrance or days of celebration were introduced by the Sahaabah or by the illustrious authorities of the Shariah for centuries after the demise of  Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). Great and noble souls  such as Sayyidush Shuhadaa Hadhrat Hamzah,Hadhrat Umar, Hadhrat Uthmaan and countless Sahaabah were martyred in the Path of Islam. Besides the  Shuhadaa (Martyrs), numerous  Sahaabah sacrificed their all in their Service of love and devotion for Islam and the Rasool of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). But never did Islam enact a day of celebration in honour and in remembrance of any of its most valiant Sons who shook the world from top to bottom. But, the  Ahl-e-Bid’ah considered it appropriate centuries later to innovate customs and festivals inherited from pagan kuffaar.  Such innovated customs were merely disguised with an Islamic hue by the introduction of Islamic  acts of Ibaadat. Since there is no Islamic precedent nor any valid Shar’i  basis for the Moulood festival, this practice is utterly  baatil and un-Islamic.


Among their arguments in favour of Meelaad is their baseless  interpretation of the following  Qur’aanic aayat:

“And remind them of the days of  Allah.”  

They present their  misinterpretation as follows:

“The days are those wherein Allah  has sent His bounties unto His servants…… Those who believe  know that above all the gifts  from Allahu Ta’ala none is more apparent in greatness than the very person of the Holy Prophet  of Allah (peace be upon him)……. Then surely to celebrate the day  of his coming cannot be branded  as an innovation or as an  unfounded custom or ritual.”  

Why should it not be branded as  such? When this custom has no beginning in Islam, when it was an unknown practice to the Sahaabah and when it did not exist for many centuries after the  demise of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), then why should it not be branded as an unfounded and a baatil custom of  evil innovation? Did the  Sahaabah not realize that Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was the greatest  Bounty of Allah Ta’ala upon mankind? Why did the Taabieen  and those after them not appreciate this fact? In the logic of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah the Sahaabah and the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen and all the illustrious Souls who lived in Khairul Quroon (the three noblest ages succeeding the age  of Rasulullah sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) did not understand or appreciate this greatest of Allah’s Bounties, hence they did not innovate Meelaad. The Ulama-e-Haqq abstain from this baseless, innovated and unfounded custom  just as the Sahaabah had abstained, just as the Taabieen and their followers had abstained.  But, the votaries of this custom spit venom and brand as kufr abstention from their innovated baatil!

The noble Nabi of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and his illustrious Sahaabah were fully  aware of the meaning of the  aforementioned aayat. They, better than all, understood what  was meant by “the  days  of  Allah”. If this aayat even remotely  suggested days of celebration,  then undoubtedly, Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) would have ordered the observance of Meelaad and other days in remembrance of the sacrifices of the great souls in the  cause of Islam. But there is absolutely nothing of this sort of festival and custom ordered by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) nor did the Sahaabah ever introduce any such festival or  celebration. The Ahl-e-Bid’ah are  audaciously implying that they possess a greater understanding of the aayat (mentioned above) than Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah.

By reminding people of past great events of admonition, kindness and favours of Allah Ta’ala  (referred to as “the days of Allah” in the aayat) is meant nothing other than naseehat – giving good counsel, warning and admonishing.It does not mean the enactment of celebrations and festivals on specific days of the years. There is no basis whatever in the Shariah for this  interpretation advanced by the supporters of Moulood festivities.  The emphasis of Islam is on reminding of the days of Allah,  i.e. Naseehat, hence Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Deen  is  Naseehat”. Islam does not stipulate that the process of  reminding about the “days of Allah” be on specific days of the year.

While the Qur’aan Majeed says: “Remind them of the days of  Allah”, the Ahl-e-Bid’ah say:  “Remind them on particular days  of the birth of the Nabi.” But, the Qur’aan does not mention this.  Bounties do come within the scope of the meaning of “days of Allah”, but the Islamic way of “reminding” is not the innovation  of customs, rituals and festivals which have no sanction in the Shariah. The interpretation of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah is thus baatil.


In support of Meelaad, its votaries cite the following aayat: “Say (O Muhammad) with the descent of Allah’s Bounty and Mercy the believers should be happy.” 

Arguing the Meelaad case on the  basis of this verse, the Ahl-e-Bid’ah say:
“Here the Holy Qur’aan clearly sanctions the fact that the  believers should rejoice the bestowal of the gifts from Allahu  Ta’ala. ……Thus to be happy, to rejoice and to celebrate the coming of the most supreme of Allah’s Gifts is an action of compulsory gratitude to Allah Almighty in accordance with the Divine command.”  

To be happy and to rejoice over the bounties and gifts of Allah Ta’ala are one thing. No sensible person has ever denied this fact or taken up cudgels against it. But, to forge customs and to innovate unfounded practices and  to introduce festivals akin to the festivals of paganism are entirely different issue which have nothing whatever to do with the expression of the Mu’min’s happiness for the Bounty of the Blessed Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). The argument of Haqq  is not directed against lawful and valid rejoicing, happiness and gratitude. The argument is in refutation and in denial of the  baatil Meelaad and customary evil  festivals of the Bid’atis –  functions of merrymaking and  haraam – functions where dagga smoking qawwaals preside with their haraam musical instruments; where fussaaq and fujjaar gather,  where they sing the night through, where the raucous clamour of Hubb-e-Rasool is  dinned throughout the night but  the Fajr Salaat is abandoned at the altar of this conception of ‘Hubbe Rasool’ which sanctions all the haraam acts of flagrant  transgression. This conception of  ‘Hubb-e-Rasool’ of-the Ahl-e-Bid’ah of our time tolerates the destruction of almost every Sunnah of Muhammadur Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). This is not an expression of love and gratitude.  It is the manifestation of the bestiality of the carnal nafs  floundering in the sea of  shaitaani deception and baatil.

It is not an Islamic teaching to fix specific days for the innovation of celebrations to express happiness  and to rejoice and be grateful for  the bounties of Allah Ta’ala. If expression of gratitude and happiness had to be by means of  annual festivals and celebrations  then the Sahaabah would have been the first to have done so.  The conspicuous absence of  Meelaad celebration in the ranks  of the Sahaabah and the Taabieen  speaks volumes for the fallacy of  the Bid’ati claim. The Ahl-e-Bid’ah are implying that the Sahaabah  were ungrateful to Allah Ta’ala for  the greatest of Bounties since they did not indulge in Moulood.  Yet, they were the happiest and the most grateful of Muslims for the Boon of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), but their happiness, rejoicing and gratitude did not assume the form of Meelaad celebration.  They never specified any ‘Prophet’s Day’. Happiness and  gratitude stem from the heart  and manifest themselves on the external body of the Mu’min in the form of IbaadatNafl Salaat in solitude, Saum, Sadqah, Thikrullah and service to the servants of Allah Ta’ala. Islamic  happiness and expression of gratitude to Allah Ta’ala do not consist of singing and merrymaking under Deeni guise. The Mu’min expresses his undying  loyalty and remembrance for  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) by the inculcation of  the Sunnah – by following the  Sunnat teachings and practices  in the minutest detail. Love for the Rasool (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) means total obedience  to him, hence the Qur’aan Shareef  declares:

“Say (O  Muhammad!): If you love  Allah then follow me (Muhammad).”  

Love for Allah and love for the Rasool are enshrined in  submission and obedience to the  Command and to the Sunnah,  not in singing praises and listening to songs sung by dagga-smoking qawwaals with the  accompaniment of haraam  musical  instruments. The whole  customary Meelaad celebrations  in vogue among the Ahl-e-Bid’ah  is one huge trick and deception  of shaitaan talbees-e-Iblees.

The claim that celebration of  Moulood “is an action of compulsory gratitude, to Allah  Almighty in accordance with  Divine command”, is a vile fabrication– a lie spoken in the  Name of Allah Ta’ala. Let them  produce the “Divine command”  which commands Meelaad  celebration, Qur’aanic verses  totally unrelated to this bid’ah  are not proof for this baatil claim.  Those who venture such falsehood in the Name of Allah Azza Wa Jal should heed well the following warning of Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam):

“He who speaks a lie on me deliberately should prepare his abode in the Fire (of Jahannum).”


Arguing their case, the votaries  of customary Moulood celebrations present certain  narrations attributed to Hadhrat  Abu Bakr, Hadhrat Umar, Hadhrat Uthmaan and Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhum). Some such narrations are:

“He who hath spent in the recital  of Moulood-un-Nabi one dirham then he shall be my companion in  Jannat.”  (This narration is attributed to Hadhrat Abu Bakr  –  radhiyallahu  anhu).

“He who hath kept in veneration  the Moulood-un-Nabi of the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace) he  hath kept Islam alive.”  (Attributed  to Hadhrat Umar– radhiyallahu anhu)

“He who hath spent one dirham  in the recital of Moulood-un-Nabi  he is as he had been a participant  in the battles of Badr and Hunain.”  (Attributed to Hadhrat  Uthmaan – radhiyallahu  anhu).

“He who revered Moulood-un-Nabi and was instrumental in its recital, he shall leave this world  upon Iman and shall enter Jannat without reckoning.”  (Attributed  to Hadhrat Ali – radhiyallahu  anhu).

No wonder that the participants  in the customary Moulood  celebrations ignore the  performance of Salaat and rather  spend the night listening to  drunken qawwaals singing and  drumming away their tablas until  just before Fajr. But as the  Muath-thin is about to call the  Fajr Athaan they slink away like shayaateen into their beds. This  easy prescription of  “entering  Jannat without reckoning” as  long as Moulood was upheld has  made people audacious and careless about Deeni Commands.

The  abovementioned  narrations  in the first place do not appear in  any of the highly placed authentic  Books of Hadith. Let the  supporters of customary Moulood  celebrations present the proof  for the authenticity of these narrations. Secondly, why did the  Khulafa-e-Raashideen not  participate in Moulood celebration? Narrations in this  regard are being attributed to the Khulafa-e-Raashideen, but why  did they not organize customary  Moulood celebrations if indeed  this custom was of the significance mentioned in these narrations attributed to them?

Assuming that the narrations are  correct, then too, here is no  substantiation for the customary  Moulood functions prevailing in  the ranks of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah.  There is no argument in the fact  that speaking, discussing and  feeling ever grateful for the Birth  (Moulood) of the Nabi (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are all acts of  merit, barkat and thawaab. It was  never contended that it is wrong  to discuss the Moulood (Birth) of  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). But, the customary  Moulood functions with its  accompaniment of haraam  factors is the target for the criticism of the Ulama-e-Haqq. If  Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu  anhu) mentioned the significance  of Moulood, he meant thereby  the Birth of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), which was a great or the greatest boon to  mankind and Jinnkind. He did not  refer to the type of Meelaad  function in vogue today. He  never meant by Moulood, the  functions consisting of qawwaali,  etc. There never existed the  customary Moulood function  during the time of the Sahaabah  nor for centuries thereafter. It is,  therefore, highly deceptive to  extract a mere word from a narration and claim that the term  refers to a present-day baatil  custom which has neither origin  nor sanction in the Shariah.

If the customary Meelaad celebration had any basis in the Sunnah and if the Khulafa-e-Raashideen did in fact speak so glowingly of  these practices as is being alleged, then the least expected of them was practical expression of such an important celebration which is purported to secure the entry of its votaries into Jannat without reckoning. The fact that the early six centuries of Islam were without this customary Meelaad practice is sufficient proof for the Meelaad custom being a bid’ah (an innovation). It is typical of the perpetrators of bid’ah to clasp at any straw to eke out support for their un-Islamic practices.

The Ahl-e-Bid’ah have all along presented a variety of spurious ‘proofs’ and baseless arguments in  substantiation of their innovated practice of Meelaad. Their latest attempt consists of presenting ‘hadith’ narrations which have absolutely no standing of authenticity in the Shariah. They tender narrations claiming that Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) himself spoke highly of the custom of Meelaadunnabi. Other narrations cited, allege that the Khulafa-e-Raashideen exhorted the observance of this practice.

It is a well-established Islamic fact that the custom of Meelaad or Moulood never existed in Islam for approximately six centuries from the time of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). If  there was any merit  in this practice of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah, surely Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah would have upheld it. But all Shar’i facts and Islamic  history testify that Meelaad did  not exist during the time of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), the Sahaabah and for  centuries after them.

Such fallacious ‘proofs’ and miserable attempts of the Bid’ati group should be dismissed as claims devoid of substance.

A blatant attempt to justify  the  custom of Meelaad is made by an  effort to enlist Hadhrat Mujaddid  Alf-e-Thaani (rahmatullah alayh).  Thus, the votaries of  Meelaad  allege:

“Imaam Rabbani Mujaddid Alfi  Sani, in his writings, says of Mauludun-Nabi: ‘What matters   when the Qur’aan is recited sweetly and when praises are sung in honour of the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him)!” e

Indeed, nothing matters to recite  the Qur’aan Majeed sweetly and to sing the praises of Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). But,  Meelaad of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah is not  mere sweet recitation of the  Qur’aan nor is it merely a session  where-praises are sung in honour of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). The many evils  associated with this custom of  the Ahl-e-Bid’ah can never be  justified or supported by an unrelated statement of Hadhrat Mujaddid (rahmatullah alayh). It  is necessary for the Bid’ati group to state the context in which Hadhrat Mujaddid (rahmatullah  alayh) made his statement.  Furthermore, it is incumbent for  the supporters of Meelaad to  inform Muslims what exactly Hadhrat Mujaddid Alf-e-Thaani  said directly in reference to the  practices of bid’ah. Since it is a forgone conclusion that the  upholders of Meelaad will never  act honestly by informing people  of Hadhrat Mujaddid’s view on bid’ah, we shall do so. It is highly  misleading to describe the  customary Meelaad simply by  asserting that it is merely “sweet  recitation of the Qur’aan and  singing of praises in honour of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).” The present Moulood is a bid’ah custom – a bid’ah  sayyiah (evil innovation), which the votaries of bid’ah describe as  bid’ah hasanah (beautiful innovation). In refutation of their contention of bid’ah hasanah we shall reproduce verbatim the view of Hadhrat Imaam Rabbaani Mujaddid Alf-e-Thaani (rahmatullah alayh) as it appears  in the book, Endless Bliss, a publication of the Turk, Huseyn Hilmi Isik who incidentally is a great enemy of the Ulama of Deoband and a supporter of Moulood and other acts of bid’ah:


“The happiest, the most fortunate  person is he who recovers one of the forgotten sunnats and annihilates one of the widespread  bid’ats in a time when irreligiousness is on the increase. We are now in such a time when  a thousand years have elapsed  after the Best of man kind  [Hadhrat Muhammad]. As we get  farther from the time of  happiness of our Prophet, the  sunnats are gradually being covered and, lies being on the increase, the bid’ats are spreading. A hero is needed who will uphold the sunnats and stop,  expel the bid’ats. To spread bid’ats  is to demolish Islam. To respect those who make up and commit bid’ats, to deem them great will  cause Islam to perish. It is declared in a hadith, “He who says  ‘great’ about those who commit bid’ats has helped the demolition  of Islam”. The meaning of this should be given die consideration  on. Utmost energy should be spent in striving for uncovering  one sunnat and annihilating one  bid’at. For strengthening Islam  any-time, especially when Islam  has become so weak, it is necessary to spread the sunnats  and demolish the bid’ats. The  former Islamic savants, having seen maybe some beauty in the  bid’ats, gave some of them the name of hasana [beautiful]. But  this faqir [Imaam-Rabbani means  himself] do not follow them in this respect; I do not regard any  of the bid’ats as beautiful. I see all  of them as dark and cloudy. Our  Prophet declared: “All bid’ats are  aberration, deviation from the  right way”. In such a time as this when Islam has become weak, I  see that salvation and escaping Hell is in holding fast to the  sunnat; and destruction of the  deen is, no matter how, in falling for any bid’at. I understand that  each bid’at is like a pickaxe to  demolish the building of Islam  and all sunnats are like brilliant stars to guide you on a dark night. May Allahu Ta’ala give  enough reasonableness to the  hodjas of our time so that they  will not say that any bid’at is  beautiful or permit any bid’at to  be committed. They should not tolerate bid’ats even if they seem  to illuminate darknesses like the  rising of the sun! For, the satans  do their work easily outside the  sunnats. In the early times, Islam  being strong, the darknesses of  bid’ats were not conspicuous,  but, maybe, along with the world-wide powerful light of Islam, some of those darknesses passed  as bright. Therefore they were said to be beautiful. Whereas,  those bid’ats did not have any  brightness or beauty, either. But now, Islam having become weak and disbelievers’ customs and  even the symptoms of disbelief  having become settled [as fashion] among Muslims, each  bid’at has displayed its harm, and  Islam, without anyone noticing it,  has been slipping away. Our hodjas should be most vigilant in  this respect, and they should not  pioneer the spreading of bid’ats  by saying, “it is permissible to do  so and so”, or “such and such things is not harmful”, and  putting forward the old fatwas.  Here is the place for the saying,  “The deen will change in process  of time”. It is wrong for disbelievers to use this saying as  tongs for demolishing Islam and  settling the bid’ats and disbelief.  The bid’ats having covered all the  world, this age roosts like a dark  night. The sunnats being on the  decrease, their lights blink like  fire-flies flying here and there in  dark night. As the committing of  bid’ats increases, the darkness of  the night has been increasing and  the light of sunnat has been  decreasing. But the increasing of  the sunnats would decrease the  darkness and increase the light.  He who wishes may increase the darkness of bid’at, thus strengthening the devil’s army! And he who wishes may increase  the light of sunnat, thus  strengthening the soldiers of  Allahu Ta’ala! Know well that the end of the devil’s army is calamity,  loss. He who is in the army of  Allahu Ta’ala will attain endless bliss.”

The above excerpt very adequately states the viewpoint  of Hadhrat Mujaddid on the  question of practices dubbed  bid’ah hasanah.


A bid’ati molvi speaking in  support of innovation of Meelaad  celebrations argued that Meelaad  “is the origin of all other Eids”.  In  view of it being the “origin” of  Eidul Fitr and Eidul Adha (according to the bid’ati), there is  the need to celebrate Meelaad in  the way the qabar pujaari sect is  presently doing. If Meelaad was  the origin of the other Eids, why  neither Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) nor the  Sahaabah (radhiyallahu anhum)  ever taught or practised this  custom? Why is the Shariah  totally silent about Meelaad if it was indeed a practice of any significance?

Meelaad celebrations are ostensibly organized to express love and  honour for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). But who had greater love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) – the  Sahaabah or those given up to acts of grave-worship? We see the Sahaabah rigidly clinging to  the minutest details of  Rasulullah’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) Sunnah – even to such detailed acts which are not imposed on the Ummah by the  Shariah. On the contrary we find  the loud-mouthed grave-worshippers shunning almost  every Sunnat act of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). We  find clean-shaven fussaaq –  dagga smoking qawwaals –  singing the praises of Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) with  the accompaniment of haraam  musical instruments. Are these  fujjaar superior in love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) than the noble  Sahaabah who offered their  blessed bodies as shields to protect the mubaarak body of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) from the spears and  arrows of the kuffaar? But never did any of the Sahaabah innovate  this custom of Meelaad.

That the Sahaabah had the highest degree of love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) cannot be contested.  Therefore, the best and the most  acceptable ways of expressing love for and honouring Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) can  be obtained from only the Sahaabah. Any person who even  implies that he has greater love  for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) than the Sahaabah or  that his way of expressing such  love is better than the way of the  Sahaabah is undoubtedly a  shaitaan. When Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has commanded obedience to the Way of the Sahaabah, it will be  quite obvious that those who  deviated from the Path of the  Sahaabah are the followers of  shaitaan.

If Meelaad was the mother of the other Eids, then surely Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) would have explained the  importance of upholding this so-called “eid Meeladun Nabi”. But, we find that for centuries, from the age of the Sahaabah, the Ummah did not know anything  about this innovated custom of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah. Only after six  centuries had passed did the  bid’ah of Meelaad celebration  rear its head in the Ummah.

The  custom of Meelaad originated in  the year 604 A.H. in the city of  Mosul at the behest of the evil  king Muzaffaruddin Kaukri Ibn Irbal. Huge sums of money misappropriated from the Baitul Maal were squandered on festivals in the name of Meelaadun Nabi. Evil and haraam  were perpetrated under cover of Hubb-e-Rasool. Today the qabar  pujaaris are branding the people of the Sunnah as kaafir since  they refuse to uphold a practice which has neither origin nor sanction in Islam – leave alone it being the origin of the Eids.

The bid’ati molvi in asserting that  the festive of Meelaad is the  origin of the Islamic Eids has only  exhibited his profound ignorance.  He has demonstrated that the  bid’ati mind derives greater pleasure in customs and practices unconnected to the Sunnah.

A custom which was introduced six hundred years after Rasulullah  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) can never be accorded the  significance which the acts of  the Sunnah enjoy. Why do the people of bid’ah consider the ways of the Sahaabah insufficient for the  expression of love and honour to  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam)? Why is the Tareeqah of the Sahaabah not accorded the  same concern, vigour and importance as some Muslims prefer to give to innovated customs such as Meelaad? Did the Sahaabah organize any  festival? Other than the two Eids, Islam is conspicuous for its lack of festivals and celebrations. Even the Eids were not festivals and occasions of celebration as  people of our times understand celebration to mean. The way to celebrate Eid is recorded in detail in the Sunnah. Haraam activities  do not constitute part of the Islamic celebration of Eid. Eid too,  while a day of happiness, is a day  of Ibaadat. Frivolities do not form part of Islamic and Sunnah culture. Qawwaali, brigades and  other western-orientated displays  of the nafs are the tools of shaitaan. Such activities do not form part of the Sunnah, but they  do form part of the Customary Meelaad celebrations of the qabar pujaari sect.

The 12th day of Rabiul Awwal is  accorded Shar’i status and great displays of love (albeit hollow) for  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are made on these occasions of Meelaad. Did the Sahaabah then not know that  Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was born on this day?  Why did they not uphold this day  as a day of Eid? Why did Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) not instruct them to  celebrate this day as a day of Eid  and festivity? The votaries of this  custom designate this day as “a  day of resolution”. But why has  the Shariah never described this  day as a “day of resolution”? Why  did the Sahaabah, despite their  profound love for Nabi-e-Kareem  (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) not stipulate this day as a day of resolution? Yes, we all know that Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has described the  Night of Baraa’t as the Night of  Stocktaking. And, we know that  Lailatul Qadr has been described  as a very auspicious Night. And,  we have been apprized by Islam that the 10th Muharram is a great  day – not because of the Shahaadat of Hadhrat Husain (radhiyallahu anhu), but because  of a number of other factors. The  10th Muharram was a day of  auspiciousness long before the martyrdom of  Hadhrat Husain (radhiyallahu anhu). But, qabar pujaaris emulating the Shiahs,  have introduced Shiah beliefs into Islam.

It is indeed a queer phenomenon that those who shout the loudest  about love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are the worst criminals violating the  Sunnah of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). What else is to be expected from mobs of grave-worshippers. Such  vile innovators who displace and murder the Sunnah will be buffeted from Haudh-e-Kauthar on the Day of Qiyaamah by Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and the Malaaikah.  May Allah Ta’ala save us from such  calamities.

Love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is not qawwaali-singing and slogans. Love for Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is obedience to the  Sunnah, everyday obedience.


A molvi arguing the case for Meelaad celebrations says:

“The day is essentially a day of  rededication and resolution to do good things and not to practice ‘falsehood, forgery, bribery and corruption.”  

Rededication and resolution are daily practices or should be daily practices of Muslims. The Sunnah  of Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) commands daily Muhaasabah (Reckoning of one’s deeds) and Muraaqabah (Meditation on various aspects of  the Aakhirah, etc.) But, to the  bid’atis it is a practice to be resorted to once a year on the occasion of Meelaad. The irony is  that even on the day of Meelaad, the participants in these celebrations do not rededicate themselves to good. Meelaad  celebrations consist primarily of the following ingredients: 

Qawwaali singing.
⚫ Music. Public  feasting.
Haraam brigade trumpeting and marching in emulation of the kuffar.
⚫ Singing songs of praise. 
⚫ Some such songs being  excessive veneration to the  degree of shirk and kufr.
Niaaz or the distribution of food parcels supposed to be blessed.

There is no piety in these celebrations. There is absolutely no resemblance to the Sunnah in  these festivals ostensibly organized to praise Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and to “rededicate” oneself to do  good. People have organized and attended these customary Meelaad celebrations for many  years, but none ever emerges with  piety. Such celebrations have never converted the evil. These celebrations are totally devoid of roohaaniyat. How can roohaaniyat permeate a function which is bereft of Deen? No one has ever learnt anything of the Deen from  these celebrations. No one has acquired any Deeni knowledge from the talks of speakers at these celebrations. They do not speak what Rasulullah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) spoke. They do not teach what the Sahaabah  practised.

The baatil of the Meelaad-qabar pujaari group is manifest from their beliefs. Among their beliefs is that Meelaad is superior to even the Fardh Salaat. A single Meelaad session compensates for  a year’s Salaat omitted. This attitude of the bid’atis appeals to ignorant people who find the  Ibaadat of Islam difficult impositions. For such people the celebrations of merry-making appear very alluring since everything done in these  celebration’s is pleasant to the nafs of man – singing, music,  feasting, etc., are most satisfying  pursuits to the bestial nafs of  man.


One thought on “Moulood and the Shariah”

  1. First of all, this article shows that Mawlid was prohibited by consensus of Muslims. And Ulema were unanimous in the reprehensibility of this act. This is obviously not true, scholars from the past practiced Mawlid and today, the majority of the Muslims practice it. Considering all of them outside the path of Ahlus Sunna is something problematic.
    Secondly, Mawlid that is prevalent is not correct. The greatest reason for this is that people specify days giving their specification some religious meaning. Increasing good deeds in the Night of Mawlid with the belief that something special occurs this Night and our acts will be more rewarding is obviously wrong. But this doesn’t make all the defenders of Mawlid ‘Mubtadi’. And the position of some Shafi’i scholars is that if an act that is recommended is done in the wrong way, it should not be stopped.
    Similarly, specifying 12th Rabi al-Awwal with the belief that this specification itself has an importance makes Mawlid invalid an thus, it is Bid’ah. But one of the defenders of Mawlid, Sayyid al-Shaykh Muhammad bin Alawi al-Maliki (Rahimullah) clearly stated that this specification is customary and is not a religious specification. So, it is not a good idea to blame everyone who is doing Mawlid to be a Mubtadi and everyone who defends it is on the wrong path.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s