[Ekrbcbvh]

Are there any other scholars who are unanimously accepted by the Ummah (leaving out the Salafis), who have made similarly harsh statements against bidah hasanah?

I am sorry I haven't posted Mujaddid's (ra) quote from that book I was talking about. InshaAllah, I will do it soon.

Wassalaam

[Tndfpcin]

Are there any other scholars who are unanimously accepted by the Ummah (leaving out the Salafis), who have made similarly harsh statements against bidah hasanah?

Shaykh al-Islam Imam ibn Daqiq al-Eid [r.h], who reached the status of Mujtahid fil Madhab and was equally a Shafi and a Maliki, said:

وقسم البدعة الى الاقسام المذكورة والى الحسنة والسنية ليس عليها اثارة من علم
لانه لم يرد دليل دال عليها ولم برح حديث ورد فى هذا الباب رانحة القسمة قط٠٠
و من ثم انكر الراسخون فى العلم والكتاب والسنة تقسيم البدعة الى الاقسام٠٠
كانتا ما كان ومن كان واين ماكان وكل بدعة ضلالة على اطلاقها ٠٠
دعت عليه اهوالهم من غير دليل لامن قرآن ولا من سنة ولا من اجماع ولا من قياس جلى وبعنوبه شبهة٠٠
وحديث الباب حجة نيرة على كل قائل بالتقسيم والانواع٠٠

"The division of bid'ah into bid'ah hasana and sayyi'ah has no footing in the arena of knowledge because there is no proof for it nor any hadith that came concerning this issue whatsoever. Therefore those who are raasikh [solid] in ilm of the Kitaab and Sunnah have denied the dividing of bid'ah into these categories in whatever manner and from whom ever it may be and declared all bid'ats as being misleading. Their fears have caused them to bring this up without any proof from Qur'an nor the Sunnah nor any Ijma nor any Qiyaas jali rather they base it on unclarities [shubhah]. The hadith in this baab is clear proof against those who claim division into different types."

For more, read Al-Minhaj al-Wadih - The Path of Sunnat

[N1bNXuDb]

Shaykh al-Islam Imam ibn Daqiq al-Eid [r.h], who reached the status of Mujtahid fil Madhab and was equally a Shafi and a Maliki, said:

وقسم البدعة الى الاقسام المذكورة والى الحسنة والسنية ليس عليها اثارة من علم
لانه لم يرد دليل دال عليها ولم برح حديث ورد فى هذا الباب رانحة القسمة قط٠٠
و من ثم انكر الراسخون فى العلم والكتاب والسنة تقسيم البدعة الى الاقسام٠٠
كانتا ما كان ومن كان واين ماكان وكل بدعة ضلالة على اطلاقها ٠٠
دعت عليه اهوالهم من غير دليل لامن قرآن ولا من سنة ولا من اجماع ولا من قياس جلى وبعنوبه شبهة٠٠
وحديث الباب حجة نيرة على كل قائل بالتقسيم والانواع٠٠

"The division of bid'ah into bid'ah hasana and sayyi'ah has no footing in the arena of knowledge because there is no proof for it nor any hadith that came concerning this issue whatsoever. Therefore those who are raasikh [solid] in ilm of the Kitaab and Sunnah have denied the dividing of bid'ah into these categories in whatever manner and from whom ever it may be and declared all bid'ats as being misleading. Their fears have caused them to bring this up without any proof from Qur'an nor the Sunnah nor any Ijma nor any Qiyaas jali rather they base it on unclarities [shubhah]. The hadith in this baab is clear proof against those who claim division into different types."

For more, read Al-Minhaj al-Wadih - The Path of Sunnat

How prevalent is this opinion that the division of bidah is unacceptable? I have heard that Shaykh Ibn Hajar, and others have categorised bidah into good and bad, whereas it appears that Mujaddid Alf-Thaani and Shaykh ibn Daqiq have condemned this division.

Another exception is the eighth century Punjabi scholar Diya al-din Umar ibn Muhammad al-sunnami, who wrote the nisab al-ihtisab, a very important work in hisba. His teacher was a student of the great Hamid al-Din al-Darir (from central asia).

This work has been published and is an exceptional contribution to the genre. It also shows how ulama before deoband and Shah WaliAllah were acutely aware of the problem of bid'a in india. There are many sections in the work which deal with bid'a in this work, dancing and sama etc etc. which the author tirelessly opposed throughout his life.

May Allah bless him and raise his station in paradise.

Are there any translations or excerpts available from this book?

[AlexanderDrew]

Assalamualaikum

I would like to know whether the following quotes from the Mujaddid portray and accurate picture of his view on Bidah. If they are out of context, can any knowledgable brothers/sisters who have access to his maktoobat, post an alternate view of his on Bidah.


Hadrat Mujaddid Alf-e-Thaani (R.A.) said”

Quote:
“MAY ALLAH TAALA GRANT THE ULAMA OF THE TIME THE TAUFEEQ OF NOT HAVING THE AUDACITY TO DESCRIBE ANY BID’AH AS BEING HASAN (BEAUTIFUL) EVEN IF THE BID’AH IN THEIR SIGHT APPEARS TO BE LIKE THE GLITTERING RAYS OF MORNING LIGHT BECAUSE IN ANYHING OTHER THAN THE SUNNAH, THE DECEPTION OF SHAITAAN PLAYS AN IMPORTANT ROLE.”

[Maktoob 23, Daftar 11]


Imam Rabbani-Mujatadi Alf-e-Thaani (R.A.) writes:

“This Faqeer pleads in humility, sincerity and earnest to Allah Taala in open and secret that which has been newly introduced into Deen and those bid’ats which have been cooked up and that which was not prevalent in the time of Rasulullah (S.A.W.) and the Kulafaah-e-Rashideen (R.A.) even if be the likeness the whiteness of the brightness of the morning – Allah Taala does not catch this Faqeer and those who are connected to him in those new invented things – And does not make us crazy (dazzle) on its beauty (eternal) by the Barakaah of Rasulullah (S.A.W.).

(Daftar 1, Maktoob 186)

Hadrat Mujaddid Alf-e-Thaani (R.A.) said:

“The fortunate and highly successful one is the man who in this forlorn stage of Islam revives a Sunnah from among the shunned Sunnahs and wards off a bid’at from among the bid’ah in vogue…. The signs of Qiyaamah have cast their dazzle. The Sunnah because of its distance (in time) from the age of Nabi (S.A.W.) has become hidden. As a result of falsehood, bid’ah has manifested itself. The time therefore, calls for such a valiant warrior who will aid the Sunnah and vanquish bid’ah.”

[Maktoob 23, Daftar 11]


Imam Rabbaani (R.A.) said:

“In the past, Islam was powerful and it could carry the darkness of bid’ah. It is, therefore, quite possible that engulfed by Noor of Islam (i.e. past Islam), the darkness of some innovated practices was lit up and appeared to dazzle (with reflected glitter), hence such practices were described as hasanah and noor. But in the prevalent times, Islam is weak and does not posses the strength to bear the darkness of bid’ah.”

[Maktoob 23, Daftar 11]


Hadrat Mujaddid Ali Thanvi (R.A.) says"

“As long as man does not abstain from such ‘bid’ah hasanah’ which is in reality ‘bid’ah sayyiah’ evil innovation, he will be deprived of fragrance of this wealth of Imaan. Today, the comprehension of the tenth has become most difficult because the entire world is drowning in the ocean of bid’ah. People are reclining and taking comfort in the darkness of bid’ah practices. Who today has the ability to eliminate bid’ah and revive Sunnah? The majority of the Ulama of this age (i.e. the age in which Hadrat Mujaddid lived 4 centuries ago) are engaged in establishing bid’at and eliminating Sunnah….”

[Maktoob 54, Daftar 11, addressed to Sayyid Shah Muhammad]

" Gatherings of Meelaad as-Shareef with the recitation of Holy Quraan with good (melodious) voice and Naats and Qasidaas are recited for Huzoor Sallallaho alayhi wa sallam then what is the hesitation ? "

[Ahmed Sirhindi, Maktobaat, Volume 1, First Chapter, Maktoob number 42, page 154]

Syed Abul Hasan Nadwi's writes in his 'saviours of the spirit':

When he was asked whether there was any objection to such gatherings (Milad) if they were not attended by any ritual against the approved religious practices, he answered:

''This poorling is of the opinion that unless this practice is completely given up, the interested persons would not cease taking advantage of it. If the practise is declared lawful, it would gradually lead to finding justification for other innovations also. Even a small mistake becomes a prelude to grave errors.''

Maktubat Vol. III No 72 to Khwaja Hosam-ud-Din

And a long quote:

'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-Rabbini 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 din 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 din 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."

Mujaddid is quoted as saying:

“I vehemently prohibit the practice of Moulood because it is contrary to our Path (Shariah). I prohibit whatever is in opposition to our Path, whether the contrary [b]act be simaa’, riqs (Spiritual dance and music), poetry, music, and Moulood practices.”

(If anybody knows the reference to the last two quotes please could you state it ).

"The majority of the Ulama of this age (i.e. the age in which Hadrat Mujaddid lived 4 centuries ago) are engaged in establishing bid’at and eliminating Sunnah…"

If majority ulema are engaged in bida & eliminating sunnah and we are not capable of interpreting Quran, sunnah, evidences ourselves who are we to follow? Or are the ulema of this age much better than 400 years ago? State of ummah is in big mess.

[griddle]

If we get some definitions out the way then it would make this discussion so much more fruitful, and save us from finding apparent contradictions between scholars.

When the scholars or even the Sahaba used the term 'bid'a hasana' it only referred to that good action from the Sunnah which has been forgotten, and then re-introduced and reminded for the people. The one who revives it among a people who never knew of he sunnah has 'introduced' it, thus bearing the name 'bid'a' but only in a linguistic sense.
This is also the case for the Hadith of the Prophet (s) when he said whoever introduces a good action will be rewarded for it and those who do it after him. This only refers to that part of the authentic sunnah which the people were unaware of (e.g. making adhan with 15 clauses or 17 or 19) and is introduced to them so they may act upon it, thereby rewarding the 'innovator' (linguistic def) for it.

This is the Bid'a hasana that Scholars like Ibn Hajar condone and praise.

The other scholars such as Mujadid alf thani and Ibn Daqiq are condemning the misunderstanding of this term, namely the idea that it refers to actual shar'i innovations in the deen which have no explicit evidence yet is considered by them to be good... or if a practice wasn't done by the Prophet (Sallallahu 'alayhi wassalam) or his companions or the early generations of Muslims AND it is done without making it a part of the religion i.e. Sunnah, Wajib, Fardh etc. etc. then it is fine provided the practice itself is not against the laws of Shari'ah. This is a misconception, and it is this that these scholars condemned.

[AlexanderDrew]

salamu alaykum,

if Mujaddid is correct in his assessment that majority of ulema are engaged in establishing bida and eliminating sunnah then this explains very well the present state of the Ummah.

Alternatively, you can argue ulema 400 years after Mujaddid's time have reformed themselves and they are much better than past ulemas; and state of ummah is attributed to other reasons.

"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-Rabbini 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 din 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...."

If ulema are calling bad bida as bida hasana, then how are we to distinguish which one is bad bida. Every ulema is justifying more and more fancy stuff through bida hasana, ikhtilaf, minority fiqh, circumstances and so on; and any sincere questions you ask, you are called wahhabi. You have bhangra mawlids, men dancing like wild animals in zikr and so on. But the ulema always have evidences from past scholars to support their action, sometimes stretching the interpretations of those evidences in amazingly innovative ways - or lets say bida hasana ways. It is a big mess. What is halal and what is haram is no longer clear and its mainly the ulemas fault.

[VawSwaspamups]

I will like to further clarify the term Bid'ah, as described by Shaikh Sirajuddin Mujaddidi Naqshbandi (shaikh of Hazrat Pir Fazal Ali Qureshi) as I read once. (Pir Fazal Ali Qureshi r.a is most revered by deobandi shuyukh as well, like shaikh Zulfiqar Ahmed).

One of his murids asked him why the graves at the Dargah Musa Zai sharif were made of bricks which was a Bid'ah, whereas the sacred graves at Sirhind sharif were not cemented? The shaikh replied in his letter (His letters are translated in Urdu and published), that Bid'ah is of five types:

1. Bid'ah Wajib: That is compulsory.
2. Bid'ah Mustahib: That which is recommended.
3. Bid'ah Mubah: That which is allowed.
4. Bid'ah Makruh: That which is considered bad.
5. Bid'ah Haram: That which is strictly forbidden.

He said making the graves cemeted is due to certain reasons, otherwise it is Bid'ah. The reasons are that the clay at the dargah sharif is such that the grave does not remain solid after a few months. And maintaining a grave is necessary in Islam to remember the dead, therefore the graves are cemented so they do not get destroyed.

He also said that making cemented homes and masajid is also Bid'ah, as this was not present at the time of Holy Prophet (s.a.w). Likewise, making place of wuzu with the masjid is also a Bid'ah. but this type of Bid'ah is mubah: allowed.

I don't remember the exact words: that is a long maktub and I read it long time ago. But this is something I thought to be related with the current discussion.

For the compulsory Bid'ah, I will like to quote an example from myself: During the Jihad with Musailma Kazzab during the Khilafah of sayyidna Abu Bakr r.a, Sahaba heard the other side raise the slogan of "Allaho Akbar". Since this was also the slogan of Muslims, and both slogans were similar, so the Amir of Muslims changed their slogan to "Ya Muhammadah" in order to differentiate between Muslims and the other side. This was need of the time, although it was a Bid'ah.

If I am wrong in something, please correct me.

Thanks

[Hbkj89D2]

I will like to further clarify the term Bid'ah, as described by Shaikh Sirajuddin Mujaddidi Naqshbandi (shaikh of Hazrat Pir Fazal Ali Qureshi) as I read once. (Pir Fazal Ali Qureshi r.a is most revered by deobandi shuyukh as well, like shaikh Zulfiqar Ahmed).

One of his murids asked him why the graves at the Dargah Musa Zai sharif were made of bricks which was a Bid'ah, whereas the sacred graves at Sirhind sharif were not cemented? The shaikh replied in his letter (His letters are translated in Urdu and published), that Bid'ah is of five types:

1. Bid'ah Wajib: That is compulsory.
2. Bid'ah Mustahib: That which is recommended.
3. Bid'ah Mubah: That which is allowed.
4. Bid'ah Makruh: That which is considered bad.
5. Bid'ah Haram: That which is strictly forbidden.

He said making the graves cemeted is due to certain reasons, otherwise it is Bid'ah. The reasons are that the clay at the dargah sharif is such that the grave does not remain solid after a few months. And maintaining a grave is necessary in Islam to remember the dead, therefore the graves are cemented so they do not get destroyed.

He also said that making cemented homes and masajid is also Bid'ah, as this was not present at the time of Holy Prophet (s.a.w). Likewise, making place of wuzu with the masjid is also a Bid'ah. but this type of Bid'ah is mubah: allowed.

I don't remember the exact words: that is a long maktub and I read it long time ago. But this is something I thought to be related with the current discussion.

For the compulsory Bid'ah, I will like to quote an example from myself: During the Jihad with Musailma Kazzab during the Khilafah of sayyidna Abu Bakr r.a, Sahaba heard the other side raise the slogan of "Allaho Akbar". Since this was also the slogan of Muslims, and both slogans were similar, so the Amir of Muslims changed their slogan to "Ya Muhammadah" in order to differentiate between Muslims and the other side. This was need of the time, although it was a Bid'ah.

If I am wrong in something, please correct me.

Thanks

Asslamo Allaikum,

You are mentioning the opinion ascribed originally to Imam Al-`Izz ibn `Abdus-Salam (RA), however the Mashaykh of Naqshbandi-Mujaddidi SilSila have in majority maintained that there is nothing Good in Bidah and all Bidah is EVIL and DETESTABLE (as clearly stated by Mujaddid Alf Thani (RA) with no ambiguity).

Pir Ghulam Habib (RA) and his Khulafa to this day steadfastly stick to the opinion of Mujaddid Alf Thani (RA) and believe that there is no such thing as Bidah Hasana.

Previous to that I believe that Hadhrat Mirza Jan-e-Janah also didn't believe in Bidah-Hasana.



Jazakullah Khairun

[DINAKuncher]

Bid'ah Hasana and Bid'ah Sayyi'a is another categorization of Bid'ah. The above categorization of Bid'ah is something different. It may have been described by previous scholars, I just shared what I read myself.

Regarding Bid'ah, there are many things considered Bid'ah by Deobandi scholars, whereas it is proved that Hazrat Imam Rabbani did that. For example making dishes for the Fatihah of the dead. and there are other examples. So although I too agree that there is no Bid'ah Hasanah, who is going to draw a clear line between Bid'ah and Sunnah?

Most of the things declared Bid'ah by Deobandi scholars were practiced by famous sufi shuyukh, even Hazrat Imam Rabbani. So who is considered the authority to define something as Bid'ah. Imam Rabbani used to attend the Urs sharif of Hazrat Baqi Billah, but today Urs is declared Bid'ah. Rather common deobandi people say it is totally Haram.

Due to lack of understanding and tolerance between Deobandi/Barelvi ulema, even the simple matters have gone complicated. Both sides stick to one harsh definition of the matters. Deobandis say Urs to be Bid'ah, Barelvis make it compulsory. If we stick to the lives and teachings of previous shuyukh and ulema, being totally neutral, I think we can make a way out.

Thanks

[Tndfpcin]

He said making the graves cemeted is due to certain reasons, otherwise it is Bid'ah. The reasons are that the clay at the dargah sharif is such that the grave does not remain solid after a few months. And maintaining a grave is necessary in Islam to remember the dead, therefore the graves are cemented so they do not get destroyed.

This type of qiyas is rejected infront of the clear ahadith of Prophet [s.a.w] and verdicts of the fuqaha of Alh-e-Sunnah regarding this matter. To build up the graves is not any form of respect neither is it disrespectful not to build up around the graves. If the solidifying of graves and building domes there upon was a form of respect, and if there was any form of Deeni benefit therein, then our Nabi [s.a.w] would most certainly not have prohibited therefrom.

Hadhrat Jaabir [r.a] reports:

“Nabi [s.a.w] prohibited from solidifying the graves or to build anything thereupon or to sit on them.”

قال نهى رسول اللّه صلى اللّه عليه وسلم ان يجصص القبور وان يبنى عليه وان يقعد

[Muslim, vol1 p312]
[Mishkaat, vol1 p148]
[Tirmidhi, vol1 p125]

The leader of all the worlds, Hadhrat Muhammad Mustafa [s.a.w] has expressly prohibited from such actions. Who then is there that can overturn his express prohibition and audaciously claim benefits in what he has prohibited from?

For more see Al-Minhaj al-Wadih

[bromgeksan]

I think this is a pretty decent answer that will calrify a lot of issues raised in this thread.

http://www.daruliftaa.com/question.a...nID=q-22355054

"...Due to the above Hadith, scholars say that from a perspective of the Shariah definition of Bid’a, every type of Bid’a is reprehensible and sinful. When an act is determined to fall into the abovementioned Shariah definition of Bid’a, then it can never be termed as good or lawful. All innovations are reprehensible and misguidance, thus unlawful.

Imam Malik (Allah be pleased with him) said:

“Whosoever innovates an innovation believing it to be good (hasana) has indeed claimed that the Prophet (Allah bless him & give him peace) breached the trust of Prophethood, because Allah Almighty says: “This day I have perfected your religion for you”. Anything that was not part of religion on that day, can not be a part of religion today.” (al-I’tisam, 1/48).

However, Bid’a can be divided into various categories when considering the linguistic definition. As mentioned earlier, linguistically, Bid’a means to introduce something, thus any thing that is introduced will (from a linguistic point of view) be termed as Bid’a. .."

[Tndfpcin]

Regarding Bid'ah, there are many things considered Bid'ah by Deobandi scholars, whereas it is proved that Hazrat Imam Rabbani did that. For example making dishes for the Fatihah of the dead. and there are other examples. So although I too agree that there is no Bid'ah Hasanah, who is going to draw a clear line between Bid'ah and Sunnah?

I am not aware of any Deobandi scholar who denys isaal-e-sawab for the deceased. Once a student complained to Mufti Zar Wali Khan regarding his bad memory. So Mufti saheb told him to prepare food/sweets and feed them to the poor with the intention of isaal-e-sawab for Imam Anwar Shah Kashmiri [r.h], Baba Fariduddin Masood Ganjshakar [r.h], Imam Abu Yusuf [r.h], etc. Problem is specifying the days, like 3rd, 7th, 40th, which a salient feature of Ahle Biddah.

Mujaddid was against specifying any days unless mentioned by the Sharia. He says:

“It is the habit of this faqeer not to stipulate any particular day over others unless it is granted preference by Sharia’, like Jumuah and Ramadan are given preference by Shari’a.”

[Maktobaat, part 4, p67]

[RagonaCon]

Can one specify a particular time of the day to do dhikr and such? or is that bidah also?

[FreeOEMcheapestPHOTOSHOP]

I am not aware of any Deobandi scholar who denys isaal-e-sawab for the deceased. Once a student complained to Mufti Zar Wali Khan regarding his bad memory. So Mufti saheb told him to prepare food/sweets and feed them to the poor with the intention of isaal-e-sawab for Imam Anwar Shah Kashmiri [r.h], Baba Fariduddin Masood Ganjshakar [r.h], Imam Abu Yusuf [r.h], etc. Problem is specifying the days, like 3rd, 7th, 40th, which a salient feature of Ahle Biddah.

Mujaddid was against specifying any days unless mentioned by the Sharia. He says:

“It is the habit of this faqeer not to stipulate any particular day over others unless it is granted preference by Sharia’, like Jumuah and Ramadan are given preference by Shari’a.”

[Maktobaat, part 4, p67]

Salam o Alikum,

Brother i would highly appreciate your answer to my question that what is wrong in specifying and fixing a time , you mentioned a source of Mektubaat, if you could come up with some other refernce or any hadeeth i will be thankfull.

Jazak ALLAH khair

[Ekrbcbvh]

Ok, this discussion is getting a bit confusing so I will try my best to clarify some issues based on my understanding which I have learned from scholars InshaAllah (although I am a totally ignorant layman myself).

With regards to specifying times and dates for certain actions (like 3rd, 7th, 40th etc.), problems creep in when this specification of times and dates are deemed compulsory or something that should be adhered to by everyone. Whoever doesn't do it is looked down upon and sometimes even spoken bad about.

This is why 'Ulama stop from specifying times and dates AND deeming them to be necessary or part of Deen like Fardh, Wajib, Sunnah, Mustahabb etc. etc.

However, if such specification is done only as a matter of routine for instance and it's NOT taken as something necessary or part of Deen and people are not criticized for not practising upon it, then it's fine InshaAllah.

Example: Someone wants to do Isaal e Thawab by reading Quran. He sits down on the 4th day of the person's death at 4:30 PM to read, however, he doesn't regard this as part of Deen i.e. Fardh, Wajib, Sunnah, Mustahabb etc. and doesn't hope for any extra reward based on the day being the 4th one then InshaAllah there's no problem.

However, if the same person regards the 4th day to be a 'special' one for doing Isaal e Thawab and regards doing it as an aspect of Deen i.e. Fardh, Wajib, Sunnah, Mustahabb etc. and thinks bad about people who don't participate with him, then this same act will become a Bid'ah.

It is this 2nd scenario which 'Ulama caution against and this is what is found commonly in, say, Pakistan where people specify the 3rd, 10th, 40th etc. for doing Isaal e Thawab.

I request the 'Ulama and those more knowledgeable than myself to correct me if I am wrong anywhere.

Wassalaam

[Ekrbcbvh]

The following link has 2 lectures (in Urdu) by Shaykh Mufti Muhammad Taqi Uthmani Sahib (db) on the topic of Bid'ah and Bid'ah e Hasana. I highly recommend these lectures to anyone wanting to gain an authentic understanding of the concept of Bid'ah.

http://www.khutbaat.com/audio/taqiusmani.shtml

Wassalaam

[Tndfpcin]

Salam o Alikum,

Brother i would highly appreciate your answer to my question that what is wrong in specifying and fixing a time , you mentioned a source of Mektubaat, if you could come up with some other refernce or any hadeeth i will be thankfull.

Jazak ALLAH khair

This issue was discussed in great detail by Allamah Sarfraz Khan Safdar in Al-Minhaj al-Wadih. Those who are interested should refer to pages 122-126 and 245-248.

[DINAKuncher]

If that is the definition of Bid'ah, then even the whole Sufism comes under it. These very many types of Zikr in different tariqahs, other different actions told by shuyukh of sufism, all become Bid'ah. So how do you justify this. All these practices of Sufism were not present in the days of the holy Prophet (s.a.w), nor even in the days of Sahaba.

And how do u justify making solid masajid, solid homes, wuzu khana in masajid, applying tiles in flors, and every other thing u do in your daily life. Even the dresses today (including shalwar qameez) were not present at that time. every thing becomes Bid'ah.

The problem is that we don't respect other's ideas. Being conservative about ones rulings and finalizing the things is very bad.

We respect the rulings of deobandi ulema, but they should not consider it final rulings for the whole Ummah. They are only for certain time and certain place (south asia), whereas other's rulings should also be accepted as valid. The whole world isn't just based on doebandi school of thought. Most of the Sunni Muslims today celebrate Mawlid, in all parts of the world. And it has been regular practice in the previous times by famous shuyukh of Islam.

Regarding Mawlid, nobody says 12th Rabiul Awwal sharif is fardh or wajib or sunnah. Mostly it is celebrated for the whole month of Rabiul Awwal, although it can be celebrated for the whole year. And if there is no other Bid'ah, praising and glorifying the birth of the Prophet is such a great rewarding action, nobody can deny its benefits and blessings. 12th Rabiul Awwal sharif is the birth-day of the Prophet (s.a.w) according to most of the hadiths. But if someone doesn' believe in that, they can celebrate it on any other date they wan't suitable. Even it is not required to fix a date, although it is fixed for the ease of attendees.

Thanks

[DINAKuncher]

There was a very detailed pdf file posted by a brother on this forum that demonstrates that the majority of the Deobandi Akabir were strong proponents of loud group Zikr sessions.

Really? But nowadays Deobandi people clearly make it Bid'ah, and have prohibited doing loud Zikr from masajid.

[AlexanderDrew]

Really? But nowadays Deobandi people clearly make it Bid'ah, and have prohibited doing loud Zikr from masajid.

salamu alaykum,

Those comments from mujaddid which you posted before it disappeared suddenly was very interesting. Can you post them again brother but have a thread title which will be less concerning for moderators so they won't over react and reach for extinguisher.

Try to be less provocative in your wording then inshallah those comments from Mujaddid will have less chance of vanishing from this forum.