She's too nice to start a fight.

IMO If someone celebrates the mawlid for the right reasons, IMO they will be rewarded. If someone DOES NOT celebrate it (and by this I mean specific celebration events as opposed to being pleased that the prophet was born) for the right reasons, they will be rewarded too.

When it comes to good deeds, its not a zero sum game - God can reward both positions if He so wills.

You wrote:

She's too nice to start a fight.

It doesn't have to become a fight...just a debate. But if she doesn't feel she know enough to argue the point then yeah best not to get into it. (I would've liked to see how (well) it was counter-balanced)

dont understand why this is such a big issue.

whether or not its halaal or haraam, its clearly (or at least to me) not a big part of faith OR one of the major sins.

or maybe it is (one or the other) and shaitan has fooled me.

but it seems more likely that shaitan is using it to put a wedge between Muslims, who otherwise might be unified and productive, maybe even (shock!) powerful and strong.

that is NOT what shaitan wants in the least.

a'uth billahi minash shaitanir rajeem!

Good point, I've learnt this and along with the fact that I'm not great at explaining I try not to discuss such matters too deeply that it becomes a fitna. I find it interesting to know the different views and where they come from though.

ThE pOwEr Of SiLeNcE wrote:

Good point, I've learnt this and along with the fact that I'm not great at explaining I try not to discuss such matters too deeply that it becomes a fitna. I find it interesting to know the different views and where they come from though.

+1

Ya'qub wrote:

dont understand why this is such a big issue.

Because people who celebrate mawlid are labelled by some people as those who indulge in innovation. If people don't want to do it then that's fine, but its different when they start attacking those who do it.

MuslimBro wrote:

Ya'qub wrote:

dont understand why this is such a big issue.

Because people who celebrate mawlid are labelled by some people as those who indulge in innovation. If people don't want to do it then that's fine, but its different when they start attacking those who do it.

yeah but there are just as many ppl attacking those who DO celebrate. both sides seem to.

the person free from sin should cast the first stone, surely (i.e. noone).

What does Ikhtilaaf mean?

TheRevivalEditor wrote:

Unfortunately most muslims cant tolerate different views especially on creed and are very sectarian.

Is it really most muslims?

I dont think this is true in the Muslims I've met. Or maybe it is and they don't talk about these issues.

in which case it would seem they CAN tolerate different views.

BTW, personally I've not convinced that its right to celebrate mawlid, from the fact that as far as I know the Prophet and the Sahaba (ra) didn't.

But I do like admin's answer, that both parties are praiseworthy if their intentions are sound.

Then again, just because I like the answer, does that mean its right?

ThE pOwEr Of SiLeNcE wrote:

What does Ikhtilaaf mean?

Difference/disagreement.

Ya'qub wrote:

BTW, personally I've not convinced that its right to celebrate mawlid, from the fact that as far as I know the Prophet and the Sahaba (ra) didn't.

That's what I used to think aswell..until you learn usul (principles). When did the Prophet and the companions not doing something become a principle for something to be classified as wrong?

Try and learn the definition of bidah first along with its different types, and just for your information is something which salafi's disagree with as they take the hadith literally. Bidah is of two types, bidah hasanah and bidah sayyiah (good and bad innovation). Then they are sub-divided further into 5 types. Whilst you're at it, look at how the classical scholars have interpreted ahadith re bidah.

MuslimBro wrote:

Try and learn the definition of bidah first along with its different types

That's the thing though - there are different definitions and itnerpretations of it.

Ya'qub wrote:

But I do like admin's answer, that both parties are praiseworthy if their intentions are sound.

Then again, just because I like the answer, does that mean its right?

That answer is based on the views of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, who when questioning its validity said that those that do celebrate it for the right intentions will be rewarded.

(beyond that, his view on mawlid is disputed where one side say he disliked it, and the other side say that he thought it should be done, but that is not important here.)

You wrote:

That's the thing though - there are different definitions and itnerpretations of it.

That's why I said learn how the classical scholars interpreted ahadith re bidah and you will find that most of them agreed with bad AND good bidah.

"most" != "all"

that is the problem with current Islamic studies - they stop you from thinking.

You wrote:

"most" != "all"

that is the problem with current Islamic studies - they stop you from thinking.

do they? why?

MuslimBro wrote:

ThE pOwEr Of SiLeNcE wrote:

What does Ikhtilaaf mean?

Difference/disagreement.

Ya'qub wrote:

BTW, personally I've not convinced that its right to celebrate mawlid, from the fact that as far as I know the Prophet and the Sahaba (ra) didn't.

That's what I used to think aswell..until you learn usul (principles). When did the Prophet and the companions not doing something become a principle for something to be classified as wrong?

Try and learn the definition of bidah first along with its different types, and just for your information is something which salafi's disagree with as they take the hadith literally. Bidah is of two types, bidah hasanah and bidah sayyiah (good and bad innovation). Then they are sub-divided further into 5 types. Whilst you're at it, look at how the classical scholars have interpreted ahadith re bidah.

can you tell me how exactly something that causes fitnah (and not merely ikhtilaaf) between muslims can be regarded as a bi'dah hasanah?

In this case the difference between ikhtlaaf and fitna is a mixture of ignorance and a lack of tolerance.

Overmedicating a situation can lead to greater harm.

I have read (along long time ago, something like) that some scholars are/were of the opinion that if someone tried to ban something that was allowed, then it could become waajib to actually do the act in order to prevent a new prohibition from being added to religion.

Ya'qub wrote:

can you tell me how exactly something that causes fitnah (and not merely ikhtilaaf) between muslims can be regarded as a bi'dah hasanah?

I can't be bothered to explain something if one is not bothered to look it up themselves.

Forget about mawlid, tawassul is something which has many evidences including practises of the companions but it still causes fitna, following madhabs causes fitna, esp in areas such as Birmingham and London, doing group zikr causes fitna and the list goes on..

MuslimBro wrote:

I can't be bothered to explain something if one is not bothered to look it up themselves.

[size=8](if you even become a "full scholar" - whatever that means - please NEVER treat people with such an attitude. Thanks.)[/size]

MuslimBro wrote:

Ya'qub wrote:

can you tell me how exactly something that causes fitnah (and not merely ikhtilaaf) between muslims can be regarded as a bi'dah hasanah?

I can't be bothered to explain something if one is not bothered to look it up themselves.

Forget about mawlid, tawassul is something which has many evidences including practises of the companions but it still causes fitna, following madhabs causes fitna, esp in areas such as Birmingham and London, doing group zikr causes fitna and the list goes on..

:S But you have the knowledge, you're the one who's arguing that particular point and he's asking you what exactly you mean, why not just be helpful and give him the info. Even if it's a little bit to work with then he (we) could look deeper if we want/need to :/

TheRevivalEditor wrote:

The simple answer to this topic is that if 1000 years of classical scholars including the likes of Imam Suyuti, asqalani, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Jawzi, Imam Nawawwi and his shaykh, Qastallani, Zurqani, Alusi, Mullah Ali Qari and many many others which the whole ummah accepts as rightly guided Imams- it means that:

- if mawlid was an evil act these giant scholars wouldnt touch it
- if all bidah hasanahs were evil and would lead to hellfire they wouldnt deem mawlid as permissible/rewardable etc. I mean did these scholars not know that the Prophet (pbuh) and sahabah did not celebrate mawlid:-)
- if mawlid was a fitna these great scholars wouldnt encourage the ummah to celebrate it and label it as a blessed celebration

none of the classical scholars are salafi/deobandi/wahabbi/brelwi as we label them today. They are scholars from all school of thoughts.
Each of these great scholars has written a book/booklet on mawlid saying mawlid has always been celebrated and one should celebrate it.

They can be difference in how mawlid is celebrated and as long as celebration is within islamic teachings then these classical scholars deem it permissible.

Now to quote Hamza Yusuf, if the great classical scholars who we have learnt the deen from are wrong then I am happy with their mistakes rather than the corrections of the modern day 'scholar'.

so ur saying we should celebrate it?

does that mean its sinful/disliked not to?

(according to the scholars u mentioned)