Mawlid – The Conclusive Fatwa

“I do not know of any basis for this Mawlid, neither in the Book nor in the Sunnah. Its practice has not been recorded from any of the ‘ulamā’ of the Ummah who are the model of Religion, who held fast to the ways of the early ones…the Sharī‘ah has not given permission for this, nor did the ṣaḥābah practise it, nor the tābi‘īn, and nor the practising ‘ulamā’, as far as I know. This is my answer to it in the presence of Allāh if I am asked about it…Nor is it possible for it to be permissible because innovation inside the Religion is not permissible by consensus of the Muslims….[The first type of Mawlid] is that a man practises it from his own wealth, for his family, associates and dependents, not going beyond eating food in this Gathering, nor perpetrating any sin. This is what we characterise as a reprehensible bid‘ah and an abomination, since none of the early ones from the people of obedience practised it – who are the Jurists of Islām, the ‘ulamā’ amongst the creation, the lamps of the ages and the adornment of the places...”

[Allamah Taj al-Deen al-Fakihani (654 – 731 AH)]



Amongst the numerous Fatwas of Haqq issued by the Fuqaha throughout the ages against the Mawlid, possibly the most complete, conclusive, yet concise Fatwa is the one issued by Allamah Taj al-Deen al-Fakihani (654 – 731 AH) (rahmatullahi alayh). We shall cite the full Fatwa in its entirety, before proceeding to demonstrate decisively and conclusively, using copious narrations from the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen and the early Fuqaha, that each and every letter of this Fatwa is fully in accordance with the Shariah, and in doing so, it will also become manifestly clear to the sincere reader that the flaccid “refutations” of this Fatwa by later, pro-Mawlid scholars such as Allamah as-Suyuti (rahimahullah), behind whom the Meeladi Bidatees of today seek refuge, are in fact a refutation (though inadvertent) of the way of the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum) and the Salaf-us-Saaliheen.

The unmistakeably stark contrast between the Fatwas and Amal (practice) of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen towards any new practice that carries even the slightest facade of worship, and the attitude of some of the latter-day scholars such as Allamah as-Suyuti towards the Mawlid Bid’ah, will then become too visibly apparent for anyone to ignore or attempt to obfuscate, leading any person who possesses the slightest shred of sincerity (Ikhlaas) to only one possible conclusion: The numerous Fatwas issued by the Ulama-e-Haqq against the Mawlid Bid’ah throughout the ages, such as Allamah al-Fakihani’s Fatwa cited here, are the Haqq.

Moreover, the Fatwas of the Leading Authorities of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen, the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen, whom the Meeladi Bid’atis fraudulently claim to do Taqleed of, will vividly expose the fact that not only the Mawlid aberration, but also the whole “Deen” of the Meeladi Bida’tees of this age, consisting largely of Kuffaar-type gluttonous festivities, group chanting, group dancing, birthday/deathday celebrations of their Auliya, local peer sahibs, holy cows, etc. is a “Deen” that is completely alien to Islam, and which is also in complete conflict with the Deen of righteous scholars such as Allamah as-Suyuti (rahimahullah) who had erred grievously in regards to the Mawlid, and also in complete conflict with the Deen of the true Sufis whose private Khanqah practices we shall explain and elaborate on later.

Allamah Taj al-Deen al-Fakihani was not some unknown or obscure scholar whose Fatwa, which is in complete conformity with the Way of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen and Fatwas of other Ulama-e-Haqq, can simply be brushed aside or ignored. He was amongst the leading students of the great Mujaddid, Allamah Ibn Daqeeq al-Eid, and also of other Pillars of the Deen of that age, such as Allamah al-Dimyati and Allamah Ibn al-Munayyir (rahmatullahi alayhim). Known widely to be a Master of all the sciences of the Deen, and famed for his piety and intense love for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), he drew unanimous praise from both his contemporaries and those who came after him. In fact, the only ones to have ever soiled their tongues in casting aspersions on this Exemplar of the Deen, are the deviant Salafis of this age who, in typically Salafi fashion, deem his intense love for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as “extreme.” A fuller description of this Authority of the Deen will follow straight after the Fatwa.

The manner in which Allamah al-Fakihani’s Fatwa covers so much, yet so concisely makes it a timeless masterpiece which has, and will continue to haunt all Bid’atees till and right during Yaumul Qiyaamah itself – insha-Allah. It addresses both the so-called “good” Mawlid gathering which is supposedly devoid of any Haraam elements such as free-mixing, music, dancing, etc. and the other type of Mawlid gathering which consists of such flagrantly Haraam elements. The Fatwa then proceeds to mention the significant fact that the initiators of this Bid’ah were “Battaloon” (idlers), whereas the most fervent lovers of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), i.e. the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), had all failed to perform the Mawlid – a fact even conceded by righteous pro-Mawlid scholars who had admitted that their version of “good” Mawlid, which consisted merely of simple gatherings of undisputed good deeds, was an innovation that was not present during the early generations. In fact, those “Battaloon” whose “love” for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) compelled them to initiate this Bid’ah “Hasanah” (i.e. evil in the guise of good) were none other than Satanists from the 4th Century as shall be conclusively proven in this very introduction.

When a scholar of Allamah al-Fakihaani’s stature who was amongst the leading students of Towering Authorities such as Ibn Daqeeq al-Eid, al-Dimyati and Ibn al-Munayyir, and who held close ties with innumerable scholars throughout the Muslim lands, provides his personal testimony that he was not aware of even one Exemplar of the Deen who had approved of the Mawlid, it lends considerable weight to the fact that this practice originally concocted by Satanists in the 4th Century, and illegally smuggled into the Sunni world some time during the 6th or 7th Century, was a practice largely limited to Fussaaq and Fujjaar (flagrant sinners and criminals) throughout the ages – a fact even conceded by Ulama who had erroneously permitted the so-called good Mawlid. This self-evident reality would not alter one jot even if the Meeladi Bidatees were able to cite a hundred more scholars than the mere handful of real Authorities, notably and exclusively from the Muta-akhkhireen eras, whose names they repeatedly do group Zikr of in parrot fashion.

Since the five-fold classification of Bid’ah in its literal sense (anything new, not just Ibaadah), employed by some Fuqaha of the past is terribly misused today by Bid’atees to pass off all their innovated acts of worship as Bid’ah “Hasanah”, the timeless benefit and utility of this particular Fatwa is amplified by the fact that Allamah al-Fakihani himself, in analysing the Mawlid Bid’ah, also subjects it to the traditional five-fold classification in which all acts fall – obligatory, recommended, permissible, reprehensible, and forbidden – before proceeding to deliver a painful uppercut on the chin (mostly kuffar-looking) of all Bid’atees, by stating emphatically that there is complete “Ijma’ of the Muslimeen” (absolute consensus) that Bid’ah IN the Deen is not permissible, hence such an innovation falls into the two impermissible categories i.e. reprehensible and forbidden.

An authority such as Allamah al-Fakihani who has absolutely no blemish to his character could never have hallucinated nor fabricated such an Ijma’ – especially an Ijma’ that is in complete conformity with the Fatwas and Practice of the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), the Salaf-us-Saaliheen and the early Fuqaha, as shall soon be demonstrated. The “Ijma’ of the Muslimeen” unambiguously transmitted by Allamah al-Fakihani obviously includes ALL the Authorities of the Deen – both the group of scholars who generally employed the term Bid’ah only in its technical sense i.e. in respect to Ibaadah only, and the other group of scholars who generally employed the term Bid’ah in a purely linguistic and literal sense, thus subjecting it to the traditional five-fold classification, just as al-Fakihani himself does here in this Fatwa.

In this respect, we shall demonstrate that other Authorities of the Shari’ah who subjected Bid’ah to the same five-fold classification, such as Allamah Izz ad-Deen ibn Abdis Salaam (rahmatullahi alayh) and Imam Nawawi (rahmatullah alayh), whom the Meeladi Bid’atees of today misrepresent satanically, have been authentically reported to have condemned severely as an evil Bid’ah, undeniably meritorious acts such as Nafl Salaat, and the recitation of the Qur’an, when such meritorious acts took a form that had no exact precedent in the Sunnah, hence demonstrating that they too are in complete conformity with the Ijma’ transmitted by Allamah al-Fakihani – an Ijma’ that will be shown to be in remarkably striking conformity with the Fatwas and Amal of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen, and which is not affected in the slightest by the handful of Muta-akhkhireen (latter-day) scholars such as Allamah as-Suyuti who attempted to subject “Bid’ah in the Deen” itself, which falls only into the two impermissible categories, to a further five-fold division – one of many errors the pro-Meelad scholars were naturally constrained to make in attempting to justify a practice whose founding “Mujtahid” was a Shiah “Mujtahid” whose Ijtihad could never ever have been based on the teachings of their arch-nemeses, the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), hence the complete conflict between the Mawlid Brain-child of the Shiah and the Fatwas of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen for whom the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum) formed the bedrock of their Deen.

Finally, Allamah al-Fakihani quotes a powerful piece of poetry from his teacher, Allamah Ibn Daqeeq al-Eid al-Qushayri, which vividly describes the lamentable state of the scholars of his age, many of whom had fallen into disrepute, with the ever-growing dominance and influence of falsehood, a reality that holds increasing relevance with each passing age, and which makes it absolutely imperative for every individual to take due precaution and safeguard himself from falling victim to the slips of latter-day Ulama, whose errors, taken advantage of by the Ulama-e-Soo’, will inevitably increase in number as we move further away from the blessed age of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen and closer to the End of Times.

The Fatwas and Amal (practice) of the Salaf-us-Saaliheen which we shall cite in this article, will also demonstrate that Allamah al-Fakihani was a true and rigid Muqallid (blind-follower) of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen, in contrast to some of the latter-day, pro-Mawlid scholars who had loosened slightly the tight reins of rigid Taqleed, albeit on an extremely part-time and momentary basis, in order to indulge in an Ijtihaad that was never ever propounded by any of the Aimmah Mujtahideen, nor by any of the early Fuqaha – the very same type of Ijtihad which today is recklessly employed full-time and over-time by the Salafis and modernists of this age whom Shaytaan has specially commissioned for digging the foundations and pillaging of the Deen.

In fact, the Meeladi Bid’atees of this age take full advantage of the easily discernible academic bankruptcy of the Salafis, by attempting to impose a Haraam version of Taqleed which the Shariah prohibits vehemently. Since the Meeladi Bidatees dangle this chimera of Taqleed to lure the masses into following the errors of latter-day scholars which conflict with the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen for whom exclusively Taqleed is obligatory, we shall also cover the topic of Taqleed later, and examine some of the ridiculous, retrospective, and self-certifying “Ijtihaad” the pro-Meelad scholars were constrained to resort to in order to abortively confer some credibility to a practice spawned from the the Ijtihaad of a satanic sect.

Before proceeding with the Fatwa, for the edification of those whose base desires compel them to attach themselves to the errors of latter-day scholars, let us deliver the first hammer-blow of a series of hammer-blows in this article, in order to assist in dislodging them out of their state of Haraam Taqleed and their state of self-deception regarding the “infallibility” of some Muta-akhkhireen (latter-day) scholars, in an issue in which their erroneous Fatwas conflicted severely and irreconcilably with other Ulama-e-Haqq whose own Fatwas were in striking conformity with the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen for whom, exclusively, Taqleed is obligatory.

The following quote from the book, “Masaarr al-Shi‘ah” of the influential Shi‘ite Imam, al-Mufeed (336 – 413 AH), describing the Mawlid as an already established practice amongst the 4th century Shiah, proves without the slightest doubt that the original initiators of this Bid’ah “Hasanah” were the Shiah, amongst the most satanic sect to have ever emerged from this Ummah. This fact in itself  exposes the tragic error of some latter-scholars who all did Taqleed of each other in their errors, and who seemingly attempted to soothe agitated consciences and confer some credibility to the extremely rare, so-called “good” Mawlid, by claiming in unison, almost all of them in synchronised parrot fashion, that the Mawlid was first invented by a 6th century “righteous”, music-listening and dancing Sunni King, Muzaffar, along with his palace scholar for dollar, Ibn Dihya, both of whom – not coincidentally  – incited towards relinquishing the tight reins of rigid Taqleed to the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen:

“On the seventeenth of [Rabee‘ al-Awwal] is the Mawlid of the Messenger of the Allah, blessing upon him and his progeny, at the break of dawn on Friday. It is an honourable day, with immense blessing. The righteous [i.e. the Shi‘ah] from the progeny of Muhammad have since ancient times glorified it and recognised its due, and observed its sanctity, and volunteered its fast…Charity is recommended in it, as is going to visit the shrines, volunteering to give charity, and bringing joy to the people of Imaan.” (Mawsoo‘at al-Shaykh al-Mufeed, 7:50-1)

Thus, as we now unfold the curtain to the timeless Masterpiece of Allamah Taj al-Din al-Fakihani, this much should be manifestly clear to the sincere searcher of the truth:

The Shiah sect, amongst the most satanic and virulent gustakhs (haters) of the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), not only superseded the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), but also the latter-day pro-Mawlid scholars by a good few centuries in acquiring a unique “love” for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) which compelled them to celebrate his (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) birthday – the very same type of “love” manifested by the Kuffaar which compels them to invent such days as mother’s day, father’s day, children’s day, wedding anniversary, Meelad of their prophets (e.g. christmas), etc. in order to facilitate soothing their consciences over their unforgivable neglect of their mothers, fathers, children, wives, etc. throughout the length of their life, and whose example is perfectly mirrored today by the proponents of Mawlid today whose satanic neglect of the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is vividly apparent from their anti-Sunnah lifestyle and anti-Sunnah appearance year in and year out.

Al-Mawrid fi l-Mawlid:

The Drinking-Water Source:
On the Mawlid

By Imām al-Fākihānī (654 – 731 H)

All praise belongs to Allāh Who guided us to follow the master of the messengers; aided us with direction towards the supports of Religion; facilitated for us to follow the traces of the pious Salaf, until our hearts were filled with lights of the knowledge of Sharī‘ah and the certainties of evident truth; and purified our hidden secrets [i.e. hearts & minds] from the emergence of innovations and [from] inventing inside the Religion.

I praise Him for what He has bestowed of the lights of certainty, and I thank Him for what He has conferred of holding fast to the Firm Rope [i.e. the Qur’ān].

I testify that there is no deity but Allāh alone having no partner; and that Muḥammad (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) is His slave and messenger, the master of the first and the last, Allāh bless him and his folk, his companions and his pure wives – the mothers of the believers –, with a blessing that will last till the Day of Resurrection.

To proceed:

Indeed a question from a group of blessed ones has been recurring, on the Gathering some people do in the month of Rabī‘ al-Awwal, which they call “Mawlid”, whether it has a basis in the Religion or it is an innovation that arose in the Religion? They wanted an elucidated answer to that and an ascertained clarification of it.

So I say, and direction is from Allāh:

I do not know of any basis for this Mawlid, neither in the Book nor in the Sunnah. Its practice has not been recorded from any of the ‘ulamā’ of the Ummah who are the model of Religion, who held fast to the ways of the early ones. It is in fact an innovation (bid‘ah) introduced by idlers and an appeasement of the base soul to which the consumers are given, on the evidence that when we pass the Five Rulings over it, we would say:

It will either be wājib, mandūb, mubāḥ, makrūh or ḥarām. It is not wājib by consensus. Nor [is it] mandūb because the reality of mandūb is: “that which the Sharī‘ah seeks without censuring the one who leaves it,” while the Sharī‘ah has not given permission for this, nor did the ṣaḥābah practise it, nor the tābi‘īn, and nor the practising ‘ulamā’, as far as I know. This is my answer to it in the presence of Allāh if I am asked about it. 

Nor is it possible for it to be mubāḥ because innovation inside the Religion is not mubāḥ by consensus of the Muslims.

Nothing remains but for it to be makrūh or ḥarām, and thus the discussion on it will be from two angles and will make a distinction between two situations:

The first of them is that a man practises it from his own wealth, for his family, associates and dependents, not going beyond eating food in this Gathering, nor perpetrating any sin. This is what we characterise as a makrūh bid‘ah and an abomination, since none of the early ones from the people of obedience practised it – who are the Jurists of Islām, the ‘ulamā’ amongst the creatures, the lamps of the ages and the adornment of the places.

The second is that criminality mingles with it, and devotion to it is intensified to the point that one of them gives something while his base self follows it [i.e. desires it], and his heart causes him pain and hurt for what he feels of the pain of injustice [i.e. for being pressured to give]. The ‘ulamā’, Allāh have mercy on them, have said: “Acquiring wealth by means of shame is like taking it using a sword”; especially when some singing, alongside bellies filled with instruments of futility like drums and flutes, are added to this; as well as men gathering with adolescent young boys and shameless women who are either intermingling with them or watching over them; as well as dancing with twisting and turning; and immersing in entertainment and forgetting the Day of Fear. Likewise, when women get together by themselves raising their voices with screams and beats in reciting [poems], falling outside of what is legislated and normal conduct in recitation and dhikr, while being unmindful of His (Exalted is He) statement: “Your Lord is in observation.” This is the one over which no two [scholars] differ in it being ḥarām, and nor do the chivalrous, the possessors of honour, approve of it. This is only pleasant to persons with dead hearts, and those who have not given up sins and evils. 

I add to you that they view it as being from amongst the rituals, not from the prohibited abominations – so to Allāh we surely belong and to Him we are surely returning! 

Islām started out as strange and it will soon return as it began. 

To Allāh is [credited] the excellence of our shaykh, [Ibn al-Daqeeq al-Eid] al-Qushayrī, Allāh (Exalted is He) have mercy on him, when he says in what he authorised us with:

The disapproved is approved, 

And the approved is censured in our difficult days.

Possessors of knowledge have fallen into disrepute,

And the people of ignorance have come into position.

They have deviated from truth; so what of that 

By connection with which they attained glory in the past? 

I declare to the righteous ones possessing Taqwā 

And piety, when the calamity worsens:

“Do not find your conditions strange,

Your turn has come at a time of strangeness.”

Imām Abū ‘Amr ibn al-‘Alā’, Allāh (Exalted is He) have mercy on him, indeed did well when he said: “People will remain on goodness for as long as the surprising is wondered at!”

This is along with [the fact] that the month in which he (Allāh bless him and grant him peace) was born, which is Rabī ‘al-Awwal, is the very month in which he passed away, so delight is not more worthy in it than is grief. 

This is what [falls] on us to say, and from Allāh (Exalted is He) we expect a beautiful acceptance.

‘Allāmah Abū Ḥafṣ Tāj al-Dīn al-Fākihānī

‘Allāmah Abū Ḥafṣ Tāj al-Dīn ‘Umar ibn ‘Alī ibn Sālim al-Lakhmī al-Fākihānī, known as “al-Fākihānī” or “Ibn al-Fākihānī”, was born in the year 654 H in Alexandria, Egypt. He was brought up in his hometown, and learnt Qur’ān under one of Alexandria’s most prominent Qur’ān teachers and Muqri’s, Makīn al-Dīn al-Asmar ‘Abdullāh ibn Manṣūr al-Iskandarī (d. 692 H). He learnt the various Qirā’āt from Abū ‘Abdillāh Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdillāh al-Māzūnī (606 – 693 H). He travelled to Cairo, and excelled in Mālikī Fiqh and the sciences of Arabic language. He learnt the Shifā’ and Tirmidḥi from Abū ‘Abdillāh Muḥammad ibn Ṭarkhān, and learnt Sunan Ibn Mājah from Jamāl al-Dīn Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aẓīm ibn al-Saqaṭī (622 – 707 H).

He kept the company of the great Alexandrian imām, Nāṣir al-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Mālikī, known popularly as “Ibn al-Munayyir” (620 – 683 H), and attended his durūs. He was known to have kept the company of a group of the Awliyā’.

Amongst his teachers was the great erudite imām of Qus, Egypt, Shaykh al-Islām Abu l-Fatḥ Ibn Daqīq al-‘Īd (625 – 702 H). He also learnt ḥadīth from the ḥāfiẓ of his time, Ḥāfiẓ Sharaf al-Dīn al-Dimyāṭī (613 – 705 H). Amongst his teachers was also the famous Badr al-Dīn Ibn Jamā‘ah al-Shāfi‘ī (639 – 733 H). (Bughyat al-Wu‘āt, 2:221) He learnt from many other teachers.
He travelled to Quds and Damascus in 731 H. In Damascus, he taught some of his books, and amongst those who learnt from him was Hāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr. They both attended lessons of other mashāyikh together. (Al-Bidāyah wa l-Nihāyah, Dār Ibn Kathīr, 16:261) He also took from, and taught, al-Dhahabī while in Damascus. (al-Mu‘jam al-Mukhtaṣṣ, 227) 

Ibn Farḥūn relates from the muḥaddith, Jamāl al-Dīn ‘Abdullāh ibn Muḥammad Ibn Ḥadīdah (d. 783), that he heard him narrating in the year 778: “We travelled with our shaykh, Tāj al-Dīn al-Fākihānī, to Damascus, and he wanted to visit the sandal of our master, the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam), which was in Dār al-Ḥadīth al-Ashrafiyyah in Damascus, while I was with him. When he saw the blessed sandal, he uncovered his head, and began to kiss it and rub his face on it, while tears were flowing, and he recited [the following lines of poetry]: ‘Had it been said to Majnūn: Is it Laylā and keeping ties with her that you desire, or the world and what is [hidden] in its folds? He would say: The dust from the soil of her sandals are more beloved to my soul and more protective of its trials.’” (al-Dībāj al-Mudhhab, 2:81)

He was the author of a number of accepted works. His al-Taḥrīr wa l-Taḥbīr, a commentary on al-Risālah of Ibn Abī Zayd al-Qayrawānī, became an accepted reference work in the Mālikī madhhab, quoted frequently in later works like al-Ḥaṭṭāb’s Mawāhib al-Jalīl and al-Kharshī’s Sharḥ Mukhtaṣar Khalīl. He wrote a book on praise of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) called al-Fajr al-Mubīn and a book defending visitation of his grave called al-Tuḥfat al-Mukhtārah fi l-Radd ‘alā Munkir al-Ziyārah. One of his famous works is a commentary on a text devoted to the ḥadīths of legal rulings, called al-‘Umdah, which he titled Riyāḍ al-Afhām fī Sharḥ ‘Umdat al-Aḥkām. The book is in print and has been highly regarded by the scholars. He also authored a work on Naḥw, called al-Ishārah, on which he wrote a commentary. He has a commentary on Nawawī’s al-Arba‘ūn, called al-Manhaj al-Mubīn, which is also in print. From his list of written works, Ibn Ḥajar includes: al-Mawrid fi l-Mawlid, his refutation of the Mawlid, the birthday celebration of the Prophet (ṣallallāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) held in Rabī‘ al-Awwal. (al-Durar al-Kāminah, 3:178)

He is described as a polymath, ascetic, of beautiful character and piety. There are different views on when he died, whether in the year 731 or 734. He died in his hometown of Alexandria. At his deathbed, his son-in-law, al-Faqīh Maymūm, was reciting the shahādah to him to remind him to recite it; at which al-Fākihānī opened his eyes, and recited the following lines of poetry: “He proceeds to remind me of bonds [made] at the protectorate, but when have I forgotten that I need to remember?!” Then he recited the shahādah and passed away. (al-Dībāj al-Mudhhab, 2:82)

Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Abī Bakr al-Jazarī (d. 738 H), a Damascene contemporary of al-Fākihānī, described him as: “The shaykh, the imām, the ascetic…He was a shaykh, a Mālikī jurist, a scholar of Naḥw; he possessed virtues and piety.” (Tārīkh Ibn al-Jazarī, 3:704)

Another contemporary, the great Imām al-Dhahabī (673 – 748 H), described him as: “The imām, the scholar of Naḥw, the proficient…I saw him, and he had authored books; he heard from me and I took ḥadīths from him.” (al-Mu‘jam al-Mukhtaṣṣ, 227)

Ibn Kathīr (701 – 774 H), who is counted amongst his students, described him as, “the shaykh, the polymath.” (Al-Bidāyah wa l-Nihāyah, Dār Ibn Kathīr, 16:261)

Qāḍī Burhān al-Dīn Ibn Farḥūn al-Mālikī (730 – 799 H), a great Mālikī scholar of Madīnah, described him as follows: “He was a jurist, virtuous, a polymath in [the fields of] ḥadīth, Fiqh, Uṣūl, Arabic language and literature. He possessed a great share in the firm religion and [in] immense piety and following the righteous Salaf. [He was] of beautiful character. He kept the company of a group of the Awliyā’, adopting their traits and taking on their etiquettes, and he performed ḥajj more than once and narrated some of his books. He has a commentary on ‘Umdah, which is unprecedented, because of its many benefits.” (al-Dībāj al-Mudhhab, 2:80-1)

Al-Suyūṭī (849 – 911 H) describes him as follows: “He was a jurist, a polymath in the sciences, pious, immense (aẓīm). He kept the company of the Awliyā’ and adopted their etiquettes.” (Ḥusn al-Muḥāḍarah, 1:458)


The following sections will be forthcoming here insha-Allah:

  • Fatwas and Attitude of the Sahabah (radhiyallahu anhum), the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen, and the early Fuqaha with regards to any new practice that carries the slightest facade of Ibaadah (worship).
  • The Haraam (forbidden) Taqleed imposed by the Meeladi Bidatees of today as opposed to the Waajib (obligatory) Taqleed of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen.
  • An analysis of the far-fetched, downright absurd, retrospective, and self-certifying Ijtihad the pro-Mawlid scholars were constrained to resort to, in order to justify a practice spawned by the Ijtihad of the Shiah.
  • An explanation of the private Khanqah practices of the true Sufis in light of the Shariah.
  • Conclusion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *