Arguing their case, the votaries of customary Moulood celebrations present certain narrations attributed to Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Hadhrat Umar, Hadhrat Uthmaan and Hadhrat Ali (radhiallahu 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 ( صلى الله عايه وسالم) are all acts of merit, barkat and thawaab. It was never contended that it is wrong to discuss the Moulood (Birth) of Rasulullah (صلى الله عايه وسالم ). 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 (صلى الله عايه وسالم ), 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 (صلى الله عايه وسالم ) 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 ( صلى الله عايه وسالم). If there was any merit in this practice of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah, surely Rasulullah (صلى الله عايه وسالم ) and the Sahaabah would have upheld it. But all Shar’facts and Islamic history testify that Meelaad did not exist during the time of Rasulullah ( صلى الله عايه وسالم), 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 Maulud- un-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)!”

Indeed, nothing matters to recite the Qur’aan Majeed sweetly and to sing the praises of Rasulullah ( ). 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 ( ). The many evils associated with this custom of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah cannever 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 ( ).” 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: