Saturday, 14 May 2011


This refutation is by Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naimi. He wrote an article on biddah which can be read from here :


If, without created any exception, we say that every new act is a Bid’ah and every Bid’ah is an evil act, then why you divided the Bid’ah into two types i.e. “biddah in deen” and “biddah in worldly matters”? If anyone asks us, why do you classify Bid’ah into good and bad? Then, we must say, from where did you got the concept of classification of Bid’ah into two? Did holy Prophet (pbuh) classify the Bid’ah into “biddah in deen” and “biddah in worldly matters”? If holy Prophet (pbuh) did not classify the Bid’ah into two types, then this classification of yours itself becomes a Bid’ah, because none of the companions (as) classify the Bid’ah into “biddah in deen” and “biddah in worldly matters”, then how can you classify it? If your classification of Bid’ah, based on genuine reasoning, into “biddah in deen” and “biddah in worldly matters” is acceptable, then the classification of Bid’ah, based on Quran and hadith, into “Hasana” and “Saiyeea” is also permissible. Let us apply a uniform principle to all the Islamic concepts. Either we should completely neglect the classification to Bid’ah, if this is the case, then all the minarets of Mosques are to be demolished, because they come under the category of good Bid’ah, or we should accept the classification of Bid’ah, given to us by the great classical Islamic authorities.

Bid'ah actually means to alter the Islamic Law or Shari'ah i.e when the ruling has already given as Shari'ah for any worldy or relgious matter but now to force or believe in a different ruling than given by Shari'ah or anyone opposing this ruling from their own will or to consider this wrong ruling as the rightful decision or to agree with it, is Muhdath (new thing) and every Muhdath is Bid'ah. In this regard there exists no difference between worldly or religious matter(like to deceive some people say that worldly affairs are not Bid'ah but only religious affairs like celeberating Mawlid etc are Bid'ah) despite the fact that Allah 'Azzawajallah already gave ruling about every matter of world or religion and the Shari'ah Rulings (Classification) about various religious or worldly actions are: Fard (Compulsory) Wajib (Essential) Sunnatul Mu-akkida (and Sunnat Ghair Mu'akkida and Mustahab) Aula (Preferred) Haram (Forbidden) Makro'ah Tahreemi (near to Haram) Asa'at (Makrooh Tanzeehi and Khilafe Aula) Mubah (permissible) Any of the above Shari'ah order is sufficient enough for all the things in universe, their usage or rejection; and all the beliefs, their approval or disapproval; and all religious matters, their allowance or disallowance; and for all such matters any Shari'ah Ruling is already present which be evident and proved by four Shari'ah sources, in their general or special terms. This statement is proven by Qur'an, Hadith and various great books of Islamic Jurisprudence (Fiqah). There is a Hadith which states: Hazrat Salman Farsi (May Allah be pleased with him) narrates that Non-Muslims asked him "Does your Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) guide you about everything, even tells you how to answer call of nature?" He replied "Yes" (Muslim, V1, Page 130) i.e. Hazrat Salman Farsi replied "He teaches us everything including how to answer call of nature."
Thus it is proven that all the matters (religious or worldly or new or old) of this universe are included in that statement by companion of Prophet (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), it doesn't matter whether they were already apparent in that time or not; and even if these matters have appeared now or some time before, the Shari'ah Rulings (classification) about all matters (religious or worldly or new or old) is already present in anycase whatsoever.

People mistranslate the Arabic word “DEEN” in English as “RELIGION”.
The word religion is used in English language only to denote a set of beliefs about God whereas the Arabic word “DEEN” includes religious life as well as the worldly life because ISLAM IS THE COMPLETE WAY OF LIFE!!! THUS THERE IS NO SUCH CLASSIFICATION EXISTS AS “BIDDAH IN WORLDLY MATTERS” AND “BIDDAH IN DEEN” BECAUSE “BIDDAH IN DEEN” INCLUDES “BIDDAH IN WORDLY MATTERS”.

According to there saying, biddah in worldly matters is allowed, so my question is that, “ARE ALL WORLDLY INNOVATIONS PERMISSIBLE??”
Worldly innovations includes some good things and some bad things. So are those bad worldly innovations are permissible ?? any logical person will reply by saying “NO”. So now according to them also only good worldly innovations are permissible and they themselves rejects bad worldly innovations. THATS WHAT WE SAY THAT THERE EXISTS TWO TYPES OF INNOVATIONS: “GOOD INNOVATIONS” AND “BAD INNOVATIONS”. Hence there classification is not general and is bias!


This refutation is by Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naimi. He wrote an article on biddah which can be read from here :

Following is an extract from the article:
To emplace the restriction of a religious action is only on your part and is contrary to the Sahih Ahadith and rulings of the Ulama and Muhadditheen. The Hadith states, "Every new work is an Innovation (Bidat).' 7.51 - Mishkaat, Baabul-Itisaam
There is no limitation of religious or worldly here. We have already presented the extracts from Ashiatul-Lam'aat and Mirqaat wherein it is stated that there is no restriction of a deeni work. We have also produced extracts from Mirqaat and Shaami in the first chapter of this discussion in which the authors of these works have included good food and clothes, etc. amongst the Permissible Innovation. These things are all worldly related but were included. Thus, to emplace such a restriction is incorrect. Hypothetically, even if it is accepted that there is a limitation of a religious work in Innovation, a religious work is only that action through which thawaab is attained. Mustahab, Nafil, Waajib and Fardh acts are all regligious works because a person completes them for reward, and any worldly work done with the intention of goodness causes thawaab to be attained. The Ahadith state, "Meeting your Muslim brother cheerfully carries with it the reward of Sadaqah; Nurturing your children brings reward if done with the intention of Goodness; Even the morsel of food with which you feed your spouse is reward."7.52.
Thus, every worldly action of a Muslim is a religious work. Now answer the question: Is feeding people palau (a rise dish) with a good intention Innovation or not? Also, placing the restriction of regligious work is not beneficial to you as well, because the Mzdrassah of Deoband, its timetable and syllabus of Hadith, giving a salary to the teachers of the institution, coordinating holidays and examinations, placing zabar, zer and pesh in the Holy Quran, printing Bukhari Sharif and the Holy Quran, making the Khatme-Bukhari at the time of any problem (as practiced by Darul Uloom Deoband), etc, are all religious works and Innovation. None of these things occurred in the time of The Holy Prophet صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم. Answer: Are these things Halaal or Haraam? What did Meelad and Fatiha ever do to you that you deem them to be Haraam "because they weren't in the time of Rasoolullah صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم "? They are deemed as Haraam but the abovementioned things are all Halaal?
In my debate with Maulwi Thanaullah Amritsari, I challenged him and his fraternity of "Scholars" to define only four things correctly and in such a manner that no objection can be raised. The four were: Innovation (bidat), Polytheism (shirk), Religion (deen) and Worship (ibaadat). Ifhe could do this, I would grant him any reward he wished from me.
Having trust in Allah عزوجل , I say that no Deobandi, Ghair-Muqallid (refuter of the Four Imams رضی اللہ تعالٰی عنہ ) or person who throws around the words "Bidet" and "Shirk" can define these four things while also saving their muzhab from any criticism due to these definitions.
Even today, every Deobandi and Ghair-Muqallid is challenged to define these four things, showing how Meelad gatherings become Haraam while taking out the magazine "Qaasim" and "Ahle-Hadith" remains Halaal; how asking the Friends of Allahعزوجل for help is polytheism (shirk) but asking from the police is completely in accordance to the laws of Islam. Insha-Allah they will not (and never will) be able to define these things in such a manner. Thus, they should make tauba from this baseless muzhab of theirs and enter the Ahle-Sunnah wal-Jamaat. May Allah عزوجل grant them the ability to do so.
With regards to the Hadith that you presented, we have already submitted that 'Maa' can refer to either beliefs or, if to deeds, then by 'Laisa minhoo' it refers to those deeds and actions which are contrary to the deen or Sunnah. We have already presented the reference for this.
Saying that every Innovation is Haraam and that there is no such thing as Good Innovation is contrary to the presented Hadith which states, "He who invents a good practice is worthy of reward and he who invents a bad practice is worthy of punishment." Extracts of Shaami, Ashiatul-Lam'aat and Mirqaat which state that there are five types of Innovation (Mubah, Waajib, Mustahab, Makrooh and Haraam) have already been given. So, if it is accepted that every Innovation is Haraam, you should do away with Madrassahs because they are included here.
Also, Fiqhi laws and practices of the Sufiya that originated after the Khairul ­Quroon (era of the Prophet صلی اللہ علیہ وسلمand two generations after him) will all become Haraam. All things mentioned above (e.g. Imaane-Mujmal and Mufassal, the gathering of Hadith into book form, criticizing their Chain of Narrators, etc) will all become Bidat because they all originated after the time of Rasoolullah صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم and even the Sahaaba. No Deobandi can show proof of these things in the Quran and Hadith. In short, there is no practice of the Shariah and Tareeqah that doesn't include Innovation (Bidal).
Maulwi Ismail Dehlwi writes, "Also, regarding the elders of Tareeqah, though they strived in fixing Azkaar, Muraaqabat, Riyaazat and Mujaahidat (practices of Tareeqah) which form the base of Sainthood (Wilaayat), they also acted upon knowing that there are appropriate practices for every time and that the method of Riyaazat would be different according to every era." - Siraate-Mustaqeem, Pg. 7
This quote proves that the practices of Tasawwuf (Islamic spiritualism) are the inventions of the Sufiya, are changed according to every time and era and are permissible. In fact, the path of Sulook (practical Tareeqah) is treaded upon with only these, so now what happened to the rule that "every new thing is Haraam"? In the end, we have to conclude that the action which goes against the Sunnah is bad and all others which don't are good and acceptable.


 "Today I have perfected your din for you, completed My Blessing upon you, and have chosen for you Islam (as) din"
[Qur'an 5:3]
It means that Islamic Aqeeda is completed now. Any addition in Islamic beliefs [aqeeda] will be considered an evil innovation. Where as innovation in Fiqh or Hadiths [branch of sciences of hadiths , Fiqh is a new innovation as well] is a Good innovation and mustahab in most cases. Ahlus sunnah wa jammah interpret Quran and hadith is correct way so there no contradiction is present between the two. Unlike others.
 When Prophet Mohammad (SAWS) appeared, the Islamic laws were made most comprehensive in the shape of Quran. Before that, the scriptures of other prophets did not contain so much details. The basics of Islam were completed during Prophet’s (SAWS) time. If a scientist tells us more details about the solar system and discovers new planets which were unknown to us, it will be treated as the development of science. But if someone says that the Sun has hands and eyes and ears, but these are not visible and not similar to human beings, he will be treated as a innovator, liar,  because he is reporting against the fact of the matter. The same rules apply in religion.  The basic faith of Islam is Allah (SWT) is one, independent and everything else is dependent upon Him.  He is free from the limitations of face, body, limbs and direction.  If a group of people  say that Allah (SWT) has hands, eyes and face and other limitations,  they will be treated as liars and will be counseled to change their attitude and come back to the truthful teachings of Islam.  If they do not heed to the good counsel, they will see the consequence of their beliefs on the Day of Judgment.
Imam Ibn Kathir writes that the meaning of this verse is that:
 "...they do not need any other religion or any other Prophet except Muhammad (peace & blessings be upon him)...Therefore, the permissible is what he allows, the impermissible is what he prohibits" [Tafsir ibn Kathir, under Qur'an 5:3]
What Ibn Kathir means here is the same, that do not invent new things which are contradictory to the Qur'an and Sunnah, by making haram into halal and vice versa, and follow the Prophet (peace & blessings be upon him) for he has made things clear.

Thus “an innovation would become a bad Bid’ah only, when it is in contradiction to any specific commandment of the holy Quran or specific hadith of holy Prophet (pbuh), in all other cases, the Bid’ah is termed as a good Bid’ah. Celebration of Moulid-un Nabi (SAW), U’rs and birthdays comes under the category of good Bid’ah, they cannot termed as bad Bid’ah, because, they do not contradict with any of the commandments of holy Quran and Hadith.”

There is an oft repeated concept held by some Muslims today, that any practice in religion that was not done by the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam or his companions should be rejected because our deen is completed.  However one must go beyond slogans and oversimplifications and reach a correct opinion by examining the facts based upon the Qur’an and Sunnah.  As we have seen, new practices are not rejected, but are accepted and even rewarded.  However, the practice concerned should be compatible with the dictates of the Shari’ah, otherwise it will be rejected.  The opinion of those who condemn any new act without qualification comes from a misunderstanding of the sources of the Qur’an and Hadith, for example by quoting passages out of context or without the true meaning.  It is apparent that the classical scholars, who probably had a greater knowledge of Qur’anic or Hadith exegesis than any living person today decreed that newly introduced practices are allowed as long as they do not contradict the Qur’an or Sunnah.  This stands in marked contrast to the opinion of many so-called learned people today.  They should be careful of condemning an act as Haraam or prohibited if it is not specifically prohibited by the Qur’an or Sunnah, as judging a permissible act as Haraam may lead to Shirk.  In fact, the introduction of new things into the deen ensures that Islam can apply itself to any given time and situation because ISLAM IS A PERFECT DEEN (As Allah swt said:  "Today I have perfected your din for you, completed My Blessing upon you, and have chosen for you Islam (as) din[Qur'an 5:3]) , and some new things have even been essential for its preservation and propagation.

[FOR MORE INFO VISIT:  VIDEO: Concept of Bid'ah (In the Light of Qur'an and Sunna) by Dr. Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri : Session Two [ EXPLAINING THE VERSE OF SURAH MAIDA QURAN 5:3] {ABOUT TWO HOURS}


The meaning of the words of `Umar : “An excellent innovation” ABOUT TARAWEEH PRAYERS


An Excellent Innovation 1
Shaykh `Abdul Hayy al-`Amrawi and Shaykh `Abdul Karim Murad
Translated: Ustadha `Aisha Bewley
Released by 1428 H
The meaning of the words of `Umar ,
“An excellent innovation”
On page 110, you mentioned regarding the words of `Umar , “An excellent
innovation,” that the scholars who are considered all agreed that it refers to a linguistic
innovation, i.e. something new.
We want to know the source of this consensus because the commentators of Hadith,
including al-Qastallani and Ibn Hajar in their commentary on the Sahih al-Bukhari, who
are those who are trusted in Hadith, agree that it is not a linguistic innovation, as you
claim. You must look at the text of the Hadith of al-Bukhari from `Abdul Rahman ibn
`Abdul Qari’. He said,
One night in Ramadan I went out with “`Umar ibn al-Khattab to the mosque and
the people were separated in different groups. One man was praying on his own
and another man with a group behind him following his prayer. `Umar said, “I
think that it would be better for all these people to join together behind one
reciter.” So he decided to gather them behind Ubayy ibn Ka’b. Then another
night I went out with him again and all the people were praying behind one
reciter. `Umar said, “This is an excellent innovation! But the one they sleep
through is better than the one they are praying,” meaning prayer in the last part of
the night. People used to stand in prayer during the first part of the night.
This is the text of the Hadith of al-Bukhari, and you can consult the text of al-Qastallani,
vol. 3, p. 426 with commentary on this Hadith. `Umar called it bid`ah (innovation):
1. Because the Prophet had not made it their custom to gather together for it.
2. Nor was it the custom in the time of Abu Bakr .
3. It was not done in the first part of the night.
4. Nor was it done every night.
5. Nor was this number of rak’at done.
1 Excerpted with the translators’ kind permission from “Sufis and Sufism: A Defence” by Shaykh
`Abdul-Hayy al-`Amrawi and Shaykh `Abdul-Karim Murad of the Qarawwiyyin Mosque, Fes.
Published by Madinah Press, order from (
Innovation can be either mandatory, recommended, permissible, disliked, or forbidden.
The Hadith, “Every innovation is misguidance” is a general one which is subject to
specification. `Umar judged this innovation desirable with his words, “This is an
excellent innovation.” Ni’ama is a word which includes all that is good as bi’isa includes
all that is evil.
Then al-Qastallani said,
The number of rak’at which were prayed is not mentioned in this Hadith. It is
known and it is the view of the majority that it was 20 rak’at with 10 taslims, and
that is five rests, each rest consisting of four rak’at with two taslims, not counting
the shaf’ and witr, which are three. Malik related that in the Muwatta’: “The people
used to pray twenty-three rak’ats at night during Ramadan in the time of `Umar
ibn al-Khattab.” Then he said, “Malik preferred to pray 36 rak’at, not counting the
witr, and said, ‘That is the practice in Medina .’” He said, “It was 23 rak’at, and
then was made 39 with the shaf’ and witr.”
In the book of Ibn Abi Shayba, he is reported as saying, “I found people in Madina in
the time of `Umar ibn ‘Abdul Aziz and Aban ibn `Uthman praying 36 rak’ats and doing
the witr with three.” This is the action of the people of Medina because they wanted to
be equal to the people of Mecca who did tawaf as seven between every two of the
tarawih. The people of Medina put four rak’at in place of every seven. Al-Shafi`i said in
what al-Za`frani transmitted, “I saw people praying 37 in Medina and 23 in Mecca.”
There is no specific limit in any of that. The Hanbalis say, “Tarawih is 20, and there is
nothing wrong in doing more as Imam Ahmad stated.”
Ibn Hajar mentioned in al-Fath, vol. 4, p. 353, Dar al-Fikr, when he quotes this Hadith
under no. 2010,
The root meaning of bid`ah is that which occurs without prior example. In the
Shari`ah it is opposite the Sunnah and so it is blameworthy. The truth is that if it
is part of what is though good in the Shari`ah, it is considered good, and if it is
part of that which is thought ugly in the Shari`ah, it is considered ugly. Otherwise,
its category is permissible (mubah). It is divided into five rulings.
Al-Qastallani said on the same subject, “Others believe that the prayer alone at home is
better since the Messenger of Allah persisted in that and he died while matters were
like that and that continued until well into `Umar’s Caliphate.” `Umar admitted that it
was preferred, as was stated. Imam Malik, Abu Yusuf and some Shafi`is say that.
You can see by these texts that by bid`ah, `Umar meant legal, not linguistic bid`ah, and
that some scholars originated an increase in the numbers of rak’at, like Imam Malik who
knew that the Messenger had not prayed 39 rak’at. That is confirmation that what is
meant by the words of `Umar, “an excellent innovation” is a legal, not linguistic
innovation. We are discussing a legal ruling as `Umar spoke of a legal ruling connected to
tarawih. If the tarawih prayer which continues in Ramadan is not a legal innovation, why
do scholars disagree about it and there are differing views about its number and the
manner of its performance? If it had been a firm Sunnah which the Messenger did,
scholars and Imams would not have disagreed about it and its number.
Al-Zurqani said in the commentary of the Muwatta’, vol. 1, p. 214, about the words of
`Umar, “An excellent innovation,”
Ibn `Umar said about the duha prayer, ‘An excellent innovation.’ Allah Almighty
said, ‘They invented monasticism – We did not prescribe it for them –
purely out of desire for the pleasure of Allah.’ (57:27) This is a clear statement
from `Umar that he was the first to gather people together to pray behind one
Imam in Ramadan because the innovation is what the innovator begins which no
one has done before him. So `Umar innovated it and the Companions and people
follow that, etc. This explains the soundness of giving a verdict by opinion and
ijtihad, and it is called innovation because the Prophet did not make it a Sunnah
to gather for it nor did that exist in the time of Abu Bakr. Linguistically it means
what is originated without prior model, and legally it is the opposite of Sunna. It is
what did not exist in the time of the Prophet . Then innovation is divided into
five rulings. The Hadith ‘Every innovation is misguidance’ is general and then
made specific. When the Companions agreed to that with `Umar, then the name
innovation is removed from it.
Imam al-Ubbi mentioned the following Hadith in the Sahih Muslim, vol. 3, p. 152,
“Anyone who creates a good sunnah in Islam has its reward and the reward of
whoever does it after him until the Day of Rising” with the following isnad:
Muhammad ibn Muthanna al-`Anazi related from Muhammad ibn Ja`far from Shu`ba
from `Awn ibn Abi Juhayfa from al-Mundhir ibn Jarir from his father who said,
Once we were with the Messenger of Allah at the beginning of the day when
some people came, barefoot, unclothed, wearing striped garments or cloaks,
girded with swords. Most of them were from Mudar. The face of Messenger of
Allah showed his concern at what he saw of their extreme need. He went inside
and then came out and commanded Bilal to give the adhan and the iqama. He
prayed and then spoke and said, “O mankind! Be fearful of your Lord who
created you from a single self…” (4:1) and the ayat in al-Hashr, “Be fearful of
Allah! Let each self look to what it has forwarded for Tomorrow.” (59:18)
“Let a man give from his dinars, from his clothes, from the sa’ of his wheat, from
the sa’ of his dates, even, “, he said, “a half of a date.” A man of the Ansar
brought a bag which he could barely get his arms round, indeed, he could not do
so. Then the people came one after another until I saw two heaps of food and
clothes and I saw the face of the Messenger of Allah shining as if it was
illuminated. The Messenger of Allah said, “Anyone who creates a good sunnah
in Islam has its reward and the reward of whoever does it after him without that
decreasing his reward in any way. Anyone who creates a bad sunnah in Islam bears
its burden and the burden of whoever acts by it after him without that decreasing
his burden in any way.”
Its commentator said,
It contains encouragement to initiate what is good. This Hadith narrows down the
meaning of the general Hadith: ‘Every new thing is innovation’ . What is meant
by new things are those which are innovations, new false things.” Included in the
Hadith, ‘Anyone who creates a good sunna’ are recommended innovations, like
preparation with equipment, a morning meal, and writing books.
We see that the scholars innovated that. Shaykh al-Maliki included celebration of the
Mawlid of the Prophet as one of the recommended innovations.
Omission does not indicate prohibition
The conclusions of the author of the Hiwar about bid`ah and prohibition are usually
phrased, “The Messenger did not do that,” “It is not established that the Messenger 
did that,” and “The Messenger did not celebrate the Mawlid”, and he deduces
prohibition from the fact that the Messenger did not do that. We ask, “Does omission
indicated prohibition?”
The noble Hadith scholar, Abul Fadl `Abdullah Muhammad ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari
wrote in a book called, Excellent Understanding and Perception of the Question of Omission:
Omission means that the Prophet omitted something and did not do it, or that
the Salaf omitted it without there being a Hadith or tradition about the
prohibition of that omitted thing which would demand that it is prohibited or
disliked. Man later people use that as proof of the prohibition or censure of
things, and some obstinate individuals go to excess in that.
When the Messenger omitted something, that can imply things other than prohibition.
He may have omitted it by his custom, as he did not eat lizards. He may have omitted it
by forgetting it, like forgetfulness in the prayer. He may have omitted it out of the fear of
imposing something on his community, like not doing the tarawih prayer. He may have
omitted it by not thinking of it. So the Messenger spoke on a palm trunk and did not
think about using a chair until the Companions suggested that a minbar be made and then
he did that. Or he may have omitted it out of fear of having a negative effect on the
hearts of the Companions or some of them, as he said to `A’isha, “Were it not that
your people were recently unbelievers, I would have demolished the House and then
rebuilt it on the foundations of Ibrahim ” as we find in the two Sahih Collections.
So omission alone, if not accompanied by a text that what was omitted is forbidden, does
not constitute proof. This verdict is not derived from the mere fact of omission on its
own. It is derived from evidence which indicates that.
Abu Sa`id ibn Lubb said,
Those who dislike supplication at the end of the prayer rely on the fact that the
supplication at the end of the prayer rely on the fact that the supplication was
unknown at the end of the prayers, necessitating the interpretation: since it was
not part of the action of the Salaf. Based on the assumption of the soundness of
this transmission, omission does not oblige a ruling about what is omitted other
than the fact that it is permitted to omit it and there is no interdiction in it. As for
connecting prohibition or dislike to the omission, that is not the case, especially
when it has a basis in the Shari`ah, as supplication does.
In al-Muhalla pt. 2, p. 254, Ibn Hazm mentioned the evidence of the Malikis and Hanafis
for it being disliked to pray two rak’at before Maghrib along with the verdict of Ibrahim
al-Nakha’i since Abu Bakr , `Umar and `Uthman did not pray it. He replied to
them: “If it were sound, there still would be no proof in it because it does not say that
they were forbidden that.”
Evidence that omission
does not indicate prohibition
Part of the evidence is what Ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari says about omission not
entailing prohibition.
1. Allah Almighty, “Whatever the Messenger gives you, you should accept
and whatever He forbids you, you should forgo.” (59:7) He did not say,
“Leave what he left.”
2. The Messenger of Allah said, “When I command you to do something,
then do it as much as you can. When I forbid you to do something, then
leave off doing it.” He did not say, “Avoid what I omit.” How then does
omission indicate prohibition?
3. The Usulis define the Sunnah as the words of the Prophet his actions and
his affirmation. They did not include his omission because it is not evidence.
4. Omission can have categories other than prohibition. The rule in the usul is
that something which is theoretical is not used for conclusion. We do not say
that what the Messenger did not do, like celebrating the Mawlid, is haram
because that is forging against Allah since omission does not necessitate
prohibition. Al-Shaf`i said, “All that has a source in the Shari`ah is not
innovation, even if the Salaf did not do it.” So if someone forbids celebrating
the Mawlid of the Prophet with the claim that is innovation, we argue with him
with what we said, followed by the words, of Allah , “Say: ‘Has Allah
given you authority to do this or are you inventing lies against Allah?”
Omission is not a proof in our Shari`ah.
It does not demand prohibition or make mandatory.
Whoever desires prohibition by the omission
of our Prophet and sees it as true judgment and correct
Has been misguided from the path of all proofs.
He errs in the sound ruling and fails


Recent Posts Widget