There is one issue that remains in anomaly which really leaves me wondering… that is concerning the maulid. From all that I have seen around the world, the maulid seems to be an accepted practice among Sunni Muslims. Scholars like Jalaluddin Suyuti, Ibn Hajar Asqalani and even Ibn Taimiya رحمهم الله تعالى described it as a praiseworthy innovation.
From the Ottoman Turks to the pre-Salafi Arabs, the Malay archipelago, the Persian and Indo-Pak region, the maulid was not controversial or questionable in any way. The Sudanese uprising against the colonial forces was fueled by the emotion of the maulid (verhandelingen). This is why the colonial forces tried to quell the celebration of maulid in order to subdue the masses.
So, then the result is that the only people who speak against it are Salafis, Deobandis and the Tablighi Jamaat. This is curious. If Imams like Suyuti have permitted it, was he in error? Was Asqalani in error? The establishment of a day to celebrate the maulid is completely regarded as bid’ah by Mufti Usmani.
As I explained in my article on celebration of Eid-e-Milaad-un-Nabi, holding a meeting to discuss different aspects of the life of the Holy Prophet ﷺ is a very meritorious act for which the Muslims should strive to the best of their ability, but confining this discussion to the events of the birth of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and restricting it to a particular date and holding such meetings as necessary or obligatory for every Muslim renders this practice as innovation. Mostly, the meeting of Maulid today are of the same nature, therefore, contemporary Ulama of Deoband have taken it as a Bid’ah. If with these restrictions the life of the Holy Prophet ﷺ is made subject of a meeting, nobody can hold it as a bid’ah. It is in this context that some scholars of the past have allowed this practice.
Rabi Awwal 1426