The Prophet’s Birthday: Following or Innovating — A Spiritual Education Between Right and Wrong

All praise is due to Allah, and may blessings and peace be upon His beloved Messenger. In Islam true love for Allah and His Prophet means obeying their guidance, not merely expressing emotional affection. As the Quran teaches, “Say, [O Prophet], ‘If you love Allah, then follow me; Allah will love you and forgive your sins’”. Allah’s Prophet Himself warned that emotional love without adherence is not enough: “Whoever innovates something in this matter [of Islam] that is not part of it will have it rejected”. In other words, the believer whose love is sincere strives to follow the Prophet’s example in all actions. Mere sentimental displays (poems, chants, dances, yearly festivals) – even if well-intentioned – are condemned when they depart from the Prophetic model. Some enthusiasts have even gone so far as to slander fellow Muslims who do not celebrate the Prophet’s birthday by accusing them of lack of love – a grave injustice. Such attitudes “turn things upside-down,” the author laments, “making bid‘ah into the Sunnah, and wrong into right”.

Believers should therefore ask: is celebrating the Prophet’s birthday (mawlid) a praiseworthy innovation or a blameworthy one? To address this, it helps to recall the traditional Islamic categories of bid‘ah (innovation). Scholars distinguish three types of innovations in Arabic usage:

• Linguistic innovation (bid‘ah lughawiyyah) – a new thing in language or custom, like inventing clocks, cars or loudspeakers. These are generally permitted.
• Religious innovation (bid‘ah shar‘iyyah) – any newly introduced act of worship or religious practice not rooted in the Quran and Sunnah (for example, building structures on graves or playing devotional songs). These are specifically at issue, since they were not taught by the Prophet.
• Additive innovation (bid‘ah iḍāfiyyah) – taking an established act (like saying dhikr silently) and adding an illicit form (like mixing it with unorthodox phrases).

The question of whether any innovation can ever be “good” or “bad” revolves around religious innovations (bid‘ah shar‘iyyah). The overwhelming classical view is that all religious innovations are blameworthy. They “vary in degree” – some are as extreme as disbelief, others merely sinful – but none is neutral. As the author notes, “All innovations (bid‘ahs) are evil and false… Allah does not accept any [such] act of worship”. The Prophet’s words are categorical: “Whoever innovates something in this matter of ours that is not part of it will have it rejected”. Other hadith add, “Every innovation is misguidance.” Likewise the Quran tells us the religion was already completed: “Today I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and chosen Islam as your way”. If Islam is “complete,” what could these new celebrations add but confusion? Imam Malik (d.795 AH) famously said, “What was not [part of] religion on that day of perfection will never be religion today”. No doubt, if religion is perfect, nothing unlegislated can be accepted later.

Historical Origins. Historically, celebrating the Prophet’s birth did not exist among the early generations. It only appears centuries later. In fact, historians report that the first known public mawlid festival was introduced in 625 AH (1228 CE) by the ruler Muẓaffar of the Kurdish Mamluk state of Erbil. The chronicler Ibn Kathir (d.774 AH) wrote: “He held the glorious Mawlid in Rabiʿ al-awwal and celebrated it with a grand festivity… Sheikh Abu al-Khaṭṭāb ibn Dihyah even wrote an entire volume entitled ‘Light on the Birth of the Bearer of Good News’, for which [Muẓaffar] paid a thousand dinars”. Another report recounts that at one such mawlid thousands of grilled lambs, roasted chickens, and sweet dishes were prepared; scholars and Sufis attended; freed captives and guests were honored; and even the Sultan himself danced with the performers!.

If the Prophet’s birthday were a genuinely religious ordinance, surely the Companions and Followers would have observed it. Yet it was unknown until the high medieval period. One scholar remarks: “If [the Mawlid celebration] were truly sanctioned by Islam, the early generations would not have overlooked it… it only came to light under Muẓaffar and passed by Abu Bakr, ʿUmar, ʿUthmān and ʿAlī.” As one traditional verse goes: “The best of all matters is that which is according to the Sunnah; the worst matters are its novelties.” This sums up the classical attitude: follow the Prophet, beware any religious novelty.

Scholarly Opinions. Recognized Sunni scholars across the centuries have almost unanimously treated the Mawlid celebration as an unauthorized innovation. For example, the 14th-century Maliki jurist Taj al-Dīn al-Fākihānī wrote a book “On the Work of the Mawlid” and stated bluntly: “I know of no basis for this Mawlid in the Book or the Sunnah, and its practice is not transmitted from any of the learned guides of the community. Indeed, it is an innovation introduced by idle people and indulged by gluttons.” He analyzed it under the five legal categories and concluded it cannot be considered obligatory or recommended, let alone permissible – it is at best makrūh (disliked) or ḥarām (forbidden).

Likewise the great ʿUlamāʾ of the third/eighth century wrote similar statements. The hadith scholar Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d.852 AH) was asked about celebrating the Mawlid, and he replied: “The origin of the Mawlid is an innovation not transmitted from any of the righteous predecessors in the first three centuries.” Ibn al-Jawzī (d.597 AH) said virtually the same (though he later seemed to soften when praising the idea of finding good aspects – a stance he was criticized for). Ibn al-Ḥajj al-Mālikī (d.842 AH) observed that people had come to believe this innovation was among the greatest acts of worship, but he warned it brings serious evils (especially if accompanied by music, lavish feasts, and mixing of genders). In sum, the classical verdict is that the Mawlid, in any form, is a bid‘ah ḥāditha — a newly introduced practice with no origin in the religion.

Many scholars even forbade attending such celebrations, on the ground that it involves claiming an act of worship unsupported by any evidence. As the article notes, celebrated imams like Malik and others taught: “What was not [part of] religion on that day of perfection will never be religion today… Whoever claims religion isn’t complete has essentially claimed Muhammad failed the mission”. Numerous hadith warn that ALL newly invented acts in religion — no matter how appealing or widespread — are misguidance. Hence popular adages like “every innovation is misguidance” are taken literally: even well-meaning innovations (so-called bid‘ah ḥasana) are rejected by the soundest proofs. One scholar quoted a hadith saying “whoever establishes a good practice in Islam will have its reward…and [whoever] establishes a bad one will bear its sin” and explained that context showed “good” meant reviving an old Sunnah (like a charitable act that had died out), not inventing an entirely new rite.

Because of this, many jurists (such as Imams al-Qārfī and Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ) even rejected the idea that a religious innovation could have one of the five legal rulings (such as mubāḥ, makrūh, etc.) in the normal way. They held that religious innovations are categorically rejected (by definition), so discussions of “legal status” don’t apply except perhaps in an analogy of fixing their gravity. Others like Ibn Taymiyyah (†728 AH) went so far as to say the Mawlid was bid‘ah but argued that innovations may contain what is righteous as well as what is blameworthy. In short, the dominant Sunni view is that celebrating the Prophet’s birthday in ritual form is a prohibited innovation. Any apparent merits are considered either conjectural or attainable by other means.

Arguments and Counterarguments. Proponents of the Mawlid have advanced various arguments to justify the practice. For example, some cite the Prophet’s hadith about fasting Mondays, because he said: “That is the day I was born on”, arguing that honoring that day was implicit in his own devotion. The 15th-century scholar Jalāl al-Dīn al-Suyūṭī took this up, saying that the Prophet’s remark “honors this day and the month in which he was born, so we should esteem it highly”. Some supporters also draw analogies to the practice of thanking Allah for blessings on special days (like fasting on the Day of ʿĀshūrāʾ in remembrance of Moses) or cite anecdotal reports (such as a dream about ’Abbās the uncle of the Prophet).

However, critics point out these arguments are far-fetched. There is no strong hadith saying “Celebrate my birth”, and many possible explanations exist for each tale or statement. A prophetic hadith about Ali or Abbas, or a dream of a disbeliever, cannot override clear evidence. Even if a dream were recorded (and it is weak), a vision from a known foe like Abū Lahab carries no legal weight. Nor is it valid to say “the companions never objected, so it must be good” – because the evidence is silence, and absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. As the author concludes: “Merely having conflicting opinions is not a justification for clinging to a view without evidence”.

In fact, the article treats these pro-mawlid arguments as “weak knots easily undone.” For instance, al-Suyūṭī’s reasoning about the Prophet’s birthday is labeled “a strange deduction”. The analogy with ʿĀshūrāʾ is similarly critiqued: there may be gratitude to Allah on the day of Moses’s deliverance, but that does not entail celebrating an unrelated birthday in the same way. In sum, while a few learned men (like al-Suyūṭī) have written in favor of the Mawlid, the article notes that every supportive claim is met with a rebuttal. One concluding “Summary” point states: “Celebrating the Prophet’s Mawlid is an innovation with no origin in the religion in any form – weekly or yearly, with music or otherwise.”.

Reflections on Celebration. Spiritually and socially, the author warns, commemorating the Prophet’s birth can do more harm than good if done improperly. On one hand, love and respect for the Prophet should indeed lead us to feel joy for his life and mission. But the author insists that such joy must be expressed strictly within Islamic bounds: obedience to the Prophet’s teachings. The article observes that some believers have restricted their love to mere emotional displays – singing hymns and holding festivals – without grounding them in actual obedience. Worse still, they sometimes demonize those who do not participate, as if the absence of ritual meant absence of love. This is described as a “clear slander” and a “grave injustice,” since the earliest Muslims deeply loved the Prophet yet often paid no public attention to his birthday.

Morally, celebrating the Mawlid as a religious duty can blur the line between authentic worship and innovations. It can give the impression that Islam needs supplements from modern creativity. The author reminds us: Islam is not a matter of opinion or following customs, but of submitting to divine revelation. As Umar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, companion of the Prophet, once quipped about “innovation”: “This (meaning the gathering) is surely a linguistic innovation, if innovation it is!” – he approved the congregational prayer which had precedent, not a bid‘ah in worship. In contrast, contemporary festival-makers have replaced clear tradition with novel ceremonies, confusing the faithful. The article urges that Muslims always turn back to the Quran and Sunnah, and to what the righteous predecessors practised, whenever controversies arise.

Conclusion. In conclusion, the author takes the position that the Mawlid celebration, as commonly practiced, is a bid‘ah lacking any clear basis in the sources of Islam. The motivating love for the Prophet is acknowledged, but love alone “is not enough” without following his example. Because the religion was perfected with the Prophet’s life, nothing unauthorized could legitimately be added. The article warns against falling into legalistic arguments or blind imitation of scholars; rather, guidance must come strictly from revealed evidence. Readers are reminded that scholarly opinions, no matter how eminent the scholar, cannot override what is established in the Quran and authentic Sunnah.

Ultimately, the Prophet’s birth can be commemorated in ways that truly honor him – by giving charity, strengthening faith, and drawing lessons from his life – but only within the bounds of what he taught. The author prays that Allah unite the hearts of Muslims, guard them from misguided innovations, and raise up leaders who strengthen the true legacy of the Prophet (peace be upon him), guiding people to what pleases Allah.