Galandān
The Ruling On Celebrating Anniversaries And Birthdays And The Issue Of Imitating Disbelievers
Al-Shaykh Al-Muḥaddith Sulaymān Al-ʿAlwān
[1]
[Question]: Regarding whoever initiates an "Eid" (a recurring event, especially an annual celebration): in order for it to be considered a "Bidʿah" (religious innovation), is it a condition that they intend to gain "closeness" [to Allah] through it?
“Fundamentally, Eids are not prohibited only because they are Bidʿah. An "Eid" is essentially a name for what returns—either by the return of the year, the return of the month, or the return of the week. So the Eid was named from al-muʿāwadah (reoccurrence) if a thing’s coming becomes habitual and they arrange this matter upon that [habit] and begin celebrating it every year; for indeed, this is considered imitation of the disbelievers, so it is prohibited due to that, even if one did not intend closeness to Allah—Mighty and Majestic.
Therefore, when a man came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and had vowed to slaughter camels at Buwānah (a location situated in the lower part of Mecca), the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to him: "Was there an Eid among their (i.e. pagan's) Eids [celebrated] there?" He said: "No." He asked: "Was there an idol among the idols worshipped besides Allah there?" He said: "No." He (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Fulfill your vow, for indeed there is no fulfillment of a vow in disobedience to Allah, nor in what the son of Adam does not possess." Narrated by Abū Dāwūd with an authentic (Ṣaḥīḥ) chain of transmission.
So his saying (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), "Was there an Eid among their Eids [there]," despite the man not intending [their Eid]—and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not ask him, "Did you intend it for the sake of their Eid or not?"—then the Prophet said, "Fulfill your vow." The meaning of this is that if he had said "Yes," the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would not have said, "Fulfill your vow"; he would have prohibited him, otherwise there would be no meaning to the detailed inquiry (istifsāl). This is evidence that imitation of the disbelievers is prohibited even if the man did not intend the imitation.
As for the matter of "intending closeness (to Allah)" so that it becomes a Bidʿah, this is second matter. This is because Eids are of two categories:
1. The Category Intended as Closeness to Allah
This is prohibited from two angles: the angle of Bidʿah and the angle of imitation of the disbelievers.
2. The Category Not Intended as Closeness to Allah
Such as a birthday, for example; a person establishes a birthday for his children or for himself. In reality, people do not intend closeness to Allah by that. For this, it is not a condition for [the ruling of] prohibition to be removed that we say: "He did not intend closeness." Because if he intended closeness, it would become a Bidʿah. If he did not intend closeness, we do not prohibit it from the standpoint that it is a Bidʿah—since he did not intend closeness, and Bidʿah is the initiating into the religion what is not of it—but we prohibit this form because this is from the customs of the Christians.
The Christians are the ones who initiated the birthday, the wedding anniversary, and Valentine’s Day; they initiated these Eids and they were never known except from the Christians. A birthday was never known from the Muslims at all. If we permit a man to celebrate his birthday, the meaning of that is that we permit people to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and this is not permissible. If closeness to Allah is intended, it becomes a Bidʿah and an imitation of the disbelievers. If closeness is not intended, it becomes an imitation of the Christians.
In the Ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmar, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever imitates a people, he is of them." Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyyah] (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “Its chain of narration is Jayyid (i.e. fair, similar to the grading, "ḥasan"), and its outward meaning necessitates the disbelief of the one imitating them, and at the very least of its states, it is prohibition.” He also said: “Indeed, similarity in the outward appearance inherits affection in the inward.”
Therefore, a man is prohibited from celebrating his birthday, or the birthday of his children, or the passing of a year since his marriage. All of this is from the customs of the Christians; so people are prohibited from that and not enabled in it. Even if a person comes and says, "I do not intend closeness," we do not say "We prohibit you because it is a Bidʿah," because you did not intend closeness; rather, we prohibit you because it is imitation of the Christians, and this is from their customs.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) strictly prohibited us from imitating the disbelievers. As we had previously mentioned more than once: there is a distinction between the issues which are exclusive to them and what was not exclusive.
The response to the view of [imām] Mālik on this issue, and the saying of some of those attributed to knowledge in this era—that "what is prohibited (regardless of it being exclusive or not) is to intend imitation, but if there is [merely] a similarity it is not prohibited"—we say that this is incorrect. The preceding evidence [ḥadīth of Buwānah] refutes this saying, as that man was not even intending this [i.e. imitation], yet despite that, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) sought detail from him, and had it been found [that pagan's had a similar activity], the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would have prohibited him from it.” — End.
— Al-Shaykh Al-Muḥaddith Sulaymān Al-ʿAlwān (text)
[2]
When Does an Act Become a Prohibited Act of Imitating Disbelievers?
“The scholars do not differ over the prohibition of imitating the disbelievers; rather, the scholars have differed regarding the criterion (ḍābiṭ) of imitating the disbelievers. Imitating the disbelievers consists of two types:
The First Type: That which is of their exclusive characteristics (khaṣāʾiṣ). (This refers to things that are unique to them—their specific religious symbols, distinct dress, or unique customs.) This is prohibited absolutely, at all times and in every moment, even if Muslims perform it. As long as this matter is of their exclusive characteristics, it is forbidden to do it even if Muslims do it, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever imitates a people, he is of them."
The Second Type: That which the disbelievers do but they are not uniquely distinguished by it over the Muslims—meaning, it is not of their religious rites (shaʿāʾir) nor of their exclusive characteristics. This is what Imām Mālik and others said: that if it becomes well-known among the Muslims and the Muslims perform it, it is not [considered] imitation.
This [logic] is not applied to every kind of imitation; it is only applied to this specific [second] type. As for the [first] type, the ruling is never separated from them [the acts]—specifically what has been narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and what was of their exclusive characteristics. This is because it is not possible for us to link the aḥkām [religious rulings] to the actions of the people.
We know that people today do not care and are not concerned with imitating the disbelievers. The meaning of this [logic] would be that every single thing performed by the dissolute Muslims (fasaqat al-muslimīnl)—wherein they imitated the disbelievers and performed their actions—the ruling [of prohibition] would disappear. According to this, the Sharʿī aḥkām would become linked to the fāsiq Muslims (A fāsiq or a dissolute muslim is one who commits a great major sin or repeatedly commits minor sins.)
The sons of the Muslims go abroad, they are influenced by the disbelievers, then they return to the Muslims with the customs of the disbelievers; if this Muslim then performs it, it is said: "The [status of] imitation has disappeared." And the statement of the one who says: "The sin remains upon the first person but not the others," this is incorrect; because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) came with a general ruling and he did not link the ruling to one person over another.” — End.
— Al-Shaykh Al-Muḥaddith Sulaymān Al-ʿAlwān (audio)
[3]
What Is The Ruling On One Who Imitates The Disbelievers And Says, "I Did Not Intend The Imitation"?
Some people imitate the disbelievers, and when you denounce it to them, they say: "I did not intend the imitation; and that the prohibited imitation is that which you intend, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever imitates (man tashabbaha)"—and tashabbuh is on the morphological pattern of tafa‘ul, in which there is something of volition (irādah) and something of intent.”
And this is a weak saying, by the evidence of what Abū Dāwūd narrated in his Sunan with a Ṣaḥīḥ chain from Thābit bin al-Ḍaḥḥāk (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: "A man vowed to slaughter camels at Buwānah (a location situated in the lower part of Mecca), so he asked the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He [the Prophet] said: 'Was there an Eid among their Eids [celebrated] there?' He said: 'No.' He (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: 'Was there an idol among the idols worshipped besides Allah there?' He said: 'No.' He said: 'Fulfill your vow, for indeed there is no fulfillment of a vow in disobedience to Allah, nor in what the son of Adam does not possess.'"
So this [man] did not intend [imitation], and despite that, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) asked him: «Was there an Eid there? Was there an idol among the idols worshipped there?»
So this is evidence for the prohibition of imitation even if the doer did not intend it. This is the first evidence.
The second evidence: What appeared in Ṣaḥīḥ of Imam Muslim from the Ḥadīth of ʿAbdullah bin ʿAmr bin al-ʿĀṣ, that he came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) wearing two garments dyed with safflower. He (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "What is this?"—meaning, by way of denunciation—"Indeed, these are from the garments of the disbelievers, so do not wear them." And ʿAbdullah bin ʿAmr bin al-ʿĀṣ did not intend the imitation of the disbelievers at all; rather, he thought this was permissible. Despite that, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) denounced him and said to him: "Indeed, these are from the garments of the disbelievers, so do not wear them."
So this is evidence for the prohibition of imitating the disbelievers even if the doer did not intend to imitate them. However, if the doer did intend to imitate them, the sin would be greater.
It has already been mentioned that there are three levels (of a prohibited act):
the act itself is among the prohibitions;
if one promotes that through buying or selling, it is greater [in sin] than the one who [merely] performs it; and
if one theorizes and organizes [for it], that is even greater.
As for the matter of following the words of jurists (Fuqahāʾ), in this there is detail: for indeed, whoever follows a scholar who is trusted in his religion and his knowledge—and this was the extent of his [the follower's] knowledge and it was not out of desire (hawā)—then this [person] is excused before Allah (Mighty and Majestic), because these are from the matters of Ijtihād (legal reasoning) and probability may enter them.
However, in the clear and manifest matters for which evidences have come from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), or were in matters such as these and the text reached him, it is obligatory upon him to follow the evidence. Because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: "Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord, and do not take others as guardians besides Him. How seldom are you mindful!" [Al-Aʿrāf: 3] — End.
—Al-Shaykh Al-Muḥaddith Sulaymān Al-ʿAlwān (text)
~ Galandān