A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah
| dc.contributor.advisor | Mabrook, Ali | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.author | Owaisi, Fakhruddin Ahmed | en_ZA |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2014-11-05T17:39:52Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2014-11-05T17:39:52Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2005 | en_ZA |
| dc.description | Includes bibliographical references. | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | In the contemporary Salafi/Puritan discourse, the traditional Muslim practice of celebrating the Prophet's birthday (mawlid) is consistently termed as 'bid'ah,' i.e. an innovation. In the Puritan discourse, all 'innovation' is considered reprehensible. In the first half of this study, I attempt to prove the inherent error and contradiction in the Puritan approach to the issue of innovation in Islam. I argue that the Puritan understanding of what constitutes bid 'ah and the conditions for its acceptability and rejection, is flawed, both from a textual and a logical point of view, and is in fact contrary to the way of the Prophet himself and his Companions (the salaf); thus belying their claims to 'Puritanism,' and 'Salafism.' Puritans base their discourse on certain hadith such as, "Every bid 'ah is misguidance," and "Whoever innovates in this matter of ours that which is not of it, it is to be rejected," as well as certain statements by the sahabah, and the works of al-Shatibi. In this work, I critically analyze these hadith and statements from a fresh point of view, substantiating my points with an abundance of essential scriptural evidences and historical data, which Puritans have long ignored or evaded. I also discuss other relevant issues such as the concepts of tark and the 'good bid'ah' in considerable detail. Traditionally, the jurists of Islam have termed 'beneficial' practices that appeared after the era of the Prophet as either 'bid'ah hasanah' (good innovation) or 'sunnah hasanah' (good practice/tradition), the latter being the position of those scholars whom the Puritans claim to be inspired by. My point is that the difference is only semantical and not really conceptual, as both schools agree on the acceptance of a certain amount of 'good' innovations in Islam, albeit with different terminologies. In the second half of the paper, I use the contentious issue of the mawlid as my case-study of the practical implementation of the conflicting approaches towards bid'ah. After studying the origins and development of the maw lid, as well as looking at some of the early discussions and arguments around it, I conclude that the mawlid, if proven to be based upon sound Islamic principles and evidences, cannot then be considered a reprehensible bid'ah, as Puritans, based upon a questionable logic, consider it to be. In the contemporary Salafil/Puritan discourse, the traditional Muslim practice of celebrating the Prophet's birthday (mawlid) is consistently termed as 'bid'ah,' i.e. an innovation. In the Puritan discourse, all 'innovation' is considered reprehensible. In the first half of this study, I attempt to prove the inherent error and contradiction in the Puritan approach to the issue of innovation in Islam. I argue that the Puritan understanding of what constitutes bid 'ah and the conditions for its acceptability and rejection, is flawed, both from a textual and a logical point of view, and is in fact contrary to the way of the Prophet himself and his Companions (the salaf); thus belying their claims to 'Puritanism,' and 'Salafism.' Puritans base their discourse on certain hadith such as, "Every bid 'ah is misguidance," and "Whoever innovates in this matter of ours that which is not of it, it is to be rejected," as well as certain statements by the sahabah, and the works of al-Shatibi. In this work, I critically analyze these hadith and statements from a fresh point of view, substantiating my points with an abundance of essential scriptural evidences and historical data, which Puritans have long ignored or evaded. I also discuss other relevant issues such as the concepts of tark and the 'good bid'ah' in considerable detail. Traditionally, the jurists of Islam have termed 'beneficial' practices that appeared after the era of the Prophet as either 'bid'ah hasanah' (good innovation) or 'sunnah hasanah' (good practice/tradition), the latter being the position of those scholars whom the Puritans claim to be inspired by. My point is that the difference is only semantical and not really conceptual, as both schools agree on the acceptance of a certain amount of 'good' innovations in Islam, albeit with different terminologies. In the second half of the paper, I use the contentious issue of the mawlid as my case-study of the practical implementation of the conflicting approaches towards bid'ah. After studying the origins and development of the maw lid, as well as looking at some of the early discussions and arguments around it, I conclude that the mawlid, if proven to be based upon sound Islamic principles and evidences, cannot then be considered a reprehensible bid'ah, as Puritans, based upon a questionable logic, consider it to be. | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.apacitation | Owaisi, F. A. (2005). <i>A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah</i>. (Thesis). University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Religious Studies. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9265 | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.chicagocitation | Owaisi, Fakhruddin Ahmed. <i>"A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah."</i> Thesis., University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Religious Studies, 2005. http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9265 | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.citation | Owaisi, F. 2005. A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah. University of Cape Town. | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.ris | TY - Thesis / Dissertation AU - Owaisi, Fakhruddin Ahmed AB - In the contemporary Salafi/Puritan discourse, the traditional Muslim practice of celebrating the Prophet's birthday (mawlid) is consistently termed as 'bid'ah,' i.e. an innovation. In the Puritan discourse, all 'innovation' is considered reprehensible. In the first half of this study, I attempt to prove the inherent error and contradiction in the Puritan approach to the issue of innovation in Islam. I argue that the Puritan understanding of what constitutes bid 'ah and the conditions for its acceptability and rejection, is flawed, both from a textual and a logical point of view, and is in fact contrary to the way of the Prophet himself and his Companions (the salaf); thus belying their claims to 'Puritanism,' and 'Salafism.' Puritans base their discourse on certain hadith such as, "Every bid 'ah is misguidance," and "Whoever innovates in this matter of ours that which is not of it, it is to be rejected," as well as certain statements by the sahabah, and the works of al-Shatibi. In this work, I critically analyze these hadith and statements from a fresh point of view, substantiating my points with an abundance of essential scriptural evidences and historical data, which Puritans have long ignored or evaded. I also discuss other relevant issues such as the concepts of tark and the 'good bid'ah' in considerable detail. Traditionally, the jurists of Islam have termed 'beneficial' practices that appeared after the era of the Prophet as either 'bid'ah hasanah' (good innovation) or 'sunnah hasanah' (good practice/tradition), the latter being the position of those scholars whom the Puritans claim to be inspired by. My point is that the difference is only semantical and not really conceptual, as both schools agree on the acceptance of a certain amount of 'good' innovations in Islam, albeit with different terminologies. In the second half of the paper, I use the contentious issue of the mawlid as my case-study of the practical implementation of the conflicting approaches towards bid'ah. After studying the origins and development of the maw lid, as well as looking at some of the early discussions and arguments around it, I conclude that the mawlid, if proven to be based upon sound Islamic principles and evidences, cannot then be considered a reprehensible bid'ah, as Puritans, based upon a questionable logic, consider it to be. In the contemporary Salafil/Puritan discourse, the traditional Muslim practice of celebrating the Prophet's birthday (mawlid) is consistently termed as 'bid'ah,' i.e. an innovation. In the Puritan discourse, all 'innovation' is considered reprehensible. In the first half of this study, I attempt to prove the inherent error and contradiction in the Puritan approach to the issue of innovation in Islam. I argue that the Puritan understanding of what constitutes bid 'ah and the conditions for its acceptability and rejection, is flawed, both from a textual and a logical point of view, and is in fact contrary to the way of the Prophet himself and his Companions (the salaf); thus belying their claims to 'Puritanism,' and 'Salafism.' Puritans base their discourse on certain hadith such as, "Every bid 'ah is misguidance," and "Whoever innovates in this matter of ours that which is not of it, it is to be rejected," as well as certain statements by the sahabah, and the works of al-Shatibi. In this work, I critically analyze these hadith and statements from a fresh point of view, substantiating my points with an abundance of essential scriptural evidences and historical data, which Puritans have long ignored or evaded. I also discuss other relevant issues such as the concepts of tark and the 'good bid'ah' in considerable detail. Traditionally, the jurists of Islam have termed 'beneficial' practices that appeared after the era of the Prophet as either 'bid'ah hasanah' (good innovation) or 'sunnah hasanah' (good practice/tradition), the latter being the position of those scholars whom the Puritans claim to be inspired by. My point is that the difference is only semantical and not really conceptual, as both schools agree on the acceptance of a certain amount of 'good' innovations in Islam, albeit with different terminologies. In the second half of the paper, I use the contentious issue of the mawlid as my case-study of the practical implementation of the conflicting approaches towards bid'ah. After studying the origins and development of the maw lid, as well as looking at some of the early discussions and arguments around it, I conclude that the mawlid, if proven to be based upon sound Islamic principles and evidences, cannot then be considered a reprehensible bid'ah, as Puritans, based upon a questionable logic, consider it to be. DA - 2005 DB - OpenUCT DP - University of Cape Town LK - https://open.uct.ac.za PB - University of Cape Town PY - 2005 T1 - A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah TI - A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah UR - http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9265 ER - | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9265 | |
| dc.identifier.vancouvercitation | Owaisi FA. A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah. [Thesis]. University of Cape Town ,Faculty of Humanities ,Department of Religious Studies, 2005 [cited yyyy month dd]. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/9265 | en_ZA |
| dc.language.iso | eng | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher.department | Department of Religious Studies | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher.faculty | Faculty of Humanities | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher.institution | University of Cape Town | |
| dc.subject.other | Religious Studies | en_ZA |
| dc.title | A critique of contemporary Puritan/Salafi discourse on the issue of the mawlid and its classification as Bid'ah | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Master Thesis | |
| dc.type.qualificationlevel | Masters | |
| dc.type.qualificationname | M.A | en_ZA |
| uct.type.filetype | Text | |
| uct.type.filetype | Image | |
| uct.type.publication | Research | en_ZA |
| uct.type.resource | Thesis | en_ZA |
Files
Original bundle
1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
- Name:
- thesis_hum_2005_owaisi_fa.pdf
- Size:
- 3.45 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- Description: