Manisfestations

I’ve just heard a Khutbah and from what I understood then manifestations and rallies are innovations (bid’ahs) the speaker was arguing that the way of the people of Bid’ah is so come to a conclusion (manifesting) THEN looking for the evidence in the Qur’an (which here would be “He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do that, then he should do it with his tongue; and if he has not strength enough to do even that, then he should (at least abhor it) from his heart; and that is the least of faith.” Sahih Muslim Hadith 79 Narrated by Abu Sa’d al Khudri )

He says the right way is to take the evidence THEN based all our actions on them. Furtheremore we should follow the Sahabahs and he was saying that the Sahabas never manifestated, the Sahabas prayed and make dhikr, they didn’t “mix with mushrikoons” shout and scream and carry placards.

I’m not sure about where I stand yet, but I think I do agree with what he is saying…

Another example he gave was celebrating the Birthday of the Prophet (which I believe is wrong), again he explained that people come to conclusion “we want to celebrate the birthday of the Prophet” then look for evidence; the prophet saying that we should love him more than ourselves, or the prophet informing us that he was born on a Monday, therefore saying that “oh he gave us his birth day so that we could celebrate it”

As muslims we’re suppose to follow Allah, the prophet and his companions. right?
Does that mean doing something they didn’t do becomes Bid’ah? How far can you push this?

Comments

What did he mean by "manisfestations"?

As for the idea of bid'ah, applying it everywhere without limit I would also consider to be a bid'ah.

There is a hadith to balance it - it says that if someone starts a good act and others follow, the original person who started it is also rewarded.

The person seems naive about "look at the evidences and then make the act", because generally the act would have existed before. What you do is judge the act compared to the evidences. you can only look at the evidences first if you are the one who is about to start something. otherwise it cannot be done in that order.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

You wrote:
What did he mean by "manisfestations"?
Protest, i think he was referring to what is going to happen tomorrow.

There is a hadith to balance it - it says that if someone starts a good act and others follow, the original person who started it is also rewarded.

yeah but all Bid'ahs started off with a good intention, it doesnt make them not bid'ahs.

The person seems naive about "look at the evidences and then make the act", because generally the act would have existed before. What you do is judge the act compared to the evidences. you can only look at the evidences first if you are the one who is about to start something. otherwise it cannot be done in that order.

But its better to look at the evidence first isn't?, because, in this case, it isnt really evidence, its more like orders, as it's from the Qur'an. So you look at the order, then brainstorm around it all the actions that would go with it. Instead of taking something you want to do then trying to make it good by using Qur'anic verses. That's just like the non-muslims who say that Islam is racist and then Quote that verse saying that Believers should kill all unbelievers they meet; taken out of context to justify a point made.

We can't just choose whenever we want, shall we take evidence first, or action first, we need it to be consistent, and looking at the Qur'an (and Sunnah) should be the first thing to do. in my humble opinion

what do you think of the Sahabah's thing?

Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?

With the sahabahs thing, it depends on what the word manifestations meant there. I have no clue as to what he was referring.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

I think he was referring

and just following the Sahabas in general.

Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?

He seems to be suggesting that the second part of that hadith you quoted does not apply - the bit that says speak up against the evil.

Actually, he says more than that - he is saying it is actively wrong and evil.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

You wrote:
He seems to be suggesting that the second part of that hadith you quoted does not apply - the bit that says speak up against the evil.

you've got a point here.
but there is so many ways to "speak up against evil" and maybe protest and rallies arent so good, i've never personally being to one so i couldnt say

Actually, he says more than that - he is saying it is actively wrong and evil.

because it wasnt what the Sahabas did.

Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?

But speaking out WAS from ahadith. Maybe the sahabas were always able to act?

Just waving placards in a small demo may seem pointless (it does to me), but actively calling it an evil I think is wrong.

"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.

Agreed

I just really do hope that this is what he said and not what i understood.. =/

Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?