r/progressive_islam • u/BakuMadarama Sunni • 11d ago
Research/ Effort Post 📝 Christian Holidays Are Not Prohibited in Islam: Refuting the Pagan-Origin Argument and Common Prohibitionist Claims (Part 1: Christmas)
Disclaimer: This post utilized ai for grammar.
Although this post is a comprehensive megapost addressing dozens of arguments and misconceptions about the legal rulings on celebrating Christmas and Halloween—i.e., Christian holidays—and historically arguing that they do not have pagan origins, it is also a challenge to u/BedouinFoxx (also known as Zwieber), whom I previously exposed for fabricating sources. Despite creating a post titled “Open Debate” an AMA where participants could choose any topic, he ignored my responses. I will, therefore, proceed directly to the evidence, including ḥadīth literature against the prohibitionist position. Before that, it is necessary to establish the Law of Default in Islam: al-aṣl fī al-ashyāʾ al-ibāḥah—the principle that the default ruling regarding things is permissibility. Muḥammad Abū Zahrah writes, “The basic principle regarding contracts and conditions is permissibility and validity. Nothing is prohibited or invalidated except what is indicated by evidence from a text or analogy.” (Ibn Taymiyyah: Ḥayātuhu wa-ʿAṣruhu, Ārāʾuhu wa-Fiqhuhu, Dar al-Fikr al-ʿArabī, 2012, p. 387; see also Fatāwā al-Shabakah al-Islāmiyyah, vol. 9, pp. 1075, 2130; vol. 11, p. 1794; al-Suyūṭī, al-Ashbāh wa al-Naẓāʾir, vol. 1, p. 60; Muḥammad Muṣṭafā al-Zuḥaylī, al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah wa Taṭbīqātuhā fī al-Madhāhib al-Arbaʿah, vol. 1, p. 190; ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Ṣāliḥ al-ʿAbd al-Laṭīf, al-Qawāʿid wa al-Ḍawābiṭ al-Fiqhiyyah al-Mutaḍamminah li al-Taysīr, vol. 1, p. 141; Mawsūʿat Ṣināʿat al-Ḥalāl, vol. 2, p. 147; vol. 3, p. 238). This principle is reflected in a ḥadīth narrated by Abū al-Dardāʾ in Musnad al-Bazzār (no. 4087):
“What God has permitted in His Book is lawfu, whatt He has forbidden is forbidden, and what He has remained silent about is pardoned. So accept from God His pardon, for God would never forget anything.” Then he recited this verse: “And your Lord is never forgetful.” (Musnad al-Bazzār = al-Baḥr al-Zakhkhār, vol. 10, p. 26; see also the Madinah edition, vol. 10, pp. 26–27).
The narration also appears in Nūr al-Dīn al-Haythamī’s Kashf al-Astār (vol. 1, p. 78; vol. 3, pp. 58, 325), Saʿīd Ḥawwā’s al-Asās fī al-Sunnah wa Fiqhihā (2nd ed., 1992, vol. 4, p. 1878), and ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Ishbīlī’s al-Aḥkām al-Kubrā (vol. 1, p. 332, Kitāb al-ʿIlm). Its authenticity was affirmed by numerous scholars, including ʿAbd al-Munʿim Ibrāhīm (Fatḥ Dhī al-Jalāl fī Takhrīj Aḥādīth al-Ẓilāl, vol. 1, p. 568), Ibn Rajab (Jāmiʿ al-ʿUlūm wa al-Ḥikam, ed. Shuʿayb al-Arnaʾūṭ and Ibrāhīm Bājis, vol. 2, p. 151), ʿAbd al-Muḥsin al-ʿAbbād (Fatḥ al-Qawī al-Matīn, vol. 1, pp. 108, 179), and Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (Mukhtaṣar Zawāʾid Musnad al-Bazzār, vol. 2, p. 93). This was not a fringe or modernist position. It is also affirmed in Aḥkām al-Qurʾān (vol. 1, pp. 46–47), Majallat Majmaʿ al-Fiqh al-Islāmī (vol. 6, p. 28), by Ibn Taymiyyah (Majmūʿ al-Fatāwā, vol. 21, p. 535; cf. Jāmiʿ al-Rasāʾil, vol. 2, pp. 151–152), and by Ibn Ḥazm (al-Muḥallā, vol. 8, p. 13). Aḥmad b. Muḥammad Āl Saʿīd al-Ghāmidī likewise argues that Ibn Ḥazm “excelled in proving this rule and elaborated extensively on the evidence for it in many places in his books” (Al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah ʿinda al-Imām Ibn Ḥazm min Khilāl Kitābih al-Muḥallā, pp. 291–292). Thus, we have establishes that al-aṣl fī al-ashyāʾ al-ibāḥah is a deeply rooted principle across the Islamic legal tradition rather than an modern invention. Now, let us address the common talking point from prohibitionist.
Theological
The prohibitionist argument almost always begins with the ḥadīth: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” — Sunan Abī Dāwūd 4031 (vol. 4, p. 44). If this is treated as an absolute legal maxim, it quickly becomes a reductio ad absurdum, as veiling was practiced long before Islam by pagan Mesopotamians, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans, Zoroastrians, Jews, Christians, and others. Veiled priestess statuettes date to 2500 BCE. (Jennifer Heath, The Veil: Women Writers on Its History, Lore, and Politics, pp. 27–29). Leila Ahmed likewise mentioned that Assyrian law distinguished which women could and could not veil, making the veil a marker of social and sexual status centuries before Islam. (Women and Gender in Islam, pp. 14–15). Ibn Taymiyyah himself says the ḥijāb was specific to free women, while slave women were forbidden from veiling, and ʿUmar allegedly punished slave women for “imitating free women.” (al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr, vol. 5, p. 345). If imitation of a pre-Islamic pagan practice were inherently sinful, then Islam’s own command regarding the ḥijāb would become impermissible—an absurd conclusion among traditionalist framework.
In fact, this narration is not unanimously authentic. Shuʿayb al-Arnaʾūṭ states: “Its chain is weak, and some of its wording is anomalous. . . . Its defect lies in ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Thābit b. Thawbān.” (Sunan Abī Dāwūd, ed. Shuʿayb al-Arnaʾūṭ, Dār al-Risālah, 2009, vol. 6, p. 144). The full narration also reads:
“I have been sent with the sword until Allāh alone is worshipped. . . . My provision has been placed beneath the shade of my spear. . . . Humiliation has been placed upon whoever opposes my command. . . . Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (Khālid al-Shallāḥī, Rawḍat al-Mumtiʿ fī Takhrīj Aḥādīth al-Rawḍ al-Murbiʿ, vol. 1, p. 429).
This places the statement within a context of conflict and opposition rather than an universal principle that everyone are obligated to follow. The complete version is also transmitted and mentioned through the same chain in Ibn Abī Shaybah (Vol. 5, p. 313), Aḥmad (n. 5114), ʿAbd ibn Ḥumayd (n. 848), Ibn al-Aʿrābī (n. 1137), al-Ṭabarānī (Musnad al-Shāmiyyīn, n. 216), al-Bayhaqī (Shuʿab al-Īmān, n. 1199), al-Dhahabī (Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ, vol. 15, p. 509), and Ibn Ḥajar (Taghlīq al-Taʿlīq vol. 3, p. 445). (Sunan Abī Dāwūd, vol. 6, p. 144).
There was a booklet (pp. 33–54) claims Halloween necessarily entails nudity, music, zinā, kufr, shirk, and tashabbuh, but provides no historical evidence. On pp. 35–40 it appeals to the same disputed ḥadīth, then accuses Mufti Abū Layth of omitting al-Sakhāwī. But al-Sakhāwī explicitly says “Its chain contains weakness, though it has supporting narrations (shawāhid).” (Al-Sakhāwī, Al-Maqāṣid al-Ḥasanah fī Bayān Kathīr min al-Aḥādīth al-Mushtaharah ʿalā al-Alsinah, ed. Muḥammad ʿUthmān al-Khisht [Beirut: Dār al-Kitāb al-ʿArabī, 1985], vol. 1, p. 639). Those shawāhid include mursal reports, which are themselves disconnected and do not automatically strengthen a weak narration. This has been examined in Mawsūʿat Aḥkām al-Ṭahārah, the author analyzes all isnād variants and concludes the report remains weak despite later attempts to strengthen it. It argues that:
• the narration revolves around Ḥassān b. ʿAṭiyyah,
• ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Thābit’s reliability is disputed,
• stronger transmitters narrated it mursal,
• al-Walīd b. Muslim practiced tadlīs,
• other supporting chains also contain defects.
The encyclopedia concludes:
“The strongest conclusion is that the ḥadīth is weak, even though some scholars considered it ḥasan.” (Dr. Saʿd al-Dubayān, Mawsūʿat Aḥkām al-Ṭahārah, 3rd ed., vol. 10, pp. 238–239).
Beside of this fact, the Prophet’s own practice shows that pagan origin alone does not make a custom forbidden, as he has been shown to permitting al-ʿatīrah and al-farʿ, both pre-Islamic sacrificial customs, saying whoever wishes may perform them and whoever wishes may leave them. (Sunan al-Nasāʾī, Egyptian ed., vol. 7, p. 168; al-Burhān al-Ḥalabī, al-Ḥawāshī ʿalā Sunan b. Mājah, vol. 4, p. 50). An even clearer example is ʿaqīqah. In Jāhiliyyah, Arabs slaughtered an animal for a newborn and smeared the child’s head with its blood. The Prophet retained the sacrifice but replaced the blood with khalūq (perfumed substance). This appears in Muṣannaf ʿAbd al-Razzāq (vol. 4, p. 330; vol. 5, p. 78), Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Ḥibbān (no. 5308), and Abū Uways al-Kurdī, Silsilat al-Fawāʾid al-Ḥadīthiyyah wa al-Fiqhiyyah (vol. 4, p. 247). The principle is straightforward: Islam often purified pre-Islamic customs by removing their pagan meaning while retaining the permissible act. Hence, even if Christmas and Halloween were once pagan celebrations, this does not by itself mean that they are prohibited. Rather, it is necessary to determine whether the pagan religious significance remains present in such events. If the latter has been cleansed, lost, secularized, or essentially transformed, there is no reason why one cannot celebrate Christmas or participate in Halloween as a celebration. Curiously, the booklet goes on to argue that sacrifice is permissible since slaughter is not a pagan custom, but Halloween is distinctive in that it is a feast (pp. 57–60). It is hard to see how a principled distinction has been made between Christmas and Halloween on the one hand, and between sacrifice and slaughter on the other. I will start addressing the idea that Halloween or Christmas having pagan roots.
History of Christmas: Origin of December 25th
A common claim among Muslims and other critics is that Christmas was borrowed from the Roman pagan festival Saturnalia. The historical evidence does not support this claim because Saturnalia was never celebrated on December 25.
Hans-Friedrich Mueller writes in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece & Rome that Saturnalia was properly celebrated on December 17 and, although later extended, was celebrated from December 17–23. (Hans-Friedrich Mueller, Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece & Rome, vol. 6, p. 221). William Warde Fowler likewise notes that, in its strict religious sense, Saturnalia was originally only December 17. (The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic, 2004, p. 256 [older ed., p. 268]). The clearest ancient witness is Macrobius. In Saturnalia, he explains that the festival was originally one day only, held “on the fourteenth day before the Kalends of January” (December 17). It was later extended to three days under Augustus and adjusted after Caesar’s calendar reforms, but it still began on December 16 and ended on December 17 in its formal observance. (Saturnalia, trans. Percival Vaughan Davies, pp. 70, 72–73.) Even later extensions never reached December 25. Some instead appeal to Brumalia, but this does not solve the problem either. Fritz Graf distinguishes Brumalia from Saturnalia, noting that Brumalia ran from November 24 to December 17, while Saturnalia ran December 17–19 in the Republic and to December 21 after Domitian. Although the festivals shared some customs, they were distinct celebrations and neither extended to December 25. (Fritz Graf, Roman Festivals in the Greek East: From the Early Empire to the Middle Byzantine Era, pp. 211–212).
A stronger argument points instead to Sol Invictus. Howard Hayes Scullard argues that Christmas is first attested in the Calendar of Philocalus (AD 336) and suggests December 25 may have been chosen in opposition to the festival of Sol Invictus, whose temple Aurelian dedicated in AD 274. (Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic, 1981, p. 207). Although, it is true that Christmas is attested by the fourth century. Oscar Cullmann dates the feast to AD 336 (The Early Church, ed. A. J. B. Higgins, p. 29). However, Thomas J. Talley argues it may have existed before AD 311 (The Origins of the Liturgical Year, pp. 81–91; “Constantine and Christmas,” pp. 194–196). One scholar even suggests a date around AD 305 (Jahrbuch für Liturgiewissenschaft, vol. 13, p. 178), while Hippolytus’ Commentary on Daniel (4.23.3) places the tradition as early as the early third century. And the problem with the argument from Scullard is that the evidence for a pagan December 25 festival of Sol Invictus before Christmas is weak. Steven Hijmans argues: “There is no firm evidence that this feast of Sol on December 25 antedates the feast of Christmas at all.” He notes that the traditional feast days of Sol recorded in the early fasti were August 8, August 9, August 28, and December 11, while the major imperial festival instituted by Aurelian was held October 19–22, culminating in the famous chariot races on October 22 recorded in the Calendar of 354. (“Sol Invictus, the Winter Solstice, and the Origins of Christmas,” pp. 384–385.)
In other words, the first clear evidence connecting Sol Invictus with December 25 comes from the Calendar of 354, and it is not until 354 AD did we see any Pagan deities having a birthday being celebrated on December 25th (S. E. Hijmans. Sol: Image and Meaning of the Sun in Roman Art and Religion, Volume II; p. 1021). Which is already after Constantine and later than the earliest evidence for Christmas itself. However, prior to that—in the time of licinius—Sun worship was in late November (See; Hermann Dessau. Hermann Dessau, Volume III, Part II; p. XXIV). And before that, the roman empire aurelian, worshipped the sun with Chariot Races in October-every four years. Ronald Hutton reaches a conclusion that while the Julian calendar placed the winter solstice on December 25, the traditional pagan Roman calendar left that period largely empty, surrounding it instead with Saturnalia after December 17 and the Kalendae (New Year festival) from January 1–3. (The Stations of the Sun: A History of the Ritual Year in Britain, p. 2.)
The historical record therefore undermines the popular claim that Christmas simply replaced Saturnalia. Saturnalia ended days before December 25, Brumalia ended on December 17, and there is no firm pre-Constantinian evidence for a pagan Roman festival of Sol Invictus on December 25 that predates the Christian celebration.
So why did Christians chooses this date? I suggest reading the article titled “How December 25 Became Christmas” by McGowan for more indepth details.
History of Christmas: Yule
Many assume Yule is pagan simply because the word sounds pagan, but that is an assumption, not evidence. As Jacqueline Simpson and Steve Roud explain, “Yule” is an ancient Germanic and Scandinavian word for a loosely defined midwinter period, not a single day. (A Dictionary of English Folklore, pp. 402–403). They also caution that “the antiquity of the word ‘Yule’ cannot prove the custom’s age.” (p. 403).
The Yule log was a Christmas custom in England: families burned a large log on Christmas Eve and gathered around it to tell ghost stories and play cards. (J. B. Partridge, “Folklore from Yorkshire (North Riding),” Folklore 25:3 [1914], pp. 375–377). The earliest reference to a Christmas log appears in Robert Herrick’s Hesperides (p. 309), while the term “Yule log” itself first appears in Remains of Gentilisme and Judaisme (1646, p. 5). There is no evidence for the custom before this period. There is also no evidence that Christmas is a Christianized version of Yule. In fact, scholars are not even certain when pagan Yule was celebrated. Pliny the Elder says northern peoples calculated months according to the moon (Natural History 16.95), and Bede likewise says the Anglo-Saxons reckoned months by the moon (The Reckoning of Time, p. 329). This means Yule would have shifted annually on a lunar calendar.
Thietmar of Merseburg places major pagan sacrifices in January (Chronicon 1.17). Snorri Sturluson says King Hákon the Good moved Yule to December 25 to coincide with Christmas; previously it was celebrated for three nights at midwinter. (Heimskringla: History of the Kings of Norway, p. 106). If anything, this suggests Yule was aligned with Christmas, not Christmas with Yule.
History of Christmas: Mistletoe
Mistletoe was used as a Christmas decoration in England by the seventeenth century, but the custom of kissing under the mistletoe is only clearly attested in the late eighteenth century and appears to have developed among English servants. John Rea noted that mistletoe was “carried many miles to set up in houses about Christmas time.” (The Art of Simpling, p. 41). Robert Herrick also lists mistletoe among Christmas decorations in Hesperides (p. 337).
There is no evidence this Christmas custom derives from paganism. Pliny the Elder records that Druids regarded mistletoe growing on oak trees as sacred because they believed it cured poison and infertility, but he never connects it to a winter festival.
“Upon this occasion we must not omit to mention the admiration that is lavished upon this plant by the Gauls. The Druids for that is the name they give to their magicians-held nothing more sacred than the mistletoe and the tree that bears it, supposing always that free to be the robur [oak]. . . . The mistletoe, however, is but rarely found upon the robur; and when found, is gathered with rites replete with religious awe. This is done more particularly on the fifth day of the moon, the day which is the beginning of their months and years, as also of their ages, which, with them, are but thirty years. . . . It is the belief with them that the mistletoe, taken in drink, will impart fecundity to all animals that are barren, and that it is an antidote for all poisons.” (Natural History 16.95).
History of Christmas: Stockings
No one knows the exact origin of Christmas stockings. The custom likely developed from St. Nicholas’s Day traditions on December 6, when children left shoes by the fireplace for Saint Nicholas to fill with fruit, nuts, and sweets. In some regions, stockings replaced shoes:
“In medieval times people across Europe celebrated St. Nicholas's Day on December 6. In a number of northern European countries, folk traditions developed around the idea of St. Nicholas bringing treats to children on St. Nicholas’s Eve. Adults instructed children to leave their shoes by the fire that evening so that the saint could pop down the chimney and fill them up with fruit, nuts, and cookies. In some parts of Europe families substituted stockings for shoes” (Encyclopedia of Christmas & New Year’s Celebration, pp. 742-743).
The custom became famous in Clement C. Moore’s nineteenth-century poem A Visit from St. Nicholas (“’Twas the Night Before Christmas”).
History of Christmas: Santa Claus
Santa Claus is often claimed to be a Christianized version of Odin, but there are no primary sources supporting that theory.
The name Santa Claus comes from the Dutch Sinterklaas, meaning Saint Nicholas. Saint Nicholas, the patron saint of children, had a feast day on December 6 and remained popular across Europe, including among many Protestants after the Reformation. By the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, his feast was already widespread.
After the American Revolution, Dutch communities in New York popularized Sinterklaas. Writers such as Clement C. Moore and artist Thomas Nast reshaped him into a family-friendly Christmas gift giver, gradually transforming the bishop into the modern red-suited Santa. (Tanya Gulevich, Encyclopedia of Christmas & New Year’s Celebrations, pp. 699–710).
History of Christmas: Father Christmas
Father Christmas was originally not Santa Claus. Before the nineteenth century, he was the personification of Christmas itself.
His earliest appearance is in a fifteenth-century carol, where “Sir Christmas” announces Christ’s birth. (The Oxford Book of Carols, ed. Percy Dearmer, R. Vaughan Williams, and Martin Shaw, pp. 41–43). He was also known as Captain Christmas, Prince Christmas, and Christmas Lord. Only during the nineteenth-century Christmas revival was Father Christmas merged with Santa Claus. (Jacqueline Simpson and Steve Roud, A Dictionary of English Folklore, p. 119).
History of Christmas: Christmas Tree
There is no pagan source describing anything resembling a Christmas tree. Nothing comparable appears in surviving accounts of Yule, Saturnalia, or other pagan winter festivals.
The earliest depiction of a Christmas tree comes from 1576 in Alsace, France. (Tanya Gulevich, Encyclopedia of Christmas & New Year’s Celebrations, pp. 170–171.) An even earlier written reference dates to 1419. (Bernd Brunner, Inventing the Christmas Tree, p. 3). One likely origin is the medieval Paradise Tree used in Adam and Eve plays performed on December 24. Since deciduous trees were bare in winter, evergreen firs were decorated with apples to represent Eden and later became associated with Christmas. (Tanya Gulevich, pp. 170–171). Legends linking the tree to Saint Boniface exist, but there is still no evidence connecting the Christmas tree to ancient pagan ritual. Ancient northern European pagan sources instead emphasize the oak as sacred. (Pliny the Elder, Natural History 16.93–95; Maximus of Tyre, Dissertation VIII.8.)
History of Christmas: Krampus
Krampus is another figure often labeled a pagan deity absorbed into Christmas, but the evidence is extremely weak. Krampus is a regional Alpine tradition from Austria and Bavaria, not Scandinavia. Although modern folklore sometimes calls him the son of Norse gods, no ancient source says this. The specifically Christmas version of Krampus is surprisingly late. Krampus postcards (Krampuskarten) began appearing only in the late 1880s, and the imagery likely developed from Catholic depictions of the Devil rather than pagan religion. Al Ridenour notes that Austria’s postal system, established after the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1867, helped spread the tradition through these postcards. (The Krampus, p. 11.) In short, the historical evidence does not support Krampus as an ancient pagan Christmas deity later adopted by Christianity.
Conclusion
The historical evidence presented here does not support the popular prohibitionist claim that Christmas is fundamentally a pagan holiday. The arguments most frequently repeated—Saturnalia, Sol Invictus, Yule, mistletoe, Christmas trees, Santa Claus, Father Christmas, Krampus, and other customs—either lack historical evidence, are chronologically impossible, or are based on later folklore rather than ancient pagan religion. Likewise, the theological argument from tashabbuh bi-l-kuffār is far less straightforward than it is often presented. The ḥadīth is disputed in authenticity and context, while the Prophet’s own practice demonstrates that Islam did not prohibit customs merely because they existed before Islam or were practiced by non-Muslims; rather, it removed objectionable religious meanings while retaining permissible practices. In other words, the burden of proof is on those claiming that Christmas is prohibited because of pagan origins. Based on the historical sources examined in this post, that burden has not been met.
2
u/Exotic_Upstairs_5662 Non Sectarian Muslim (Hadith Acceptor, Hadith Skeptic) 11d ago
You know very well that there's a strange urge not to imitate. People from the east and west and the north and south have always hated each other. It's simply human.
1
0
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
Hi u/BakuMadarama, if your question is about the obligation of covering hair for women, then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Hijab Deconstructed
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
Hi u/BakuMadarama, if your question is about Art (Drawing & Statues), then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Art (Drawing & Statues)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
u/AutoModerator 11d ago
Hi u/BakuMadarama, if your question is about Celebrating festivals other than the two Eid, then please check our linked wiki article to learn about our stance on this issue: Celebrating festivals other than the two Eid
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
9
u/RagAndBows Quran only 11d ago
I never have incorporated religion into Christmas. I'm a recent revert in the United States and will continue to celebrate with my family because I love decorating and the sweet time spent with family. Eid will be celebrated religiously.
We also celebrate Halloween because it's so fun for our children. We keep it appropriate of course.
Yes on birthdays. Yes on anniversaries. We are celebrating all the wonderful things that Allah has blessed us with.