The legality of music and singing in the Islamic shari’ah (the divinely-revealed law) is an issue which is hotly debated among individuals and scholars in Islamic societies of our present day. Arriving at the correct view requires unbiased, scholarly research of the available literature which must be supported by authentic, decisive proof.
A considerable amount has been said and written both for and against this subject, and the proliferation of doubt and confusion necessitates another more critical, meticulous analysis and assessment of this whole matter, in order for one to come to a clear, decisive conclusion which leaves not the least bit of doubt in the mind of the reader.
In hope of acheiving such a difficult and lofty goal, I have applied a distinctive method which I trust, by Allah’s leave, will succeed in achieving these treasured aims and objectives.
Firstly, I analysized and assessed the claims made by differing factions that certain Quraanic verses support or prohibit the legality of the issue at hand. Secondly, I stringently researched the area of pertinent hadeeth literature in order to shed light on the issue as well as to dispel a number of misconceptions about the authenticity of certain traditions. Thirdly, I presented a consensus of the Islamic scholars with special reference to the pious predecessors of the Islamic ummah; i.e. the noble companions, the taabi’een, the famous imams and other jurisprudents (fuqahaa). Fourthly, I attempted to explain the infinte wisdom which underlies the ruling of prohibition as ordained by the divinely-revealed shari’ah. Fifthly, I cited examples of exceptions to the general rule of prohibition, as either defined by the authentic sunnah or agreed upon by the scholars. Finally, I presented a synopsis of the shar’iah texts and a conclusion which clarifies the prohibited aspects of music, singing and their adjuncts.
QURAANIC VERSES ALLEGED TO INDICATE PROHIBITION OF MUSIC
In his tafseer, Imam Al-Qurtubi mentions that there are three verses which have been used by the ulaama as proof of the contempt for and the prohibition of singing.
The first of these verses appears in Soorah An-Najm(*23) as follows:
Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, addresses the disbelievers from the tribe of Quraysh, {Do you marvel at this statement, and laugh and do not weep, while you amuse yourselves [proudly] in vanities? Rather, prostrate before Allah and worship Him.}
The important phrase is Allah’s saying, {Wa antum saamidoon} (”while you amuse yourselves [proudly] in vanities). Due to the root ’samada’ having various interpretations in the Arabic language, the scholars differ about this phrase’s meaning. As a result, different interpretations are given by the commentators of the Quraan, such as the companions, taabi’een and later scholars of tafseer.
Al-Qurtubi refers to the various derived meanings mentioned by the linguists (*24). Among the meanings understood from the root’ samada’ is the raising of one’s head up proudly or in disdain. When conjugated, the noun form ’sumood’ means leisure or idle play, while ’saamid’ (the doer of the action) means one who plays idly with musical instruments or other objects of play. It is said to the singing girl, “Asmideena!”(”Amuse us with your singing!”) However, ’saamid’ can also designate one who lifts his head in pride and haughtiness, as mentioned in the ancient dictionary, As-Sihah.(*25) A further meaning derived from the root ’samada’ is the notion of standing motion less or idle. This was mentioned by Al-Mathdawi,(*26) one of the famous grammarians, but he added that the common, established meaning in the language points to the idea of turning away by making fun and amusement. Finally, Al-Mubarrid mentions the meaning of ’saamidoon’ saying, “Saamidoon means khaamidoon [silent, motionless].”(*27)
At-Tabari mentions in detail the various narrations traced to the sahaabah and taabi’een.(*28) According to Ibn Abbaas, the word ’saamidoon’ in this verse refers to the mushrikeen’s habit of singing and playing noisily whenever they heard the Quraan being recited, in order to drown out the reciter’s voice so that others wouldn’t hear it.(*29) This meaning is used by the people of Yemen. Ibn Abbas also indicated a second, more general meaning for the word ’saamidoon’; namely, that they were playing and amusing themselves and making light of the affair. The same opinion was held by some taabi’een such as Ikrimah and Ad-Dahhaak. A third meaning given by Ibn Abbaas is that they held their heads up in pride. Other tabi’een have indicated certain meanings similar to the preceding linguists’ views. Thus, Qataadah reports Al-Hasan as saying that ’samidoon’ is the mushrikeen’s being inattentive and negligent. Mujaahid says it indicates their being in a state of extreme anger or rage.
Clearly, the term ’saamidoon’ has various possible meanings, e.g that those referred to were singing noisily and amusing themselves with music and idle play, that they were holding their heads in pride, or that they were exhibiting extreme anger and hatred for what they heard of the Quraan and the message of Islam. Furhermore, it could indicate that they were indifferent, negligent and rejectionist in their attitude. All of these meanings are possible, and are not – in essence – contradictory. Most likely, ’saamidoon’ is a comprehensive description of their different reactions upon hearing the verses of the Quraan and the new message of tawheed. However, it must be said that when a Quranic term yields a number of different possible meanings and we have no clear, authentically-reported statement from the Prophet defining it in a strict sense, then such a verse containing the said term cannot be used as an unequivocal, decisive proof (daleelun qat’ee) of any particular meaning. Thus, this verse cannot stand alone as an uncontestable proof of the prohibition of singing, music, etc. Rather, other evidence, either from the Quraan itself or from the authentic sunnah, must prove such a position.(*30)
Another verse alleged to be proof of the illegality of music, singing, etc is mentioned in Soorah Al-Israa as follows:
After Iblees (Satan) refuses to bow before Adam as ordered, he requests that Allah grant him respite until the Day of Resurrection, so that he may misguide all but a a few of the descendants of Adam (peace be upon him). Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, addresses Satan thus, {And excite any of them whom you can with your voice. Assault them with your cavalry and infantry, be a partner with them in their wealth and children, and make them promoses. But Satan promises them nothing except deceit.}(*31)
It is related that some of the commentators from the generation of the taabi’een, such as Mujahid and Dahhaak,(*32) interpreted Satan’s exciting mankind with his voice to mean through the use of music, song and amusement. Ad-Dahaak said it was the sound of wind instruments. However, according to Ibn Abbaas, the voice mentioned in the verse refers to every form of invitation which calls to disobedience to Allah, the Exalted.(*33) After mentioning the various interpretations of the commentators, At-Tabari says, “The most correct of these views expresses that verily, Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, said to Iblees, {Excite whosoever of Adam’s progeny you can with your voice,} and He did not specify any particular type of voice. Thus, every voice which is not an invitation to Allah’s worship and to His obedience is included in the meaning of Satan’s ‘voice’ which is referred to in the Quraanic verse.”(*34)
In conclusion, this verse – like the preceding one – is too general in its meaning, and is not by itself an explicit and unequivocal proof of the prohibition of music and singing, except in the case that such singing and music invites or leads to disobedience to Allah. Therefore, one must look at other unambiguous texts, which clearly show music, singing, etc. to be prohibited intrinsically and not due to some extraneous variable.
The final verse, and the one most often presented as proof of prohibition, is located in Soorah Luqmaan:(*35)
Allah, the Exalted, says, {And there are among men those who purchase idle talk in order to mislead others from Allah’s path without knowledge, and who throw ridicule upon it. For such there will be a humiliating punishment.}
After mentioning the condition of the felicitous (those who are guided by Allah’s Book and who benefit from listening to it), Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, reveals the condition of the miserable ones who refuse to benefit from hearing the word of God. They only devote themselves avidly to idle and foul talk, empty amusements and all other false works and deeds whose purposes are to turn others away from Allah’s path and to make it the butt of mockery.
Ibn Jareer At-Tabari, in his Jaamiul Bayaan, mentions that the interpreters of the Quraan differed as to the meaning of the term {lahwal hadeeth} (idle talk) which occurs in the above-quoted verse. Their views regarding its meaning can be formulated into three basic categories.
The first category defines the term {lahwal hadeeth}: (a) singing and listening to songs, (b) the purchasing of professional male or female singers and (c) the purchase of instruments of amusement; namely, the drum (tabl). The elements of this category revolve around reference to the blameworthy usage of instruments of idle amusement, in short, music and song. This view was held by a number of companions such as Ibn Masood, Jaabir and Ibn Abbaas. It is related that the former was questioned regarding the meaning of the verse under discussion to which he replied, “I swear by the One other than Whom there is no god that it refers to singing [ghinaa]“; he repeated it three times to emphasize his position.(*36) It is related that Ibn Abbaas said it referred to “singing and the like.”(*37) Jaabir is reported to view its meaning to signify singing and listening to songs.(*38) This general view pointing to censure of music and song was also held by a great number of taabi’een, such as Ikrimah, Mujaahid, Makhool and Umar bin Shuayb, to name only a few.(*39)
The second category of interpretation centers around the idea that {lahwal hadeeth} indicates conversation inviting to or consisting of shirk (polytheism). This view was the view of some tafseer scholars from the generation after the companions, such as Ad-Dahaak and Abdur-Rahmaan bin Zayd bin Aslam.(*40)
The third category conveys the meaning of all false talk, actions or deeds, whose nature it is to divert people from Allah’s path and from His worship and remembrance. For example, Al-Aaloosi relates that Al-Hasan Al-Basri was reported as saying that {lahwal hadeeth} includes “everything which distracts one from worship and the remembrance of Allah such as whiling the night away in idle conversation or entertainment, jokes, superstitous tales, songs and the likes thereof.”(*41) Al-Aaloosi supports this view, saying that the verse should be interpreted to include all such blameworthy words and deeds which divert one from Allah’s path.
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE HADEETH LITERATURE
The translation of the hadeeth follows: The Prophet (Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “There will be [at some future time] people from my Ummah [community of Muslims] who will seek to make lawful: fornication, the wearing of silk,(*46) wine-drinking and the use of musical instruments [ma'aazif]. Some people will stay at the side of the mountain and when their shepherd comes in the evening to ask them for his needs, they will say, ‘Return to us tomorrow.’ Then Allah will destroy them during the night by causing the mountain to fall upon them, while He changes others into apes and swine. They will remain in such a state until the Day of Resurrection.”(*47)
A CRICTICAL DISCUSSION OF ITS ISNAAD:(*48)
Prior to a discussion of the meaning of the part of this hadeeth relevant to this treatise, it is necessary to refute certain unfounded criticisms of its authenticity directed at it by a few scholars of the past and present, struggling under unfortunate misconceptions.
At the beginning of the isnaad, Imam Al-Bukhaari related, “Qaala Hishaamu-bnu Ammaar…”(”Hishaam bin Ammaar said…”) This statement was misconstrued by Ibn Hazm to indicate that there is a missing link between Al-Bukaari and the next narrator (i.e Hishaam),(*49) implying that the hadeeth’s isnaad is disconnected (munqati’) and therefore not valid as proof in the prohibition of music, song, musical instruments, etc. This type of isnaad, termed mu’allaq, contains a missing link. However, Al-Bukaari’s hadeeth is authentic, because there exist fully-connected chains for it which fulfill the condition of authenticity. This was stated by the great critical scholar of hadeeth, Shaykh Ibnus-Salaah, in his celebrated work, Uloomul Hadeeeth (his treatise on the science or methodology of hadeeth criticism and assessment). In his commentary of Saheehul Bukhaari, entitled Fat-hul Baari, Ibn Hajar mentioned Ibnus Salaah’s meticulous refutation of Ibn Hazm’s statement.(*50)
Among the other great critical scholars of hadeeth who mentioned that the isnaad is soundly connected (mowsool) is Ibn Hajar’s shaykh, Al-Haafidh Al-Iraaqi. He stated that the isnaad is found connected in Al-Ismaa’eeli’s work, entitled Al-Mustakhraj, which collects together other chains of narrators (or similar ones) for the same hadeeths mentioned in Al-Bukhaari’s collection.
And finally, there is Ibn Hajar’s distinctive work, Taghleequt Ta’leeq, a rare and stupendous masterpiece, which brings together connected, authentic chains (asaneed) of transmitters for those traditions which appear in Al-Bukhaari’s compilation in the form of the disconnected (mu’alliq) type of hadeeth, thereby dispelling accrued misconceptions regarding the claim of “weak” hadeeths occuring in the text (matn) of Al-Jaamis As-Saheeh.(*51)
After quoting other complete, authentic chains(*52) for the tradition under study, along with the sources wherein such chains of transmitters are mentioned,(*53) Ibn Hajar concludes by emphasizing (in reference to Al-Bukhaari’s narration):
“This is an authentic hadeeth. It has no deficiency or defect, and there is no point of weakness for any attack to be made on it. Abu Muhammed Ibn Hazam labeled it as defective by virtue of his claim that there is a break [intiqaa'] in the chain between Al-Bukhaari and Sadaqah bin Khaalid and because of the difference of opinion regarding the name of Abu Maalik(*54) As you’ve seen, I have quoted nine fully-connected chains of transmission (asaneed) whose narrators are thoroughly dependable. As for the difference regarding the kunyah of the companions, they are all of impeccable repute. Further more, in Ibn Hibbaan’s narration, the transmitter stated that he heard from both of them…(*55) I have in my possession yet other chains which could be presented here, however, I would not like to prolong this subject further by mentioning them. In what we have stated there is enough proof for the sensible, thinking person. And Allah is the grantor of success.”(*56)
In short, this particular narration of Al-Bukhaari is authentic and consequently constitutes a valid and binding text to be referred to in determining the ruling (hukm) regarding music.
It should be mentioned that certain modern-day writers, who blindly imitate previous scholars by quoting their views without applying the critical sciences of hadeeth research, have merely parroted the position of Ibn Hazm, and due to this, have caused many unwary persons to go astray regarding this issue. For example, Yoosuf Al-Qardaawi, in his popular book, entitled Al-Halaal wal Haraam fil Islam,(*57) says in regard to the extant hadeths on music: “As for what has been mentioned by way of prophetic traditions [relating to the subject of music], all of these have been assessed to have some point or another of weakness according to the fuqahaa of hadeeth and its scholars.(*58) The Qaadi Abu Bakr Ibnul-Arabi said, ‘There is no authentic hadeeth prohibiting singing.’ And Ibn Hazm said, ‘Every hadeeth related [prohibiting music and singing] is false and forged.”(*59)
Unfortunately, the statement that “all” the narrations are weak according to “scholars of hadeeth” is a gross error on Al-Qardaawi’s part and is not the result of meticulous critical research. Rather, it is due to an uncritical, blind acceptance of the words of Ibn Hazm and Ibnul-Arabi. Ibn Hazm was no doubt a virtuous, sharp-minded scholar; however, in the area of hadeth assessment and verification (as is the case in many aspects of his school of Dhaahiri fiqh), he has certain untenable and unfounded, even some very abnormal views.(*60) The accomplished hadeeth scholar and student of Ibn Taymiyyah, Al-Haafidh Ibn Abdul-Haadi, says of Ibn Hazm that “he often errs in his critical assessment of the degrees of traditions and on the conditions of their narrators.”(*61) In fact, there is unanimous consensus among the most reputable critical scholars of hadeeth regarding Ibn Hazm’s erroneous assignment of a ruling of d’af (weakness) to Al-Bukhaari’s hadeeth. Regarding the degree of this hadeeth, the views of Ibnus-Salaah, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani and Al-Haafidh Al-Iraaqi have already been mentioned. Among the qualified scholars who also agree with his assessment are the great scholars, Ibnul-Qayyim and Ibn Taymiyyah. Ibnul-Arabi is similar to Ibn Hazm in that he is quick to give a ruling of forgery or weakness on a hadeeth, without the necessary, detailed analysis and synthesis of all extant chains of narration relating to the subject. Had he executed such an analysis, undoubtedly he would have arrived at a sound decision and avoided much blame and censure.
Having established the authenticity of the aforementioned narration recorded in Imam Al-Bukaari’s compilation, the meaning of his hadeeth and its stand as an indisputable proof of the unlawfulness of music may now be discussed.
COMMENTARY ON AL-BUKHAARI’S HADEETH:
The portion of Al-Bukhaari’s hadeeth, which is presently of concern, is that segment whose text states: “There will be a people of my ummah [nation] who will seek to make lawful: fornication, the wearing of silk, wine-drinking and the use of musical instruments…”
The word of consequence here is the Arabic term ‘ma’aazif’. In order to discover what it implies, one must turn to Arabic dictionaries of hadeeth terms and other scholarly works. According to Lisaanul Arab,(*62) ma’aazif is the plural of mi’zaf or ‘azf,(*63) and indicates objects or instruments of play or leisure which are beat upon for their sound. If the singular form is used (mi’zaf), it specifically means a type of large wooden drum used mainly by the people of Yemen. The noun ‘azf also stands for the act of playing with ma’aazif, i.e. hand drums (dufoof)(*64) or other instruments which are struck upon. Al-Jowhari, the author of the ancient dictionary, As-Sihaah, asserts that ma’aazif signifies musical instruments, al-’aazif indicates one who sings, and the ‘azf of the wind is its voice.(*65) In the famous Taajul ‘Aroos min Jawaahiril Qaaamoos, besides quoting the above-mentioned meanings, the commentator Az-Zabeedi says that ma’aazif are instruments of leisure which are drummed upon or played, like the lute (’ood), the drum (tanboor), the small hand drum (daff) or other such musical objects.(*66) And finally, in the famous dictionary, An-Nihaayah fee Ghareebil Hadeeth,(*67) Ibnul-Atheer mentions the meaning of ma’aazif as it is used in various hadeeths. He comments, “By ‘azf is meant playing with ma’aazif, consisting of dufoof [hand drums] or other instruments which are beat upon.” He also mentions the derived noun form, ‘azeef, which means “sound” or voice”, while ‘azeeful jinn signifies the ringing of the jinns’ voices. It is said that the people of the desert imagined the shrill ringing of the winds in the desert air to be the voice of jinns.(*68)
The commentaries of the scholars of hadeeth also agree on the above-quoted meaninings for the term maazif mentioned in Al-Bukhaari’s narration. In Ibn Hajar’s exhaustive commentary of Saheehul Bukhaari,(*69) he adds that an earlier hadeeth scholar, named Ad-Dimyaati, says that the word ‘azf is also used to describe singing (ghinaa).(*70)
Such a detailed analysis of the meaning of the term ma’aazif, as mentioned in the most authoritative dictionaries of the Arabic language, is necessary to refute any others’ possible attempts to “explain away” or “interpret” it in a matter suiting their preconceived notions or opinions. It clearly has been established that the word ma’aazif – according to correct Arabic usage – indicates a specific number of things: (a) musical instruments, (b) the sounds of those musical instruments (music) and (c) singing to instrumental accompaniment.
ANALYSIS OF THE TEXT AS A PROOF OF PROHIBITION:
An analysis of the hadeeth’s wording clearly indicates the unlawfulness of music. In the text it is said that people from the Prophet’s ummah will “seek to make lawful” that which is termed ma’aazif. This statement (”seek to make lawful”) is derived from the verb yastahilloona, whose first part, yasta, is the conjugated addition to the root ahalla. The conjugated form ista means to seek, try, attempt, desire, etc., while the root ahalla means to make lawful. Taken together it means “to seek to make lawful”. Obviously, one can only seek, desire or attempt to make lawful that which is not lawful. For if something is already lawful, it is nonsensical for one to seek to establish it. Other things which people will attempt to make lawful are named along with ma’aazif. These additional matters are definitely prohibited in Islam – namely, illegal sexual intercourse, the drinking of wine or liquor and the wearing of silk (for males). Had ma’aazif(*71) not been prohibited, they never would have been associated with other prohibited objects in one and the same context.
In order to dispel the common misconception prevalent among certain Muslims that “only one hadeeth” in Al-Bukkhaari’s compilation stands as proof of prohibition regarding this issue, it is necessary to mention a sample of other authentic hadeeth. The fact that the majority of traditions regarding music, instruments and singing are weak and rejected (munkar) does not negate the existence of an appreciable number whose degree is saheeh (authentic) or hasan (of good, acceptable quality).
There is a narration by Ibn Maajah in Kitaabul Fitan(*72) in the chapter on punishments. The translation is: The messenger of Allah said: “A people of my ummah will drink wine, calling it by other than its real name. Merriment will be made for them through the playing of musical instruments and the singing of lady singers. Allah will cleave the earth under them and turn others into apes and swine.”
This is an authentic hadeeth. It was also narrated by Al-Bayhaqi and Ibn Asaakir with the same wording. The renowned scholar of hadeeth and fiqh, Ibnul-Qayyim, authenticated it as mentioned in the famous hadeeth commentary of the ‘allaamah, Abut-Teeb Muhammad Shamsul-Haqq Al-Adheem-Aabaadi.(*73) Furthermore, it was given a degree of saheeh by muhaddith of our era, Shaykh Muhammad Naasiruddeen Al-Albaani. He mentioned its detailed, critical evaluation and assessment in his Silsatul Ahaadeeth As-Saheehah(*74) and in his Saheehul Jaamis Sagheer.(*75) It is further mentioned and authenticated in his Ghaayatul Maraam, Takhreejul Halaali wal Haraam.(*76)
THE NARRATIONS OF AHMAD BIN HANBAL:
There are a number of narrations proving the prohibition of music and instruments in Ahmad bin Hanbal’s Musnad. Although many of them are weak, two narrations from his compilation, which have been verified to be authentic, follow.
THE FIRST TEXT:
The translation is:
The Prophet said: “Verily, Allah prohibited wine, gambling and al-koobah; and every intoxicant is prohibited.” Sufyan said, “I asked the narrator, Ali bin Badheemah, ‘What is al-koobah?’ He answered, ‘It is the drum.’”
THE SECOND TEXT:
It is translated thus:
Allah’s Messenger said, “Verily, Allah has prohibited for my ummah: wine, gambling, a drink distilled from corn, the drum and the lute;(*79) while He supplemented me with another prayer, the witr.”(*80)
These narrations have also been related by other compilers, such as Al-Bayhaqi in his Shu’ubul Eemaan with an authentic isnaad and At-Tabaraani in Al-Mu’jam Al-Kabeer with a jayyid (good) isnaad. The detailed proof of their verified authenticity are mentioned in Al-Albaani’s Saheehul Jaami’is Sagheer.(*81) It is further authenticated in his Mishkaatul Masaabeeh(*82) and in his work, Al-Ahadeeth As-Saheehah.(*83)
THE NARRATION OF AL-HAAKIM AND OTHERS:
It is reported by Al-Haakim in his Mustadrak(*84) that the Prophet (upon whom be peace and blessings) took the hand of the companion, AbdurRahmaan bin ‘Owf, and they proceeded to visit the Prophet’s ailing son, Ibraheem. They found the infant in the throes of death, so the Prophet took him to his breast and held him until his spirit left him. Then he put the child down and wept, whereupon Abdur-Rahmaan asked in astonishment, “You are weeping, Oh Messenger of Allah, while you prohibit crying!?” The following is the Prophet’s reply:
“Verily, I did not prohibit weeping [per se] but rather, I forbade two voices [sowtayn] which are imbecilic [ahmaq] and sinfully shameless [faajir]: one, a voice [singing] to the accompaniment of musical amusement [lahw] and Satan’s [wind] instruments; the other, a voice [wailing] due to some calamity, accompanied by striking of the face and tearing of garments. But this [weeping of mine] stems from compassion, and whosoever does not show compassion will not receive it.”
This hadeeth’s degree is hasan,(*85) and it has been strengthened by another narration related by Abu Bakr Ash-Shaafi’ee in his work, Ar-Rubaa’eeyat.(*86) Its abbreviated text follows.
THE NARRATION OF ABU BAKR ASH-SHAAFI’EE:
Anas bin Maalik related from the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) that “two cursed sounds are that of the [wind] instrument [mizmaar](*87) played on the occasion of joy and grace, and woeful wailing upon the occurrence of adversity.”(*88)
A similar text with slightly different wording is related by Al-Bazzaar in his collection(*89) of hadeeths. Al-Haafidh Nooruddeen Al-Haythami mentioned it in his Majma’ Az-Zawaaid(*90) and indicated that the narrators of this isnaad are all dependable. Thus, these last three narrations prove the illegality of music and singing to musical accompanient, especially wind instruments (mazaameer), which are referred to as “flutes of Satan” in the tradition related by Al-Haakim.
The traditions quoted are not the only available authentic hadeeths which establish prohibition. There are others(*91), however the scope of this treatise does not allow a more detailed exposition. The sample mentioned is sufficient proof, for {verily, therein is a reminder for any who has a heart or who gives ear and earnestly witnesses [the truth].}(*92)
IMPORTANT FOOTNOTE !!!
(*57)This book has been translated into English by various publishers under the title “The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam (Al-Hilal Wal Haram Fil Islam)” by Yusuf Al-Qaradwi.
(*58)The terminology “fuqahaa of hadeeth” used by Al-Qardaawi appears to reveal his unfamiliarity with proper designation of the various types of scholars of Islam according to their particular branch of Islamic science. Fuqahaa is a term applied to jusisprudents who study the legal issues derived from the shari’ah and who arrive at rulings in regard to them. Nowhere, to my knowledge, has the term fuqahaaul hadeeth been used in hadeeth criticism. The specialists in the area of criticism, verification and assesment of hadeeth literature are termed ashaabul hadeeth (those who relate and apply the hadeeth) or nuqqaadul hadeeth (critical assessors of hadeeth) or merely al-muhaddithoon (narrators of hadeeth). It appears that Al-Qardaawi depends on the views of “general “scholars, the likes of Al-Ghazaali, Ibnul-Arabi and Ibn Hazm rather than on the qualified specialists in the noble hadeeth sciences such as Al-Bukhaari, Muslim, Ahmad, Ibn Ma’een, Abu Dawood, Abu Zura’h, Ibn Abi Haatim, Ibnus-Salaah, Al-Iraaqi, Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn Hajar. These and their likes are authorities. But Al-Qardaawi has not quoted these or any of their calibre, even though there is a conensus among such qualified authorities that authentic hadeeths prohibiting music and its variants do exist, as shall be seen futher on in this paper.
(*59)See p.293 of his Al-Halaal wal Haraam fil Islam. Such bold, all-encompassing statements (if correctly attributed to Ibn Hazm and Ibnul-Arabi) are unfortunate examples of overstepping the boundaries of the scholars’ domain. Not even the most accomplished specialists in the field of hadeeth criticism would dare to make such blank statements such as, “Every hadeeth relating to prohibition of music is false.” or “There is no authentic hadeeth prohibiting music,” etc. because they dont know every hadeeth which exists nor the degree of every hadeeth which exists!! Had these scholars confined their views somewhat by saying something like, “As far as I know, there are no authentic hadeeths…”etc. that would have been closer to the truth, would have protected their honor and would not have left them open to blame and censure. But as it is said, “Every prize courser is prone to a fall”, all are prone to error except the true, chosen Messengers of Allah (may He exalt them and grant them peace).
CONSENSUS OF THE COMPANIONS,TAABIEEN IMAMS AND OTHER FUQAHAA
No doubt, the companions of the Prophet) were the best people after the Messengers of Allah. The companions received the knowledge of Islam from the Prophet and faithfully conveyed it to us. Therefore, it is useful to know their views regarding the subject of this treatise, for their consensus (ijmaa’) carries absolute weight(*93) in this matter and clarifies the correct view, removing any lingering doubts in the hearts of those who have not yet been graced with the gift of surety (yaqeen) and conviction.
In order to further strengthen the view previously established, it is necessary to review the opinions of the taabi’een, the four imams and other accomplished scholars of Islam. One of the attributes of sound Islamic methodology is the reference to the views and positions held by the pious predecessors of the Islamic ummah and the respectful consideration with which one approaches them. However, their views, as with the views of all, must be subjected to the criterion of Allah’s Book and the authentically-related prophetic traditions. Since the prohibition of music has already been established beyond the slightest doubt through detailed proof from the authentic sunnah, this section of the treatise is presented merely for the sake of the reader’s knowledge and Islamic awareness.
THE POSITION OF THE COMPANIONS ON THIS ISSUE
A few of the later Shafi’ite scholars related Ibn Taahir’s(*94) claim that the sahaabah and taabi’een unanimously agreed upon the permissibility of singing (ghinaa); therefore, those who came after them have no right to challenge their authority. The Shafi’ite scholar, Ibn Hajar Al-Haythami Al-Makki (909-974 H.), mentioned(*95) that some went so far as to claim the supposed consensus of ahlul Madeenah on this question. They even accused twenty-four scholars from among the sahaaabah, as well as innumerable taabi’een, their followers, and the four imams and their disciples of singing and listening to song. However, regarding the previously mentioned claim by Ibn Taahir and those who indiscriminately followed him, an authority on Shafi’ite scholarship, Shihaabuddeen Al-Adhraa’i (708-783 H.) refuted such facile reports and insisted that Ibn Taahir was not dependable in such matters. Al-Adhraa’i related that in Ibn Taahir’s book Safwatut Tasawwuf (The Vanguard of Sufism) and his treatise, As-Samaa’a (Listening [to music, singing, etc.]), one finds disgraceful, scandalous things, along with ugly instances of fraudulent presentations of material(in defense of his position on this issue).(*96) Al-Adhraa’i further clarified that what has been attributed to the companions could not be established by authentically-related narrations (aaathaar), but rather, their assertions were based on reports of certain companions listening to poetry, chants or songs.(*97) This does not substantiate their allegations, for such things are permitted by consensus and fall outside the realm of this area of dispute.(*98) Clearly, it was related that some companions performed permitted aspects of singing, etc., however, these actions were distorted out of context by such persons to include every type of singing, without specification or restriction.
Al-Adhaar’i then quoted an authoritative Shafi’ite imam, Abdul-Qaasim Ad-Dowlaqi, who clarifies in his book As-Samaa’a, the vital point which is at the crux of this issue. He says, “It has not been related regarding any one of the companions (may Allah be pleased with them) that he listened to the sort of singing which is of the disputed type;(*99) nor is it related that gatherings for song were organized for him, nor that people were invited to them – either publicly or privately, nor that he praised such song; rather, it was the companions’ habit to censure and blame such gatherings for the purpose of listening to it.”(*100)
Ibn Hajar Al-Haythami concludes his discourse by pointing out that it is clear from what has preceded that it is not permissible to blindly adhere to Ibn Taahir’s views, because he has deviated in both the point of view of his narrations (naql), and his personal opinions (aql). He was also a liar, innovator and a libertine. As for those who relate that the companions and others permitted the disputed types of song, they have committed an ugly mistake and have fallen prey to gross error. The issue of song and music is of two types: the first type is permitted by consensus, and the second type is disputed about as to its prohibition. To intimate that the companions’ listening to certain forms of poetry, singing, chanting, etc. is of the second type is invalid arbitrariness and is not based on the principles of jurisprudence and hadeeth science. Such principles clearly indicate that we must interpret whatever has been related on this issue regarding the companions as that type of song permitted by consensus.(*101)
Regarding this particular issue, Yoosuf Al-Qardaawi makes a bold and misleading statement. It reads: “It is related regarding a large number of companions and taabi’een, that they used to listen to song [ghinaa], and they didn’t see any harm in that.”(*102) This assertion is misleading for a number of reasons. Firstly, he claims that it has been “related”, however, he brings no valid proof of such a statement – not even a single pertinent tradition (athar) related to the companions(*103). Secondly, he leads the reader to believe that the sahabah listened to all types of song. This he accomplishes with the general wording “used to listen to song.” In reality, they only listened to particular types, as specified lawful in the sunnah. These types are restricted as to who may sing and who may listen, on what occasions they are allowed and in what manner they are to be delivered. The difference between what Qardaawi has intimated and what really occurred is like night and day.
In reality, the companions unanimously agreed upon the prohibition of music and song but allowed particular exceptions specified by the authentic sunnah. Many authentic narrations (aathaar) traced to the various sahaabah bear witness to this. For example, it is authentically related by Al-Bayhaqi that the companion, Abdullah bin Masood said, “Singing sprouts hypocrisy in the heart as rain sprouts herbs and greens.” As was related in an earlier portion of this treatise, when he was questioned regarding the meaning of the words {lahwal hadeeth}(*104) he replied, “I swear by Him besides Whom there is no other god that it refers to singing.”(*105) He repeated it three times over to emphasize his belief that the words from the Quraan were a rebuke and censure of singing. In addition to this, the same view was held by the four rightly-guided caliphs, the fuqahaa among the sahaabah such as Ibn Abaas, Ibn Umar and Jaabir bin Abdullah, as well as the general body of sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them all)(*106). Anyone who claims differently is requested to bring proof. It is further requested that it be an authentically-reported, clear and unambiguous text that it relate specifically to the point of dispute (mahallun nizaa).
THE VIEW OF THE TAABI’EEN IMAMS AND SCHOLARS AFTER THEM
The view held by the companions was generally adhered to by the taabi’een and their followers, the four imams and the great majority of dependable Islamic scholars up to the present time. From among the taabi’een and their followers, there are such authorities as Mujaahid, Ikrimah, An-Nakha’i and Al-Hassan Al-Basri.(*107)
Imam Abu Haneefah(*108) has perhaps the harshest view of the four famous Imams of jurisprudence. His school of thought is the strictest, for he detested singing and considered it sinful. As for his disciples, they have explicitly confirmed the prohibition of listening to all musical amusements and pastimes, including wind instruments (mazaameer),(*109) all types of tambourines, hand drums (dufoof)(*110) and even the striking of sticks(al-qadeeb). They have asserted that such actions constitute disobedience to Allah and that the performer of such action is sinful, therefore necessitating rejection of his testimony.(*111) They have further stated that it is incumbent upon the Muslim to struggle to avoid listening to such things, even if he were passing by or stationed near them (without any willful intention). Abu Haneefah’s closest disciple, Abu Yoosuf, stated that if the sound of musical instruments (ma’aazif) and amusements (malaahi) were heard coming from a house, the house could be entered without permission of its owners.(*112) The justification for this is that the command regarding the prohibition of abominable things (munkaaraat) is mandatory, and cannot be established if such entering rests upon the permission of the residents of the premises.(*113) This is the madhhab (position) of the rest of the Kufic scholars as well, such as Ibraheem An-Nakha’i, Ash-Sha’bi, Hammaad and Ath-Thowri. They do not differ on this issue. The same can be said of the general body of jurisprudence of Al-Basrah.(*114)
It is related by Ibnul-Jowzi that Ishaaq bin ‘Eesaa At-Tabba’a asked Imaam Maalik bin Anas,(*115) the leading jurisprudent of Madeenah, about the view of the people of Madeenah regarding singing (ghinaa). He replied, “In fact, that is done by the sinful ones.” Abut-teeb At-Tabari said, “As for Maalik bin Anas, he truly did prohibit singing and listening to it.” He further related that Maalik said, “If one purchased a slave-girl(*116) and found her to be a professional singer, he could return her to the original owner for reimbursement on the claim of having found fault in the merchandise.”(*117) The ruling of prohibition (tahreem) is generally agreed upon by the scholars of Madeenah. The Maaliki jurisprudence and commentator, Al-Qurtubi, reports Ibn Khuwayz Mandaad as saying that Imam Maalik had learned singing and music as a small boy until his mother encouraged him to leave it for a study of the religious sciences. He did, and his view became that such things were prohibited.(*118) Al-Qurtubi confirmed Maalik’s view by saying that the only exception to this general ruling was the type of innocent songs such as those sung to placate the camels during travel, or during hard labor or boredom or during times of festivity and joy, such as the ‘Eed days and weddings – the latter to the accompaniment of a simple daff (hand drum). Al-Qurtubi then said, “As for that which is done in our day, by way of the [blameworthy] innovations [bidah] of the Sufi mystics in their addition to hearing songs to the accompaniment of melodious instruments such as flutes, string instruments, etc., such is haraam [forbidden].(*119)
THOSE WHO APPROVED OF SINGING AND ITS REFUTATION
There is agreement among the four imams that all musical instruments(*136) (ma’aazif) are forbidden. Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah affirms this in his celebrated Fataawa where he says, “The madhhab of the four imams is that all instruments of musical entertainment are haraam [forbidden]. It is authentically related in Saheehul Bukhaari and other compilations that Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) foretold that some of his ummah would seek to make lawful: fornication, the wearing of silk, wine-drinking and musical instruments [ma'aazif]; and that such people would be turned into apes and swine. The term ma’aazif means musical entertainment, as has been mentioned by the scholars of the Arabic language. It is the plural of mi’zafah, the instrument upon which one makes musical sounds. None of the disciples of these imams has mentioned the existance of any dissension from the consensus on the prohibition of all instruments of musical entertainments.”(*137)
It has been indicated that a few scholars see no harm in singing and/or in the playing of music. In order to remove any doubt from the reader’s mind regarding this vital issue it is necessary not only to mention these scholars and their claims but also to establish the proof against them. Any such claims of permissibility made in reference to the noble companions or the four imams of the popular schools of jurisprudence have already been refuted in detail.
It is mentioned in various classical works that certain fuqahaa saw no harm in singing. Some of these early scholars(*138) are: Ibraheem bin Sa’d from the people of Madeenah, Ubaidullah Ibnul-Hasan Al-Anbari from Al- Basrah and Abu Bakr Ibnul-Khallaal from the Hanbalite scholars.(*139) The Shafi’ite faqeeh, Ibn Taahir, was mentioned earlier, and his claims were refuted in detail.(*140) Therefore, there is no need to mention him at this point. This reply regards what has been related in reference to the three above-mentioned scholars. It was narrated that they did not see any harm in simple ghinaa (singing), without musical accompaniment or licentious lyrics, etc. In addition to this, as has been previously detailed(*141) by Ibnul-Jowzi, Ibnul-Khallaal saw no harm in the recitation of spiritual poems (qasaaid zuhdiyaat) in a sweet and melodious voice. Therefore, even though those who would like to establish the ruling of permissibility sometimes exploit the positions of such scholars, it is futile, because what these scholars allowed is agreed upon by consensus and is not the point of contention (mahallun nizaa’).
A group of later scholars often referred to as maintaining the view of permissiblility are Ibn Hazm,(*142) Ibnul-Arabi(*143) and Al-Ghazaali.(*144) Some of the gross misconceptions of the former two have already been refuted.(*145) A final reply to them is a quotation from the oft-repeated words of Ibn Hazm himself: “It is incumbent upon us that we do not accept the saying of any person after Allah’s Messenger, unless such a person authentically relates it back to the Prophet (peace and blessing be upon him).” Being aware of the previously-established, clear ruling of prohibition given by the Prophet on this issue,(*146) it becomes one’s obligation to reject all positions contradictory to his and to accept his decision as binding and final. Verily, Allah, the Majestic and Exalted, has made such an attitude of obedience to His Messenger the criterion of true faith (eeman). He says in His glorious Quraan:
{But no, by thy Lord, they [Muslims] do not have [real] faith unless they make you [Oh Muhammad] judge of all disputes between them, and then find within themselves no dislike of your decision, but rather, submit with full submission.}(*147)
THE WISDOM BEHIND ITS PROHIBITON BY THE DIVINELY REVEALED SHARIAH
Perhaps the most salient feature of the divinely revealed shari’ah is its all-encompassing benefit (maslahah) for the sake of mankind, regarding all aspects of their spiritual and material welfare. Thus, it is, that various ordinances in the form of divine legislation have been given to man, directing him to pious works of worship (ibaadat)and social transactions (mu’aamlaat). Such works lead to spiritual peace and material prosperity. In accordance with Allah’s infinite knowledge, wisdom and mercy, it is necessary that He( glorified be His praise) should prohibit certain things whose effects are evil and harmful to His slaves. This principle is perfectly epitomised in the following authentic tradition of the Prophet (upon whom be peace and blessings):
“By the One in Whose hand is my soul, there is not a thing which brings you nearer to Paradise and distances you from the Fire, except that I have directed you to it; and there is not a thing which brings you closer to the Fire while distancing you from Paradise, except that I have prohibited it for you.”(*152)
From the foregoing hadeeth , as well as other texts of the Quraan and sunnah, the scholars of usool(*153) have formulated certain vital objectives (maqaasid) of the divine law. Among these is the principle that nothing has been ordained for man except that which is for his own good and benefit, while nothing has been prohibited except that which is harmful and detrimental to his welfare. With this principle in mind, one perhaps can have a general understanding of the infinite, divine wisdom behind the prohibition of music and its adjuncts. Its potential moral, spiritual and social evils are a danger to the Muslim individual as well as the Islamic community at large.
In order to convey some of the divine wisdom behind prohibition, it is useful to quote a few excerpts from the writings of the authoritative scholar, Ibnul-Qayyim,(*154) who has dealt with this subject extensively.(*155) In the section which exposes Satan’s deception of those who claim “spiritual mysticism” (tasawwuf)(*156) in their dancing, singing and listening to music, he says, “From among the artful machinations and entrapments of Allah’s enemy [Satan], with which he has snared those possessing little good sense, knowledge and deen [faith], and by which he has stalked the hearts of the false and ignorant people, there is the listening to whistling, wailing, handclapping and song to the accompaniment of forbidden [musical] instruments.(*157) Such things block the Quraan from people’s hearts and make them devoted to sin and disobedience. For song [to musical accompanient] is the Quraan(*158) of Ash-Shaytaan (Satan). It is a dense veil and barrier, preventing nearness to Ar-Rahmaaan!(*159) By way of such song, Satan deceives vain souls, making it appear pleasing to them through his cunning appeal to their vanities. He insidiously whispers false, specious arguments suggesting the ‘goodness’ in song. These arguments are accepted, and as a result, the Quraan becomes an object of neglect and abandonment.”(*160)
Ibnul-Qayyim describes in detail the physical and emotional change which overcomes the “Sufis” when they begin to hear such song and music. They begin to strike their feet in time to the rhythm, ans swaying effeminately to the tune, they whirl to a frenzy, screaming and wailing and tearing their clothes, like donkeys around the axis of a grinding mill. Such a laughing stock is the very joy of the enemies of Islam.(*161) Yet such people pretend that they are the very “elite”(*162) of Islam while taking their deen as an amusement and pastime. Hearing the [musical] instruments of Satan is dearer to them listening to the recitation of the Quraan.(*163)
He concludes by saying that “the result of preoccupation with song and music is that you never find its devotee other than astray from the path of guidance, in thought and deed. Such a person develops an aversion to the Quraan and a devotion to song. If he were offered a choice between listening to song/music or the Quraan, he would most certainly choose the former over latter, the audition of which is like a heavy burden upon him.”(*164)
Later on in his treatise, Ibnul-Qayyim specifies other aspects of the divine wisdom: “Therefore, know song has particular characteristics which faint the heart, causing hypocrisy to sprout therein, just as water sprouts plants. Among its qualities is that it distracts the heart and prevents it from among contemplation and understanding of the Quraan, and from applying it.(*165) This is because Quraan and song can never coexist in the heart, since they are mutually contradictory. For verily, the Quraan forbids the pursuing of vanities and ordains restraint of the souls passions and temptations to evil. Song, on the other hand, encourages the very opposite of these virtues, as it excites the hidden inner self and entices the soul to inequity by driving it towards every shameful desire…”
Among the signs of hypocrisy is one’s rarely remembering Allah(*166) and one’s laziness in rising to prayer along with its poor performance. Seldom do you find one infatuated by song except with such blameworthy attributes.
“Furthermore, hypocrisy is based on falsehood, and song contains the falsest lyrics. It attempts to beautify the abominable and encourages it, while seeking to make ugly and discouraging that which is good. Such is the very essence of hypocrisy. A person’s addiction to song peculiarly makes listening to the Quraan a heavy weight upon his heart, hateful to his ears. If this is not hypocrisy, then hypocrisy has no reality.”(*167)
Needless to say, the preceding exposition highlights the negative effects of music and song upon the Muslim. These effects induce in him hypocrisy, vice, neglect, vanity and a host of other attendant evils, the worst of which is its insidious ability to turn the devotee away from remembrance of Allah, His Book and His deen.
The adverse ramifications of music and song and their various attendant evils are well known facts experienced by all enlightened, thinking believers.(*168) It is this reality which has convinced a host of prominent American and European musicians and singers who have embraced Islam to leave this vile and ignoble profession(*169) {And verily, Allah guides the believers to a straight path.}(*170)
No comments:
Post a Comment