Regarding the Permissibility of Music
Question:
Some scholars and many zealous laymen claim that there is a consensus among jurists as to the prohibition of listening to any music with musical instruments. Some Imams say the opinion that allows it is a strange (شاذ) opinion, which is rejected as baseless by all prominent scholars and schools of thought. If this is true, how can so many Imams and scholars allow this new phenomenon of Islamic music using instruments?
Answer:
بسم الله والحمد لله والصلاة و سلام على رسول الله
In the name of Allah, and all praise and thanks is due to Allah, and may He send peace and blessings upon the Prophet Muhammad
It is quite true that—historically—the prevalent (جمهور) opinion in Islamic jurisprudence regarding the use of and listening to musical instruments is that of prohibition (حرام). It is the official opinion of the four schools of thought, although various scholars from different schools held it is only disliked (مكروه) and many others deemed it permissible with the condition that the song is not immoral. It is not true that there is a consensus on it or that the opinion of permissibility is a strange opinion, which is a divergence from clear teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah. In today’s world there are a growing number of prominent scholars that allow listening to instruments that don’t accompany sinful poetry (song).
We will—with divine support—show that this issue is a matter of legitimate disagreement based on scholarly derivation and interpretation (اجتهاد). Unfortunately, one of the main reasons for this research is that there is actually a movement among modern scholars to dismiss, suppress, or misrepresent the opinion of permissibility!
There is a claim that no prominent scholars ruled for the permissibility of musical instruments except for Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who is purported to solely rely on a strange opinion of Imam Ibn Hazm. This is false. There are hundreds, dare I say thousands, of scholars who held the permissibility of listening to music as long as the song is morally upright. The following are some of the most prominent scholars (mujtahideen) in our history who, not only deemed it permissible, but in some cases wrote a whole research to prove it!
- Abdullah bin Ja’far bin Abi Talib (al-Aqd al-Fareed 6/12)
- Sh. Abu Hamed al-Ghazali (vol. 6 pg. 1150 al-Ihyaa’)
- Imam al-Shawkani (Ibtal da’wa al-Ijmaa ala mutlaq al-Sama’)
- Imam ibn Hazm (Al-Muhallah)
- Imam Abdul-Ghani al-Nablusi (Idaahat al-Dalalaat fee sama’ al-alaat)
- Sultan al-Ulema al-Iz ibn Abdul-Salam (Rislat al-Sama’)
- Al-Qadi Ibn Qutaiba al-Daynoor (al-Rukhsah fi al-Sama’)
- Imam Ibn Tahir al-Qaysirany (pg. 31 al-Sama’)
- Imam al-Thahabi (al-Rukhsah fil-Ghinaa wa al-Turb)
- Abu Talib al-Makky (Qoot al-Quloob)
- al-Qady Ibn Al-Araby al-Makky (Ahkam al-Quran vol. 3 pg. 1494)
- Sh. Yusuf al-Majishoon the prominent Muhaddith (#3399 ibn al-Khuthayma)
- Ibn Daqeeq al-Eid (Iqtinas al-Sawanih)
- Sh. Jad Ali jad al-Haqq (fatawah #3280)
- Sh. Mahmood Al-Shaltoot (pg. 375 fatawaah)
May God shower them all with His Mercy!
Some scholars try to say that many of these scholars were simply saying that it is permissible to listen to songs a cappella—and some of their works do make that point in addition to the permissibility of also using musical instruments. Each one of these references refers to the opinion of permissibility for songs with instruments.
The following are the juristic proofs used to illustrate prohibition and the response from the scholars who are not convinced by the evidence or who see the evidence in a different way:
From the Qur’an: There are two verses which are interpreted as justifying prohibition supporting the clearer hadith (narration) on the subject. They are as follows:
“There are some people who buy distracting/entertaining speech without knowledge in order to mislead people from the path of God…” (Qur’an 31:6)
Only a couple out of the dozens of exegetes thought this had anything to do with musical instruments.
Many exegetes took the more common path of general meaning in the absence of an authentic text and said it refers to preferring or liking to listen to false speech, thus distracting one from Islam.
The vast majority of exegetes said it is talking about the singing of jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic days). Imam al-Qurtubi said that this and the other verse are those that the scholars use as evidence for the disliked (مكروه) nature of singing. Imam al-Qurtubi also narrates that this verse was revealed in the life of the Prophet ﷺ when a man bought a slave known for singing unIslamic songs of jahiliyyah (ignorance).
Many exegetes pointed out a weak hadith that is strengthened by the aforementioned circumstantial cause of revelation. The weak hadith states:
“.لا يحل بيعُ المُغنّياتِ ولا شِراؤهنّ وثمنهنّ حرامٌ”
“It is prohibited to buy or sell women singers of jahiliyyah. The price of such transaction is prohibited.”
The evidence for prohibition of Islamic Music in this verse is very weak. Any true scholar will surely admit that the verse is not evidence in and of itself; rather it is supportive to a couple hadiths and the position of many Companions.
The second verse is:
“(God is saying to Satan) Incite whoever you can among them with your voice…” (Qur’an 17:64)
Some scholars from the early generations said this is literal and it means that Satan is whispering to us to follow him and disobey God as is mentioned in the famous verse in Surah Ibrahim, “I had no authority over you except that I called you and you followed me…” (Qur’an 14:22). The great Imam of tafsir (exegesis) al-Tabari took the position as is his style that it is general and since there is no clear evidence specifying what is meant by “your voice” then it is taken literally and generally.
Many other scholars noted that the verse is talking about playing (لعب) and wasting time (لهو). Once again, no real scholar will claim that this verse in and of itself can be used to prohibit listening to music.
Let’s see what evidence we can find from the Sunnah (traditions of the Prophet ﷺ):
There is a hadith mentioned as an attachment (معلق) to a section in the authentic collection of Bukhari under the chapter of drinks #5590 titled those who seek permission of drinking alcohol by calling it another name. Imam al-Bukhari did not put the Hadith as an official Hadith in his authentic collection. According to Imam al-Muhallab the reason was because Hisham was not sure of the name of the companion (Al-Ibtal Al-Shawkani pg. 9) The hadith goes:
“…ليكونَنَّ من أمَّتي أقوامٌ ، يستحلُّونَ الحِرَ والحريرَ ، والخمرَ والمعازِفَ”
“There will be a group of people from my nation who will deem silk, alcohol and musical instruments as permissible…”
Some hadith scholars found a connected chain for this type of hadith. The most famous is the book by Ibn Hajr in his book “closing the attachments” (تغليق التعليق). There are scholars who argued against his assertions, but even if we were to accept his findings about a connection between al-Bukhari and Hisham bin Ammar there is still a problem with Hisham as a narrator among some prominent hadith scholars.
There are many concerning issues with this hadith. According to Imam al-Thahabi in his famous 4-volume book Mizan al-I’tidaal which accounts for all the weak narrators he could gather. Imam al-Thahabi mentions that Hisham bin Ammar used to be a veracious narrator, then he changed. He has narrated 400 hadiths that have no basis. He used to not narrate unless someone paid him. He was accused of changing the text. Imam Ahmad said he was reckless. Some narrated that he said the Qur’an has words from Gabriel and Muhammad ﷺ and is created speech.
Ibn Hajar acknowledges this, but justifies his ruling of the hadith through a different narration that has someone else narrating it other than Hisham. That hadith varies in text but does mention the people deeming musical instruments as permissible (which linguistically and logically doesn’t necessarily mean that it is prohibited). The next problem with this hadith, which is not solved by Ibn Hajar’s book, is a narrator named Atiyah bin Qays.
Atiyah bin Qays was a righteous man who hadith scholars agreed regarding his character and honesty (عدالة), but there is an issue among some scholars about his precision of memory and narrating (ضبط). Some famous scholars of hadith call him trustworthy (ثقة) just because he is a known pious man while the issue of his precision with hadith is unknown (مجهول). Some of them said although he is acceptable (far from Saheeh ) to be careful in narrating from him. This is mentioned by the hadith scholar Abu Hatem al-Razi in his book al-Jarh wa al-Ta’deel 2/37 and by Abu Bakr al-Bazzaar in his book Kashf al-Astar 1/106.
This is the best proof that the proponents of prohibition bring forth according to them. Other hadiths are relying on this one. For example:
“.ليكونن في هذه الأمة خسف، وقذف، ومسخ، وذلك إذا شربوا الخمور، واتخذوا القينات، وضربوا بالمعازف”
“There will be disgrace and defamation in this nation when they will drink alcohol and listen to music (literally female singers while beating on instruments).” (al-Suyooti al-Sagheer 7720)
Even a layman can see that the linguistic connotation does not in any way show a prohibition for listening to music, but rather a prohibition of the “party” scene. There are many other hadiths like this one that show that the combination of alcohol and music is a shameful and immoral scene. On this fact there is a consensus among scholars. Even in the narration of the other hadith seen as the strongest proof, there are variations which focus on drinking alcohol by a different name and don’t even mention musical instruments. Thus Imam Bukhari’s precise classification.
Many people feel that even though we see the issues in the proofs used for prohibiting music, still it is the official opinion of the 4 main schools of thought and that shows that it was clear to those scholars who know better than us. The assumption here is that every scholar from the different schools of thought over the centuries was a mujtahid and was willing to challenge the opinion and evidence of his own school. This was simply just not the case as Dr. Mana’ al-Qattan narrates in his book on the history of legislation in Islamic history. He elucidates on the well-known unfortunate part of our history known as the closing of the doors to juristic reasoning (إغلاق باب الاجتهاد). For close to 8 centuries, most of the scholars passed down by memory and book most of the rulings of Islamic Law. For various reasons, they were uncomfortable with people changing or questioning popular rulings. Some of those who didn’t agree with this methodology like Ibn Taymiyyah (ra) or al-Suyooti (ra) were seen as dissidents. There is also some historical evidence that this ruling of prohibition of all music was heavily promoted toward the end of the Abbasi Caliphate because of the widespread immorality with music and drinking as many of the hadiths indicate. In my research, which really requires a whole book, there is more than meets the eye on the prevalence of the opinion prohibiting all instrumental music.
Proofs for the Permission of Good, Morally Upright Music:
- There is a false claim that the Companions all prohibited it. Abdullah bin al-Zubair used to keep women playing guitars (lutes) and singing in his presence. (Idahaat al-Dalalat al-Nablusi 96)
- There is no disagreement about the Ibrahim bin Sa’d bin Abdul Rahman bin Awf listening to songs with guitars (al-Sama’ Ibn Tahir 63)
- Jews have always attributed music to Prophet David ‘alahi assalatu wassalam (peace and blessings be upon him). It is in the Bible, “The priests stood in waiting at their assigned places, along with the descendants of Levi who carried musical instruments used in service to the LORD that King David had made for giving thanks to the LORD—because his gracious love is eternal…” (2 Chronicles 7:6). So in the following hadith and commentary we have some solid evidence for the praise of good music:
“يا أبا موسى ، لقد أوتيتَ مِزمارًا مِن مزاميرِ آلِ داود”
“Abu Musa, Surely you have been given a voice like the music of David.” (Bukhari 5048)
Many scholars want to say that this hadith is simply referring to a beautiful voice. When we look into Ibn Hajar’s explanation of this hadith he comments with another sound hadith, “I entered Abu Musa’s house and I have not heard a cymbal, lute or a flute better than his voice.” (al-Fath)
The clear linguistic indication here is that the Prophet ﷺ is talking about musical instruments as though they are beautiful and delightful. That cannot be the case in something prohibited. It would be like him saying to his companion who earned a lot of money, “That’s even better than hijacking a caravan!”
- Imam al-Thahabi’s recordings about scholars in his book on prominent Muslims. Here are two examples:
“Ishaaq al-Nadeem an Imam who was a great scholar master of many sciences. Known for music with untainted poetry…” (Siyar 11/118)
“Ulayyah sister of the commander of the faithful Haroon al-Rasheed ‘Well-refined poetess known for singing and music with a pleasant voice. A modest pious women of precedence…’” (Siyar 10/187)
There are hadiths that led many scholars from the schools of thought to permit listening to drums. Other prominent Malikis and Shafi’ees (two different schools of thought) allowed trumpets, flutes and tambourines. Those are all musical instruments and the Islamic legal practice of analogy (قياس) allows other instruments in the absence of a clear text prohibiting them.
Whichever opinion you feel is stronger, you are welcome to follow. Please don’t judge someone else because they follow a different opinion than you. Our scholars teach us the following principle in dealing with law—there shall be no rebuking in matters of legitimate disagreement.
.لا إنكار في مسائل الاختلاف
Islam has a rich tradition of knowledge that by divine decree has differing interpretations as to the details of law. Only God owns the absolute truth.
If you choose to listen to music, observe piety and do not listen to immoral music or choose to be in immoral environments. There is no doubt that much of today’s music is prohibited by Islam and even some Islamic music still brings bad environments.
Tweet This
Share on Facebook
Digg This
Save to delicious
Stumble it
RSS Feed
Salam
I just KNEW peeps would get fired up about this in a rude way! when I first read the above hadiths mentioned, I carried on listening to music. What made me stop was the fact that the songs and beats would crop up in my head just as I was about to pray. i finally got fed up of hsving my concentration ruined, and chose to stop listening. In hindsight I saw the benefits of not listening to music. But I think the truth is as Muslims grow older and meet more people, priorities and outlook of life changes. When I was at uni I’d happily follow whatever was the most “religious” sounding way of life, because I didnt have the confidence to go against a Muslim Crowd and find out things for myself, ESP as Muslims can be very harsh to one another if you don’t agree with their particular view. I’d expect most of the pp who are being aggressive will grow out of this black/white mentality by their 40s because by then their kids would have grown up and they’d have more pressing things to worry about than arguing with imam John about music.
Assalamu alaykum shaykh
Just a quick question. Imam ash-Shawkani, did he follow the opinion that it is permissible or did he just list the various opinions on the subject in his book?
WAS Raiiq,
Imam al-Shawkani was a prominent scholar he was showing the large evidence for the permissibility and didn’t make a clear preference although leaning to permissibility over prohibition. His main goal was accomplished- The utter destruction of the claim of consensus among scholars as to its prohibition!
Salaam and barakallah feek for putting forth such an insightful and well-balanced article.
Especially considering some on the comments that are being made.
With peace.
Yahya Ederer has provided us with an excellently researched article.As a musician myself these are some points I would like to add in response,at least to let the ummah know that thought is given by musicians on the issue in question.We are not all seeking to be famous for a loud egotistical noise or promote immorality.My knowledge of Arabic comes mainly from the pages of this website,and quite often I jot down notes in my notebook of the english meaning of the arabic phrases wether they be from the Qur’an or the Hadith. On one occasion I listened to a recitation of a passage from the Qur’an at the house of a muslim sister for whom I had done some pretty substantial repair work.This was in Rochdale in Northern England.To my ear the recitation in Arabic seemed as much musical as it was spoken,for there was inflection and note in the passage from a certain Surah.
I have also thoughtthat Allah gave the blackbird its voice,its song. He gave the crickets the percussive sound they make in the fields.He gave them this as much as The Qur’an says He gave the rain to ensure the sprouting of seeds.He gave the whale a communicable language and He gave the geese a mighty honk.Who are we to be so deficient in sound. We can abuse it of course, but as much as any other human endeavour surely we can make the effort to practise with modesty in mind.Because if we are
going to be faced with the blow
of a mighty trumpet then we must learn to recognise the genuine calll from the false.In my opinion this must be true of song,wether accompanied by instruments or no.In Blues music there is a whole culture of the history of a people to whom redemption means much. In the different lands there are different scales of musical notes to be seen¬ed
as how we can learn from each other.Dont the wind and the river and the air have voices,and does not The Qur’an so many times ask us to b mindful of these elemental things. Then as musicians are we not very often attemping to recreate these inspiring
sounds of nature as it were,through whatever medium ,ancient or modern, that the musical scales give us.All is a not a tv show in this world, and when the Gershwin Brothers, George & Ira, wrote the song ‘Summertime’ for the Broadway musical musical ‘Porgy & Bess’ they weren’t thinking of their bank balences,they were thinking of the human heart and how to make an honest expression of its condition.What are we most famous for here in Northern England? The Beatles I’d say & perhaps the rugged landscape of The Pennine Hills,the moorland and the cries of The Curlew.I suppose y
ou could say we loved The Beatles
as much as we were familiar with the cries of the Curlew, because through their songs in 1960′s & since they gave us nothing less than a world view. Such a view in my opinion is a marvelous antidote to intolerance.Surely Man must have a purpose under Heaven to show a care for this world, Allah’s creation,as it is
as much as a regard for The Hereafter & behaviour according to islam.
That’s what I hear in the song of a Blackbird. That’s what I hear in The Beatles’song of the same name.Inshallah. Brian Cokayne,/Stockport ,England
Asalaamu alaikum,
There are not many books that are thorough in dealing with the topic of music and its impermissibility. Ibn Hajar al-Haytami for example, has two invaluable books:
كف الرعاع عن محرمات اللهو والسماع
الزواجر عن اقتراف الكبائر
In the first book, he gathered approximately forty ahadeeth and concluded: “All of this is explicit and compelling evidence that musical instruments of all types are unlawful.” – In the second book, he brings the statement of scholars (like al-Qurtubi al-Maliki) who said there was no difference of scholarly opinion that it is haraam to listen to musical instruments. Al-Qurtubi lived in the 7th century hijri, and for anyone to come in the consequent centuries and try to disturb an established consensus can only be seen as a desparate revisionist effort. It also suggests at the very least that opinions permitting musical instruments are unreliably weak.
Shaykh al-Islam also cited the view of the four imams and apparent concensus in his Fataawa (11/576, 597, 603; 28/118). At-Tabari, Ibn Qudamah and an-Nawawi also cited ijma. The following link additionally provides references for 23 scholars (inc. Malikis) from different time-periods who declared music to be haraam by concensus.
In one of his articles, shaykh Haitham Al-Haddad wrote:
“Al-Awza’i (d.157 A.H.), a very famous scholar of the second generation, narrated that the righteous Caliph Umar Ibn Abdul‘Aziz (d.101 A.H.) sent a letter to one of his governors with the words, ‘…and your presentation of musical and woodwind instruments is an innovation in Islam. I had resolved to dispatch to you someone who would shear the hair on the back of your head, such vile hair!’ Likewise, Imam Malik (d.179 A.H.), who resided in Madinah – the home of the vast majority of the Companions of the Prophet stated, ‘Only the very sinful amongst us listen to music’. Imam Malik’s opinion was in fact a Madinian opinion, which reflected their consensus: a source of authority if not legislation. Can it be reasonably argued that while so many early scholars greatly detested using musical instruments, there were those who believed it was acceptable? This cannot be the case and is precisely the reason why some scholars negate the opinion (of allowing music) being attributed to any of the early scholars. The famous Hanbali scholar Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (d.795 A.H.) stated, ‘Whoever attributes the opinion permitting music to any of the scholars who are respected in legal issues has surely erred.”
And Tawfeeq is from Allah alone.
WAS Zaki,
We’ve all heard these claims before. Do you think with your comment you have clearly solved the matter??? LOL
This article was to show the other side of the story. But I’m not sure you read it…
The clear point is that there is a difference among scholars all with valid principled juristic reasoning behind it.
If you are convinced with the opinion of prohibition then don’t listen, but as the scholars say don’t rebuke others for following in matters of legitimate disagreement.
Of course our opinions do not count when the scholars, as a collective group throughout the centuries have already spoken. I suggest you read about what makes a “difference of opinion” valid, and what the rule of “ijma” necessitates. Imam Ash-Shawkani or any other scholar of repute is unable to come centuries later and disturb or re-open a matter that has long been settled.
Wa alaykumusalam wa wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
Not everything is legitamate disagreement. When Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, there is no disagreement among the believers.
“We’ve all heard these claims before. Do you think with your comment you have clearly solved the matter??? LOL
This article was to show the other side of the story. But I’m not sure you read it…”
Assalamualaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
wa kanal insanu akthara shayin jadala
complete the following:
1) ‘who let the…..
2)’oops i…
3)’baby……
Now try these:
1)’wa nafsiyoon w’…
2)da likal’kitaboo….
3)lahu ma’fis….
which of them would we like to be played in our heads at our death bed?
Its hilarious how all these haters clearly didn’t read the article. Its rather simple.
1) Can you quote a SINGLE verse of the Qur’an that says Music is forbidden? Not what SOMEONE (no matter how noble) other than the Prophet (peace be upon him) said the verse meant. What the verse clearly SAYS. You can’t.
2) Can you cite a SINGLE authentic Hadith that says Music is forbidden. Again, an authentic Hadith from the Prophet (peace be upon him), not an Athar from a Sahabi or Tabi`i. You can’t.
Remember, Hadith of Ashrat al-Sa`ah that speak of future events aren’t legitimate variables in deriving a Hukm. Such a Hadith would not be an Amr.
’2) Can you cite a SINGLE authentic Hadith that says Music is forbidden’
=Excuse me, but the article mentions the bible as evidence, not to mention stories with no isnad of people listening to music !!! Wow
1. ‘musical instruments as though they are beautiful and delightful. That cannot be the case in something prohibited.’
=> The beautiful women and their bodies are delightful for us, but its forbidden outside marriage – false logic
—
2. Hadith that make music prohibited not mentioned in article
a) “A people of my ummah will drink wine calling it by other than its real name, cheer and joy will be made for them through the playing of musical instruments ad the singing of lady singers, Allah will cleave the earth under them and turn others into apes and swine ” ibn Maja, Bayhaqi, Ibn Asakir
=> the prophet mentions people drinking wine while cheering with something not halal, otherwise he wouldnt mention it if it was halal and the lady singers + wine = forbidden, all 3 parts are foridden
—
b) “Allah has made forbidden upon the ummah intoxicants, gambling, and Quba(drum). And every intoxicant is forbidden”
Musnad Ahmad, Ebu Dawud, Bayhaqi, Musnad Abu Yala, Ibn Hibban, Tabarani-Mujam Kabir
=> the drums are explicitly made forbidden
—
c) “I have not been prevented from crying, however I have been prohibited from two shameless idiotic sounds: A voice singing alongside musical instruments and Satans Wind instruments ” Hakim
=> Explicitly mentioned voice+instruments and wind instruments
—-
d) “There shall be among my Ummah some who will be stoned from the skies, some who will be transformed, and others which will be swallowed by the earth.
They said: When will that happen o Messenger Of Allah ?
-He said: When musical instruments become popular, abundant and when singing slave girls become abundant and people drink alcohol !” Tirmidhi
=> Again, all 3 things are forbidden not just 1 or 2
—–
Ibn Abas: “Duff is forbidden, musical instruments are forbidden, Quba-drum is forbidden, and the flute is forbidden”
etc etc
art: that didn’t really address anything at all.
Assalamualaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
Actually waqqas, it totally did.
Just quote a single verse from the Qu’ran to substantiate the claim. That’s all.
I’ve read the article and still find music to be something that should be avoided. I agree with Abdullah the previous commentator. These arguments / justifications seem to be very vague and long winded for me to comprehend. When in doubt, avoid. So since music is causing such a difference of opinion for you to bring up an article about its permisibility, i think its best if i stick to what is clearest to me. I love Kamal el Mekki’s lecture on The End of Music. By Allah’s will after listening to that lecture I completely stopped listening to any type of music and just listened to Quranic recitations. And it actually changed my life subhanAllah. Instead of singing along to songs or even anasheed, I found myself reciting Quranic verses instead. I don’t think nasheed with music can give me the same effect, but this is just me and my opinion.
and Allah knows best
I’m happy to read this research. I think we should leave it to the individuals to decide. I am indifferent to music. I sometimes listen when I like to. For those who have addiction problems e.g. let’s say shopping then they should control themselves and stop listening to music altogether including television.
i find myself relating to brian’s point. Music can have a very uplifting effect. A lot of research is done on the effect of rhythm on the brain, and what makes music more or less attractive. It soothes, inspires, and for many, helps learning and memory. Lullabies are universal, and every culture makes rythmic sounds from instruments, and sings. We humans respond greatly to acoustic signals. What really is the reason to allow creation, manipulation and play in a visual art context such as fine calligraphy, embroidery, architecture etc. as well as in other senses such as gastronomy etc. but not in an acoustic art context? Just as visual arts can be perverted to reflect idolatry and sin, e.g. pornographic images, so can music, as they are both sensory media that tap into our emotional stimuli and response mechanisms. But the prohibition of one is more context-specific, and the other is blanket? It seems that hadith may be describing this scenario of sin, which perverted music is usually a part of. To extrapolate it to mean any and all music, which is such a ubiquitous thing and creatable with virtually anything that creates sound, seems quite preposterous.
I think if we cared a bit more about acoustic beauty as we do about beauty in other forms, perhaps finally we would be more serious about acoustics in our buildings, about choosing muezzins for the beauty of their azan and their musical ability, about balancing silence and pleasant musical sounds in public spaces – many would say that these are not forbidden, but you cannot learn and explore sounds if you have forbidden its play form, music. Sound is ubiquitous, banning its form of beauty and art simply means its absence is filled with discordance and noise, like what impairs so many cities, especially in the crowded East. So much of learning and discovery is inspired from things discovered through ‘play’ forms of knowledge – through puzzles and art and music and games. Excellence in any field is driven by a cultural love for that field’s highest form of beauty, often expressed as art. I think there has not been a culture who excelled in a field of endeavour, without that field’s art/play form also being beloved by its people.
Love, love, love your response. These are things I think about when I listen to good, clean, thought-provoking music. You and Brian have hit it on the nose. Thank you guys for articulating it with such insight!
If music is permissible in Islam, then how does one deem it Islamic? Perhaps the finest response comes from Imam al-Ghazali, the giant polymath and Sufi of the 12th century. He wrote that music inflamed the passions. However, if music drew the person nearer to Allah it was beneficial, but if it didn’t, it was detrimental. It has to be noted that Imam Ghazali was wise enough not to lay down absolutes!
Over the years I have learnt that Imam Ghazali’s approach has been the most appropriate. Too often, issues of halal and haram (especially in music) have been pre-determined by pure like or dislike, rather than any juristic principle. And too often, when assailed with new sound, the most convenient Muslim response has been to cry haram – even though the music may not be alien to Islamic theology.
I think that its wise to concede to Imam Ghazalis approach,thus leaving the door ajar that was left open by the beloved Prophet (upon Him peace and blessings) for Muslims to develop the lingua-franca of spiritually uplifting, and permissible music through ijtihad, or informed collective thought.
As an Islamic art form, music falls under the category of Mercy and Beauty, and that Allah has written beauty upon the face of all things. The Prophet’s(upon Him peace and beauty) Hadith that “Allah loves Beauty” serves to reinforce this idea. The lingua-franca of music is its beauty, or as the violinist, Yehudi Menuhin, commented when he heard Iranian classical music:
“This music is the ladder between the soul and God.”
It is this connection to the Divine, through beauty and ecstasy, that Islamic music gains its currency. And the premier instrument is the Qur’an – an amazing compendium of metre, rhythm and rhyme – that almost “sings” its deeply profound message as it moves like a heartbeat from verse to verse. The miracle of the Qur’an is witnessed in as much the human voice, which is a Mercy from Allah, as it is in its words and message.
This is perhaps why the music of the masjid, the place of worship, is the human voice and the Qur’an; and why the market-place, the material world, expresses its awareness of Allah through the voice and instrument, its melodic timbre drowning out the jarring sounds of the dunya so that the senses can savour beautific splendour.
Afterall if music be the food of love play on
Salaam u alaikum Sheikh Yusuf Ederer,
Can we please have the sanad of the report which says that Abdullah bin Zubair used to listen to music?
And, what is the name of your book on music?
Allaah says in Soorat Luqmaan (interpretation of the meaning):
“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…” [Luqmaan 31:6]
The scholar of the ummah, Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: this means singing. Mujaahid (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this means playing the drum (tabl). (Tafseer al-Tabari, 21/40).
Al-Hasan al-Basri (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this aayah was revealed concerning singing and musical instruments (lit. woodwind instruments). (Tafseer Ibn Katheer, 3/451).
Al-Sa’di (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: this includes all manner of haraam speech, all idle talk and falsehood, and all nonsense that encourages kufr and disobedience; the words of those who say things to refute the truth and argue in support of falsehood to defeat the truth; and backbiting, slander, lies, insults and curses; the singing and musical instruments of the Shaytaan; and musical instruments which are of no spiritual or worldly benefit. (Tafseer al-Sa’di, 6/150)
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The interpretation of the Sahaabah and Taabi’in, that ‘idle talk’ refers to singing, is sufficient. This was reported with saheeh isnaads from Ibn ‘Abbaas and Ibn Mas’ood. Abu’l-Sahbaa’ said: I asked Ibn Mas’ood about the aayah (interpretation of the meaning), ‘“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks’ [Luqmaan 31:6]. He said: By Allaah, besides Whom there is no other god, this means singing – and he repeated it three times. It was also reported with a saheeh isnaad from Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both) that this means singing. There is no contradiction between the interpretation of “idle talk” as meaning singing and the interpretation of it as meaning stories of the Persians and their kings, and the kings of the Romans, and so on, such as al-Nadr ibn al-Haarith used to tell to the people of Makkah to distract them from the Qur’aan. Both of them are idle talk. Hence Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “Idle talk” is falsehood and singing. Some of the Sahaabah said one and some said the other, and some said both. Singing is worse and more harmful than stories of kings, because it leads to zinaa and makes hypocrisy grow (in the heart); it is the trap of the Shaytaan, and it clouds the mind. The way in which it blocks people from the Qur’aan is worse than the way in which other kinds of false talk block them, because people are naturally inclined towards it and tend to want to listen to it. The aayaat condemn replacing the Qur’aan with idle talk in order to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah without knowledge and taking it as a joke, because when an aayah of the Qur’aan is recited to such a person, he turns his back as if he heard them not, as if there were deafness in his ear. If he hears anything of it, he makes fun of it. All of this happens only in the case of the people who are most stubbornly kaafirs and if some of it happens to singers and those who listen to them, they both have a share of this blame. (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/258-259).
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“[Allaah said to Iblees:] And befool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice (i.e. songs, music, and any other call for Allaah’s disobedience)…” [al-Israa’ 17:64]
It was narrated that Mujaahid (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “And befool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice” – his voice [the voice of Iblees/Shaytaan] is singing and falsehood. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: This idaafah [possessive or genitive construction, i.e., your voice] serves to make the meaning specific, as with the phrases [translated as] “your cavalry” and “your infantry” [later in the same aayah]. Everyone who speaks in any way that is not obedient to Allaah, everyone who blows into a flute or other woodwind instrument, or who plays any haraam kind of drum, this is the voice of the Shaytaan. Everyone who walks to commit some act of disobedience towards Allaah is part of his [the Shaytaan’s] infantry, and anyone who rides to commit sin is part of his cavalry. This is the view of the Salaf, as Ibn ‘Abi Haatim narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas: his infantry is everyone who walks to disobey Allaah. (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan).
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Do you then wonder at this recitation (the Qur’aan)?
And you laugh at it and weep not,
Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”
[al-Najm 53:59-61]
‘Ikrimah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: it was narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas that al-sumood [verbal noun from saamidoon, translated here as “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”] means “singing”, in the dialect of Himyar; it might be said “Ismidi lanaa” [‘sing for us’ – from the same root as saamidoon/sumood] meaning “ghaniy” [sing]. And he said (may Allaah have mercy on him): When they [the kuffaar] heard the Qur’aan, they would sing, then this aayah was revealed.
Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning) “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)” – Sufyaan al-Thawri said, narrating from his father from Ibn ‘Abbaas: (this means) singing. This is Yemeni (dialect): ismad lana means ghan lana [sing to us]. This was also the view of ‘Ikrimah. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer).
It was reported from Abu Umaamah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not sell singing slave women, do not buy them and do not teach them. There is nothing good in this trade, and their price is haraam. Concerning such things as this the aayah was revealed (interpretation of the meaning): ‘And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allaah…’ [Luqmaan 31:6].” (Hasan hadeeth)
The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
“Among my ummah there will certainly be people who permit zinaa, silk, alcohol and musical instruments…” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari ta’leeqan, no. 5590; narrated as mawsool by al-Tabaraani and al-Bayhaqi. See al-Silsilah al-Saheehah by al-Albaani, 91).
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: This is a saheeh hadeeth narrated by al-Bukhaari in his Saheeh, where he quoted it as evidence and stated that it is mu’allaq and majzoom. He said: Chapter on what was narrated concerning those who permit alcohol and call it by another name.
This hadeeth indicates in two ways that musical instruments and enjoyment of listening to music are haraam. The first is the fact that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “[they] permit” which clearly indicates that the things mentioned, including musical instruments, are haraam according to sharee’ah, but those people will permit them. The second is the fact that musical instruments are mentioned alongside things which are definitely known to be haraam, i.e., zinaa and alcohol: if they (musical instruments) were not haraam, why would they be mentioned alongside these things? (adapted from al-Silsilah al-Saheehah by al-Albaani, 1/140-141)
Shaykh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyah) (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: This hadeeth indicates that ma’aazif are haraam, and ma’aazif means musical instruments according to the scholars of (Arabic) language. This word includes all such instruments. (al-Majmoo’, 11/535).
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: And concerning the same topic similar comments were narrated from Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Saa’idi, ‘Imraan ibn Husayn, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Umaamah al-Baahili, ‘Aa’ishah Umm al-Mu’mineen, ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, Anas ibn Maalik, ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn Saabit and al-Ghaazi ibn Rabee’ah. Then he mentioned it in Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, and it indicates that they (musical instruments) are haraam.
It was narrated that Naafi’ (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Ibn ‘Umar heard a woodwind instrument, and he put his fingers in his ears and kept away from that path. He said to me, O Naafi’, can you hear anything? I said, No. So he took his fingers away from his ears and said: I was with the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and he heard something like this, and he did the same thing. (Saheeh Abi Dawood). Some insignificant person said that this hadeeth does not prove that musical instruments are haraam, because if that were so, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) would have instructed Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both) to put his fingers in his ears as well, and Ibn ‘Umar would have instructed Naafi’ to do likewise! The response to this is: He was not listening to it, but he could hear it. There is a difference between listening and hearing. Shaykh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyah) (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Concerning (music) which a person does not intend to listen to, there is no prohibition or blame, according to scholarly consensus. Hence blame or praise is connected to listening, not to hearing. The one who listens to the Qur’aan will be rewarded for it, whereas the one who hears it without intending or wanting to will not be rewarded for that, because actions are judged by intentions. The same applies to musical instruments which are forbidden: if a person hears them without intending to, that does not matter. (al-Majmoo’, 10/78).
Ibn Qudaamah al-Maqdisi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: the listener is the one who intends to hear, which was not the case with Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with them both); what happened in his case was hearing. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) needed to know when the sound stopped because he had moved away from that path and blocked his ears. So he did not want to go back to that path or unblock his ears until the noise had stopped, so when he allowed Ibn ‘Umar to continue hearing it, this was because of necessity. (al-Mughni, 10/173)
(Even though the hearing referred to in the comments of the two imaams is makrooh, it was permitted because of necessity, as we will see below in the comments of Imaam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him). And Allaah knows best).
The views of the scholars (imaams) of Islam
Al-Qaasim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Singing is part of falsehood. Al-Hasan (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: if there is music involved in a dinner invitation (waleemah), do not accept the invitation (al-Jaami by al-Qayrawaani, p. 262-263).
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The view of the four Imaams is that all kinds of musical instruments are haraam. It was reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaari and elsewhere that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said that there would be among his ummah those who would allow zinaa, silk, alcohol and musical instruments, and he said that they would be transformed into monkeys and pigs… None of the followers of the imaams mentioned any dispute concerning the matter of music. (al-Majmoo’, 11/576).
Al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The four madhhabs are agreed that all musical instruments are haraam. (al-Saheehah, 1/145).
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The madhhab of Abu Haneefah is the strictest in this regard, and his comments are among the harshest. His companions clearly stated that it is haraam to listen to all musical instruments such as the flute and the drum, even tapping a stick. They stated that it is a sin which implies that a person is a faasiq (rebellious evil doer) whose testimony should be rejected. They went further than that and said that listening to music is fisq (rebellion, evildoing) and enjoying it is kufr (disbelief). This is their words. They narrated in support of that a hadeeth which could not be attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). They said: he should try not to hear it if he passes by it or it is in his vicinity. Abu Yoosuf said, concerning a house from which could be heard the sound of musical instruments: Go in without their permission, because forbidding evil actions is obligatory, and if it were not allowed to enter without permission, people could not have fulfilled the obligatory duty (of enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil). (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/425).
Imaam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked about playing the drum or flute, if a person happens to hear the sound and enjoy it whilst he is walking or sitting. He said: He should get up if he finds that he enjoys it, unless he is sitting down for a need or is unable to get up. If he is on the road, he should either go back or move on. (al-Jaami’ by al-Qayrawaani, 262). He (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “The only people who do things like that, in our view, are faasiqs.” (Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 14/55).
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Among the types of earnings which are haraam by scholarly consensus are ribaa, the fee of a prostitute, anything forbidden, bribes, payment for wailing over the dead and singing, payments to fortune-tellers and those who claim to know the unseen and astrologers, payments for playing flutes, and all kinds of gambling. (al-Kaafi).
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, explaining the view of Imaam al-Shaafa’i: His companions who know his madhhab (point of view) stated that it is haraam and denounced those who said that he permitted it. (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/425).
The author of Kifaayat al-Akhbaar, who was one of the Shaafa’is, counted musical instruments such as flutes and others, as being munkar (evil), and the one who is present (where they are being played) should denounce them. (He cannot be excused by the fact that there are bad scholars, because they are corrupting the sharee’ah, or evil faqeers – meaning the Sufis, because they call themselves fuqaraa’ or faqeers – because they are ignorant and follow anyone who makes noise; they are not guided by the light of knowledge; rather they are blown about by every wind. (Kifaayat al-Akhbaar, 2/128).
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: With regard to the view of Imaam Ahmad, his son ‘Abd-Allaah said: I asked my father about singing. He said: Singing makes hypocrisy grow in the heart; I do not like it. Then he mentioned the words of Maalik: the evildoers (faasiqs) among us do that. (Ighaathat al-Lahfaan).
Ibn Qudaamah, the researcher of the Hanbali madhhab – (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: Musical instruments are of three types which are haraam. These are the strings and all kinds of flute, and the lute, drum and rabaab (stringed instrument) and so on. Whoever persists in listening to them, his testimony should be rejected. (al-Mughni, 10/173). And he said (may Allaah have mercy on him); If a person is invited to a gathering in which there is something objectionable, such as wine and musical instruments, and he is able to denounce it, then he should attend and speak out against it, because then he will be combining two obligatory duties. If he is not able to do that, then he should not attend. (al-Kaafi, 3/118)
Al-Tabari (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The scholars of all regions are agreed that singing is makrooh and should be prevented. Although Ibraaheem ibn Sa’d and ‘Ubayd-Allaah al-‘Anbari differed from the majority, (it should be noted that) the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Adhere to the majority.” And whoever dies differing from the majority, dies as a jaahili. (Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 14/56). In earlier generations, the word “makrooh” was used to mean haraam, then it took on the meaning of “disliked”. But this is to be understood as meaning that it is forbidden, because he [al-Tabari] said “it should be prevented”, and nothing is to be prevented except that which is haraam; and because in the two hadeeths quoted, music is denounced in the strongest terms. Al-Qurtubi (may Allaah have mercy on him) is the one who narrated this report, then he said: Abu’l-Faraj and al-Qaffaal among our companions said: the testimony of the singer and the dancer is not to be accepted. I say: if it is proven that this matter is not permissible, then accepting payment for it is not permissible either.
Shaykh al-Fawzaan (may Allaah preserve him) said: What Ibraaheem ibn Sa’d and ‘Ubayd-Allaah al-‘Anbari said about singing is not like the kind of singing that is known nowadays, for they would never have allowed this kind of singing which is the utmost in immorality and obscenity. (al-I’laam)
Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: It is not permissible to make musical instruments. (al-Majmoo’, 22/140). And he said: According to the majority of fuqahaa’, it is permissible to destroy musical instruments, such as the tanboor [a stringed instrument similar to a mandolin]. This is the view of Maalik and is the more famous of the two views narrated from Ahmad. (al-Majmoo’, 28/113). And he said: …Ibn al-Mundhir mentioned that the scholars were agreed that it is not permissible to pay people to sing and wail… the consensus of all the scholars whose views we have learned about is that wailing and singing are not allowed. Al-Shu’bi, al-Nakha’i and Maalik regarded that as makrooh [i.e., haraam]. Abu Thawr, al-Nu’maan – Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him) – and Ya’qoob and Muhammad, two of the students of Abu Haneefah said: it is not permissible to pay anything for singing and wailing. This is our view. And he said: musical instruments are the wine of the soul, and what it does to the soul is worse than what intoxicating drinks do. (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 10/417).
Ibn Abi Shaybah (may Allaah have mercy on him) reported that a man broke a mandolin belonging to another man, and the latter took his case to Shurayh. But Shurayh did not award him any compensation – i.e., he did not make the first man pay the cost of the mandolin, because it was haraam and had no value. (al-Musannaf, 5/395).
Al-Baghawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) stated in a fatwa that it is haraam to sell all kinds of musical instruments such as mandolins, flutes, etc. Then he said: If the images are erased and the musical instruments are altered, then it is permissible to sell their parts, whether they are silver, iron, wood or whatever. (Sharh al-Sunnah, 8/28)
An appropriate exception
The exception to the above is the daff – without any rings (i.e., a hand-drum which looks like a tambourine, but without any rattles) – when used by women on Eids and at weddings. This is indicated by saheeh reports.