In response to your request for sharʿī advice regarding the hosting of a music show, I am pleased to submit to you the document attached. It is regrettable that haste, as a result of the short notice, as well as my own preoccupation, has prevented a more detailed presentation. In any event I trust that what has been documented here will suffice.
I hope and pray that Allah grants us guidance in our affairs and inspires us with the courage to follow truth wherever it may be, and however disagreeable it may appear.
Background
Legislation in Islam is based upon the Qurʾān and the Sunnah. All authority to declare things permissible or impermissible must derive from these two sources, directly or indirectly. For as long as the Qurʾān or the Sunnah provide guidance on a particular issue there is no need, or rather, it would be unwarranted, to opt for other sources of legislation. The actions of any particular person, no matter how erudite or pious he may be, will have no bearing on the ruling of the Sharīʿah, if it does not derive from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah, or is in contradiction with either of these two.
The Qurʾān on music
There are at least four references in the Qurʾān on music.
(1) In Sūrah Luqmān [6] Allah taʿālā states:
“There are those amongst men who purchase vain speech without knowledge, to mislead from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule on (on the Path). For them there is a humiliating chastisement.”
The words lahw al-ḥadīth in this āyah are interpreted by three of the eminent mufassirīn among the Ṣaḥābah, ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd, Jābir ibn ʿAbdillāh and ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās raḍiyaLlāhu ʿanhumā as a reference to singing. This interpretation is narrated from seven different Tābiʿīn: Ḥasan al-Baṣrī, ʿIkrimah, Saʿīd ibn Jubayr, Mujāhid, ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb, ʿAlī ibn Badhīmah and Makḥūl. From this it can be deducted that in the early days the opinion holding this āyah to be a reference to singing was a widespread one, an opinion in fact, whose roots go back to three of those who received their education at the feet of RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam.[1]
At the same time it must be noted that in the interpretation of these Ṣaḥābah and Tābiʿīn, “singing,” and not “music,” is mentioned. Allah expresses his displeasure at singing, even when not accompanied by musical instruments. The implications upon song that is in fact accompanied by instruments cannot be clearer. Of course, if the words sung are of a religiously beneficial nature, the censure is lifted, since it cannot then be classified as “vain speech.”
(2) Allah says in Sūrah Banī Isrāʾīl [64], addressing Shayṭān:
“Arouse those whom you can amongst them with your voice; make assaults upon them with your cavalry and your infantry; share with them (their) wealth and children; and make promises to them. But Shayṭān promises them nothing but deceit.”
In the tafsīr of Mujāhid ibn Jabr the “voice of Shayṭān” that the āyah refers to is “song and flutes.”[2]
(3) In Sūrat al-Najm [59-61] Allah states:
“Do you wonder at this Recital? And will you laugh, and not weep, wasting your time with vanities?”
The words of Ibn ʿAbbās as well as his student Mujāhid ibn Jabr are on record that by “wasting time in vanities” Allah refers to singing.[3] Ibn ʿAbbās comments that the word sāmidūn, in the old Ḥimyarite dialect of Yemen, literally means “singing.”
The Sunnah
In the Sunnah we are confronted with a host of aḥādīth narrated from the Nabī ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam that indicate the impermissibility of music. Below we reproduce some of them.
(1) In Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī it narrated from Abū ʿĀmir (or Abū Mālik) al-Ashʿarī that RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam said:
لَيَكُوْنَنَّ مِنْ أُمَّتِيْ أَقْوَامٌ يَسْتَحِلُّوْنَ الْحِرَ وَالْحَرِيْرَ وَالْخَمْرَ وَالْمَعَازِفَ.
“Indeed, there will be in my Ummah such people who will regard fornication, silk, wine and musical instruments as permissible for themselves.”[4]
In the Sunan of Abū Dāwūd the narration goes on to state that those spoken of in this ḥadīth will call these things by other names in order to embellish their evil doings.[5]
(2) In the Sunan of al-Tirmidhī it is narrated from ʿImrān ibn Ḥusayn that RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam said:
فِي هذِهِ الأمَّةِ خَسْفٌ وَمَسْخٌ وَقَذْفٌ.
“In this Ummah there will be [people who will be] sunk into the earth, deformed, and upon whom stones will rain from heaven.” REFERENCE
The Ṣaḥābī asked when that would be, and RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam replied:
إِذَا ظَهَرَتِ الْقِيَانُ وَالْمَعَازِفُ وَشُرِبَتِ الْخُمُوْرُ.
“When singing girls and instruments of music will appear (become common), and wine will be drunk.”[6]
(3) In another ḥadīth documented in Talbīs Iblīs of Ibn al-Jawzī, RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam is reported to have said:
بُعِثْتُ بِهَدْمِ الْمَزَامِيْرِ وَالطَّبْلِ.
“I have been sent to destroy the flute andthe drum.”[7]
(4) Ibn ʿAbbās narrates that RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam said:
إِنَّ اللهَ حَرَّمَ عَلَيَّ الْخَمْرَ وَالْمَيْسِرَ وَالْكُوْبَةَ.
“Truly Allah has prohibited wine, gambling and the drum upon me.”[8]
(The word al-kūbah in this ḥadīth means a drum accord to the most widely accepted opinion.)
(5) It is narrated from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿUmar that once he was on a journey and heard the sound of a flute. He immediately blocked his ears with his fingers and moved away to where he could no longer the sound. He then informed his servant, Nāfiʿ, that he had seen the Prophet ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam do likewise.[9]
Attitude of the Ṣaḥābah and the awliyāʾ raḍiyaLlāhu ʿanhum
In the sayings of the Ṣaḥābah there is also considerable evidence of a disvarouble attitude towards music.
(1) It is authentically narrated from ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd that he said:
الْغِنَاءُ يُنْبِتُ النِّفَاقَ فِي الْقَلْبِ كَمَا يُنْبِتُ الْمَاءُ النَّبَاتَ.
“Singing breeds hypocrisy in the heart like water causes plants to grow.”[10]
(2) Ibn ʿUmar once passed by a little girl singing, and remarked:
لَوْ تَرَكَ الشَّيْطَانُ أَحَدًا لَتَرَكَ هذِهِ.
“If Shayṭān were to leave anyone alone he would have left this little one.”[11]
(3) Fuḍayl ibn ʿIyāḍ, the famous ascetic of Makkah, said:
الْغِنَا رُقْيَةُ الزَّنَا.
“Singing is the stepping stone to fornication.”[12]
Music in the time of the Prophet ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam
It is sometimes claimed that there was music in the time of the Prophet ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam too. Admittedly there were cases where a musical instrument like the duff (a sort of tambourine) was used, and for that reason such instruments on those specific type of occasions were allowed by the later fuqahāʾ too. But nowhere is there any evidence of an organised culture of music in the early society of Islam. The few incidents in which music featured were spontaneous occurrences of an amateurish nature. Of professional musicians, or of organised gatherings music, there is no trace at all. In fact, early Muslim society was so much averse to the musical profession, that any person known for his indulgence in it was considered lacking in moral integrity, and therefore not a credible witness. Up to today the issue of music in the books of fiqh is discussed in the chapters on testimony.
The madhāhib
In light of the āyāt and aḥādīth adduced above it is not surprising at all to find that each of the four madhāhib, the Ḥanafī, Mālikī, the Shāfiʿī and the Ḥanbalī, regard song accompanied by musical instruments as ḥarām. The views of the respective madhāhib are as follows.
The Shāfiʿī Madhhab
Al-Imām al-Nawawī states in Minhāj al–Ṭālibīn:
ويكره الغناء بلا آلة وسماعه، ويحرم استعمال آلة من شعار الشربة كطنبور وعود ومزمار عراقي لا يراع في الأصح، قلت: الأصح تحريمه، ويجوز دف لعرس وختان، وكذا غيرهما في الأصح وإن كان فيه جلاجل، ويحرم ضرب الكوبة، وهي طبل طويل ضيق الوسط.
Singing without musical accompaniment is makrūh, as is listening to it. It is ḥarām to use an instrument that is characteristic of those who consume intoxicants, such as the ṭunbūr (an instrument resembling the mandolin), the ʿūd (lute), the ṣanj (cymbal), the ʿIrāqī mizmār (a type of flute), but not the yurāʿ (flute). [This exception is the view of Imām al-Rāfiʿī. Imām al-Nawawī disagrees with him, saying:] I say: It (the yurāʿ) too is ḥarām according to the more correct opinion. It is allowed for weddings and circumcision ceremonies, as well for other (similar) occasions, according to the more correct view, even if it may have little cymbals. It is ḥarām to beat the kūbah, which is a tall drum with a narrow middle.[13]
The Ḥanafī Madhhab
ʿAllāmah ʿAlāʾ al-Dīn al-Ḥaṣkafī writes in al-Durr al-Mukhtār:
والمذهب حرمه مطلقا فانقطع الاختلاف، بل ظاهر الهداية أنه كبيرة ولو لنفسه، وأقره المصنف، ولا تقبل شهادة من يسمع الغناء أو يجلس مجلس الغناء.
The official view of the madhhab is that it (singing) is altogether ḥarām, so the difference of opinion is effectively negated. In fact, it appears from the text of al-Hidāyah that it is a major sin, even if it be for a person himself. The author [of Tanwīr al-Abṣār] concurs with him on that. The testimony of one who listens to singing or attends a gathering of singing is rejected.[14]
Al-Imām Ibn ʿĀbidīn comments in Radd al-Muḥtār:
ونصوا على أن التغني للهو أو لجمع المال حرام بلا خلاف …اعلم أن التغني لإسماع الغير وإيناسه حرام عند العامة، ومنهم من جوزه في العرس في العرس والوليمة.
They [the Ḥanafī fuqahāʾ] have categorically stated singing for no specific purpose, or for the purpose of earning wealth is unequivocally ḥarām…Know that singing for someone else to hear, or to entertain others is ḥarām according to (the fuqahāʾ) in general. There are some who declare it permissible in weddings and wedding feasts.[15]
The Mālikī Madhhab
Al-Imām al-Khurashī states in his commentary on Mukhtaṣar Khalīl:
وسماع الغناء يرد الشهادة إذا كان بغير آلة وتكرر، لأن سماع المكروه حينئذ مكروه، فإنه يخل بالمروءة، وأما بالآلة فحرام.
Listening to singing causes one’s testimony to be rejected if it is without instruments and happens repeatedly, since listening to something makrūh in that case becomes makrūh (i.e. if done repeatedly). (This is) because that interferes with a person’s moral integrity. As for when the singing is (accompanied by musical instruments), that is ḥarām.[16]
The Ḥanbalī Madhhab
Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī states in al-Mughnī:
فصل في الملاهي: وهي على ثلاثة أضرب: محرم، وهو ضرب الأوتار والنايات والمزامير كلها والعود والطنبور والمعزفة والرباب ونحوها، فمن أدام استماعها ردت شهادته.
The Chapter on Musical Instruments: Instruments are of three categories: The first category is ḥarām, and includes the beating of stringed instruments, all types of flutes, the ʿūd, the tunbūr, the miʿzafah (a type of stringed instrument), and the rabāb (an instrument similar to the violin). The testimony of a person who continuously uses these instruments is rejected.[17]
Consensus
It is a fact that the consensus of the four major madhāhib in itself does not constitute the Ijmāʿ that is an incontrovertible source of law in Islam. Yet when we consider that what we have in this consensus of the four madhāhib is in actual fact not the opinions of four men alone, but rather of four traditions of jurisprudence, in which generation after generation of fuqahāʾ concurred with the stated views of their respective madhāhib, when that is taken into consideration, the value of the views of a few singled out scholars like Ibn Ḥazm and other more recent proponents of the permissibility of music, diminishes into insignificance.
Departure from madhhab
I, in principle subscribe to the idea that the strength of argument outside one’s own madhhab does warrant departure from the view of the madhhab. However, there are reasons why I cannot warrant departure from the view of the madhhab in this instance.
- Firstly, strength of proof clearly lies with the four madhāhib in this instance.
- Secondly, it is not one, but all four madhāhib that have unanimously and unequivocally stated music to be ḥarām, while contending views are those of singular individuals.
- Thirdly, there definitely seems to be an element of personal prerogative involved in the efforts of some of those who wish to have music legalised. Fiqh is not a tool to shape the aḥkām of the Sharīʿah according to our own desires. Allah says:
“Have you seen him who takes his own desires as his object of worship? In full knowledge Allah has led him astray, sealed his hearing and his heart, and placed a cover over his sight. Who will guide him after Allah?” (Al-Jāthiyah: 23)
Necessity
Ḍarūrah (necessity) is a principle that has the effect of rendering the unlawful lawful. However, before this principle can be invoked to legalise this venture it must be established beyond all doubt that there are absolutely no other viable alternatives. For as long as such alternatives exist, even though they may not bring in as much funds as a music show would, it will be dishonest and sinful to claim exemption on the grounds of necessity.
Personal reflection
Juristic opinions (fatāwā) are usually the means of seeking the judgement of the Sharīʿah in exigencies that arise. However, RasūluLlāh ṣallaLlāhu ʿalayhi wa sallam has shown us another, much less complex way to the truth: personal reflection in all sincerity and honesty. He says:
اِسْتَفْتِ قَلْبَكَ، وَالْبِرُّ مَا اطْمَأَنَّتْ إِلَيْهِ النَّفْسُ وَاطْمَأَنَّ إِلَيْهِ الْقَلْبُ، وَالإِثْمُ مَا حَاكَ فِي الْقَلْبِ وَتَرَدَّدَ فِي الصَّدْرِ، وَإِنْ أَفْتَاكَ النَّاسُ وَأَفْتَوْكَ.
“Ask your heart. Good is that with which your soul feels content, with which your heart is at ease. Evil is that which causes uneasiness in the heart and creates agitation in the chest. (Ask your heart) even if the people give you opinions, even if they give you their opinions.”[18]
If any of us would be asked what he or she thinks about hosting a function of this kind in aid of the masjid, or worse even, within the masjid, I am sure we would recoil in repugnance and horror. Let it be known then, that there is no difference in the Sharīʿah between what can be done for the masjid and for our other institutions. Our masājid are the places for our ʿibādah, but similarly our schools are the centres for the education of our children. No ḥarām funds may go into the upkeep of any of these institutions.
Utilisation of ḥarām funds
There exists the notion that it is permissible to use funds accrued by way of bank interest towards the construction of toilets, and that the same ruling should consequently be applicable to the case in question, since the funds generated will be used to construct an ablution block. I wish to point out here that this is in fact a grievous misreading or misunderstanding of the fatwā issued by Muftī Kifāyatullāh of Delhi. It is not correct to invoke the fatwā of Muftī Kifāyatullāh in this case for the simple reason that there exists a difference in ʿillah (ratio legis). In the case responded to by the learned Muftī the source of the funds derived was the general public, without specification of any particular persons, groups, societies or religious denominations. Money paid out by banks as interest derives from the public in this way. The learned Muftī reasoned that since the money derives from the public without any knowledge of to who in particular it belongs to, it must be returned to the public in a similar fashion. For this he devised the plan of building of public toilets in cities like Bombay and Delhi that would be used by the general public (Muslims, Hindus and Christians alike), and cannot be regarded as the exclusive property of any specific group or society. In our case, neither do the funds derive from a source similar to that of Muftī Kifāyatullāh’s fatwā, nor does the area towards which the funds are to be used correspond with that of his fatwā. (The ablution block will be built upon the school grounds, and become part of the school building, both of which is the property of the Muslims of the Strand.) To invoke the said fatwā is thus incorrect.
Another notion seems to regard the nature of the function of a toilet as sufficient grounds to legitimise the channeling of unlawful funds towards it. Let it be known that in Islam the function of a toilet is far from squalid. Ṭahārah in Islam is regarded as half of faith, and ṭahārah starts in the toilet. The role of the toilet is therefore religious in every sense of the word.
Fatwā and facilitation
It might also be observed that the muftī’s role is to facilitate things for the public, and not to make it difficult for them. To this I respond as follows. The element of taysīr (facilitation) in fatwā comes into play in two cases: one, when dire necessity (such as described earlier) calls for the relaxation of prohibition; and two, when the muftī is faced by two or more possible solutions to a problem, both or all of which fall within the sphere of the lawful. In that case he will opt for the easier solution. However, in a conflict between the lawful and the unlawful, of which the case in question is an example, introduction of the element of taysīr amounts to nothing less than the arbitrary cancellation of all things prohibited by the Sharīʿah. By such a radical step every unlawful thing in the Sharīʿah can be rendered lawful. What, I ask, is then the wisdom in prohibiting certain things if every jurist holds arbitrary power over the cancellation of prohibition?
Furthermore, I do not doubt that all of us are acutely aware that we live in times of moral degeneration and bankruptcy, where the little morality that remains is also at also at a steady ebb. I honestly doubt whether any ʿālim endowed with the qualities of taqwā and fiqh al-nafs (a sociological and psychological appreciation of an issue under scrutiny) could possibly fail to read the implications of opening a door as destructive and obnoxious as that of a music show; not in an age where music is practically synonymous with libertinism.
For all of the above reasons I, with full realisation of my responsibility in this regard towards Allah, rule that:
- it is ḥarām to host such a function;
- funds generated in such a show are ḥarām, and cannot be used for the intended purpose;
- it is wājib upon the body that oversees the affairs of the community to ensure that the organisation and planning of the function is terminated immediately.
And Allah taʿālā knows best.
11 November 1996 (Amended 13 November 1996)
References
[1] Ibn Kathīr: Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿAẓīm, vol. 3 pp. 440-441.
[2] Ibid., vol. 3 p. 49; al-Suyūṭī: al-Durr al-Manthūr, vol. 4 p. 192; Ibn al-Jawzī: Talbīs Iblīs, p. 225.
[3] Ibn al-Jawzī: Talbīs Iblīs, p. 225.
[4] Muḥammad ibn Ismāʿīl al-Bukhārī: Saḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, no. 5590.
[5] Abū Dāwūd al-Sijastānī: Sunan Abī Dāwūd, no. 4039.
[6] Abū ʿĪsā al-Tirmidhī: Sunan al-Tirmidhī, no. 2212.
[7] Ibn al-Jawzī: Talbīs Iblīs, p. 226-227.
[8] Abū Dāwūd al-Sijastānī: Sunan Abī Dāwūd, no. 3696.
[9] Abū Bakr Aḥmad ibn Ḥusayn al-Bayhaqī: Shuʿab al-Īmān, no. 5120.
[10] Ibid., no. 5098.
[11] Ibid., no. 5102.
[12] Ibid., no. 5108.
[13] Al-Khaṭīb al-Shirbīnī: Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, vol.4 pp.429-430.
[14] REFERENCE MISSING
[15] Ibn ʿĀbidīn: Radd al-Muḥtār, vol.4 p.382.
[16] Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdillah al-Khurashī: Sharḥ al-Khurashī ʿalā Mukhtaṣar al-Khalīl, vol.7 p.178.
[17] Ibn Qudāmah al-Maqdisī: al-Mughnī, vol.12 p.39.
[18] ʿAbd al-ʿAẓīm al-Mundhirī: al-Targhīb wa al-Tarḥīb, vol. 2 p. 557.