- THE QUESTION OF MUSIC AND SINGING
- THE ARGUMENTS OF THE MODERNIST JUHHAAL
- THE STATEMENTS AND PRACTICES OF SOME AULIYA
- THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LEGALIZERS
- THE MODERNIST ATTITUDE
- A SUMMARY OF THE NARRATIONS OF PERMISSIBILITY
- THE EVIDENCE OF THE QUR’AAN
- THE EVIDENCE OF THE HADITH
- THE STATEMENTS OF THE SAHAABAH
- THE SALF-E-SAALIHEEN, MUSIC AND SINGING
- THE RULINGS OF THE FUQAHA
- MORE RULINGS OF THE FUQAHA
- THE DUFF
- THE YARAA’
- DUFF, MIZHAR AND GHIRBAAL
- SUMMARY OF THE FOUR MATH-HABS
- THE SAMA’ (SINGING) OF SOME OF THE AULIYA
- THE SAMA’ OF THE AULIYA IS NOT DALEEL
- THE SAMA’ OF THE SUFIYA
- THE ARBITRATOR
- THE TAUBAH OF THE AULIYA
- THE SHAAFI PERMISSIBILITY
- THE HANAFI MATH-HAB
- ABROGATION OF THE DUFF’S PERMISSIBILITY
- SINGING AND THE AHAADITH
- THE ONE WHO LISTENS TO SAMA’
- THE SPIRITUAL DANGERS OF SAMA’
- THE DECEPTION OF DHAEEF AHAADITH
- RATIONAL ARGUMENTS
- THE FINAL WORD
- THE WAY IN A CONFLICT
- THE SUMMARY OF THIS DISCUSSION
The mizhar, ghirbaal as well as the kabar are kinds of duff. The Maaliki Faqeeh, Asbagh explaining the mizhar writes in Al-Ateebah: “Ghirbaal is a round duff (which is permissible on marriage occasions). The mizhar is Makrooh and is bid’ah. The difference between duff and mizhar is that the latter involves one in futility, and whatever involves in futility also diverts from the Thikr of Allah. It is of the baatil (instruments). Shaikh Yusuf Bin Umar said that the duff is (a drum) which is closed only on the one side. When there are no strings and no bells attached to it (and this is the permissible duff). Nowadays it is called bandeer. In Al- Mudkhal it is said that according to the Math-hab of Imaam Maalik that a duff with bells is haraam. Similarly is the shabaabah.” (Mawaahibul Jaleel)
According to the Maaliki Ulama a mizhar is a rectangular drum. The difference of opinion among them pertains to this rectangular drum. In certain quarters mizhar is the violin which is unanimously haraam according to all Math-habs. Regarding this instrument, Allaamah Ahmad Bin Muhammad As-Saawi states in Ash-Sharhus Sagheer:“The Mash-hoor (popular view) of the Four Math-habs is that playing it (the violin) and listening to it are haraam.”
Regarding the kind of duff called kabar, Asbagh says:“Both (i.e. mizhar and kabar) are unlike the ghirbaal (duff). Its (the kabar’s) use is not permissible either on marriage occasions or on any other occasion… This view is supported by the Kitaab of Imaam Suhoon who said: ‘Verily, the sale of a kabar should be annulled and its seller and buyer should be punished.’” (Mawaahibul Jaleel)
The Ulama of the Maaliki Math-hab have given different views regarding this type of duff on the basis of the variety of definitions.
(1) The Math-hab of Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal (rahmatullah alayh) is unambiguous in the prohibition of singing. Allaamah Ibn Jauzi Hambali explains the Hambali position as follows:“Our Ashaab (Hambali Ulama) have narrated the permissibility of singing from Abu Bakr Khilaal and his companion, Abdul Azeez. This permissibility refers to only the zuhdiyyah qaseedas which were customary during their time. (These were songs/poetry of abstinence or renunciation of the world). This is the type of singing which is not Makrooh according to Imaam Ahmad.
The proof for this is that a man posed the following question to Imaam Ahmad: ‘A man died leaving a son and a slavegirl who is a singer. The son is in need of selling the slavegirl. How should he sell her?’ Imaam Ahmad replied: ‘She should not be sold as a singer.’ The man said: ‘If she is sold as a singer her price will be 30,000 dirhams, and if sold as an ordinary slave, the price will be only 20 dinars.’ Imaam Ahmad said: ‘He should sell her as an ordinary slave.’
Abul Farj said that Imaam Ahmad issued this fatwa because the slavegirl does not sing zuhdiyyah qaseedas, but such songs which incite carnal passion. This (fatwa) is the proof that singing is not permissible and is prohibited. If it was not prohibited Imaam Ahmad would not have considered it permissible to cause a loss to the orphan child……..
Maruzi narrated that Imaam Ahmad described the earnings of a mukhannath (hermaphrodite), which is acquired by singing, as being impure. This ruling is on account of the immoral songs the hermaphrodite sings.
With regard to the singing which is in vogue nowadays, it is unlawful according to Imaam Ahmad…. According to the Hambali Fuqaha, the testimony of a singer and a dancer is unacceptable.” (Talbees Iblees)
(2) Allaamah Ali Bin Salmaan Murdaawi, a famous Hambali Faqeeh, said: “It is said in Ar-Riaayah: Listening to singing and wailing without instruments is Makrooh. With instruments it is haraam, whether it is male or female.” (Al-Ansaaf)
(3) “If someone is persistent in singing or he makes it a profession or he employs his slave or slavegirl as a singer for audiences, his testimony will be rejected.” (Al-Ansaaf)
(4) “The Author of Al-Furoo’ says: ‘Singing is Makrooh. A Jama’at of Ulama says that it is haraam. In At-Targheeb it is mentioned that this (second view of haraam) has been adopted by the majority.” (Al-Ansaaf)
(5) “Singing with musical instruments is haraam without any difference among us (Hambali Fuqaha). Similarly (is it haraam), said the Hamabali Fuqaha as well as Ibn Aqeel, if the singer is a strange woman.” (Al-Mustau-ib, At-Targheeb, etc.)
(6) Allaamah Ahmad Bin Yahya Bin Muhammad Al- Hafeedh states:“There are different narrations of Imaam Ahmad (rahmatullah alayh) pertaining to permissibility and impermissibility of singing. It is only permissible to recite poetry related to the Aakhirah and which encourages righteous deeds. Besides this, all other types of singing which are in vogue by us today are unlawful. According to Imaam Maalik (rahmatullah alayh), the customary singing in vogue at this time is also Makrooh (forbidden).
Therefore, when he was asked about the singing taking place in Madinah, he responded that it is the practice of the fussaaq. According to Imaam Tabari (rahmatullah alayh), Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahmatullah alayh) said that singing is Makrooh (i.e. Makrooh Tahrimi) and to listen to singing is sinful. This is the maslak of all (the Ulama) of Kufa. The Ulama of Basra also unanimously say that singing is Makrooh. Only according to one narration Ubaidullah Ambari says that it is not Makrooh.
Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alayh) said that singing is futility and Makrooh which resembles baatil. A person who commits excess in it is an ignoramus. His testimony will be rejected. The one who attributes permissibility of singing to Imaam Shaafi is guilty of slandering him.
The summary of this is: In all the lands of Islam there exists Ijma’ of the Ulama on the karaahat (abominability) and prohibition of singing. Hence, only such a person will claim permissibility who is the victim of a little knowledge or compound ignorance or the desires of the nafs.” (Majmuatul Hafeed)
(7) Allaamah Ibn Qudaamah writes:“There are two kinds of musical instruments. The one kind is haraam, namely those instruments which excite passion even without singing, e.g. flute, etc. The second kind is only the duff which is permissible on marriage and other happy occasions while it is Makrooh at other times.” (Al-Mughni)
(8) Allaamah Aalusi (rahmatullah alayh) states in his Tafseer: “The son of Imaam Ahmad (rahmatullah alayh) said: ‘I asked my father about singing. He replied: ‘Singing creates hypocrisy in the heart, hence I detest it.”
The terms “I detest it” is a technical phrase which denotes Tahreem (being haraam). Of the four Imaams, Imaam Ahmad (rahmatullah alayh) adopted the sternest position. Once he grabbed a tambourine from a boy and smashed it. Amr Bin Husain narrates: Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal (rahmatullah alayh) smashed a tambur which was in the hand of a slave of Nasr Bin Humzah. The slave complained to his master about the action of Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal. The master asked: ‘Did you mention that you are my slave?’ The slave said: ‘No.’ His master said: ‘Go! I have set you free for the sake of Allah Ta’ala.” (Al-Amr Bir Ma’ruf Wan Nahyi anil Munkar) Nasr Bin Humzah was aware of the evil of musical instruments. When his slave informed him that he did not reveal his (the master’s) identity, the latter out of sheer delight emancipated the slave.
(9) Amr Bin Saalih narrates: “Once I saw someone carrying an open violin. As he passed by Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal, he (Imam Ahmad) stood up and broke it.” (Amr Bil Ma’roof Wan Nahy Anil Munkar)
(10) Muthanna Ambaari narrates: “Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal once heard the sound of a tablah (drum) coming from his neighbour. He stood up from our gathering, then sent someone to forbid them.” (Amr Bil Ma’roof Wan Nahy Anil Munkar)
(11) Abu Bakr Matuzi says: “I asked Abu Abdullah (Imaam Ahmad) regarding breaking of tambourines. He said: ‘It should be broken.’ I asked about small tambourines (toys) which little children have. He said: ‘These too should be broken.’ He further said: ‘If it is in the open, then break it.” (Al-Amr Bil Ma’roof Wan Nahy Anil Munkar)
(12) Abus Safr asked Imaam Ahmad about a man in whose hand one sees a violin or a tambourine. If he breaks it, has he done the right thing or has he erred, and is he liable for paying any damages? Imaam Ahmad replied: “He has acted beautifully. He is not liable for anything.” (Al-Amr Bil Ma’roof Wan Nahy Anil Munkar)
(13) Yahya Bin Yazdaan reports that he asked Imaam Ahmad about a man playing the violin, the tambourine and other musical instruments. Is there punishment for him? If yes, how much, if the matter goes to the Sultan? Imaam Ahmad said: “There is punishment for him. It should not exceed 10 lashes.” (Al-Amr Bil Ma’roof Wan Nahy Anil Munkar)