- 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 modernist deviates are professed antagonists of Taqleed. They do not attach themselves to any Math-hab or Imaam. They consider themselves to be capable and qualified to formulate the rules of the Shariah on the basis of their opinions of deception. A queer and distinctly dishonest attitude of these modernist juhhaal is to scurry into the folds of Taqleed whenever they seek ‘proofs’ for their fallacies. They latch onto the errors and obscure views of just any Aalim, Wali or Faqeeh if they are able to squeeze any capital out for substantiating their theories of baatil.
Being ignorant of the Knowledge of the Shariah, they are constrained to resort to Taqleed of obscure views and opinions which are in contradiction of the Ijma’ of the Ummah. Displaying this selective brand of Taqleed, the modernists resort to a downright dishonest Taqleed of Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) in their attempt to ‘prove’ the permissibility of music and musical instruments. While they reject every aspect of Imaam Ghazaali’s ta’leem on all other issues of the Shariah, which militates against their opinions, they are rapid in expressing their Taqleed of his view on singing and music. They further distort his opinion of restrictive permissibility and present it as a basis for their claim of blanket permission for all types of music and musical instruments, a position which Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) never propagated. The modernist deviates are extremely selective in their Taqleed of Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) in particular, and in general of the other Auliya from whose statements they labour to eke out confirmation for their fallacious theories. For the modernists, Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) has importance in only the issue of music. As far as the entire Shariah is concerned, other than the exception of singing and music, Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) is lumped into the same category of orthodoxy which the modernist deviates dispose and deprecate with a vehemence pleasing to only shaitaan and heretics.
Consider Imaam Ghazaali’s position on astronomy and related science. In his view, it is not permissible for all and sundry to learn astronomy. He labels astronomy as futile and trivial. He regards only limited astronomy for a select few to be permissible – such astronomy which is necessary for navigation and finding direction in the land and sea. He argues that astronomy is guesswork and blameworthy. He propagates the truth of the Hadith that it is better to remain ignorant of some branches of learning. This is a position which is unpalatable to the modernist palate soured by mental corruption. He therefore advocates: “Do not indulge in such sciences which the Shariah brands as useless.”
Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) propagates the prohibition of eating food from tables. He advocates eating on the ground as the Sunnah. Eating on tables is bid’ah according to Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) He avers that it is an innovation to use soap and to eat to one’s heart’s content even though he does not brand these as haraam. Nevertheless, this is the position which he adopts. The modernists who have made a selective Taqleed of Imaam Ghazaali, should henceforth refrain from the utilization of all soap, soap powders and detergents.
“Lick your fingers after eating” commands Imaam Ghazaali. This practice is detestable to the modernist juhhaal who have western kuffaar masters to serve and appease. It is practice viewed with revulsion by the western intellectual masters of the modernist deviates prowling in the shadows of the community, hence they will not make Taqleed of Imaam Ghazaali in this practice of the Sunnah. Regarding the issue of gender equality which these modernist juhhaal propagate, Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) said: “Don’t sport with the wife so much that she loses fear thereby ruining her conduct…..Strike some sort of fear in her mind when she commits evil…There is blessing in opposing women… He who becomes a slave of women is ruined… If a husband acts in accordance with the wishes of his wife, he becomes her slave…The right of the husband is that the wife should follow him and he should not follow her… Evils and deficient intelligence are salient in women…. Fear the harms of women because they do not call towards goodness….”
The views of Imaam Ghazaali on Purdah are undoubtedly chagrin to the modernists. In short, Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) is an orthodox Muslim, a ‘fanatic’ like the Molwis except for some latitude on the issue of singing and two musical instruments, the duff and the flute, which he opined to be permissible in certain circumstances with certain restrictive conditions.
The modernist deviates have absolutely no licence to cite Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh) in substantiation of their corruption. There is no affinity between Imaam Ghazaali and the views of kufr which constitute the religion of the deviates. Their selective ‘Taqleed’ of Imaam Ghazaali, viz., in only the issue of music and singing, displays the bankruptcy of their morality and the total untenability of their theory of permissibility for which they have miserably failed to discover any proof from the Sources of the Shariah.
The clinching argument in this debate pertaining to Imaam Ghazaali’s view is that since his view is in conflict with the Ijma’ of the Four Math-habs, it is devoid of substance. It has to be incumbently set aside. A conflicting opinion which developed many centuries after the Sahaabah and the Fuqaha of Khairul Quroon (The First three pious ages of Islam), is not the Fatwa of the Shariah. It is the erroneous opinion of an individual. It has been said: “Every Aalim slips” just like every good horse slips and falls.