Note: The following transcript was generated using AI and may contain inaccuracies.
As we often do, I want to get straight into the topic inshallah.
And today we are actually going to be talking about the issue of music. And whether music is permissible or not in the religion of Islam. And as always, I am going to give you the opportunity to start with your introduction.
Alhamdulillahi Rabbil Alameen. Lahu alhamdul hasan, wa thana'u al jameel. Wa ashadu an la ilaha illa Allah, wa ahdahu la sharika lah.
Yaqulu al haqqa, wa huwa yahdi al sabeel. Wa ashadu anna muhammadan abduhu wa rasuluh. Sallallahu alayhi wa ala alihi wa ashabihi wa attabi inna lahum bihsani ila yawm al deen amma ba'd.
Inshallah ta'ala, before I go into the ruling of music and what it is in our shari'ah. I think it is very important that we first of all understand what these terms are. Or else what is going to happen is khalq, confusion.
You are going to be talking about something, I am going to be talking about something. And they might come out from there. When we don't have the same thing in mind.
And we are given two different rulings. In order to come together, is that we first of all agree on these definitions, these terms. And then we make our way.
So I have looked into the books of the ulama. What they have said about al ghina for example, that is the term. Al ghina means singing.
Al ghina, the ulama, when I looked at their categorization or their definition of the word. I found that their categorization revolves around three. And you can find it in the kitab Kafur Ria'ah.
By Ibn Hajar Al Haytami. And also Talbisu Iblis by Ibn Al Jawzi. And also Majmoo Al Fatawa by Ibn Taymiyyah.
And Ithafu Al Saadat Al Muttaqeen by Al Zabeedi. Those great scholars have mentioned the types I am going to be mentioning. And these types are of course, The Quran has shown it.
And the sunnah. And also the istilah ul ulama. The usage of the scholars.
Ahlul Lughah, Ahlul Fiqh. And other than them inshallah ta'ala. So the first categorization is al ghina, which is mubah.
So there is a type of singing which is permissible. And that is, that which is just mujarrad raf'ul sawt. Just raising the voice with poetry for example.
Or other than poetry. And there is recitation to it. And it's not done in a way where, You know when people sing, Singers, professional singers, They have, it's a science for them.
So they have rhythms, they follow. A tone. A tone, pronunciation, articulation.
It's none of that. Okay fine. It's just mujarrad al tarteel.
And maybe al tarjeel, which is mu'atadeel. It doesn't go outside the natural form of the person. It's not something you need to study or learn.
And this is generally used, according to the early Arabs, When there was amal shaq, a hard labor, Work they were doing, they would say these words. Or if they were carrying anything heavy, Or they were traveling a far distance, In order to make things easy for themselves. And it's called, according to the Arabs, Hudail a'rab.
Okay. They do it for their camels when they sing for the, Also women singing for their children. It's called ghina'un nisa'i li taskeeni sigarihina.
Women are singing just to calm their children down. For example, rockabye baby. Yeah.
For example, may fall under this one. And I think every culture has something similar to this. And also the slave girls, back in those times, Singing to one another.
Also, poetry, all of this falls under this form. But there's no melody to it. Is that right? Or can there be a little melody to it? Exactly, what do you mean? See, these terms are general terms.
So when you say, are there a melody to it, It's like a recitation of the Quran. Is there a melody to it? Yeah, to a certain extent. Yeah, so that's the level of it.
Mubah, this type, there's no issue on this one. And this is part of the Sunan of the Arabs. Arabs were like this.
This is not something new for them. The way that the Arabs were, In terms of how their personality and their singing was. And Imam Al-Shatibi mentions in his I'tisam, He says, والعرب لم يكن لهم من تحسين النغمات ما يجري مجرم الناس عليه اليوم The way that the people are today, When it comes to singing, The Arabs before were not like that, he says.
بل كانوا ينشدون الشعر مطلقا They used to just sing, And they used to say those words من غير أن يتعلموا هذه ترجيعات Without having to study these rhythms التي حدثت بعدهم Which came after. So, they used to just say it as it is.
And then he mentions the example of ʿAbdullāh ibn Rawāḥah, the companion, When he was doing it in front of the Prophet, And the Anṣār were saying it when they were also building the trench — like that. And then they would respond to each other by saying these types of statements.
Al-Shāṭibī says: So this type is permissible. It is from the ghinā’, the singing which is mubāḥ.
And for that reason, the ḥadīth of our mother ʿĀ’ishah — Where the two slave girls were singing — It is mentioned that Ibn al-Jawzī mentions in his Talbīs Iblīs That Jaʿfar ibn Muḥammad — And he said: I said to Imām Aḥmad, I said to him about the ḥadīth of ʿĀ’ishah عن عائشة حيوان يغنين ايش هذا الغنى What were these two women who were singing in front of our mother ʿĀ’ishah? What were they doing?
And then he said: غناء الراكب — It's the singing of the rider, And he mentioned what they were saying.
Khalāl mentioned in his Kitāb. Ibn al-Jawzī mentions it in his Kitāb Talbīs Iblīs. So that's the type we're talking about here — which is mubāḥ.
Also Ibn al-Athīr commented on that same ḥadīth of our mother ʿĀ’ishah — They were singing for ʿĀ’ishah. He said: They were reading poetry which was said on the day of Buʿāth, And this is called — it's in the words which are strange — So he's trying to explain to you what the word ghinā’ means. He says: Here in this ḥadīth, it means that they were reading poetry Which was said on the day of Buʿāth. He says: So these women were just singing.
And this type that we mentioned, Ibn Ḥajar mentioned in his explanation of the ḥadīth of the two slave girls — He said: A summary of what he says — It means they were just raising their voices, maybe beautifying it.
And he mentions — again it's the term that's going to keep coming back — It's referring to the way they used to sing for their camels. If you go on YouTube you can see it — how they sang for their camels, And the camel, when it’s done, it starts moving.
Also when they do it among themselves, They carry heavy things and they do it together — this also helps them.
Also Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ mentions it. He mentions it — his statement. Suyūṭī mentions it in his Kitāb. He says: These two women who were with ʿĀ’ishah, Their singing was with the poetry of the Arabs.
Suyūṭī himself mentions it in his Kitāb. He says: They were just raising their voices. It was like a ḥudā’.
Also Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr mentions a very powerful point. He says: You see — so this type, the scholars have all allowed it — fine, okay? There’s no dispute.
And the Salaf — many of them said it. It's sometimes called ḥudā’, It’s also called nashīd, It’s also called ghinā’.
And this type — which I’ll just explain now — This one, he says, there’s no dispute among the scholars regarding this.
Okay, sorry — before I go into the second one: It comes in many forms. Many — I thought I've shown it. For example, ḥadīth of ʿĀ’ishah, which was on the day of ʿĪd:
So — the day of ʿĪd — These two women were singing in front of the Prophet ﷺ. Abū Bakr basically rejected their action. And then he said to them: Abu Mizmar al-Shayṭānī, Abu Mizmar al-Shayṭānī —
Under the Prophet ﷺ, he said to them: Are you going to play the mizmar of Shayṭān in the presence of the Prophet ﷺ? And then the Prophet told him — he said: He told him that this is allowed. This is your ʿĪd.
Okay, by the way, the word mizmar is used for beautifying your voice, okay? It's not referred to as music all the time.
Like when Dāwūd عليه السلام — The Prophet ﷺ mentioned in the ḥadīth of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Muslim — The Prophet ﷺ said Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī was given mizmar from the mazāmīr of Dāwūd.
Imām al-Nawawī mentions — he says: It means — He said: it means to sing.
The same — he says: He said: it means beautifying your voice.
The same thing Ibn Ḥajar mentions in Fatḥ al-Bārī.
So when he said to him — for example, when Abū Bakr said to ʿĀ’ishah: Are you going to be playing mizmar of Shayṭān in the presence of the Prophet ﷺ?
He meant: the beautification of the voice, of course. But the Prophet ﷺ corrected Abū Bakr and told him: No, no — this is the ʿĪd, which is mubāḥ.
Okay — I have some more questions on that ḥadīth, And I'm sure we're going to tackle them, in shā’ Allāh.
The second one is — It means: the jawārī are singing on the day of ʿĪd, Like the day of ʿĪd.
So it's the second type, yeah — Within the first type, which is mubāḥ. Within the first type — mubāḥ type.
The Second Type: It means the jawari (the slave girls) are singing on the day of a wedding. This is found in Bukhari from the hadith of Aisha (radiAllahu anha). She said there were slave girls who were hitting the duff, and they were talking about their fathers, of course, on the day of Badr. That’s what they were chanting — they were talking about their dead and praising them and stuff like that.
The Third Type: I mentioned that already — Ibn al-Jawzi mentions it in his Talbis Iblis. He says it’s something that you say that moves a person, of course it’s not outside the norms of a person. And of course, it’s the famous one Ibn Qudamah mentions in his al-Mughni — Abdullah ibn Rawaha was doing it. And the Prophet ﷺ said:
“Easy, Abdullah.” He said: “Be simple with the women.” Because it was…
The Fourth Type within the first type that’s permissible is: I already mentioned it — people are building houses, they’re building something, and they just want something to… I mean, this is a type — same type — which is singing. They sing in order to get work done. And it’s the one I mentioned — the Sahabah were saying:
"اللهم لولا أنت ما اهتدينا" "ولا تصدقنا ولا صلينا" Like that.
Also, the Fifth Type — which would be: Horsemen fighting in the battlefield, things like that. All of which is basically legislated, evidences have come regarding it — and it’s all the first type.
Summary of the First Type:
This is the permissible type. This is the type where it's just like — your voice is raised, and it doesn't go out of any kind of natural voice or rhythm. It’s not like anything that is too far-stretched.
He says:
"ولا يخرج عن العادة" It doesn’t go outside the norms. These people are just singing, and it's used for motivation and things like that.
The Second Type (Which is Haram):
This is when it becomes:
"التغني بالأنغام"
This one — the issue with it is that the person raises his voice, but now he’s following a melody, he's following a rhythm, he's following something outside the norms. This is something that the Arabs didn’t even know, even in Jahiliyyah times. Even when they entered Islam — they didn’t know this. It was not something they knew. This came from the Ajam (non-Arabs) — foreigners, and the non-Muslims.
And also the "takhanuth" of the Arabs — we said that word takhanuth, yeah — people who…
“What was it again?” Hemophrodites.
Yeah — hemophrodites. And also, some Arabs generally didn’t know this. It was introduced by people who had Tasawwuf later onwards into Islam. And of course, people who had takhanuth in them.
Ibn Abd al-Barr says:
"وأما الغناء المجرد عن آلة فهو مكروه"
He said: As for the singing, he just said it means Makrooh. But the word Makrooh according to the Salaf, is referring to Haram.
He says Ibn Najjar also said the same. He said: The word Makrooh according to the early scholars — okay — it's referring to what is Haram.
We know, obviously, nowadays we take it as something disliked, not Haram, but disliked.
Ibn al-Qayyim has a very powerful statement of his in his Ighathat al-Lahfan. He really explains it, but he gives an example of it happening in the Qur’an.
Like Allah ﷻ, He says:
"وَقَضَىٰ رَبُّكَ أَلَّا تَعْبُدُوا إِلَّا إِيَّاهُ" Allah has decreed that we do not worship anybody other than Allah — that’s shirk, right?
And then Allah mentions:
Zina, and then Allah mentions: Killing an innocent person.
So we have shirk, we have zina, we have killing — all of these. At the end of the page, Allah says:
"كُلُّ ذَٰلِكَ كَانَ سَيِّئُهُ عِندَ رَبِّكَ مَكْرُوهًا"
Makrooh here doesn’t mean disliked. It means: Haram.
So Allah mentions shirk, Allah mentions zina, Allah mentions killing, which are all Haram, obviously by unanimous agreement — no one is going to dispute that.
So that’s another important thing, which is:
We can’t take a term and force it on
So I interrupted you through that statement.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr — he says something very important. He summarizes it beautifully. He says:
As for the singing which the Salaf prohibited — it is when a person cuts up the letters in a particular way and destroys the form of poetry that the Arabs were aware of.
By the way, the forms of poetry that we study — they knew them. The person breaks it, and then introduces this new, studied, learned singing — it's actually a science, you learn it.
This is the one that the Salaf and the scholars prohibited.
And this is just with the voice — we’re still only talking about the voice. No instruments — just the voice.
Now, keep in mind — even the 'ibadat which are mashru’ah (legislated acts of worship), such as:
- Adhan (call to prayer)
- Qira’at al-Qur’an (recitation of Qur’an)
If someone was to do them in that way — if someone was to recite them with melodies and tunes, then this is not allowed.
Let me say that point again:
If someone was to take the legislated acts of worship — like reciting the Qur’an or doing the Adhan — and then they add lحن (melody) and تطريب (musical tune), then this is not permissible.
You're not allowed to do that to the acts of worship. Not even with the Qur’an.
Imam Sahib al-Mabsut mentions this in al-Hawi al-Kabir — you can find it there. The scholars clarify this clearly. You can’t do that.
Ibn al-Qayyim has a very powerful statement on this.
I would encourage people to go read it — it’s in:
I‘lam al-Muwaqqi‘in, Volume 3, Page 493 (or in some prints, Zad al-Ma‘ad)
He clarifies the two types I mentioned.
He says:
The First Type
This is the natural type. When you hear someone saying it, you say:
“اللهم بارك” — May Allah bless you, Allah has given you a beautiful voice.
That’s the one the Prophet ﷺ praised Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari for.
When the Prophet ﷺ heard him reciting the Qur’an, he was amazed by his voice. So Abu Musa said to the Prophet ﷺ:
“If I had known you were listening to me, O Messenger of Allah, I would have beautified my voice even more for you.”
This is the natural, praiseworthy kind.
The Second Type
This is:
صناعة — a profession, something you learn and train for.
It’s outside the natural voice. The person has to train. He gets it wrong, he’s corrected, told:
“Go back, say it like this.” “Now go up — now come down.”
It becomes technical.
This type — it’s the one that’s not permitted, and it’s not allowed.
Now I just have a question on the second type — because I think this is important for contemporary discussion:
Are we talking about just singing? Or are we also talking about listening to this?
— You: I haven’t come to that yet. Right now, I’m just talking about the person singing.
I haven’t come to listening to it. I also haven’t spoken about musical instruments.
I know we haven’t. Right now, we’re just talking about singing.
This second type — again — it’s:
Learned, crafted, studied, and trained.
Again, those like:
- Muhammad ibn Tahir al-Qaysarānī
- Abu Hamid al-Ghazali
- Ibn Hazm
- Al-Shawkani — and others —
We say:
They went against the ijma‘ (consensus).
We’re not talking about them. We’re talking about those who were at the time of the Salaf:
- From the Sahabah
- The Tabi‘in
- And those who followed them in goodness — "wa man tabi‘ahum bi ihsan"
Any one of them who you bring me, their issue doesn't go out of one of these three. So I always want us to come back to these three points. The three points are, number one, annahu ghina'u mubah, it was a ghina'a which is permissible, it was the first time that we were talking about, which doesn't go out of hadd al-i'tidal wa takalluf al-jari ala ghayri salan al-Arab.
That's the first one. The second, so it's gonna be the singing which is permissible, you and I just spoke about. The second one is annahu sami'uhu, they heard it, fi awqatin makhsoosatin, they heard it at specific times, ka ayyami al-Eidi, like days of Eid, wa al-Ursi, wa al-Qudoon, day of wedding, a day of marriage, or a day when someone was coming, so someone special, okay? Which the sunnah has permitted all of that.
The third one is annahu sami'uhu min khaslatin nisa'i wal-jawari, this was restricted by women doing it, and the men weren't doing it. And this act, scholars unanimously agree, that it's a women's, it's permitted for women to sing. For men, singing.
Which kind of singing are you talking about? I'm talking about. The second type? Yeah, the second type. Okay.
Women can do that? Women have an exception? Women are allowed to sing on the days of wedding, which I'm gonna speak about. Ibn al-Qayyim, rahimahullah, mentions in his Zad, he says, wa kullu man lahu ilmu bi-ahawali al-sanaf, anyone who knows the situation of the pious predecessors, ya'alamu qatt'an, he will clearly come to the conclusion, annahum bura'a'u min al-qiraati bi-alhani al-musiqaa. They are far from singing with musical instrument, which is al-mutakallifah, al-lati hiya'iqaa'atu wa haraqatu al-mawzoora, ma'doodatu al-mahdooda.
They're singing, the rhythms of their voices, and all of that, and instruments, he says. Wa annahum atqal lillahi min an yaqra'u biha, and they were pious people to do such a thing. Wa yasooghuha bi, wa ya'alamu qatt'an, annahum kanoo yaqra'oona bi-al-tahazeeni wa-al-tatreeb wa yuhassinoona aswaatohum bi-al-Qur'ani.
So Ibn al-Qayyim says, anyone who knows the Salaf, will realize that they were not people who sang, who read musical, used musical instruments, forced themselves to make their words rhyme according to the musicians and singers. Ibn al-Rajab said the same thing, rahimahullahu ta'ala, in his Kitab al-Nusrat al-Asma'i, he says, sama'u al-alati al-lahwi la yu'arafu an ahadi mimman salaf al-ruqsatu fiha, innama yu'arafu dhalika an ba'di al-mutaakhireena min al-dhahiriya al-sufiyya mimman la yu'taddu bihi. Ibn al-Rajab says, listen to musical instruments, he says that's not known from anyone of the Salaf.
What is known from is the mutaakhireen, from the dhahiriya and the sufiyya. Hafidh ibn al-Hajarin, he said the same, Ibn al-Hajar actually said, wama istima'u al-alati al-malahi al-mutribati al-mutalaqati min wad'i al-a'ajimi fa muharramun mujma'un ala tahreemihi wa la yu'lamu an ahadi minhum al-ruqsatu fi shay'in dhalika, waman naqala al-ruqsatu fihi an imamin yu'taddu bihi fa qad kadaba waftara, he says Ibn al-Hajar. This is something he says, subhanallah, Ibn al-Hajar, his kalam is very shadeed and it's qawiy.
He says, you listen to musical instruments, which was taken from the ajam, Arabs didn't know this. He says, fa muharramun mujma'un ala tahreemihi, it's haram and it's haram is unanimously agreed upon. Then in the Qur'an he says, wa la yu'lamu, it's not known, an ahamada, wa la yu'lamu an ahamada minhum al-ruqsatu fi shay'in dhalika, wa man naqala al-ruqsatu, anyone who brings permissibility, an imamin from an imam, yu'taddu bihi which we take serious, fa qad kadaba waftara, the person is lying.
Ibn al-Jawzi in his kitab talbisu iblis, where he speaks about the deceptions of shaytan, he explains, rahimahu allahu ta'ala, he says, wa qad kana ru'asa'u al-shafi'i yunkiruna al-sama'a, wa amma qudama'uhum fa la yu'rafu baynahum khilafun, wa amma akabilun mutaakhilina fa ala al-inkar, wa man adhafa ila al-shafi'i hada fa qad kadaba alihi. Ibn al-Salah says this, and if you say it with Abu Ahmed, he didn't allow it, shafi'i didn't allow it, Ibn al-Jawzi mentions it. Okay, I know I don't want to get too deep into the discussion because I've also got some points I want to contribute, but I just want to finish this foundation.
So far you've said music is of three types. The first type, which is the permissible type, and that is basically just raising your voice but not going out of like really emphasizing it too much, it's just something that's natural and it can be used in situations like trying to encourage yourself or for your animals and things like that. The second one is the impermissible type, which is still no instruments involved, still just your voice, but you're doing it in the kind of melody tone that is not natural and it's like a skill and it's like a profession and things like that, and the only exception for that is women, is that exception women at all times or is it women in specific circumstances? In specific circumstances.
Okay, so the only exception for that is women in special circumstances. What's the third type of ghina? It's called al-ghina al-sufi. Okay.
This is ghina al-sufi, it's actually the second type that we took, but then the problem with this one, they made it qurbah wa ta'ah lillahi rabbil alameen, they actually get closer to Allah by doing it. Okay, I see. They've added something else on it, which makes it an innovation.
So it's a sin, but they get closer to Allah by doing it. Hafidh ibn Hadir, may Allah have mercy on him, mentioned in his Fath al-Bari, he says There's no dispute in this matter, there's no khilaf in this issue. Ibn Taymiyyah says, these are misguided people by unanimous agreement of the Muslims, and no one from the Muslims, scholars of Islam, would say that doing this is a way to get closer to Allah, it's permissible.
This person he said is misguided, he's misguided in others, and he opposes the ijma' of the Muslims. Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, he transmits the kalaam of al-Qadhi Abi al-Tabariyyu in Misalat al-Sama'a, he says, So these people, they took something which was haram, and then they made this something, they get closer to Allah by doing it. He said, the belief of these people is mukhalifu li jama'ati al-Muslimin, it goes against the Muslims.
The unanimous agreement of the Muslims. Okay, so you split up music into three types, first one being permissible, second one being impermissible, and the third one is when people actually take the impermissible form and they use it in an attempt to get closer to Allah, it's like an innovation in the religion. Question at this point is, what if people use the first type, the first type which is permissible, but they use it in a method with the intention of getting closer to Allah, is that allowed? No, it's not an act of worship, it's an a'ada, a norms, it becomes an innovation, but it's not as worse as the second one.
It's not as... wa li dhalika, I want to say to the people who listen to music, who are trying to justify it, who are trying to look for these qeel and qaal, a statement Ibn al-Jawzi says in his kitab, Talbisu Iblis, he says, Yanbaghili al-'aqili an yansaha nafsahu, wa ikhwanahu, it is upon every smart person to be a sincere advisor to himself and to his brothers, wa yahdhala Talbisa Iblis, and he stays away from the deceptions of shaytan, fi ijra'i hatha al-ghinaa al-muharram, in this prohibited music, majra al-aqsamin mutaqadima, allati yutlaku alaiha ismu al-ghinaa, fa la yahamilul kulla mahmanan wahidan, fa yaqulu qad abaha hu fulanun, wa kareeha hu fulanun. He says, don't take, don't be warned of shaytan and his deceptions, and how shaytan wants to play with you, wants to take you to this music, and the types that we mentioned, he mentions the three types I told you, in his kitab Talbisu Iblis, type which is permitted, type which is prohibited, and the third type which is innovation, and not just prohibited alone. Don't mix those three, he's saying to you.
Take this one to use it for, this one, stay away from it. And also he warns against the statement of saying fulan made it permissible, so and so made it permissible. Remember, it's religion.
Don't let shaytan deceive you. So far we haven't talked about instruments yet. This is all just singing with a voice, right? Okay, a few questions that I have at this stage then.
First of all, you just said don't make it an issue of fulan said it's permissible, fulan said it's haram. That's exactly what you're doing when you call all these scholars Ijma'a, Ijma'a, Ijma'a. You're relying on the opinions of men.
So, the evidences that support me are the Quran, the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ, and the Ijma'a. I'm going to mention some statements inshallah ta'ala, if time allows it. Some of their statements.
I'm going to mention Imam Malik and Shafi'i and Ahmad and the Madhahibs and Abu Hanifa and what he said. So this, by the way, it goes in line with the maqasid al-shariah. It goes in line with the qawa'id al-kulliyah.
It goes in line with the kitab and the sunnah and the Ijma'a and the aqwal al-ahl al-ilm. There are five verses in the Quran, five ayat in the Quran that prohibits music. And we're going to get to them and I do want to discuss them in more detail.
But before we do, again, this issue of Ijma'a that you're mentioning. Imam Ahmad said, rahimahullah, anybody who claims Ijma'a, fahuwa kadhib. Anybody who claims Ijma'a, then he's a liar.
And yet you're using this Ijma'a as a proof for yourself. How do you reconcile between that? Okay, let me go to an Imam Ahmad rahimahullah statement, which you're not the only person who uses it. A lot of people use the statement of Imam Ahmad, manidda al-Ijma'a fahuwa kadhib.
They say Ahmad said this, Ahmad said this. I'm going to respond to this from two perspectives. The first one is, Imam Ahmad himself has used Ijma'a as a proof.
But was that before he made the statement, this nasikh al-mansukh? No, Ahmad, over the board, he used Ijma'a. Imams of his madhhabs have also said Ijma'a as a proof for Ahmad in many issues. The second point, inshallah, in response to your question, I want to say, is what did Ahmad actually mean by when he said manidda al-Ijma'a? Anyone who claims Ijma'a fahuwa kadhib is a liar.
What did he mean by it? So first of all, let me prove to you, Ahmad, many issues here. Many issues. I'm only going to mention some that he, rahimahullah ta'ala, used Ijma'a.
His son, Abdullahi, ibn al-Imam Ahmad, in his masail, he narrated from his father. He said, qultu li abi, I said to my father, idha lam yakun, if there isn't, anin nabi sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, if it's not from the Prophet, alayhi salatu wasallam, if there's nothing from the Prophet in this issue, mashroo'unna, legislates it, yukhbiru fihi an khususin or umum, general or specific, what do we do in a situation like that? He said, if we haven't got something from the Prophet in this issue, whether it be general or specific, that permits this issue, what do we do? Al-Imam Ahmad said to his son, he said, yuntharu, it's looked at ma'amila bihi as-sahaba, that which the companions did. That becomes the meaning of the verse.
He then says, fa-in ikhtalafu, if they differ. Ponder on this. If the sahabas have acted upon this ayah in this way, then that's it.
But if they differ, i.e. the ijma' sahaba is using here. He said, but if they differ, yuntharu, it's looked at, ayyul qawlayn, which of the two qawls, or whatever views out there from the sahabas, ashbahu biqawli rasulillahi sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, yakunu al-amalu alayhi. We look at which of the sahabas is in line with the evidence.
So if they don't differ, then you don't even need to look at it. You just accept it. Exactly.
The second one is Al-Imam Abu Dawood, in his Masa'il also, he asked Al-Imam Ahmad. He said, I heard Ahmad was said to him, innafulanan qala, so and so said, qira'atu fatihat al-kitab, reciting surah al-fatiha, behind the imam, is specific with the verse, wa idha quri'al quranu fastabi'u lah. Fa qala amman yaqulu hadha.
He said, who is saying this? ajma'an naas anna hadhi al-ayati fissalat. He says, this is the part I want. Ahmad said, ajma'an naas, the scholars have unanimously agreed upon, anna hadhi al-ayati fissalat.
This ayah is referring to the salah. Abu Ya'la, if you go to, which is he, Abu Ya'la al-Farra, he is Imam al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah al-Hanabilah So these a'imma, have understood from Imam Ahmad, that ajma'a is a proof. And their understanding might be wrong, right? The sarikh statement of Imam Ahmad, fahuwa kadhibun, we are going to come to where he meant by that.
But I am just, first point I wanted to speak about is, Ahmad used ajma'a as evidence. Also these a'imma tul madhab, the a'imma of the madhab, as I have mentioned to you, Abu Ya'la al-Farra is Imam al-Hanabilah, in his kitab al-muswada fi usul al-fiqh, if you go to page 282, you find it there, clearly, Rahim Allah mentioned Ahmad's view in the issue of ajma'a. Now let's go to the meaning of what Ahmad meant by, Rahim Allah manid da'al ajma'a fahuwa kadhibun.
What did he mean by it? If you actually go to the statement in its full version, if you've got it there, you find Ahmad, Rahim Allah, says manid da'al ajma'a fahuwa kadhibun, la'alla an-naasa qad ikhtalafu haadihi da'awa bishri al-marisi wal-asam. What does that mean? Ahmad says anyone who claims ajma'a is a liar. Maybe the people are different.
These are the claims of bishri al-marisi and al-asam. Now who's bishri al-marisi? Bishri al-marisi is bishri min ghiyati al-marisi, he's a, Ibn Hajar he says in Lisan al-Mizan, he says mubtadi'un dallun, la yanbaghi ayirwa'anhu wala karama. No one should narrate anything from bishri al-marisi.
He's an innovator, Ibn Hajar is saying this, and he's misguided. No one should ever narrate from him, wala karama has no honor whatsoever. Khatib al-Baghdadi mentions in his tarikh, he says zindiq, and he brings that statement from who? Abu Zura'a al-Tarazi.
Abu Zura'a says bishri al-marisi is zindiq, a heretic. Also Yazid ibn Harun, he said about him, bishri al-marisi kafirun halalu al-dam. He said he's a kafir and his blood is permissible.
That's first of all bishri al-marisi. The second person is al-asam, Ahmad mentioned here in his statement. Al-asam is Abu Bakr al-asam, he's sheikh al-mu'tazila, he's the sheikh of the mu'tazila.
Hafid ibn Rajab, he mentions, wa amama ru'yaa min qawli li imami Ahmad man idda'a al-ijma'a faqad kadab. Ibn Rajab is the imam of the madhab, he knows he's imam Ahmad. He says, fa huwa innama qalahu inkaroon ala fuqaha'i al-mu'tazila alladheena idda'oona al-ijma'a al-naas ala ma yaqooloonahu, wakanu aqalla al-naasi ma'arifatan bi-aqwali as-sahabati wa-tabi'u il.
And he's saying, Ibn Rajab al-Hambari, he said Ahmad's statement here was referring to Bishr al-Marisi and what's called Abu Bakr al-asam, sheikh al-mu'tazila, who used to just make, merely claim ijma'a in everything, when they were the most ignorant people when it came to knowing the aqwal of the sahabas and the tabi'in, they didn't know anything about chains, and then they would just claim ijma'a, ijma'a, ijma'a in everything. Ibn Taymiyyah also mentions it, he said, innama fuqaha'u al-mutakallimeena kal-marisi wa-al-asam yadda'oona al-ijma'a wa la ya'arifoona illa qawla bi-hanifatu wa-maliku wa-nahuwihimaa. They only knew the statement of Abu Hanifa and Malik and other than them, wa la ya'alamoona aqwala sahabat wa tabi'in.
So the statement of Ahmad which we brought, man idda'a al-ijma'a, it needs to be put in its right place. So in the context obviously that he was referring to a specific group of people, and he's not talking mutlaqan, unrestrictedly. The asam for acts of worship is that they're kharam, unless you have an evidence to make it kharam.
The opposite way around, right? For the adat, for the things in the dunya, the normal things, the customary things, the asam is that they're permissible and you need to bring in evidence to show they're kharam. So the fact that you've mentioned a few ahadith in your introduction where the Prophet ﷺ, it happened at the time of Eid and at the time of a wedding and this happened, this happened and therefore it's permissible in this situation, I say no. The asam is that singing, which is something in the dunya, it's not an act of worship, obviously singing without the intention of getting close to Allah is what I'm talking about.
Singing asam is permissible until you bring in evidence to say it's kharam. What's your evidence? I mentioned that my evidence is the evidence from the Quran and the sunnah and the ijma'a of the ummah. I'm not saying this issue is disputed, I'm saying this issue is unanimously agreed upon, that it's not permissible.
And of course when I now talk, I hope the listeners who are watching me are understanding when I say al ghina, I'm referring to the second type that we took in the introduction. The Quran doesn't allow it, the sunnah doesn't allow it, the ijma'a doesn't allow it. Are we going to talk about musical instruments at any point by the way? We can bring it inshallah ta'ala.
Is that included in these? Yes, by unanimous, yes, the ijma'a, there's no difference of opinion on that. Okay, let's go into the evidences then that you have to say that this second type, obviously we're excluding the first type which we already said is permissible, the second type is haram. Insha'Allah ta'ala.
Let me bring you, there's five ayats in the Quran that I can bring inshallah ta'ala. The first one is وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ وَيَتَّخِذَهَا هُزَىٰ هُزْوَىٰ أُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَن سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ بِغَيْرِ عِلْمٍ وَيَتَّخِذَهَا هُزْوَىٰ أُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ لِيُضِلَّ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ Surah Al Luqman Allah Ta'ala says وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهُوَ الْحَدِيثِ This is a statement that became famous amongst the Sahabas How do you know it spread amongst the Sahabas? The fact that we have no one from the three noble generations commenting on this issue That shows it hasn't become famous It did We have to, this is very important, we understand this is a Mas'ala, important, very important A statement of Ibn Mas'ud and Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar Is quoted, it's not one companion that said it We're talking about three big companions And we know Our Prophet ﷺ promised us Allah made an oath إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا ذِكْرًا وَإِنَّا لَهُ الْحَافِظُونَ We have sent down the revelation and we're going to protect it For us to think that this is what the Sahabas believed Because we don't have anyone who said Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Umar This is wrong This is wrong Not even one Not even one other companion What if it never reached them and they were just so The Asal is permissible, so all upon the Asal Okay, now you're going into an issue of Ijma' al-Sukuti You're saying that there's an Ijma' upon the companions Because this statement was made and nobody opposed it We have no one opposing it We have no one opposing it Okay, I have an issue with that Because Ijma' al-Sukuti is not really considered as a delil According to the Majhur of the Ulema Okay It's just like, for example, the Shafi'i al-'Ain al-Malikiya The majority of them don't consider it to be a delil It's just a fraction from the Hanabila and the Hanafiya That would consider it to be a delil So what do you know that they don't? Okay, you're right in the sense Ijma' al-Sukuti, we have to divide it into two Mujarrad Ijma' al-Sukuti Mere Ijma' al-Sukuti is not approved I'm with you on that I agree with you on that Okay, good If this situation reoccurs Keeps reoccurring by multiple people after that And it happens And it happens for a long period of time The Usuliyin are by unanimous agreement That this Ijma' al-Sukuti is a proof Unanimously You're saying if a statement is made By multiple people across multiple generations And nobody opposes them Then by unanimous agreement This is a proof And it's not just a proof It's a proof that this is Ijma' al-Sukuti Which is a proof And Imam Tajuddin al-Subhi mentions it In his Raf' al-Hajib Which is Sharh al-Muqtasir al-Hajib If you go to the great Imam Tirmithani He mentions it Subhi brings his statement in his works Abim Ali al-Juwaini says it in his Kitab al-Burhan Zarkashi, Rahimahullah Zarkashi says it If I even mention Zarkashi's statement He says Al-Shart al-Ashr He mentions the 10th condition And he says وَإِن كَانَ ذَلِكَ مِمَّا يَدُومُ وَيَتَكَرَّرُ وُقُوعُهُ وَالْخَوْضُ فِيهِ فَإِنَّهُ يَكُونُ السُّكُوتُ إِجْمَاعًا And this is what Imam al-Haramayn chose in the end of the matter وَأَنَّ مَحَلَّ الْخِلَافِ إِذَا فُرِضَ السُّكُوتُ فِي زَمَنٍ يَسِيرٍ The originalists only differ upon He says وَمَحَلُّ الْخِلَافِ The place of difference Is إِذَا فُرِضَ السُّكُوتُ Silence happens No one objects But it happens for a short time Okay That's the one that's questionable Questionable amongst the ulama I'm saying to you لا This مسألة has happened for a time عبد الله بن عمر عبد الله بن مسعود عبد الله بن عباس Said it And we have these great تابعين All saying after سعيد بن جبير Saying it here مجاهد Saying it here عكرم Saying it here إبراهيم النخعي Saying it حسن البصري Saying it ميمون مكحول And other than them Over 23 imams have said it So you're standing upon this principle But your own imam Imam al-Shafi'i disagrees with you I told you Imam al-Shafi'i said لا ينصب إلى ساكة قول He said it can't be attributed To a silent person Speech Speech can't be attributed To a silent person Of course that makes logical sense as well Just because the others were silent about it You can't come along and say I'm now going to say They also affirm And they believe in the same ruling This ihtijaj of Imam al-Shafi'i لا ينصب إلى ساكة قول That a silent person We cannot attribute a statement to him We have to first of all understand What Imam al-Shafi'i meant by it Everything goes back to What did they mean No because Why can't you take the dhahir Why do you have to make it with jazi By the way he said this in his kitab al-um We go back to We have to look at the context In which he said it He said it في حالة واحدة In one situation only Which is If a hakim is judging between Muslims In a particular issue There is no sunnah known for it From the Prophet ﷺ Those who are around this hakim They don't know a sunnah from the Prophet In this issue This hakim is now going to judge it Based on his ihtijad Those who are around him They are not allowed to dispute with him Because they have no evidence And he is obliged This hakim is forced to do what To base things on his ihtijad He is not allowed to blindfold He is a mujtahid These people Even though they may oppose his opinion It's their ihtijad They keep silent from him Because based on me doing ihtijad And you doing ihtijad And you doing ihtijad And you are the person in authority Yeah And they all know here That it's all based on ihtijad And no one is allowed to blindfold As they are all mujtahid Shafi'i say The ones who have chosen to be silent here And not speak to the hakim And say look you are wrong They only went silent Because they know their ihtijad Is not stronger than An ihtijad cannot nullify another ihtijad He said Their silence here He mentions it clearly In his kitab al-um You can go back to it And he mentions it in great detail But that's a red herring to be honest Shafi'i himself Believes in ijma' al-sukuti Himself When it is what As I said to you before He believes in it If the issue kept going There is dawam And the wuqoo Something keeps going on For a very long period of time And we've studied the madhab So we have an understanding I have another issue with this Lahwal hadith meaning music Because the reason for this Is clearly given I agree with you If singing or music Or this kind of impermissible action Is used to misguide people Like for example Some of the Mufassirun They say that When the ayat of the Quran Were being revealed People would try and talk over it Or sing over it Or try and misguide People so they couldn't hear The verse of the Quran No Muslim in his right mind Is going to say This is okay Of course it's not But then to take that And to apply it unrestrictedly And say every single type of music Even the person at home He's just listening to it The Quran is not recited It's not being played He's not trying to misguide people He's just listening to it Out of enjoyment To say that is now Not allowed Because of this ayah That's a stretch It's not As we said before The ahadith And the Quran And the sunan The nusus al wahi They explain one another The ayah is saying That these music That the people listen to It's a means of misguidance No it's saying Let's get the ayah out First of all Lahwal hadith Hadith obviously being speech You've said that some companions Have interpreted You've said some companions Have interpreted that as being music The other companions Have remained silent Therefore we believe all companions Have interpreted it as being music That's your claim right? No my claim is that These sahabas No one said Your statement is wrong They correct each other But if there's Difference and diversity For example Someone says Difference and diversity I have to explain it first There's difference sometimes Amongst the sahabas In the wording of something Okay Someone might for example Say the cup is half full And someone might say It's half empty They haven't differed here But they have differed again They've differed in their wording But what they're talking about Is the same It's not a contradiction It's not a contradiction Different perspectives Yeah So some scholars might mention Different meanings for a verse All of that can fall under it Which is what I've got Like some of the sahabas Said it's shirk Misleading stories So all of that We don't deny It could mean it It doesn't contradict the fact If we're saying it's Difference and diversity But we want to prove our point Which is that This meaning There isn't Difference and contradiction The sahabas are not Differing that One is saying You're right You're wrong I'm right It's not the case here So one is saying This is music And another one is saying This is not music No it's not happening Okay The second part of the ayat This actually gives the reason Why lahul hadith Is not allowed Okay It's because People are using it To misguide people From the path of Allah That's the only That's the only circumstance It's not allowed in Do you think That music today Let's be fair Because we're talking to people Who live in our time Who are watching Who listen to music Do you not believe That today That music is a means To misguide others? I don't think that Our aqal Should be used To rule something No it's not aqal It's just I mean even this conversation It's a logical argument Just because it's Okay so in our time I say yes But in 100 years time The music scene changes No it's getting worse We can see We can see the way It's heading right now We can see where It's heading And let's take this verse Many people And who are watching Who are munsif Who are sincere And honest to themselves Would say to you I agree Music has been My downfall My demise Has come from music It's misguiding me From many things I don't pray anymore Because I started Listening to music I now speak In a certain way In a despicable way Because of music I act in a certain way Because of music I've started to fornicate And adultery All because of music By the way I want brothers and sisters Who are watching To really understand this point The music here That the sahabas And the tabi'in Are talking about Is not as bad As the ones today The ones today I don't think Any person Who's I even think If the non-muslims were asked Let alone the muslims They would say This is not right This is not right I think a lot of muslims Who have contention with this They will probably agree with you That 95% of the music Out there now In existence today Is terrible It's bad It's wrong We should stay away from it As muslims We shouldn't But to say all kinds of music Just to say someone's Just listening to Beethoven's symphony For example Just in the comfort Of his own home And there's not even words There's just noise And he's just To say that Is based on this It's not I'm not convinced This is the point I feel like It's very important That we all Come to understanding it And that is The Sharia Doesn't always base Things on A few Things Something minute Something very small To make that The general rule And you forget You just mentioned It's 90 How many did you say? I'm just making up numbers 95% 95% of it You said is dangerous You know 95% Of the people Are watching this And you come For example I'm just trying to Just give a You know Keep my Top point So even to the ones Who say it's impermissible I want to Speak to them as well Okay 95% of the people You know are listening to rap And they're listening to Very despicable lyrics And they're listening to music That's very Yani Volga Volga words And Yani It comes with videos That have Bad things in there 95% of the people Are watching that And it talks about Murdering and killing And blood 95% And then you come With the fatwa Of Ibn Hazm Or Shaukani Or others Yani And you meant in your head Beethoven's Yani Symphony It just It makes No Sense It's like That I'm just coming from That perspective Without us going into Yani Sources and evidences But let's explain this ayah With the hadith Of the Prophet A.S The Prophet S.A.W. Has come from him With 14 evidences Yani 14 hadiths S.A.W. Music Can you mention music? Music 14 hadiths Go ahead First one is The most famous hadith Of Imam Al-Bukhari That Imam Al-Bukhari Narrated Waghayru And other than him The Ahlus Sunan He narrated From the Masanid Waghayrihim They narrated From Abi Malik Or Abi Amir You're not even sure Of the companion That was narrating this hadith And you're trying to use it As an evidence The companion Being unknown It doesn't harm It doesn't harm the hadith Why? Whichever of the companions it is For example A hadith If there's disputed Abu Hurairah narrate this Or did Ibn Umar for example Narrate this It doesn't harm the hadith Because whichever direction you go Or to whoever it goes back to It's accepted Whether Abu Hurairah narrates it Or Ibn Umar or Ibn Abbas Or Aisha It doesn't matter But if we're not sure Which one of these two How do we know it might not be A third or a fourth We can't have certainty But we have many hadiths A man came to the Prophet And he said O Messenger of Allah The ambiguity of a companion Doesn't really harm a hadith And anyone who studied The science of hadith Knows that So Also the dispute Of a name of a companion Was his real name Like again Abu Hurairah There are 30 or 40 views Regarding his name Abu Hurairah Was his actual real name Is Abdur Rahman Ibn Sakhrin Is it something else The fact that we don't know The name of a companion Doesn't matter Or details related to that All we know is that The companions are reliable So Imam Al-Bukhari narrated it That Abu Amir Or Abu Malik Al-Ashari R.A He said I heard from the Prophet S.A.W. saying There will be From my Ummah A people They will permit for themselves Al-Hira Which is Zina Hira means Al-Farj And Al-Harir means Silk Al-Khamra and Alcohol Al-Ma'azif and Music So the hadith mentions There are going to be a people Who are going to make it Halal For themselves What I want for us To take from this hadith A few things First one is that The Prophet mentioned There will be There will be The Noun he used Was the Noun of Tawqeed Emphasis From my Ummah A people They will make it Halal For themselves In other words It's Haram They will make it Halal For themselves And he mentioned Some things That we won't dispute That is Haram Like Al-Hira Zina Al-Harira And the Prophet S.A.W. Prohibited what Silk for men S.A.W. Al-Khamra No one I hope no one Is going to dispute The impermissibility Of Alcohol For now Insha'Allah And last but not least Al-Ma'azif Ok All of these points The Prophet S.A.W. Mentioned them Together Fine I've got I've got questions On this Hadith Because I knew This would come up In our conversation I have Criticism of this Hadith From two perspectives And of course I shouldn't say me I'm saying those who preceded me But the first perspective Is the chain And whether this is authentic It's very nice And very easy To just say to the people And pull the wool Over their eyes And say this Hadith In Sahih Al-Bukhari Without mentioning That it's Mu'allaq It's not fully connected It's not a fully connected chain All the way back To the Prophet S.A.W. And that's important Because the proper name Of Sahih Al-Bukhari As we know it Is Al-Jami' Al-Musnad Al-Sahih It is a Jami' It's Musnad I.e. it's got connected chains If Bukhari Had a connected chain Between himself And the Prophet S.A.W. And I'm trying Not to get too technical For the people at home If he had a connected chain He would have bought it In this book Because that's the title Of this book The fact that he bought This Hadith This narration Without a connected chain Shows that even He doesn't believe it's Sahih Al-Imam Al-Bukhari You're right His Kitab is called Al-Jami' Al-Sahih Al-Musnad And it's true His Kitab He conditioned For it to be Authentic Whatever he brings in it Which is connected First of all The narrator That you're referring to That he didn't mention Is Hisham Ibn Ammar So there is a narrator That he didn't mention We agree on that No Isn't that problematic Even before we get on To who the narrator is No He did mention Hisham Ibn Ammar But he didn't use What scholars of Hadith Refer to as The way he took that narration From Hisham Ibn Ammar Was not Sahih They say it's not direct He said Hisham Ibn Ammar Hisham Ibn Ammar said So he could have said It's someone else And then Bukhari heard it later They say there's possibilities The ones who weaken it Which I'm going to come to They say Their argument is that They say Bukhari said Hisham Ibn Ammar said Now he didn't say I heard from Hisham Ibn Ammar Which is very important In the science of Hadith These kind of terminology Is very important You're right It's very important Now what we have to understand Is if we're going to speak About the science of Hadith We first have to understand A few things Number one Number one Hisham Ibn Ammar Is from the Shuyukhs of Bukhari He is from the Shuyukhs of Bukhari He is Bukhari's teacher Number one Very important that we understand that Bukhari took from Hisham Ibn Ammar That's number one Number two The scholars of Hadith The scholars of Hadith Scholars who have grounded themselves Studied Hadith They mention An Anatul Bukhari Because Qala is like Is similar to An Meaning for the people When Qala and An Don't show that this person Heard from this person Directly Directly It doesn't show it It's not clear in showing that So they say The Qala and An Is the same An Which is also still the same Because it's not clear The person heard from this person So they say An Anatul Bukhari And An here means of course The Qala as well An Anatul Bukhari Mahmoolatul Anatasala In English means Bukhari When he uses the word An Or he uses the word Qala Or the likes of these words It's connected For Bukhari There is a reason It's because Bukhari Is not a Mudallis A Mudallis means A person who wouldn't say Hisham said And he dropped out people Bukhari is not a person Who would do that He doesn't do that So he's not a Mudallis And Ibn Hajar explained that And spoke about that In the Muqaddima Why do you say Qala here then? We're going to come to it Ibn Hajar mentions it In his Hajj Al Sari If you want to call it Or his Hud Al Sari He mentions it there That Bukhari is not a Mudallis And that if he uses An or Qala It's like Hadathana It's like he heard It's like he heard From other scholars When they say Hadathana There are some scholars When they say An We say he's a Mudallis Whereas Sareeh Let me give you A few examples Ishaq Al Sabee'i Ishaq Al Sabee'i He's a Mudallis Humayd Al Tawil For example He's a Mudallis And there are Qatad Al Sadoos He's a Mudallis There are people Who are Mudallis If they Have not narrated With Hadathana Or Akhbarana Or Anbaana It's not taken Okay Because they're known For when they say An They're actually dropping people Out of the chain That's one Second thing is that When Bukhari narrated He said Qala Yeah And he didn't say Qila Okay Yeah So even if we take Your argument That this is just Muallak But he did it with Sighat Al Jasm Sighat Al Jasm means He did it in an Affirmed form Bukhari when he brings Something which is Muallak Muallak means disconnected He doesn't mention His Shaykh He brings it When he believes it's weak He brings it with Ru'iya He's done this In other places Qila of course Hamna Hajar Rahim Allah Ta'ala Points out He's also written A book called Taghliq Al Ta'aliq Where he brings All of the Muallakat In Bukhari So he said Hisham Ibn Ammar said And he didn't say It was said So this shows This is called Sighat Al Jasm That's another point That we would have Taken into consideration Okay Another point That we have to really Take into consideration Is that the Hadith itself With the word Hadith Was narrated Where Where it's Sareeh It's clearly Muttasil From Hisham Ibn Ammar Other than Bukhari of course Ibn Hibban brought it In Sahih Imam Al Tabarani Brought it In his Mu'ajam Al Kabir Bayhaqi brought it In his Sunan Al Kubra Barqani Brings it In Nasb Al Raya To Zayla'i Hassan Ibn Sufyan Brings it In his Taghliq Al Ta'aliq Sunan Al Kubra Bayhaqi also Mentions the Hassan Ibn Sufyan Abu Nu'aym Mentions it as well As Ibn Hajar Brings it In his Sunan Al Kubra Abu Dara Al Harawi In his Fath Al Bari Ibn Hajar brings it Ibn Asakir In Tariq Al Damashq Abu Ahmed Al Hakim As Imam Ibn Hajar Brings it In his Taghliq Al Ta'aliq Tamam Al Damashqi As it's found in the Musnad Al Mulaqeen By Al Zahabi Also Imam Al Mizzi Brings it In his Tahdeeb Al Kaman Al Zahabi Brings it In his Taghliq Al Ta'aliq Ibn Hajar Brings it Taghliq Al Ta'aliq Rahim Allah Al Jamia So this hadith is actually present Same wording With Yeah The same hadith Where you said There was Just Qala All of those People narrated All of them With the wording Qalu Hadathana Hisham Ibn Ammar Bi Isnadhi Bil Hadith With their chain To the hadith Connected Connected So the word Hadathana Is if that's your concern Alhamdulillah It's been Okay Another point I want to mention Is that This hadith Has been authenticated By The first one Is Bukhari himself When he said Qala We And if we accept It was That Bukhari He brought And if he brings It It's According to him So the hadith To Bukhari Is authentic Ibn Hibban Authenticated it Ismaili Authenticated it Abu Dharr Al-Harawi Authenticated it Al-Hakim Al-Naysaburi Authenticated it Ibn Salah Authenticated it Al-Barqani Authenticated it Al-Nawawi Authenticated it Ibn Taymi Authenticated it Ibn Qayyim Authenticated it Ibn Kathir Ibn Rajab Ibn Mulqin Al-Iraqi Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani Al-San'ani Ibn Al-Wazir Al-Yamani Al-Sakhawi Al-Shawkani Al-Dihlawi Al-Sheikh Nasir Al-Din Al-Albani Al-Rahim Imam Al-Shawkani authenticated this hadith Even though he's of the opinion that music is permissible But he authenticated this hadith To him, this hadith is sahih What about Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali and Ibn Khazmin? Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali and Ibn Khazmin are not an imam to the hadith We have to understand that Especially Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali When it comes to ilm al-hadith, he's Hatibulain He's very weak in hadith He's not seen We cannot mention him in the context of Ibn Hajar Nawawi in Iraq, Ibn Hajar Sorry, Imam Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali In hadith, he's Hatibulain Hatibulain means a person at night time He picks everything This is not his field Ibn Khazmina Again, he has ghara'ib when it comes to hadith He has statements which are very strange For example, his statement like Imam Al-Kirmi is Majhool In many hadiths, he weakens This is not his field This is not something we will go back to Ibn Khazmin Especially when Iraqi says in his alfiyah He says Iraqi, the sheikh of Ibn Hajar He says the hadith This hadith He authenticates it and he says Don't give any attention to what Ibn Khazmin said Imam Al-Hadith The well-known scholars for the science of hadith They've strengthened this hadith And I would encourage anyone Who is sincere To go to the book Ighatatul lihfan fi masayid al-shaytan By Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim Al-Jawziya That book is very important For a student of knowledge to read He responds to all of their doubts That they might bring regarding the hadith And issues related to it So he's a very First volume, page 391 You'll find the response to a lot of the points Sheikh Al-Bani has Where he responded to Ibn Khazmin In a hadith way If you want you can find it there My second question about the same hadith Is that Imam Al-Bukhari He actually placed this hadith In the chapter of those who Seek permissibility of Drinking alcohol by calling it Other names Now he's not mentioned music He's not mentioned anything like What you're trying to understand from this hadith And just like you say about the companions many times If we trust Bukhari To narrate the hadith to us We should also trust him With his understanding He's not understood what you've understood from this Clearly because he's put it in a chapter of drinks No, just first of all Bukhari didn't say this hadith does not show The impermissibility of music He didn't say that Your point is only the fact that he mentioned it Your question should be Why did he put it under the chaptering of The people who were named Khamar other than its name Why did he choose to put it there Bukhari does that for many many reasons And the concept of The issue of Imam Al-Bukhari's Chaptering is a science itself There's a 10 volume book written by Abdul Haq Al-Hashimi on just the Chaptering of Bukhari And how he looks for the Correlation between the hadith And also the The chaptering Somebody can flip the table on you And say to you what about the hadith That's the first hadith that Bukhari Narrated And it's talking about the intention And he brought it under the chaptering of Kitab Al-Badr Al-Wahi And he brings it in that In that section Where the descending of the revelation What does Innam Al-Amal Bin Niyat have to do with it The descending of the revelation But he did it for I mean Does it mean that Bukhari doesn't believe That the actions are based on the intention Is that what he's going to derive from that Rather he narrated the hadith Of course seven other places as well But what I mean is that the chaptering Of Bukhari Does not support your point It just shows that he chose to Use it for something else Okay then The next question that I have on this particular hadith Hisham Ibn Ammar Who you've also mentioned In the chain This is a person who A lot of scholars of hadith Have weakened Such as Such as Imam Al-Dahabi for example What did he say about him First of all he mentioned him in Mizan Al-Itadal What is that book He mentions weak narrators right And he speaks about him in this book He grades the narrators over there Okay he says Hisham Ibn Ammar Used to be a truthful narrator But 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 So let's go bit by bit So you said He mentioned it in Mizan Al-Itadal Just as a side benefit For the students of knowledge Who Inshallah The book Mizan Al-Itadal By Imam Al-Dahabi Ibn Hajar Came after him And he wrote a book called Lisan Al-Mizan Lisan Al-Mizan And the Lisan Al-Mizan Is written by Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani And the reason why he wrote it Is that he wanted to come after Ibn Al-Dahabi And basically correct him In some of the mistakes he might have Fallen into in his Mizan Al-Itadal That's a side benefit So when a student is reading Mizan Al-Itadal He must go back to Lisan Al-Mizan By Ibn Hajar Ibn Hajar has Mashallah Taqeebat Very beneficial Taqeebat And poor points Especially if you have the Taqeeq of Shaykh Abdullahi Abdi Fattah Abu Ghuddah Abdi Fattah Abu Ghuddah May Allah Ta'ala Forgive him for his mistakes And his shortcomings May Allah forgive him for his shortcomings But truly was a scholar Especially in Ilm Al-Hadith The points that Abdi Fattah Abu Ghuddah Puts under Lisan Al-Mizan It's amazing So that's a side benefit For the students of knowledge Now let's come back to Dahabi Dahabi Rahim Allah Ta'ala Has a statement in his Kitab Seerah Al-Aminu Bala Regarding Hisham Al-Ammar And he calls him Ibn Nusayr Ibn Maysarat Ibn Abanin Ibn Al-Imam Al-Hafidh Al-Allamat Al-Muqri He also said he was a truthful narrator And he changed This concept of Hisham Al-Ammar Changing when he grew older And the statement That was said about him Who he really came from He came from Abu Hatim Al-Razi But there's a statement Al-Khalili mentions in his Kitab Al-Ishad Fi Ma'rifat Al-Ulamai Al-Hadith He mentions Hisham Al-Ammar Al-Dimashqihi Said Sikah Sometimes it may happen That in his Hadith some strange things happen And Shuyukh Al-Shami From the teachers of Sham He says The weakness The mistakes that people see is not him It's the mistakes that happen from these Shuyukhs He's quoting From them right They made mistakes about the Hadith So how do we know that this Hadith isn't from them We're going to come to that Inshallah Ok So that's the first point Al-Imam Al-Bukhari Authenticated him because he brought him in He's Sahih And the scholars they mention The narrators that are mentioned in Sahih Al-Bukhari The scholars mention this They mention this generally speaking The scholars that are mentioned By Bukhari in his Sahih They say Jawaz Al-Qantarah They have passed the Qantarah The Qantarah is after the person goes on the Sirat Yawmul Qiyamah May Allah make us pass that path The people Allah is going to save are the pious people That they own When the person passes that place They go to a place called the Qantarah The brothers who had hate and animosity for one another That's the place that Everybody will get their rights Once you get to the Qantarah There's only Jannah for you So They say that Bukhari The people he brought in his narration Jawaz Al-Qantarah They're safe, you can't be criticized I'll just give you two examples Let's take Hushayn Ibn Bashir Hushayn Ibn Bashir narrates He's a strong scholar in Hadith Hushayn Ibn Bashir If he narrates from An Imam Muhammad Ibn Shihab Al-Zuhri His Hadiths are not accepted by Bukhari But he will narrate it from other people Bukhari is a science Bukhari is a science It took 16 years of Ibn Hajar To understand the ins and outs of Sahih Bukhari 16 years, that's why he wrote the two volumes The Muqaddimah Fatah Al-Bari He called it Hadith Sari Say it both ways Hushayn Ibn Bashir When he narrates from Zuhri, Bukhari will avoid him Why? Because Hushayn Ibn Bashir, the day in which he took the Hadiths From Zuhri, the day where he went to Zuhri And he took the Hadiths from him It was a windy day It was a windy day And he wrote everything And it was a windy day and the papers went into the air And what happened was Hushayn Ibn Bashir tried to take the papers back But of course, the notes went back and forward He didn't memorize it He avoided taking those narrations from him But if you find him Abiz Hakk Al-Sabi'i for example If you find him If you find him in Sahih Bukhari He avoided He avoided him through Zuhri Another example is Abiz Hakk Al-Sabi'i Abiz Hakk Al-Sabi'i Bukhari narrated from him And His narrations of Sufyan Ibn Uyayna Bukhari never narrates from him But his narrations from Sufyan Al-Thawri And his narrations from Shu'bah Shu'bah Ibn Hajjaj Abu Bistam Al-Ataki The narrations are accepted Because Yahya Ibn Ma'in said He is the strongest when it comes to the narrations of who? Shu'bah Ibn Hajjaj Abu Bistam Al-Ataki And the narrations of who? Sufyan Al-Thawri Bukhari narrates from those two But he doesn't accept the narrations of whom? When it comes to Sufyan Ibn Uyayna The point I'm trying to say to you is that Even if criticism were put towards Hisham Ibn Ammar We will say His narrations Bukhari Selected them That's a side point that you always need to remember If you find a narrator that's criticised Which is in Sahih Bukhari Bukhari picked him From all of his mistakes to versions which were right He does that It's very important But here I'm arguing that he's a thiqa Hisham Ibn Ammar He's a thiqa Imam Al-Nasa'i praise him Dar Qutni Dar Qutni Imam Al-Ilal By the way Dar Qutni He has a book called Ilal Al-Walidah They said He narrated the whole entire 10 something volumes From memory Zahabi I think it was him, he said that if it's true I think it was Imam Zahabi He said if it's true that Dar Qutni Dictated this book from memory Then he's no less than Ahmad Muhammad And Abu Zuraat Al-Razi By the way They said about Dar Qutni as a side benefit They said about him They used to say He would put things in his ears When he walked outside Because he would memorise people's conversations Oh his memory was that sharp There was a strange story That was mentioned about Dar Qutni as a side point They said that Two men were arguing And they were speaking a different language And he saw the argument Going back and forth He had his Cotton wool in his ears He chose to take it out and came to the two people And he said what is the problem? What's the quarrel that you guys are having? And they told him their problems Later both of them went And they went to the court To argue The court said who is your witness in this situation? They said that Dar Qutni is our Shaheed, witness, he was there He was present when we were both arguing He was there Keeping in mind that Dar Qutni They were quarrelling They were arguing in two different languages So he came to the court room And the judge asked Dar Qutni Is it true? That you were Present when these two people Were arguing over an issue He said yes What did they say to each other? He said they spoke different languages I don't know what they said But I memorized it He quoted this first man what he said He quoted the second one what he said And he kept the information For them intact Passed it on The judge said we know what happened Gave the judgement to them So Dar Qutni said his memorization was Strong, solid He said He said He said he is a reliable person And he said He said he has a high position A high station Even the words that you mentioned This statement When you go back to Mizan ul I'tidal you find that It has next to it Sadha But did Dahabi mention all this? He has narrated 400 hadiths He used to not narrate unless someone paid him This is different from I'm going to come to that What I want to mention is that He mentions The fourth one in page 302 He mentions Dahabi mentions Sadha Which means What does that mean It's a sign Ibn Hajar mentions Because he knows Dahabi, he studied Dahabi That's what he is working on Mizan ul I'tidal by Dahabi He says If Sadha is written Before the name It's a sign Dahabi says If Sadha is written That means that person's hadiths are authentic And he is acting upon it Okay, so that's Dahabi what he said Also Hafidh Mughlatai In his book Ikmal ut Tahdeeb al Kamal He says He mentions He mentions Hisham Suyuti mentions it Scholars of hadith Even Dahabi mentions That he is a Now There is a Shubha, a doubt that's brought forward Regarding Hisham ibn Ammar That Ahmed ibn Hanbal said something about him That he said You have that quote Yeah, he was reckless That statement was Attributed to Ahmed ibn Hanbal And the scholars mention why he said it Okay They mention why he mentioned it Dahabi specifically mentions it He says He says It was Ahmed who reached him that he said about him That Hisham ibn Ammar said in his khutba The one who became apparent to his creation With his creation So this kalam The statement Dahabi says Is not permissible to just say it like that Even though it has a correct meaning The Hululi The pantherism, the one who believes in Allah and his creation And he became one They use these kind of statements So when Ahmed was told that statement In that context he said He said And look what Dahabi said after that He said Whatever the situation is Statements of contemporaries Peers And we mention it And that's what Dahabi was saying About Ahmed's statement As for the statement that Abu Hatim al-Razi mentioned That his hifdh changed And I unequivocally differ with that Because Hisham ibn Ammar His hadiths are very well known And we have many Chains of narration that they go into But the way I'm going to respond to this is the following way Number one, Hisham ibn Ammar His hadiths are known very well They are known what? Very well Abu Walid al-Baji You mentioned that Hisham ibn Ammar He gave his hadiths To Yahya ibn Ma'in And Ubaid Qasim al-Salam And they looked at it And they observed these narrations They had it in a book, that's where he narrates from Scholars didn't write it And they memorized it from their notes All of the narrations that Hisham ibn Ammar Wrote But Yahya ibn Ma'in and Ubaid Qasim al-Salam Both of them looked at it And Hisham mentioned He looked at my hadith All of it Except the hadith of Suayid ibn Abdulaziz And then he said to me, Suayid is da'if al-hadith That's one So the hadiths of Hisham ibn Ammar Are well known That's number one The second response is Bukhari took from him Before he even changed Bukhari took it from him before he changed And the evidence to that is that Bukhari Mentioned that he went to, he traveled لقيت أكثر من ألف رجل أهل الحجاز والعراق والشام والمصر He mentioned that in the refutation of the Ash'ara He mentioned that he went to Many places He mentioned he went to Basra four times He went to Hijaz six times And how many times I went to Kufa, I don't know And Baghdad, I mentioned And then here he mentions And I went to Sham By the way Hisham ibn Ammar is from the ulama of Sham So Bukhari says I went to Sham And I met I met these people And many other people, if we look at the time of Firyabi, Firyabi died in 212 Abu Misr al-Dimashqi died He was the sheikh of Sham He died the year 218 Hijri That shows that Bukhari He went to Sham To hear from the sheikhs of Sham Before the year of 212 at least Because Firyabi was the earliest one who died And that's before the Death of Hisham ibn Ammar 40 years before that When did Hisham ibn Ammar change though? The call of What's his name Abu Hatim al-Razi is that he mixed up In his last stages of his life 40 years cannot be considered the last stage of a person's life That's a long time Ok And the scholars they mention He mixed up just before he passed away That's the ones who mentioned it So that's that one The third one is that You have to really understand Abu Ja'far al-Ruqayli he said When Bukhari wrote his Suhih Who did he present it to? He presented it to Ali ibn al-Wadini and Ahmad ibn Hanbal You have to understand this Sa'id Bukhari was presented to who? The greatest scholars of Hadith at that time Abu Ja'far al-Ruqayli is saying this That Imam Bukhari when he wrote his Suhih He went to Ali ibn al-Wadini and said check my book When Ali ibn al-Wadini checked it By the way Ali ibn al-Wadini is the one that Bukhari said I belittle myself in the presence of this man And also Imam Bukhari presented it to Ahmad ibn Hanbal And he presented it to Ahmad ibn Hanbal So what does that show you? These three men have agreed to this Hadith of Hisham ibn Ammar as well Of Bukhari in his Suhih Okay They all affirmed it So this shows you that this Kitab That Imam Bukhari wrote Is Ya'ni This Hadith is accepted by the Aymatul Hadith The ones who don't want to take this Hadith Because this Hadith if it becomes Suhih It is Suhih We're going to talk about that definitely So I'm getting from that What you mean is that this is directly Clearly Categorically stating that Music is Haram Which is strange because Having gone through the narrators And I can comfortably say that you dismissed A lot of the arguments brought forward for that From the text of the Hadith itself And again it might be worth Because it's been a while since you re-narrated the Hadith And telling me what you understand From this Hadith So the Hadith we have the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam mentioning Layakunanna a'ubi Min Ummati from my people Aqwam Ya'ni there's going to be from amongst my Ummah A people Yastahillun al-Hira Wal Harira Wal Khamra There's going to be a people who are going to permit for themselves The following Al-Hira Zina Al-Harira Silk Al-Khamra Alcohol And Al-Ma'azif Music Okay So in this Hadith The Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam he mentioned Khamar Which is Haram by unanimous agreement Zina which is Haram by unanimous agreement And Al-Harira which is prohibited For the men By unanimous agreement So we have all of that And then on top of that The Ma'azif the music was mentioned In this context This is something very well known Dalalatul Iqtiran Which is as I'm sure you know Dalalatul Iqtiran is not a very strong argument In Usool Al-Fiqh A lot of the scholars of Usool They actually say it's very very weak to use this As a proof And one of the reasons they say that is because The whole issue is Connecting certain things and saying When it's brought together in one manner In one statement then they all take the same meaning Now there's a problem here Because there's an Ayah in the Quran which does something Very very similar yet the two things That are connected have different rulings The Ayah I've got it here Allah says in this Ayah Eat from the fruits When they harvest And then pay Pay it's right Which is the Zakat obviously here On the day that they harvest Now we have an issue here because according to you Because these two things are mentioned together The ruling on both of these things Must be the same yet we know And I'm sure you'll agree that eating Is something that's permissible It's not Wajib, it's not Hamam, eating is permissible Yet paying Zakat Is something that is obligatory So Allah is connecting two things here Something that is permissible And something that is obligatory Which completely refutes your claim That every time Some things are connected they must all take the same ruling Like in this Hadith that you're claiming So we You're taking me to an issue in Usulul Fiqh known as Dalalatul Iqtiran Now Dalalatul Iqtiran According to Ulema Usulul Fiqh Is two types Okay, you put a good argument to be honest And it's a strong point Dalalatul Iqtiran is two types The first type Is What the scholars refer to As Dalalatul Iqtiran which is Dham Dalalatul Iqtiran Which is Those two, it's either Dham or Naqs In another wording In another way the scholars refer to Is Dalalatul Iqtiran Which is Or The second type which is Atful Jumlah Atful Jumlah Atful Mufradat And Atful Jumlah What does that mean? The Ayah that you brought right now In Suratul An'am Ayah 141 He says That's one sentence And the next part Is if you take the waw out Which is the second sentence Allah connected Two sentences between it A waw This one It's Two complete sentences Yeah, here we have Two Two sentences Which are both complete We have That's a complete sentence In Arabic language We have It's a sentence Then Allah says Which is another sentence Now here you're right If that happens That type which is Atful waw Between two complete sentences This one according to the Ulema, this one has We can't connect them all in ruling Because we say Is Mubah Is a what? Wajib Is obligatory, zakat is referring to here You're right, in this situation they don't have the same Ruling, but the second type is what we're talking about Which is Dalalatul Iqtiran Which is Atful Mufradat What does Atful Mufradat mean? Atful Mufradat means Zaynab Muaddaba wa Fatima Zaynab is disciplined Well-mannered and Fatima Now, Zaynab Muaddaba This is two words And It's a complete sentence, right? Zaynab Muaddaba If you took that out Fatima can't stand by itself, it's one word It's Atful Mufradat, it's one word So Fatima here is Connected to Muaddaba, disciplined This one according to the Ulama of Usul By unanimous agreement This one is Accepted And to them this one is not like The Ayat Scholars agree upon this, this is called Atful Mufradat, Zarkashi mentions it In his Bahru Al-Muhit, he says Sometimes the scholars they call it Atful Naqis Because it's Naqis, Fatima It's deficient, it's not a complete sentence by itself Or they call it Atful Mufradat This one The scholars he says He says There's no dispute Amongst the scholars That it goes under the same ruling as the other one Right, I see So when the scholars say that Dalalatul Iqtiran is Mukhtalafun Fi, they're actually talking about the first type Which is connecting sentences and not individual words Yeah, if they're two Jumlatayni Tamatayni Then the Jumla Aula And the Jumla Thani don't necessarily Have to be connected to each other That's something Also Ala Uddin Al-Bukhari in his Kitab Kashful Asrar Which is a Sharh of Usul Al-Bazdawi He mentions the same, he says If it's Naqis Yusharikul Jumlatal Ma'tuf Alayha Fi Khabari Wa Hukmihi Jami'ah The same, Sadr Al-Sharia Ibn Mas'ud Al-Bukhari In his Kitab Tawadihul Matnin Tanqih He mentions it, Shahabuddin Al-Qarafi In his Kitab Nafais Al-Usul I mentioned four Imams, they mentioned it Rather, Al-Qarafi in his Kitab Nafais Al-Usul He says Nassan Nuhat The grammarians have stated as well Ala Anna Al-Ma'tufa Yajibu Macharakatul Al-Ma'tufi Alayhi Fi Asli Al-Hukmi Alladhi Siqal Kalamu Liajrihi Fayaqa'u Al-Ijtiraki Fi Asli Al-Tahrim It's important to translate some of that So what it is, is that If it's A'tuf Al-Mufradat He's saying it's obligatory According to the grammarians If it's connecting words If it's connecting individual words Then whatever the Hukm Whatever the ruling goes on the first word It takes a ruling for the other words as well If the word can't stand by itself As a sentence In the situation here, let's apply it on the Hadith The Hadith says Layakunanna Min Ummati Aqwam Yastahilluna Al-Hira Wal-Harira Wal-Khamra Wal-Ma'azif So we have Yastahilluna They make permissible Al-Hira That's the word, Yastahilluna Al-Hira And the other ones are connected to it So that in itself is a complete sentence but the other ones They stand alone Can you say Layakunanna Min Ummati Aqwam Al-Harira Wal-Khamra Wal-Ma'azif It's not a sentence, you need the other sentence Can't stand by itself So according to the Ulama Dalalatul Iqtiran Which is Al-Mufradat Tujibu Ijtirak Wa Itihadil Ma'atufati They have to all be under the same ruling So according to that principle that you just mentioned Then one of the things that was mentioned In that Hadith like you said was Silk And you rightly said that Silk is Haram for men But permissible for women So by that token then music Is Haram for men but also permissible for women No you can't say that How do you know Silk is Haram for men From the Hadith in Sunnah of Ibn Majah So you dandy an exception For the women With an external evidence I'm just using your principle alone You said that when things are connected like this They take all the same ruling But they have different rulings But you only found out that there is a different ruling For Silk with an external evidence If there came an external evidence That said music for the men Is allowed Or not allowed And it's permissible for women music Then we would say okay you're right You brought external evidence just like you brought for the Silk Right I see the Asal of the Hadith Originally Is that everything is Haram For men and women But then we have an external evidence If this Hadith was the only Hadith out there We would say to women you're not allowed to wear Silk Like in the Hadith that permits Silk for women Is when the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam grabbed it And he picked it with one hand with his left and his right And he said this has been made Haram For the male of my Ummah The gold and the Silk He picked them both up And the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said This has been made Haram for The male of my Ummah So you know that Silk for men is Haram With an external evidence But merely just this Hadith by itself It's not the case There is another contention that people bring With the understanding of this Hadith When the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam Is connecting all of these things together And they say that some things might be Okay and permissible individually But when you Connect them together and you do them at the same time It becomes impermissible So for example Even though it's a secular law, let's take the UK law For example, driving is permissible And drinking alcohol Is permissible But when you do them, according to law obviously The secular law of the UK When you do them together, drinking and driving Is not permissible And that's basically what they're saying with this Hadith And the reason why they say that is because There's another narration in The Sunan of Ibn Majah Which also Makes this clear So the Hadith That you mentioned is that There will be people who will consider it To be legal, Zina Wearing Silk, Khamal And music It's like what they're claiming here Basically is that the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam Is describing a scene Where people are drinking And people are wearing silk And they're listening to music And they're committing Zina It's like the party scenes that we have in the modern day world In clubs and stuff like that What the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam is saying here When all of these things come together He's not actually individually saying this is haram But rather he's describing a scene, a scenario And the reason they say that is because the Hadith In Sunan Ibn Majah And you can have a look at it here It says, it's a very similar situation What the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said It's narrated by Abu Malik Ash Ali People among my nation will drink wine Calling it by another name But so far exactly the same And musical instruments will be played for them And singing girls will sing for them Allah will cause the earth to swallow them up And turn them into monkeys and pigs He's basically describing a scene People are drinking wine and at the same time music is being played He's not saying individually These acts are prohibited But when you bring them together They become prohibited I mean, again I think that's far fetched What about the Ayah for example Let me flip that at you I'm saying you're wrong in that understanding Each one independently is what Allah is going to destroy the people for Even the Hadith Ibn Abi Dunya narrated it Ibn Abi Shayba narrated it On the authority of Imran Ibn Hussain That the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said He said He said He said If people start to consume alcohol And they get Qiyan Qiyan is women who sing for them If they start listening to music Musical instruments The Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam said Allah is going to deform them Earth is going to swallow them up This you're saying That all of it has to happen In order for the punishment to come right Yeah What about the statement of Allah Allah mentioned a punishment A severe punishment is for these people Are you saying that a person has to do shirk And kill someone innocent And commit zina, dust When they're going to get the sin Do you understand my point Of course nobody would say that No one would say that Independently you get sin for doing it If you do shirk alone itself is a great sin If you kill innocent people Or a person itself is a great sin If committing zina or fornication Or adultery Itself is a great sin Independently it's a sin It's the same as the ayah also Anyone who opposes the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam That itself is a sin And then opposes the path of the believers The second sin If you do all of it you're The worst One by itself can render you A criminal, one by itself can render you A wrongdoer A sinner They all don't have to be found Which is disbelief So how do you reconcile the fact that It's an action of disbelief Yet the Prophet Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam Said to my Ummah Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah has a very good response to this He's got a book called Bayan Al-Dalil Shaykh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah And on the 20th page he says The point Ibn Taymiyyah points out here He says that Istihlal here in the hadith Is referring to They use interpretations Which we saw today We can in the hadith because of Hisham Al-Ammari Saying that the Dalalatul Iqtaran Is not a Hujjah These interpretations That was used by Ibn Hazmin By also used by Shawkani, that's what Has happened here Because of that they are going to be sinners And not because they're Kufar They would have been Kufar if they saw it to be Haram And then they said it's still Halal for me, I don't care That's when it would be Kufr from the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah He says He says Then they would become Kufar And they won't be from his Ummah But if they Say that no, I don't even believe In the first place, I believe this is not actually Haram, it's not clear Then they become sinners And people fall into major sins And they are going against Allah and His Messenger And it's very dangerous Then he brings a statement of the poet Abdullah Ibn Mubarak The people you see, they've taken Evil Scholars who've told them this is permissible And gave them Fatwa So, it's not Kufr But it's a major major sin now I want to put the Hadith to one side I think we've comprehensively gone through The chain, first of all, and then secondly We've gone through the text of the Hadith itself as well Give me like a 30 second, 1 minute summary of that Hadith and what that really really shows for the people At home before we move on to the rest of the point The one we were just discussing The one about the Istikhlal This Hadith shows The severity of the person who Commits Zina And who, the male The male who take silk and wear it And use it, and those who drink Khamr and music Each one, if we look into it by itself For example, Al-Hara Which is Zina, we know the Prophet He said, when I was ascended high up in the sky I saw a group of people Who were being burnished in a furnace These were the Zunnat, when the Prophet was told The people were doing Zina Al-Hara Now we have the Khamr, the ones who drink alcohol And are consumers of alcohol The prohibition that has come regarding them Khamr, Al-Maysur, Al-Ansab, Al-Azam All of these are actions of Satan So avoid them Knowing that music That you are listening to And that you are adorning And you are admiring, has been mentioned First of all, your heart should move Zina Because a lot of people who are watching today Will be like, I know Zina Al-Hara Even if I do do it, I still know it's Haram I don't justify it Even the ones who drink alcohol Will say, bro, I know it's wrong man I can't stop it, I've become used to it My culture, my people, we do this And etc So the same thing should be for the music Of course, know it's prohibition And also try to stay away from it Another thing is the fact that the Prophet S.A.W. told us in the hadith itself وَلَيَنزِلَنَّ أَقْوَامٌ إِلَى جَنْبِ عَلَمٍ إِنَّ يَرُوحُوا عَلَيْهِم بِسَارِحَةٍ لَّهُمْ There's a punishment for these people And that is Allah is going to deform them And I actually believe I actually believe a lot of these rappers And these singers, Allah has deformed them already What do you mean by that? Look at the way they scream and they shout and they bark Jump on the table, running around I mean Things when you really sit down and you think to yourself Subhanallah, brother Subhanallah, this is not sane A man whose trousers are falling down I mean, you can see his backside This is not a sane person A sane person wears his clothes A man whose name is Dog He calls himself an animal The worst of animals, dogs I mean, you can see Allah has already Humiliated him, put him down And a lot of them, they make noises Of dogs when they sing Etc. So the actual Changing of their form It's not far-fetched Okay, I want to move on now I want to go back to the ayah In the Quran that you mentioned Where you said Lahwal Hadith and you gave the Interpretations of the companions The Tabi'een who said that this Refers to music.
And I really want to focus now on the Adilah from the Quran. If that isn't enough, if this hadith in and of itself isn't enough for people, and they say we need something from the Quran, for example—
The first question I have about this particular ayah that you brought, when you said Lahwal Hadith is talking about music— Isn't there another ayah in Surah Jum'ah where Allah says:
وَإِذَا رَأَوْ تِجَارَةً أَوْ لَهْوًا فَضُّوا إِلَيْهَا وَتَرَكُوكَ قَائِمًا
Allah says that in this ayah—that when the companions actually left the Prophet ﷺ in prayer to attend to trade, and He also uses the word Lahw here as well, the same word you were using.
Are you saying that this means music, and in which case the companions ran towards music and ran towards business? Allah connected the two together: Tijarah and Lahw, and according to you Tijarah is permissible, therefore music must also be permissible?
No, first of all the argument I want you to understand is that:
وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَشْتَرِي لَهْوَ الْحَدِيثِ
The scholars that commented on it—like Ibn Abbas—is the one who explained this ayah, Surah Jum'ah, in this way. And explained this Surah to me in this way. It is very important we understand it.
These are Arabs. They are not just Arabs, they are the most honest, sincere, and the most knowledgeable people that we know in our Ummah— Ashab Rasulullah ﷺ.
They looked at these verses and they commented on it not based on their whims and desires but based on وَلِذَٰلِكَ سَمَعُوا الْسُّخَالِرِينَ and other great scholars—I don't want to go into that too much— They believed the tafsir of a Sahabi on a verse, it is like the Prophet ﷺ. It is another discussion for another time.
Here we have—now it doesn't contradict itself if the word Lahw al-Hadith has many meanings. There is no denying—it could be a word that has many meanings. It could be used in many different—
So your claim is not that it only means music?
No, that is not my claim. Then your point and your contention would be very solid and strong against me if I only said Lahw al-Hadith only means music. I would say no. And I mentioned before that is called Ikhtilaf al-Tanawwuʿ.
Any other ayat from the Quran that you want to bring on your side for example?
There are many. I said five verses to show. One of them is Surah al-Najm when Allah says:
أَفَمِنْ هَذَا الْحَدِيثِ تَعْجَبُونَ وَتَضْحَكُونَ وَلَا تَبْكُونَ وَأَنتُمْ سَامِدُونَ
What does that mean? The word Samid—Ibn Abbas, he said the word Samidun—it is it is—it means the word Samidun actually means music in the language of the dialect of the people of Himyar.
So what is the context of this because you just said “you guys are Samidun”—what came before it?
Meaning in English: Are you amazed with this Hadith, this discussion, this speech? Are you amazed with—are you laughing? Are you not crying—whilst you are listening to music?
So here the word al-Ghina, according to Ibn Abbas, Samidun according to Ibn Abbas—he said that the word Samidun is referring to al-Ghina. According to the Himyariyyah, it’s a dialect—they say it like that.
And the ayah—he used it and that meaning— Took that view from Ibn Abbas like ʿIkrimah, Mujahid, al-Dahhak, Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah and others.
I think that all of these ayats talking about this kind of situation is really talking not about music unrestrictedly, but it's talking about music when it's being used to—like for example, the ayat of the Quran— I'll give you an example.
For example, let's just say listening to podcasts. We both agree that listening to podcasts doesn’t have any music, anything that’s haram—it's permissible, right? But if someone was to listen to a podcast and the time for Salah came, and he was so consumed with listening to the podcast that he didn’t want to pray and he left the Salah—that’s obviously not permissible.
But another person just wants to listen to a podcast when he’s driving into work for example, and he’s just listening to it just as entertainment. There’s nothing wrong with that.
So why do you have to say that music in all its forms and all its entirety is haram when these ayat are clearly talking about the time when music is being used to distract you from worshipping Allah?
The music that was listened to at that time was used to distract the people from the Qur’an and the remembrance of Allah. Yes, it did. Of course it did.
That’s the situation which it came in. And I don’t deny the fact that it's the case for us today as well—today, there’s no denying to that. Many people today, large amount of Muslims today, are listening to music—giving precedence to music over the Qur’an. They've not memorised the Qur’an, but they’ve memorised albums and lyrics. That’s well known, well established.
That’s true, but it doesn’t necessarily make it haram in and of itself—just like listening to podcasts over the Qur’an doesn’t make podcasts haram.
Now we go to the point of the fact that they used to do that with music. That’s what they used to do—they used to listen to music and they used to try to avoid hearing the Qur’an. And Allah Ta'ala unrestrictedly prohibited it.
When it became an act that was done to distract people from the remembrance of Allah, from the Qur’an, Allah prohibited it. Whether you're trying to distract yourself from the Qur’an or not, it got prohibited. And it became something which is haram. So if someone comes after now and says, “I’m not going to do what Quraysh did,” or “I’m not going to do what the people that these verses came under were doing—I’m not going to do that,” they’re going to say now: the ḥukm has been made. If it’s music, if it’s a musical instrument, if it’s songs, without the conditions that we mentioned—it’s haram. It’s haram. The only ones that you can take out are the points that we mentioned. Those are the istithnāt—exceptions only. Anything other than those exceptions—and I want somebody to remember this, and a lot of people do this—it’s a sad reality, but a lot of people tend to do this.
Okay, I for example say: “Everyone in this room go—except Zayd. Except Zayd.” Now, what’s the general ruling here? Everyone should leave. And the only person who can—if Khalid comes up to me and says, “Shall I leave?” I said, “Everyone leave.” I gave a general ruling. Was your name mentioned under the exception? No. Music and songs are haram. The Shari’ah has permitted situations, contexts, times, conditions, types—these were not denied. These ones fall under the general prohibition. Don’t use these specific situations to headbutt and destroy the general ruling of the prohibition.
How big a problem do you think music is nowadays? How widespread is it? In every country. When you look at the Salaf, what they were saying about music—Qur'an al-Shayṭān, Ruqyah al-Shayṭān—it brings nifāq (hypocrisy). You’re saying they didn’t even know the music we’re seeing today—and the fact that it’s so widespread as well, and how evil it is—you go into a supermarket, you can’t help but hear it. It’s going on in the taxis. You’d agree with that obviously.
I used to deal with brothers on the street, who were trying to come off the street, who wanted Allah to guide them. They were on the streets and committed crimes—some of them being imprisoned and what not. Wallahi, it’s like it’s a maḥall al-ijmāʿ amongst all of them. They all said: Whenever we would go and shoot up someone, or stab someone, or this or that, or rob or this—we’d have to listen to music. And specifically a particular type of genre—we’d listen to drill. If we listened to that music, we don’t know what’s happening around us. We would go out there and stab someone. He says to me, wallahi, sometimes I wouldn’t even have to take any drug substance—just listen to that. And the lyrics of what it says—“I’ll go and I’ll murder someone. If not necessarily, I’ll stab him and put him into coma or whatever. I would rob, I would this, I would that.” All of it with music.
You said earlier that the Salaf—obviously they didn’t know that music was going to be like this. Did Allah know that it was going to end up like this? That’s why Allah generally prohibited it. So Allah knew that it was going to end up like this? Of course Allah knows that. So then why isn’t there a clear—knowing that music is going to be such a big issue, it’s going to be so widespread, it’s going to cause so much harm, it’s going to cause so much damage—when Allah talks about shirk, for example, He says: إِنَّ الشِّرْكَ لَظُلْمٌ عَظِيمٌ. When Allah talks about zinā, He says: وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا الزِّنَا. When Allah talks about murder, for example, Allah says: وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا النَّفْسَ الَّتِي حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ. Allah has clear ayat telling you: Don’t do this. Don’t do this. Don’t go near this even. It’s so clear, it’s so ṣarīḥ. Why didn’t He do that with music—knowing that it was going to be as big a problem as it is in the 21st century?
Ḥabībī, when you say it’s not clear—it’s clear to every sincere, genuine Muslim. There’s nahi (forbidding)—would you agree with that? There are many ayats that Allah prohibited it. Which one in that form? The ones: وَالَّذِينَ لَا يَشْهَدُونَ الزُّورَ. Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥanafiyyah, Mujāhid ibn Jabr, and other mufassirīn—they said zūr here means music. What I mean, ḥabībī, is your voice. Mufassirīn—the voice here, yes. Mujāhid ibn Jabr—Ibn Jabr brought it, Abū Nāʿib brings it in his Ḥilyah, Ibn al-Jawzī brings it in his Talbīs Iblīs, Qurṭubī brings it in his Tafsīr—all of them. The word aṣ-ṣawt here means—Mujāhid says it means music.
So it’s clear to anybody who’s munṣif—who’s sincere, who’s genuine—who now the truth has reached him. And when he sees those evidences, he’s not going to argue back—he’s going to be pleased with it. He’s going to be—I don’t need ten, I don’t need five evidences from the Qur’an for me to stay away from something. One is enough for me.
But it’s always like the companion interpreters—the companion said this. These were great noble men, don’t get me wrong. But they’re the eyewitnesses. If there happened a car accident in front of us, we would be eyewitnesses. We saw it. The police would take our encounter of the situation. Somebody came 500 years later, 5 days later, 5 hours later—no one would file a case from him.
It just seems so contradictory, because on this podcast many times before, you've said the speech of a scholar is not a proof—it requires proof. And you say this over and over again: the speech of an ‘ālim, it doesn’t matter who he is. I read Tamadhub as well, and we talked about the importance of not taking the opinion of any man. I'm not saying they are proofs in and within themselves—I am not. Nor do I claim that. I'm not saying Ibn ʿAbbās, Ibn Masʿūd, Ibn ʿUmar, Ibn Mujāhid, Ibn Jubayr, Ibn al-Daḥḥāk, Ibn al-Suddī, Ibn Abī ʿĀliyah, Ibn al-Rayyāḥ—all of these—are proofs in and within themselves. I'm not. What I'm saying is that they say statements, and no one is rejecting their statements when they commented on these verses. I'm saying to anyone who listens: take this point on board. When Mujāhid said وَالَّذِينَ لَا يَشْهَدُونَ الزُّورَ, zūr here means al-ghināʾ. And it's written in the books of tafsīr—al-Durr al-Manthūr of al-Suyūṭī, Ibn Kathīr, Ibn Ḥātim. My question here is: these people, when they said these statements, why was there no one rejecting and saying, “Look, these āyāt don’t mean this”? We went through ijmāʿ al-sukūtī as well. We went through ijmāʿ al-sukūtī.
I want to move on now. Some of the arguments that people bring for the permissibility of music—they actually say there are hadiths that clearly allow music. The first of them is narrated by ʿĀʾishah, and we mentioned this earlier, about the two slave girls who were singing. Besides ʿĀʾishah, the Prophet ﷺ was also there, and Abū Bakr came and spoke harshly, saying “musical instruments of Shayṭān,” and the Prophet ﷺ actually turned his face to it and said, “Leave them, leave them alone, let them continue.” Isn’t this a proof that singing and musical instruments, as Abū Bakr put it, are permissible?
Okay, the first word that was used—can you see that? So Abū Bakr—what did he say? He said mizmar. So ʿĀʾishah, she mentioned—she said the Prophet ﷺ entered upon me. She said: dakhala ʿalayya Rasūlullāh ﷺ wa ʿindī jāriyatān taghniyān, there were two slave girls, okay? They were both singing. Okay, so that’s the first point, right? They were singing the songs of Buʿāth. We’re going to come to what that means. Then we’ve got Abū Bakr seeing this happen. The Prophet ﷺ didn’t say anything—he was there. The Prophet ﷺ, he was sitting—lying down on his bed, and he turned his face. Abū Bakr entered. He warned me against it. He prohibited me from it. And look what he said.
The first point I want to go through is that the word mizmar that Abū Bakr here used doesn’t always mean musical instruments. I think the English translation here should be looked into. The word can be the voice—as I mentioned before—that the Prophet ﷺ said to Abū Mūsā, laqad ʿuṭīta mizmāran min mazāmīr Āl Dāwūd—you have been given a mizmar from the flutes of the family of Dāwūd. And here, mizmar means you’ve got a very beautiful voice. And we know that, because he was reciting Qur’an at the time—of course he’s not singing. Not only that—just Imām Aḥmad, when he came to Abū Mūsā, he said haddithnā Abū Mūsā...—he says the same thing.
But we still have a situation where—we’re not going to come to it. He says ya Abā Mūsā. So that’s important that we understand it. Also, the hadith itself—it mentions what ʿĀʾishah said at the beginning. She said they were singing. So now I’ve clarified to you the word mizmar is not a musical instrument. They were singing. So now we have to go back to: what were they saying? Because I remember I categorized the singing for you into two. This one falls under the first category of singing.
Okay, but—and you in the 21st century know this—maybe he didn’t know the ḥukm. He didn’t know the ḥukm, but you do? No, but I’m saying to you: he didn’t know the ḥukm of the Prophet ﷺ—yet the ruling hasn’t come that it’s mubāḥ. The ruling hasn’t come yet. The Prophet ﷺ didn’t prohibit it yet. The āyāt didn’t come down regarding music or singing. Alcohol was drunk at the beginning of Islām—alcohol was drunk by the companions.
Why did he say “musical instrument of Shayṭān” if the ruling hadn’t come? Of course the ruling came. The ruling I’m referring to here is the type that’s permissible. When did that ruling come? I don’t understand. Look at the hadith itself. This hadith also scholars use it against you. The Prophet ﷺ did not say to Abū Bakr, “Who gave you the right to call it the musical instrument of Shayṭān?” If we say mizmar means musical instrument, him saying “leave them alone” is just to show it’s permissible. The Prophet ﷺ told them: leave them alone. He didn’t have to—but he used a word here. If you say mizmar means musical instrument, the Prophet ﷺ said to him—Abū Bakr said: “a Shayṭānic musical instrument.” Why didn’t the Prophet ﷺ say: “That’s not what this is”? Because you’re assuming that at the time the Prophet ﷺ believed that musical instruments—if you take that presumption off, which is what the other side is saying—you’re presuming based on that. Like you’re saying: why didn’t he say these are not musical instruments, O Abū Bakr? The Prophet ﷺ would correct them in the statement they say—do you agree with me?
The action the Prophet ﷺ was stopping him from is the fact that he’s stopping his daughter from it. Because ʿĀʾishah, she said: he stopped me. So I agree with you that he’s correcting him on the action. I don’t understand how you’re using that as a proof. The fact that he called it mizmar al-shayṭān—he called it “the musical instrument of Shayṭān”—that’s not a good thing. The Prophet ﷺ didn’t correct him and say “music is fine, why are you calling it Shayṭān?” I don’t know—the thing is weak. You’re saying: just leave them. It’s clear that it’s not. There are two things that happened. Abū Bakr stopping his daughter—he was told off for that. And the usage of the word mizmar al-shayṭān—the Prophet ﷺ calling it “the musical instrument of Shayṭān”—that wasn’t corrected from the Prophet ﷺ. That’s something you should look into.
The next point I want to go into is that—this, first of all, falls under taghnīyah. We were talking about taghnīyah because Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, a great imām, and he said—I said to him: “What is this singing that they were singing?” He said: they were just singing. No musical instrument was used. Khalāl narrated that in his Kitāb, Ibn al-Jawzī narrated that in his Talbīs Iblīs, Ibn al-Athīr—who is an imām in the Arabic language—and what he does is that he takes the words that are strange.
The words that need clarification, it's called. He takes that word, and what does he do? He takes the word and he defines it, explains it to you. If it's in a hadith, he will mention it, expand on it. It's a very good book.
Ibn Al-Jawzi, Ibn Al-Athir—when he came to the hadith, he said: "They were only saying poetry that was said on the day of Bu'ath." That's what he said.
And Aisha, at the ending of the hadith, if you look at it, she mentions: "They were not singers." She affirmed the singing and negated another singing. The singing that was affirmed here was what? The singing that was affirmed is that she was referring to the first type of singing, which is the one we said is permissible. And the second one that she is prohibiting is that they were not known singers.
Ibn Hajar, when he came to Hadith Bukhari—he is explaining this issue—he said: "They raised their voices," and he mentions the person who is doing that is not called a singer. The person who is doing that is not called a singer.
Qadi Iyad said the same thing, important in his Debauch. Suyuti mentions it. Suyuti brought the statement of Qadi Iyad. Also, Suyuti says Ibn Abdul Barr, his words—he says that is what Ahmad said: "There is no dispute amongst the scholars in the permissibility of this type."
There is another hadith that people tend to bring, which is narrated by Ibn Umar, who said that he heard a pipe. Translated, you can have a look at the Arabic. A pipe—and he put his fingers in his ears. Who did that? Ibn Umar. And he was with Nafi’.
And he said that he went away from the road and he asked Nafi’: "Are you listening to anything? Are you still hearing anything?" He said, "No." And he took the fingers out. And obviously, at the time, there was some kind of singing or music or whatever you want to call it.
And he said, "I was with the Prophet, and he heard like this and he did like this."
Now the question here is that if the Prophet was with Ibn Umar and there was singing or music going on, and the Prophet put his fingers in his ears—he didn’t want to hear it—but he never told Ibn Umar to do the same, how would the Prophet allow Ibn Umar to do something when his job is to correct the companions and remove them from harm?
This is a very good point. But these points—you know, it's always repeated. If it gets responded to, they bring it again. So I hope the answer that’s given here really sinks in for people.
There's a difference between sami'a and istama'a. Sami'a means you heard, and you listened. No one’s blamed ever for hearing something; he's blamed for listening to something.
Ibn Taymiyyah pointed this out. Abdullah ibn Umar did the best of what should be done. The best of what was done is that if you hear it...
But we don’t say to a person who’s in a car and music is playing—but he doesn’t listen to it, it’s just played, he can hear it, but he’s not listening to it—that he's a sinner.
So you go into a supermarket that’s just playing music in the background, and you’re not intentionally listening to it—it’s not a sin.
Ibn Taymiyyah before that said this. So this issue is hearing it. So you have to prove to me that Nafi’ was listening to the music. He just put his finger in, and then after, he asked him, “Is it on?”
Nafi' said, "Let me hear it now." "It's gone now." Do you see my point? Same with the Prophet (peace be upon him). His sahabas were not listening to the music. They could hear it if they were asked. It’s like me: "Can you hear that music?" And you're like, "Yeah, yeah, I can hear it," because I've now told you. But all that time it was on, I didn't even notice it. But when I ask you, you go and you listen—"Yeah, it's on."
So this hadith is not proof for someone to listen to music, okay? The most that can be said is that someone is in a place where music is playing and he's not listening to the music—he's walking by somewhere.
If two people are insulting each other, do I have to put my fingers in my ears? Two people are using the F word and they're arguing with each other—do I have to put my fingers in my ears?
It’s best to avoid anything going into your heart and mind. It doesn’t mean you have to do that. Same if you're walking—every time you hear music, you don't put your fingers in your ears. You don’t have to. It’s not a must, because you're not listening. If you're listening, yes.
There’s probably a proof on your side that says: why doesn’t the Prophet even do this in the first place if the music was completely fine?
Okay, fine. The next one—and I think this is the final one—is the hadith of Buraida, where the Messenger came back from an expedition, and the slave girl said to him, "Oh Messenger of Allah, I took an oath that if Allah returned you safely, I would beat the daf for you and sing." And the Messenger said, "If you have taken an oath, then beat it, and if you have not, then do not."
Again, we mentioned the daf is permissible for the women—it's something that’s legislated. Alhamdulillah, you've proven that. And also qudūm, somebody coming—we mentioned is from the ghinā’ which is mubāḥ (permissible). Someone can sing for someone who’s coming. This is the first type of singing that we already discussed.
Okay, I don’t think there’s anything else that I have on my sheet to bring. I think the only other one is—you’ve already mentioned that the word mizmār does not necessarily mean musical instruments. Because there’s another hadith where you’ve mentioned it a couple of times already—when the Prophet was listening to Abu Musa recite the Qur’an and he said, "This man is being the mizmār of the family of Dāwūd."
And that obviously doesn’t say that the Prophet was glorifying music like some people claim. Rather, mizmār just means the beautiful voice.
Yeah, and to be honest, thirty scholars transmitted—I feel like—it’s that music is prohibited.
ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz, al-Imām al-Awzāʿī, Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī, al-Imām al-Ājurī—ijmāʿ, these people transmitted ijmāʿ. Abū Ṭayyib al-Ṭabarī, al-Baghawī, Ibn Qudāmah, Ibn Ṣalāḥ, Ibn ʿAbbās, al-Qurṭubī, al-Nawawī, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, Ibn Rajab, Ibn Ḥajar, al-Haythamī—all these great scholars. They are not saying, "It’s ḥarām—no, no, no." They are saying ijmāʿ.
You have to understand—this is not difference of opinion, it’s issues. The second type that we mentioned from singing and the musical instruments are unanimously agreed upon.
Like in the case of women—in situations it’s permissible for them. Women are allowed to have music, they are allowed to sing, and they are allowed to use the daf specifically. Nothing else was mentioned for them. The daf—they are allowed to use it.
But men are not allowed to. Men are never allowed to use the daf. In no situation is a man allowed. And that man is a mukhannath.
Ibn Taymiyyah—he says, that’s all that we know he said. We don’t know men doing daf for men. This is what—the man who sings is a mukhannath. It’s like a transgender, they say. I’m afraid that transgender-like terminology—
Ibn Taymiyyah says in his 22nd volume, page 154, he says: For the women to sing and to use the daf—the men who did that were referred to as what? Mukhannath.
And today we look up to those people, and we say: "SubḥānAllāh, he's a rapper, he's a singer, man this guy is good." And we give them so much attention.
Ibn ʿĀbidīn—he said... Ibn ʿĀbidīn, he mentioned that in his Ḥāshiyah. He says again, even the women—a free woman cannot do it in front of a man. But a woman who is what? A slave. Because they’re not ʿawrah. Their voices are not ʿawrah. So the scholars gave an exception to that.
Okay, so you mentioned just now that there are thirty scholars that have transmitted ijmāʿ, and ijmāʿ is not, like you said, just: "My opinion is this," or "This is ḥarām." It’s actually consensus, which is a proof in the religion—as we’ve already gone through in this podcast and other podcasts as well.
The question is though, however, a lot of people still claim that the strongest opinion might be that it’s ḥarām, but there is still a valid difference of opinion. And even across my research that I was doing for this podcast, I came across one kitāb in particular—the kitāb of Imām al-Shawkānī—where he listed many people who he claimed, or many scholars who he claimed, that they saw it to be permissible. They saw music to be permissible.
What’s your response to this kind of thing?
It’s a mistaken belief. I’m talking about ijmāʿ. This ijmāʿ I mentioned of these great scholars—ijmāʿ—23 of them is actually ijmāʿ qawlī (verbal consensus). They clearly and categorically said ijmāʿ.
And the other remaining ones—you can understand it from their statements and the context. Like for example, Imām ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz. ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz died 101.
It’s not an issue that some people make it look like—"This is you guys, you’re just Wahhābīs, and you guys are just extremists, and you love to push the hardest view."
ʿUmar ibn ʿAbdul ʿAzīz—they say he was one of the most righteous people. Tārīkh in Islam—if you read it, imām ʿādil (a just leader). He mentioned it and he died 101—101 Hijriyyah.
We have the likes of Imam Malik, who died in 179 Hijri. We have Imam Shafi’i, who died in the year 204 Hijri. These are big Imams. We have the likes of Ahmed ibn Hanbal, who clearly and categorically has been narrated from that he said that it's haram. And Imam Ahmed passed away when the year was 241 Hijri. We have Zakariya ibn Yahya al-Sajji, who died in the year 307. We have Imam al-Ajuri, who died in the year 360 Hijri. We have Abu Layth Nasr ibn Muhammad al-Samarqandi, who died in the year 375 Hijri. We have Abu Abdillah ibn Battah al-Ukburi, who died in the year 387 Hijri. We have al-Qadi Abu Tayba al-Tabari, who died in the year 450 Hijri. Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la al-Farra al-Hanbali, who died in the year 458 Hijri. We have al-Qadi Abu Bakr al-Shami al-Shafi’i, who died in the year 488 Hijri. We have Abu Bakr al-Tartushi, who died in the year 520 Hijri. We have Abu al-Husayn ibn al-Qadi Abu Ya’la al-Farra al-Hanbali, who died in the year 526 Hijri. We have Ibn Salah, who died in the year 643 Hijri. We have Abu Muhammad Muhammad al-Dashti, who died in the year 660 Hijri. We have Ibn Taymiyyah, who died in the year 728 Hijri. We have al-Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, the student of Ibn Taymiyyah, who died in the year 751 Hijri. We have Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Manbaji al-Hanbali, who died in the year 785 Hijri. We have Ibrahim ibn Umar al-Biqa’i, who died in the year 885 Hijri. We have Abu al-Muhasin Hibatullah ibn Muhammad al-Nasr al-Khuza’i.
Like Ibn Hazm and Shawkani — they are great scholars of Islam — they have fallen into a mistake and error in this matter. Maybe they have seen it in a particular way. But for us to come after, and to see these evidences being established and mentioned, and these proofs being quoted and referenced, and for us to say, “Ibn Hazm said it,” — you don’t have a way out. Ibn Hazm probably has a hujjah for himself because the evidence didn’t reach him, and he was sincere, and we hope the best for these great scholars, and we think good of them. But what’s your excuse? “Ibn Hazm said,” when somebody already told you, “Allah said.”
Very strong point.
So to summarize the discussion, to simplify it to many people who may be watching at home — and correct me if I’m wrong, because I’m going to try and do this off memory — but essentially you started by dividing the issue of music and singing into three categories:
One is a permissible type, which is basically naturally raising your voice. It might have a very, very slight melody attuned to it, but it’s nothing that’s unnatural. And this kind of singing was used at the time of the Prophet ﷺ to boost morale and things like that.
The second type is the impermissible type, which is where you go unnaturally trying to make a tone to your voice and put a melody on it. And even this type is only permissible for women, and even then it’s only permissible for women in specific situations like weddings and Eid and things like that.
And then we have the third type, which is completely impermissible, which is when people use either the first or the second type — whether permissible or impermissible — and they use this kind of singing and music in an attempt to get closer to Allah. And it’s completely haram, impermissible.
And then to prove that this is a different category of music and haram in the religion of Islam, you brought many different ayat from the Qur’an. And you haven’t brought your understanding of these ayat — you haven’t just quoted for the people and just said, “I believe this means this.” You’ve actually quoted companions — these people who are the closest to the revelation — and many of them as well, not just one, many of them.
And we actually discussed an issue of ijma’ sukuti, which is basically when a companion says that this refers to music and nobody else says otherwise — and this happens with many companions across many different generations — it becomes an ijma’, which is a proof in our religion, just like the Qur’an and the Sunnah are a proof.
Furthermore, you mentioned a hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari, which clearly and categorically states — and we went through in great detail the sanad to prove that it’s authentic, and secondly the matan, which is the actual text itself — and we proved that this clearly and directly says that music, just like alcohol, silk for men, and zina, is not permissible. And the Prophet ﷺ actually rebuked, and he actually spoke harshly against the people who made it halal — just like somebody may be watching this and thinking that music is halal.
And finally, you brought the ijma’ of many, many, many different scholars. And again, just one of them is a proof in our religion. But the fact that there are so many of them across so many generations — and you responded also to some of the questions brought forward from the other side, and you dismissed them.
Is that a fair summary?
That's a fair summary. And I also just want to say: JazakAllahu khayran, you did a good job. I also want to mention to people: don’t read these shubuhāt that are brought by people who are not going to give you the answers. Don’t. And not every khilāf that comes is given weight.
If:
- Ubaidullah ibn al-Hassan al-Anbari, who died in the year 168 Hijri,
- Ibrahim ibn Sa‘ad al-Qurashi, who died in the year 183 Hijri,
- Ibn Hazm al-Ẓāhir, who died in the year 456 Hijri,
- Abu Hāmid al-Ghazālī, who died in the year 505 Hijri,
- Muhammad ibn Tāhir al-Qaysarānī al-Ṣūfī, who died in the year 507 Hijri —
If their khilāf wasn't given consideration by scholars...
Al-Qāḍī al-Ṭīb al-Ṭabarī — Al-Qāḍī al-Ṭabarī — in his Kitāb al-Radd ʿalā man yuḥibb al-samāʿ says:
“Ajmaʿa ʿulamāʾ al-amṣār ʿalā karāhat al-ghināʾ wal-manʿ minhu.”
That is: The scholars of the lands made ijmāʿ on the dislike of singing and the prohibition of it.
Two men went against the jamāʿah: Ibrāhīm ibn Saʿad and ʿUbaidullāh. He mentioned only those two.
So not every khilāf or every person who comes and says, "There’s a difference of opinion — there are some scholars on this side and some scholars on that side" — no. Those scholars I mentioned — all the 30 I have — they didn’t give weight to the khilāf of Ibrāhīm al-Azmin, or the khilāf of Abu Ḥāmid al-Ghazālī, or anyone. They didn’t. They just pushed it to the side.
And just to clarify — because I’ve got a couple of notes here — when we first talked about the issue of singing, and you categorized it in al-ghināʾ in three parts, I did say we’re not even talking about musical instruments — we’re just talking about singing.
Throw on musical instruments — I know it’s come up many times in our discussion — musical instruments take the same ruling.
And the same with — because obviously you said at the time in the introduction: singing, as in the act of singing. What about listening to someone singing? It takes the same ruling. We’ve mentioned it many, many times throughout this podcast, but I just want to make that absolutely clear.
Also, there’s a lie that some people put out there — “Imām al-Shāfiʿī permitted music.” You know, the issue of Ahl al-Madīnah, etc.
Al-Qāḍī Abū Bakr al-Shāmī al-Shāfiʿī, who died in the year 488 Hijri, he says: Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān. Even Abū Bakr al-Ḥaṣnī, the author of the book (unspecified), he debunked that. He said: Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān Qurʾān, and he accepted it.
So if you really want to know these issues — one of the great books that’s written (sorry) — he speaks about it nicely there. He speaks about it in good points as well.
Okay. Also, Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī speaks about it.
Other books that some people are trying to read — and I want to mention the books because some people might want to go and see those books — avoid those books.
Okay, I want to finish with some closing questions, and I really want to bring this issue to the contemporary — so our modern-day situation. Most of my questions are going to be surrounding the questions that people ask generally.
You mentioned on the podcast that there’s a difference between al-samāʿ and al-istimāʿ — listening and hearing. Some people may be asking: Is it permissible to eat at a restaurant, for example, willingly, and you know there’s going to be music on in the background, like you get in many of the Western countries? Is that okay?
Going there and knowing the music is on is different from having to go — when you’re hungry and you need to go — then no problem. But if the music is on, you shouldn’t go there. You should avoid going to it.
Places like malls, where people generally love to go, and places where music is playing — if you have to — like you’re nervous... okay.
What about giving daʿwah through poetry? So we’re talking about the permissible side, and I know we covered this before — but just to reiterate: we’re talking about the permissible side. So it’s not like the normal just raising your voice — spoken word, for example.
First of all, let’s remove daʿwah from it. Are you allowed to do spoken word poetry?
Spoken word poetry — break it down for me and the listeners.
Like someone is just standing on a stage, and they’re just reciting a poem that they’ve written, and the poem rhymes, but there’s no melody?
I don’t see any problem.
Okay. And so listening to that is okay. But what about someone with the intention, like many people do — giving daʿwah through these poems?
Now you’re doing something to get closer to Allāh. So making that your way of daʿwah — whenever you want to give daʿwah you give poetry — that’s not something a person should make their shawl or shagil. And every time it’s poetry — you’re coming out to do poetry — and that’s your way of daʿwah?
It’s best to avoid it.
Sometimes the dīn was defended by poetry. We can’t deny that. The Prophet ﷺ said:
Go with your poetry and speak. So the dīn can be defended.
And we memorize some books in poetry form — we read them and stuff like that. The sciences of the religion are protected through these poetic forms.
But all the time, a person’s daʿwah is always like... don’t make it your (main). But if you do it, it’s no problem here and there.
Someone listened to acapella — like you have a song, for example, but you take the music out and it’s just a rapper, for example, and it’s almost like he’s talking — but it’s acapella. Is that permissible to listen to?
But how did that person get that tune? They had to have listened to the music.
I’m sure on YouTube people upload acapella tracks, so they’ve actually done the editing where they’ve stripped the music, and they just have the voice of the artist — the rapper.
I don’t know the acapella properly.
What if the content of the permissible type of music — the one where it’s just raising the voice — the permissible type of singing, but the content is anti-Islamic? It’s talking about alcohol and drugs — is that permissible to listen to?
No. The last one is reciting Qur'an in a melodious tone, like you hear about the maqamat. Yeah. Great scholars of Islam prohibited it and spoke about it. The great qurra of our time—Shaykh Mubaz gave a fatwa against it. It goes too much, and it goes into the second category. Yeah, there are reciters who are musical. When you hear the recitation of the Qur'an, is this Qur'an? There's one I heard—he was reading the Qur'an, sounds like a song basically.
Okay, last thing then—a summary. If you want to just sum up the discussion today, and if you could say, include in your summary just advice for someone who's listening to music, who's struggling to get off music for example, and they really want to leave music after listening to this podcast—what kind of advice would you give this person?
This is the way that Shaytan gets to a person, and it's from the deceptions of Shaytan. I found myself personally that many people who've been struggling with sins, who've been falling to zina—it's through music. Music, killing, zina—all of it, it makes it easy. Specifically the lyrics they use—it makes it people.
Also, this concept of depression and anxiety—it gives you it. A lot of people, they connect themselves to it. I know people who told me that: I listen to it when I'm sad, this music; and when I'm happy, I listen to this music; and when I'm reading, when I'm walking, I listen to this music; and when I do this... And then what happens to them is, when they strip themselves from the music, they're dark. They're feeling hurt and heartbroken. It's kind of like a drug, and you have withdrawal symptoms when you get off a drug. You can't function. You can't function.
Also, the many zina—boyfriend and girlfriend—and it comes through lyrics. Women talking about men, men talking about women. All of this makes somebody want to go, come to zina. I want to have sexual intercourse with someone that is not halal for them, because it becomes normal. You heard this lyric, it was said. You heard this lyric, it was said. It becomes normal to you. And you lose one of the greatest qualities a person should have, which is shyness—become desensitized to it.
And the Prophet ﷺ, he told us in a hadith: Be shy of Allah the way He deserves to be shy.
This is actually a good answer to a lot of people—sorry to interject. A lot of people ask that murdering someone—you're taking someone’s life, there's a clear harm there. Zina even—you probably give birth to a child in a family where the dad is going to run away, for example. There's a clear harm there. Music has no harm. You're just in your own house, you're not harming the society, you're not harming the people. But as you mentioned here, there are many, many reasons—many harms that occur. That's a good answer for that.
Yeah, it does.
The hadith I was mentioning, which is that the Prophet ﷺ said: Be shy of Allah the way He deserves to be shy.
When the Sahabah said: We are shy of Allah the way He deserves to be shy, then the Prophet ﷺ said: Be shy of Allah the way He deserves to be shy. Let him protect his head and everything on it—your head and everything else on it—and the stomach and everything that's in it. Don't eat what is haram.
So what's on your head that you need to protect? Your eyes, your ears, your mouth—all of these you need to protect. And the stomach—meaning don't eat what is haram.
Then the Prophet ﷺ said: Remember death and the day you're going to stand in front of Allah.
So, why do you want to listen to music when you have the Qur'an? The Qur'an—you have the Book of Allah right in front of you. This Qur'an came down from the mountain. Not only that, Allahumma barik, you have beautiful reciters who touch your heart, penetrate your heart. The recitation of the Qur'an, when you listen to it—anyone who has the Qur'an and has Mahmood Khalil Al-Hussari and Minshawi—wallahi, I don’t—subhanallah, haqiqatan—Mahmood Khalil Al-Hussari and Minshawi and these great Imams of the Qur'an, when you have them, why would you ever want to listen to it or somebody else? Why would you want to listen to music? La shak.
Also, I know a lot of brothers—very good brothers, very good—shy, good to their parents. They listen to this stuff. They lost everything. They lost their wives. They lost their children. They lost the respect they had for their parents. Good kids they were—wallahi, I never saw in my life, the course of my life that I’ve lived, I have not seen—I don’t generally like these blanket statements like this—but I haven’t seen anything that can destroy a person the way that our music can. The reason is because everything comes from it: zina comes from it, liwat comes from it, alcohol comes from it, murdering comes from it, bad friends come from it. And it's the source of all evil, especially at our time.
I always used to ask, back in the days, I always used to ask people—I used to say to them, whenever they come and complain to me about [something], do you listen to music? That was one of my first questions I had on my discussion with them.
If he says yes, I’ll say, first of all, stop that. You pray, you fast, you be good to your parents—everything. This thing, subhanallah… you know these headphones that they put in and they listen to—and they… it’s made people monsters. Young youths that you're seeing, they’re in a civilized world, and in Europe. Some of them tell me, "For 2–3 days I haven't eaten, I'm hungry, I haven't eaten for 2–3 days, I'm starving." You look at him—he’s not clean. His nails are dirty, his clothing… the situation is sad.
A lot of it because—we look at it, be honest—a lot of these brothers, his name is Abdullahi, Ahmed, Khalid, Zainab, Amina, and Fatima. They grew up in a house where their moms are… Qur’an was played. They were going to dukshi on Saturday, Qur’an classes on Saturday. Good parents, good household.
Where did they learn about: I'm looking after my ends, my turf, my postcode? What postcode are you talking about? You're from Somali—African skin. It's weird. Very weird. What postcode do you know? This is owned by the Queen. It’s owned by either the Conservative Party or the Liberal Party—it’s not your postcode. And when he moves from that postcode, he’s fighting for the other postcode. And it comes from the gangster rap and the hip-hop and things like that. Where did he get that from? Another guy in America, who’s not a Muslim, who fell off in life. Even the non-Muslims see him to be the lowest of the lowest. These rappers are the lowest of the lowest. And non-Muslims are looking at them like—many Muslims actually look up to him, almost idolize him. And his name is Ahmed—I mean, Fatima—I mean… Why are you looking up to a non-Muslim kāfir? Because there are kāfirs who are educated or learned or anything like that? Why, out of all the things you could have copied the non-Muslims—and if you don’t want to listen, you still want to copy the non-Muslims—why are you watching these ones?
Do you understand my point? It’s weird. The people today—what we think civilization is—is following the non-Muslims in the things that… it doesn’t bring honor to Islam. Why would you follow the Muslims in football? Why would you follow the non-Muslims in music? Why would you follow the non-Muslims in clothing?
If you really want to follow them, follow them in technology. Follow them in the worldly progression they've come with. You don't. You're backwards on that. Why are you following these things? It's weird.
Also, the people who’ve given you this fatwa that music is allowed—remember, they’re not going to come with you on Judgement Day. You're going to be alone. You're going to be questioned by Allah by yourself. And these people who give this fatwa to the people—I ask them one question. When you came out and gave this fatwa to the people, and you say music is a difference of opinion—one question I have. I don't want to ask you any other question, just one question: Did you feel that the Ummah were so backwards for not listening to music, that you felt that it was a necessary thing for you to come forward and say to them, Music is a difference of opinion—listen to it. There's a difference of opinion—listen to it?
That's the first question I ask. And the last I ask: If that's not the case, then there are many other things you could have told the Muslims to do.
I conclude there, insha’Allah.
