[addifttiest]

It is one of the signs of Qiyamat that music will become part of households, something that was not there in the centuries gone by, and humankind fulfilled that prophecy by inventing sound systems, stereos, TV, youtube...May Allah guide and protect us...

[Avaboormavoro]

So yeah , since the matter is "disputed" among Islamic scholars , you can choose those scholars who say Music is allowed in Islam ...

Can I choose this scholar to take opinion about interaction with non-mahram?

[DJElizardo]

Allahu Akbar....
Pls my brothers.....don't argue with these kind of people's....
They are just wasting our time...they know the truth...but still they have gone astray..
May Allah guide them.

[katespepach]

No a person cannot legitimize every single evil deed by looking for minority opinions - that is absolute rubbish. Its a lazy excuse used to silence dissent. We can easily establish the severity of listening to music in comparison to zina.

Zina is a hadd offence - it is a major violation of God's natural law and the severity of that transgression is explicitly and clearly mentioned in the Quran without the need for any interpretation whatsoever. Music on the other hand is not - this is basics of Islamic fiqh 101.

There is clear differences and scholarly controversy over music. Islamic civilization produced some of the most sophisticated and refined musical theory - one can easily think of Al Andalus as an example of this.

You have no proof by virtue of UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS (not a numerical majority by absolute unanimous consensus) to suggest minority opinions are religiously inadmissible and tantamount to sinning and transgressing God's law (yes I concede sometimes following minority opinions is unwise but you cannot use a blanket statement on this regard) and you are confusing fiqh-al-aqalliyyat (the opinions that you mention such as legalizing the eating of haraam meat has only to my knowledge ever been justified on the basis of Muslims living as a minority community in a non-Muslim majority country). Disregarding the discussion on this contentious issue of fiqh - minority opinions have a valid basis in the juristic literature.

Furthermore you cast aspersions on the faith of another brother by coming out with all sorts of rubbish such along the lines of ''you place greater significance on your desires, this world instead of the Hereafter''. What need is there for this - keep your opinions to yourself on this regard.

I urge everyone to listen to this brilliant lecture by Shaykh Abdullah on Following the Mashhur:

http://www.lamppostproductions.com/?p=3727

And his paper on ijma is absolutely brilliant:

http://www.lamppostproductions.com/f...0Consensus.pdf

You are either willfully ignorant or are blind.

First of all, the punishment for zina (adultery) is stoning but that isn't found in the Qur'an, yet it is overwhelming agreed to be the punishment. On the other hand, modernists and progressives use the fact that stoning for adultery isn't mentioned in the Qur'an to say that it is not the punishment for adultery. So even that paltry example you're trying to use is inadmissible since many people have even tried to denounce it. In fact, many modernists have said that none of the hudud punishments apply to our present times, and that we must instead be more obedient to the secular, democratically selected punishments.

And you're naive to believe that "absolute unanimous consensus" even exists. Even on the most basic concepts of fiqh, there is no unanimity. Even when many classical ulama have cited consensus on an issue, there have always been detractors who have held minority opinion. As I've said, even consuming any meat from non-Muslims becomes permissible and yes, it is when one is living in a non-Muslim society - but then that is because it is nearly impossible to get haraam meat in Muslim societies (well, not anymore with the importing of haraam meat). So, if a person follows one opinion when living in the West (i.e. that all meat is permissible because one is a minority) and then another opinion is adopted when one goes to a Muslim country where haraam meat is available, is there not a clear contradiction? That is called following desires. Now, as I've mentioned before, Shaykh Qaradawi and even that Tahir ul Qadri that he linked to say that hijab is fardh, obligatory. Auzer does not believe it is necessary, that a woman wearing a shirt and trousers is wearing sufficient clothes. So why does he choose their opinion on music and make up his own ideas with regards to hijab? And he has referenced Javed Ghamdi for his support, even though that guy is no scholar.

I would not have any real issue with Auzer if he had not responded as he did (you seem to be turning a blind eye to how he has responded) and if he didn't have a history of creating controversy, even on established beliefs, such as wearing hijab. There have been many people before who have come and tried to legitimize music but none of them that I've seen would be so utterly hypocritical and fitnah-mongering.

And you're also unaware of the "diversity" of "scholarship" where it is so easy to justify any evil thing because so and so "scholar" said so. As brother Maripat has posted, a person can say, "Look at Adnan Oktar (Harun Yahya); he hangs out with ghayr mahram women so it MUST be permissible."

[UitEz0Qo]

Why are you creating straw men?

In almost all your posts related to the permissibility of music ,you have been committing the fallacy of appeal to authority. Something is true because mr so and so says so and mr so and so is of a high value because another mr so and so has praised him and called him so and so.

[Bondjrno]

Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 49:

"Narrated An-Nu’man bin Bashir :

I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, ‘Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.'"





EDIT: If Music is not considered to be a "doubtful, suspicious" thing, then I don't know what is! Even the likes of the ones trying to 'justify' music in this thread (by any means necessary) would hopefully at least, at a minimum, consider music to be doubtful, suspicious, a heavily grey area, etc. But then again, maybe I shouldn't be so hopeful.

Allah knows best.

[Oppofeescom]

*
http://www.suhaibwebb.com/islam-stud...n-usul-part-6/

Mashallah Imam Suhaibb Webb's website is a beacon of tolerance and scholarship on an internet ravaged by sectarian intolerance...

Adnan Oktar is not well read in jurisprudence nor does he claim to be a jurist! Please people get some perspective here....

The suhaibwebb.com website is a beacon of modernism and obscure non-mainstream 'fatwas'. Free mixing, shaking women's hands, celebrating christmas and other kuffar holidays, music, courting before marriage etc etc *if you're shopping for a fatwa that appeals to your nafs that's the place to go.

http://www.suhaibwebb.com/society/do...nct-u-s-style/

[tooratrack]

This suffices for me,

Instruction of Umar Ibn Abdul Aziz rahmatullahi alayh to his son's teacher Sahal:

"The first thing that your instruction should instill in their hearts is the hatred of musical instruments; their beginning is from Shaytaan and their end is the anger of Ar Rahmaan. For it has come to me from reliable scholars that attending to instruments and listening to songs and fondness for them breed hypocrisy in the heart like water grows grass."

Imam Suyuti, al Durr al Manthur, tafsir of Surah Luqmaan, verse 6, 11:620-21. Cf.Ibn Abi'l Dunya, Dhamm al Malahu no 20, 40-41.

I will not even attempt to include the Ijma of the Four math-habs on the impermissibility of music.

[Britfunclubs]

Music is the qur'an of the shaytaan.

[interbaoui]

That unfortunately is not how I choose it to be - it is the very circular nature of juristic reasoning in the classical tradition where the appeal to authority is self-evidently the basis of much juristic thought since the idea of a legal methodology and juristic personality are incredibly intertwined. Of course I have given the names but those names are only a reference point - indeed a starting point for you to go and read about their views on this issue which are abundantly available.

There are some legitimate types of appeals to authorities , like quoting Imam Ibn Qudama ra on Hanbali rulings is a legitimate appeal to authority as it is well known that Ibn Qudama ra is an authority on Habali Madhab. Your appeals are fallacies because Qardawi has never been accepted as an authority on Islam and he is a much controversial figure. It is obvious that you are just quoting him to add a weight to your stance.The nature of juristic reasoning is not so circular in Islam. You can quote the valid muthamad authorities in madhahibs to justify a ruling or you can quote a hadith for that. Fortunately in the case of Music , none of them is with you.

[Unlinozistimi]

Suit yourself - alhamdullilah....

I love Imam Suhaib Webb

Yeah, I wonder why...

[luffyplayaz]

what modernists do:
1. form an opinion about a matter.
2. google the statement of the matter
3. look for any 'scholar' who has agreed with them or tried to dispute with the opposite stance.
4. if they cant find scholars look for some layman pretending to be a scholar who agrees with them or find a classic layman who gives a half baked argument in favor of their opinion.
5. regurgitate the name of the 'scholar' (if they find any) or the layman-scholar or the layman's argument whenever they can and play the differences of opinion card.
6. accuse the actual scholars of every crime committed on the face of the earth by anyone even slightly religious looking.
7. accuse the supporters of the actual scholars of intolerance, sectarianism and violence.
8. misguide tons of people.(illa ma sha Allah) by leading them to haram, to hatred of scholars, to worship of nafs etc etc.

i hope everyone now is clear why the modernists are a cancer to the ummah.
May Allah guide them and us.

[kertionderf]

You're confusing many issues together - when I cited zina I cited it in the context of it being a sin not about the nature of its punishment (that is a separate issue and one that needs not to be discussed here). The issue at hand to be clear is that there does exist UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS about what is sinful and what is not. Adultery is sinful fullstop (no jurist in the world can even begin to try and justify sexual relations outside of marriage) - I'm not talking about the nature of its punishment or the earthly penalty imposed on it - but there is complete consensus that Muslims who engage in sexual behaviour outside of the holy framework of marriage are indulging in sinful behaviour. Such a consensus does not exist with regards to music.

Here is a clear cut list on things where there is UNANIMOUS CONSENSUS (and please read this article you are very confused on some very basic issues of fiqh):
http://www.suhaibwebb.com/society/wh...olars-a-mercy/

''Some examples of qatʻī matters:

The oneness of God
The finality of the message of Muḥammad ﷺ
The prohibition of unlawful murder
The prohibition of homosexuality
The prohibition of adultery/fornication
The prohibition of drinking alcohol
The obligation of the five daily prayers
Dealing with people justly
Abusing, cursing and defaming others
Sectarianism and breaking up Muslim unity
Backbiting and slander
Spying and unwarranted suspicion
Declaring the companions of the Prophet as apostates (May Allāh protect us)''

I challenge you to bring even one person/scholar who will use the juristic resources of the Islamic tradition to argue the opposite of the propositions described above. So please do not speak rubbish when you say ''even on the most basic concepts of fiqh, there is no unanimity'' - because of course there is unanimity. There are some absolutely clear cut injunctions that cannot be discarded. You are presenting a very simplistic picture of what is definitive and what is a source of disagreement. You really must understand the issues of where there exists a difference in opinion for our modern context....

And please read this very beneficial article as well:
http://www.suhaibwebb.com/islam-stud...n-usul-part-6/

Mashallah Imam Suhaibb Webb's website is a beacon of tolerance and scholarship on an internet ravaged by sectarian intolerance...

Adnan Oktar is not well read in jurisprudence nor does he claim to be a jurist! Please people get some perspective here....

What does it matter whether Adnan Oktar is "well read in jurisprudence" or doesn't "claim to be a jurist"? Where are these prerequisites coming from? Scholars much greater and more numerous than anyone who has tried to make music permissible have come and gone and some are still alive but of course you won't listen to them so what do all these ranks, positions, and status matter?

Suhaib Webb is also someone who has flip flopped and went from one organization to the next.

Furthermore, even that list you've provided, you have to prove that these matters are agreed upon by complete unanimity. I can tell you that they're not, especially when people get into defining what exactly is slander or spying or finality or unlawful murder or even drinking alcohol. For example, in the Hanafi madhhab, only alcohol that is derived from grapes and dates specifically is haraam. Otherwise, alcohol that may be synthetic or derived from other sources and if it does not intoxicate - it is considered permissible (an example would be alcohol used to carry flavour in modern manufacturing processes, which would make the product haraam for non-Hanafis but people who like to pick and choose and follow their desires choose the Hanafi position in this regard). Even the obligation of the five daily prayers is contested, especially if you consider the Shi'a to be Muslim - which automatically includes THEIR beliefs as being valid differences in opinion. The Shi'a have three prayers, for example. "Abusing, cursing, and defaming others" is also something that is challenged and there is no ijma' on this: the Shi'a say it is praiseworthy to curse the Sahaba , the pure wives رضي الله عنهن, and anyone who "opposed" the Ahlul Bayt. Is this a valid opinion? If you consider them Muslims, then their opinions are supposed to be acceptable to you, since you accept all minority opinions to be valid.

Even the most basic belief - the oneness of God - has been contested by "minority opinion". The Alawi Shi'a believe that 'Ali is God. The Druze also believed that God came down as a human. Now, both of these groups have been expelled from the folds of Islam by the ulama because of their perversion of this fundamental belief of Islam because of their minority opinion.

If you think Suhaib Webb is a good representation of a great 'alim, you're sorely mistaken because your gauge for measuring how good a scholar is appears not to be based upon adherence or promotion of haqq despite opposition, but taking the path of least resistance to placate everyone. Do you even know why the Deobandis or Barelvis or Salafis exist? These groups exist because each believes that there is a fundamental difference between them on the most basic of things.

[gorbasevhuynani]

This thread is full of opinions, but very short on Adab. The scholars Sheikh Suhaib Webb and Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi have been spoken of in ways that it is not good to speak of learned people - even if they follow a different school of thought from yourself. Those Scholars who permit music have seemingly been compared to Alawites and Druze because they hold a minority view!?

Really this is not nice.

[catermos]

This thread is full of opinions, but very short on Adab. The scholars Sheikh Suhaib Webb and Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi have been spoken of in ways that it is not good to speak of learned people - even if they follow a different school of thought from yourself. Those Scholars who permit music have seemingly been compared to Alawites and Druze because they hold a minority view!?

Really this is not nice.

Suhaib Webb has opined that gustakh of Rasulullah should not be punished as the Sahabah punished it on the basis that 'times are different, we can't force people to believe.'

This is a 'scholar' to you?

[newspetty]

This thread is full of opinions, but very short on Adab. The scholars Sheikh Suhaib Webb and Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi have been spoken of in ways that it is not good to speak of learned people - even if they follow a different school of thought from yourself. Those Scholars who permit music have seemingly been compared to Alawites and Druze because they hold a minority view!?

Really this is not nice.

What is your view regarding music?

I agree to your comment generally..despite of his opinion here, he's a Mufti now so let us give him some respect. We congratulated a moderator recently graduating as a Mufti on SF..let's not forget Sh. Suhaib Webb is a Mufti now too.

[Hoglaunccoolf]

Walaikum Assalam sister!

Almost every Hadith which talks against music also speaks against drinking (alcohol), doing zina with girls etc. So these Ahadith criticize that kind of music which can arouse sexual desires and can lead a person to drinking and zina etc. According to those scholars, the music used in Qawali etc doesnt arouse sexual desires, but incites the love of Allah and His Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم), so it does not come under the prohibited category.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rCHy5XXz6k

thank you for the simple answer
that is the answer i was searching for
but i didnot want all that arguments done by the other people
i was a very adddictive listener of bollywood songs but now i am trying to avoid them as much as i can..
can we listen those music which show the love of ALLAH?

[SerycegeBunny]

thank you for the simple answer
that is the answer i was searching for
but i didnot want all that arguments done by the other people
i was a very adddictive listener of bollywood songs but now i am trying to avoid them as much as i can..
can we listen those music which show the love of ALLAH?

This should help

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHhve...eature=related

[VladFal]

This should help

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHhve...eature=related

[BamSaitinypap]

We really need someone of the calibre of Mufti Abu Hajira, Mufti Javed etc to write a comprehensive response on this topic, in particular addressing the desperate claim of 'iktilaaf' on the issue. Some of these modern american Imams are diluting the deen to such an extent that it's barely recognisable, wheeling out the same 'there's no criticism when theres ikhtilaaf' mantra if anyone tries to say otherwise and here you see their followers doing the same. In some ways you can't really blame them, Shaytaans pull on the nafs is strong and they will desperately cling onto any 'fatwa' legitimising their sinful deeds, regardless of how obscure or faraway from mainstream and Ijmah it may be.

As Shaykh Abu Yusuf once said, "a person of taqwa does not shop for a fatwa"

Unfortunately many of these youth are now doing exactly the opposite, scouring all corners of the globe in their desperate search for a fatwa permitting what their nafs desires.

May Allah guide us all.