Praise be to Allah.
In Islam, the question of music’s permissibility is a topic of considerable discussion and, for many, definitive rulings. This guide aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of why music is widely considered haram (forbidden) within Islamic jurisprudence, drawing upon primary Islamic texts and the consensus of respected scholars. We will delve into the Islamic concept of Ma’azif, explore the scriptural evidence, and examine the scholarly views that shape this understanding.
What is Ma’azif?
The term Ma’azif (مَعَازِف) is central to the Islamic discourse on music. It is the plural of mi’zafah, which, in classical Arabic, refers to musical instruments. This definition is supported by authoritative sources such as Fath al-Bari and al-Majmu’. Al-Qurtubi, citing al-Jawhari, further explains Ma’azif as encompassing singing. Historically, Sihah, a renowned dictionary, defined it as musical instruments, while others interpreted it as the sound produced by these instruments. Al-Dimyati in al-Hawashi clarifies Ma’azif to include drums (dufuf, singular daff) and other percussion instruments. In essence, Ma’azif broadly encompasses musical instruments and their sounds, and in some interpretations, singing itself.
Scriptural Evidence from the Quran
The primary source of Islamic law, the Quran, is often cited to support the prohibition of music. One of the most frequently referenced verses is from Surah Luqman (31:6):
“And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allah…” [Luqman 31:6]
Early Islamic scholars, including the esteemed Ibn ‘Abbas, the scholar of the ummah, interpreted “idle talks” (lahw al-hadith) in this verse as referring to singing. Mujahid associated it with the drum (tabl). Al-Hasan al-Basri connected the verse to both singing and musical instruments, specifically woodwind instruments.
Al-Sa’di broadened the scope, stating that “idle talk” includes all forbidden speech, falsehood, nonsense promoting disbelief and disobedience, arguments against truth, backbiting, slander, lies, insults, curses, and importantly, “the singing and musical instruments of the Shaytan,” lacking spiritual or worldly benefit.
Ibn al-Qayyim emphasized the consensus of the Sahabah (companions of the Prophet) and Tabi’in (successors) who interpreted “idle talk” as singing. He highlighted the authentic chains of narration (sahih isnad) supporting this interpretation from Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud. Ibn Mas’ud himself swore by Allah, repeating three times, that “idle talk” in this verse meant singing. Similar narrations exist from Ibn ‘Umar.
Ibn al-Qayyim further clarified that interpreting “idle talk” as singing does not contradict interpretations that include stories of Persians and Romans meant to distract from the Quran, as both are forms of idle talk. He argued that singing is even more detrimental than such stories, leading to zina (adultery/fornication), fostering hypocrisy, and acting as a trap of Satan that clouds the mind. Its power to divert people from the Quran surpasses other forms of false talk due to the natural human inclination towards music.
Another Quranic verse cited is from Surah al-Isra (17:64), where Allah addresses Iblis (Satan):
“[Allah said to Iblis:] And befool them gradually those whom you can among them with your voice (i.e. songs, music, and any other call for Allah’s disobedience)…” [al-Isra 17:64]
Mujahid interpreted “his voice” (the voice of Iblis/Shaytan) in this verse as “singing and falsehood.”
Ibn al-Qayyim elaborated that “your voice” in this verse specifies the meaning, similar to “your cavalry” and “your infantry” mentioned later in the same verse. He asserted that anyone speaking against obedience to Allah, playing flutes or woodwind instruments, or any forbidden drums, is using “the voice of the Shaytan.” He extended this to actions, stating that anyone walking towards disobedience is part of Satan’s infantry, and anyone riding to commit sin is part of his cavalry. This understanding, he notes, is consistent with the Salaf (early generations of Muslims), citing Ibn ‘Abi Hatim’s narration from Ibn ‘Abbas that Satan’s infantry is anyone walking to disobey Allah.
Surah al-Najm (53:59-61) is also brought forward:
“Do you then wonder at this recitation (the Quran)? And you laugh at it and weep not, Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)” [al-Najm 53:59-61]
‘Ikrimah, narrating from Ibn ‘Abbas, explained that al-sumud (translated here as “Wasting your (precious) lifetime in pastime and amusements (singing)”) means “singing” in the Himyar dialect. He mentioned that when the kuffar (disbelievers) heard the Quran, they would engage in singing, leading to the revelation of this verse. Ibn Kathir corroborated this interpretation, citing Sufyan al-Thawri’s narration from his father from Ibn ‘Abbas, and ‘Ikrimah’s agreement.
Prophetic Traditions (Hadith)
The Sunnah, or traditions of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), provides further evidence against the permissibility of music. Abu Umamah reported the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) saying:
“Do not sell singing slave women, do not buy them and do not teach them. There is nothing good in this trade, and their price is haram. Concerning such things as this the ayah was revealed (interpretation of the meaning): {And of mankind is he who purchases idle talks (i.e. music, singing) to mislead (men) from the path of Allah…} [Luqman 31:6].” (Hasan hadith)
A particularly significant Hadith, narrated by al-Bukhari and others, states:
“Among my ummah there will certainly be people who permit zina, silk, alcohol and musical instruments…” (Narrated by al-Bukhari ta’liqan, no. 5590; narrated as mawsul by al-Tabarani and al-Bayhaqi. See al-Silsilah al-Sahihah by al-Albani, 91)
Ibn al-Qayyim argued that this sahih (authentic) Hadith, quoted by al-Bukhari as evidence, indicates the prohibition of musical instruments in two ways. First, the Prophet’s statement “[they] permit” implies that these things, including musical instruments, are inherently haram in Sharia but will be made permissible by some later people. Second, the mention of musical instruments alongside definitively haram activities like zina and alcohol suggests that musical instruments share the same status of prohibition. If music were not haram, there would be no reason to mention it in the same context as these grave sins.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah affirmed that this Hadith indicates the haram nature of Ma’azif, which, according to Arabic language scholars, encompasses all musical instruments.
Ibn al-Qayyim further noted that similar condemnations of musical instruments are narrated from numerous Companions, including Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Sa’idi, ‘Imran ibn Husayn, ‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Amr, ‘Abd-Allah ibn ‘Abbas, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Umamah al-Bahili, ‘Aishah, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Anas ibn Malik, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Sabit, and al-Ghazi ibn Rabi’ah, further strengthening the view of their prohibition.
The Hadith of Ibn ‘Umar’s reaction to hearing a woodwind instrument is also cited. Nafi’ narrated that Ibn ‘Umar, upon hearing a woodwind instrument, put his fingers in his ears and moved away from the path. He only removed his fingers after asking Nafi’ if he could still hear the sound and being told no. Ibn ‘Umar explained that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did the same thing in a similar situation. While some argue this doesn’t explicitly prohibit music, as the Prophet didn’t instruct Ibn ‘Umar or Nafi’ to block their ears, the counter-argument is that the Prophet and Ibn ‘Umar were not intentionally listening but merely hearing the sound, which is different.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah clarified that unintentional hearing of music is not prohibited or blameworthy, based on scholarly consensus. The prohibition and blame are connected to listening intentionally, not merely hearing. Actions are judged by intentions. Therefore, unintentionally hearing forbidden musical instruments is not sinful.
Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi further explained that Ibn ‘Umar’s action was due to hearing, not listening, which implies intentional engagement. The Prophet’s action was to ensure the sound stopped as he moved away and blocked his ears, indicating his aversion to it, even unintentional hearing.
Scholarly Consensus (Ijma)
The consensus of Islamic scholars across different schools of thought is presented as a strong pillar for the prohibition of music. Al-Qasim described singing as “part of falsehood.” Al-Hasan refused wedding invitations (walimah) where music was involved.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah stated that the four Imams (Abu Hanifah, Malik, al-Shafi’i, and Ahmad) all held the view that musical instruments of all kinds are haram. He referenced the Hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari about people who would permit forbidden things and be transformed into monkeys and pigs. He emphasized that none of the followers of these Imams disputed the prohibition of music.
Al-Albani affirmed the agreement of the four madhhabs (schools of jurisprudence) that all musical instruments are haram.
Ibn al-Qayyim highlighted the strict stance of the Hanafi madhhab, stating that their view is the harshest and that they consider listening to musical instruments like flutes and drums, even tapping a stick, as haram. They considered it a sin that makes a person fasiq (rebellious sinner) whose testimony is rejected. Some Hanafi scholars even considered enjoying music as kufr (disbelief). They advocated avoiding even unintentionally hearing music and cited Abu Yusuf’s view allowing entry into a house without permission to stop music due to the obligation of forbidding evil.
Imam Malik, when asked about unintentionally hearing and enjoying drums or flutes while walking or sitting, advised getting up and leaving unless necessary to stay or unable to move. He considered those who habitually engage in such activities as fasiqs.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr listed earnings from singing and playing flutes among those haram by scholarly consensus, along with riba, prostitution fees, bribes, and fortune-telling payments.
Ibn al-Qayyim, explaining Imam al-Shafi’i’s view, stated that his knowledgeable followers affirmed the prohibition of music and denounced those who claimed he permitted it.
The author of Kifayat al-Akhbar, a Shafi’i scholar, categorized musical instruments like flutes as munkar (evil) that should be denounced.
Regarding Imam Ahmad’s view, his son ‘Abd-Allah quoted him saying that “singing makes hypocrisy grow in the heart” and that he disliked it, referencing Malik’s view that “evildoers (fasiqs) among us do that.”
Ibn Qudamah, a Hanbali scholar, categorized string instruments, flutes, lutes, drums, and rabab as haram. He stated that persistent listening to them invalidates one’s testimony. He also advised attending gatherings with objectionable elements like music if one can denounce them, otherwise, to avoid them.
Al-Tabari claimed that scholars across regions agreed on the makruh (in earlier times, often meaning haram) nature of singing and its prohibition. He noted the differing views of Ibrahim ibn Sa’d and ‘Ubayd-Allah al-‘Anbari but emphasized the Prophet’s call to “adhere to the majority” and warned against dying in opposition to it. Al-Tabari’s use of “should be prevented” further suggests makruh here implies prohibition. Al-Qurtubi, after citing this, mentioned that Abu’l-Faraj and al-Qaffal, among their companions, deemed the testimony of singers and dancers unacceptable, and that receiving payment for such activities is also impermissible.
Shaykh al-Fawzan clarified that the views attributed to Ibrahim ibn Sa’d and ‘Ubayd-Allah al-‘Anbari regarding singing do not align with modern-day singing, which he considers highly immoral and obscene.
Ibn Taymiyah stated the impermissibility of making musical instruments and mentioned that the majority of fuqaha (jurists) permit destroying them, citing Malik and a prominent view in the Hanbali school. He also noted the scholarly consensus against paying for singing and wailing, citing al-Shu’bi, al-Nakha’i, Malik, Abu Thawr, and Hanafi scholars. Ibn Taymiyah equated musical instruments to “the wine of the soul,” arguing their effect on the soul is worse than intoxicants.
A historical anecdote from Ibn Abi Shaybah recounts a case where Shurayh, a judge, did not award compensation to a man whose mandolin was broken by another, implying its lack of value due to its haram nature.
Al-Baghawi issued a fatwa (religious ruling) prohibiting the sale of all types of musical instruments like mandolins and flutes, but allowed selling their parts (wood, metal, etc.) if their form is altered and images (if any) are removed.
Exceptions: The Daff
A notable exception to the general prohibition is the daff (frame drum without rings), specifically for women during Eid celebrations and weddings. This exception is based on sahih (authentic) narrations.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah acknowledged the Prophet’s allowance for certain instruments at weddings and for women to play the daff on joyful occasions. However, he emphasized that men at the Prophet’s time did not play the daff or clap, citing the Hadith “Clapping is for women and tasbih (saying Subhan Allah) is for men.” He also condemned men imitating women and vice versa. He noted that Salaf considered men who sang or played daff as effeminate.
He referenced the Hadith of ‘Aishah regarding two young girls singing Ansar poetry during Eid in her presence. Abu Bakr initially called them “musical instruments of the Shaytan,” but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) corrected him, saying, “Leave them alone, O Abu Bakr, for every nation has its ‘Eid, and this is our ‘Eid, the people of Islam.” Shaykh al-Islam notes that the Prophet approved of Abu Bakr’s description (“musical instruments of the Shaytan”) but permitted it specifically for Eid. This indicates that gathering to listen to singing was not the Prophet’s or his Companions’ habit, and the permissibility was specific to Eid and for young girls, not professional singers or for general entertainment. He quotes Shaykh al-Albani who clarified that this permission was to show “that in our religion there is room for relaxation.” Importantly, the Hadith doesn’t indicate the Prophet himself was listening to them, emphasizing that commands and prohibitions relate to intentional listening, not accidental hearing. This exception is thus understood to be for women only and limited to specific occasions. Imam Abu ‘Ubayd defined daff as “that which is played by women.”
Refuting Counterarguments
The article systematically addresses and refutes common arguments used to justify music’s permissibility, such as:
- Military Music: The argument for allowing drums in war is dismissed as baseless, lacking clear evidence and contradicting the Islamic emphasis on turning to Allah in times of war. Music is seen as distracting from remembrance of Allah and imitating kuffar customs.
- Abyssinians Playing in the Mosque: The Hadith about Abyssinians playing in the Prophet’s mosque is clarified as relating to play with weapons on Eid, not general singing or music. Al-Nawawi’s interpretation is mentioned but criticized by al-Hafiz ibn Hajar for being outside his area of expertise.
- Singing of Young Girls: The Hadith of young girls singing is explained as an exception for young, prepubescent girls on Eid, singing non-corrupting lyrics, not general permission for music. Abu Bakr’s description “musical instruments of the Shaytan” and the Prophet’s approval of it, along with the specific Eid context, are emphasized to limit this exception. Ibn al-Qayyim expresses amazement at using this incident to justify sophisticated songs. Ibn al-Jawzi notes that ‘Aishah herself condemned singing after puberty, and her nephew al-Qasim ibn Muhammad also condemned it, learning from her. Al-Hafiz ibn Hajar points out Sufi misuse of this Hadith and stresses limiting its application to the specific context of the narration.
- Companions Listening to Singing: The claim that Sahabah and Tabi’in listened to singing is challenged, demanding sahih isnad evidence. Al-Fawzan quotes Ibn al-Mubarak on the importance of isnad in religion.
- Faulty Hadiths: The claim that Hadiths prohibiting music are weak is refuted by Ibn Baz, who asserts that while some Hadiths may be da’if (weak) individually, the collective body of evidence, including sahih Hadiths in Bukhari and hasan (good) Hadiths, provides definitive proof of music’s prohibition. He notes the consensus of Imams on the soundness of these Hadiths, except for figures like al-Ghazzali (criticized for Hadith knowledge) and Ibn Hazam (whose errors are explained by al-Albani, and who himself would accept sahih Hadith).
- Music Haram Only with Alcohol: The argument that music is only haram when combined with alcohol is refuted by al-Shawkani, who points out that contextual mention doesn’t limit prohibitions. He argues that this logic would absurdly imply zina is only haram when combined with alcohol and music. The prohibition of music is independently established through other evidence.
- “Idle Talk” Not Singing: The interpretation of “idle talk” as not referring to singing is dismissed, citing al-Qurtubi’s view that the singing interpretation is the best, supported by Ibn Mas’ud’s oath and the consensus of early scholars. Ibn al-Qayyim highlights al-Hakim Abu ‘Abd-Allah’s view on the authority of Sahabi tafsir (interpretation).
- Singing as Worship: The idea that singing becomes worship if intended to aid obedience is rejected by Ibn al-Qayyim as paradoxical. He questions how something disliked by Allah can bring one closer to Him. Shaykh al-Islam describes how those addicted to music lose desire for and joy in the Quran, preferring music over it.
- Music Softens Hearts: The claim that music softens hearts is refuted as untrue, as music is seen to provoke desires and whims, not genuine softness of heart. The behavior of many musicians is cited as evidence against this claim.
Conclusion
This detailed exposition, drawing upon Quranic verses, Prophetic traditions, and the consensus of esteemed Islamic scholars across various schools of thought, strongly indicates that music, in its general forms (beyond the very specific exception of the daff for women in limited contexts), is considered haram in Islam. The arguments for permissibility are consistently refuted based on scriptural and scholarly evidence.
For those seeking to adhere strictly to Islamic teachings, this understanding is crucial. It is essential to seek knowledge from reliable sources rooted in the Quran and Sunnah, rather than being swayed by contemporary trends or lenient opinions that lack solid foundations in Islamic jurisprudence. True adherence involves prioritizing the guidance of Allah and His Messenger over personal desires and cultural norms.
This summary aims to provide clarity and understanding for fair-minded and objective readers on this complex issue. It encourages seeking truth based on evidence and avoiding interpretations that contradict the weight of Islamic textual and scholarly tradition.
References:
Summary of a paper entitled al-Darb bi’l-Nawa li man abaha al-Ma’azif li’l-Hawa by Shaykh Sa’d al-Din ibn Muhammad al-Kibbi.
For more information, please see:
- Al-I’lam bi Naqd Kitab al-Halal wa’l-Haram, by Shaykh al-‘Allamah Salih ibn Fawzan al-Fawzan
- Al-Sama’ by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn al-Qayyim
- Tahrim Alat al-Tarab, by Shaykh Muhammad Nasir al-Deen al-Albani (may Allah have mercy on him)
