Actually, the problem is the composition of the music as you’ve given in your example. I could take the same instrument and make a happy tune for a children’s cartoon. Again, the composer, the producer, etc are at fault for eliciting the emotions they chose to elicit using this instrument.
I think this whole “stringed instruments are haraam” is a myopic way of dealing with the problem. Again, early muslim scholars decided to avoid the real problem - the humans who misuse materials that could be put to a good use if the intention was there.
The Rasul was really big about intentions. He took Aisha (R) to street shows. He obviously did not disapprove of entertainment.
Anyway, I don’t understand how such obvious topics are so debated in the muslim world. I can’t believe we’re actually debating whether the actual instrument is at fault here.
There is no evidence whatsoever from the Quran that music is haraam. Only -if at all- indirect evidence suggests -if you extrapolate it- that songs/music are haraam (this reasoning is -as we’ve also come across in this thread- that music will make u start dancing and via via via can lead to unlawful things between you and other human beings.
But the reasoning that is required to reach this far-fetched conclusion would in the same manner also be applicable to clothes/paper/talking/internet/gupshup.
As usual, there is incomplete and conflicting evidence from Hadith that music is not allowed (some state music is not allowed at all, then they say drum is allowed etc etc). This lends support to Seminole’s statement that conflicting hadith probably originate from persons, who -in order to promote their own agenda- put words in the prophet’s mouth and as such could control the masses.
Now where is my Beethoven CD?
ammarr: rest assured, Beethoven’s music will actually make me feel more calm and rested. Worry not, that it will lead me to start dancing around and do unlawful things. You should try it too :k:
And Arm Chair “scholars” have given their verdict to lead the masses astray.
Totally ridiculled scholars from the lineage of the Prophet pbuh and those who have dedicated their whole life in the study of religion.
Way ta Go!
I’ll finish off with the following. Because Now i see why it makes sense.
***“Verily, those who disbelieve, it is the same to them whether you (O Muhammad Peace be upon him ) warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe.”
Wait! Before you yank out that key again...
Disbelieve what? That verse sounds like it pertains to what was revealed in the Quran, not suspect writings by people who followed its revelation.
I don’t wanna repeat anything, If it didn’t get to u the first time, then re read the thread. Its in there and i’ll atleast give you THAT much of a hint.
Sorry its closed. For more information, contact the nearest Fuqhi.
And its pretty futile to explain to someone ( i’ll say again) who doesn’t believe in the hadiths.
]“When Umar became the Caliph he took further steps to rid the society of sexual laxity.
In the days of ignorance poetry was pressed into service as an instrument of moral laxity. The poets indulged in ribald poems. They named their sweethearts in their poems and by indulging in poetic license compromised the honor and integrity of ladies. Then where ladies were no party to love the poets in their imagination made their beloveds return their love in passionate terms. Such poetry did considerable social harm, and disturbed domestic peace in many a home. Umar took cognizance of this unsocial practice. He commanded the poets not to mention the names of ladies in their poems. He also issued directions that the poets should not indulge in any versification calculated to encourage moral depravity. Where some poets inadvertently or otherwise contravened these instructions they were flogged or punished”.
(5) Narrated Abu 'Amir or Abu Malik Al-Ash’ari: that he heard the Prophet saying, “From among my followers there will be some people who will consider illegal sexual intercourse, the wearing of silk, the drinking of alcoholic drinks and the use of musical instruments, as lawful. And there will be some people who will stay near the side of a mountain and in the evening their shepherd will come to them with their sheep and ask them for something, but they will say to him, ‘Return to us tomorrow.’ Allah will destroy them during the night and will let the mountain fall on them, and He will transform the rest of them into monkeys and pigs and they will remain so till the Day of Resurrection.” (Book #69, Hadith #494v) bukhari
nice one hareem,i already know u KNOW THE DETAILED ANSWER to it .
there r 3 separate issues in ur query though,maybe 4.each shud be dealt with separately i suggest.
the reason i know of which prohibits music wud b unbelievable for most and there is no proof for it so i wont go into it.
from ahadith only ''daff'' was allowed to have a beat.
lately there r 'naats' on tv in which the beat is provided by a man saying Allah Allah in the background.Ullema r very disputed on this.one thing they r certain on is that it is a heela,if not explicitly wrong.
i personally am against the naats on tv like these.i was buying groceries n was absently tapping my foot with the beat then i realized this was a naat.it is a disgrace.imagine getting the beat right for the final production after numerous attempts..but evryone has his own set of religious rules to follow so i cant say anything abt them.
not much knowledgeable in this regard so i will shutup.
Unless there is a typo here, if musical instruments, in this sentence, are to be considered unlawful, there should be a comma after 'alcoholic drinks'. Otherwise (if there is no comma), the sentence refers to musical instruments associated with the list it succeeds, as unlawful.
Now, I can name you a very common place where all of this (illegal sexual intercourse, the wearing of silk, the drinking of alcoholic drinks and the use of musical instruments*) *happens all together - Nightclubs. So, unless I am mistaken, the above sentence is referring to nightclubs, parties, and such things as unlawful.
