This excerpt is taken from Sheikh Irshad-ul-Haq Asri's book Islam and the Critique of Ishraq on Music.
The foundation of the religion of Islam is the Holy Quran and the Hadith and Sunnah. These two are the fundamental sources for determining what is permissible and impermissible, lawful and unlawful in the religion. The majority of the Ummah and the four great jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, declare music to be forbidden and impermissible based on these very evidences from the Quran and Sunnah. In fact, the Companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them, are also unanimous on the prohibition of music and musical instruments. Not a single Companion has been authentically proven to permit it. Although some individuals have tried to prove permissibility from certain Companions, Hafiz Ibn Hajar, may Allah have mercy on him, has clearly stated: [لكن لم يثبت من ذٰلك شيء] Nothing of this sort is proven from them.
Reference: (Fath al-Bari:10, p.543)
On the contrary, Mr. Javed Ahmad Ghamidi and the members associated with Idara-e-Ishraq state: Music is a legitimate expression of human nature, therefore there is no doubt about its permissibility.
Reference: (Ishraq: p.8, March 2004)
Our viewpoint is that music is among the natural permissible things. Islamic Shariah never declares it forbidden.
Reference: (Ibid: p.9)
The noteworthy point is: on what religious principle is the rule based that if something is according to human nature, then it is permissible? On one hand, they acknowledge the fact that: the decisive authority for the permissibility or impermissibility of anything in religion is the Quran and Sunnah. Without their evidence, no amendment or addition can be made to the list of permissibility and prohibition in Shariah.
Reference: (Ibid: p.8)
When the matter is as it is, then, being in accordance with "human nature," does the ruling of its permissibility and legitimacy cause an addition to the principle of Shariah? Undoubtedly, Allah, the Exalted, created man on the nature of monotheism. However, it is not possible for man to understand all the requirements and necessities of this nature. That is why Allah Almighty sent the noble Prophets, peace be upon them, to guide mankind. Departing from their teachings to understand the necessities of nature, in our view, is tantamount to deliberately or unintentionally opening the door to permissibility. The roots of this lead to the Mu'tazilite principle that good and evil are rational, and intellect can perceive good and bad without needing Shariah. The famous Mu'tazilite Jahmi considered intellect as the "inner Shariah." The people of Ishraq have also followed this path, moving away from intellect and instead following what they call nature. What are the sources of religion? They have clearly written about this:
The sources of religion, besides the Quran, are the realities of nature, the traditions of the Abrahamic Sunnah, and ancient scriptures as well.
Reference: (Ishraq: p.11, March 2004)
We are surprised that on one hand it is said: that the decisive authority for the permissibility or impermissibility of anything in religion is the Quran and Sunnah. Yet, at the same time, the Sunnah is excluded from the sources of religion; instead, the Abrahamic Sunnah, the realities of nature, and ancient scriptures are included. The logical conclusion of this is that Islam, which is defined by the Quran and Sunnah, is not a complete religion; its completion is through the Abrahamic Sunnah and ancient scriptures. All Ahl al-Sunnah agree that the Holy Quran is the final complete book of religion, and our master Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, is the last prophet. Apart from the Quran and Hadith, the previous scriptures and the commands and laws of the earlier noble prophets (peace be upon them) are absolutely not included among the sources of religion for the Muslim community. If any ruling from the previous laws is followed, it is because the Messenger of Allah ﷺ has stated or commanded it, not because of the previous laws themselves. This is the fundamental and essential difference between Mr. Ghamidi and the men of illumination and the scholars of the Ummah. If the completion of Islam is not through the Quran and Sunnah, but rather alongside them through the "traditions of the Abrahamic Sunnah and ancient scriptures," then why do these gentlemen not clearly say that Islam is not a complete religion? They do not have the courage to say this, but the logical consequence of the path of thought and philosophy they have set is, in any case, this.
Regarding previous scriptures, it is permissible to narrate stories from [حدثوا عن بنی اسرائیل ولا حرج] the Children of Israel.
Reference: (Bukhari, Ahadith al-Anbiya, Chapter: What is mentioned about the Children of Israel, Number: 3461)
But to have faith in them or to make them sources of religion, about this the Prophet ﷺ said: [لا تصدقوا أهل الكتاب ولا تكذبوهم] Do not confirm nor deny the People of the Book.
Reference: (Sahih Bukhari, Book of Tafsir, Chapter: Say "We believe", Number: 4485)
Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Abbas رضي الله عنهما says: O Muslims! How do you ask the People of the Book when your book, which was revealed upon your Prophet ﷺ, is a new book from Allah among all the books? You read it and there is no confusion in it. And Allah Almighty has warned you in this book that the People of the Book have altered Allah’s book and tampered with it with their own hands and said, "This is from Allah," while they did it for a small gain in worldly life. Are you not forbidden to ask those who have been given knowledge by Allah about it? By Allah! We have not seen any of them ask you what has been revealed upon you.
Reference: (Bukhari, Book of Testimonies, Chapter: 29, Number: 2685)
This is the statement of the Noble Prophet ﷺ and the explanation of Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Abbas رضي الله عنهما. This is the verdict of the entire Ummah of Muhammad that the previous scriptures are not sources of religion. However, contrary to this, Ghamidi Sahib and his followers consider them sources of religion.
The esteemed readers will recall that Mr. Javed Ahmed Ghamidi gave a lecture some time ago on the topic "Islam and Fine Arts." This was published by the members of Idara-e-Ishraq after further research and revision under the title "Islam and Music" in the March 2004 issue of Ishraq. The response to this article was given by this incapable person, by the grace of Allah, who is a guardian of the Salafi school, published in eleven installments in the weekly "Al-I'tisam" Lahore, Volume 57 (corresponding to 2005). Later, for the benefit of the public, with necessary corrections and additions, it was also printed in book form under the title "Islam and Music: Refutation of Doubts and Misconceptions." A detailed critical review of our critique was published in two issues of Ishraq in March and April 2006. The humble author is grateful to Idara-e-Ishraq for directly sending these issues to the incapable person and for continuing the distribution of Ishraq later, providing an opportunity to benefit from it.
In response to our article, it was stated: The title of the first chapter of our article was Quran and Music, the second was Bible and Music, and the third was Hadith and Music. Al-I'tisam began his criticism from the third chapter without commenting on the first two chapters. We interpret his silence on the discussions of the first two chapters as tacit partial approval and move forward.
Reference: (Ishraq: p.27, March 2006)
It is stated that according to the consensus of the Ummah, the "Bible" is absolutely not included among the sources of religion in our view, and it holds no ruling for the Ummah of Muhammad. The source and foundation of religion and Shariah are the Holy Quran and the sayings of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. Therefore, we have not considered the argument regarding music based on the Bible to be worthy of attention, and have limited our discussion to the Quran and Hadith, as this issue belongs to the Ummah of Muhammad, may peace and blessings be upon him, and for them, their own texts are sufficient and conclusive. However, Mr. Ghamidi and Idara Ishraq also count the 'Bible' among the sources of religion; this is their own compulsion. Introducing new principles and regulations for modernism has always been the method of reformers and innovators in every era; for them, such principles and sources are certainly a great support, but for the Muslim Ummah, they hold no status.
As for the topic of "Quran and Music," the scholars of illumination themselves have written: As far as music is concerned, the Holy Quran is essentially silent on this matter. There is no verse in it that explicitly states a ruling regarding the permissibility or prohibition of music. However, there are certain indications within it that support the permissibility of music. Based on these, deriving a definitive ruling of permissibility from the Quran would undoubtedly go beyond the primary purpose of the discourse, but it is clearly evident from their presence that a ruling of impermissibility cannot be derived in any case.
Reference: (Ishraq: p.12, March 2004)
This passage from "Ishraq" is clear evidence that the permissibility of music is absolutely not established from the Quran. Attempting to justify it from the Quran is to go beyond the original purpose of the Quran. Despite this clarification, the demand for a response to the impression of the permissibility of music under the title "Quran and Music" can only be called deceit. However, it is also stated that there are certain indications in the Quran that support the permissibility of music. That is, these indications themselves are not proof of the permissibility of music, but they support its permissibility. It is obvious that the "permissibility" of music, according to the Ishraq Hadith Institute, is established from the Hadith, absolutely not from the Quran, neither explicitly nor implicitly. Therefore, it was not surprising that this ineffective person limited his critique and commentary to the evidences of "Hadith and Music." The decision of knowledge and reason can also be that the original evidence of "permissibility" should be considered and reflected upon, and one should not waste their own and the readers' time on self-created indications.
What are these indications? It was said that these are the phonetic melodies of the Quran. Undoubtedly, the Holy Quran contains phonetic melodies; otherwise, the disbelievers would not have called it the speech of a poet. They felt more impact and sweetness in it than in poetry, sensing poetic taste and emotion and delight without meter and rhyme. But how can this phonetic melody be compared to bands, musical instruments, and entertainment devices, شتان بينهما!
How astonishing it is that the disbelievers of Arabia were deceived by the same tonal melody into thinking it was the poet's speech, yet no companion dared such audacity. Similarly, Ghazali Sahib and Idara Ishraq were deceived by the same tonal melody into believing that indications of music are present in the Quran, but no companion understood any such indication. Rather, they declared the verse from Surah Luqman to prohibit singing and music. How regrettable it is that based on these imaginary indications, it was also stated that "in their presence, the prohibition of music cannot be derived in any case." In other words, the ruling of the Quran regarding the prohibition of music, as understood by the noble companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and the jurists of the Ummah, is not correct based on these indications. Where is the stance of the pious predecessors on the prohibition of music from the Quran, and where are the indications of Ghazali Sahib and Idara Ishraq? سبحان الله
Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz (may Allah have mercy on him) beautifully responded to a Quranic argument of the innovators: [لقد قرءوا منه ما قرأتم وعلموا من تأويله ما جهلتم وقالوا بعد ذلك كله بكتاب وقدر ... الخ]
The Companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them, recited the Holy Quran, which you recite, and they understood the interpretation and exegesis of the Quran, of which you are unaware. Despite this, they stated: that the Book of Allah is the Preserved Tablet and the decree is true.
Reference: (Abu Dawood with Al-Awn: p.335 vol.4)
We also state here that the noble Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, read and understood the Holy Quran. They did not interpret the "indications" in the Quran as support for music; rather, they understood the Quran to prohibit it, which the enlightened people fail to see. It is said: "The Holy Quran is silent about it." We have already stated that this is exactly the kind of thinking that a free-thinking segment in Pakistan holds, claiming that the Holy Quran did not declare alcohol forbidden, even though the noble Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, cried out upon hearing the Quranic ruling of __ARABIC_6: ARABIC_7__: but our intellectuals do not see this prohibition. Similarly, the noble Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, understood the example of [لہو الحدیث] in the Quran as singing, playing music, and music itself, but according to our modern religious and research scholars, the Holy Quran is silent about it. تشابهت قلوبهم وأقوالهم
Respected Ghamidi Sahib and Idara-e-Ishraq have argued for the permissibility of music based on certain traditions, whose weaknesses we have already clarified earlier. The arrangements they have made under deceptive titles such as music on Eid, music at weddings, music at celebrations, music during travel, musical instruments, the art of music, and dance, and the fatwa they have issued permitting music, will certainly please and gratify the actresses, singers, film stars, gatherings of dance and music, and the couples who enliven these events. They will be thankful that, according to the advice of the city's jurist, they perform prayers on time and avoid obscenity, and everything else is fine. In other words,
The libertine remains a libertine; paradise did not slip from his hand
In the Prophetic era, some partial incidents, which mention melodious recitations, chanting, and installation, are used to justify known music. In our view, this is exactly like saying there is no difference between usury and trade, no difference between marriage and halala, and no difference between mut'ah and marriage. If the Idara-e-Ishraq has taken up this cause with great determination, it should prove that music is among the permissible things of nature. Above all, the Master of the Universe, Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, who possessed the purest nature, invited musicians on such and such occasions, gave the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) the invitation to watch, gatherings were held, dancers performed dances, male and female singers took the stage and displayed their art with great elegance, and the Prophet ﷺ and the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) applauded and honored them with gifts and respect. If Idara-e-Ishraq can prove such gatherings of this nature, then we will also reconsider our views and join them. If not, and certainly they cannot, then they should refrain from the audacity of granting permission for music, musical art, and gatherings of dance and melody based on chanting and melodious recitations.
