Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 138

Thread: On music

  1. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AbuZayd
    SubhanAllah.

    Akhi, I would not advise your quoting Islam-qa - the extremely unreliable Wahabbi / Salafi site. Interestingly your quote contradicts Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam's article - if you read it you will see why.

    Which quote?


  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    323

    Default

    What does your favoured Islam-qa site article say about singing?


  3. #33
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Islam-qa is not totally unreliable. At times, I find it to be better than all the others out there.

    This is what Shaykh G.F. Haddad had to say about this Islam-qa website:





    Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim



    ************ typifies Wahhabism



    ************ is a Wahhabi/"Salafi" site rife with errors and should be avoided. Its texts are mostly from the late "Desert Storm" mufti - `Abd al-`Aziz bin Baz - and by another Saudi author, Muhammad Salih al- Munajjid who is on record for stating that female circumcision consists in clitoridectomy (i.e. precisely what the enemies of Islam adduce as barbarous mutilation) in "Manners of Welcoming the New Born Child in Islaam" ("By Yoosuf ibn Abdullah Al-Areefee, Translated by Aboo Talhah Daawood ibn Ronald Burbank."

    These are the same translators that to this day spell the name "Nasa'i" [from Nasaa, Khurasan] as "al-Nisaa'ee" - the womanizer.)

    Some examples of more errors on ************:

    - The strange claim that if a hadith is not sahih but da`if then it is not mustahabb to use it. See http://www.************/index.php?ln...e&QR=6544&dgn=2 among other replies. This claim shows true ignorance of hadith science as there is consensus on the permissibility and istihbab of weak hadiths in fada'il al-a`mal or good deeds, as is the case here.


    (Therefore disregard the blatant falsehood that Based on this, it is not mustahabb to recite this du’aa’ [“Allaahumma ajirni min al-naar” seven times] after Fajr and Maghrib prayers!! It IS mustahabb.)


    - The usual Wahhabi hurlings of "shirk", "bid`a", and "kufr" together with obsession with condemning the celebration of the birth of the Prophet, upon him peace (Mawlid) as an innovation when the massive majority of the reliable Ulema consider it good.


    Subhan Allah, how they rush to commit offenses with a vengeance! This is the Khariji plague and it survives today in the sects. A man said to Ibn `Umar, Allah be well-pleased with them: "I have a neighbor who bears witness against me that I commit shirk." He replied:

    "Say: 'La Ilaha illAllah,' you will make him a liar."



    Sawwar ibn Shabib al-A`raji said: I was sitting in Ibn `Umar's house when a man came and said: "O Ibn `Umar! There are groups of people bearing witness against us and attributing to us kufr and shirk." Ibn `Umar replied:

    "Woe to you! Did you not say: 'La Ilaha IllAllah'?!"

    Whereupon the entire household began to say La Ilaha IllAllah until the house was shaking.



    Abu Sufyan said they went to see Jabir ibn `Abd Allah who lived in Makkah and resided with the Banu Fihr. A man asked him: "Did you [the Companions] use to call anyone from the People of the Qibla [i.e. Muslims], 'Mushrik'?" He replied: "I seek refuge in Allah!" The man continued: "Did you call anyone from them 'Kafir'?"

    He said: "No!!"



    All three reports in Ibn `Asakir, Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari (Saqqa ed. p. 373f.).



    - The usual Wahhabi cant that visiting graves to pray to their occupants or seek their help or ask them to intercede – this is a reprehensible action, and indeed it is major shirk. Signed by Bin Baz at http://www.************/index.php?ln...&QR=14631&dgn=3



    Indeed, the same man made the same impudent comment about the Sahabi Bilal ibn al-Harith's visit to the grave of the Prophet, upon him peace, and request for the latter's intercession and help against a drought as mentioned in Ibn Hajar's Fath al-Bari (Istisqa').



    - The claims made about Abu Mansur al-Hallaj on http://www.************/index.php?ln...&QR=21379&dgn=3

    [T]he scholars were agreed that he was a kaafir and a heretic: This is untrue, several major figures considered him a Wali of Allah among the Muslims, such as al-Harawi al-Ansari, Ibn `Aqeel, Ibn Qudama, and al-Tufi, to mention only the Hanbalis!



    It is established that Imam Ibn Khafif al-Shirazi visited al-Hallaj in prison in Baghdad upon his return from pilgrimage in the year 300 and described him as "a true monotheist (muwahhid) and godly knower (`alim rabbani)."



    Similarly, most of the Sufis denounced him and denied that he was one of them. Among those who denounced him was al-Junayd, and he was not mentioned by Abu’l-Qaasim al-Qushayri in his book in which he mentioned many of the Sufi shaykhs. This is another lie: al-Junayd is the exception, al-Sulami, Ibn `Ata' Allah, and al-Daqqaq praise al-Hallaj, while al-Qushayri reproduces al-Hallaj's

    `Aqida of several pages in its entirety in the beginning of his Risala Qushayriyya! This text is pure Sunni `Aqida and was translated and posted in full at http://www.sunnah.org/aqida/Hallaj_doctrine.htm



    The false claims made by Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid - may Allah forgive him - in this matter stem from his blind taqleed of Ahmad ibn Taymiyya who said, according to the same webpage: We do not know of anyone among the imams of the Muslims who spoke well of al-Hallaaj, neither among the scholars nor among the shaykhs [...] (Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 2/483) So he is either ignorant or dishonest but in either case he is unreliable - and usually always is, in matters concerning Sufis and tasawwuf. May Allah forgive him.



    - The apology for Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab against the description of Wahhabism by D.S. Margoliouth at http://www.************/words/mohame...wahab_eng.shtml

    This apology and attempted refutation is replete with lies and inaccuracies beginning with the fact that Margoliouth spoke about the Wahhabis while apologists try to restrict the discussion to Muhammad ibn `Abd al-Wahhab himself. Even so, it is clear that the latter strayed from Ahl al-Sunna (as exposed by his own brother Sulayman in his long fatwa) then his followers strayed even more. This is the rule with sects since the beginning.



    Wahhabism is TA`TEEL - nullification- of the CORE of the Religion. They want all Muslims to:



    (i) make less dhikr (alone and especially in group)

    (ii) pray less (especially in Ramadan)

    (iii) make less du`a (alone and especially in group)

    (iv) invoke less blessings on the Prophet sallallahu

    `alayhi waSallam

    (v) remember him less, love him as "a brother",

    "just a human being"

    (vi) memorize Qur'an less (especially in Morocco which

    has the highest per capita rate of memorizers)

    (vii) discard hundreds of hadiths via nincompoop gradings

    (viii) avoid qualified Shaykhs in the Deen (`Aqida, Fiqh,

    Tasawwuf)

    (ix) live lives and die deaths devoid of tabarruk and

    tawassul

    (x) think of Awliya' as unidentifiable and meaningless

    (xi) hurl insults on the friends of Allah in thought and

    deed beginning with the Sahaba and down to our times.



    Wal-`Aqibatu lil-Muttaqin, wala `Udwan illa `alal-Zalimin.


  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    323

    Default

    Akhi I am off now, I apologise if I have offended you in any way.

    Wasalamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakatuhu.


  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AbuZayd
    What does your favoured Islam-qa site article say about singing?
    Favoured? I don't think so. That was my last evidence. And you know very well what my stance is on singing without musical instruments. Issue of discussion is Musical Instruments.

    After giving you tons of evidence brother I don't want to waste my time so the following is all I have to say:

    You might want to pick up the Quran and read Surah25 v63.

    salam

    I concur with what G F Haddad wrote about the islam-qa site.

    The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Adhere to the majority. And whoever dies differing from the majority, dies as a jaahili." (Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 14/56)
    Last edited by Zidane; 08-07-2004 at 04:13 AM.


  6. #36
    Senior Member salman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Location
    Long Island, New York
    Posts
    3,129

    Default

    Sallamu Alaikum

    Adherance to the Majority is not in rulings of Fiqh, otherwise the concept of Ikthilaf would be genuinely void. However, although i do not agree with Music and nor do i endorse it, it is only fair to note that there have been scholars - in the past and present - that have allowed it and who have based their evidence on Hadith. Take Imam Muhammad Abu Zahra for example, or Sayyid Al Nas whose book contains proofs of 180 companions who used to write poetry in praise of the Prophet with Musical instruments or Maulana Rumi and the great Sultan Al Awliya Shaikh Izz Ad Din. The great Sufi Hanafi Faqih if Damascus, Shaykh Abdul Ghani Nablusis book Idaah al Dalaalaat fi Samaa` Al Aalaat is really one the most authoritative and precise work to date on this issue in which he lists the examples of numerous Sahabas playing instruments or having it played to them. Also i should not fail to mention Imam Dhahabis Siyar Al Ulum that the MAdhab of the people of people of Medina was the allowance of Musical instruments.

    The rule is: "Do not leave what the Umma concurred on keeping, do not keep what the Umma concurred on leaving, and in between one may keep or leave." The Umma did NOT deicde on prohibiting musical instruments as a whole so to say it is "Jahilliya" if one doesnot abide by a ruling that may well seem to be the majority is ignorance on ones part.

    Note: I take the opinion that music is Haram.

    Wallahu A'lam
    Last edited by salman; 08-07-2004 at 04:28 AM.
    May My Soul be sacrificed for your soul, my beloved, my master Muhammad - peace and blessing upon you- !

    روحي لروحك الفداء يا حبيبي يا سيدي محمد


  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Maliki
    Posts
    6,490

    Default

    Here is a translated quote from the explanation of the Murshid by
    Muhammad ibn Ahmad Mayyarah that contains these three
    dispensations and also the popular opinion:

    "Listening to musical instruments is a general prohibition for both
    men and women.
    Now if each gender is prohibited from listening to
    musical instruments when not with the opposite sex, then it is even
    more [prohibited] when the genders are gathered together...."

    "Now if [the player] has taken up musical instruments as a profession
    or is constantly returning to them, there is no difference in the
    Maliki school that it is unlawful.... and there is disagreement about
    the person who plays musical instruments not as a profession and only
    once in a while. Some Maliki scholars say that it is still unlawful while
    others say it is mubah...."


    "Imam Malik's view is that listening to any and all musical instruments is
    unlawful except the one-sided tambourine (daff) in a wedding and the
    long drum (kibar)
    ; however, there is disagreement about the long drum
    [and other drums]. And likewise is treated playing them, selling them, and
    buying them..."

    "However, some Maliki scholars have said that it is permissible to listen
    to musical instruments."


    [DT: volume 1: page 451: line(s) 19: {explanation of verse(s) 295-300,
    after first quoted stanza of poetry}}

    Ibn `Ajibah writes in his explanation of al-Mabahith al-Asliyah:

    "This issue [of musical instruments] is one of [much] disagreement
    as no clear primary text has come from the Legislator - and all
    affairs are mubah by default until a [clear] prohibition is found. And
    [the fact of the matter is that] listening to musical instruments was
    not declared unlawful until the idle [wrong-doing] folk took it up
    and linked it with drinking wine and fornicating...


    [It has been narrated that] a scholar (who condoned [certain] musical
    instruments) in the presence of Caliph Harun Rashid said, 'I
    attended a wedding feast in Madinah in which the scholars attended.
    [There were so many singers at this wedding] that if the house were
    to collapse, no singer would remain in Madinah. And the smallest
    of the [condoning] scholars present was Imam Malik ibn Anas. So,
    they sang [and a man] had a mizhar [i.e. a musical instrument (probably
    a tambourine)]; so, they sang [with it] and uttered nasheeds."


    [IH: volume 1: page 287: line(s) 28-29: {explanation of verse 202
    of the Mabahith}]

    Now in the above excerpt, other Maliki scholars could have interpreted
    mizhar as applying to other than a tambourine.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Following Easier Positions

    "And others have said - and they are a section of the Malikis
    like al-Qarafi... that it is permissible for the common man
    to search for and follow easier positions (rukhas) from other
    madh-habs.


    The reason for this is that there is no clear Divine text which
    prohibits this. The person has a choice to follow what is easier
    for him... This is also the way of the Prophet (May Allah bless
    him and give him peace) and his actions and verbal statements
    dictate the permissibility of this.
    The Prophet was not given
    a choice between two matters, except he chose the easier one
    [Tirmidhi, Bukhari]. He used to love to make things easy for
    his ummah [Bukhari, `A'ishah]. He said that he had been sent
    with a pure din which is tolerant (pardons easily) [Ahmad]. He
    also said that this din is easy and no one tries it make it
    hard except that it overcomes him [Bukhari, Nisa'i]...

    Imam al-Qarafi's also said: It is permissible to follow
    easier positions from other madh-habs as long as the resultant
    act is not invalid in all of the schools chosen.
    For example,
    following Imam Malik in wudu' not being broken by touching
    a woman without sensual desire and also following Imam
    Shafi`i in not needing to run one's hand over the washed part
    (dalk)...

    As for what other scholars have said (i.e. Ibn `Abd al-Barr)
    that it is not permissible for the common man to follow
    easier positions from other madh-habs and that this is agreed
    upon by all major scholars(ijma'), it cannot be verified that
    Ibn `Abd al-Barr actually said this and also it cannot be verified
    that this is actually an ijma` position since Imam Ahmad ibn
    Hanbal has two statements narrated from him on this matter...

    `Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam said, "It is in the common man's right
    that he be able to follow easier positions from the [four]
    madh-habs. And whoever denies this is simply ignorant..."


    [UF: volume 2: page(s) 1154-1155: {Talfiq, last section in chapter}]

    Technically speaking, any easier opinion that strays from
    the popular opinion is a rukhsah (as you note this is for
    "keeping things orderly ")

    If the opinion was issued by someone qualified in at least
    qiyas or limited ijtihad within the madh-hab, then it is
    permissible to follow either that opinion or the popular
    opinion.
    The qualification for performing qiyas within the
    madh-hab are:

    a) Being thoroughly learned in the Arabic rulings for
    all the twenty subjects in the madh-hab (basically,
    the person knows the twenty subjects mentioned
    in Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi's al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah
    inside out)
    b) Being aware of the ijma` positions within our din
    (e.g., eating pork and drinking wine is unlawful
    except when in dire hunger/need)
    c) Knowing the reasonings and basis (`illah) behind
    the rulings for which one is attempting to perform qiyas
    along with knowing the other arkan (essentials)
    and shurut (preconditions like 'la qiyasa fi wujudi
    al-fariq') of qiyas.

    Thus, since the above is not rare to find, there are many
    people alive today that can perform qiyas within the Maliki
    school.

    References:
    Entry 1131 of the Notes of Sources for the Main Text.

    Once we have narrated a valid opinion, then for consistency, all associated opinions are
    *also* changed (for those who follow this opinion). And this is the reason for the ruling
    given in footnote 321 of the Explanatory Notes.

    People who only learn fiqh in a narrow-minded way and are ignorant of the method the
    popular opinion was derived (see footnote 196 of Notes of Source) from the various
    narrations within the madh-hab will ruin the consistency of the madh-hab (with such
    rip-and-tear dispensations) or produce rulings which are impossible (or very difficult) to
    follow by the common man today - in effect making the madh-hab obsolete. We cannot go
    against ijmaa` nor a strong agreed upon point within the madh-hab, but there is nothing
    wrong with narrating a non-popular opinion or an opinion from outside the Maliki School
    as long as we tell people what we are doing (e.g., in a Notes of Sources Book).

    Advanced scholars realize this and realize that the popular opinion was made to avoid fitna
    among the Malikis so that multiple people would not argue about the same issue.

    The later *rulers* and government-sanctioned scholars tried to impose rules forcing people
    to only follow the popular opinion, but such has no basis in either our din nor early Maliki
    madh-hab.

    Reference(s):
    See Previously Answered Questions Learning About the Din about issues of ikhtilaf
    and talfiq and rukhas.

    May Allah (SWT) expose my mistakes. Ameen. I do not necessarily agree with any of the above, but it comes from: Sheikh Abuqanit Hasani of http://www.guidinghelper.com

    Also, to Sheikh Ramadan Bouti a well known Syrian Shafii scholar (the one who refuted Albani) has said:

    Question: Listening to music (western): is it forbidden? Why? and could we say the same about Islamic music which has instruments backing ie. flute, piano, percussion.

    Answer: Hearing Western music by a cassette is not forbidden.

    [Reference: http://www.bouti.com/bouti_e_fatawa_c14.htm#12]

    There is no more information given with that fatwa, and Bouti is a Shafii. The popular and strongest opinion in the Shafii school is that musical instruments are unlawful except for the duff as stated in the Relliance of the Traveler.

    To conclude:
    I am merely a layperson. I have no qualifications what so ever to give a ruling or anything. I disassociate myself from the opinions and rulings of others, which I have just posted to show the difference of opinion. If you follow these, you are following those scholars whom I have mentioned. The opposing view has been given in many posts by Zidane.

    The Day of Judgement is coming, and the layman is not allowed to make rulings. So I have just simply CUT and PASTE from other websites. The only writing that is my own is a little bit before the Bouti fatwa (when I say May Allah (SWT) expose my mistakes) and all after the Bouti fatwa.

    Jazakallah wa Khayun,
    Astaghfirallah.

    Again, let me remind you that I am just a layman and not even close to even being a student of knowledge or anything of that sort. The opinions and rulings all have references, and they are all from those sources insha'Allah.

    Jazakallah wa Khayrun.
    Allah (SWT) knows best![SIZE=3]
    Last edited by Omar HH; 08-07-2004 at 04:54 AM.


  8. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    116

    Default

    I get what you are saying brother Salman, but when the minority are going against clear ahadith, why do people still stick to their opinions? Against the hadith, against the hadith, against the hadith, against the hadith. Why don't people get it? The prophet was ordered to destroy musical instruments! What more do people want after that?

    Surah28 v55:
    "To us our deeds, and to you your deeds. Peace be to you. We seek not the ignorant."


  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Maliki
    Posts
    6,490

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zidane
    I get what you are saying brother Salman, but when the minority are going against clear ahadith, why do people still stick to their opinions? Against the hadith, against the hadith, against the hadith, against the hadith. Why don't people get it? The prophet was ordered to destroy musical instruments! What more do people want after that?

    Surah28 v55:
    "To us our deeds, and to you your deeds. Peace be to you. We seek not the ignorant."
    Brother, this reminds me of an article I read by Sheikh Nuh Keller:

    I had a visitor one day in Jordan, for example, who, when we talked about why he hadn’t yet gone on hajj, mentioned the hadith of Anas ibn Malik that

    the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Whoever prays the dawn prayer (fajr) in a group and then sits and does dhikr until the sun rises, then prays two rak‘as, shall have the like of the reward of a hajj and an ‘umra." Anas said, "The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: ‘Completely, completely, completely’" (Tirmidhi, 2.481).

    My visitor had done just that this very morning, and he now believed that he had fulfilled his obligation to perform the hajj, and had no need to go to Mecca. The hadith was well authenticated (hasan). I distinguished for my visitor between having the reward of something, and lifting the obligation of Islam by actually doing it, and he saw my point.

    But there is a larger lesson here, that while the Qur’an and the sunna are ma‘sum or "divinely protected from error," the understanding of them is not. And someone who derives rulings from the Qur’an and hadith without training in ijtihad or "deduction from primary texts" as my visitor did, will be responsible for it on the Day of Judgment, just as an amateur doctor who had never been to medical school would be responsible if he performed an operation and somebody died under his knife.

    Why? Because Allah has explained in the Qur’an that fiqh, the detailed understanding of the divine command, requires specially trained members of the Muslim community to learn and teach it. Allah says in surat al-Tawba:

    "Not all of the believers should go to fight. Of every section of them, why does not one part alone go forth, that the rest may gain understanding of the religion, and to admonish their people when they return, that perhaps they may take warning" (Qur’an 9:122)

    —where the expression li yatafaqqahu fi al-din, "to gain understanding of the religion," is derived from precisely the same root (f-q-h) as the word fiqh or "jurisprudence," and is what Western students of Arabic would call a "fifth-form verb" (tafa‘‘ala), which indicates that the meaning contained in the root, understanding, is accomplished through careful, sustained effort.

    This Qur’anic verse establishes that there should be a category of people who have learned the religion so as to be qualified in turn to teach it. And Allah has commanded those who do not know a ruling in Sacred Law to ask those who do, by saying in surat al-Nahl,

    "Ask those who recall if you know not" (Qur’an 16:43),

    in which the words "those who recall," ahl al-dhikri, indicate those with knowledge of the Qur’an and sunna, at their forefront the mujtahid Imams of this Umma. Why? Because, first of all, the Qur’an and hadith are in Arabic, and as a translator, I can assure you that it is not just any Arabic.

    To understand the Qur’an and sunna, the mujtahid must have complete knowledge of the Arabic language in the same capacity as the early Arabs themselves had before the language came to be used by non-native speakers. This qualification, which almost no one in our time has, is not the main subject of my essay, but even if we did have it, what if you or I, though not trained specialists, wanted to deduce details of Islamic practice directly from the sources? After all, the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) has said, in the hadith of Bukhari and Muslim: "When a judge gives judgement and strives to know a ruling (ijtahada) and is correct, he has two rewards. If he gives judgement and strives to know a ruling, but is wrong, he has one reward" (Bukhari, 9.133).

    The answer is that the term ijtihad or "striving to know a ruling" in this hadith does not mean just any person’s efforts to understand and operationalize an Islamic ruling, but rather the person with sound knowledge of everything the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) taught that relates to the question. Whoever makes ijtihad without this qualification is a criminal. The proof of this is the hadith that the Companion Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah said:

    We went on a journey, and a stone struck one of us and opened a gash in his head. When he later had a wet-dream in his sleep, he then asked his companions, "Do you find any dispensation for me to perform dry ablution (tayammum)?" [Meaning instead of a full purificatory bath (ghusl).] They told him, "We don’t find any dispensation for you if you can use water."

    So he performed the purificatory bath and his wound opened and he died. When we came to the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace), he was told of this and he said: "They have killed him, may Allah kill them. Why did they not ask?—for they didn’t know. The only cure for someone who does not know what to say is to ask" (Abu Dawud, 1.93).

    This hadith, which was related by Abu Dawud, is well authenticated (hasan), and every Muslim who has any taqwa should reflect on it carefully, for the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) indicated in it—in the strongest language possible—that to judge on a rule of Islam on the basis of insufficient knowledge is a crime. And like it is the well authenticated hadith "Whoever is given a legal opinion (fatwa) without knowledge, his sin is but upon the person who gave him the opinion" (Abu Dawud, 3.321).

    - Sheikh Nuh Keller

    [Reference: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/masud/I...dhhabstlk.htm]


  10. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Gender
    Brother
    Madhhab
    Hanafi
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ohossino
    Brother, this reminds me of an article I read by Sheikh Nuh Keller:

    I had a visitor one day in Jordan, for example, who, when we talked about why he hadn’t yet gone on hajj, mentioned the hadith of Anas ibn Malik that

    the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Whoever prays the dawn prayer (fajr) in a group and then sits and does dhikr until the sun rises, then prays two rak‘as, shall have the like of the reward of a hajj and an ‘umra." Anas said, "The Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) said: ‘Completely, completely, completely’" (Tirmidhi, 2.481).

    My visitor had done just that this very morning, and he now believed that he had fulfilled his obligation to perform the hajj, and had no need to go to Mecca. The hadith was well authenticated (hasan). I distinguished for my visitor between having the reward of something, and lifting the obligation of Islam by actually doing it, and he saw my point.


    [Reference: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/masud/I...dhhabstlk.htm]
    The silly guy did not want to go to Hajj and just wanted to pray two rakats! lol He was probably taking a minority opinion! There must be someone out there who said it's ok.


    What's so hard about understanding the various ahadith about musical instruments being haram! You don't have to be a big mufti to understand why it's wrong. It's clear cut! There are no ifs and buts. All of you in favor of musical instruments have not put forward one answer of any of the ahadith which prohibit musical instruments! I have not come across one answer yet. All you ppl have done is such and such a person says it's ok and pasted tons of stuff. Well, go and find out what answers they have about the ahadith which prohibit musical instruments. The first person who started this thread should write or rather since he is in England this week, should contact the author of HALAL and HALAL in Islam and inquire from him what his answers are about the ahadith which prohibit musical instruments. I am talking about asking 'Shaykh' Qaradawi.

    Salam


Similar Threads

  1. Music
    By Abu Dajanaa in forum General Islam
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24-03-2010, 04:53 PM
  2. music
    By imana in forum General Islam
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-04-2008, 07:18 PM
  3. Music
    By Rasia in forum In-depth Fiqh
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 19-08-2007, 01:45 PM
  4. Music
    By mo_123 in forum General Islam
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-08-2007, 01:20 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •