Hujjat al-Islam Ali Akbar Safi Esfahani, born in 1343 AH (1964 CE) in Esfahan, hails from the renowned and beloved Safi Esfahani family in this region. For years, in addition to teaching and researching in the fields of jurisprudence, principles of jurisprudence, and Quranic exegesis, he has undertaken various responsibilities in the seminary, including Deputy of Education at the Esfahan Office of Islamic Propagation, Director of the Allameh Majlesi Specialized Center, and the Lady Amin Mujtahida Advanced School. We sat down with him to discuss the concept of “misguidance” (idlāl) as one of the commonly used titles to establish the prohibition of artistic activities. He believes that the two significant arts present during the time of the Prophet were fundamentally promoted to mislead individuals and distance them from the religion of Islam; thus, the evidence for the prohibition of art must be analyzed in light of this background. The full text of the exclusive interview by Contemporary Jurisprudence with this professor and researcher of the Esfahan Seminary is as follows:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What is misguidance (idlāl), and can it be applied to various forms of art?

Safi Esfahani: Misguidance, as mentioned in verse 6 of Surah Luqman, “And of the people is he who buys the amusement of speech to mislead [others] from the way of Allah without knowledge and who takes it in ridicule. Those will have a humiliating punishment,” in conjunction with “from the way of Allah,” refers to behaviors and programs that have a culturally aggressive nature and oppose the truth, seeking to lead individuals and society astray from the path of God into deviant alleys and byways. Therefore, it is certainly not possible to consider all art as an instance of misguidance, as not every art, in every context, plays such a role.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Is there any religious evidence indicating the prohibition or lack of preference for misguidance in absolute terms?

Safi Esfahani: Certainly, misguiding from the path of God is a reprehensible act. In its real instances, it will be subject to prohibition or disapproval depending on the extent of its impact in distancing people from the divine path.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Is there any art that, in and of itself, is an instance of misguidance, or does it become an instance of misguidance due to accompanying factors such as the mixing of men and women, inappropriate or misleading content, etc.?

Safi Esfahani: Yes, there are arts that are instances of misguidance—if one can even call such arts with their diabolical function “art.” This is a matter clearly understood from the context of the revelation of the verse. The context of the revelation of the verse on misguidance has been explained in two ways: some commentators have stated that the verse condemns those who purchased singing slave girls to perform in opposition to the Prophet’s recitation of Quranic verses, distracting people from listening to the verses and drawing their attention to themselves. Other commentators have stated that the verse pertains to storytellers (qassāsūn) who, in a cultural assault against the revelation of the Quran, engaged in storytelling and reciting legends in the streets and markets to divert people’s attention from the Quran—God’s prescribed path for human guidance—to these fictional and legendary tales.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does the classification of certain arts, such as music, performing arts, etc., under the title of “misguidance” stem from jurists and religious scholars not recognizing categories such as art, recreation, joy, and leisure? In other words, if we consider art, recreation, and joy as legitimate and rational matters, no art, in and of itself, would naturally be an instance of corruption. Do you accept this claim?

Safi Esfahani: As I mentioned in response to the previous question, both cases cited in the context of the revelation of the verse were forms of art prevalent in that era: one, the art of storytelling and narration; and the other, the art of singing. However, these two arts, at that time, were characterized by an aggressive stance against truth and reality, pursued by celebrities who harbored ambitions of diverting people’s thoughts and hearts from listening to and engaging with the true and righteous word, or, in my opinion, were hired by the mischief-making Jews of that era or the ignorance of Mecca to prevent people from being captivated and enchanted by the beauty and eloquence of the Quran. Thus, based on this, it can be said that any art that is true art—art as art—and brings joy, recreation, and vitality cannot be a source of misguidance or subject to condemnation. Rather, the art that is a source of misguidance and subject to prohibition and criticism by jurists and commentators is that which engages in a cultural assault against values, truths, and the divine roadmap. Therefore, the fatwas of those who classify every form of music, performing arts, or other arts under the title of misguidance and deem them prohibited are, in our view, subject to serious critique. It is not acceptable to view all forms of art with suspicion or, out of caution, brand them all as prohibited simply because some models or forms of art may lead to deviation from the path of God. Likewise, deeming all arts absolutely permissible and legitimate is also erroneous.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Is the application or non-application of the title of “corruption” (ifsād) the responsibility of the jurist, the general public, or the obligated individual?

Safi Esfahani: It is clear that the prohibition of misguidance is among the rulings with an explicit rationale, and the jurist or commentator is only tasked with articulating the ruling and clarifying its rationale and basis. However, applying the ruling to its real instances is the responsibility of custom and rational individuals. Just as in early Islam, when the art of storytelling and narration was employed in opposition to the Quran to undermine the truth of revelation, it was labeled as “misguidance from the way of Allah.” However, if the same art is used in service of truth and human growth, it no longer falls under that title or ruling.