Note: The specialized session “Jurisprudence of Music: Dimensions, Opportunities, and Challenges from the Perspective of the Martyred Leader” was held with the presence of a group of researchers in the jurisprudence and philosophy of art. In this session, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mojtaba Falahati, professor of advanced seminary levels, elucidated the trends in the jurisprudence of music and reread the views of the Martyred Leader in this domain, while Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Seyyed Hamid Mirkhandan, emphasizing the necessity of clarifying jurisprudential concepts, critiqued and reviewed the presented theoretical foundations.

According to the news portal of the Research Institute of Contemporary Jurisprudence, the scientific session “Jurisprudence of Music: Dimensions, Opportunities, and Challenges from the Perspective of the Martyred Leader” was held featuring a presentation by Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mojtaba Falahati, researcher and author of the book Music, Jurisprudence, Islamic Revolution: Threat or Opportunity?, and a critique by Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Seyyed Hamid Mirkhandan.

At the beginning of the session, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Seyyed Mohammad-Mohsen Mirmorshedi, scientific secretary of the session and faculty member of the Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute, considered music one of the important issues requiring serious dialogue in the domain of the jurisprudence of art, stating: “Music, as a manifestation of contemporary art, must have its issue clarified in jurisprudence and its ambiguous points examined.”

Continuing, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Falahati, pointing to the historical background of the discussion of music in philosophy and art, stated that music throughout history has consistently faced varying evaluations, and few thinkers have praised or rejected it absolutely.

Referring to the views of philosophers such as Farabi, Ibn Sina, and Mulla Sadra, he added: The works of these thinkers show that music in the Islamic philosophical tradition was a subject capable of analysis and classification, not a phenomenon merely rejected or accepted.

This researcher in the jurisprudence of art considered music an influential phenomenon in cultural and social arenas, specifying: “Music is not merely simple entertainment; rather, it shapes taste and generates trends, playing a role in molding social and cultural attitudes.”

The professor of advanced seminary levels also pointed to the role of art and music in contemporary social transformations, emphasizing the necessity of jurisprudential and cultural policy attention to the civilizational and social dimensions of music.

Elucidation of the Intellectual System of the Martyred Leader of the Revolution Regarding Music

Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Falahati, in another part of his speech, proceeded to elucidate the intellectual system of the Martyred Leader of the Revolution in the field of music, stating: This system possesses various dimensions, including jurisprudential methodology, analysis of trends in the jurisprudence of music, and explaining the relationship of music with human and cultural life.

Referring to certain expressions of the Martyred Leader of the Revolution regarding music, he added: “In his statements, music is not presented merely as a threat; rather, if endowed with correct orientation, it can serve the elevation of humanity and society.”

This researcher also criticized the distance between the jurisprudential and cultural concerns of the Martyred Leader and certain official documents in the music sector, stating: Many strategic discussions raised in his views have not received sufficient reflection in executive documents and policies within the music domain.

He added: “Within the intellectual system of the Leader of the Revolution, approximately 35 management strategies in the field of music can be extracted, a significant portion of which has been neglected in the country’s cultural structures.”

Elaboration on Six Jurisprudential Trends Regarding Music and Ghina’

The professor of advanced seminary levels further considered the analysis of trends in the jurisprudence of music as one of the main axes of his discussion, emphasizing the distinction between the concepts of “music” (musiqi) and “vocal singing” (ghina’), stating: “In jurisprudential texts, these two concepts are distinguished from one another, and this distinction is the prelude to a precise understanding of discussions in the jurisprudence of music.”

He then elaborated on six jurisprudential trends in this field:

1. The trend advocating the absolute prohibition (hurmah mutlaqah) of music;

2. The trend advocating the absolute prohibition of ghina’;

3. The trend in absolute favor of music;

4. The trend advocating the permissibility (jawaz) of certain instances alongside general disapproval (qubh) of music;

5. The trend advocating the lawfulness (hilliyyah) of the majority of prevalent music;

6. And the trend advocating the separation between lawful and unlawful instances based on jurisprudential titles (‘anawin fiqhiyyah).

Referring to the view of the Martyred Leader of the Revolution regarding prevalent music, this researcher emphasized that a correct understanding of the jurisprudence of music requires simultaneous attention to jurisprudential foundations, social effects, and cultural functions of music.

He emphasized the necessity of a scientific and documented rereading of jurisprudential views in the field of music and their alignment with the country’s cultural policies, criticizing weaknesses in documents drafted in the nation’s music sector, including the “Comprehensive Music Document” and the “Audit Document,” stating: “These documents in many cases lack the specific strategies and fatwas of the Leader of the Revolution and other authorities (marjas) and have failed to cover the main concerns of this domain.”

Criticizing certain approaches in Islamic seminaries that do not distinguish between “censure” (madhammah) and “prohibition” (hurmah), he emphasized the necessity of revising the jurisprudential understanding of music, adding: “It must be examined what exactly was censured in narrations, and whether it can be generalized to all types of music without regard to conditions and instances.”

Narrational Evidence Negating Absolute Prohibition of Music

Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Falahati, in another part of his speech, pointed to narrational evidence (qara’in riwa’iyyah) arguing against the possibility of deriving “absolute prohibition” from the corpus of narrations on music and ghina’, stating: In many narrations, the ruling is subject to the type of application and purpose of utilization of musical instruments and instances.

In this regard, he cited the “Sahihah of Ibn Udhaynah,” explaining: In this narration, an individual asks Imam Sadiq (a) about buying wood to manufacture a lute (barbat), and the Imam (a) replies: “There is no harm in it” (la ba’sa bihi); however, when the question is posed regarding buying wood to manufacture a cross, the Imam (a) considers it impermissible.

According to Falahati, this distinction shows that one cannot regard all instruments related to music as absolutely lacking lawful benefit (manfa’ah halalah); rather, their ruling depends on the type of usage and the possibility of legitimate utilization.

Citing the Narration from “Tuhaf al-Uqul”

This researcher in the jurisprudence of art further referred to the narration “Ma’ayish al-‘Ibad” in the book Tuhaf al-Uqul, considering it among other notable evidences in this discussion.

He explained: At the opening of this narration, any industry and craft possessing benefit and goodness for humanity is deemed lawful; however, later in the narration, instruments are discussed whose predominant function might lean toward corruption.

Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Falahati emphasized: The important point in this narration is that the mere possibility of misuse or the existence of certain unlawful functions does not signify the absolute prohibition of an instrument or industry; rather, as long as lawful benefit and a dimension of goodness can be conceived for it, a ruling of absolute prohibition cannot be established.

For further explanation, he pointed to examples such as knives and swords, stating: The ruling on these tools is subject to their type of usage and orientation, not merely the existence of potential misuse.

According to this researcher, the combination of these evidences shows that from the narrations, “partial prohibition” (hurmah fi-l-jumlahi) can be derived, not “total prohibition” (hurmah bi-l-jumlahi)—meaning that the subject of the ruling is subject to the application, orientation, and effects resulting from music and ghina’.

Sheikh Ansari’s Interpretation and Four Evolutions in the Jurisprudence of Music

The professor of advanced seminary levels further referred to the views of certain Shia jurists regarding music, citing a phrase from Sheikh Ansari: The prohibition of musical instruments stems from their “diverting nature” (lahwi-budan), not merely from being an instrument.

He considered this understanding one of the most important jurisprudential supports in rejecting the theory of absolute prohibition of music, adding: If a musical instrument is utilized outside diversion (lahw) and sin (ma’siyah), the subject of prohibition is likewise negated.

This researcher then pointed to four important evolutions in the jurisprudence of music among Shia jurists:

1. The view advocating absolute prohibition of music;

2. The stage of hesitation (tardid) between lawfulness and prohibition;

3. Imam Khomeini’s (r) view distinguishing between instances;

4. And a more positive and rule-based approach in the views of the Leader of the Revolution.

He emphasized: These developments show that Shia jurisprudence in the domain of music has gradually distanced itself from an absolutist perspective and moved toward a more precise analysis of instances and functions.

Distinguishing Between Lawful and Unlawful Ghina’

Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Falahati, in the final part of his speech, addressed the discussion of ghina’, stating: In this area as well, two main approaches—namely absolute prohibition and conditional lawfulness—have existed among jurists.

Referring to the view of the Leader of the Revolution, he added: In this view, ghina’ is divided into two categories, lawful and unlawful, and the main criterion for prohibition is “leading astray from the path of God” (idlal ‘an sabil Allah)—meaning any type of ghina’ causing deviation from the divine path assumes the title of prohibition.

The professor of advanced seminary levels also specified: Certain restrictions raised in jurisprudential texts, such as “tarab” (liveliness/enrapture) or “tarji'” (trilling/vocal vibration), are not in themselves the ultimate criterion of prohibition and must be examined alongside other analytical elements.

Concluding his remarks, the presenter critiqued the view of those who regard music as an absolutely positive and harmless phenomenon, stating: Although certain forms of music can have positive and even therapeutic effects, this does not mean ignoring the harms and negative consequences of certain other types of music.

Critique and Review of the Foundations of Music Jurisprudence in the Views of the Martyred Leader

In the critique section, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Seyyed Hamid Mirkhandan, member of the Scientific Council of the Department of Jurisprudence of Culture, Art, and Media at the Research Institute of Contemporary Jurisprudence, emphasized the necessity of clarifying jurisprudential foundations and distinctions in the issue of music.

Stating that the discussion of music from a jurisprudential perspective requires precise formulation of proofs and concepts, he stated: “If music is to be discussed within the framework of jurisprudence, it must be clarified what status music occupies in the corpus of jurisprudential proofs, and how its relationship with titles such as diversion (lahw), leading astray (idlal), and hindering from the remembrance of God (sadd ‘an dhikr Allah) is explained.”

The member of the Scientific Council of the Department of Jurisprudence of Culture, Art, and Media added: In examining the jurisprudential views of the Leader of the Revolution, it is necessary to specify what exactly the criterion for prohibition or permissibility of music is, and if music in certain cases is not only not an obstacle to remembrance but serves spiritual concepts, how its jurisprudential status is analyzed.

The Role of “Tarab” in Defining Ghina’

He considered one of the most important contentious axes in the jurisprudence of music to be the issue of itrab (inducing tarab) in defining ghina’, stating: In many jurisprudential works, the question is raised whether itrab is an essential restriction in realizing ghina’ or not.

Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mirkhandan, pointing to different views in this field, stated: “If in a jurisprudential theory the restriction of itrab is set aside, it must be clarified on what basis the criterion for the prohibition of ghina’ is defined, and what inferential basis this departure possesses.”

He also referred to discussions such as “potential tarab” (itrab sha’ni) and “contingent tarab” (iqtidai), stating: In certain views, actual realization of tarab is not a condition; rather, the capability and tendency to induce tarab also intervene in applying the title of ghina’; hence, it is necessary to elucidate these discussions precisely and methodically.

The member of the Scientific Council of the Research Institute of Contemporary Jurisprudence further proceeded to examine concepts such as “lahw” (diversion), “zur” (falsehood/deceit), “batil” (vanity), and “laghw” (frivolity) in jurisprudential and Quranic literature, emphasizing: Precise understanding of the jurisprudence of music depends on clarifying the conceptual boundaries of these titles.

Referring to the verse “And of the people is he who buys diverting speech to mislead from the way of Allah” (Wa min al-nasi man yashtari lahwa al-hadithi li-yudilla ‘an sabil Allah), he stated: One of the fundamental questions is whether the restriction “li-yudilla” (to mislead) in this verse is a restrictive clause (qayd ihtirazi) or an explanatory clause (tawdihi), because the answer to this question directly impacts determining the scope of prohibition of music and ghina’.

Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Mirkhandan also stated regarding the title “zur” in certain verses and narrations: It must be clarified how “zur” differs from “batil” and why this expression is used in Quranic literature, since each of these concepts carries a specific semantic weight and cannot be used interchangeably without differentiation.

He added: In examining the jurisprudential views of the Leader of the Revolution, it must be specified what analysis he provided when confronting concepts such as “lahw”, “zur”, “batil”, and “laghw”, and what role these titles play in the jurisprudential theory of music.

In another part of his speech, the member of the Scientific Council of the Department of Jurisprudence of Culture, Art, and Media referred to the role of “custom” (‘urf) in identifying instances of unlawful music, stating: If identifying the diverting nature (lahwi-budan) of music is entrusted to custom, the mechanism of this reference and the limits of custom’s intervention in the deduction process must be clarified.

He emphasized: In this regard, it is necessary to precisely elucidate the relationship between “the jurist’s work” and “identifying subject matters” (tashkhis al-mawdu’at), because part of the existing challenges stems from ambiguity in the boundary between conceptual discussions, subject-identification (mawdu’-shenasi), and jurisprudential deduction.

This researcher in the jurisprudence of culture and art added: One of the important issues in the jurisprudence of music is conceptual and instance-level clarification, as many audiences and even activists in the field of music do not clearly know what is meant by unlawful music and what criterion governs its identification.

In the final part of his speech, he referred to the issue of “music consumption level” and its relation to cultural policy-making, stating: The discussion of music is not limited merely to its lawfulness or unlawfulness; rather, it must be clarified what limits exist regarding the level of music utilization for a believing person.

He added: Even if certain forms of music are considered permissible or desirable, the question still remains as to what cultural and educational consequences extensive music consumption will produce, and what responsibility cultural policy-making bears in this regard.

He also made a distinction between “jurisprudential discussion” and “cultural policy-making discussion,” stating: Part of the discussions related to music regulation, rather than falling within the realm of conventional jurisprudence (fiqh mustalah), pertains to the sphere of cultural policy-making, and these two domains must not be conflated with one another.

At the conclusion of the session, Hujjat al-Islam wal-Muslimeen Dr. Seyyed Mohammad-Mohsen Mirmorshedi, scientific secretary of the session and faculty member of the Imam Khomeini Educational and Research Institute, expressing appreciation to the presenters and attendees, emphasized the necessity of continuing specialized discussions in the field of music jurisprudence.

Pointing to conceptual and instance-level ambiguities in this domain, he expressed hope that future sessions could contribute to clarifying the relationship of concepts such as “lahw”, “batil”, “zur”, and “laghw” with the issue of music and a more precise elucidation of jurisprudential views in this area.

This specialized session concluded its work with the presence of a group of researchers and enthusiasts in the jurisprudence and philosophy of art.