Muslim women are permitted to sing in public according to the Qur'an

sahaba

Peace,

While I think that a lot of your article makes sense, shouldnt women also take notice to the fact of men with "disease in their hearts" and do what they can not to conjure it up? I dont see why women shouldnt try and emulate the wives of the prophets just because it was directed at the wives. Its like saying we shouldnt try and live like the prophets because they were unique.

Peace

I dont agree with your understanding. We follow the God-consciousness of the Prophet's and all righteous people mentioned in the Qur'an. However we DON'T follow specific commandments for who they were ie. Prophets or wives of the Prophet.

Emulating specific commandments to the wives of the Prophet's therefore mean nothing. If you mean their God-consciousness, then yes. But specific criterias explicitly stated to be only for them are only for them.

I will elaborate on some points I made earlier

If any of the Prophet's wives were to commit an act of indecency, the punishment for them is double to that for ordinary believing women (3330).

What did the Prophet's wive ever do wrong to deserve double punishment? Why do ordinary believing women get halve the punishment than they do? That is because the wives of the Prophet's are bound by a set of criteria DIFFERENT to ordinary believing women, and ordinary believing women do not have to abide by those criterias.

Ordinary believing men are not allowed to EVER marry the wives of the Prophet (3353).

Why are the Prophet's wives so special that no one can ever marry them after the Prophet? Whereas they can marry ordinary believing women after their previous husband? That is because the wives of the Prophet are DIFFERENT in the sense that they are bound by criteria DIFFERENT to the ordinary believing women.

"O wives of the prophet, you are not like any other women." This Verse even explicitly states this. Proving what I have said so far Indicating the ordinary believing are not required to be like them.

Again, emulating specific commandments to the wives of the Prophet's therefore mean nothing as you (as you ordinary believing women) are not expected to abide by them and hence not held accountable for.

Thanks for reading.

huruf

Dear brothers and sisters,

Really to go into any aya of the Quran is a treasure trove. As to 33.32, thanks for bringing it up. Reading it carefully, I don't see that even the mothers of the believers were forbidden to sing in public, but I will leave that aside.

Adding to what Ace of Hearts has so well stated, I have looked into the aya and, when the translator says "speaking softly", the impression I get is that he is talking about the women's voice, however the Quran says "takhda3na bil-qawl". But "qawl" to me doesn't carry the meaning of voice, but means "the words that are said", and t-kh-dh- is about humility, deference, compliance. Then, what has been translated as "desire" (yathma3a), very misleadingly I would say, is not that, at any rate nor any sensual desire, but rather ambition and covetousness, which obviously are also desire, but quite of a different kind of what we are led to believe by the general formulation and usage of the translation. It seems reasonably to think that a correct speech by the mothers of the believer could be used by scheeming men to extract mileage form a merely polite behaviour. So, in fact, as I see it, what it recommends is a careful speech that precludes anu dubious interpretation from alegal point of view. And in this sense, yes, no softness whatsoever. Summing up, nothing to do with lust, and all to do with diseased minds who try to obtain advantage from any "weak" point (in their minds) such as the women of the man of power and virtue, who are bound to be as least polite, and therefore could hardly chase them away with a bucket of cold water. Diplomacy?

Salaam

unknownuser

The increasing number of women who dress as men, who take on the role of breadwinners, who keep the same jobs as men and who sing in public
are all signs that the emergence of the Awaited One is upon us. hail

May Allah hasten his reapperance, so he may behead all of you Koran-Only infidels.. >

Samia

Salaam Huruf

Thanks for the indepth explanation of these two badly translated expressions YakhDa3na bilqawli and ya6ma3u. I fully agree with your explanation.

huruf

The increasing number of women who dress as men, who take on the role of breadwinners, who keep the same jobs as men and who sing in public
are all signs that the emergence of the Awaited One is upon us. hail

May Allah hasten his reapperance, so he may behead all of you Koran-Only infidels.. >D

Thanks, sweetie, for those cheerful thoughts. You better be sure you know as much as you think you do, because Allah knows best.

Other than, that, you cheerful one, what has dress fashion to do with this thread? But never mind, I wish anyway happy breadwinning, if in fact you do that, and you don't just leave to your womenfolk the burden of supporting you, which is somehting that many of those awaiting happy beheadings precisely are fond of doing.

Mazhar

An excellent explanation of the meanings of the discussed verses. But from this correct meanings and explanation how one can infer that ordinary woman of the society could sing in public? And let not "singing" and reciting Quran be made synonymous.

Samia

But from this correct meanings and explanation how one can infer that ordinary woman of the society could sing in public?

Could it be the same way we could infer (from nowhere) that ordinary men of the society could sing in public confused

Mazhar

The word "public" refers to a mix gathering of men and women. And I am taking "singing" in the ordinary manner we take it for singers, all sort. If singing is permissible in public gathering what will be the point in not focussing eyes on women/men? Would people listen the lady singer by keeping eyes on the floor.

Focussing the vision gives the strongest "....signal", then comes the voice and then comes the "....odor". Public exposure needs to be avoided.

unknownuser

Peace all,

Brother Mazhar raises a very logical point

If singing is permissible in public gathering what will be the point in not focussing eyes on women/men? Would people listen the lady singer by keeping eyes on the floor.

Normal/regular voice of a man/woman used in day to day conversation is different from the voice used by the same man/woman while singing. This "singing" voice is thus not readily apparent. Also, it is a known fact that the "normal" voice is not sexually provocative as opposed to the sensual voice that the same man/woman can emit. This "sensual" voice is not readily apparent.

Could it be that this "sensual" or "singing" voice is part of a woman's "zeenat"/beauty/adornment ? If that is so, then per 2431, women are not allowed to reveal their "zeenat" except what is apparent. Hence they will be allowed to reveal their "normal/regular" voice for ordinary conversation purposes, but not allowed to reveal their "sensual" or "singing" voice as it is not apparent. Likewise, lowering the gaze would also include not continuing to listen to "sensual" or "singing" voices.

Just throwing this out to see what others think about this. It just came to mind and I have not yet formed any solid stance about this.

huruf

I think the Quran has not spared detail in 24.31 and it doesn't hint that something has been left out. Apart from the aya for the mothers of the believers there is nothing to warrant such interpretation, which itself rest in a certain perception that is, I think, very individual. Myself I would say that singing is not at all an intimate thing, less anyway so that normal speech, unless you to make it look like that on purpose. People sing everywhere just like that, because they are happy, because they enjoy it, because they love it. It is like breathing. Can't really fathom how that can become a "hidden" zeenat. If one can imagine that, there is no stopping, and everything can be "hidden" zina.

On the other hand we are told on the Quran that God is not very fond of imposing burdens, can't remember exact formulation or aya, but I think it comes up saveral times.

unknownuser

Peace all,

Brother Mazhar raises a very logical point

Normal/regular voice of a man/woman used in day to day conversation is different from the voice used by the same man/woman while singing. This "singing" voice is thus not readily apparent. Also, it is a known fact that the "normal" voice is not sexually provocative as opposed to the sensual voice that the same man/woman can emit. This "sensual" voice is not readily apparent.

Could it be that this "sensual" or "singing" voice is part of a woman's "zeenat"/beauty/adornment ? If that is so, then per 2431, women are not allowed to reveal their "zeenat" except what is apparent. Hence they will be allowed to reveal their "normal/regular" voice for ordinary conversation purposes, but not allowed to reveal their "sensual" or "singing" voice as it is not apparent. Likewise, lowering the gaze would also include not continuing to listen to "sensual" or "singing" voices.

Just throwing this out to see what others think about this. It just came to mind and I have not yet formed any solid stance about this.

I have to highly disagree. Unless it is in the quran as a clear command, anything within reason goes. I agree with Huruf. 2185, I believe you want.

Mazhar

I have to highly disagree. Unless it is in the quran as a clear command, anything within reason goes. I agree with Huruf. 2185, I believe you want.{OPF}

Brother OPF,

If this is the logic then tomorrow someone could say there is no proibition in performing Zina since Quran has said do not go near Zina. The word "perform Zina" has not been used. When people are advised to lessen their gaze, i.e. avoid focussing the vision the cause is apparent and well understood because visual signal is known as the strogest signal that exictes certain cells of the body even there not being a will/deliberate desire {except those who are gone very cool}. Then women are advised to take care while walking so that their bosoms do not become reflective since it may exicte the cells of onlookers without their own desire/deliberate will. Satan was permitted to thrill people with voice; singing voice excites the cells to make them dance.

huruf

Brother OPF,
Satan was permitted to thrill people with voice; singing voice excites the cells to make them dance.

Again this reflects a very personal point of view and not a general perception or indication that the Quran in fact "means" that, which again would be an interpretation and a lot of stretching. But, if that were the case, I take it that singing male voices do also excite. Cannot see how they are less exciting than women voices. In fact looking at the tremendous inroads that male homosexuality is making nowadays I am sure that forbidding male public singing would be more pressing than any other musical curtailing. And according to the reasons that you give to stretch meanings, also grounded in the Quran. Modesty in men is not a choice but a
command.

Also what you say about going near zina, please state aya. It is clear that el zani y al ziniya are punished, that is not going near zina that is zina itself. So the comaprison you make is not valid. Again if you say the aleya number we may study it and get some uselful counsel. What is not in doubt is that zina, and not getting near it, is forbidden explicitly in the Quran.

Salaam

Mazhar

{Refer 1732}

A "distance" needs to be covered before actually performing Zina. And hope this distance/road/path is not to be measured in miles or kilometers but means certain things done that facilitates/propmts that thing.

{Refer 651}
How would it be interpreted {without stretching}?

Jack

If women aren't going to be allowed to sing in public; Men shouldn't be either.

Do you understand that these 'visual signals' can exist anytime/anywhere. There's no end to it.

huruf

????? ??????????? ????????? ??????? ????? ????????? ??????? ????????
{Refer 1732}

A "distance" needs to be covered before actually performing Zina. And hope this distance/road/path is not to be measured in miles or kilometers but means certain things done that facilitates/propmts that thing.

????? ??????????? ???????????? ??? ?????? ??????? ????? ??????
{Refer 651}
How would it be interpreted {without stretching}?

Thank you for the 17.32. However I have looked at 6.51 and may be you have quoted the numbers wrong because it has nothing to do with what you quote.

To 17.32, to how would I interpret it? It comes after an aya where it talks about something that should be avoided and is followed by another which does the same, so we it is abundandtly clear that we should avoid getting nearer zina.

May be it can be made more complicated, though don't see why or how, but my understanding in hearing or reading this injunction is quite clear dont't take any of the steps toward zina. Don't put yourself in a situation where you can be tempted to go that way. Don't play with the idea. Dont' invite, don't entice, don't seduce, don't insinuate, don't be equivocal, don't kid yourself that you are just playing and let the ending open as if you didn't have anything to do with it. Don't start what you are not going to en or what you at any rate should not end. And the aya gives a brief explanation of why.

I will take the second aya you mention and I trust, of course, your quote, although I would have liked better to see it in context to get the best of it.

This other aya it is not speaking about zina but fauahisha, which is a wider meaning and comprises other hateful and criminal actions. Again, as far as i get it, it means do not put yourself in a situation in which you can be enticed, or cheated or tempted to do what you know you shouldn't do. Don't stick around with robbers, for instance, with brothel goers, junkies, etc. etc. Do not even entertain the idea. And of course do not isnuate or incite o thersto such a thing.

That is my understanding.

Now coming back to the theme of the thread, the fact is that I can't see the relationship between these ayas you mention and women singing. It is preposterous that a singer, for instance, Monserrat Caballe or Maria Callas should be responsible for the weirdness any male may have been stuffing into his mind for God knows how long. Only a hoplessly twisted, vicious mind can come up with such a thing. But then no woman will be ever able to be up to the mark with that kind of distorted personality, nor should attempt it. Personal morals are personal responsibility. Women are not responsible for the lack of morals in any man, nor men are responsible for the lack of morals of any woman. Nor anybody should make anybody else a victim and curtail his or her rights so that he or she can abdicate of his or her own duties to him or herself and the Creator. Each person imagination and delusions are his or her respnsibility. If he or she has to sacrifice and tyranise others for his or her moral "perfection", then there is not much of that moral to guard, and the best favour for him or her is to make him or her responsible of his or her own acts without indulging petty tyranies and childish traitsfor spurious reasons.

Going back to 17.32, there is no comparison between this and what you say about the hidden zeenat. Zina is clearly forbidden and punished, and we are told not to get nearer it. On the other hand it is not said anywhere that singing in whatever circumstance is forbidden nor there is any punishment for it. The equivalent of what you say is that there should be an aya which said "do not get nearer singing (by women if you are a man) and that simultaneously there was in the Quran a clear and explicit prohibition of singing (by women) and a penalty attached to it.

Now let us concede that there was something wrong with men hearing women sing. Then, the prohibition should be on men to listen, not on women to sing. But the fact that is taken the other way around goes to show that we are not talking about women's or men's rights, but about how to curtail women's rights. Why can a woman not enjoy on TV womens sports just because some men do not aprove of women sporting in front of men. Men should take care not watch if they think that they are not supposed to, and not that since they can't, nobody can or do because everything airtime, home, tv, waves, radiation, sun, moon, beaches, everything seems to be men's unshared property. I don't know if many men realise how hostile, how arrogant, how spoiledbrattish, how disdainful for their fellow human beings that is and how barren.

Why not start keeping themselves from what they shouldn't do instead of preventing women from doing anything on the excuse that, who knows, they might miraculously be tempted? How can people be protected from being tempted to be hopelessly spoilt, hopelessly irresponsible should be the question. And I mean it really. Here we are, with a religion that is the geatest Mercy, the love of God breathed into our existence, into our own intimacy, a sublime blessing for our hearts and souls, a Book of wisdom and knowledge beyond imagination and wild wishes, and what do we get out of it? Does the ocean hold enough tears to cry for that waste? Probably yes. It does. Finally we are here for only an eyeclick and we will be comforted by the Only One who cares.

I won't get into the batin and thahir of the second aleya Mazhar quoted because I think by now it is obvious, and being sincere and having outbursts in fact is very hard work and for everybody's sake and mine I should take a little rest.

Salaam, no ill feelings for anybody, just heartache.

amuslim

Peace,

Maybe men shouldn't be going to such places?

Men should lower their gaze (2430). It shows equal responsibility. Why should women be held responsible for the men with evil in their hearts? Aren't we all held accountable for our own doings?

How do you live like the prophets? Which prophet(s)? And Why?

I agree. The point that I am trying to make IS equal responsibility. I think that women should do their best and men do their best. Its like how women shouldnt wear provocative clothes. Same with the singing IF it causes the disease in the hearts of men. Now Im not saying that they should or shouldnt sing, Im just speaking for equal responsibility. I listen to women sing myself.

All the prophets. Are they not one of the best examples of Muslims?

Let's go the full way and write our books like the Quran, because even though that states we shall never be like the prophets, or the wives of the prophets, and we shall never be able to produce a book like it, we should still try...

Thats not the point that I was trying to make. Im speaking in regards to following God the best we can. Of course we cant be completely like a prophet, since they are chosen by God.

I dont agree with your understanding. We follow the God-consciousness of the Prophet's and all righteous people mentioned in the Qur'an. However we DON'T follow specific commandments for who they were ie. Prophets or wives of the Prophet.

Emulating specific commandments to the wives of the Prophet's therefore mean nothing. If you mean their God-consciousness, then yes. But specific criterias explicitly stated to be only for them are only for them.

I will elaborate on some points I made earlier
....

I agree with what you state there, for specific commandments towards them. I have this question though. Had it said something to the wives of the prophet in the lines of, "If you are righteous, you will follow monotheism", would that then mean that women in general dont need to follow monotheism since it was directed towards the wives in that specific verse?

I can see the other things that you pointed out, such as the punishment for the wives is double, but Im not quite sure about this verse in particular. The way I interpret it is that it is towards those women, but that doesn't necessarily that other women cant follow it.

Again Im not saying that women CANT sing, but mutual responsibility again. Like I mentioned, I personally listen to women sing. I also think, depending on the material, that it can be quite beautiful. Regarding the beautiful part though, then we would go to what Tanveer was saying.

Peace

Yosemite

Peace all,

Brother Mazhar raises a very logical point

Normal/regular voice of a man/woman used in day to day conversation is different from the voice used by the same man/woman while singing. This "singing" voice is thus not readily apparent. Also, it is a known fact that the "normal" voice is not sexually provocative as opposed to the sensual voice that the same man/woman can emit. This "sensual" voice is not readily apparent.

Could it be that this "sensual" or "singing" voice is part of a woman's "zeenat"/beauty/adornment ? If that is so, then per 2431, women are not allowed to reveal their "zeenat" except what is apparent. Hence they will be allowed to reveal their "normal/regular" voice for ordinary conversation purposes, but not allowed to reveal their "sensual" or "singing" voice as it is not apparent. Likewise, lowering the gaze would also include not continuing to listen to "sensual" or "singing" voices.

Just throwing this out to see what others think about this. It just came to mind and I have not yet formed any solid stance about this.

I do not find a the voice of a singing woman so sexy. It's calming or soft, but not sexually attractive or provocative. But if the woman intentionally uses moaning and stuff it could be different.

Twilight

Again this reflects a very personal point of view and not a general perception or indication that the Quran in fact "means" that, which again would be an interpretation and a lot of stretching. But, if that were the case, I take it that singing male voices do also excite. Cannot see how they are less exciting than women voices. In fact looking at the tremendous inroads that male homosexuality is making nowadays I am sure that forbidding male public singing would be more pressing than any other musical curtailing. And according to the reasons that you give to stretch meanings, also grounded in the Quran. Modesty in men is not a choice but a command.

I agree with this. Think about boy bands for a second. Sure, mostly they are young good looking guys anyway, but also they have voices that women (and gay men) swoon over. So if voices and singing were the problem, I'm sure there'd be an equal command for men and women to not speak softly, etc. At the end of the day, those who are inclined to will take anything innocent and turn it into something perverse, while blaming their lack of control on others.

Peace.

unknownuser

Thats not the point that I was trying to make. Im speaking in regards to following God the best we can. Of course we cant be completely like a prophet, since they are chosen by God.

Sorry, I believe I missed your point entirely. Yes, the messengers are good examples. Has this been said for the prophet's wives?

Brother OPF,

If this is the logic then tomorrow someone could say there is no proibition in performing Zina since Quran has said do not go near Zina. The word "perform Zina" has not been used. When people are advised to lessen their gaze, i.e. avoid focussing the vision the cause is apparent and well understood because visual signal is known as the strogest signal that exictes certain cells of the body even there not being a will/deliberate desire {except those who are gone very cool}. Then women are advised to take care while walking so that their bosoms do not become reflective since it may exicte the cells of onlookers without their own desire/deliberate will. Satan was permitted to thrill people with voice; singing voice excites the cells to make them dance.

If there is no prohibition, then don't make a prohibition out of it. The Quran should not be cloudy on subjects. In this case, can it be said something with a prescribed punishment is prohibited? Or is it being punished for the fun of it? There are definitely hidden/subliminal communications going on in the cases you mentioned, but let's stick to quranic decree. If it says it is prohibited, it is, otherwise, who are we to ban something even God allows? Isn't that a form of shirk in itself, assuming you have higher knowledge/foresight than the God?