with his father, who was the teacher of al-Shāfi‘ī, Ahmad, and others of their generation.

Anyone with even the slightest knowledge of these men knows that this story is fabricated. Even if such an account were authentic, whoever its subject might be, it would establish nothing beyond what the senses already perceive: that a pleasant voice is delightful and exhilarating. This is something common to all people, not a religious matter for which al-Shāfi‘ī’s authority needs to be invoked. Indeed, mentioning al-Shāfi‘ī in such a context diminishes his standing, as does the fabricated story Ibn Tāhir related about Mālik, may Allah have mercy on him. Those who frequent brothels know more about this matter than the leading religious scholars. Had such a story been related about Ishāq ibn Ibrāhīm al-Nadīm or Abū al-Faraj al-Asbahānī, the author of al-Aghānī, that would have been more fitting than relating it about al-Shāfi‘ī.

Moreover, one may say: That a beautiful voice gives pleasure is a matter of sensory experience. But what in this establishes any religious ruling—that it is permissible, disliked, or forbidden, or that singing is a means of drawing near to Allah or an act of obedience?

Rather, this is like someone saying: The pleasure derived from sexual intercourse cannot be denied; people’s enjoyment of sexual intercourse cannot be denied; their enjoyment of physical intimacy with beautiful women and boys cannot be denied; their enjoyment of looking at beautiful forms cannot be denied