The Shaykh’s talk on gold jewelry.

The Shaykh : Who is it that wears a necklace? We do not say who is it that wears a ring; it is the women who wear necklaces. The witness to this is the hadith you referred to and which I intended to mention, which is very interesting: "That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) saw on one day a large gold ring on a woman's finger." The *fatkh* is a large ring. "So he struck her with a stick in his hand (peace be upon him) and said to her: , and she left, and the Messenger (peace be upon him) left. And glory to Allah! For a wisdom that Allah wills, this woman whom the Messenger struck with a stick, her name came in the hadith as the daughter of Hubayrah. "So she went to Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her), and soon the Messenger came and entered upon Fatimah, and he found on her hand a gold chain necklace. So he said (peace be upon him): O Fatimah, would it please you that people would talk and say: Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad, has a chain of fire around her neck?! And he rebuked her severely, and he admonished her with severe admonition, and he went out. So what she did (may Allah be pleased with her) was nothing but that she took this chain and sold it, and bought with its price a slave and freed him for Allah. When the news of her deed reached the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), he said: الحمد لله الذي نجَّى فاطمة من النار Praise be to Allah who saved Fatimah from the FireAs-Sunan al-Kubra lil-Nasa'i 64:138. This is an explicit text, and the wisdom I referred to earlier is as if our Lord decreed that this woman would return to the daughter of the Messenger so that she would understand that the ruling is one, and that this is not specific to you because you are my daughter; she is my daughter, and I saw what I did to her." So he rebuked her severely, and he said to her as you heard, يتحدث الناس بأن فاطمة بنت محمد - صلى الله عليه وسلم - في عنقها طوق من نار ؟! Will people talk about Fatimah, the daughter of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), having a necklace of fire around her neck?!; therefore, the scientific principles of usul al-fiqh on one hand, and their treatment of the hadith regarding drinking from gold vessels on the other hand, obligates all scholars to exclude gold jewelry from the general permissibility. It is said: Gold is permissible for women except for what is worn as jewelry, which is three things: a ring, a bracelet, and a necklace. But most scholars are of the opposite opinion; most scholars permit gold for women absolutely. So when it is said to them, "Well, is it permissible for her to drink from it?" they say, "No." What is the evidence? The evidence is general, so apply the general evidence, and they abandoned the specific evidence. This is not correct, neither from the perspective of the usul al-fiqh that they established, where they said, for example, that the specific specifies the general, and some of the Salaf used to call the general text abrogated and the specific text abrogating. This is a meaning that contains precision, because in fact the specific text does abrogate the general text, but not all of it; it abrogates this particular aspect. So they noted this meaning and said words that influenced us later scholars. For example, Imam al-Suyuti in his book *Al-Itqan fi 'Ulum al-Qur'an* mentions that there are about sixty verses or more, and I have forgotten now, that are abrogated. The later scholars say... Allah, sixty verses in the Qur'an are abrogated. This is an exaggeration, but the one who finds this strange and considers it an exaggeration does not know the terminology of the Salaf. Because al-Suyuti's job was to collect the opinions on the verses, so he collected so-and-so saying such-and-such a verse is abrogated, and so-and-so saying such-and-such a verse is abrogated, and so on. So he thought that abrogation here means the later usuli meaning, i.e., canceling the ruling from its root. For example, His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ قَدْ تَبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong.[Al-Baqarah 2:256]; so it is not permissible to fight the disbelievers. But he (peace be upon him) said: أُمِرْتُ أن أقاتل الناس حتى يشهدوا أن لا إله إلا الله ، وأن محمدًا رسول الله ؛ فإذا قالوها فقد عصموا منِّي دماءهم وأموالهم ؛ إلا بحقِّها ، وحسابهم على الله It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and they establish prayer, and pay Zakat and if they do it, their blood and property are guaranteed protection on my behalf except when justified by law, and their affairs rest with Allah.Sahih Muslim 22. So the verse is not abrogated; it is specified. It is specified by the fact that there is compulsion for the one who refuses to pay the jizyah and refuses Islam. So in that case, fighting is necessary. This is known in the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace be upon him) when he would prepare the expeditions and appoint commanders over them, he would say to the commander: إذا لقيتم المشركين فادعوهم إلى إحدى ثلاث : إلى الإسلام ، فإن أبوا فالجزية ، فإن أبوا فالقتال When you meet the polytheists, call them to one of three things: to Islam, and if they refuse, then the jizyah, and if they refuse, then fighting.. So the one who pays the jizyah is not compelled in religion, and does not become a Muslim. The remaining third thing is the one who does not become a Muslim and does not pay the jizyah, so he is compelled to Islam because he fights. And in that case, he must do one of two things: either he becomes a Muslim, or he pays the jizyah, as He said (Glorified and Exalted is He): عَنْ يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ willingly while they are humbled.[At-Tawbah 9:29].
The point is that these hadiths are numerous and are explicit in the prohibition of a type of gold for women. The hadiths regarding wearing gold jewelry are more explicit than the hadith regarding the prohibition of drinking from gold vessels. They all said that drinking and eating in gold vessels for women is not permissible, even if the original ruling for them is lawful. So they excluded this little from the much. So the correct thing would have been for them to follow this exception with the exception of gold jewelry. But the majority of them did not do so. May Allah have mercy on us.

The questioner: Question.