We heard that kohl and the ring are among the adornments whose display is permissible, so what is the evidence?

The Shaykh : We heard that kohl and the ring are among the adornments whose display is permissible, so what is the evidence? If this statement is attributed to Ibn Abbas, it is not considered a legal text in the face of the verse: . There are matters taken from the reality of the life of the Companions, and the life of the Companions is among the resources or sources to which the jurist resorts to deduce what is permissible and what is not permissible. When we went in the book "The Hijab of the Muslim Woman" to establish that the face of the woman is not an awrah (part of the body that must be covered), while preferring to cover this face, we did so for many reasons, among which is: that a large section of the female Companions were those who uncovered their faces, they uncovered their faces. So when we see this uncovering and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) approving it, we consider this evidence for the permissibility of uncovering, and this is one of the proofs as I mentioned earlier. I am not in this position now, but I want to say: that from the reality as well that was the case for women in the time of the Messenger (peace be upon him) is that kohl was a desirable matter for both men and women. It was reported in "Sahih al-Bukhari" that a woman died, leaving her husband, and she was pregnant, then she gave birth to her child after ten or fifteen days. She adorned herself and put on kohl for the proposal. There was a man who had proposed to her named Abu al-Sanabil. When he saw that she had prepared herself for the proposal, jealousy took him, and he said to her: It is not permissible for you until your waiting period is completed, meaning four months and ten days. It appeared that she was a jurist, or it was reported to her that if a woman’s husband dies while she is pregnant and then she gives birth, her waiting period has ended. Therefore, she considered that as soon as she gave birth to her fetus, her waiting period had ended. When she heard this objection from Abu al-Sanabil, she went to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and said to him: Abu al-Sanabil says such and such. He (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . The point of this is that Abu al-Sanabil saw kohl in the eyes of that woman, which indicates that this was a customary matter in that time and established in the era of the Messenger (peace be upon him). If this is added to the fact that some of the Companions interpreted His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): as kohl and the ring, this supported the reality with such an interpretation. It does not concern us here whether this interpretation is a correct interpretation of this verse, i.e., it is not our concern whether the Companion hit the mark in interpreting the verse as mentioned or not. But what concerns us and we benefit from this interpretation, whether it is correct or incorrect, is that this Companion is explaining or interpreting with this verse a reality in the society of the Companions, in the female society of the Companions. from kohl and the ring, meaning he either hit the mark in interpreting this verse or erred, but he is establishing the permissibility of the appearance of the woman’s ring and the appearance of her kohl. Closer, but this is like that, and it is much stranger than this for one who has not heard this new science. His saying (Glorified and Exalted is He): recently, meaning yesterday, the day before yesterday, we were staying up late at a friend of ours, a Palestinian Kuwaiti, and with him was his brother-in-law. This brother-in-law was telling us about the problems of the Salafis and non-Salafis in Kuwait. Among the things he said: My brother, one was praying and the other saw him doing this, so the other objected to him and said to him: What is this? And he supported the one telling us, whose name is Abu Ibrahim. I said to him: Hold on, you are objecting to this and it is well known. He said: How did we know? And he invoked good. I said: Allah (Mighty and Majestic) said: What does "and sacrifice" mean? He said: Ali ibn Abi Talib, meaning put your hands in prayer at your chest, put your hands in your prayer at your chest and sacrifice. Who comes to mind with this meaning? No one at all. And the meaning mentioned in the books of tafsir (Qur'anic exegesis) is two sayings of the scholars, famous in the Hanafi school and the Shafi'i school. "Sacrifice" in the Hanafi school means a sacrificial animal. For the other scholars: "Sacrifice" is an absolute sacrifice, and this is the correct opinion that fits the context and the preceding part of the verse. O Muhammad, indeed We have given you al-Kawthar, meaning the abundant good. So what must you do? Pray to your Lord as a voluntary act and in gratitude, and sacrifice the sacrificial animals in gratitude to Allah (Mighty and Majestic), meaning: the one who hates you is the one whose lineage is cut off to the end. These two opinions are the famous ones in the books of tafsir. As for "put your hands at your chest in prayer," by Allah, I am the first to admit that this meaning does not come to our minds at all. But is this meaning correct or not? If we want not to be bold in declaring the Companion wrong, we say: it is possible that this is one of the meanings of the verse. And if a person is not convinced by this meaning, I say, and here is the point: if this meaning for this verse is not correct, but it certainly interprets a reality that he witnessed with his own eyes, because it is not possible for the Companions to see the Messenger (peace be upon him) not doing this and then interpret the verse in a way that contradicts the reality of the life of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and the reality of the life of the Companions. So this interpretation is a correct reality, but as an interpretation of this verse, it may be correct and it may be incorrect. This is exactly what is said in the issue of: Rather, the stronger opinion with us, as I mentioned in my book "The Hijab of the Woman," is "except what is shown of it" without intention. This is the strongest opinion in the verse. But the Companions who interpreted meaning from the adornments, such as the ring and kohl, this is their interpretation of the reality and support for this reality with this verse. Whether they hit the mark in the support or erred, it does not concern us as much as it concerns us to understand from this interpretation that they are dealing with a reality. And this reality is that Allah (Mighty and Majestic) allowed the woman, if she is wearing kohl, that she does not leave her house until she rubs her eyes and harms them. No, this is from the adornments that He allowed. Likewise, the ring, especially if the ring has become part of the woman’s body that is not separable. This is our answer regarding this question, and this is sufficient, and there is no more in my mouth.