Why did Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) lower her veil when she saw the riders?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : O Shaykh, why did Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) lower her veil when she saw the riders? Why did she do that?
The Shaykh : And we mentioned this just now.
The questioner : For what reason? I mean, Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) would raise it if she turned her face toward the Ka'bah; she would raise it from her face, yes.
The Shaykh : And where is the Ka'bah here?
The questioner : Lowering the veil over the House; she would say that if she saw the riders, she would put it down and lower it over her head.
The Shaykh : But why did you bring the Ka'bah into the matter? Why does it have anything to do with the Ka'bah? She is walking.
The questioner : May Allah reward you, O Shaykh. I want to know why Aisha would lower her veil over her face when she saw the riders.
The Shaykh : It is fine, may Allah reward you. I will answer you, but why did you bring the Ka'bah into the matter?
The questioner : May Allah reward you. Perhaps it was a mistake. May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : This is it, yes.
The questioner : It is fine, please forgive me.
The Shaykh : Well, I do not fear that there is something behind the veil that is behind it.
The questioner : No, there is nothing behind it.
The Shaykh : So I am asking you: if it was a slip of the tongue, we all make mistakes; and if you intended something, you know what you intended.
First, the hadith did not mention the issue of the Ka'bah. As for my answer, it has already been clearly stated regarding ordinary women. We see that the best and most noble for ordinary women is to cover their faces and their hands as well. The wives of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) are more entitled to this ruling. In fact, some have reported that there is scholarly consensus that it was obligatory for the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that nothing of their bodies be exposed at all. As for the Mothers of the Believers, covering the face is obligatory for them. And as for ordinary believing women, it is the best, without doubt. So the answer to this has already been given. But it seems you are referring to the Mother of the Believers herself. The answer is that the stronger position is that it is obligatory for the wives of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to cover all of their bodies.
The questioner : And that it is not obligatory for women.
The Shaykh : It is not obligatory for ordinary women.
The questioner : Well, for ordinary women, it is obligatory for them to cover their feet, as in the hadith.
The Shaykh : Without a doubt
The questioner : I mean, her foot is exposed.
The Shaykh : Without a doubt
The questioner : And you said in the book of hadiths, O Shaykh, that the woman's foot is an awrah (part of the body that must be covered). I read the book a year ago and concluded from it that you intended that the woman's foot is an awrah.
The Shaykh : Yes, by Allah, it is correct.
The questioner : ... that the woman's foot is an awrah, and her face, which means, if her foot is more obligatory to cover as an awrah, what about her face, which is the beauty, the description, and the nature?
The Shaykh : It seems you did not read the athar (report) of Ali.
The questioner : Which is
The Shaykh : And the one who saysBulugh al-Maram 60
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh :Musnad Ahmad 216[Sahih lighairihi (Darussalam) You have certainly read this.
The questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : But you did not pause at it to take a lesson or to avoid falling into this analogy.
The questioner : May Allah bless you, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible to enter this issue through the path of opinion, and you know that there is a school of thought that is not approved by the majority of scholars because they call them the People of Opinion. Why? Because they preferred their opinions over the texts of the Shari'ah.
So it was obligatory, but I am not surprised, and no blame, because "You are not the first to be deceived by the moon". Many of those who dealt with this issue started with this view. They said that the Lord of the Worlds said[An-Nur 24:31], so the exposure of the face is a greater trial than striking with their feet. What are these analogies? And analogies in acts of worship are not permissible to enter into except as Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Analogy is a necessity". This means when a person finds a matter that he must issue a ruling on, he is compelled to look at a verse; if he does not find an answer in a hadith, he does not find an answer in a valid scholarly consensus, then at that time "he analogizes the like with the like and the equivalent with the equivalent". But to forbid people a matter that Allah the Mighty and Majestic has permitted, this is not the way of the people of the Sunnah, nor the way of the people of the Athar, but rather this is the way of the People of Opinion who prefer their opinions over the texts of the Shari'ah. It would have been possible to say: Allah said such and such, from what indicates the obligation of covering the woman's face. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said such and such, from what confirms this obligation. After that, after that, this analogy comes, because this analogy is in line with the evidence. But to start the issue with opinion, this is contrary to the correct opinion, as you heard from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).
And they have reported from Abu Hanifa himself, who is the master of the People of Opinion, if this expression is correct, although it is narrated from him that he said: "If religion were by opinion, I would say that it is obligatory to perform the full ritual bath for urination and the ablution for major ritual impurity". They said to him: Why? They said: Because the scholars differed on whether semen is pure or impure, whereas they all agreed on the impurity of urine. So making the full ritual bath obligatory for something impure that came out of a person is more appropriate than making it obligatory for something that came out of him regarding which there is disagreement about its purity and impurity.
This is how it should have been said: there is a text in the Qur'an or in the hadith of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) that the woman's face is an awrah, and there is no such text. And therefore they resort to analogy, which pleases many people who do not know the value of the evidence of the Shari'ah and when a scholar resorts to analogy. Do you have a text?
The Shaykh : And we mentioned this just now.
The questioner : For what reason? I mean, Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) would raise it if she turned her face toward the Ka'bah; she would raise it from her face, yes.
The Shaykh : And where is the Ka'bah here?
The questioner : Lowering the veil over the House; she would say that if she saw the riders, she would put it down and lower it over her head.
The Shaykh : But why did you bring the Ka'bah into the matter? Why does it have anything to do with the Ka'bah? She is walking.
The questioner : May Allah reward you, O Shaykh. I want to know why Aisha would lower her veil over her face when she saw the riders.
The Shaykh : It is fine, may Allah reward you. I will answer you, but why did you bring the Ka'bah into the matter?
The questioner : May Allah reward you. Perhaps it was a mistake. May Allah reward you.
The Shaykh : This is it, yes.
The questioner : It is fine, please forgive me.
The Shaykh : Well, I do not fear that there is something behind the veil that is behind it.
The questioner : No, there is nothing behind it.
The Shaykh : So I am asking you: if it was a slip of the tongue, we all make mistakes; and if you intended something, you know what you intended.
First, the hadith did not mention the issue of the Ka'bah. As for my answer, it has already been clearly stated regarding ordinary women. We see that the best and most noble for ordinary women is to cover their faces and their hands as well. The wives of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) are more entitled to this ruling. In fact, some have reported that there is scholarly consensus that it was obligatory for the wives of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that nothing of their bodies be exposed at all. As for the Mothers of the Believers, covering the face is obligatory for them. And as for ordinary believing women, it is the best, without doubt. So the answer to this has already been given. But it seems you are referring to the Mother of the Believers herself. The answer is that the stronger position is that it is obligatory for the wives of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to cover all of their bodies.
The questioner : And that it is not obligatory for women.
The Shaykh : It is not obligatory for ordinary women.
The questioner : Well, for ordinary women, it is obligatory for them to cover their feet, as in the hadith.
The Shaykh : Without a doubt
The questioner : I mean, her foot is exposed.
The Shaykh : Without a doubt
The questioner : And you said in the book of hadiths, O Shaykh, that the woman's foot is an awrah (part of the body that must be covered). I read the book a year ago and concluded from it that you intended that the woman's foot is an awrah.
The Shaykh : Yes, by Allah, it is correct.
The questioner : ... that the woman's foot is an awrah, and her face, which means, if her foot is more obligatory to cover as an awrah, what about her face, which is the beauty, the description, and the nature?
The Shaykh : It seems you did not read the athar (report) of Ali.
The questioner : Which is
The Shaykh : And the one who says
If the religion were based on opinion, it would be more important to wipe over the under parts of the leather socks
لو كان الدين بالرأي لكان المسح أسفل الخفينThe questioner : Yes
The Shaykh :
I saw the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wiping over his leather slippers
أولى من مسحه أعلاه ولكني رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يمسح على الخفينThe questioner : Yes
The Shaykh : But you did not pause at it to take a lesson or to avoid falling into this analogy.
The questioner : May Allah bless you, O Shaykh.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible to enter this issue through the path of opinion, and you know that there is a school of thought that is not approved by the majority of scholars because they call them the People of Opinion. Why? Because they preferred their opinions over the texts of the Shari'ah.
So it was obligatory, but I am not surprised, and no blame, because "You are not the first to be deceived by the moon". Many of those who dealt with this issue started with this view. They said that the Lord of the Worlds said
And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment
ولا يضربن بأرجلهن ليعلم ما يخفين من زينتهنAnd they have reported from Abu Hanifa himself, who is the master of the People of Opinion, if this expression is correct, although it is narrated from him that he said: "If religion were by opinion, I would say that it is obligatory to perform the full ritual bath for urination and the ablution for major ritual impurity". They said to him: Why? They said: Because the scholars differed on whether semen is pure or impure, whereas they all agreed on the impurity of urine. So making the full ritual bath obligatory for something impure that came out of a person is more appropriate than making it obligatory for something that came out of him regarding which there is disagreement about its purity and impurity.
This is how it should have been said: there is a text in the Qur'an or in the hadith of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) that the woman's face is an awrah, and there is no such text. And therefore they resort to analogy, which pleases many people who do not know the value of the evidence of the Shari'ah and when a scholar resorts to analogy. Do you have a text?