The Shaykh’s discussion of the ruling on lengthening the garment.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Regarding lengthening the garment, I agree with you that lengthening the garment may involve arrogance and vanity. I do not agree, and I will explain to you why. If I were going to explain it, I would have done so before, because you spoke in a way that agrees with the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), which is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): Whoever drags his garment out of vanity, meaning arrogance.
The questioner : In a Qudsi hadith on this subject:
The Shaykh : Yes, this is an authentic hadith, but it has no direct relation to the subject of clothing. The subject of clothing falls under this general statement, but this hadith does not mean—and here, as they say, is the crux of the matter—that if a Muslim lengthens his garment claiming he is not doing so out of vanity, it is permissible. It does not mean that. Why? Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) established a methodology, or if we wish to call it a specific style, for Muslims regarding not lengthening the garment. If there were no hadith other than the hadith of vanity on this subject, we would say that wearing a long garment is permissible except when done out of vanity, in which case it is forbidden. But we have two other things. The first is from the practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), as his garment was not long enough to drag on the ground, or at least it did not extend below the ankles. And without a doubt, as came in some hadiths:Sahih al-Bukhari 6098 This is the first thing. The other thing, which is more important, is that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: The meaning of this hadith is that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) established a general methodology for Muslims regarding their clothing, regardless of vanity. That is to say, if someone asked us, "What is the Sunnah regarding the garment?" we would say it should be to the middle of the shin. It is permissible for it to be longer. What is the limit of this permissibility? It is not above the ankles. The ankles are the two prominent bones. So you are permitted one of these two forms. As for anything below that, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) says: Therefore, it is not permissible for a Muslim to say, "I do not lengthen my garment out of vanity," because the answer might be that that is the case, and Allah knows best what is in hearts, and we are not in control of what is in hearts. We deal with the apparent, and Allah takes care of the hidden. This apparent aspect is what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) defined by his saying: After this methodology that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) established for Muslims in general, it is not permissible for us to say that this was only in the time of the Messenger. No, because as we all know, we take pride in the fact that our Prophet (may Allah’s prayers and peace be upon him) has among his characteristics that he said in a well-known hadith: And among them is: Sahih al-Bukhari 438 And the verse is sufficient in this regard: [Saba 34:28] And the other verse: [Al-Anbya 21:107] Then the other hadith which says: The meaning of all this is that the Shari'ah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is a continuous Shari'ah until the Day of Resurrection. There is no change in the creation of Allah. So every ruling that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke of or practiced in that time, and for which no evidence has come that restricts that ruling to him or to that time, these rulings remain continuous until the Day of Resurrection. Therefore, it is not correct for us to say that the thobe today, if it is long, is permissible because it was the custom of the Arabs to lengthen their tails out of arrogance. We say it is possible that this was the case among the Arabs, as it was among the Ajam, and as it exists today. But that does not mean that if someone does it with an intention other than vanity, it is permissible for him. And as we said, how do we distinguish that this person’s garment is long out of vanity and this other person has the same problem but does not do it out of vanity? What is the measure we have? We do not have a measure. And therefore,The questioner : I believe that this era has ended. No one is lengthening their garment in the way it was in the time of Jahiliyyah.
The Shaykh : What was that form like?
The questioner : They actually used to drag it behind them, approximately.
The Shaykh : Meaning, and you drag it, right? I mean, if it does not drag like women’s garments, but rather there is a finger’s width between it and the ground, so it does not sweep the ground, then it is permissible.The questioner : Shaykh, these matters were... and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) used to alert Muslims to this. The Muslims in the Dhuhr and Asr prayers adhered to the report of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). And after that, in the subsequent eras, this matter did not recur at all. In the present time, we say no one is lengthening their garment as the disbelievers of Makkah did.
The Shaykh : Well, when you speak of this, what is your evidence?
The questioner : What is the evidence like? For example, a hadith?
The Shaykh : What evidence do you have? We are satisfied if you have evidence. We do not put you in a difficult position. We do not say we want this or that. You bring the evidence.
The questioner : You are being lenient. May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : This is our duty: We will ease things for you a bit. We have a pant in Sham that has been around for a while, called the "charleston." What is your opinion? They used to wear it with good intentions.
The questioner : This is the one with the wide leg at the bottom.
The Shaykh : Yes, wide and long, sweeping the ground. I mean, first of all, regarding the pant, the bottom of it—what does this tell you? This fashion, is there not something intended behind it? I mean, now when the woman who displays her adornment wears the short skirt, it is fashion, but is there not something intended behind the fashion?
The questioner : A woman’s clothing is different.
The Shaykh : I am a fortune-teller that it is different, but I want to hear from you: is something intended from what is called fashion, or is it not intended? It does not happen, Abu 'Abdullah, that you treat the texts of the Shari'ah with your emotions and your opinion, and you have no evidence. And if I ask you, you bring a real example and say "fashion." And when I ask you what is intended by this fashion, you are at a loss for an answer. Why?
The questioner : It is not a story of me being at a loss for an answer. I will give you an example: the "mu'allafat qulubuhum" (those whose hearts are to be reconciled).
The Shaykh : The example came from me. There is no answer. Do not lose the answer for me.
The questioner : He gave them what he gave to the Muhajireen and the Ansar, but in the time of 'Umar, the Messenger gave them [support] when Islam was weak. Now Islam is strong. These are matters and issues that Islam faced at the beginning. And this does not mean that we continue to follow them, for example.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, why did he give to the "mu'allafat qulubuhum" what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) gave?
The Shaykh : There is a great difference between 'Umar and Abu 'Abdullah. 'Umar is giving an answer, and Abu 'Abdullah is not giving an answer. 'Umar is saying that the "mu'allafat qulubuhum" are [given support] in order to reconcile hearts. Now Islam has become strong; they will either accept Islam or they will never accept it. This is a statement that fills the head. But Abu 'Abdullah makes a claim and does not bring evidence for it, until he is forced to ask, "What is the evidence you want?" When we ask him, we say to him, "What evidence?" He does not present any evidence.
The questioner : By Allah, my Shaykh, regarding even this subject, it is not a fundamental issue in 'aqidah (creed), I mean.
The Shaykh : Did we raise this issue, or did you?
The questioner : The subject is not worth all this talk.
The Shaykh : I am telling you, and it is not you. Did we raise it, or did you?
The questioner : And I am commenting on the hadith, saying that the hadith of clothing is not important in 'aqidah to this extent.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. I mean, how many times have you not answered me? Why do I not see you? What Allah willed, you are calm and long-suffering. Why do you not answer?
Another questioner: Do we understand that your not asking or answering means that you are unable to answer it, or that you want to benefit more from the Shaykh, for example?
The questioner : The subject of clothing, in my opinion, there is no evidence for it.
The Shaykh : This opinion, where did you get it from? May Allah guide you. Your saying "in my opinion," where did you get it from? Do you believe that every Muslim, and there are millions of them, every Muslim has an opinion according to his own whim, or is he bound by the Shari'ah?
The questioner : Is clothing 'aqidah?
The Shaykh : What do you gain from this question? I mean, I am telling you, it is not 'aqidah. What have you reached? I am asking you now: your question about standing in prayer, and your question about clothing being 'aqidah.
The questioner : You opened a subject that I did not open, I mean, and I did not look for it.The Shaykh : Also, this is something I raised.
Another questioner: Your extreme precision in the subject made the brother Abu 'Abdullah think that all this excessive attention to the subject means that it leads him to the level of 'aqidah. Abu 'Abdullah, the Shaykh loves for matters to be clarified completely, but in order for this issue to be a creedal, decisive matter.
The questioner : We spoke about the subject to understand, I mean, and we understand from our honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh : The point is that not everything is possible, but this is something that can happen. You spoke, as you see, and as you mean, right? And no one is asking why you are speaking like this. But just as you have the freedom to speak whatever you wish, we also have the freedom to ask you: what is the evidence for what you say? And I am sorry that you deflected the evidence in everything we said; you did not give us any evidence. I say, may Allah reward you, just as you spoke with complete freedom, because that is your right to speak. In return, we also speak and ask. But unfortunately, there was no question you were asked that you did not deflect the answer from. We asked you and you did not answer us; you deflected the answer from the question and then returned to say at the end that this is a matter of creed. We answered you and said to you: what is the creed? But what did you gain from the question and the answer? You gained nothing. You are where you started.
The questioner : My only intention is that the Prophet forbade these matters, and they ended in their time because they were necessary in that era.
The Shaykh : How do you know? What do you mean?
The questioner : In that era, there were issues that faced the Muslims, and they were present, and they were dealing with them, and the Prophet forbade them, and they ended in that era.
The Shaykh : How do you know, my brother, Abu 'Abdullah? Open your eyes. You are speaking very dangerous words now. And now we are speaking with some heat. When you say this legal ruling has ended, it means you have abrogated the Shari'ah. How easy is it for you to say: this ruling has ended? Who forbade a legal ruling that Allah revealed to the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and it became the first Sunnah, for two years, three, five, ten, a million? Who stopped it? Who abrogated it? Who has the authority to stop a legal ruling?
The questioner : I do not mean that someone stopped the ruling. I am saying these are issues that face the Muslims.
The Shaykh : Do you want us to repeat the words as if we did not understand you? This is a problem.
Another questioner: The Shaykh understands your words one hundred percent, my brother. But the Shaykh is commenting on the word "ended." Because the prohibition was for one person in the time of the Prophet, the prohibition lasts until the Day of Resurrection. Everyone who experiences the same thing has the prohibition applied to them until the Day of Judgment. As for it having ended, if it ended for some individuals, it exists for other individuals.
Another questioner: Abu 'Abdullah says "ended," meaning there is a legal ruling in it, meaning there is a legal ruling, that is all.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, I did not understand, by Allah.
Another questioner: He means by "ended" that there is a known legal ruling that is in effect.
The Shaykh : What is the known legal ruling? What is it?
Another questioner: That is his intention.
The Shaykh : Where is it? Is this legal ruling present or absent?
Another questioner: It is present, of course.
The Shaykh : Where is it? It is not present except with you. You have it, but we are asking you a question that has no relation to creed. And if you also like to research creed, we can research creed. What is the ruling on a man wearing gold? Is it permissible or forbidden?
The questioner : By Allah, the narrated hadiths state that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade wearing silk and gold for men.
The Shaykh : Go ahead, say it is forbidden or lawful. When you tell me it is lawful, I will ask you for the evidence, because you would be contradicting what I have. When you say it is forbidden, and for example, we agree. The first issue is that he forbade it.
The questioner : I know that making things lawful and forbidden is by the text of the Noble Qur'an.
The Shaykh : But by the text of the Noble Qur'an?
The questioner : Allah is the One who makes things lawful and forbids them.
The Shaykh : I am telling you that the One who forbids is other than Allah, so teach me that no one forbids except Allah. No one forbids except Allah. So what did you not answer me on?
The questioner : We ask in order to understand.
The Shaykh : We are asking, not you. May Allah reward you. We are asking you: what is your opinion? Is gold and silk forbidden for men or not? You return and say "no one forbids except Allah." We know that no one forbids except Allah, but we are asking you: is it forbidden or lawful? You do not answer. You have kept us up tonight, but if Allah wills, on the second night, may Allah honor us and we may receive the answers from you.
Whoever drags his garment out of arrogance, Allah the Mighty and Majestic will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection.
من جر إزاره خيلاء لم ينظر الله عز وجل إليه يوم القيامةThe questioner : In a Qudsi hadith on this subject:
Arrogance is My robe and honor is My garment, so whoever competes with Me in either of them, I will cast him into My Fire, and I do not care.
الكبرياء ردائي والعز إزاري فمن نازعني على واحدٌ منهما أدخلته ناري ولا أباليThe Shaykh : Yes, this is an authentic hadith, but it has no direct relation to the subject of clothing. The subject of clothing falls under this general statement, but this hadith does not mean—and here, as they say, is the crux of the matter—that if a Muslim lengthens his garment claiming he is not doing so out of vanity, it is permissible. It does not mean that. Why? Because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) established a methodology, or if we wish to call it a specific style, for Muslims regarding not lengthening the garment. If there were no hadith other than the hadith of vanity on this subject, we would say that wearing a long garment is permissible except when done out of vanity, in which case it is forbidden. But we have two other things. The first is from the practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), as his garment was not long enough to drag on the ground, or at least it did not extend below the ankles. And without a doubt, as came in some hadiths:
and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad.
خير الهدى هدى محمد صلى الله عليه وسلمThe garment of the believer is to the middle of the calf, and if it is longer, then to the ankles, and if it is longer than that, then it is in the Fire.
إزرة المؤمن إلا نصف الساق فإن طال فإلى الكعبين فإن طال ففي النارin the Fire
في النارThe garment of the believer is to the middle of the calf, and if it is longer, then to the ankles, and if it is longer than that, then it is in the Fire.
إزرة المؤمن إلى نصف الساق فإن طال فإلى الكعبين فإن طال ففي النارI was given five things over the prophets.
فضلت على الأنبياء بخمسEvery Prophet used to be sent to his nation exclusively but I have been sent to all mankind.
وكان النبي يبعث إلى قومه خاصة وبعثت إلى الناس كافةAnd We have not sent you except comprehensively to mankind as a bringer of good tidings and a warner
وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا كَافَّةً لِلنَّاسِ بَشِيرًا وَنَذِيرًاAnd We have not sent you, [O Muhammad], except as a mercy to the worlds.
وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا رَحْمَةً لِلْعَالَمِينَThere is no man from this Ummah, whether a Jew or a Christian, who hears of me and then does not believe in me, except that he will enter the Fire.
ما من رجلٍ من هذه الأمة يهودي أو نصراني يسمع بي ثم لا يؤمن بي إلا دخل النارThe Shaykh : What was that form like?
The questioner : They actually used to drag it behind them, approximately.
The Shaykh : Meaning, and you drag it, right? I mean, if it does not drag like women’s garments, but rather there is a finger’s width between it and the ground, so it does not sweep the ground, then it is permissible.The questioner : Shaykh, these matters were... and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) used to alert Muslims to this. The Muslims in the Dhuhr and Asr prayers adhered to the report of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). And after that, in the subsequent eras, this matter did not recur at all. In the present time, we say no one is lengthening their garment as the disbelievers of Makkah did.
The Shaykh : Well, when you speak of this, what is your evidence?
The questioner : What is the evidence like? For example, a hadith?
The Shaykh : What evidence do you have? We are satisfied if you have evidence. We do not put you in a difficult position. We do not say we want this or that. You bring the evidence.
The questioner : You are being lenient. May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : This is our duty:
Make things easy and do not make them difficult.
يسروا ولا تعسرواThe questioner : This is the one with the wide leg at the bottom.
The Shaykh : Yes, wide and long, sweeping the ground. I mean, first of all, regarding the pant, the bottom of it—what does this tell you? This fashion, is there not something intended behind it? I mean, now when the woman who displays her adornment wears the short skirt, it is fashion, but is there not something intended behind the fashion?
The questioner : A woman’s clothing is different.
The Shaykh : I am a fortune-teller that it is different, but I want to hear from you: is something intended from what is called fashion, or is it not intended? It does not happen, Abu 'Abdullah, that you treat the texts of the Shari'ah with your emotions and your opinion, and you have no evidence. And if I ask you, you bring a real example and say "fashion." And when I ask you what is intended by this fashion, you are at a loss for an answer. Why?
The questioner : It is not a story of me being at a loss for an answer. I will give you an example: the "mu'allafat qulubuhum" (those whose hearts are to be reconciled).
The Shaykh : The example came from me. There is no answer. Do not lose the answer for me.
The questioner : He gave them what he gave to the Muhajireen and the Ansar, but in the time of 'Umar, the Messenger gave them [support] when Islam was weak. Now Islam is strong. These are matters and issues that Islam faced at the beginning. And this does not mean that we continue to follow them, for example.
The Shaykh : Why?
The questioner : 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, why did he give to the "mu'allafat qulubuhum" what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) gave?
The Shaykh : There is a great difference between 'Umar and Abu 'Abdullah. 'Umar is giving an answer, and Abu 'Abdullah is not giving an answer. 'Umar is saying that the "mu'allafat qulubuhum" are [given support] in order to reconcile hearts. Now Islam has become strong; they will either accept Islam or they will never accept it. This is a statement that fills the head. But Abu 'Abdullah makes a claim and does not bring evidence for it, until he is forced to ask, "What is the evidence you want?" When we ask him, we say to him, "What evidence?" He does not present any evidence.
The questioner : By Allah, my Shaykh, regarding even this subject, it is not a fundamental issue in 'aqidah (creed), I mean.
The Shaykh : Did we raise this issue, or did you?
The questioner : The subject is not worth all this talk.
The Shaykh : I am telling you, and it is not you. Did we raise it, or did you?
The questioner : And I am commenting on the hadith, saying that the hadith of clothing is not important in 'aqidah to this extent.
The Shaykh : May Allah forgive you. I mean, how many times have you not answered me? Why do I not see you? What Allah willed, you are calm and long-suffering. Why do you not answer?
Another questioner: Do we understand that your not asking or answering means that you are unable to answer it, or that you want to benefit more from the Shaykh, for example?
The questioner : The subject of clothing, in my opinion, there is no evidence for it.
The Shaykh : This opinion, where did you get it from? May Allah guide you. Your saying "in my opinion," where did you get it from? Do you believe that every Muslim, and there are millions of them, every Muslim has an opinion according to his own whim, or is he bound by the Shari'ah?
The questioner : Is clothing 'aqidah?
The Shaykh : What do you gain from this question? I mean, I am telling you, it is not 'aqidah. What have you reached? I am asking you now: your question about standing in prayer, and your question about clothing being 'aqidah.
The questioner : You opened a subject that I did not open, I mean, and I did not look for it.The Shaykh : Also, this is something I raised.
Another questioner: Your extreme precision in the subject made the brother Abu 'Abdullah think that all this excessive attention to the subject means that it leads him to the level of 'aqidah. Abu 'Abdullah, the Shaykh loves for matters to be clarified completely, but in order for this issue to be a creedal, decisive matter.
The questioner : We spoke about the subject to understand, I mean, and we understand from our honorable Shaykh.
The Shaykh : The point is that not everything is possible, but this is something that can happen. You spoke, as you see, and as you mean, right? And no one is asking why you are speaking like this. But just as you have the freedom to speak whatever you wish, we also have the freedom to ask you: what is the evidence for what you say? And I am sorry that you deflected the evidence in everything we said; you did not give us any evidence. I say, may Allah reward you, just as you spoke with complete freedom, because that is your right to speak. In return, we also speak and ask. But unfortunately, there was no question you were asked that you did not deflect the answer from. We asked you and you did not answer us; you deflected the answer from the question and then returned to say at the end that this is a matter of creed. We answered you and said to you: what is the creed? But what did you gain from the question and the answer? You gained nothing. You are where you started.
The questioner : My only intention is that the Prophet forbade these matters, and they ended in their time because they were necessary in that era.
The Shaykh : How do you know? What do you mean?
The questioner : In that era, there were issues that faced the Muslims, and they were present, and they were dealing with them, and the Prophet forbade them, and they ended in that era.
The Shaykh : How do you know, my brother, Abu 'Abdullah? Open your eyes. You are speaking very dangerous words now. And now we are speaking with some heat. When you say this legal ruling has ended, it means you have abrogated the Shari'ah. How easy is it for you to say: this ruling has ended? Who forbade a legal ruling that Allah revealed to the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and it became the first Sunnah, for two years, three, five, ten, a million? Who stopped it? Who abrogated it? Who has the authority to stop a legal ruling?
The questioner : I do not mean that someone stopped the ruling. I am saying these are issues that face the Muslims.
The Shaykh : Do you want us to repeat the words as if we did not understand you? This is a problem.
Another questioner: The Shaykh understands your words one hundred percent, my brother. But the Shaykh is commenting on the word "ended." Because the prohibition was for one person in the time of the Prophet, the prohibition lasts until the Day of Resurrection. Everyone who experiences the same thing has the prohibition applied to them until the Day of Judgment. As for it having ended, if it ended for some individuals, it exists for other individuals.
Another questioner: Abu 'Abdullah says "ended," meaning there is a legal ruling in it, meaning there is a legal ruling, that is all.
The Shaykh : Excuse me, I did not understand, by Allah.
Another questioner: He means by "ended" that there is a known legal ruling that is in effect.
The Shaykh : What is the known legal ruling? What is it?
Another questioner: That is his intention.
The Shaykh : Where is it? Is this legal ruling present or absent?
Another questioner: It is present, of course.
The Shaykh : Where is it? It is not present except with you. You have it, but we are asking you a question that has no relation to creed. And if you also like to research creed, we can research creed. What is the ruling on a man wearing gold? Is it permissible or forbidden?
The questioner : By Allah, the narrated hadiths state that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade wearing silk and gold for men.
The Shaykh : Go ahead, say it is forbidden or lawful. When you tell me it is lawful, I will ask you for the evidence, because you would be contradicting what I have. When you say it is forbidden, and for example, we agree. The first issue is that he forbade it.
The questioner : I know that making things lawful and forbidden is by the text of the Noble Qur'an.
The Shaykh : But by the text of the Noble Qur'an?
The questioner : Allah is the One who makes things lawful and forbids them.
The Shaykh : I am telling you that the One who forbids is other than Allah, so teach me that no one forbids except Allah. No one forbids except Allah. So what did you not answer me on?
The questioner : We ask in order to understand.
The Shaykh : We are asking, not you. May Allah reward you. We are asking you: what is your opinion? Is gold and silk forbidden for men or not? You return and say "no one forbids except Allah." We know that no one forbids except Allah, but we are asking you: is it forbidden or lawful? You do not answer. You have kept us up tonight, but if Allah wills, on the second night, may Allah honor us and we may receive the answers from you.