Does isbal apply to trousers? And what are the harms of the pantalon?

The questioner : ... Is the sarwal the same as the pantalon?

The Shaykh : Everything—the pantalon, the shirt, the abaya, and anything a man wears—is isbal.

The questioner : On the same topic, in Sahih al-Jami' al-Saghir, I found more than one narration: "Indeed, isbal is with the thawb, the qamis, and the 'imamah," whereasThe Shaykh : Ibn Taymiyyah, in the Fatawa, cites a narration regarding the sarwal, but everything that was mentioned on this topic in Sahih al-Jami' did not mention the sarwal.

The Shaykh : It did not mention what? The sarwal, excuse me. We now have two issues regarding your question: one is hadith-related and the other is fiqh-related. The hadith-related one is that Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned the sarwal, and did not mention the 'imamah?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : He added it.

The questioner : He did not mention it.

The Shaykh : Okay, what do we do with it? If the hadith came in this form in the books of Sunnah.

The questioner : I mean, I have not seen the narration of the sarwal in Sahih al-Jami' al-Saghir. Is it reported?

The Shaykh : I do not know, but suppose it was found and suppose it was authentic, what would be established based on it?

The questioner : That isbal occurs in the sarwal.

The Shaykh : And did I say it does not occur? I did not say it does not occur, did I?

The questioner : I said it may occur, and I want to elaborate based on what it occurs. You said it occurs, and it is restricted in the authentic hadith to the thawb, the qamis, and the 'imamah, and it was restricted to them, so we stop at this restriction, and the sarwal was known to be worn in the time of the Messenger of Allah.

The Shaykh : Where is the restriction, my brother?

The questioner : "Indeed" (innama).

The Shaykh : From the Arabic perspective, where is the restriction?

The questioner : In my limited understanding...

The Shaykh : No problem, let us cooperate.

The questioner : "Indeed" (innama), does it not imply restriction?

The Shaykh : "Indeed" (innama) here restricts regarding the three items, but we do not take the 'imamah, right? Our discussion now is not about the 'imamah, but rather

The questioner : What exceeds the ankles.

The Shaykh : What exceeds the ankles, that was not our discussion. Okay, so of the three types, which one relates to our topic? Is it not the one that came with the word "thawb"?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, if the narration of Ibn Taymiyyah regarding the sarwal is authentic, is the sarwal a thawb or not a thawb?

The questioner : You need to know the linguistic concept of "thawb," and I do not know.

The Shaykh : Okay, let us reverse the question, meaning, is the sarwal not a thawb?

The questioner : It is a thawb in its general meaning.

The Shaykh : What I want to say, may Allah reward you, is that there is no difference between the narration I saw in al-Jami' al-Saghir on one hand, and the narration I read in the words of Ibn Taymiyyah on the other. Al-Jami' al-Saghir uses the word "thawb" and the narration of Ibn Taymiyyah uses the word "sarwal." There is no difference between them from the Arabic perspective, meaning here there is a general and a specific, and the general term includes the specific term, and there is no contradiction, so even specifying the general with the specific, there is no contradiction. This is from one aspect. From another aspect, it is not permissible for us, even if the word "thawb" was not in the hadith I read in al-Jami' al-Saghir and only "sarwal" was there, to stop at this. We look at "whoever drags his izar out of arrogance." The izar, of course, I think you have no hesitation that it is a thawb, okay? And you have no hesitation that the sarwal is not an izar and the izar is not a sarwal, okay? So we have something other than the word "sarwal" which Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned. So the conclusion is that stopping at the word of Ibn Taymiyyah does not define the topic we were addressing. And I am actually, until now, if I understood you correctly, and I hope I am wrong, I understood that you want to restrict the topic to the sarwal. If this is wrong, then I do not know why you mentioned the narration of Ibn Taymiyyah?

The questioner : I want to take from you a dispensation to exclude the pantalon from this.

The Shaykh : Okay, but the pantalon is a sarwal.

The questioner : If the narration of Ibn Taymiyyah is not authentic and we remain with the narration of al-Tabarani, and I want, if you permit me, is it correct for me to say that the prohibition of isbal, that this ruling is attributed to arrogance? Is it correct?

The Shaykh : No, this statement is not correct. The ruling attributed to arrogance is specific to the one to whom that threat in the authentic hadith agreed upon by al-Bukhari and Muslim applies. As for , it is not attributed to the condition of arrogance, and this is what we said earlier. Yes.
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, there is something here, meaning the words you favored regarding the issue of the thawb, and the inclusion of the sarwal in the thawb, meaning it seems to me now, and I do not assert and confirm that the word is not the word "thawb" in the hadith, but the word "qamis," the qamis, the izar, and the 'imamah. If that is the case, does it change the course of the discussion you favored?

The Shaykh : No, not that which is without it, because we then leave the hadith of the compiler, as it is restricted to the shirt, and you, may Allah reward you, have memorized it well. The hadith contains the word "shirt," so we leave it, because its indication is like the indication of the word "trousers," meaning it is specific to a type of garment, namely the shirt. But the same answer we directed to the brother applies here, looking at the narration of Ibn Taymiyyah following the trousers. In our view, this is a beginning, meaning here, Professor, this is a refutation of al-Ghazali and his like among the contemporaries, who consider holding onto this Sunnah to be a distortion of the call. They rebuke our Kuwaiti brothers and others who go to America with their Islamic attire, asking how these people call to Islam with attire that repels the hearts of the disbelievers? Glory be to my Lord! How does a person consider himself a caller to Allah, and wants the caller to conform to the disbelievers with their customs and traditions, and does not try to develop these disbelievers to the traditions of the Muslims? He then complains about this and says it is repulsive, and so on, and limits the issue to arrogance, forgetting—and this is the point of my following words—forgetting his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) as a methodology for the Muslim's life in his garment: . He ignores this and gives it no weight, as is his habit with many other authentic hadiths, and we ask Allah to guide us and him. So with this, we answer regarding the word "shirt." This is a general text that includes the shirt and includes the abaya, which is usually dragged, as is the case with women who drag their garments. We have nothing that helps us, and unfortunately, we wanted to fulfill your desire, which is to exclude the trousers that many of the youth have been afflicted with, even some of the callers among them. Today we were in a place, and I attended the 'Asr prayer, and we prayed four rak'ahs behind an imam, and there were three of us. Between me and him was a man wearing trousers, and the other man was wearing this shirt, the jilbab or the dishdasha as they call it here. So both were praying, and both were from the people of the Sunnah, but this one next to me, first, was in a state of ritual impurity, and second, he was wearing trousers and was leaning on them. So I said to the one who was far from me, I said to him, how are you, so-and-so? When you stand up, how do you stand up? Because I saw him relying on one hand, so when he showed me, he showed me the Sunnah with both hands. I said to him, but I saw you relying on one hand, so he admitted to it. He said, sometimes I have pain in my hair. I said, we ask Allah to keep us and you safe, but I did not speak to my brother who is next to me, and I told him, why don't you sit in the resting position, and why don't you sit cross-legged, because the trousers he is wearing prevent him from doing the Sunnah. He said, I can, but I don't know anything. I said to him, if you can, why don't you do it? If you can, but really, I said to him, let us see. And then he leaned on his companion. So I said to him, like this, this is one of the harms of the trousers today, Professor. If there were not, or let us correct the phrase, I say if we could, with a Shari'ah proof, exclude the trousers from these general texts, the trousers would not be Islamic trousers, because they have many prohibitions. Once the prayer was established, it was said to some of them to lead us. I said, no, this one does not lead us, because this one will expose our 'awrah now, because he is wearing tight trousers. So we must emphasize that the trousers, first, by the generality of the evidence, it is not permissible to lengthen them because the fashion is like this. You know, in Syria, for more than ten years, a type of trousers came out called "charleston," its width from the bottom is like this, big, and from the knees it is tight, and it drags on the ground, oh, glory be to Allah! What is this mentality?! And it drags on the ground, and its width is big. The point is, all of this is imitating the disbelievers. The disbelievers do not have prayer, nor do they have fasting, nor do they have anything.
Telephone call

The Shaykh : Yes, and upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings and His forgiveness.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : I thank Allah to you. How are you? May Allah preserve you, my brother. May Allah love you for the love you have for Him.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : ... If there is an exchange of expenses, it is permissible, otherwise it is not ... Yes, indeed, it is so. Advise him to leave the bank and leave eating riba (usury or interest), and so on. As for him providing him with food from the riba (usury or interest) while he is eating half and remaining silent, this is not permissible, as it is cooperation in evil. Yes, indeed.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : And it is so ... In some hadiths, what is between the navel and the knee is 'awrah (the part of the body that must be covered). Yes, indeed, if my memory does not fail me, it is in al-Targhib wa al-Tarhib in the book of prayer. And you, my brother, welcome, peace be upon you and him ... And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah and His blessings.