Continuation of the discussion regarding the position of the scholars of Saudi Arabia on the hadith of al-Khath'amiah in the issue of the woman's face.

The Shaykh : The hadith of al-Khath'amiah, perhaps you all remember it?
Al-Halabi : Our Shaykh, I mentioned that our brothers, or our scholars, in Saudi Arabia, have something you want to complete the research on...

The Shaykh : They stand before the hadith of al-Khath'amiah, adopting methods of figurative interpretation and attributing to the hadith what it cannot bear, so that it aligns with their strict school of thought regarding the Muslim woman. The hadith of al-Khath'amiah is authentic; it took place during Hajj, and she stopped on the path of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) asking him. She said: "My father is an old man who cannot stay on his mount, and the obligatory Hajj has overtaken him. Should I perform Hajj on his behalf?" He said: Behind him (peace and blessings be upon him) was al-Fadl ibn al-Abbas, who was handsome, and she was beautiful, so he would look at her and she would look at him. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) turned al-Fadl's face toward the other side, the other direction. It was reported in the external part of the authentic collection that he said: or as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said. This hadith is very explicit that the woman's face is not an 'awrah (part of the body that must be covered); otherwise, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) would not have approved of this woman standing there while the signs of fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) regarding exposure were emerging. What do they answer? They say she was in a state of ihram (the consecrated state of pilgrimage). This is what I want to say regarding these noble scholars: she was in a state of ihram, fine, but what if she was in a state of ihram! The one who reads their words, who has no knowledge, and these are the general readers, who have no fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), understands that it is not permissible for a woman in a state of ihram to cover her face in any form of covering, and that is not the case. They themselves, when they want to provide evidence that the face is an 'awrah, bring a hadith that does not indicate what they claim, but rather indicates that it is permissible for a woman to cover her face, but they quickly forget this hadith when they answer regarding the hadith of al-Khath'amiah, meaning the hadith of Aisha, who said: If letting the hair fall (covering the face loosely) is permissible even if one is in a state of ihram, but wearing the niqab (the face veil) is what is not permissible. When they research the topic of the woman's face being an 'awrah, they bring this hadith, even though it is an action, and we do not deny it, an action by Aisha and her sisters; we do not deny it. But why do they not recall in the hadith of al-Khath'amiah that she was in a state of ihram, and that it is not permissible for the Messenger to tell her to cover her face because she is in a state of ihram? This is a very strange fallacy. It should be said that it is permissible for her to let her hair fall over her face, as the Lady Aisha did, but the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), for a clear wisdom, did not order her to cover it, to make it clear that it is not obligatory for her, and to fulfill His saying in the Noble Qur'an: So here, when the fitnah began to appear, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not order covering the face, but he ordered the man who was his companion to turn his face to the other side. In conclusion, seizing upon the claim of fitnah and making it a general law, imposing it on all women, first the beautiful and the ugly, and second the beautiful ones who are not exposed to fitnah, especially if she is modest and wearing her full legal hijab (the covering prescribed for women), such that this hijab itself, by its very nature, says, "I am not one of them, open your eyes."
Al-Halabi : Fine, our Shaykh, is she really in a state of ihram?

The Shaykh : Who? Ah, we have researched this issue, and it appears to us that it was after the stoning. And as we stated in the treatise on the rituals of Hajj and 'Umrah (the lesser pilgrimage), if the pilgrim or the one performing 'Umrah stones the large pillar, he exits the lesser state of ihram. So if it was after stoning the pillars, then she had already exited the state of ihram. But without a doubt, we always observe that it is not the style of convincing others to impose our opinions on others. So we say this is our opinion, that it was after the stoning, and that means she had exited the state of ihram, so it is permissible for her to wear the niqab, let alone letting her hair fall. But they may not be convinced by that, and indeed many of them insisted and said no, she was in a state of ihram. Fine, she was in a state of ihram, but is it forbidden for her to let her hair fall? As the women in a state of ihram, Aisha and her sisters, did. The answer is no. So why did she not let her hair fall? Why did the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) not order her to? I put these people before a reality, and the truth is that their position is very awkward. I say to one of them: suppose you were in such a situation, you saw a woman in Hajj, and a young, handsome, beautiful man, and she was uncovered in her face, and you saw him looking at her, would you not order her to let her hair fall over her face? If he says no, the case is closed, it is proven that covering is not obligatory for her. And if he says yes, we say you contradicted the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). Are you more scrupulous than him and more mindful of Allah than him? The truth is, when a person studies this issue, he finds that there is an undesirable strictness, with no justification for it. Because if we were like some of the Lebanese, whom we refuted where they explicitly stated that covering the woman's face is a religious innovation in Islam, I wrote a special chapter in refuting these people, and I proved that covering the woman's face is the best. So if there is a scope for drawing near to Allah by the woman covering her face, we say this is the ruling of Allah: exposure is permissible, and covering is better. So whoever wishes, let him do this, and whoever wishes, let him do this, and there is no blame, and welcome.

The questioner : My teacher, regarding the science of hadith for the student, how do you advise him and how does he begin, and with what does he begin? May Allah reward you with good, and even if it is, but it is a wealth, if Allah wills?

The Shaykh : Student, what?

The questioner : In the science of hadith, how does he begin? And with what does he begin?

The Shaykh : Do you mean the science of hadith terminology?

The questioner : In terminology, if we started with terminology, then with the jurisprudence of hadith?

The Shaykh: Yes.

Another questioner: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace and the mercy of Allah.

Another questioner : How are you, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah, I am well. Where are you speaking from?

Another questioner : I am from Algeria...

The Shaykh : Raise your voice, speaking with you is a struggle.

Another questioner : I am a student from Algeria.

The Shaykh : Yes, raise your voice.

Another questioner : We have a printing press in Algeria, we ask your permission to print the book "The Description of the Prayer of the Prophet." Are there any conditions or anything of this sort?

The Shaykh : Contact the Islamic Office, because this book came out of my possession.

Another questioner : Do you not have any conditions?

The Shaykh : Did you hear me?

Another questioner : Yes, I heard you.

The Shaykh : What did you hear from me?

Another questioner : I heard that it is necessary to contact the Islamic Library.

The Shaykh : Yes, so you have no conversation with me today; the book has left my ownership.

Another questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : And may He reward you.

Another questioner : Fine, I have a small question only.

The Shaykh : Please, make it louder.