A woman covered her face during Hajj, and some students of knowledge issued a ruling for her to uncover her face along with paying a fidyah. What is your opinion?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The questioner says: I bear witness to Allah that I love you for the sake of Allah, and my question is that a woman was covering her face during Hajj because of the large number of men, and some students of knowledge saw her and said: she should uncover her face and offer a sacrifice. What is your esteemed opinion on this?
The Shaykh : I say to this brother: May Allah love you for the sake in which you loved us, and I ask Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, to make us all among His loved ones, and to place in our hearts love and affection for Allah, for His Messenger, and for the believers.
As for what was mentioned about a woman in ihram who covered her face, some people said to her: cover your face?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Uncover your face and you owe a fidyah. I say: if a woman is in ihram, the sunnah (recommended practice) is for her to uncover her face, except if there are non-mahram men around her, in which case it is obligatory for her to cover her face, based on the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), who said:. This is what the texts from the Book and the Sunnah indicate, and the correct view is that it is obligatory for a woman to cover her face, whether she is in ihram or not. And if she covered her face because of the proximity of men, she owes no fidyah, because she did what she was commanded to do.
As for the ruling of the one who issued this fatwa, it is an error in two respects. The first respect: his statement that she should uncover her face, for it is not permissible for a woman to uncover her face when there are non-mahram men around her.
The second respect: his statement that she owes a fidyah.
So, is this man who issued the ruling considered ignorant, specifically compound ignorance, or simple ignorance? Answer, everyone!
The student: Compound ignorance.
The Shaykh : Compound ignorance, because it is composed of his ignorance of the ruling and his ignorance of himself, since he thinks he is a scholar while he is ignorant. So he is ignorant with compound ignorance, and compound ignorance is more severe than simple ignorance. Why? Because the one with compound ignorance thinks he is a scholar, so he remains in his ignorance, while the one with simple ignorance knows he is ignorant, so he seeks knowledge.
And there is nothing more harmful to the Muslims than those who issue rulings to people without knowledge, even though speaking about Allah without knowledge is among the major sins. Allah the Exalted said:[Al-A'raf 7:33] So speaking about Allah without knowledge regarding His names, attributes, and rulings is all forbidden and not permissible.
We say of this man that he is ignorant with compound ignorance, and the one with simple ignorance is better than him.
It is mentioned that a man named Tuma was riding a donkey, and it was said in the voice of the donkey:
"The donkey of the wise man Tuma said: If the age were just, I would be the rider
Because I am simply ignorant, and my companion is compoundly ignorant"
This statement is in the voice of the donkey. The donkey says: I am better than my rider. Why? Because the donkey is ignorant, but its ignorance is simple, while its companion is ignorant and his ignorance is compound.
And after that, I warn my brothers not to issue rulings without knowledge. But someone might say: If a layperson hears a scholar say this, is it permissible for him to issue a ruling based on that scholar's statement? We say: Yes, but he must attribute the statement to the scholar, not to himself. For example, he says: I heard so-and-so say such-and-such. This is not in the category of issuing a fatwa, but in the category of transmission, of transmitting knowledge and attributing knowledge to its speaker. As for presenting oneself for issuing fatwas while being ignorant, this is forbidden and not permissible.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : In any case, if she has already paid the fidyah, she owes nothing, because she thought that this man was a scholar. But the sin is on the one who issued the ruling for her.
The Shaykh : I say to this brother: May Allah love you for the sake in which you loved us, and I ask Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, to make us all among His loved ones, and to place in our hearts love and affection for Allah, for His Messenger, and for the believers.
As for what was mentioned about a woman in ihram who covered her face, some people said to her: cover your face?
The student: ...
The Shaykh : Uncover your face and you owe a fidyah. I say: if a woman is in ihram, the sunnah (recommended practice) is for her to uncover her face, except if there are non-mahram men around her, in which case it is obligatory for her to cover her face, based on the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), who said:
We used to uncover our faces, and when men were alongside us, we would cover our faces.
كنا نكشف وجوهنا فإذا حاذانا الرجال غطّينا وجوهناAs for the ruling of the one who issued this fatwa, it is an error in two respects. The first respect: his statement that she should uncover her face, for it is not permissible for a woman to uncover her face when there are non-mahram men around her.
The second respect: his statement that she owes a fidyah.
So, is this man who issued the ruling considered ignorant, specifically compound ignorance, or simple ignorance? Answer, everyone!
The student: Compound ignorance.
The Shaykh : Compound ignorance, because it is composed of his ignorance of the ruling and his ignorance of himself, since he thinks he is a scholar while he is ignorant. So he is ignorant with compound ignorance, and compound ignorance is more severe than simple ignorance. Why? Because the one with compound ignorance thinks he is a scholar, so he remains in his ignorance, while the one with simple ignorance knows he is ignorant, so he seeks knowledge.
And there is nothing more harmful to the Muslims than those who issue rulings to people without knowledge, even though speaking about Allah without knowledge is among the major sins. Allah the Exalted said:
Say, "My Lord has only forbidden immoralities - what is apparent of them and what is concealed - and sin, and oppression without right, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down authority, and that you say about Allah that which you do not know."
قل إنما حرم ربي الفواحش ما ظهر منها وما بطن والإثم والبغي بغير الحق وأن تشركوا بالله ما لم ينزل به سلطانا وأن تقولوا على ما لا تعلمونWe say of this man that he is ignorant with compound ignorance, and the one with simple ignorance is better than him.
It is mentioned that a man named Tuma was riding a donkey, and it was said in the voice of the donkey:
"The donkey of the wise man Tuma said: If the age were just, I would be the rider
Because I am simply ignorant, and my companion is compoundly ignorant"
This statement is in the voice of the donkey. The donkey says: I am better than my rider. Why? Because the donkey is ignorant, but its ignorance is simple, while its companion is ignorant and his ignorance is compound.
And after that, I warn my brothers not to issue rulings without knowledge. But someone might say: If a layperson hears a scholar say this, is it permissible for him to issue a ruling based on that scholar's statement? We say: Yes, but he must attribute the statement to the scholar, not to himself. For example, he says: I heard so-and-so say such-and-such. This is not in the category of issuing a fatwa, but in the category of transmission, of transmitting knowledge and attributing knowledge to its speaker. As for presenting oneself for issuing fatwas while being ignorant, this is forbidden and not permissible.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : In any case, if she has already paid the fidyah, she owes nothing, because she thought that this man was a scholar. But the sin is on the one who issued the ruling for her.