Addendum to the benefits of the hadith on what the person in ihram must not wear.

The Shaykh : The benefits from the benefits of this hadith are:
The prohibition of wearing the branis and similar garments, and the khuffayn (leather socks), except in this specific case. Among its benefits is that if wearing the khuffayn is permitted due to the absence of sandals, then it is obligatory to cut them below the ankles, as indicated by the hadith of Ibn 'Umar. However, the hadith of Ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him and his father) was in Madinah before the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) traveled to Makkah. The hadith of Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and his father) reports that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) addressed the people at 'Arafah and said: at 'Arafah, and did not mention cutting them. It is known that the hadith of Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him and his father) is later than the hadith of Ibn 'Umar. Is this correct?
The student: Yes.

The Shaykh : Why is it later? Because that one was before the travel and this one was after the travel. It is also known that the people present at 'Arafah were more numerous than those present in Madinah, and it is not possible for all of them to have heard him say "let them cut them" in that brief period. Therefore, the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with them) is abrogated by the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas because it is the later of the two. If someone asks, "Why do you not say that the general is restricted by the specific?" meaning restricting the hadith of Ibn 'Abbas by the hadith of Ibn 'Umar, as is the custom that the general is restricted by the specific, the answer is: that such restriction is not possible here because the hadith of Ibn 'Abbas is later, the attendees of this sermon were far more numerous, and people will transmit the hadith of Ibn 'Abbas more than those who transmitted the hadith of Ibn 'Umar, because they were all pilgrims. It is not possible that cutting is obligatory and then it is not mentioned despite the need for it in the sermon at 'Arafah. This is the stronger position: that if wearing the khuffayn is permitted due to the absence of sandals, cutting them is not obligatory. Among the benefits of this hadith is the prohibition of wearing perfumed clothes. If a person perfumes his ihram clothes before entering ihram, meaning the ihram clothes before he enters ihram, we say it is forbidden for you to wear them after entering ihram. Is that clear? Because you can wash them; wash them and then wear them. As for the statement of some scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) that it is disliked to perfume the ihram clothes but it is permissible to wear them afterwards, there is a problem with that. The hadith is explicit, and the hadith is in the context of clothes that are not worn. Among the benefits of this hadith is the permissibility of dyeing clothes with warseh (a yellow dye) when not in ihram, because the original ruling for clothes is permissibility. If something is prohibited in a specific state, the other states remain on the original ruling, which is permissibility. However, it is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) pure red that has no white, black, or any other color in it. If someone says, "Has it not been established in the two Sahihs that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) went out in Makkah wearing a red cloak?" The answer is that this means the patterned color in it is red, not that it is entirely red. People always say, for example, "he is wearing a red shemagh" or "he is wearing a blue shemagh," and the shemagh is not entirely red nor entirely black. Among the benefits of this hadith is also the prohibition of using saffron for the person in ihram, meaning it is not permissible for him to perfume himself with it, nor with the fragrant warseh. So, is it said that drinking coffee containing saffron is forbidden for the person in ihram, or do we say that if the scent has gone, it is permissible? The second answer: if the coffee containing saffron is cooked until the scent of the saffron has completely gone, then it is permissible to drink it because it has become non-fragrant, meaning it has turned into a non-perfumed drink. A benefit of the hadith is that it is recommended for the mufti (scholar who issues fatwas) to reduce his words as much as possible, because that is closer to understanding and closer to memorization. The indication is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned what the person in ihram does not wear, even though the question was about what he wears, so he shortened the statement in the fatwa. Do not lengthen it, especially if the one asking you is a layperson. If a layperson asked you, and you said, "By Allah, regarding a matter in which there is disagreement, your question is such and such, this matter has twenty opinions, Imam Ahmad said such and such, so-and-so said such and such, so-and-so said such and such, some of them distinguished based on the state of the questioner, some based on the time, and some based on the place, what does he do?" He goes away with nothing at all, and it confuses him more. Do not mention the different opinions to a layperson. Say: "This is lawful, this is forbidden," regarding what the Book and the Sunnah indicate as forbidden or lawful. Yes, if it is assumed that a contrary opinion to what you consider correct has become widespread in the town, then if you issue a fatwa with what you see as correct, say: "And some scholars said such and such, but the stronger position is what I mentioned to you." Why? So that the second opinion, which is widespread in the town, does not confuse him. Because many laypeople, when they ask a scholar and he issues a fatwa with what he has, if they then sit in a gathering and hear a fatwa contrary to this, they remain doubtful about the scholar's fatwa. So if you indicate that there is a disagreement but the stronger position is what he mentioned, the doubt is removed. And all of this is among the etiquettes of issuing fatwas. So, we take from this hadith that it is recommended for the mufti to make the fatwa easy for the questioner by reducing words as long as the objective is achieved.
Now, here are some issues. What do you say about wearing a ring?
The student: Permissible.

The Shaykh : It is permissible because it is established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to wear a ring, and it is not mentioned that he removed it when entering ihram. The jurists have explicitly stated the permissibility of wearing a ring. Is wearing a bracelet permissible or not permissible? Hmm, I don't know. The brothers say it is permissible. As for the woman, this question does not apply to us because this clothing is not forbidden for a woman. As for the man, it does not apply because it is not permissible for a man to wear a woman's bracelet. But here is something similar to a bracelet, which is the watch. Does the person in ihram wear it or not? When these watches that are worn on the hand first appeared, some scholars forbade them, saying: "This is not permissible for the person in ihram to wear." This is clear according to the one who says that it is forbidden for the person in ihram to wear sewn clothing and encircling clothing. Then the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) transmitted this issue and reviewed it, and some of them said that both are lawful because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "Do not wear such and such," and this is not among what the Messenger warned against, so the Sunnah indicates permissibility. And indeed, pilgrims came here one year and told us that Shaykh 'Abd al-'Aziz ibn Baz (may Allah have mercy on him) holds that wearing a watch is forbidden and wearing glasses is forbidden. I was surprised, as Shaykh 'Abd al-'Aziz (may Allah have mercy on him) is known not to be one who rigidly sticks to the madhhab (school of jurisprudence). So I wrote him a letter and said, "The pilgrims came to us and mentioned such and such about you." He wrote back to me a letter saying: "And the defect of news is in its narrators". And we do not say this, but rather we said, out of caution due to the disagreement, that it is better for a person not to wear it. Caution is that a person does not wear it. This has been the case for a long time. Does the layperson know what is caution and what is not? He does not know what was said in... it is correct... it does not become crooked in every way. But there is no harm in a scholar saying "caution" as Imam Ahmad and others issue fatwas in a matter that he does not see as permissible. Now, the eyeglass is clothing, and for this reason people say "he wears glasses." Are they forbidden for the person in ihram or not?
The student: No.

The Shaykh : What is an eyeglass?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Like this.
The student: ...

The Shaykh : ... In any case, regarding the eyeglass, he says it is not clothing. Now, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) says: "Do not wear such and such." Is it from this? No. So there is no harm with it, and we do not say that caution is to leave it off. Rather, we say that caution is what the Book and the Sunnah indicate.
Now, what do you say about earphones? For those who have not heard, may Allah protect us and you, there is an earphone that goes into the ear and raises the sounds for him. Is it permissible or not? Adam?
The student: It is permissible.

The Shaykh : Hmm, it is permissible! An earphone! Now, did this hadith indicate it or not?
The student: It indicated it.

The Shaykh : It indicated it. What is the indication?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Yes, what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned is what is forbidden, and everything else is lawful. This is part of the eloquence of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in that he mentioned the forbidden in order to tell his Ummah that everything other than that is lawful. And praise be to Allah. So it is not befitting for a person to make things difficult for the servants of Allah in what Allah has made easy for them. And if you err in being lenient, it is less severe than if you err in being strict, is it not so, O people? Because leniency is in keeping with the spirit of the Islamic religion. For this reason, 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) said, regarding discretionary punishment: “It is more beloved to me to err in forgiveness than to err in punishment”. So as long as the matter is broad, make it easy for the people as much as you can, so that people take the religion with open hearts and peaceful minds. But to make things difficult for them in something that Allah and His Messenger did not make difficult, and we know that Allah did not make things difficult for the servants Strive for leniency. But to make things difficult—well, we heard one person issuing fatwas to people in Mina; whenever someone came to him, he would say, “I was walking and my foot brushed a small, small branch,” and he would say, “You owe a blood sacrifice.” Every time someone came to him, he would say, “You owe a blood sacrifice.” By Allah, if we were to adopt this view, all the valleys of Mina would be left with blood flowing. This is a mistake. Even though people nowadays issue fatwas, for example, regarding perfume and wearing a shirt and the like, saying that a blood sacrifice is due, a blood sacrifice is due, a blood sacrifice is due. This is a mistake. What is due from him, if we say that fidyah is obligatory? What is due from him? A fidyah for harm, where he is given the choice between fasting for three days or feeding six poor people, half a sa' for each poor person, or slaughtering a sheep.