The benefits of the hadith regarding what the person in ihram does not wear, with explanation.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : This hadith has several benefits. One is that Prophetic hadiths are divided into two categories: those with a cause and those without a cause. One of the causes is a question. A benefit of this is that Allah the Exalted appoints for His Shari'ah those who ask about matters the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not speak about. Another benefit is that it indicates the perfection of the Shari'ah, for there is nothing the community needs but its explanation has occurred, either initially or due to a cause. It also points to the fact that what the person in ihram wears is more than what he does not wear. The reason is that the man asked about what is worn, but he was answered with what is not worn. It also indicates that it is incumbent upon us, when we convey to people with our tongues or pens, not to go beyond the wording of the Sunnah, the Prophetic wording. These are five known and limited points. Therefore, when some of the Tabi'un spoke on this, the first to do so was Ibrahim al-Nakha'i (may Allah have mercy on him), who said: "The sewn garment is forbidden for the person in ihram". This wording contains confusion, restriction from one side, and confusion.
First: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not mention the sewn garment at all. So why do we legislate and say: Do not wear the sewn garment?
Second: This expression implies that you do not wear the izar if it has sewing. Is this correct or not correct?
The students: Not correct.
The Shaykh : I ask you now: Is it permissible to wear the izar if it is sewn? It is permissible. But if we take the apparent meaning of the expression, it is not permissible. Also, it causes misunderstanding regarding the sewn sandals, and there is much questioning about this. They say: Is it permissible for the person in ihram to wear sewn sandals? Why is it not permissible? He says: Because it is sewn. Some people added: "Do not wear the sewn garment or the encircling garment". No sewn garment and no encircling garment. What is the encircling garment? The ring and its like. Do not wear it. So the important point is that I call you to follow the wording of the text, because you are accountable for this.[Al-Qasas 28:65] And we do not restrict the servants of Allah. We say: Wear the izar even if it has a thousand patches, and likewise the rida. Now, let us proceed with the hadith. The shirt is not worn in any case, even if it is assumed that it has no thread, meaning if it is woven without sewing. Is it worn or not? It is not worn. If we took the word "sewn garment," we would say this is worn because it has no sewing. But no, the shirt in all its types is not worn. The coat is similar to it because it is a shirt, but it is short. The vest is also a short shirt, so do not wear these things.
One of the benefits of this hadith is: If a person wraps a garment around his chest without wearing it in a permissible manner, is it permissible or not? It is permissible. Why? Because it says "do not wear," and this is not wearing; he is wrapping himself in it. Based on this, if a person is on an airplane and his izar and rida are in the suitcase with the luggage, and he knows he will pass the miqat, what does he do? His rida and izar are inside the plane. We say: Take off the garment and wrap yourself in it. The trousers remain because you have not found an izar. Is that clear? If he says: I fear that if people see this, they will stand and look at me. The answer is: Let it be so. If you do this, you have initiated for your Muslim brothers what is hidden from them. Often the question arises that his izar and rida are inside the plane, and he delayed entering ihram until he reached Jeddah because he did not know. It is said: Praise be to Allah, the matter is easy. Take off the shirt and wrap yourself in it, and keep the trousers. What about the ghutra? The ghutra is not necessary. Take it off and let your head remain uncovered. Is that clear? If someone says: Why do you not say he must take off the trousers and wrap himself in an izar with the ghutra? The answer is: First, some ghatras... are light, meaning they do not cover the awrah. Second, it is not wide enough to be wrapped two or three times. If that is the case, there is a fear that his awrah will be exposed, because the ghutra is known not to fit tightly, meaning it does not cover much. We do not know if Abdullah al-Sharif... it does not fit him. Yes. In any case, we say: This involves difficulty, so praise be to Allah, the matter is facilitated. And if he wears trousers instead of the izar, does he owe a fidyah? The answer is no: meaning he does not owe a fidyah, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not mention that he owes a fidyah. This is from the dispensation, and praise be to Allah.
Now, Turbans are not worn, nor is anything that is in the meaning of them, such as the taqiyah, the ghutra, or the cap. They are not worn. In fact, the head has a characteristic different from the rest of the body, which is that it is not covered by anything. What is the evidence for this? The story of the man whose camel fell on him at 'Arafah, so the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: meaning do not cover it. So the head has two hadiths:
The first hadith: That a person does not wear what is customary to wear on the head, which is the turban. This is what is in the hadith: the turban and its like.
The second: That it is not covered by anything, even if it is not customary to wear it. If someone asks: What do you say if a person carries his luggage on his head? By luggage, we mean belongings. Is it permissible or not? Some said: It is not permissible. Some said: It is permissible. Some distinguished and said: If the intention is to cover, it is not permissible, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): An example of this is a person with a small bag who carries it in his hand without difficulty and places it on his head. Does he need to place it on his head? He does not need to. So the intention is to cover the head, and this is not permissible. Therefore, carrying belongings on the head does not harm, because it is not usually intended for covering, and it has become customary. Now, covering the head with something not touching it: We say this is of two types:
The first type: What is not connected to the person in ihram but is fixed to the ground. This is permissible by consensus, such as a tent, a tree, placing a cloak on it, and its like. No one disagrees on this, because a tent was set up for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) at Banu Namar while he was going to 'Arafah in a state of ihram, and he remained in it.
The second: That it is connected to the person in ihram, but note that it is separate from the head. It is connected to the person in ihram but separate from his head, such as an umbrella, a car, or a man, for example, with a stick in both hands and a rida on top of it, which he carries on his head from the sun, for example. The scholars have two opinions on this:
The first opinion: That it is not permissible. Based on this, it is not permissible for men in ihram to ride in all cars, except if they uncover the roof. This is the well-known view of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence (may Allah have mercy on them), but it is a weak opinion. The correct one is that there is no harm in it. Likewise, the umbrella: the well-known view of the Hanbali school is that it is not permissible because it is connected to the person in ihram, but the correct view is the opposite, and that it is permissible. It is established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was shaded on his way from Muzdalifah to Mina on the morning of the festival. And what does this indicate? It indicates permissibility. Then, is this covering the head? Is shading the head covering? It is not covering, because the head is distinct from what is covered. So the correct view is the permissibility of this. So how many categories are there? Three:
Touching, and there is no doubt in its prohibition.
And not touching, but connected to the person in ihram, so it is a point of disagreement.
And not touching, but separate from the person in ihram, such as a tent, a tree, and its like, so there is no harm in it by consensus.
The questioner : ... especially in Saudi Arabia, there is no... the plane does not know...
The Shaykh : Do you mean you started the ihram, meaning?
The questioner : Yes, the contract of ihram.
The Shaykh : No, this is the best thing: that you wear the izar in your house after you take a ghusl, then you wear the usual clothes over it. And when you board the plane, according to custom, and the usual flight is that in thirty-five or forty minutes you will have passed the miqat of Dhul Hulayfa. So if, for example, half an hour has passed, take off the clothes and wear the rida. Provided that the flight attendants (may Allah reward them with good) notify you before twenty minutes or ten minutes. If you fear all of this, then praise be to Allah, enter ihram when you take off, and there is no harm.
The questioner : After takeoff, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : After takeoff, yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
First: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not mention the sewn garment at all. So why do we legislate and say: Do not wear the sewn garment?
Second: This expression implies that you do not wear the izar if it has sewing. Is this correct or not correct?
The students: Not correct.
The Shaykh : I ask you now: Is it permissible to wear the izar if it is sewn? It is permissible. But if we take the apparent meaning of the expression, it is not permissible. Also, it causes misunderstanding regarding the sewn sandals, and there is much questioning about this. They say: Is it permissible for the person in ihram to wear sewn sandals? Why is it not permissible? He says: Because it is sewn. Some people added: "Do not wear the sewn garment or the encircling garment". No sewn garment and no encircling garment. What is the encircling garment? The ring and its like. Do not wear it. So the important point is that I call you to follow the wording of the text, because you are accountable for this.
And [mention] the Day He will call them and say, "What did you answer the messengers?"
ويوم يناديهم فيقول ماذا أجبتم المرسلينDo not wear the shirt.
لا يلبس القميصOne of the benefits of this hadith is: If a person wraps a garment around his chest without wearing it in a permissible manner, is it permissible or not? It is permissible. Why? Because it says "do not wear," and this is not wearing; he is wrapping himself in it. Based on this, if a person is on an airplane and his izar and rida are in the suitcase with the luggage, and he knows he will pass the miqat, what does he do? His rida and izar are inside the plane. We say: Take off the garment and wrap yourself in it. The trousers remain because you have not found an izar. Is that clear? If he says: I fear that if people see this, they will stand and look at me. The answer is: Let it be so. If you do this, you have initiated for your Muslim brothers what is hidden from them. Often the question arises that his izar and rida are inside the plane, and he delayed entering ihram until he reached Jeddah because he did not know. It is said: Praise be to Allah, the matter is easy. Take off the shirt and wrap yourself in it, and keep the trousers. What about the ghutra? The ghutra is not necessary. Take it off and let your head remain uncovered. Is that clear? If someone says: Why do you not say he must take off the trousers and wrap himself in an izar with the ghutra? The answer is: First, some ghatras... are light, meaning they do not cover the awrah. Second, it is not wide enough to be wrapped two or three times. If that is the case, there is a fear that his awrah will be exposed, because the ghutra is known not to fit tightly, meaning it does not cover much. We do not know if Abdullah al-Sharif... it does not fit him. Yes. In any case, we say: This involves difficulty, so praise be to Allah, the matter is facilitated. And if he wears trousers instead of the izar, does he owe a fidyah? The answer is no: meaning he does not owe a fidyah, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not mention that he owes a fidyah. This is from the dispensation, and praise be to Allah.
Now,
and he does not wear turbans
ولا يلبس العمائمDo not cover his head
لا تخمروا رأسهThe first hadith: That a person does not wear what is customary to wear on the head, which is the turban. This is what is in the hadith: the turban and its like.
The second: That it is not covered by anything, even if it is not customary to wear it. If someone asks: What do you say if a person carries his luggage on his head? By luggage, we mean belongings. Is it permissible or not? Some said: It is not permissible. Some said: It is permissible. Some distinguished and said: If the intention is to cover, it is not permissible, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him):
Actions are only by intentions
إنما الأعمال بالنياتThe first type: What is not connected to the person in ihram but is fixed to the ground. This is permissible by consensus, such as a tent, a tree, placing a cloak on it, and its like. No one disagrees on this, because a tent was set up for the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) at Banu Namar while he was going to 'Arafah in a state of ihram, and he remained in it.
The second: That it is connected to the person in ihram, but note that it is separate from the head. It is connected to the person in ihram but separate from his head, such as an umbrella, a car, or a man, for example, with a stick in both hands and a rida on top of it, which he carries on his head from the sun, for example. The scholars have two opinions on this:
The first opinion: That it is not permissible. Based on this, it is not permissible for men in ihram to ride in all cars, except if they uncover the roof. This is the well-known view of the Hanbali school of jurisprudence (may Allah have mercy on them), but it is a weak opinion. The correct one is that there is no harm in it. Likewise, the umbrella: the well-known view of the Hanbali school is that it is not permissible because it is connected to the person in ihram, but the correct view is the opposite, and that it is permissible. It is established that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was shaded on his way from Muzdalifah to Mina on the morning of the festival. And what does this indicate? It indicates permissibility. Then, is this covering the head? Is shading the head covering? It is not covering, because the head is distinct from what is covered. So the correct view is the permissibility of this. So how many categories are there? Three:
Touching, and there is no doubt in its prohibition.
And not touching, but connected to the person in ihram, so it is a point of disagreement.
And not touching, but separate from the person in ihram, such as a tent, a tree, and its like, so there is no harm in it by consensus.
The questioner : ... especially in Saudi Arabia, there is no... the plane does not know...
The Shaykh : Do you mean you started the ihram, meaning?
The questioner : Yes, the contract of ihram.
The Shaykh : No, this is the best thing: that you wear the izar in your house after you take a ghusl, then you wear the usual clothes over it. And when you board the plane, according to custom, and the usual flight is that in thirty-five or forty minutes you will have passed the miqat of Dhul Hulayfa. So if, for example, half an hour has passed, take off the clothes and wear the rida. Provided that the flight attendants (may Allah reward them with good) notify you before twenty minutes or ten minutes. If you fear all of this, then praise be to Allah, enter ihram when you take off, and there is no harm.
The questioner : After takeoff, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : After takeoff, yes.
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.