Benefits of the Hadith: (… He said to him: “O my son, it has reached me that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was presented with some cloaks and he is distributing them, so let us go to him.”
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : His statement: “So I said, shall I call the Messenger of Allah for you?” It is not hidden from us all that the hamzah is omitted here, and its original form is “Shall I call for you?” Its parallel in the Book of Allah is: [Al-Anbya 21:21] The intended meaning is “Or do they raise them?” Therefore, it is good to pause at the word, meaning at his statement: [Al-Anbya 21:21] Because if you connect it, the listener would understand that the clause is a description of what came before, may Allah have mercy on you, but it is a new sentence for the purpose of denial.
This is what the author (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted; he derived this hadith based on one of two matters. The first matter is that this was before the prohibition. There is no doubt that this possibility is weak, and it is weakened by the fact that this statement or this possibility implies that the hadith was abrogated, and a condition of abrogation is knowing that the abrogating text came later.
The second possibility is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) intended by giving it to him that he should not wear it, but rather give it to someone for whom wearing it is permissible, such as women, or sell it and benefit from its price, for those for whom wearing it is permissible. This possibility is prevented by the fact that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) came out wearing this cloak. When this prevented this possibility, Ibn Hajar responded that it is possible that the meaning of his statement “he was wearing a cloak” is that he had a cloak in his hand, so the whole was mentioned while the part was intended. But there is no doubt that this is contrary to the apparent meaning of the wording, and in that case, it is rejected.
A third possibility remains, which the author mentioned, and it is the closest. It is that this silk brocade cloak is not entirely silk, but most of it is not silk, because silk brocade, as mentioned earlier, refers to garments woven with silk containing patterns like the orange tree, so the entire garment is not silk, is it not so?
What remains for us is “buttoned with gold.” How can it be buttoned with gold? The Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) holds that a small amount of gold is permissible, just as a small amount of silk is permissible. He said that buttons of gold are not a problem, because they are a small, subordinate part. If it is a small, subordinate part, there is no harm in it. However, if it is independent, like a gold ring, then this is forbidden and not permissible. For this reason, al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) followed this hadith with his statement: “Chapter on Gold Rings”, and it seems he intends to say that rings are forbidden because they are independent, while buttons are subordinate to the garment. Just as it is permissible to have silk buttons subordinate to the garment, it is also permissible to have gold buttons because they are a small, subordinate part.
And with this, the statement that it is permissible does not mean that doing it and leaving it are on the same level, for the best is not to do it, because the least of what is in it, or because it is feared that it will be associated with imitating women, even if it is originally permissible, because most of those who take gold buttons are women, so it is feared that if a person takes them, he will be imitating women.
Then it is also feared that something else will happen: that separate rings, or intentional buttons separate from the garment, will be made, such that they are placed on a chain with buttons to fasten the garment, as this is made from silver and the like. They become silver buttons, some tied to others either with a fine iron chain or with a thread. Then an opening is made in the pocket, an opening is made for them to be inserted from the layer next to the skin until they come out to the upper layer and become its buttons. This is also separate. Yes, I do not know what… Is the button not at the elbow? No, this is in the pocket; they used to use it in the past. Now I think they have moved away from it.
The questioner : It is used in the Hijaz.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : In the Hijaz, in the Hijaz they use it.
The Shaykh : Is it used? Yes, indeed.
Or have men taken for themselves gods from the earth who resurrect [the dead]?
أَمِ اتَّخَذوا ءالِهَةً مِنَ الأَرضِ هُم يُنشِرونَOr have men taken for themselves gods from the earth
أَمِ اتَّخَذوا ءالِهَةً مِنَ الأَرضِThis is what the author (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted; he derived this hadith based on one of two matters. The first matter is that this was before the prohibition. There is no doubt that this possibility is weak, and it is weakened by the fact that this statement or this possibility implies that the hadith was abrogated, and a condition of abrogation is knowing that the abrogating text came later.
The second possibility is that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) intended by giving it to him that he should not wear it, but rather give it to someone for whom wearing it is permissible, such as women, or sell it and benefit from its price, for those for whom wearing it is permissible. This possibility is prevented by the fact that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) came out wearing this cloak. When this prevented this possibility, Ibn Hajar responded that it is possible that the meaning of his statement “he was wearing a cloak” is that he had a cloak in his hand, so the whole was mentioned while the part was intended. But there is no doubt that this is contrary to the apparent meaning of the wording, and in that case, it is rejected.
A third possibility remains, which the author mentioned, and it is the closest. It is that this silk brocade cloak is not entirely silk, but most of it is not silk, because silk brocade, as mentioned earlier, refers to garments woven with silk containing patterns like the orange tree, so the entire garment is not silk, is it not so?
What remains for us is “buttoned with gold.” How can it be buttoned with gold? The Shaykh al-Islam (may Allah have mercy on him) holds that a small amount of gold is permissible, just as a small amount of silk is permissible. He said that buttons of gold are not a problem, because they are a small, subordinate part. If it is a small, subordinate part, there is no harm in it. However, if it is independent, like a gold ring, then this is forbidden and not permissible. For this reason, al-Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) followed this hadith with his statement: “Chapter on Gold Rings”, and it seems he intends to say that rings are forbidden because they are independent, while buttons are subordinate to the garment. Just as it is permissible to have silk buttons subordinate to the garment, it is also permissible to have gold buttons because they are a small, subordinate part.
And with this, the statement that it is permissible does not mean that doing it and leaving it are on the same level, for the best is not to do it, because the least of what is in it, or because it is feared that it will be associated with imitating women, even if it is originally permissible, because most of those who take gold buttons are women, so it is feared that if a person takes them, he will be imitating women.
Then it is also feared that something else will happen: that separate rings, or intentional buttons separate from the garment, will be made, such that they are placed on a chain with buttons to fasten the garment, as this is made from silver and the like. They become silver buttons, some tied to others either with a fine iron chain or with a thread. Then an opening is made in the pocket, an opening is made for them to be inserted from the layer next to the skin until they come out to the upper layer and become its buttons. This is also separate. Yes, I do not know what… Is the button not at the elbow? No, this is in the pocket; they used to use it in the past. Now I think they have moved away from it.
The questioner : It is used in the Hijaz.
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : In the Hijaz, in the Hijaz they use it.
The Shaykh : Is it used? Yes, indeed.