The issue of permissible clothing being confused with forbidden clothing, and how one should pray.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Now, if permissible clothing is confused with forbidden clothing, this issue has two forms. The first form is that it is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah, and the second form is that it is forbidden due to a right belonging to a human being. An example of what is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah is silk. Suppose a man’s synthetic silk garment is confused with a natural silk garment. Is this possible? Yes, it is possible that he does not know which is which. He has ten natural silk garments and one synthetic silk garment, all hanging on the rack. Now, he does not know which one is which between the synthetic silk and the natural silk. What do we say?
The questioner : One garment for each prayer.
The Shaykh : No, how many? Eleven prayers, meaning he has ten forbidden natural silk garments and one synthetic silk garment. We say: Pray ten prayers, and until now your prayer has not been valid. Pray an eleventh prayer, after which we are certain that you prayed in a lawful garment, in a lawful garment. Do you understand this issue? This issue is based on a question that will come to us, if Allah wills: Is it a condition for covering the 'awrah that the garment be permissible? This is a matter of disagreement among the scholars, and its explanation will come, if Allah wills, in the chapter on covering the 'awrah. The important point is that the school of thought (madhhab) holds that it is a condition for covering the 'awrah that the garment be permissible. Accordingly, if forbidden clothing is confused with permissible clothing, one prays the number of times equal to the number of forbidden garments, praying one prayer in each garment, and adds one extra prayer. We mentioned that the issue has two forms. Now, what is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah, like silk, is clear. What is forbidden due to a right belonging to a human being is like usurped property. Suppose a man has a usurped garment and a garment that belongs to him, and the usurped one is confused with his own. What does he do? He prays the number of times equal to the usurped garments and adds one prayer. But here there is a problem: How does he pray in the usurped garment, which belongs to someone else? In that case, he has benefited from the property of another without his permission. Pay attention to this. What is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah is clear; one prays in it, and there is no difficulty. That is, one prays in it, and according to the author’s statement, one adds a prayer. But if it is forbidden due to the right of another, and we said, “Pray in these usurped garments, pray in them, and add a prayer,” what will be said to us? It will be said: Using the property of another without his permission is forbidden. This is forbidden. We now have a conflict between an obligatory act and a forbidden act. The obligatory act is that he must pray in each garment, and the forbidden act is that it entails using the property of another. What do we do? The answer to that is that using the property of another here is due to dire necessity (darurah), just as if a person needs the property of another to repel a harm. For example, if someone has a blanket and dies of cold, and he needs the blanket to cover himself, do we say, “Wait until you find its owner and let the cold kill you, or do not cover yourself with it”? We say that here, using the property of another is due to dire necessity. And upon this, the other person is guaranteed compensation for any damage to the garment and the rental fee for its use. He is guaranteed compensation if it is damaged and the fee for using it. In that case, the right of the other person is not lost, is it? It is not lost, as long as he guarantees him its benefits and guarantees him compensation for its damage. It is not lost, and I was compelled to use it because it is obligatory for me to pray the number of times equal to the forbidden garments. The difficulty is resolved now, or is it not resolved? It is not resolved, because if a person is compelled to benefit from the property of another, he must pay him for it. And this is compulsion, but does he pay it as a rental fee or pay it for free? There is disagreement on this, and it will come, if Allah wills, in the chapter on foods. I think that is where it is. Now we say: Use it for the sake of the legal necessity, and you are responsible for guaranteeing any damage and the rental fee for its benefit. This is the analysis of the issue according to the school of thought. The correct view in this issue is also that one should investigate (taharray) and pray in what one is most likely to believe is the permissible garment, and there is no blame on him, because Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. And this is a severe burden. Suppose the garments are thirty. We say: For every Zuhr, you pray thirty Zuhr prayers, and for every 'Asr, thirty-one, and for every Maghrib, thirty-one, and for every 'Isha', thirty-one. Now let us see: thirty-one times five is more than fifty. This is more than the obligatory prayers as they were first prescribed. This is a hardship.
The questioner : Can he leave off the prayer?
The Shaykh : The important point is that the correct view is that this issue, and praise be to Allah, the matter is clear in it, and that is that one should investigate. This is with regard to impure clothing, and likewise with regard to forbidden clothing.
The questioner : Five times thirty-one, O Shaykh, is more than one hundred and fifty-five, three times the prayer.
The Shaykh : Five, yes. Eleven times five is one hundred and fifty-five, yes. Yes, what Allah willed. This is three times and more.
The questioner : Without any indicators.
The Shaykh : Suppose he has no indicators and investigation is not possible because the indicator is absent. Then he prays in whatever he wishes, because in this case he is compelled to pray in the impure garment. The correct view is that if one is compelled to pray in the impure garment, he prays and there is no repetition required for him. As for the forbidden garment, there are two principles: The first principle is dire necessity, and the second principle is that there is a dispute in the issue regarding the validity of the prayer in the forbidden garment, whether it is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah or a right belonging to a human being. There is disagreement in this issue, and the detailed investigation will come, if Allah wills.
The questioner : Is he considered to have lost the garment in reality, just as he lost water in reality?
The Shaykh : No, he did not lose it in reality, but legally, perhaps.
The questioner : Yes, legally.
The Shaykh : But in reality, no, he did not lose it, because it is not considered a loss, because he can pray in it. As for the impure water, we mix the water; it is clear that if he purified himself with the impure, it would only increase the contamination. Yes.
The questioner : One garment for each prayer.
The Shaykh : No, how many? Eleven prayers, meaning he has ten forbidden natural silk garments and one synthetic silk garment. We say: Pray ten prayers, and until now your prayer has not been valid. Pray an eleventh prayer, after which we are certain that you prayed in a lawful garment, in a lawful garment. Do you understand this issue? This issue is based on a question that will come to us, if Allah wills: Is it a condition for covering the 'awrah that the garment be permissible? This is a matter of disagreement among the scholars, and its explanation will come, if Allah wills, in the chapter on covering the 'awrah. The important point is that the school of thought (madhhab) holds that it is a condition for covering the 'awrah that the garment be permissible. Accordingly, if forbidden clothing is confused with permissible clothing, one prays the number of times equal to the number of forbidden garments, praying one prayer in each garment, and adds one extra prayer. We mentioned that the issue has two forms. Now, what is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah, like silk, is clear. What is forbidden due to a right belonging to a human being is like usurped property. Suppose a man has a usurped garment and a garment that belongs to him, and the usurped one is confused with his own. What does he do? He prays the number of times equal to the usurped garments and adds one prayer. But here there is a problem: How does he pray in the usurped garment, which belongs to someone else? In that case, he has benefited from the property of another without his permission. Pay attention to this. What is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah is clear; one prays in it, and there is no difficulty. That is, one prays in it, and according to the author’s statement, one adds a prayer. But if it is forbidden due to the right of another, and we said, “Pray in these usurped garments, pray in them, and add a prayer,” what will be said to us? It will be said: Using the property of another without his permission is forbidden. This is forbidden. We now have a conflict between an obligatory act and a forbidden act. The obligatory act is that he must pray in each garment, and the forbidden act is that it entails using the property of another. What do we do? The answer to that is that using the property of another here is due to dire necessity (darurah), just as if a person needs the property of another to repel a harm. For example, if someone has a blanket and dies of cold, and he needs the blanket to cover himself, do we say, “Wait until you find its owner and let the cold kill you, or do not cover yourself with it”? We say that here, using the property of another is due to dire necessity. And upon this, the other person is guaranteed compensation for any damage to the garment and the rental fee for its use. He is guaranteed compensation if it is damaged and the fee for using it. In that case, the right of the other person is not lost, is it? It is not lost, as long as he guarantees him its benefits and guarantees him compensation for its damage. It is not lost, and I was compelled to use it because it is obligatory for me to pray the number of times equal to the forbidden garments. The difficulty is resolved now, or is it not resolved? It is not resolved, because if a person is compelled to benefit from the property of another, he must pay him for it. And this is compulsion, but does he pay it as a rental fee or pay it for free? There is disagreement on this, and it will come, if Allah wills, in the chapter on foods. I think that is where it is. Now we say: Use it for the sake of the legal necessity, and you are responsible for guaranteeing any damage and the rental fee for its benefit. This is the analysis of the issue according to the school of thought. The correct view in this issue is also that one should investigate (taharray) and pray in what one is most likely to believe is the permissible garment, and there is no blame on him, because Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. And this is a severe burden. Suppose the garments are thirty. We say: For every Zuhr, you pray thirty Zuhr prayers, and for every 'Asr, thirty-one, and for every Maghrib, thirty-one, and for every 'Isha', thirty-one. Now let us see: thirty-one times five is more than fifty. This is more than the obligatory prayers as they were first prescribed. This is a hardship.
The questioner : Can he leave off the prayer?
The Shaykh : The important point is that the correct view is that this issue, and praise be to Allah, the matter is clear in it, and that is that one should investigate. This is with regard to impure clothing, and likewise with regard to forbidden clothing.
The questioner : Five times thirty-one, O Shaykh, is more than one hundred and fifty-five, three times the prayer.
The Shaykh : Five, yes. Eleven times five is one hundred and fifty-five, yes. Yes, what Allah willed. This is three times and more.
The questioner : Without any indicators.
The Shaykh : Suppose he has no indicators and investigation is not possible because the indicator is absent. Then he prays in whatever he wishes, because in this case he is compelled to pray in the impure garment. The correct view is that if one is compelled to pray in the impure garment, he prays and there is no repetition required for him. As for the forbidden garment, there are two principles: The first principle is dire necessity, and the second principle is that there is a dispute in the issue regarding the validity of the prayer in the forbidden garment, whether it is forbidden due to a right belonging to Allah or a right belonging to a human being. There is disagreement in this issue, and the detailed investigation will come, if Allah wills.
The questioner : Is he considered to have lost the garment in reality, just as he lost water in reality?
The Shaykh : No, he did not lose it in reality, but legally, perhaps.
The questioner : Yes, legally.
The Shaykh : But in reality, no, he did not lose it, because it is not considered a loss, because he can pray in it. As for the impure water, we mix the water; it is clear that if he purified himself with the impure, it would only increase the contamination. Yes.