Explanation of the author's statement: "And on a turban for a man that is tied under the chin or has a tail."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And on a turban for a man" This is the beginning of the lesson now. "And on a turban" means that it is permissible to wipe over a turban. A turban is what is wrapped around the head and wound upon it, and it is well known. As for his saying "on a turban," what is the evidence? The evidence is the hadith of al-Mughirah ibn Shu'bah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) wiped over his turban, over the forelock, and over the leather socks. He wiped over his turban. It may also be referred to as a head covering, as in Sahih Muslim: "He wiped over the leather socks and the head covering." He meant the turban, so he explained the head covering as the turban. If this explanation were the case, we would say that it is also permissible to wipe over a ghutrah if it is wrapped around the head, just as it is permissible for women's head coverings. But since it was explained that the head covering means the turban, then it is the turban. And his saying "for a man" means not for a woman. So a woman is not permitted to wipe over a turban, because wearing a turban is forbidden for her where it involves imitating men. It is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that Sunan Abi Dawud 4097Sahih (Al-Albani) Therefore, wearing a turban is forbidden for her, and she is not permitted to wipe over it. Is it required in the turban what is required in the leather sock, that it be pure and lawful? The answer is yes. It must be pure in itself and lawful. So if a man took a turban of silk, wiping over it is not permissible. If he took a turban of something with images, wiping over it is not permissible. If a woman took a turban of silk, because silk is permissible for women, then that is permissible!
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Permissible.
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : All right, silk is permissible for a woman.
The questioner : The turban is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Ah, but the turban is not permissible. A student of knowledge may make a mistake in this. That is why I told you a moment ago about a turban of silk for a man. It was expected that you would say, "And can a turban be for a woman?" But in any case, it must be for a man. The word "man" is generally used for an adult, but it is mentioned here to contrast with the female, even if not an adult. However, that is not intended here; I mean that "for a man" does not mean an adult man. So it is permissible for a boy to wear a turban and wipe over it. He says: "Tied under the chin or having a tail". "Tied under the chin" means that a loop is passed from it under the chin. Or "having a tail" means that a tail is released from the back of it, meaning one of its ends hangs down from the back. This is the one with the tail. "Dhat" means "possessing." So the author stipulated two conditions for the turban: that it be for a man, and that it be tied under the chin, meaning a loop is passed under the chin, or that it have a tail, with the condition that it be lawful and pure in itself, as mentioned before. So the conditions are now four: it must be pure, pure in itself, lawful, for a man, and tied under the chin or having a tail. All right, what is the evidence for the condition of tying under the chin and having a tail? They said that this is what was customary for the Arabs to wear, that they tie it under the chin or give it a tail. And because the one tied under the chin is difficult to remove, unlike the one wound without tying under the chin, which a man can lift up and wipe his head. But the one tied under the chin is difficult for him to take off. However, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah opposed them in this condition and said that there is no evidence for the condition that it be tied under the chin or have a tail. Rather, the text came regarding "his turban" and did not mention another restriction. So whenever a turban is established, wiping over it is permissible, because the wisdom of wiping over a turban is not specific to the difficulty of removal. The wisdom may be other than the difficulty of removal, which is that if he moves it, its loops might unravel. And because if he wiped his head and opened it, it is likely that the head with the turban on it usually sweats, so if he opens it, he may be struck by a gust of air. For this reason, he was granted a dispensation to leave it as it is and wipe over it. Is it required with that to wipe over what appears of the head, or is it not required? It is not required. But they said that it is recommended to wipe over what appears of the head with it, because the front of the head, the forelock, will appear slightly from it, and also the lower part of the head, and also slightly from the back, because it does not cover the whole head. So it is permissible to wipe over it, and it is recommended to wipe over what appears, but it is not obligatory.
The questioner : O Shaykh, repeat the phrase, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Where are the conditions we discussed? And it is also required according to the madhhab that it be tied under the chin or have a tail.
The questioner : Shaykh.
The Shaykh : We do not leave the questions for the end, that is better. All right: "Tied under the chin or having a tail".
cursed women who imitate men
لعن المتشبهات من النساء بالرجالThe questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Permissible.
The questioner : It is not permissible.
The Shaykh : All right, silk is permissible for a woman.
The questioner : The turban is not permissible.
The Shaykh : Ah, but the turban is not permissible. A student of knowledge may make a mistake in this. That is why I told you a moment ago about a turban of silk for a man. It was expected that you would say, "And can a turban be for a woman?" But in any case, it must be for a man. The word "man" is generally used for an adult, but it is mentioned here to contrast with the female, even if not an adult. However, that is not intended here; I mean that "for a man" does not mean an adult man. So it is permissible for a boy to wear a turban and wipe over it. He says: "Tied under the chin or having a tail". "Tied under the chin" means that a loop is passed from it under the chin. Or "having a tail" means that a tail is released from the back of it, meaning one of its ends hangs down from the back. This is the one with the tail. "Dhat" means "possessing." So the author stipulated two conditions for the turban: that it be for a man, and that it be tied under the chin, meaning a loop is passed under the chin, or that it have a tail, with the condition that it be lawful and pure in itself, as mentioned before. So the conditions are now four: it must be pure, pure in itself, lawful, for a man, and tied under the chin or having a tail. All right, what is the evidence for the condition of tying under the chin and having a tail? They said that this is what was customary for the Arabs to wear, that they tie it under the chin or give it a tail. And because the one tied under the chin is difficult to remove, unlike the one wound without tying under the chin, which a man can lift up and wipe his head. But the one tied under the chin is difficult for him to take off. However, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah opposed them in this condition and said that there is no evidence for the condition that it be tied under the chin or have a tail. Rather, the text came regarding "his turban" and did not mention another restriction. So whenever a turban is established, wiping over it is permissible, because the wisdom of wiping over a turban is not specific to the difficulty of removal. The wisdom may be other than the difficulty of removal, which is that if he moves it, its loops might unravel. And because if he wiped his head and opened it, it is likely that the head with the turban on it usually sweats, so if he opens it, he may be struck by a gust of air. For this reason, he was granted a dispensation to leave it as it is and wipe over it. Is it required with that to wipe over what appears of the head, or is it not required? It is not required. But they said that it is recommended to wipe over what appears of the head with it, because the front of the head, the forelock, will appear slightly from it, and also the lower part of the head, and also slightly from the back, because it does not cover the whole head. So it is permissible to wipe over it, and it is recommended to wipe over what appears, but it is not obligatory.
The questioner : O Shaykh, repeat the phrase, Shaykh?
The Shaykh : Where are the conditions we discussed? And it is also required according to the madhhab that it be tied under the chin or have a tail.
The questioner : Shaykh.
The Shaykh : We do not leave the questions for the end, that is better. All right: "Tied under the chin or having a tail".