Explanation of the author's statement: "...And if a sutrah is lent to him, he is obligated to accept it..."

The Shaykh : He said: "If it is not sufficient for both, then the back. And if a sutrah is lent to him, it is obligatory for him to accept it; he is bound to accept it". The "if" is conditional, the verb of the condition is "is lent," and "he is bound" is the response to the condition. "If it is lent"—a loan is the permission to use an item that remains after its use is completed. This loan is the permission to use an item that remains after its use is completed. And when he said: "If it is lent", the author did not mention the doer, so it includes any person who lends it, whether the lender is a relative or a distant person, Muslim or disbeliever. The important point is that whenever a sutrah is found, he is bound to accept it.
Now, the apparent meaning of the author's words is, yes, if someone asks what is the evidence or the reasoning for the obligation to accept it, and whether this would not be a favor upon him? The answer is that we say the reasoning here is that this man is able to cover his 'awrah without harm or a favor, because a favor in such a matter is a slight favor that everyone can bear. All people lend to one another, and all people borrow from one another, so the favor is slight. But if it were assumed that this loan or this lending is intended by the lender to be a means to achieve a false objective, what do we say? In that case, he is not bound to accept it, because it is feared that if I do not do what he wants, he will make it a ladder to claim a favor over me and harm me in front of people, saying, "I did this for you, I did that for you, I lent to you," and the like. But the discussion is about a loan that is free from the prohibited element; he is bound to accept it for the reasoning we mentioned above. And the apparent meaning of the author's words is that if it were given to him as a gift, he would not be bound to accept it, because he said: "If it is lent". And the apparent meaning of his words is also that he is not bound to borrow it. Is this statement, which is understood from the author's words, correct, or is there a point to consider? We look into it. He says he is not bound to accept it as a gift because there is a great favor in that; the garment might be worth, for example, one hundred riyals, and thus it would be a favor that a person cannot bear, so he is not bound to accept the gift.
Now, is he bound to borrow it? The apparent meaning of the author's words is no, or is it yes? He is not bound to do so, because he said: "If it is lent" and did not say he is bound to borrow it. Why? He said because asking for a loan is humiliation, or humiliation of the person. Humiliation of the person, and this negates what is obligatory upon him, negating what he must do, which is covering, and there is no obligation with inability, so he is not bound to borrow. Although they mentioned in the chapter on tayammum that if water were given as a gift to one who lacks water, he would be bound to accept it, but they distinguish by saying that water does not carry a favor like the favor with garments. Water is little, meaning the favor in water is slight, unlike garments. But it is said that water in a place of scarcity might be more expensive than garments, so the favor in it would be great. But we say that even if it is in a place of scarcity, the person who gives water in a place of scarcity feels that he is the winner because he saved a soul, unlike garments.
In any case, the stronger position in this issue—we do not analyze the author's words, but the stronger position in this issue is that he is bound to obtain a sutrah by any means that does not involve harm or a favor upon him. Any means, whether by buying, borrowing, asking for a gift, accepting a gift, or the like, due to the saying of Allah the Exalted: . And this person is commanded to cover his 'awrah, so he must, to the best of his ability, fulfill this obligation.
And people differ in this issue. It may be that your asking a person for a gift to cover your 'awrah may be in the position of a favor upon him, not from him, is that not so?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, he may be pleased that you come to him and say, "I am in need of covering my 'awrah in my prayer, give it to me," and he is pleased. There is no favor in his giving, nor in asking for a gift from him. And it may be that some people, if they lent to me, I would find it a burden on me because I know he is one of those who claim favors, and in that case, there would be a burden on me in accepting it as a loan. So the correct approach is to adopt a general rule, which is what? That you must obtain a sutrah by any path that does not involve harm upon him or a burden. This rule may exclude what the author mentioned and include what the author excluded.