Explanation of the author's statement: "… or he prayed in a garment that is forbidden for him …"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : The issue: The author said, "The second case is if he prayed in a garment that is forbidden for him". If a person prays in a garment that is forbidden for him, he must repeat the prayer. For example, if a man prays in a silk garment, or a woman prays in a man's garment. In the first case, his prayer is invalid because silk is forbidden for men, based on the hadith of 'Ali ibn Abi Talib Sunan an-Nasa'i 5148Sahih (Darussalam). Therefore, if a man prays in a silk garment, his prayer is invalid and it is obligatory for him to repeat it.
A woman praying in a man's garment is forbidden because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) saidSunan Abi Dawud 4097Sahih (Al-Albani). The woman who wears a man's garment is imitating men, so this garment is forbidden.
The first is forbidden due to its type, and the second is forbidden due to its description. The first, which is silk, is forbidden because of its type, as the type of silk is forbidden for men. The second is forbidden because of its description, meaning because it involves imitating men. Good.
If a man or a woman prays in a garment with images, the prayer is also invalid, because wearing a garment with images is forbidden. Indeed, it is not permissible to possess images. Good. If a man or a woman prays in a stolen garment, the prayer is also invalid and it is obligatory for him to repeat it, because wearing a stolen garment is forbidden for the thief, whether he is a man or a woman.
Good. If a man or a woman prays in a garment whose price is forbidden, there is a distinction. If the contract was made on the specific price, then praying in it is forbidden and the prayer is invalid. If the contract was made on the debtor's liability and he paid from forbidden money, then the prayer is valid, because wearing this garment is not forbidden. Do you know the difference between these two? Good.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is not known. Good, may Allah make it known. If the contract is made on the specific price, for example, if I say, "I bought this garment from you for these dirhams," then the price has been specified. The contract was made on the specific dirhams. In this case, it is forbidden for the buyer to wear the garment, and if he prays in it, he must repeat the prayer, because this garment is forbidden since it was the exchange for this forbidden item.
The second example is if a person buys a garment and then pays its price from forbidden money. For instance, he buys the garment for ten riyals, then goes and steals ten riyals and gives them to the seller. Is the price of the garment forbidden? The specific one.
The questioner : The specific one … .
The Shaykh : It is not forbidden because the price is not specified now. I bought a garment from you for ten riyals, and the ten riyals are established in my liability. I pay them from my money. I pay them from stolen money, from stolen property, from any money. The scholars said that wearing this garment is not forbidden, so the prayer with it or in it is valid. The prayer in it is valid because its price is not forbidden, because its price was not specified in the contract. Do you understand now, or not? So, the garment whose price is forbidden: if the price is specified in the contract, using the garment is forbidden. If he uses it and prays in it, the prayer is invalid. If it was not specified, but he bought it on his liability and then paid it with forbidden dirhams, then wearing his garment is lawful and the prayer in it is valid.
The questioner : In both cases, the price paid by the buyer is forbidden, from forbidden money. So what is the difference?
The Shaykh : The difference, they say, is that if the contract is made on the specific dirhams, it becomes an exchange of one thing for another. Therefore, if the contract is made on the specific dirhams, the buyer cannot change them. For example, if I say to you, "I bought this garment from you for these ten riyals," and then I decide to give you ten one-riyal notes, these are ten notes for ten riyals, each note being one riyal. Do you know this or not? Good. I bought this garment from you for these ten riyals: one, two, three, four, ten. For these ten riyals, and then I decide, no, I will not give him the ten riyals, I will give him one ten-riyal note because I need these for … Do I have the right to change it now or not? I do not have the right to change it, because the seller owns the ten riyals now, since the contract was made on them specifically. But if I said, … in my right pocket I have a ten-riyal note and in my left pocket I have one-riyal notes, I have the choice: if I wish, I will give you from this, and if I wish, I will give you from that. Do you understand the difference now? This is the difference. They say that the specified price is the one on which the contract is made specifically, and this sold item becomes an exchange for a forbidden thing, an exchange for a forbidden thing. As for the one that is on the liability, it is in the person's liability, and the liability is open to disposal. This is how the scholars distinguish, and it is a subtle difference in reality.
The summary of the matter, or the summary of the statement, is that if a person prays in a garment that is forbidden for him, whether it is due to the type of the garment, its description, or because its specified price is forbidden, his prayer is invalid.
Good. What is the evidence? I say this is based on a preceding matter, which is that it is a condition for the covering that it be lawful. They said that because covering is an act of worship, and if worship is performed in a manner that is prohibited, it is performed other than by the command of Allah and His Messenger, so it is rejected, based on the evidenceSahih Muslim 1718b. You are now covering yourself with a garment in which you are not permitted by the Shari'ah. You are commanded to remove it, so how do you draw near to Allah by wearing it? Thus, you worshipped Allah with what He forbade you, and this is a contradiction. You performed an act that is not by the command of Allah and His Messenger, so it is invalid and rejected. The prayer becomes invalid because what is forbidden by the Shari'ah is like something non-existent in reality, so you cannot benefit from this garment. Do you know now? Good.
This issue is subject to scholarly disagreement, and I think I mentioned it to you and said that some scholars say his prayer is valid. The covering is a description in the act of worship, not the act of worship itself. It is achieved with a forbidden garment and a non-forbidden garment; it is achieved with both. The prayer itself was not performed in a forbidden manner. The prayer is the place of the ruling where we say it is valid or not valid, and it is now performed in a forbidden manner. That is, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not say, "Do not pray in a stolen garment." If he had said, "Do not pray in a stolen garment," we would say that whoever prays in a stolen garment has an invalid prayer, because he performed the act of worship in a prohibited, forbidden manner. But he did not say this. Rather, he commanded covering the 'awrah. This man covered his 'awrah, but he is sinful for covering with a forbidden item. As for the prayer, it has no involvement in the matter. The prayer was performed in the required manner and according to what he was commanded. The covering was achieved. As for whether the garment is lawful or forbidden, that returns to another matter. The phrase that implies his prayer is invalid: if the texts had said what? "Do not pray in a forbidden garment." If it had been like that, we would say yes, if he prays in a forbidden garment, his prayer is invalid.
Therefore, from the perspective of issuing fatwas, we say: if a questioner asks who has already prayed in a forbidden garment, we do not direct him to repeat the prayer. But if he asks before he prays, we say: it is obligatory for you to remove it, not just for the sake of the prayer, but because it is a forbidden garment. It is not permissible for you to use it. This is if we want to issue this fatwa. There is a difference between enabling a person to use a forbidden thing, which we do not enable, and when he comes to us asking about a matter that has passed and ended, where we cannot say to repeat the prayer. But according to the author's statement, repeating the prayer is obligatory. However, a condition for repeating the prayer in a forbidden garment is that the person must be knowledgeable and mindful. If he was ignorant, he does not have to repeat it. If he was forgetful, he does not have to repeat it. Is it a condition that he has another garment? Yes? Or is it not a condition?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : We look and say: if it is forbidden due to the right of people, we make that a condition. That is, if it is forbidden due to the right of people, he does not pray in it, even if he does not find another. He does not pray in it. Do you understand? So, if he has nothing but a stolen garment, like a man who stole a garment and traveled and had nothing else with him, then Allah the Exalted guided him, he repented, and he wanted to pray. What do we tell him? We say: remove the garment and pray naked. No, we say: remove the garment and pray naked, and it is not permissible for you to pray with the garment. Why? Because it is forbidden due to the right of another, unless you are in dire necessity to ward off cold. In that case, pray with it because it is permissible. But if there is no necessity … we say: do not pray in it. Pray naked, because this is forbidden due to the right of whom? The right of people.
Good. If it is forbidden due to the right of Allah, it is a condition that he has another garment. If he does not find another, there is no blame on him for praying with it, like a forbidden garment, such as a silk garment for a man. If he does not find another, he prays in it, because the prohibition here is for whom?
The questioner : For Allah, Glorified and Exalted.
The Shaykh : It is for the right of Allah, and the prohibition is lifted for the right of Allah in cases of dire necessity. In that case, he prays and there is no obligation on him to repeat the prayer. Likewise, if he has a garment with images in it, he prays in it if he cannot find anything else. Thus, the condition of availability applies when the prohibition is for the right of Allah. We say that if the prohibition is for the right of Allah, it is obligatory to repeat the prayer only if he finds something else. If he does not find anything else, there is no obligation on him to repeat the prayer.
Some scholars said regarding the first issue that if it is forbidden for the right of another person, there is no harm in praying in it. They said, "This is a minor use, and custom and common practice have become lenient in this regard. We know, and it is the prevailing opinion in our minds, though we do not know with certainty, that the owner of this garment, if he learns that you used it because you had no other option, will permit it. This is the usual case, if not the customary one. This opinion is not far from the truth, especially if you know that the man from whom you took it without permission is a noble and good man. In this case, we may say that it becomes obligatory for you to pray in it, because the consent of such a person is known. These are two issues regarding the fulfillment of the condition."
Gold and silk have been permitted for the females of my Ummah, and forbidden to the males.
أحِل الذهب والحرير لإناث أمتي وحرّم على ذكورهاA woman praying in a man's garment is forbidden because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said
cursed women who imitate men
لعن المتشبهات من النساء بالرجالThe first is forbidden due to its type, and the second is forbidden due to its description. The first, which is silk, is forbidden because of its type, as the type of silk is forbidden for men. The second is forbidden because of its description, meaning because it involves imitating men. Good.
If a man or a woman prays in a garment with images, the prayer is also invalid, because wearing a garment with images is forbidden. Indeed, it is not permissible to possess images. Good. If a man or a woman prays in a stolen garment, the prayer is also invalid and it is obligatory for him to repeat it, because wearing a stolen garment is forbidden for the thief, whether he is a man or a woman.
Good. If a man or a woman prays in a garment whose price is forbidden, there is a distinction. If the contract was made on the specific price, then praying in it is forbidden and the prayer is invalid. If the contract was made on the debtor's liability and he paid from forbidden money, then the prayer is valid, because wearing this garment is not forbidden. Do you know the difference between these two? Good.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is not known. Good, may Allah make it known. If the contract is made on the specific price, for example, if I say, "I bought this garment from you for these dirhams," then the price has been specified. The contract was made on the specific dirhams. In this case, it is forbidden for the buyer to wear the garment, and if he prays in it, he must repeat the prayer, because this garment is forbidden since it was the exchange for this forbidden item.
The second example is if a person buys a garment and then pays its price from forbidden money. For instance, he buys the garment for ten riyals, then goes and steals ten riyals and gives them to the seller. Is the price of the garment forbidden? The specific one.
The questioner : The specific one … .
The Shaykh : It is not forbidden because the price is not specified now. I bought a garment from you for ten riyals, and the ten riyals are established in my liability. I pay them from my money. I pay them from stolen money, from stolen property, from any money. The scholars said that wearing this garment is not forbidden, so the prayer with it or in it is valid. The prayer in it is valid because its price is not forbidden, because its price was not specified in the contract. Do you understand now, or not? So, the garment whose price is forbidden: if the price is specified in the contract, using the garment is forbidden. If he uses it and prays in it, the prayer is invalid. If it was not specified, but he bought it on his liability and then paid it with forbidden dirhams, then wearing his garment is lawful and the prayer in it is valid.
The questioner : In both cases, the price paid by the buyer is forbidden, from forbidden money. So what is the difference?
The Shaykh : The difference, they say, is that if the contract is made on the specific dirhams, it becomes an exchange of one thing for another. Therefore, if the contract is made on the specific dirhams, the buyer cannot change them. For example, if I say to you, "I bought this garment from you for these ten riyals," and then I decide to give you ten one-riyal notes, these are ten notes for ten riyals, each note being one riyal. Do you know this or not? Good. I bought this garment from you for these ten riyals: one, two, three, four, ten. For these ten riyals, and then I decide, no, I will not give him the ten riyals, I will give him one ten-riyal note because I need these for … Do I have the right to change it now or not? I do not have the right to change it, because the seller owns the ten riyals now, since the contract was made on them specifically. But if I said, … in my right pocket I have a ten-riyal note and in my left pocket I have one-riyal notes, I have the choice: if I wish, I will give you from this, and if I wish, I will give you from that. Do you understand the difference now? This is the difference. They say that the specified price is the one on which the contract is made specifically, and this sold item becomes an exchange for a forbidden thing, an exchange for a forbidden thing. As for the one that is on the liability, it is in the person's liability, and the liability is open to disposal. This is how the scholars distinguish, and it is a subtle difference in reality.
The summary of the matter, or the summary of the statement, is that if a person prays in a garment that is forbidden for him, whether it is due to the type of the garment, its description, or because its specified price is forbidden, his prayer is invalid.
Good. What is the evidence? I say this is based on a preceding matter, which is that it is a condition for the covering that it be lawful. They said that because covering is an act of worship, and if worship is performed in a manner that is prohibited, it is performed other than by the command of Allah and His Messenger, so it is rejected, based on the evidence
He who did any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf, that is to be rejected.
من عمل عملا ليس عليه أمرنا فهو ردThis issue is subject to scholarly disagreement, and I think I mentioned it to you and said that some scholars say his prayer is valid. The covering is a description in the act of worship, not the act of worship itself. It is achieved with a forbidden garment and a non-forbidden garment; it is achieved with both. The prayer itself was not performed in a forbidden manner. The prayer is the place of the ruling where we say it is valid or not valid, and it is now performed in a forbidden manner. That is, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not say, "Do not pray in a stolen garment." If he had said, "Do not pray in a stolen garment," we would say that whoever prays in a stolen garment has an invalid prayer, because he performed the act of worship in a prohibited, forbidden manner. But he did not say this. Rather, he commanded covering the 'awrah. This man covered his 'awrah, but he is sinful for covering with a forbidden item. As for the prayer, it has no involvement in the matter. The prayer was performed in the required manner and according to what he was commanded. The covering was achieved. As for whether the garment is lawful or forbidden, that returns to another matter. The phrase that implies his prayer is invalid: if the texts had said what? "Do not pray in a forbidden garment." If it had been like that, we would say yes, if he prays in a forbidden garment, his prayer is invalid.
Therefore, from the perspective of issuing fatwas, we say: if a questioner asks who has already prayed in a forbidden garment, we do not direct him to repeat the prayer. But if he asks before he prays, we say: it is obligatory for you to remove it, not just for the sake of the prayer, but because it is a forbidden garment. It is not permissible for you to use it. This is if we want to issue this fatwa. There is a difference between enabling a person to use a forbidden thing, which we do not enable, and when he comes to us asking about a matter that has passed and ended, where we cannot say to repeat the prayer. But according to the author's statement, repeating the prayer is obligatory. However, a condition for repeating the prayer in a forbidden garment is that the person must be knowledgeable and mindful. If he was ignorant, he does not have to repeat it. If he was forgetful, he does not have to repeat it. Is it a condition that he has another garment? Yes? Or is it not a condition?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : We look and say: if it is forbidden due to the right of people, we make that a condition. That is, if it is forbidden due to the right of people, he does not pray in it, even if he does not find another. He does not pray in it. Do you understand? So, if he has nothing but a stolen garment, like a man who stole a garment and traveled and had nothing else with him, then Allah the Exalted guided him, he repented, and he wanted to pray. What do we tell him? We say: remove the garment and pray naked. No, we say: remove the garment and pray naked, and it is not permissible for you to pray with the garment. Why? Because it is forbidden due to the right of another, unless you are in dire necessity to ward off cold. In that case, pray with it because it is permissible. But if there is no necessity … we say: do not pray in it. Pray naked, because this is forbidden due to the right of whom? The right of people.
Good. If it is forbidden due to the right of Allah, it is a condition that he has another garment. If he does not find another, there is no blame on him for praying with it, like a forbidden garment, such as a silk garment for a man. If he does not find another, he prays in it, because the prohibition here is for whom?
The questioner : For Allah, Glorified and Exalted.
The Shaykh : It is for the right of Allah, and the prohibition is lifted for the right of Allah in cases of dire necessity. In that case, he prays and there is no obligation on him to repeat the prayer. Likewise, if he has a garment with images in it, he prays in it if he cannot find anything else. Thus, the condition of availability applies when the prohibition is for the right of Allah. We say that if the prohibition is for the right of Allah, it is obligatory to repeat the prayer only if he finds something else. If he does not find anything else, there is no obligation on him to repeat the prayer.
Some scholars said regarding the first issue that if it is forbidden for the right of another person, there is no harm in praying in it. They said, "This is a minor use, and custom and common practice have become lenient in this regard. We know, and it is the prevailing opinion in our minds, though we do not know with certainty, that the owner of this garment, if he learns that you used it because you had no other option, will permit it. This is the usual case, if not the customary one. This opinion is not far from the truth, especially if you know that the man from whom you took it without permission is a noble and good man. In this case, we may say that it becomes obligatory for you to pray in it, because the consent of such a person is known. These are two issues regarding the fulfillment of the condition."