Is the ruling I received that a woman’s prayer is disliked if she shows some of the toes of her feet, but the prayer is valid?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : I received the answer, the fatwa, that the prayer is disliked but the prayer is valid. Is this statement correct?
The Shaykh : If the intention behind "disliked" is the dislike of prohibition, then it is close to being correct. However, if the intention is the dislike of deprecation, then it is not correct, because the opinion you received is the position of the Shafi'is, who say that the intended meaning is wearing the garment. It is completely clear that the intended purpose of this covering is to avert the gaze of the observer from the 'awrah (part of the body that must be covered), whether it is the 'awrah of a man or a woman. This averting is not complete unless the garment possesses two fundamental characteristics, which are mentioned in my book "The Muslim Woman's Hijab": "It must not be tight-fitting and it must not be transparent." "Tight-fitting" means it outlines the limb, for example, the leg or the breast, making them appear bulky or shaped.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, this shaping moves the minds of observers, so it is not considered - also - religiously valid; it must be loose. "Not transparent" means: it does not reveal or expose the 'awrah. There is no doubt that this transparency has levels and degrees. This transparency may be, for example, like the stockings that were in fashion and whose popularity has ended; they have holes or openings, so from behind the stockings, the observer can discover if the skin is white or brown, and not black, and so on. So there is no doubt that this exposure is stronger than a stocking that reveals but is weaker than the first. So this exposure has levels and degrees. Our topic just now was the head covering, regarding the difference between this covering being transparent such that the observer can say this woman's hair is black or her hair is blonde, or something similar. If it is of this nature, then the garment, without doubt, especially in prayer, is not permissible. However, if the exposure is weakened such that, as my wife said just now, by Allah, it is clear, it is clear in the hair, in the braids, in the hanging hair, this is lighter than that. In summary, it is recommended for the man, and even more so for the woman, to wear a garment in which the two characteristics are realized: it is loose and does not outline, and it is thick, meaning heavy or opaque as they say here, not revealing the color. And we have known that revealing has levels and degrees, so the closer it is to exposure, the closer it is to prohibition, and the further it is, the closer it is to permissibility, and between these are degrees that no one knows except Allah. What is the practical solution?Sunan an-Nasa'i 5711Sahih (Darussalam)
The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
The Shaykh : If the intention behind "disliked" is the dislike of prohibition, then it is close to being correct. However, if the intention is the dislike of deprecation, then it is not correct, because the opinion you received is the position of the Shafi'is, who say that the intended meaning is wearing the garment. It is completely clear that the intended purpose of this covering is to avert the gaze of the observer from the 'awrah (part of the body that must be covered), whether it is the 'awrah of a man or a woman. This averting is not complete unless the garment possesses two fundamental characteristics, which are mentioned in my book "The Muslim Woman's Hijab": "It must not be tight-fitting and it must not be transparent." "Tight-fitting" means it outlines the limb, for example, the leg or the breast, making them appear bulky or shaped.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, this shaping moves the minds of observers, so it is not considered - also - religiously valid; it must be loose. "Not transparent" means: it does not reveal or expose the 'awrah. There is no doubt that this transparency has levels and degrees. This transparency may be, for example, like the stockings that were in fashion and whose popularity has ended; they have holes or openings, so from behind the stockings, the observer can discover if the skin is white or brown, and not black, and so on. So there is no doubt that this exposure is stronger than a stocking that reveals but is weaker than the first. So this exposure has levels and degrees. Our topic just now was the head covering, regarding the difference between this covering being transparent such that the observer can say this woman's hair is black or her hair is blonde, or something similar. If it is of this nature, then the garment, without doubt, especially in prayer, is not permissible. However, if the exposure is weakened such that, as my wife said just now, by Allah, it is clear, it is clear in the hair, in the braids, in the hanging hair, this is lighter than that. In summary, it is recommended for the man, and even more so for the woman, to wear a garment in which the two characteristics are realized: it is loose and does not outline, and it is thick, meaning heavy or opaque as they say here, not revealing the color. And we have known that revealing has levels and degrees, so the closer it is to exposure, the closer it is to prohibition, and the further it is, the closer it is to permissibility, and between these are degrees that no one knows except Allah. What is the practical solution?
Leave that which makes you doubt for that which does not make you doubt.
دَعْ ما يريبك إلى ما لا يريبكThe questioner : May Allah reward you with good.
The Shaykh : And beware of that.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.