Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
ishq ast abul fazl

Hijab Of Feet?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(salam)

AFAIK the hands and feet and face do not need to be covered for a woman.

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Iv'e recently been told that if I wear the hijab, I must cover my feet as well. This is the first time since I started wearing the hijab that anyone told me this. Is it wajib?

Jazak Allah

It is wajib according to Ayatullah Sistani to cover your feet as part of hijab in front of non-mehrams. During prayer the front(upper part) of the feet can be uncovered if there are no non-mehrams around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is wajib according to Ayatullah Sistani to cover your feet as part of hijab in front of non-mehrams. During prayer the front(upper part) of the feet can be uncovered if there are no non-mehrams around.

(salam)

does he say it is wajib to cover the face as well? or does he say that is optional?

(wasalam)

Edited by theunknownpreacher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

does he say it is wajib to cover the face as well? or does he say that is optional?

(wasalam)

(salam)

Covering the face is optional. According to Ayatullah Sistani, the only parts of the body that a female can reveal in front of non mahrams are the hands up to the wrist and the face. The underchin is to be considered part of the face.

Now whether you want to wear gloves or niqaab, that's optional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Covering the face is optional. According to Ayatullah Sistani, the only parts of the body that a female can reveal in front of non mahrams are the hands up to the wrist and the face. The underchin is to be considered part of the face.

Now whether you want to wear gloves or niqaab, that's optional

I actually looked into that a few years ago, i send the question to both Sayed Sistani and Sayed Khamenei, Sistani replied that it is not obligatory to cover that area and Khamenei replied it is.

Where did you hear that it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

does he say it is wajib to cover the face as well? or does he say that is optional?

No, according to Ayt Sistani, covering the face is only optional not wajib.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually looked into that a few years ago, i send the question to both Sayed Sistani and Sayed Khamenei, Sistani replied that it is not obligatory to cover that area and Khamenei replied it is.

Where did you hear that it is?

(salam)

Question to Ayatullah Sistani:

1) Is covering the females chin part of hijab? Or is that optional?

2) Does the females feet have to be covered?

Answers:

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful

1- As for the part of the chin and the under chin that are seen when putting on the common head scarf, it is to be considered as part of the face

2- It is not permissible for a woman to expose the top part of her feet to a non-mahram onlooker. However, she is allowed to keep her feet —top as well as sole— exposed during salãt, if she is in a place where she is immune from the looks of a non-mahram person

Wassalamu Alaykum

stamp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ That's interesting. I think its extremely annoying when different representatives give different answers.

That happened with an issue that was a lot bigger in the past with Sayed Khamenei, and because I had already acted on the previous fatwa believing it was correct the other Rep (who was a scholar himself) said it was valid, but that in normal conditions doing so was wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Iv'e recently been told that if I wear the hijab, I must cover my feet as well. This is the first time since I started wearing the hijab that anyone told me this. Is it wajib?

Jazak Allah

WA wr wb..

i think some hadith say that only hands and face are allowed to be seen by other non mahram. and other hadith i think say the bottom of the foot being seen by non mahram is no problem. just wear socks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ LOL wow! Its also annoying when you yourself completely misread something and have several posts based on the misread information :lol:

Thank you for that, that's what i thought.

Now for those wondering, Sayed Khamenei does require the area under the chin to be covered!

Wasalam. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

(salam)

The hadith of the Holy Prophet SA says woman should be covered except for the face (part of face washed in wudu) and hands (up to the wrists). Each marja has said about the caution of the top of the foot being covered, and some women always wear socks to be cautious. I asked my husband why is it that during the hajj the women are allowed to be barefoot? He said that is an exceptional case, and if any man looks at a woman's foot during the pilgrimage his hajj will become batil, void or useless. So don't be looking at others in the hajj! Eltemaase-dua

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said that is an exceptional case, and if any man looks at a woman's foot during the pilgrimage his hajj will become batil, void or useless. So don't be looking at others in the hajj! Eltemaase-dua

(salam)

Sister, I don't mean this in a rude way, but can you please give a source for this?

This ruling sounds interesting, I would like to know which marja' says this?

Thank you

Wassalam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Sister, I don't mean this in a rude way, but can you please give a source for this?

This ruling sounds interesting, I would like to know which marja' says this?

Thank you

Wassalam

(bismillah)

(salam)

About the women being barefoot in Hajj, I do not know any source for that. I had read it somewhere over the years. My relative said it is allowed for women to be barefoot but the men should be busy with their ibadat and not look at the women's feet OR their Hajj will be BATIL, void or useless. So I have no source for that at all. But it sounds correct. smile.gif

From Ayatollah Khamenei's website, in the Frequently Asked Questions, in the Chapter called Prayer, the subsection called To Cover One’s Feet in Prayer (for Women):

Q: Is it necessary for women to cover their feet during the prayer?

A: At the presence of a non-maḥram, she should cover her entire feet. However, it is not necessary for her to cover them below the ankles if there is no non-maḥram.

http://www.leader.ir/tree/index.php?catid=38

From Ayatollah Khamenei's website, in the Practical Laws of Islam, in the Chapter called Prayer, in the subsection called Clothes of the Praying Person:

Q 433: How much of the body a woman should be covered in prayer? Is there any problem with short-sleeved clothes and in not wearing socks?

A: Women should cover the whole body except the area of the face washed during wuḍū’, the hands up to the wrists, and the feet up to the ankles provided that the dress should really cover the body. In the presence of a non-maḥram the feet should be covered as well.

Q 434: Is it obligatory for women to cover their feet during prayer?

A: Covering the feet up to the ankles is not obligatory as long as no non-maḥram is there.

Q 435: Is it obligatory to cover one’s chin completely when wearing ḥijāb and performing prayer or is it sufficient to cover the lower part of it? And is the obligation of veiling the chin a preliminary step for the obligatory face veil in shar‘?

A: It is obligatory to cover the lower part of the chin not the chin itself, because it is a part of the face.

http://www.wilayah.org/tree/index.php?catid=23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Iv'e recently been told that if I wear the hijab, I must cover my feet as well. This is the first time since I started wearing the hijab that anyone told me this. Is it wajib?

Jazak Allah

(salam)

If you are interested in the general subject of hijaab, I researched hadiths concerning what a woman must cover in this thread.

The covering of the feet is an issue of contention between scholars. Some have allowed it, while others have said since there is ambiguity on the issue, one should cover them out of precaution. This dispute is because there is not a clear-cut, air-tight hadith which specifically addresses this subject.

There are some hadiths which intimate that what can remain uncovered is only the hands and the face. However, based upon comparison between hadiths and linguistic precedents set in other hadiths, we know that just because some specific parts of the body were named, that the parts allowed to be shown do not have to be limited to them alone. If you'd like to know more about this, I can elaborate on it.

There are two main arguments that are adduced when analyzing the feet issue.

Argument #1--A Hadith from Al-Kafi

وعن محمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد بن عيسى ، عن مروك بن عبيد ، عن بعض أصحابنا ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : قلت له : ما يحل للرجل أن يرى من المرأة إذا لم يكن محرما ؟ قال : الوجه والكفان والقدمان

Muwarrak ibn `Ubayd narrated from a number of his companions, from Imaam al-Saadiq عليه السلام, that it was said to him, "What is allowed for a man to see of a woman who is a non-mahram?" He said: "The face, palms, and feet."

This indicates that the feet can be seen, and hence remain uncovered, in the presence of non-mahrams.

This hadith is technically mursal. Which means that the narrator, Muwarrak ibn `Ubayd, did not name the people whom supposedly heard this from Imaam al-Saadiq--and hence the saying, "A number of companions." However, Muwarrak ibn `Ubayd and the rest of the narrators in this hadith are trustworthy, and he would have probably narrated from trustworthy people, despite not naming them directly.

The issue arises when it is considered whether this hadith can be used as proof in Islamic law. Who were these people that Muwarrak narrated from, who heard Imaam al-Saadiq saying this? Were they trustworthy or not, etc.? How do we know with certainty that this ultimately goes back to Imaam al-Saadiq, if we do not know the names of the ultimate narrators and can vet their credibility?

However, the narrators after Muwarrak, very well-regarded companions of the Imaams, didn't have an issue transmitting this hadith. If the ruling in this hadith were not valid in their eyes, they probably would not have passed it on from generation to generation. Plus, just because a hadith has not reached us today, does not mean that it was not heard by others, and transmitted. For various reasons, it could have just failed to reach the compilers of the books, or the books have not reached us today. So, just because one chain of narrators exists today for this hadith, it is not an overall indication of the authenticity of its contents, and the ruling it purports. So, despite having some logical proofs as to its correctness, scholars differed over whether this narration could be used as proof in Islamic law, as it contains some ambiguities as to whether it can really be attributed to Imaam al-Saadiq or not.

The second argument lends a much firmer credence to the permissibility of the feet being shown, and draws more centrally on usul al-hadith, rather than the technicalities of one hadith alone.

Argument #2--Comparison and logical deduction from other hadiths

Within analyzing the issue of hijaab, and what women must cover, it is pertinent to analyze narrations concerning slaves. Because in the Qur'an (24:31), a woman's slave is equated with her relatives, with whom the normal standards of hijaab are relaxed. Therefore, there are authentic hadiths such as this, from Al-Kafi:

علي بن إبراهيم، عن أبيه، ومحمد بن إسماعيل، عن الفضل بن شاذان، عن ابن أبي عمير، عن معاوية بن عمار قال: قلت لابي عبدالله (ع): المملوك يرى شعر مولاته و ساقها؟ قال: لا بأس

Mu`awiyah ibn `Ammaar asked Imaam al-Saadiq: "Can the male slave see the hair and leg of his female master?" He said: "There is no harm."

Notice that Mu`awiyah ibn `Ammaar asked about two things: The hair, and the leg. If the face were obligated to be covered in the presence of non-mahrams, it is assumed that he would have first asked about the permissibility of seeing the face, not the hair. And secondly, if he believed that it is obligatory to cover the feet, why did he ask about the permissibility of seeing her leg, before asking about the foot? In the Arabic language, the word "leg" (ساق) specifically encompasses the area from the ankle to the knee, it does not encompass the foot. So, this lends credence to the belief that among the companions of the Imaams, it was assumed that the face and feet could remain uncovered.

Another authentic hadith, from Sheikh al-Sadouq's Man Laa Yahduruhu al-Faqih:

وروى إسحاق بن عمار، قال: قلت لابي عبدالله عليه السلام: (أينظر المملوك إلى شعر مولاته؟ قال: نعم وإلى ساقها

Ishaaq ibn `Ammaar asked Imaam al-Saadiq: "Can the slave look at the hair of his master?" He said: "Yes, and at her leg."

However, there is ambiguity as to whether seeing the leg encompasses the foot as well, or if the foot is assumed to be allowed to be shown, and seeing the leg is an allowance above and beyond this. However, linguistics support the notion that the foot is assumed to be allowed to be seen here.

At the same time, there is another authentic hadith which shows that the Imaams acknowledged that most women either did, or should, cover the feet--from Al-Kafi:

عنه، عن عثمان بن عيسى، عن سماعة بن مهران، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: في الرجل يجر ثوبه قال: إني لاكره أن يتشبه بالنساء

Imaam al-Saadiq said about the man who drags his garment (thobe) on the ground, "I hate that he imitates women."

Therefore, it was assumed that women dragged their clothes on the ground, so their feet remained covered.

Overall, there is no air-tight argument, but there are some indications that women are allowed to show their feet.

However, given these technicalities, some scholars opted for precaution, over outright allowance, as there is doubt over this issue. And in matters of dispute between haraam and halaal, it is always safest to practice caution and not fall into sin over doubtful matters and technicalities. Per authentic hadiths, in all areas, Muslims should be prudent and opt for the action that you are sure has no doubt of sin associated with it, as one should never sacrifice their akhirah for the sake of a technicality in the dunyah. However, ultimately it seems to remain a matter of precaution, rather than an issue of haraam and halaal. It seems that based on these factors, one can come to believe in and adopt whatever course of action they are comfortable with, but precaution is always advised in matters of doubt to safeguard one's faith and keep one's heart pure--these notions are expressed in other hadiths of the Imaams.

(salam)

Edited by avjar7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...