PART OF DRESSING BELOW THE ANKLE

"O mankind! Surely, We have sent down for you clothing that hides your private parts and adds (to your) aesthetic value. And the dress of Godwariness is the best. (All these inner and outer attires) are the signs of Allah so that they may take advice ." {surah A'raf:26}


Islam, being an all encompassing religion, did not only talk about the spiritual aspect of life but also political, social and private aspect of our lives.

Islam talks about dressing: The kind of dress, and how to wear it. Among the Muslims today, there is a practice with (more awareness) believed to be severe that failure to do attracts the punishment of hell fire. And that is: guiding part of one's dressings above the ankles .

Today, majority of "people of sunnah" wear their trousers usually above the ankle while the "more conscious ones" choose the midpart between knees and ankles (shank).

Evidence to back this practice is documented by Imam Bukhari in this hadith:

Book: Book of Dress كتاب اللباس

Chapter: The part of the garment that hangs below the ankles is in the Fire
باب مَا أَسْفَلَ مِنَ الْكَعْبَيْنِ فَهْوَ فِي النَّارِ

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet (s) said, "The part of an Izar which hangs below the ankles is in the Fire."

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5787
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 5
www.sunnah.com/bukhari/77


LIMITATION?!

Imam Muslim documents under:

Book: The Book of Clothes and Adornment

Ibn 'Umar reported:

I happened to pass before Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon bin) with my lower garment trailing (upon the ground). He said: 'Abdullah, tug up your lower garment,, I tugged it up, and he again said: Tug it still further, and I tugged it still further and I went on tugging it afterward, whereupon some of the people said: To what extent? Thereupon he said: To the middle of the shanks .

Reference : Sahih Muslim 2086
In-book reference : Book 37, Hadith 77
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 24, Hadith 5200
www.sunnah.com/muslim/37

INTERPRETATION OF THE HADITH
While a part of the "people of sunnah" adhere literally to the first hadith thereby keeping their dress (especially trousers) JUST above the ankles , others are firm based on the second hadith that it should actually be between the knees and the ankles (i.e the shanks (السَّاقَيْنِ )).

Those who failed to do any of these are seen by the "people of sunnah" as sinners.

PROPER UNDERSTANDING OF THE HADITH

Islam no doubt is an intellectual religion which usually back its doctrines and teachings on a moral and philosophical ground, and sometimes scientific.

What is the meaning and the intent of these hadiths?

Imam Muslim documents:

# Muslim b. Yannaq reported that Ibn Umar saw a person trailing his lower garment, whereupon he said:

From whom do you come? He described his relationship (with the tribe he belonged) and it was found that he belonged to the tribe of Laith. Ibn. Umar recognised him and said: I heard Allah's Messenger (s) with these two ears of mine saying: He who trailed his lower garment WITH NO OTHER INTENTIONS BUT PRIDE. Allah would not look toward him on the Day of Resurrection.

Reference : Sahih Muslim 2085 g
In-book reference : Book 37, Hadith 74
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 24, Hadith 5197
http://sunnah.com/muslim/37


Imam Bukhari documents:

# Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar:

Allah's Messenger (s) said, 'Allah will not look at the person who drags his garment OUT OF CONCEIT .''

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5783
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 1
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 72, Hadith 674


# Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar:

The Prophet (s) said Allah will not look, on the Day of Resurrection at the person who drags his garment (behind him) OUT OF CONCEIT . On that Abu Bakr said, "O Allah's Messenger (s)! One side of my Izar hangs low if I do not take care of it." The Prophet (s) said, You are not one of those who do that out of conceit "

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5784
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 2
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 72, Hadith 675


# Narrated Abu Huraira:

Allah's Messenger (s), "Allah will not look, on the Day of Resurrection, at a person who drags his Izar out of pride and arrogance.

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5788
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 6
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 72, Hadith 679


# Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar:

Allah's Messenger (s) said, "Whoever drags his clothes (on the ground) *_out of pride and arrogance_* , Allah will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection."

Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5791
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 9
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 72, Hadith 683
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/77


Indeed arrogance and pride destroy good deeds and lead to hellfire. Obviously not every clothes that goes below the ankles are out of arrogance, conceit and pride . And likewise not every dress that hangs above the ankles are sign of humility and obedience . For example, one of the new trend among the hip-pop stars and their followers is trouser hung above the ankles (Michael Jackson's style).

One of the ahadith present above proved that Abubakar's dress is usually hung below his ankles and the Prophet's response was that of exception, that is, his (dressings) is not out of pride, arrogance and conceit . Imam Bukhari documents that hadith under this headings:

Chapter: Whoever dragged his Izar without conceit
باب مَنْ جَرَّ إِزَارَهُ مِنْ غَيْرِ خُيَلاَءَ

This is what these hadiths want Muslims to be aware and conscious of. Basically any dress whatsoever worn out of pride, arrogance and conceit is frowned at in Islam. So, the literal, mechanical and fear-striking interpretation and practice of the opening two hadiths are far from the intent and wisdom of the hadith.

Quran summarized this saying:
"(وَ لِبَاسُ التَّقۡوٰی ۙ ذٰلِکَ خَیۡرٌ ) And the dress of Godwariness is the best." That is, dressings free of arrogance, pride, conceit and extravagance.

Wa Salam alaykum

What you just did up there is "system of meaning". That is, you brought together all the relevant data to derive meaning which is what many failed today. It is clear that it is not necessarily the cloth itself below the ankle but Pride & Conceit. But those who hold on to "if the trouser is below the ankle is hell fire" only deal with isolated hadith.

However, one needs to also consider نجاسة {impurity}. Allah accepts only pure. Imagine if trouser drags on the ground, it is very possible to pick up impure substance. If the cloth is only dirty without نجاسة , it is okay. That's the one thing i think the problem is. Moderation is just the best way

OP, once again you are started your crap!!!

Firstly, raising the garments above the ankle as you have stated is part of Islam. Therefore, the one who does it is not like the one who doesn't. And Allah raises in status whoever he wishes.

Secondly, the student of Usool fiqh knows that the two narrations are not limiting each other because the punishment mentioned are different.

The hadith of Bukharee says whoever drags his garment below the ankle will be punished in hell.

Book:Book of Dress ﻛﺘﺎﺏ ﺍﻟﻠﺒﺎﺱ
Chapter: The part of the garment that hangs below the ankles is in the Fire
ﺑﺎﺏ ﻣَﺎ ﺃَﺳْﻔَﻞَ ﻣِﻦَ ﺍﻟْﻜَﻌْﺒَﻴْﻦِ ﻓَﻬْﻮَ ﻓِﻲ ﺍﻟﻨَّﺎﺭِ
Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet (s) said, "The part of an Izar which hangs below the ankles is in the Fire."
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5787
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 5
www.sunnah.com/bukhari/77

The second hadith says:

# Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Messenger (s), "Allah will not look, on the Day of Resurrection, at a person who drags his Izar out of pride and arrogance.
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5788
In-book reference : Book 77, Hadith 6
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 7, Book 72, Hadith 679

The punishment of this is different from that, and once the punishment or reward of two deeds mentioned in hadith are different you can't limit them.

As for the hadith of Abu Bakr, he said "if I don't take care of it". meaning that it's not intentional. This is because Abu Bakr rodiyaLLaahu anhu is a slim man and the Arabs wear wrapper not trouser, it would be difficult to hold wrapper with a slim waist.

isn't there a difference between this noble companion and the person who tells the tailor to extend and extend till he even steps on it?!

Then back to you AlBaqir. The last hadith of Abu Bakr is an evidence against your misguidance of hating Abu Bakr because the prophet alyhissolaat wassalaam purified Abu Bakr in this hadith!!!

But you and your shia predecessors innovated the misguidance of hating and cursing this noble companion and other companions rodiyaLLaahu anhum!!!

So, if your misguidance was restricted to just dragging your trousers your case would have been very light. In fact the difference between your crime of cursing the companions rodiyaLLaahu anhum and the crime of dragging trousers is like the North Pole and the South Pole!

^
I think you should not be too quick to label him "misguided". What he stated is not about sect or hating Saidina Abu Bakr(RA). It is not about that. Can you please understand that?. If it is, there should be no non-shia saying what he stated. Dont know why everything has to be sect.

Get over it.

Hmmmmmm

In as much that I partly agree with your submission, I think we should look at it from another point of view.

Firstly, it is true having one’s trousers above the ankle NEVER connotes a very high Taqwa as most people try to portray nor does having the trousers below the ankles signifies pride and arrogance in all cases. But as my Imaam would say “We judge with what is apparent, the hidden belongs to Allah”. Sometimes, sisters using scarfs used to say “We have a noble heart as compared with all these khimarite sisters”. But how do we know that you have a noble heart from distance when your appearance looks like that of the Kardashians?


It’s true and a fact that sometimes, appearances can be deceiving. A scarfite may have a noble heart and characters than some Niqobites sisters. Same can be said of brothers who practiced Nifsu sak and those who don’t practice it. But I say that it’s your inward appearance that should drive your outward looks.


Secondly, we can’t know if the person is doing it of pride or not. Allah knows what is in the heart. Maybe some of his behaviours may give the impression of pride and arrogance, but yet we can’t ascertain if that trousers of his below the ankle is out of pride. Therefore, the safest is to make sincere your intention and wears the nifsu sak in order to clear any doubt.


Thirdly, if you love someone you should strive to be like him. If truly one loves the Prophet (May Allah grants him), then one should strive to dress like him, not only in this but also essentially in character.


Fourthly, the ways that some brothers hammer of nifsu sak sometimes makes it seems like that is the only Sunnah of the Prophet. I was discussing a brother one day and he said “I know of brothers who keep beards and practice nifsu sak yet they are worst in dealing with people.” The brother I was discussing is not practicing nifsu sak but if I should judge, he has good inter relationship with people. My reply is that “We shouldn’t use the fact that some brothers practice nifsu sak and of bad behaviours to judge others who practiced and have noble behaviours. Obviously, we should always strive to combine both together (i.e. the outward sunnahs and the inward sunnahs).


Lastly, brothers should take a chill pill with “Fa fi Nar (is in the fire)” all the times. Sometimes, some people are scared away with all these “hell hell screaming”. We should invite people to Sunnah with our character and manners. I remembered when I wasn’t practicing nifsu sak, I was passing by and met a group of brothers. I extended the salaam but they looked at my trousers and realizing that it is below the ankles they didn’t respond! SubhanAllah! If I were to take theirs into consideration, then WALLAH I WILL NEVER PRACTICE IT. Please lets stop ostracizing people because of their looks.


Another incident happened to my cousin and my uncle, they went looking for an accommodation and on getting to the intended house, and they were a bit relieved because the landlord was a Muslim. But when the Landlord came out and saw that they shaved their beards (not all, just a goatee if I should say) and having their trousers below their ankles, the man looked at them head to toe and said “There’s no accommodation because we only accommodate Muslims!” My cousin was like “But we are Muslims sir”. The man replied “We want only Ahl Sunnah and not people of innovation”. SubhanAllah!! Does this signifies that they people of bid’a? These are some of the sad incidents we witnessed. Why the segregation for crying out loud? Is that a means of correcting them or chasing them away from the deen?
May Allah have mercy on our souls

It is funny when a shia wants to spread his mischief, he resort to the sunnah of rasulLulah dat they condemn openly?! Relating these hadiths by a shia is rather misplaced. Also ur point in d entire post is dat the trouser been below d ankle if as a result of arrogance and the sorts, ur explanation of d hadith is wrong. Hypocrisy is condemning any hadith dat doesn't come from ali and d ppl u relate 2 among d sahabs, and now want 2 quote ahadiths from oda sahabas u ppl claim r goin 2 hell. Albaqir, ur virus will be ANTIVIRUSEd in shaa allaah everytym!!!!

@lanrexlan, you are so right. Either way does not denotes taqwa or conceit. It is just what it is. Far as I am concern, i believe that we should adhere to proper dress code. Pride and taqwa aside, i have always believed that trouser below the ankle or drags on the ground is bound to pick up impure substance. Or worse still, you go to public restroom where pee pee is on the floor and your trouser drags, there is possibility it could pick up najasa and then you go to pray like that without knowing?. That's sad when one realizes later that his/her salat go down the drain for days.

As for the sisters, it is true that hijab or niqab does not signifies taqwa. I dobt think Allah mentioned taqwa when he recommended their dress code. He only said it makes them stands out as respected and free women. Hence, a woman should not dress like Ashanti and claims she's conscious of Allah. That may be true but then, it is not wise. This reminds me of incident some 7 years ago. The story was narrated by a Sheikh who was on the plane and seated next to a lady. He said he and his friends sitting nearby were apparently Muslims by their dress. But he was sitting next to a lady who pretty much dressed like "Westerner".

Not too long after that, she started glancing at her watch constantly and then rose and went to the bathroom. She actually went to make Wudhu and came back. When she returned, she did not sit in her chair. She stood right there in the aisle, took out her abaya and offered salat right there. The sheikh said he was dumbfounded that "we dressed up and expected to stand up and make salat but we were shy and was hoping the flight landed so we could make our salat". Many sisters on Facebook criticized the lady for "showoff" and intended only to disgrace the Shuyuk. Wallahu Alam.

They raised their concern that her moves encourages such na!ked appearance of hers in the name of "faith is in the heart." I understand what she did but dress code was specifically prescribed especially for women. Otherwise, people would take advantage of that. We already seeing that actually. "Faith Is In The Heart" rhetoric. Also i can relate to incident you described above. Back in 2007 i had a friend who owned a house. He was looking for a tenant to rent a room from him. Many have called but he turned them down for 'incompatibility'. Finally, a brother called who sounded Pakistani or Indian but did not show up to view the room. Same day a sister called for the same room. She showed up with her husband and apparently they are Muslim. My friend was only 27 but the brother and sister were 49 and 50 respectively. He rented for them and everything seemed to be okay until late 2009. He asked them to leave in good faith bcus he wanted to fix his house and occupy everything for himself for privacy. Meanwhile, there are other non-muslim tenants in the same apartment sharing kitchen with muslim couple.


All of them left peacefully except this muslim couple. They put up a big fight with my friend and stayed in his house rent free for a yr without shame. He finally took them to court and they were kicked out. Every yr my friend cooked for them during Elds including non-muslim tenants. Plus he gave them discount on rent, gave them sadaqat and they even borrowed money from him in total of about $2000. They denied in court he loaned them money. They sued him for counterclaim for 5000$ instead but it was all dismissed. The sister wears hijab til now. The brother with his hat on 24/7 and trouser above he ankle. It was a big shame on them. Husband even called my friend kafir and gay just bcus he didnt have a woman. His wife called police and lied that to them that my friend stole 2000$ in her room. Thank God police did not believe her.

The whole thing is just zigzag. That why Qur'an says all the time "those who believe and do righteous good deeds"

All the story you have been saying is irrelevant especially since its from an unknown source.

The only relevant thing you said is the last verse you quoted. And it's an evidence against you because dressing as commanded is also a righteous deed.

Empiree:

However, one needs to also consider [size=20pt]نجاسة[/size] {impurity}. Allah accepts only pure. Imagine if trouser drags on the ground, it is very possible to pick up impure substance. If the cloth is only dirty without [size=20pt]نجاسة[/size] , it is okay. That's the one thing i think the problem is. Moderation is just the best way

A traditional Muslim woman dress dragging on the ground is not considered dirty in God's sight but a traditional Muslim man's dress touching the ground is condemned as dirty in the sight of God? Hmmm..... dogmas. Of course, believe whatever you choose but filth is filth whether on the hem of a man's trouser or the hem of a woman's dress. It is not even an Islamic subject. No hygienic person would let their cloth drag on the ground in the name of pride, religion or modesty.

usermane:


[s]A traditional Muslim woman dress dragging on the ground is not considered dirty in God's sight but a traditional Muslim man's dress touching the ground is condemned as dirty in the sight of God? Hmmm..... dogmas. Of course, believe whatever you choose but filth is filth whether on the hem of a man's trouser or the hem of a woman's dress. It is not even an Islamic subject. No hygienic person would let their cloth drag on the ground in the name of pride, religion or modesty[/s].

You have said nothing but crap, and your words are not close to being intellectual!!!

Newnas:


You have said nothing but crap, and your words are not close to being intellectual!!!

Shove it up your arse, fella.

What qualifies the enemies of intellectualism in Islam to decide what is intellectual or not intellectual?

It is sinful for the tip of a man's trouser to touch the ground but it is blessed for handspan or forearm length of a woman's dress to scrub the ground of dust, mud, sewage. Smh.
Tomorrow they 'll go holding seminars and publishing books on how high their religion regard women. I could take days after days exposing all kinds of ridiculous "Islamic" dogmas that these traditionalists promote, but I don't want to hurt anyone's feeling.

usermane:


A traditional Muslim woman dress dragging on the ground is not considered dirty in God's sight but a traditional Muslim man's dress touching the ground is condemned as dirty in the sight of God? Hmmm..... dogmas. Of course, believe whatever you choose but filth is filth whether on the hem of a man's trouser or the hem of a woman's dress. It is not even an Islamic subject. No hygienic person would let their cloth drag on the ground in the name of pride, religion or modesty.

Common man, you are better than this. You can as well criticize God for mentioning "man", "men", "male" many places in the Qur'an without directly addressing females.......smh

Empiree:
What you just did up there is "system of meaning". That is, you brought together all the relevant data to derive meaning which is what many failed today. It is clear that it is not necessarily the cloth itself below the ankle but Pride & Conceit. But those who hold on to "if the trouser is below the ankle is hell fire" only deal with isolated hadith.

However, one needs to also consider [size=20pt]نجاسة[/size] {impurity}. Allah accepts only pure. Imagine if trouser drags on the ground, it is very possible to pick up impure substance. If the cloth is only dirty without [size=20pt]نجاسة[/size] , it is okay. That's the one thing i think the problem is. Moderation is just the best way

Shukran for bringing this "hygienity" aspect of this discussion to the fore.

# An obvious view see the issue of Nifsu sak as literal and nothing else. The hadith says, "The part of an Izar which hangs below the ankles is in the Fire". Should we really take this hadith literal? If yes then it is only the "part of an Izar" that will be consumed by fire not the ankle provided we are going to put on dress in Qiyamat. Please who cares?

# Another view explore the intent and the meaning of this hadith through several other ahadith of the same genre, and the obvious conclusion is that, "any dress in general (as per surah A'raf: 26) and any part of dress that goes beyond the ankles (as per the ahadith) worn out of pride, conceit and arrogance is a licence to hell fire".

# A neutral realistic view however is Not every Nifsu sak is out of humility and fear of God, and not every part of dress above the ankles are out of pride and arrogance. Clear examples are established for these balanced observations.

# Therefore, the suggestion of physical hygiene come into play. Observe: I am not submitting that "hygieniety" is the intent of Nifsu sak.
Sunnis washes feet today in wudhu mainly for the purpose of removing dirt before salat. Shia washes and dry feet (if dirty) first before performing wudhu. Then how morally and sensibly right it is to remove dirt from the feet while leaving dirt on the edge of loose garments that drags the floors? Even if one is not a Muslim and then does not pray (salat), the part of dress that drags through the dirts is usually observe to worn out first (and as a result disfigure the whole dress). Rationality concludes that lower parts of dresses should not drag the dirts/floor.

# If anyone thinks (as some had ignorantly attacked) that Albaqir, "a Shi'a", condemned nifsu sak "of the salafis or wahabis or sunnis" (which obviously have not), a picture attached is that of Imam Khomeini's trouser. My condemnation is the wrong interpretation and understanding of the hadith.

AlBaqir:


Shukran for bringing this "hygienity" aspect of this discussion to the fore.

# An obvious view see the issue of Nifsu sak as literal and nothing else. The hadith says, "The part of an Izar which hangs below the ankles is in the Fire". Should we really take this hadith literal? If yes then it is only the "part of an Izar" that will be consumed by fire not the ankle provided we are going to put on dress in Qiyamat. Please who cares?

Lol

Newnas:


The only relevant thing you said is the last verse you quoted. And it's an evidence against you because dressing as commanded is also a righteous deed.

So obviously according to your analogy, the parts of Izars below the ankles in the below pics of your shuyukh and king are in hell fire?

AlBaqir:


So obviously according to your analogy, the parts of Izars below the ankles in the below pics of your shuyukh and king are in hell fire?

Nobody is exempted from the hadith of the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam.

Secondly, not everyone who commits a major sin will end up in hell because Allah might decide to pardon him even without repentance. The only sin that can't be pardoned once a person dies on it is disbelief and associating partners with Allah. And there are many hadiths to the effect.

Thirdly, Even if they are not forgiven, no believer will be in hell forever. The fact that a person will enter hell doesn't mean he will be there forever. Only, the disbeliever will be in hell forever.

Fourthly, I never said that the reason why you chose your opinion is because you're shia. I only brought out a benefit from one of hadiths you quoted and that is the noble status of Abu Bakr. And I mentioned that the hadith is a refutation against your misguidance of hating and cursing this noble companion!!! Don't mix it up.

Fifthly, you are a shia, you have repeatedly called Abu Hurayrah a fabricator on this forum, and you even called him a dotard! I don't know what you are still doing with his reports!!!

Just as you have also called Soheeh Bukharee an unreliable book written by some strange person not imam Bukharee, so what else do you want with the book?!

Or, is it that you have set a double standard for yourself. You choose to follow a book or when you like?!

Newnas:


Nobody is exempted from the hadith of the Messenger alyhissolaat wassalaam.

Secondly, not everyone who commits a major sin will end up in hell because Allah might decide to pardon him even without repentance. The only sin that can't be pardoned once a person dies on it is disbelief and associating partners with Allah. And there are many hadiths to the effect.

Thirdly, Even if they are not forgiven, no believer will be in hell forever. The fact that a person will enter hell doesn't mean he will be there forever. Only, the disbeliever will be in hell forever.

So you can be soft and apologetic and tender excuses when the pictures of your Shuyukh reveal their opposition to the "sunnah"?!
# I can see Sheik Abdulrahman Sudais in the picture. Are these guys ignorant of this simple and common hadith?!

That is how very dangerous it is judging apparently (nifsu sak). All of them might be free of arrogance, conceit and pride (the intent of the hadith) so there dressings are not a big deal to me.

Newnas:


Fourthly, I never said that the reason why you chose your opinion is because you're shia. I only brought out a benefit from one of hadiths you quoted and that is the noble status of Abu Bakr. And I mentioned that the hadith is a refutation against your misguidance of hating and cursing this noble companion!!! Don't mix it up.

# @ underline, So, do I mentioned your alias that you were the one am referring to? Suspicion!

# @Bolds, you dare telling me, "Don't mix it up"?! For Allah's sake this thread only talks about nifsu sak. Where does it:

* Condemn the "status of Abubakar"?

* Hate and curse sahabah?

Mentioning those two irrelevant issues expose the level of your perceptions and how far you are willing to derail this thread in your usual dirty manner.

# Nah! Am not gonna yield to your antics to mar this thread. Bring your usual propagandas please!

Newnas:


Fifthly, you are a shia, you have repeatedly called Abu Hurayrah a fabricator on this forum, and you even called him a dotard! I don't know what you are still doing with his reports!!!

The hadith in question is weird, and that is what this thread cross examined with the guidance of other more detailed ahadith.

# Besides, the fact that Shia attacks Abu Hurairah with facts and evidences doesn't mean all of his ahadith are forged by him. In fact no Shia has ever think or judge by that. We only shine our eyes when it comes to Abu Hurairah's ahadith in particular. If his hadith is corroborated by the Quran or other hadith from another reliable narrator, we accept.

Newnas:


Just as you have also called Soheeh Bukharee an unreliable book written by some strange person not imam Bukharee, so what else do you want with the book?!

Or, is it that you have set a double standard for yourself. You choose to follow a book or when you like?!

If you don't get it for years, then this is an opportunity to re-explain. Our stand on Sahih al-Bukhari is that not all its content (ahadith) are 100% true and correct. There are truth in it, and there are fabrications in it.

I think I have explained enough for the seeker of truth, I won't let you drag me into your time wasting cycle of merry-go-rounding.

Newnas:
I think I have explained enough for the seeker of truth, I won't let you drag me into your time wasting cycle of merry-go-rounding.

newnas newnas . Cant believe you could be so soft and gentle reading your reply up there. I understand what albaqir was trying to point out as regard to nifsu sak. But if you watch Nigerian brothers, they wont blink a second before awarding everyone certificate of hell. They want no excuse for "below the ankle". Is it that after albaqir posted pix of Saudi scholars and royals you came out soft?. Na wa ooo.

Anyway, i remember in my days back then, i was talking to nigerian brother on fb and he said he wouldn't give his daughter in marriage to any muslim whose pant is below the ankle. I jejeli ignored him and smh for him. Just wondering why these ppl adopted this madness when in fact arabic people dont give a fig leaf about (nifsu sak).

Empiree:
newnas newnas . Cant believe you could be so soft and gentle reading your reply up there. I understand what albaqir was trying to point out as regard to nifsu sak. But if you watch Nigerian brothers, they wont blink a second before awarding everyone certificate of hell. They want no excuse for "below the ankle". Is it that after albaqir posted pix of Saudi scholars and royals you came out soft?. Na wa ooo.

Anyway, i remember in my days back then, i was talking to nigerian brother on fb and he said he wouldn't give his daughter in marriage to any muslim whose pant is below the ankle. I jejeli ignored him and smh for him. Just wondering why these ppl adopted this madness when in fact arabic people dont give a fig leaf about (nifsu sak).

The thing farts for my guy's mouth and con add salt join am. Albaqir E no good oo
@Bold, exactly what happened in a ta'aleem session I once attended but it was in the reverse case. The man addressing said "Don't think I will give my daughter in marriage to you because of your jumping trousers, I don't see that as a criteria for nikkah". A brother just raised up his hand and said "Sir, it is criteria for nikkah". The man was like "You won't understand". I just dey shake my head for the brother ni.

Empiree:
newnas newnas . Cant believe you could be so soft and gentle reading your reply up there.

You have right to believe whatever you choose to. Personally, i don't see any softness in my speech, it's justice, you only chose to call it what you like.

What I have said about men is also what I say about a woman who doesn't wear the proper jilbab, it's a sin and makes on have right to punishment but Allah could forgive the person or choose to punish her but no believer will be in hell forever. This same principle goes for every major sin such as lying, stealing, killing etc.
This aspect is where the khawarij and murji'ah sects went astray, the former being excessive and the later being lax.

The only sin that puts one in hell forever and makes the mercy of Allah Haram for a person is Kufr and shirk.

You are too far from pristine Islamic creed.

I understand what albaqir was trying to point out as regard to nifsu sak. But if you watch Nigerian brothers, they wont blink a second before awarding everyone certificate of hell. They want no excuse for "below the ankle". Is it that after albaqir posted pix of Saudi scholars and royals you came out soft?. Na wa ooo.

The way you generalise is just too ugly.

The fact that they are Saudi royals or scholars doesn't make them immune from the punishment of Allah. It also doesn't make what they are doing permissible.

But what I was saying is that dragging trousers doesn't make a person a disbeliever, therefore even if they are punished for it they will never be in hell forever because no believer will be in hell forever.

I'm not on any of the two extremes ofdeviations: laxity and excessiveness. Unlike you.

Anyway, i remember in my days back then, i was talking to nigerian brother on fb and he said he wouldn't give his daughter in marriage to any muslim whose pant is below the ankle. I jejeli ignored him and smh for him. Just wondering why these ppl adopted this madness when in fact arabic people dont give a fig leaf about (nifsu sak).

If a person makes religious uprightness a condition for marriage, it's a praise worthy act. Just as I will never even consider an improperly dressed woman for marriage, I don't expect any sister that understands her religion to get married to a man who doesn't have the proper Islamic outlook.

Allah didn't send Arabs to us as prophet, there are many Arabs who smoke, steal, lie etc, in fact there are Christian Arabs in Lebanon, so that's not a point at all.

The stand of shia is that all those companions rodiyaLLaahu anhum are disbelievers, and the narration of a disbeliever is out rightly unacceptable.

moreover, fabricating lies against the messenger is an act of disbelief . The fact that you call the companions fabricators implies calling them disbelievers, so you shouldn't even consider their reports.

Then, once a person is known to be a liar in his mundane activities such as trading, his reports are out rightly unacceptable in every way even if it's just a simply lie like deceiving a baby eg I'll buy sweet for you without really intending to buy it!!! How much more of a confirmed fabricator according to you and your shia sheikhs?!

The inconsistencies in shia religion are obvious, I don't need to ponder before pointing them out!

Newnas:



You are too far from pristine Islamic creed.

Save me sermon you type up there. I don't need preaching this time. But thanks for saying what you said about the royals and shuyuk. Noted. But don't turn around next time and start quoting them like Islamic knowledge starts and ends there like you people do.

Now, one question i am going to ask you is TELL ME EXACTLY HOW I AM "FAR FROM PURE ISLAM"?. I need cogent and direct answer cus that's serious allegation you raised when you don't even know me on personal level. That's all.

I sometimes wonder how AlBaqir would just want to quote from our books and forget his own books. You are a shi’ah, be proud of your sect and quote your books!

Anyways, I do not have any problem with your OP, but I just want to help you quote your own books, especially when you have tried to demonize the ways of the salafis/wahabis by stating the below:

“So, the literal, mechanical and fear-striking interpretation and practice of the opening two hadiths are far from the intent and wisdom of the hadith.”

Let us read:

A number of our companions, from Sahl b. Ziyad, from Muhammad b. Isa, from Yunus b. Ya'qub, from Abdullah b. Ya'qub, from Abdullah b. Hilal, who said: "Abu Abdullah (as) ordered me to buy an "izar" (lower garment) for him." So I said to him: "I could not get but a large one." So Imam (as) said: "Cut from it and stitch it." Imam (as) further continued: "Indeed my father had said: Whatever extends beyond the ankles is in the fire."


Muhammad b. Yahya, from Ahmad b. Muhammad, from ibn Fudal, from Yunus b. Ya'qub narrated similar to it.

Grading:

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul Uqul, Volume 22, Page 337) : Muwaththaq (Reliable, the second chain)


Ali b. Ibrahim, from his father, from ibn Mahboob, from Hisham b. Salim, from abi Baseer, from abi Ja'far (as), that the Prophet (pbuh) bequeathed a man from the tribe of Bani Tamim, so he (pbuh) said to him: "Beware not to let hang down the izar or the shirt, for indeed that is from arrogance and Allah (swt) does not like arrogance."

Grading:

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul Uqul, Volume 22, Page 338) : Hasan (good)
Bahboodi (Sahih al Kafi, Volume 3, Page 209): Sahih (authentic)
Ayatullah Hadi al Najafi (Mausu'ah ahadith ahlulbait, Volume 10 Page 16): Sahih (authentic)

Source

While I do believe that someone putting on a nisfu saq might fall into pride by seeing others who do not as lesser Muslims than him, it is quite rare, just as it is rare also to see someone who drags his cloths on the floor to do so out of humility and fear of Allah (SWT), in fact, I think it is impossible! The only excuse would be, it is not intentional!

^Thanks for your contributions. It obviously doesn't change anything.

sino:
I
A number of our companions, from Sahl b. Ziyad, from Muhammad b. Isa, from Yunus b. Ya'qub, from Abdullah b. Ya'qub, from Abdullah b. Hilal, who said: "Abu Abdullah (as) ordered me to buy an "izar" (lower garment) for him." So I said to him: "I could not get but a large one." So Imam (as) said: "Cut from it and stitch it." Imam (as) further continued: "Indeed my father had said: Whatever extends beyond the ankles is in the fire."

Source of this hadith, please?

Anyway there is Sahl ibn Ziyad in this first chain. Most Shi'a scholars consider him weak. Al-Najashi even called him a liar.

For Sahl, the reference is:

Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu'jam Rijal al-Hadith, p. 273, no. 5630

sino:

Muhammad b. Yahya, from Ahmad b. Muhammad, from ibn Fudal, from Yunus b. Ya'qub narrated similar to it.

Grading:

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul Uqul, Volume 22, Page 337) : Muwaththaq (Reliable, the second chain)

You mind copy-paste this "similar" hadith? However Mir'at ul-huqul only grades ahadith in al-Kafi. You did not copy-pasted the reference of this "similar" hadith or its no. even if we try to check al-Kafi.

# Sorry, volume 22, page 337 of Mir'at ul-Huqul does not have the chain you copy-pasted. I have all the volumes of the book on pdf if you want, I can email them to you.

sino:

Ali b. Ibrahim, from his father, from ibn Mahboob, from Hisham b. Salim, from abi Baseer, from abi Ja'far (as), that the Prophet (pbuh) bequeathed a man from the tribe of Bani Tamim, so he (pbuh) said to him: "Beware not to let hang down the izar or the shirt, for indeed that is from arrogance and Allah (swt) does not like arrogance."

Grading:

Baqir Majlisi (Miratul Uqul, Volume 22, Page 338) : Hasan (good)
Bahboodi (Sahih al Kafi, Volume 3, Page 209): Sahih (authentic)
Ayatullah Hadi al Najafi (Mausu'ah ahadith ahlulbait, Volume 10 Page 16): Sahih (authentic)

This hadith is indeed Sahih (authentic). And it also put things into their perspective just like other ahadith from the op which established the intent of the opening hadith. The advice does not however stern on "above ankles".

Source: Muhammad al-Jawahiri, al-Mufid min Mu'jam Rijal al-Hadith, p. 654, no. 13335

AlBaqir:
^Thanks for your contributions. It obviously doesn't change anything.

It doesn't change anything except that it shows there happens to be no reason for you to start this thread in the first instance, and the unjustified accusation of some people (salafi/wahabi) of being mechanical and applying fear-striking interpretation and practice. Pride is something you don't joke with as a Muslim, it is what made iblis what he is today! And the narrations found in your books made it even scarier, especially this part: "Beware not to let hang down the izar or the shirt, for indeed that is from arrogance and Allah (swt) does not like arrogance."...

sino:

It doesn't change anything except that it shows there happens to be no reason for you to start this thread in the first instance, and the unjustified accusation of some people (salafi/wahabi) of being mechanical and applying fear-striking interpretation and practice. Pride is something you don't joke with as a Muslim, it is what made iblis what he is today! And the narrations found in your books made it even more scarier, especially this part: "Beware not to let hang down the izar or the shirt, for indeed that is from arrogance and Allah (swt) does not like arrogance."...

Your opposition is noted @underlined. However you are an individual out of many viewing this thread. Only you comment that this thread is not needed to be open at all whereas others welcome it. Obviously you are not being selfish, you just want to oppose a Shi'a. That's an obsession.

Fi amanillah.

AlBaqir:


Your opposition is noted @underlined. However you are an individual out of many viewing this thread. Only you comment that this thread is not needed to be open at all whereas others welcome it. Obviously you are not being selfish, you just want to oppose a Shi'a. That's an obsession.

Fi amanillah.

Please tell us why you opened this thread?! A shi'ah quoting narrations from sunni books to tell us that how we the sunni inteprete the narrations found in our own books is wrong (okay just part of the people of sunnah)?! Because you care right?! I laugh in persian! Why not present the proper understanding from shi'ah books, especially with respect to the narrations I just presented from your Shi'a book!

I present facts, if you are too scared to address them, no problem, I understand...

sino:



Please tell us why you opened this thread?! A shi'ah quoting narrations from sunni books to tell us that how we the sunni inteprete the narrations found in our own books is wrong (okay just part of the people of sunnah)?! Because you care right?! I laugh in persian! Why not present the proper understanding from shi'ah books, especially with respect to the narrations I just presented from your Shi'a book!

I present facts, if you are too scared to address them, no problem, I understand...

Hypocrisy! Since when you (and your brothers) became fan of Shi'i teachings?! To you of all people Shi'i ahadith is garbage that doesn't concern you. Should I quote you?

#Please give me a break.

AlBaqir:


Hypocrisy! Since when you (and your brothers) became fan of Shi'i teachings?! To you of all people Shi'i ahadith is garbage that doesn't concern you. Should I quote you?

#Please give me a break.

Hypocrisy?!

First I only asked that you present the proper understanding of the above-mentioned narrations found in your book. I would be proud to quote the Qur'an, authentic narrations and righteous and respectable scholars to explain the proper understanding of any issue to anyone without stress, I wonder why you get frustrated when I ask/tell you to quote from your books or your scholars...

Secondly, if you quote me, I would quote your scholars who had stated directly and indirectly that your books are filled with, for lack of better presentation by you, GARBAGE!

Thank you!

AlBaqir:


Hypocrisy! Since when you (and your brothers) became fan of Shi'i teachings?! To you of all people Shi'i ahadith is garbage that doesn't concern you. Should I quote you?

#Please give me a break.

Nobody is a fan of garbage shia books here. Well maybe your Sufi friend!

Let's Read (again!) :

A number of our companions, from Sahl b. Ziyad, from Muhammad b. Isa, from Yunus b. Ya'qub, from Abdullah b. Ya'qub, from Abdullah b. Hilal, who said: "Abu Abdullah (as) ordered me to buy an "izar" (lower garment) for him." So I said to him: "I could not get but a large one." So Imam (as) said: "Cut from it and stitch it." Imam (as) further continued: "Indeed my father had said: Whatever extends beyond the ankles is in the fire."

I can't believe any reasonable student of knowledge will ever consider this kind of chain for research. The weakness is super obvious.

Interestingly and unsurprisingly, Mr Majlisi the shia reverend of Hadith calls it RELIABLE.

Haba!