How do we reconcile the hadith, "Whatever is below the ankles of the izar (garment) is in the Hellfire," with the hadith, "The ankles have no right to the izar," concerning the ruling on lowering the garment for men?
The apparent meanings of the hadiths agree that a garment reaching the ankles and covering them is not considered the forbidden isbal (letting the garment hang below the ankles) in Islamic law, and that what is forbidden is what descends below the ankles. Al-Bukhari narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whatever is below the ankles of the izar (lower garment) is in the Fire."
As for the of Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman (may Allah be pleased with him): "This is the place for the izar; if you refuse, then lower it; if you still refuse, then the izar has no right at the ankles," it can be reconciled with other hadiths by understanding that its intent is to prohibit covering the ankles by the garment descending below them, and that it must be raised so that nothing descends below them. It can also be interpreted as makrooh (disliked) rather than (forbidden), because it is a means to falling into the forbidden.
Summary from Ftawy's records · added here
Reviewed by El Fatwa's sharia committee.
Read the full answer on Ftawyhttps://ftawy.com/en/questions/22005
Where this answer came from
- Source platform
- Ftawy
- Original fatwa ID
- 22005
- Added here
- . This is when the answer was added to El Fatwa, not the fatwa's date.
- Text
- Summary from Ftawy's records, reviewed by El Fatwa's sharia committee.
- Read the full ruling
- Read the full answer on Ftawy