Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: August 8, 2009
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 29, 2009
Award-Winning Films
that awaken compassion and deepen each individual’s understanding of the interconnectedness of all life.
A Charitable Organization
that empowers caring people everywhere to become agents of peaceful social change.
A Global Community
of people from all walks of life dedicated to living with kindness and respect for all living beings.
A Commitment
to actions guided by publicly stated values, ever mindful that the means are the end.
A Vision
of a world free of violence and full of beauty.
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 29, 2009
Update: Following our investigation inside Aviagen Turkeys, Inc., 19 indictments for cruelty to animals were filed against former employees. Now, for the first time in U.S. history, two ex-employees have been convicted of abusing factory-farmed turkeys, and one has been jailed. Learn more on our blog.
More than 72 million of the nearly 270 million turkeys killed for food every year in the U.S. are slaughtered for holiday meals. In 2008, just prior to the flesh-focused Thanksgiving holiday, PETA conducted an undercover investigation lasting more than two months at the factory farms of Aviagen Turkeys, Inc., the self-proclaimed “world’s leading poultry breeding company.”
While working at a series of Aviagen factory farms in West Virginia, PETA’s investigator documented that workers tortured, mutilated, and maliciously killed turkeys. The following are just a few of the documented offenses:
To learn more, please read the investigator’s log notes, view our photo gallery, and visit our blog.
PETA’s investigator repeatedly brought abuses to a supervisor’s attention. The supervisor responded, “Every once in a while, everybody gets agitated and has to kill a bird.” PETA also brought the abuse to the attention of Aviagen, and although the company made assurances and instituted some new rules, the cruelty did not stop.
The suffering typically found on factory farms was also routine in Aviagen’s sheds: Hens’ beaks were cut with pliers, massive birds collapsed and died of exhaustion or heart attacks, and turkeys were thrown into transport cages.
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 29, 2009
Foxes on fur farms are forced to spend their entire lives in filthy cages with uncomfortable wire-mesh bottoms, deprived of everything that is natural and important to them, before they are finally killed and turned into fur coats or fur trim for retailers like Burberry.
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 29, 2009
A shocking investigation in Canada exposed how tens of thousands of black bears are killed each year in North America—often in front of their cubs, who were left orphaned. Bear hunting in Canada involves an indefensible practice known as “baiting and shooting.” PETA sent a letter to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper asking him to support a ban on the baiting of black bears.
|
|
While there were probably once as many as 2 million black bears in North America, the population has severely declined. By current estimates, there are fewer than 600,000 living today. The once-wild places that are home to these peaceful animals are disappearing altogether, and black bears continue to suffer from unnatural deaths and terrible cruelty at the hands of “bait and shoot” hunters.
Hunters place bait in a barrel to attract the bears, and when these intelligent, gentle, and curious animals come to eat, they are shot—often several times before they die. Many bears escape wounded and face a slow death from blood loss, gangrene, or other infections, dehydration, or starvation.
Mother bears who are killed leave behind orphaned cubs who are completely dependent on them for food during their first 17 months, and when left in the wilderness alone, they often cannot survive. In many areas there are few restrictions against shooting mother bears with nursing cubs, leading to the destruction of entire families.
Because of the barbaric nature of bear baiting, it has been banned in British Columbia and many U.S. states. Many Canadians and numerous hunting and conservation groups agree that this is a cruel and unsportsmanlike practice, yet black bears continue to be mercilessly slaughtered in Canada.
Please join us in contacting Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and urge him to ban bear baiting in Canada. If you are a Canadian resident, please ask your Member of Parliament to help end bear baiting in your province.
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 28, 2009
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 20, 2009
Imam Ahmad narrates, on the authority of Muhammad Ibn J’afar, on the authority of `Awf Ibn Hayyaan Ibn Al-’Alaa`, who said: “Qutun Ibn Qabeesah informed us from his father that he heard the Prophet
say: “Verily, al-’iyaafah,1 at-tarq2 and at-tiyarah3 are all acts of sorcery.
Because the Muslims at the beginning of Islam had recently come from the Jahiliyyah (Days of Ignorance), they still carried with them many of the customs and superstitions of that time; Islam ordained for them freedom from such ignorant superstition which Revelation and common sense reject and for which no practical evidence can be produced. Such beliefs and practices include: Al-’iyaafah, which is the belief that one’s fortune is affected by the flights of birds, their species or their cries; at-tarq, which is to draw lines in the soil or sand and throwing stones in order to supposedly reveal secrets of the unseen; and at-tiyarah, which is to believe in omens and portents. The Messenger of Allah
has made plain that these three are acts of sorcery and it is confirmed that practising magic, learning it and teaching it are all prohibited and it is incumbent upon every Muslim to avoid it and to declare his innocence of any such beliefs and practices and their adherents.
Benefits Derived From This Hadith
1. Evidence that al-’iyaafah, at-tarq and at-tiyaarah.
2. The prohibition of magic.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of the Chapter
That it proves that the three above-mentioned practices are acts of sorcery.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of Tawheed
That it proves that these three practices are acts of magic, and magic is built upon a foundation of Shirk.
..ooOOoo..
It is reported on the authority of Ibn `Abbas (ra) that he said: “Allah’s Messenger
said:
“Whoever learns a part of astrology, has learnt a part of magic. Those who learn more accumulate more (sin).”
Because knowledge of the unseen is for Allah Alone, the Prophet
negated all attempts to uncover it, including astrology, according to which belief, one may know the future by understanding the supposed influence produced by the movement of the stars and the planets on peoples’ lives. And He
has made clear that learning such things is an act of sorcery, and that the more a person learns, the more he is guilty of sin.
Benefits Derived From This Hadith
1. Evidence that the study of astrology is a kind of magic.
2. That magic is of more than one kind.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of the Chapter
That it proves that the study of astrology is a kind of magic.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of Tawheed
That the Hadith proves that the study of astrology is a type of sorcery and sorcery is founded upon Shirk.
Important Note
Attempting to uncover the secrets of the physical unknown using practical methods such as the working of the Universe, biology, physics etc. are not considered acts of magic; rather, they are a fulfillment of the Command of Allah and His Prophet
to seek knowledge.
..ooOOoo..
An-Nasaa`i reports on the authority of Abu Hurairah (ra) that he said:
“Whoever tied a knot and blew on it has committed an act of sorcery, and whoever commits an act of sorcery has committed an act of Shirk, and whoever wore an amulet will be left to its control.”
The Prophet
tells us in this Hadith that anyone who makes knots in ropes and then blows upon them is guilty of practising magic; and He
makes it clear that he who practises magic has committed Shirk; likewise, anyone who wears an amulet or talisman, believing that it will protect him from harm, he will be abandoned to its protection, which is, of course, non-existent; whereas he who gives his heart to Allah and is filled with confidence in Him, Most High, and depends upon Him Alone, this will suffice him. And whoever depended upon Allah’s creatures – sorcerors and others – he will attain only evil – in this life and in the Hereafter because he has placed his faith in other than Allah , while Allah is Sufficient for His slaves.
Benefits Derived From This Hadith
1. The forbiddance of practising magic.
2. That blowing on knots is a form of magic.
3. Evidence that the sorceror is a mushrik.
4. The prohibition of wearing anything as a means of protection, or a provider, or a granter of wishes, etc.
5. That whoever depends upon other than Allah is abandoned.
6. That whoever depends upon Allah , this will suffice him.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of the Chapter
That the Hadith proves that the wearing of amulets or the like and blowing upon knots are acts of sorcery.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of Tawheed
That the Hadith proves that magic is Shirk.
..ooOOoo..
It is reported on the authority of Ibn Mas’ood (ra) that the Messenger of Allah
said:
“Shall I not tell you what al-’adhdhah4 is? It is an-nameemah.” 5 (Narrated by Muslim)
In order to focus the attention of his Companions on what he was saying, because of the great love and affection that he had for them, he used the form of a question, which he then proceeded to answer himself: He
asked them about al-’adhdhah; then he explained to them that it is an-nameemah, which means to carry tales about someone behind his back by quoting something he said about a person to that person, the result of which is to sow discord between those two people and to fill their hearts with enmity.
Benefits Derived From This Hadith
1. That asking questions is a part of the Islamic way of teaching.
2. The prohibition of an-nameemah, and that it is a major sin.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of the Chapter
That the Hadith proves that an-nameemah is a kind of sorcery, because it produces the same effect as magic, or worse causing division among the people.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of Tawheed
That the Hadith proves that an-nameemah is a kind of sorcery, and, as we have seen, sorcery is a form of Shirk.
Important Note
The person who is guilty of an-nameemah is not considered a disbeliever, nor is it ordered that he be killed, but the sorceror is guilty of kufr because he is depending upon other than Allah to supply his wants and needs, while the tale-bearer is not, but because of its similarity in some respects to sorcery, it is incumbent upon every Muslim to avoid it.
..ooOOoo..
It is reported by Bukhari and Muslim, on the authority of Ibn `Umar (ra) that the Messenger of Allah
said:
“Verily, some eloquence (can be so beautiful); it constitutes sorcery.
In this Hadith, the Prophet
has compared excessive eloquence and expressiveness with words to magic, for the eloquent man may on occasions succeed in making the false appear true or vice versa. He
distorts the truth by throwing dust in peoples’ eyes, robbing some of their rights by deception and falsehood. The truth of this may be seen by anyone who visits a court of law and watches a lawyer at work.
Benefits Derived From This Hadith
1. The forbiddance of some eloquence, i.e. that which attempts to make truth appear as falsehood and vice versa.
2. The derogatory comparison of some eloquence with magic.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of the Chapter
That it defines some eloquence as comparable to sorcery because it deflects the heart as does sorcery.
Relevance of This Hadith to the Subject of Tawheed
That it compares excessive eloquence to sorcery, and as we have seen, sorcery is an act of Shirk.
Important Note
It is not to be understood from this Hadith that the capacity of expressiveness with words constitutes kufr, but that since some forms of eloquence result in corruption and usurpation of rights, they are in some ways comparable to sorcery, and therefore it is incumbent upon us to abstain from them.
Footnotes
Source: Kitaab At-Tawheed, Chapter: 23
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 13, 2009
For the sake of Allah and HIS animals – WATCH THIS and DO something about it! This is sickening! Share this and tell everyone you know to be KIND and LOVING to ALL animals! This is our duty as muslims and as human beings! THE ANIMALS SUFFER SO MUC…H – they do NOT deserve this cruelty! They need our understanding and compassion, we need to help them MORE!!! May Allah protect, preserve and rescue his animals from all the pain and intense suffering. What color is your heart….red or BLACK? MINE BLEEDS RED WITH ALLAH’S GIFT OF COMPASSION!
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 12, 2009
“Wearing garments that hang below the ankles” is the first of the so-called “common errors” listed in the “Salafi” manual entitled “Errors in Prayers that must be Avoided.” This manual is filled with proofs that the “Salafis” are misguided and misguiding propagators of errors in the guise of corrections.
It is a more than adequate illustration of their delusion that their method of reading and interpreting the hadith in “happy-go-lucky” fashion, as if it were a newspaper, regardless of the prescriptions of hadith methodology, will save them from error. How can something save them from error which proceeds from pride to begin with — since they insist on relying on their own wits rather than on what better minds than theirs have understood from the same evidence?
They have misunderstood the caution of the Prophet against vestimentary pride to consist solely in a point about ankle-length. However, there are those who wear their the bottoms of their trousers cut short and strut with as much pride as the pagans of Jahiliyya meant by the very hadith they claim to follow. The sin does not consist in the length of the cloth but in the hidden pride it fosters:
`Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud said that the Prophet said: “He will not enter the Garden of Paradise who has an atom’s worth of pride in his heart.” A man said: “What about someone who likes handsome clothes and handsome sandals?” The Prophet replied: “Allah is beautiful and He loves beauy. Pride is refusing to admit the truth and having contempt for people.”
The hadith of the trailing of garments
Narrated Abu Dharr: The Messenger of Allah observed: “Three are the (persons) with whom Allah would neither speak on the Day of Resurrection, nor would look at them nor would absolve them, and there is a painful chastisement for them.” The Messenger of Allah repeated it three times. Abu Dharr remarked: “They failed and they lost; who are these persons, Messenger of Allah?” Upon this he observed: “They are: the one who makes (his garment) hang down on the ground (al-musbil), the recounter of obligation, and the seller of goods by false oath.”
Muslim narrates directly afterwards another version from Abu Dharr where the loin-wrap or lower garment (izar) is explicitly mentioned.
The following are Imam Nawawi’s, Ibn Qudama’s, and Ibn Hajar’s commentaries on the various hadiths on this chapter. It will be seen in the light of their views that there is no basis whatsoever in these hadiths for the preposterous statement of the “Salafis” whereby “the above and many other traditions indicate clearly that wearing clothes that hang below the ankles for men is a grave sin regardless of whether such garments are worn out of habit or pride.” Observe, dear reader, the sharp difference between the keen sight of the true ulama and the myopic sight of the rest:
As for the Prophet’s saying: “the one who makes his garment hang down on the ground” then its meaning is: The one who lets it down and drags its extremity out of arrogance (khayla’) as has been mentioned by way of explanation (of the same phrase) in the other hadith [in Bukhari and Muslim]: “Allah will not look at a person who drags his lower garment in arrogance.” Khayla’ is self-aggrandizement (kibar), and this restricted (muqayyad) meaning of letting down the garment as consisting in dragging it (al-jarr) out of arrogance reduces the general sense of the person who lets down the lower garment to a specific sense and indicates that the one meant by the threat of punishment is the one who does so out of arrogance.
The Prophet permitted Abu Bakr al-Siddiq to do so (i.e. let down his lower garment) and he said to him: “You are not of their number” [Bukhari] because he trailed it for a reason other than arrogance. Imam Abu Ja`far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari and others said: “The letting down of the lower garment was mentioned by itself because it is their most common garment, but the ruling concerning other garments such as the shirt and others, is the same ruling.” I say [Nawawi]: This has been made plain to us explicitly in the hadith from the Prophet on the authority of Salim ibn `Abd Allah from his father: “The letting down (isbal) pertains to the lower garment, the shirt, and the turban. Whoever drags something out of arrogance Allah will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection.” Abu Dawud, al-Nasa’i, and Ibn Majah narrated it with a fair chain. And Allah knows best.
The scholars are in agreement that it is forbidden to pray with braided or plaited hair, as well as with folded up garment or sleeves or the like:… all this is forbidden and agreed upon as such by the scholars, and the prohibition is that of offensiveness of the lesser type (karahatu tanzih), and if one prays in this manner then he has not done well but his prayer is valid. Ibn Jarir al-Tabari has submitted the Consensus of the scholars in this question, while Ibn al-Mundhir has related that one must repeat the prayer according to al-Hasan al-Basri.
The isbal or trailing of the shirt and the pants (i.e. the baggy middle part of the sarawil) in the spirit of arrogance is disliked (makruh). The Prophet said… [he recounts the evidence already mentioned by Nawawi].
As for the statement of the “Salafis” whereby “scholars have agreed that praying with folded sleeves or pants is unlawful” it is a lie since their near totality agree that it is makruh not haram, as Nawawi states in his commentary of Sahih Muslim quoted below; furthermore, Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari states that “the prohibition of folding up the clothes in prayer concerns other than the bottom of the lower garment.”
Imam Bukhari addressed this topic in the first three chapters of the Book of Clothing in his Sahih, respectively entitled Chapter of those who trail their lower garment without arrogance, Chapter of raising up the bottom of the clothes, Chapter of what hangs lower than the amkles being in the Fire, and Chapter of those who trail their cloth out of arrogance. Below are some of the hadiths he included in these chapters, together with some of Ibn Hajar al-`Asqalani’s commentary on them from his work Fath al-Bari:
Chapter of those who trail their lower garment without arrogance.
[Ibn Hajar:] Meaning that they are exempted from the threat mentioned in the hadith, but only if there is an excuse, in which case they are not blamed. Otherwise there are considerations which will be mentioned further down.]
Chapter of tashammur or raising or tucking up one’s clothes.
[Ibn Hajar: tashammur is the raising up of the bottom of one's clothes.]
Narrated Abu Juhayfa: I saw Bilal bringing a `anaza or small spear and fixing it in the ground, then he called for the start of the prayer (iqama) and I saw Allah’s Apostle coming out in a suit of clothes having tucked up its end (mushammiran). He then offered a two-Rak’at prayer while facing the spear, and I saw the people and animals passing in front of him but behind the spear.
[Ibn Hajar: al-Isma`ili did not have mushammir in his narration but related it as: "and the Prophet came out and I can almost see the gleaming of his shanks" then he said: al-Thawri narrated it in the terms: "I can almost see the glistening of his shanks" which al-Isma`ili commented: "This is the tashmir in question." It can be concluded from it that the prohibition of folding up the clothes in prayer concerns other than the bottom of the lower garment.]
Chapter of “What hangs below the two ankles is in the Fire.”
[Ibn Hajar: Bukhari in the chapter-title did not restrict the subject to the part of the izar as in the hadith he cites in the body of the chapter. This is a reference to the generalization of the prohibition to include the lower garment, the shirt, and others. It seems he was referring to the wording of the hadith of Abu Sa`id al-Khudri narrated by Malik, Abu Dawud, al-Nasa'i, and Ibn Majah, which Abu `Awana and Ibn Hibban declared sound, all through al-`Ala' ibn`Abd al-Rahman... Abu Dawud, Nasa'i, and al-Hakim who declared it sound [also Ahmad] cited the hadith of Abu Jurayy [Jabir ibn Sulaym] whereby the Prophet said: “Lift up you lower garment to the middle of your shank, and if you don’t wish to, then to the ankles. Beware the trailing of the lower garment, for it is arrogance, and Allah does not like arrogance.” Nasa’i also cited, as well as al-Hakim who declared it sound, the hadith of Hudhayfa with the wording: “The lower garment is let down to the middle of the two shanks, and if you don’t wish to, then lower, and if you don’t wish to, then lower than the shanks, but there is no right to the lower garment for the ankles.”]
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said: “The part of an izar which hangs below the ankles is in the Fire.”
[Ibn Hajar: al-Khattabi said: "He means that the spot which the lower garment reaches below the ankles is in the Fire, and he has named the cloth to refer to the body of its wearer (i.e. by metonymy)... its principle being in what `Abd al-Razzaq has cited from `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Abi Dawud whereby Nafi` was asked about this and he said: What wrong did the clothes do? Rather, it concerns the feet." However, Tabarani narrated from Ibn `Umar through `Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn `Aqil: The Prophet saw me trailing my lower garment and he said: "O Ibn `Umar, every part of the clothes that touches the ground is in the Fire." Tabarani also narrated with a fair chain from Ibn Mas`ud that he saw a Beduin praying with a trailing garment and he said: "What trails in the prayer is neither lawful nor unlawful in the eyes of Allah." Such a statement is not made on the basis of opinion (i.e. it is related from the Prophet). Based on the above there is no impediment to understanding the hadith literally (i.e. as referring to the cloth alone)...
The warning in absolute terms is in fact understood as specific to arrogance according to the other evidence which has been narrated, and it is agreed upon that the threat concerns arrogance...
Exempt from the absolute understanding of lowering the garment that done out of necessity, as for instance when one suffers an ankle-wound which the flies, for example, would harm if it were not covered with one's lower garment for lack of something else. Our shaykh [al-`Iraqi] has pointed this out in his Commentary on Tirmidhi, and he has cited as a proof the Prophet’s dispensation to `Abd al-Rahman ibn `Awf in wearing a silk shirt because of itching.]
Chapter of the one who trails his cloth in arrogance.
Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said: “Allah will not look, on the Day of Resurrection, at a person who trails his izar out of pride.”
[Ibn Hajar disagrees with Nawawi's limitation of the general prohibition against trailing the lower garment as being specific to trailing it out of pride. He then says: In conclusion there are two cases for men: one of desirability, which is to shorten the lower garment to the middle of the shanks; and one of permissibility, which is to lower it to the ankles. Similarly there are two cases for women: one of desirability, which is to add a handspan to what is permissible for men; and one of permissibility, which is to add an arm's length instead of a handspan...
It is inferred from the narrations:
that what is highlighted in the majority of cases is the specific meaning of dragging the garment behind;
that conceit and strutting is abhorrent even for one who lifts up his garment;
that the comprehensive understanding of the evidence is that whoever means, by dressing well, to show Allah's favor upon him, in thankful awareness of ut and without despising those who do not possess what he has: then it does not harm him in the least to wear whatever is permitted, even if it is extremely costly.]
Narrated `Abd Allah ibn `Umar: Allah’s Apostle said: “While a man was trailing his izar on the ground, suddenly Allah made him sink into the earth and he will go on wailing in the earth until the Day of Resurrection.”
Shu`ba said: I met Muharib ibn Dithar on horseback as he was riding to the place where he sat to judge cases and I asked him about this hadith. He said: I heard `Abd Allah ibn `Umar say: Allah’s Apostle said: “Whoever drags his clothes on the ground out of conceit, Allah will not look at him on the Day of Resurrection.” I said to Muharib: Did he mention the man’s izar? He replied: He specifed neither the izar nor the shirt…. Musa ibn `Uqba, `Umar ibn Muhammad, and Qudama ibn Musa add to it from Salim from Ibn `Umar: “Whoever drags his izar out of arrogance.”
[Ibn Hajar: He mentioned the lower garment because in the majority of cases it is the lower garment which shows one's conceit... In these hadiths is evidence that the trailing of one's lower garment on the ground is an enormity. As for letting it down for other than arrogance then the apparent meaning of the narrations is that it is also forbidden. However: the restriction of these narrations to the meaning of arrogance furnishes proof that the unqualified criticism in the abhorrence of letting down garments must be understood in terms of its specific meaning here. Therefore neither dragging the garment nor letting it down is forbidden if one is safe from arrogance.
Ibn `Abd al-Barr said: "What is understood from the hadith is that trailing for other than arrogance is not sanctioned by the threat, except that trailing the shirt and other than the shirt among garments is abhorrent in every case."
Nawawi said: "Letting down one's garment below the ankles is due to arrogance. If it is done for other than that then it is merely disliked. This is what Shafi`i declared about the difference between the trailing due to arrogance and that due to another reason. His words are: What is desirable is that the logarment reach to the middle of the shanks, and what is permitted without offensiveness (bi la karaha) is between that point and down to the ankles. Whatever is below the ankles, if due to arrogance, is prohibited (mamnu`) with the prohibitiveness of what is strictly forbidden (tahrim), otherwise it is prohibited with the prohibitiveness of the lesser kind (tanzih), because the hadiths that are extant concerning the prevention (zajr) of trailing are unqualified and must therefore be restricted to trailing out of arrogance."
Buwayti referred in his abridgment to the text of Shafi`i which Nawawi mentioned. He said: "Sadl -- letting down a loose cloth -- is not allowed in prayer nor elsewhere out of arrogance; but it is less (of a prohibition) if done for another reason because of the Prophet's saying to Abu Bakr." His expression "it is less" implicitly precludes strict forbiddance. The latter is definitely understood to apply for trailing out of arrogance. Other than that the case varies. If the length of the garment fits the wearer but he lets it hang down then it seems there is no tahrim of it, especially if this is unintended as happened to Abu Bakr. But if the length of the garment exceeds the size of the wearer then this may become prohibited from the perspective of waste (israf) and end up as strictly forbidden; or it may become prohibited from the perspective of resemblance to female fashion, and this is more likely than the former....
In conclusion, letting down the garment supposes dragging it behind oneself, and dragging it behind oneself supposes arrogance.]
A DUBIOUS PASSAGE FROM FIQH AL-SUNNA ON THE ISSUE
Concerning the related passage in the English translation of Fiqh al-Sunna:
Chapter entitled: “Disliked Acts in Prayer #7: Covering The Mouth and Letting One’s Garment Down” whereby Abu Hurayra said: “The Messenger of Allah prohibited as-sadl in the prayer and covering one’s mouth” which is “reported by the Five” and by Hakim who says that it is sahih according to Muslim’s conditions. Al-Khattabi explains: “As-sadl is to lower one’s garment until it reaches the ground.” Al-Kamal ibn al-Hamam adds: “This also applies to wearing a cloak without putting one’s arms through its sleeves.”
The author of Fiqh al-Sunna omits clarification in several respects of his paragraph above:
Others said what is forbidden is letting down the garment without wearing a shirt (i.e. letting down a sleeveless garment from the head). In this case if one lets it down (loose) over the chest then he remains uncovered, whereas if he is wearing a shirt then it is permitted for him to let down a cloak and he does not need to tie it to himself.
It is correct that `Umar permitted sadl as Ibn Qudama said, however, he considered it offensive because it resembled the manner of Jews, as reported from him by Ibn Abi Shayba and confirmed by Shawkani. Still we know that he permitted it because Ibn Abi Shayba reports and Nawawi confirms that he was seen doing it at least once. This apparent contradiction between the respective reports that he disliked it and yet practiced it, similar to that reported from `Ata’ dislike of sadl and the fact that he did it, is resolved by the fact that for one reason or another they may have done it while nevertheless considering it offensive. This is established by Ibn `Umar himself when he was seen leaning against a wall in prayer, although he had declared it offensive to do so. When asked about it he said: “Yes, we do it, but it diminishes the reward.” And Allah knows best.
Posted by: Sohail Ahmed Shaikh on: October 8, 2009