No announcement yet.

Is it necessary . . .

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Is it necessary . . .

    for men to fold their pant cuffs above their ankles?

    If so then WHY?

    I've heard some say if you don't then your pant cuffs are caught on by the hell fire. I hardly believe that.

    Jitna Diya Sarkar Nay Mujko, Itni Meri Auqat Nahi, Yeh Saab Tumhara Karam Hai Aqa, Mujh Mein Aisi Koi Baat Nahin.

    Love happens once . . .
    Rabul MashriqaiN wal MaghribaiN

    There are ahadith that the one whose dress covers his ankles is not liked by Allah, and other ahadith support it by saying that such a dress will catch hell-fire.

    One of the reasons Prophet PBUH asked to do such is that in those days people with PRIDE for any reason used to wear dresses which would cover all of their feet and drag behind them as they walk. There may be other reason (unknown to me), thats why it is mandatory for people to do such.

    Actually it should be done ALL TIME not just when you pray.

    Other comments??

    We oughta be Changez like, don't we?


      CL is right. It was prescribed by the prophet b/c having the cloth loose at your feet implemented 'takabur'. It was then, the prophet asked men to cover themselves above their ankles at ALL TIMES, not just during salaat. This is referred to as their sat'r, I think.


        Whoa! That is Fard you mean!!!

        What about socks during namaaz?

        If its mandatory then if not all then most of us guys is committing a sin by wearing pants that come down to your ankles covering them.

        What about those arabs that wear those white things that come down to their ankles?

        What about the Imam who is covered in the traditional cloth while giving khutba and leading the jamaat?

        Are those committing a sin as well?

        Jitna Diya Sarkar Nay Mujko, Itni Meri Auqat Nahi, Yeh Saab Tumhara Karam Hai Aqa, Mujh Mein Aisi Koi Baat Nahin.

        Love happens once . . .
        Rabul MashriqaiN wal MaghribaiN


          Here is a question that someone asked Dr Khalid Zaheer (a professor of Islam at Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan) and his response. Hope this would help:

          I have had many debates with people regarding the raising of one's pants/shalwar above the ankle specifically for the duration of Salaat. This act seems illogical and I have never heard any injuction in this regard, except a broad-sweeping one which need not apply necessarily to prayer:
          ...the part of cloth that is under the ankle will be burned in HellFire...

          Could you please clarify whether:

          1. Raising one's garment above the ankle is a requirement for Salaat?
          2. Whether the whole issue of keeping one's garment is applicable to the prevalent lifestyle, especially since it is no longer considered 'arrogant' to do so?
          There are two aspects of this question:
          1) What dress should one wear while saying one's prayers; and
          2) Is uncovering one's ankles a part of the requirements Muslim men are expected to observe in their dress?

          As for the question of the dress to be worn at the time of prayers, the Qur'an is requiring us do this:

          "O sons of Adam, adorn yourself at every time of worship" (7:31)

          What it essentially means is that one has got to be properly dressed in a manner one is dressed for important occasions, especially when it comes to the question of visiting the mosques. If uncovering one's ankles is a part of the normal dress of an individual, then most certainly the same dress should be used for saying prayers, because one has to use one's normal, decent dress for the purpose of praying and not any special one that is distinct from the usual dress.

          What kind of dress should a male Muslim wear? A clear answer to this question was given by the prophet, may Allah's mercy be on him:

          "Eat whatever you wish and wear whatever you desire, so long as two conditions are not violated: There should neither be extravagance in it nor arrogance." (Bukhari, narrated by Ibn Abbas)
          Obviously one has to consider it to be implied in this statement that the food and dress one is consuming and wearing shouldn't be otherwise prohibited from the point of view of the Shariah.
          Unfortunately, those who have an atomistic approach towards learning Islam, jump to hasty, emotional conclusions by considering only one aspect of the issue at hand. In my opinion, the only correct approach towards understanding Islamic teachings is to look at all aspects of the issue to draw final conclusions. You will see a good example of what I am trying to say in the following description on the question of uncovering ankles.

          Those Muslims who believe that uncovering ankles is a necessay part of a male Muslim's dress rely on the following hadith of Sahih Bukhari:

          "The part of dress that falls below ankles shall be in the hell-fire".
          This hadith doesn't mention any reasons for this warning. Many good Muslims believe that we are not in the business of knowing what are the reasons behind a particular injunction. All that we are expected to do is to know what the injunction requires us to do and to follow it properly. The idea is indeed commendable, but an important point that is missed in this understaning is that in a hadith sometimes a narrator can miss an important part of the original statement of the prophet, sallallahu alaihi wasallam, or doesn't describe the proper context of it and therefore it is imperative in order to do justice with the cause of understanding Islam to look at all aspects of the statement from whatever sources one can. In this particular case, for instance, the immediately following hadith of Bukhari reads like this:
          "The one who while walking drags his garment on the ground arrogantly, God Almighty would not even look at him on the day of judgement."
          This hadith is, in my opinion, clarifying the rationale behind the injunction that was mentioned in the previous one and is also consistent with spirit of the hadith mentioned earlier.
          The above understanding is further clarified by another hadith reported in Sahih Bukhari. We are informed that the prophet said,

          "Allah will not look, on the Day of Resurrection, at the person who drags his garment (behind him) out of arrogance."
          On that Abu Bakr said,
          "O Allah's Apostle! One side of my Izar (garment) hangs low if I do not take care of it."
          The Prophet said,
          "You are not one of those who do that out of arrogance."
          On the basis of these facts therefore, I agree with the opinion of those scholars who believe that it was a part of the dress of the rich,
          arrogant people of the prophet's time that they used to not only cover their ankles with their garments but would also allow them to drag on
          the ground. The prophet, may Allah's mercy be on him, stopped Muslims to emulate them primarily to stay away from all traces of arrogance.
          Feedback by Mr. Wasif M. Khan:
          Dresses that dragged on the ground were generally worn by the pagan and so-called Christian royalty, a fact that is in much evidence in every historical movie e.g. Cleopatra, etc. etc. Even today, Western brides may wear such tails >generally carried by bridesmaids.



            Aaah, I'm at ease, I think I read the long but worth reading explanation by Oiqbal which made sense compared to the last two posts. *Phew* so i guess I don't drag my clothes in conscious arrogance. That explains the questions my second post in this thread. Thank you Oiqbal.

            Hey Saadia, someone is trying to take your job Where are you eh?
            Rabul MashriqaiN wal MaghribaiN