format_quote Originally Posted by
MustafaMc
Salah is of utmost importance and we should guard against anything questionable to jeopardize its acceptance by Allah. There are certain requirements for salah including time, wudu, qibla, cover awrah, etc. The awrah for women is everything except the face and the hands and for men it is from the navel to the knees. Is there a reason to intentionally not cover the feet?
I wouldn't want to do anything that invalidates salah, however I don't want to do something that is not required but being made necessary through reinterpretation of ahadith. The thing is that there was a tradition in many countries of not covering the feet in prayer. Even now, in Bahrain I saw Arab women in the masjid with their feet uncovered. They wore long dresses (as I do) and oftentimes their feet showed. Many didn't wear socks. So the question is, if it was so necessary, why did so many generations of women not do it?
there are somethings to consider: what is the actual shafiee ruling about this. in the video i heard that the shafiee and hanafi differ on whether the ankle should be covered in prayer. so does that mean that the hanafee say that the ankle doesn't need to be covered and the shafiee say that the ankle must be covered? then what about the foot? what does shafiee say about the foot, below the ankle. and what is the evidence for the ruling? I believe that the ankle has to be covered as I heard that a woman's foot above the ankle if uncovered, will be burned with hellfire. of course that is the case in front of non-mahram men, as another hadith shows that once Fatima (R) was wearing a cover that was short so that when she covered her head with it, her feet (or legs?) would show and when she covered her feet, her head would show. so the Prophet (SAW) told her not to worry as there was only her father and her slave there. that shows that it's not necessary to cover the feet or head infront of mahram men or one's slave, male or female. And Allah knows best the words of the hadith.
there is also a difference between the cover of a woman in front of non-mahram men and the cover necessary in prayer. a woman can wear a shawl/khimar over normal clothes (not too tight or thin or short) and pray in it, but she can't do the same when going out of the house. outside, she has to wear a burka/abaya too.
the izar is a dress from the navel down (like a skirt). men can pray in just the izar; they don't need a shirt. on the other hand, a woman cannot pray in just the izar. she also needs a top and khimar (to cover the hair, neck, and chest). A woman's izar or pants should cover the ankles but a man's izar/pants should leave the ankle bone uncovered.
there is a ruling about dress that is so long that it drags on the floor. such clothes are a sign of pride and are not allowed. that means that the woman's dress should be long enough to cover the ankles but not so long that it drags on the floor.
there was a picture of a traditional woman's dress worn outside the home in Saudi Arabia in the Encyclopedia of Seerah showing a woman wearing an abaya and niqab with sandles. the feet were shwing but I'm unsure if the woman wore socks or not.
if anyone has the rulings with evidence about feet covering in prayer and in front of non-mahram men, then please provide it. thanks