When the now viral video of Niqobi Shoemaker and CEO, AM Footing and Meenah Closet, Hajia Aminah Adegoke hit the airwaves, it received accolades from thousands of Muslims and non-Muslims on social media. Many praised the Muslimah for being industrious and skillful.
However, Hajia Adegoke wasn’t spared by critics who opined that despite being on veil, she still wasn’t properly dressed during the interview that was conducted by BBC Yoruba.
“She didn’t use gloves. She exposed her hands. She didn’t even cover her face well,” were some of the crimes the Niqobi allegedly committed before her critics – who claim to be Muslims – descended heavily on her, ridiculed the Muslimah and her spouse.
Apart from the fact that the critics lack Da’wah methodology of correcting mistakes, the question on the lips of many concerned Muslims was, “What does Islam say about the use of gloves for Muslim women”? In this sequel to our first new story on the Niqobi shoemaker, Muslim News fact-check team investigated and presents the balanced position of Shari’ah on the subject matter.
Right from the time of the Sahaabah (the men and women around the Prophet Muhammad {SAW}, Taabi’oon and their righteous successors, who came after them, there have been slight differences over the issue of “Are the hands of the females among their awrah (that must be covered)”?
You should note they argued this issue alongside the issue of the obligation of veil (niqob). And none of those who opined for and against made it a serious issue amongst themselves then; they rather regarded it as a blessing because the fundamentals of the differences is subjected to the interpretation of Allah’s statement “إلا ما ظهر منها” Meaning: “Except what appears thereof” in verse 31 of surah Nuur.
If there are substantial evidence indicating that the hands are awrah (nudity), then we will agree it must be covered (with gloves); otherwise, we will agree that it may and may not be covered if there are no evidence telling they are part of the awrah.
The four schools of thought (madhaa’ib) who are the basis of the knowledge of Fiqh, they all agreed that the face and the hands are not awrah. Ibn Quddaamah who was a Hanbali scholar recorded in his book Al-Mughni that there are a few of the Hanabillah who were of the opinion that the two are awrah; but the relied upon opinion of the Hanabillah school is that, the two are not awrah. We will not claim a unanimous consensus upon them not being awrah since a few among the Hanabillah disagreed; but we are correct to say the vast majority of the past and present scholars hold to the view that covering the face and hands are not obligatory.
And this view that the hands and the face are not awrah is also the veiw of Aaisha (radiya Allahu anhaa), Abdullah bn Abbas (radiya Allahu anhu), Abdullah bn Umar and other prominent Sahaabah and Taabi’een.
Ibn Abdil Barii in his book التمهيد stated that: “The scholars differed over the interpretation of Allah’s statement “إلا ما ظهر منها”, and it was narrated from Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar that they translated the meaning of the exemption to be the face and the hands (i.e. both are the permissible areas a female can uncover). But Ibn Mas’uud interpreted the exemption to mean “what appears in cloth out of wind blow”. And this does not as well negate the interpretation of Ibn Abbas, Aaisha and others.
Imam Kasaani Al-Hanafi said in بدائع الصنائع, “It is not permissible for a man to look at his non-mahram except her face and hands that Allah exempted in verse 31 of Suratu Nuur; this is because the face and hands are often uncovered during buying and selling and for many important duties – so such are not awrah”.
Imam Ahmad Dardir Al-Maaliki said: “The awrah of a woman towards her non-mahram is all her body except the face and the hands”.
Sheikh Zakariyyah Al-Ansaariy Ash-Shaafi’i said: “The awrah of a woman on solaat and outside solaat to her non-mahram is all her body except her face and her hands”.
Ibn Quddaamah Al-Maqdisi Al-Hanbali in his Mughni also said: “And there is no difference among the scholars that the permissible parts to view in a non-mahram lady is her face and hands – because they are not awrah”.
As for the minority opinion that counts that the face and the hands are awrah, their evidence are also attached to the interpretation of this verse 31 of Suratu Nuur; likewise, their other hadeeth evidence are arguing the use of niqaab (veil) and not even the hands. Many of the minority who even opined the veil is an obligation permitted uncovering of the hands for neccesities and they did not regard it as something serious.
Hence, the use of glove is not an obligation but a choice for who wishes. And there is also no evidence to say covering of the hands (with glove) is the most virtuous; since the correct view is to base covering and uncovering upon permissibility, so, the most virtuous will be the one done with a pure intention – and that is left to Allah to decide. May He grant us ikhlaas.
Sponsored
