چکیده:
'The principle of women's covering'; it is necessary, but there is no consensus on its limits. The opinion of most jurists is the obligation of covering the entire female body with the exception of the face and hands; therefore, any opposing view is considered a rare opinion. Since neither fame (shuhra) is a reason for validity and perfection, nor rarity is a cause for the weakness and frailty of a ruling, examining the reasons and documents of rare jurisprudential opinions seems necessary. The present writing, by investigating the historical course of the issue of hijab and identifying rare opinions in different eras, has proceeded to analyze them. The result obtained from the research indicates that the well-known view of the jurists is a middle theory, while the rare opinions lie on the two sides of excess and deficiency. The method of this research is descriptive-explanatory and information gathering, library-based.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Jurists after Ibn Junayd in the fourth and sixth centuries, namely from Sheikh Saduq, Sheikh Mufid, Sayyid Murtada, Abu al-Salah al-Halabi, Sheikh Tusi, Qadi Ibn al-Barraj, and Ibn Idris al-Hilli, have made no remarks regarding the difference or lack of difference between prayer covering and non-prayer covering; also, most jurists from the seventh to the fourteenth centuries, with the exception of certain parts of the covering area (such as the roundness of the face and the palms of the hands), refer to the non-obligatory nature of covering them in Ihram, or cite the verse (الّا ما ظَهَرَ منها), or mention the hardship and difficulty of covering them in buying, selling, etc.
Muhaqqiq Karaki also, by citing the interpretation of the verse "except what appears thereof" as the face and palms, as well as the famous opinion among Imami jurists regarding the exception of the feet due to the visibility of these two limbs, and due to the narration of Muhammad ibn Muslim from Imam Baqir (peace be upon him) (Hurr al-Amili, 1409, 4/387) in His reliance on the 'dir' (tunic) and 'khimar' (veil), and the fact that a shirt also does not cover the feet in most cases, leads to the conclusion that what is derived from the apparent words of Sheikh Tusi and Abu al-Salah regarding the prohibition of leaving the palms and feet uncovered is not correct; without doubt, he considers the correct school of thought to be the exception of the face, hands, and feet (1414, 2/97-96).
(
, 
, 
)
