— of jurists say that pulling one’s lower garment and letting it drag on the ground out of haughtiness is merely reprehensible (makrūh) and not strictly unlawful.

Likewise, the Prophet ﷺ said, “Allah has cursed the woman who adds hair extensions and the one for whom they are added,” and this is among the most rigorously authenticated ḥadīths (1). Yet the permissibility of attaching hair is a well-known point of disagreement.

He ﷺ also said, “Whoever drinks from a silver vessel is only gulping down the fire of Hell into his belly” (2), while some scholars did not deem the act unlawful.

Seventh: the reason that makes the wording general is still in force, and the purported counter-evidence is unfit to serve as such; at most one might argue that applying the text to both the agreed and the disputed cases would include some who do not deserve the curse.

Our answer is that, since any specification (takhsīs) already departs from the presumption of generality, multiplying such specifications departs from it even further. Hence, from this general ruling we exempt only those who are excused by ignorance, independent reasoning, or reliance on another scholar, while the ruling continues to cover those with no excuse just as it covers the uncontested cases. Because this degree of specification is the lesser, it is therefore the more appropriate.