draws near on the afternoon of ʿArafah and boasts to the angels of those gathered there, saying: ‘Look at My servants! They have come to Me dishevelled and dust-covered. What do these people seek?’”

The hair cannot become dishevelled and dusty while the head is covered, for covered hair is not exposed to dust or dishevelled by the sun, wind, or other causes. Hence, someone who has matted his hair together, thereby deriving a measure of comfort, is instructed to shave it rather than merely shorten it. This differs from sitting in the shade—beneath a roof, in a tent, under a tree, or beneath a cloth used as a sunshade. Such shelter is permissible according to the Book, the Sunnah, and scholarly consensus, because it does not prevent the hair from becoming dishevelled and dusty, nor does it involve covering the head.

The scholars disagreed only about someone taking shade beneath a litter, because it accompanies the rider just as a turban does, yet remains separate from him. Those who prohibited it considered the fact that it accompanies him, while those who permitted it considered its separation from him. As for a covering that is separate from him and does not accompany him, it is permissible by consensus. A covering that is in contact with him and accompanies him is prohibited by agreement of the imams.

Among the literalists are those who do not attend to the meanings conveyed by the speech of Allah and His Messenger, nor understand its indications and implications. Such are those who say that His words:

“Do not say to them even ‘uff’”

do not convey a prohibition against striking them. This is one of the two positions reported from Dāwūd, and Ibn Hazm adopted it. This position is exceedingly weak. Indeed, rejecting a fortiori analogy is likewise one of the literalists’ innovations in which none of the early generations preceded them—even where the wording does not indicate the analogy, but it is known that the ruling applies with greater force to the case in question than to the case expressly mentioned. The early generations consistently used arguments of both these kinds as proof.