It is obvious that the pearl was set in gold, for a pearl cannot stay in place on its own, and in common practice it is mounted only with gold. The proof is reinforced by his choice of the word “the two glowing embers,” an image drawn from some of the previously cited hadiths of prohibition, such as the report concerning the daughter of Hubayrah. This alone invalidates the claim that there is scholarly consensus on the matter.

The Allegation of Abrogating the Earlier Hadiths—and Its Refutation

2- Others have asserted that those prohibitive hadiths were abrogated by texts such as the Prophet’s ﷺ statement, “Gold and silk have been made lawful for the women of my ummah….” When all of its transmission routes are considered together, this hadith is authentic; al-Zaylaʿi gathered them in Nasb al-Rāyah 4/222–225, and I examined them in my verification of Shaykh al-Qaradawi’s The Lawful and the Prohibited, hadith no. 78. This allegation, however, is baseless, for abrogation (naskh) is subject to many well-known conditions among the scholars,1 among them: (a) the abrogating text must be later than the abrogated, and (b) it must be impossible to reconcile the two. Both conditions are absent here. Regarding the first, there is no evidence that this permissive hadith came after