Jamay At-Tirimdhi 1731 – Women Wearing Gowns Or Maxis Below The Ankles
What Ghamidi Sahab wrote was limited to Tehband and for matters other than that, we have to see if according to norms of a scoiety (‘ Urf ‘) such a dressing has become a symbol of pride/arrogance/status symbol then it must be avoided on the same principle. Following is what Ghamidi Sahab has written in this regard: “ The issue of isbal-i izar is no different. It was very common among the arrogant in the pre-Islamic Arab society to wear a long shirt, let the loose end of their turban hang below their back and let their legware (izar) dangle so far below the ankles that half of it would drag behind on the ground. In Arabic, this is called isbal. The Prophet (sws) showed his great dislike for this, and once remarked that the Almighty would not like to see the person on the Day of Judgement who walked while arrogantly dragging his leg-cloth (tehband). All narratives regarding izar relate to this appearance. It can however be said about the tehband that if it is allowed to dangle below the ankles, then it to some extent resembles the appearance of the arrogant just discussed; so care must be exercised even if the purpose to make it dangle is not arrogance. Thus this can be said about the tehband. However, it is a fact that this resemblance is only reflected in the tehband; it has no similarity with a shalwar, apajama and a trouser .”