Ibn Qutaibah said: ‘It [the garment] was called Samm?’ because it covers the whole body and makes it like the rock with no holes at all’. (1)
This misdeed leads to other mistakes such as:
[1/ 5] wearing jackets with out putting one’s arms into its sleeves:
Ab? ‘Ubaid said: ‘The Sadl is wearing the clothes without inserting one’s arms into its sleeves.
If the arms are inserted into the sleeves then this is not Sadl’. (2)
Ab? ‘Ubaid’s statement indicates that if the garment’s sleeves are totally connected to the garment itself and they are part of it, then it is not Sadl if one does not put one’s arms into its sleeves such as the case with “Qab?’ ” and “‘Ab?’a”.
As-Saf?r?n? reported: ‘Shaikhul Isl?m Ibn Taymiyyah was once asked about wearing Qab?’ without putting one’s arms it its sleeves, is it considered a detested act?’ He said: ‘The ‘Ulamah agreed unanimously that there is nothing wrong with that; it is not Sadl and it is not an act of the Jews’. (3)
The Shaikh’s opinion is born out from the prophet’s ( - ) had?th narrated by Muslim and traced back to W?’il Ibn Hujr. W?’il once saw the prophet ( - ) when he stood to do Sal?t; the prophet ( - ) said: “All?h? Akbar”, wrapped himself with his garment then put his right hand on his left. When he wanted to bow down for (Ruk?‘), he ( - ) took his hands out of the garment and then raised them [for Takb?r] ... ’. (4)
(1) “Fath al-B?r? “(vol. 1 / p. 477), “Sharh As-Sunna” (vol. 12 / p. 16)’ “Ghar?b Al-Had?th” (vol. 4 / pp. 192 - 3) and “Al-Majm? ‘”, (vol. 3 / p. 173). Ash-shawk?n? said in “Nayl Al-Awt?r” (vol. 2 / pp. 67 - 8 )-after having reported the different opinions about the interpretation of the word Sadl-‘This had?th could be interpreted in different ways since Sadl covers the whole range of these interpretations. This is the strongest interpretation for the had?th’.
(2) “Ghar?b Al-Had?th “(vol. 3 / p. 482) and “Fath Al-B?r? “(vol. 10 / p. 362).
(3) “Ghith?’ Al-Al B?b “(vol. 2 / p. 156).
(4) Narrated by Muslim in his “Sah?h “(no. 277) ; the summarized version.