Women are also commanded to lower their gazes. It is not permissible for a woman to look from a non-mahram at what is beneath his navel to his knees. If she desires, she should lower her gaze immediately. And she should not look at another woman except in a similar manner.

Lowering her gaze from non-mahrams is more appropriate and better for her. From this is the hadith of Ibn Umm Maktum, narrated by Umm Salamah, may Allah be pleased with her. She said: I was with the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, and with Maymunah. Ibn Umm Maktum approached us—this was after we were commanded to observe hijab. He entered upon us and said: 'Veil yourselves.' We said: O Messenger of Allah, is he not blind and cannot see? He said: 'Are you both blind?' [Narrated by Abu Dawood, Al-Tirmidhi, Al-Nasa'i, Ibn Hibban, Ahmad, Ishaq, Ibn Abi Shaybah, Abu Ya'la, and Al-Tabarani, all from the narration of Banhān, the scribe of Umm Salamah. Al-Nasa'i said: We do not know anyone who narrated from Banhān except Al-Zuhri. Al-Ishaq in his Musnad said: Yahiya ibn Adam informed us, Maghul narrated to us from Yunus from Al-Zuhri from Banhān from Umm Salamah who said: 'Ibn Umm Maktum asked for permission while I was with Zaynab with him—this is the hadith. And Mandil is weak; he contradicted by mentioning Zaynab instead of Maymunah.'] Are you not able to see him? If you ask: Why was lowering the gaze mentioned before guarding the private parts? I say: Because looking is the precursor to adultery and the forerunner of immorality. The trial in it is more severe and widespread, and it is hardly possible to guard against it.

Adornment refers to what a woman adorns herself with, such as jewelry, kohl, or dye. What is apparent from her, like a ring and a bracelet [The term 'bracelet' in the authentic texts refers to a silver ring without a stone. If it has a stone, it is called a ring. Women sometimes place it on their toes. In it is 'the crown,' resembling a band adorned with jewels, and it is called a crown.] and kohl and dye. It is permissible to show these to non-mahrams. What is hidden from them, like a bracelet, anklet, armlet, necklace, crown, scarf, and earring, she should not reveal except to those mentioned. The mention of adornment without its locations is to emphasize the command to be modest and cover up. Because this adornment is placed on parts of the body that it is not permissible to look at except for these mentioned, which are the arm, leg, upper arm, neck, head, chest, and ear. Thus, it was prohibited to reveal the adornment itself. It is known that if looking at it is not permissible due to its association with those locations—evidenced by the fact that looking at it without being associated with it is permissible—then looking at the locations themselves is firmly established in prohibition, firmly rooted in its unlawfulness, and a testimony that women have the right to guard their modesty and fear Allah in revealing it. [Mahamud said: 'The intended prohibition is against revealing the locations of adornment. The prohibition of showing adornment itself is not the main purpose, but it serves as a metaphor for revealing its locations in a stronger sense.' Ahmad said: And His saying thereafter: 'And let them not strike their feet so that what they conceal of their adornment may be known' confirms that revealing the adornment itself is indeed intended in the prohibition, for He has prohibited what is a means to it specifically, as striking the feet is only prohibited because it indicates that the woman has adornment even if she does not reveal it, let alone its locations. Allah knows best.] If you ask: What do you say about the 'qarāmil' [The term 'qarāmil' in the authentic texts refers to what a woman ties in her hair.]? Is it permissible for these to look at it? I say: Yes. If you ask: Is not its location on the back, and is it not impermissible for them to look at her back and abdomen? And perhaps hair falls, and the qarāmil may be positioned over what is beneath the navel? I say: It is as you said, but the matter of qarāmil is different from that of other adornments because it is only placed over clothing. It is permissible to look at the garment that is on the back and abdomen of non-mahrams, let alone these, unless it describes her thinness, in which case it is not permissible to look at it. Thus, it is not permissible to look at the qarāmil when it is placed on her.

That entire member, or is it the amount that adornment is upon it? I said: The correct view is that it is the entire member, as I explained the places of hidden adornment, and likewise the places of apparent adornment: the face is the place of kohl in the eyes, and the dye with [UNTRANSLATED-LATIN:wasma] in the eyebrows and mustache, and the dye in the cheeks, and the hand and foot are the places of the ring and the anklet and the dye with henna. If you say: Why is there permission for apparent adornment in general? I said: Because covering it involves hardship, for a woman finds no alternative but to engage in things with her hands, and she needs to uncover her face, especially in testimony, litigation, and marriage, and she is compelled to walk in the streets and show her feet, particularly among the poor women. This is the meaning of His saying, 'except that which appears thereof,' meaning except what is customary and natural to appear, and the origin of it is appearance. Permission was only granted for hidden adornment. Those mentioned were in need of it due to their necessity for interaction and mixing, and due to the little expectation of temptation from them, and due to the nature's aversion to touching relatives. A woman needs their company during travels for alighting, riding, and other matters. Their garments were wide, revealing their necks and chests and what is around them, and they would let down their cloaks from behind them, leaving them uncovered. They were commanded to let them down from the front so that they cover themselves. It is possible that by 'garments' it is meant the chests, naming it by what follows and is adjacent to it. From this is their saying: 'the neck of the garment.' And your saying: 'I struck with my cloak upon my garment,' is like your saying: 'I struck with my hand upon the wall,' when you placed it upon it. And from Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her: I have not seen women better than the women of the Ansar. When this verse was revealed, each one of them went to her cloak, and they tore a piece from it, and they covered themselves, and they became as if there were crows on their heads. It was read: 'their garments,' with the jīm being broken due to the yā'. Likewise, 'houses other than your houses' was said regarding their women: they are the believers, for it is not permissible for a believing woman to be uncovered in front of a polytheist or a person of the Book. From Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both of them. And it appears that he meant by their women and what their right hands possess: those who are in their company and service, both free women and maidservants, all are equal in the permissibility of looking at one another. And it was said: what their right hands possess are both males and females altogether. And from Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, that she permitted her servant to look at her, and she said to Dhakwan: If you place me in the grave and leave, you are free. This is a compilation from two narrations, the first: Al-Bayhaqi narrated it from the path of Amr ibn Maimun from Sulayman ibn Yasar, who said: I sought permission to enter upon Aisha, and she said: Sulayman? Enter. For you are a servant as long as you have a dirham left. Al-Bukhari narrated it from Sulayman, and the second was narrated by Ibn Sa'd from the narration of Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Al-Husayn: Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, said: When I am shrouded and buried and perfumed, and Dhakwan lowers me into my grave, he is free. And Abdul Razzaq narrated from Ibn Jurayj. Ibn Abi Mulaykah informed me that Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, said: If Abu Amr conceals me and lowers me into my grave, he is free. And from Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyib similar to it, then he returned and said: Do not be deceived by the verse of light, for what is meant by it are the maidservants. This was narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah from the narration of Tariq from Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyib: 'Do not be deceived by the verse: except what your right hands possess, for it only refers to maidservants and not to slaves.' This is the correct view, for a woman's slave is like a stranger to her, whether he is castrated or not. And from Maysun bint Bahdal Al-Kalabiya: That Muawiya entered upon her with a eunuch, and she covered herself from him. He said: He is a eunuch. She said: O Muawiya, do you think that mutilating him makes lawful what Allah has forbidden?

Note: It was mentioned in Al-Kashaf as 'Al-Kilabiyyah.' The correct form is 'Al-Kilabiyyah' with a silent 'lam.' The story has been mentioned by others regarding the daughter of Quradhah. And according to Abu Hanifah: it is not permissible to employ eunuchs, to keep them, to sell them, or to buy them. No one from the predecessors has been reported to have kept them. If you say: It has been narrated that a eunuch was gifted to the Messenger of Allah, blessings and peace be upon him, and he accepted him. I say: It is not accepted in matters that are widespread unless it is a well-known narration. If it is authentic, perhaps he accepted him to free him. [Narrated by Ibn Sa'd, he informed us that Muhammad ibn Umar said, 'Yaqoub ibn Abi Sa'sa'ah narrated to us from Abdullah ibn Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Sa'sa'ah who said, 'The Muqawqis, the ruler of Alexandria, sent to the Prophet, blessings and peace be upon him, in the seventh year of Hijrah, Mariyah and her sister Sirin, a thousand mithqals of gold, twenty garments, a mule, a donkey named Afir, and a eunuch named Mayud. Haatib presented Islam to Mariyah, and she and her sister accepted Islam, and then the eunuch accepted Islam afterward.' The mention of this eunuch has appeared in several narrations, including a narration from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him. And his saying, 'This is weak, and it is not accepted in matters that are widespread, except for a well-known narration if it is authentic. Perhaps he accepted him to free him.' This is not in matters that are widespread at all.] Or for some reasons. The term 'Irbah' means need. It is said: They are those who follow you to obtain from the excess of your food, and they have no need for women, as they are foolish and do not know anything about their affairs. Or righteous old men who, if they are with them, lower their gazes, or they have a disability. And it has been read as 'Ghayri' in the accusative as an exception or state, and in the genitive as descriptive. The singular is used in place of the plural because it conveys the essence. What follows clarifies that the intended meaning is plural. An example is 'We bring you out as a child.' They did not appear, either from 'appeared on something' if they became aware of it, meaning: they do not know what the private parts are and cannot distinguish between them and others. Or from 'appeared over someone' if they gained power over him, and 'appeared over the Qur'an' means: he took it and could bear it, meaning: they did not reach or have the ability for sexual intercourse. And it has been read as 'Awrat,' which is the language of Hudhail. If you say: Why did Allah not mention uncles and maternal uncles? I say: Al-Sha'bi was asked about that, and he said: So that the uncle does not describe her to his son, nor does the maternal uncle. Its meaning is that all other relatives share in the prohibition of the father and son [The phrase 'the father and son share in the prohibition' has a missing link, meaning: they share in it, the father... etc.]. Except for the uncle and maternal uncle and their children. If the father sees her, he might describe her to his son, and he is not a mahram, thus leading to a perception of her through description being akin to gazing at her. This is also one of the significant indications of the necessity of being cautious with them in covering up. The woman would strike the ground with her foot to make her anklet rattle, so it would be known that she has an anklet. It is said that she would strike one of her feet with the other so that it would be known that she has two anklets. And when they were forbidden from displaying the sound of jewelry after they were forbidden from displaying the jewelry itself, it is known that the prohibition from displaying the places of jewelry is more significant and more significant. The commands and prohibitions of Allah in every matter are such that the weak servant can hardly observe them. Even if he controls himself and strives, he does not escape from shortcomings that occur from him. Therefore, he advised all believers to repent and seek forgiveness, and to hope for success if they repent and seek forgiveness. And from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both of them: 'Repent from what you used to do in the days of ignorance, perhaps you will be happy in this world and the Hereafter.' If you say: Repentance has been established by Islam, and Islam erases what came before it, what is the meaning of this repentance? I say: What is meant by it is what the scholars say: If someone commits a sin and then repents from it, he is required, whenever he remembers it, to renew his repentance for it, as he is required to continue his regret and resolve until he meets his Lord. And it has been read: 'O you who believe,' with the 'h' being pronounced, and its reason is that it was open due to its occurrence before the 'alif,' and when the 'alif' was dropped due to the meeting of the two consonants, its movement followed the movement of what preceded it.