Is the torso/chest/trunk of a man considered as awrah?

Question

It is always stated in Islamic sites that men's awrah is from knees to navel. (for example http://islamqa.info/en/34976 ).

I have searched hadiths about that, and I have found many hadiths about covering thigh, you can see them in the url or in http://sunnah.com/search/?q=thigh , but I have found almost none hadiths that clearly prove that chest (torso, trunk) is not awrah.

I have found 1 hadith: http://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/42/45 , in which somebody sees prophet naked in his house.

We can think that if that was awrah, prophet should say about it, and if he did not say, then it is tolerable. But the hadith does not clearly say that prophet did not say about it, we just can think so, because the hadith does not say about it, and since it is important thing, its narrators should not leave that hidden, so we think the prophet did not say anything about that, so we decide it is not awrah.

But there is probability that it was so much clearly known by everybody, that chest is awrah, so it was even not told in the narration.

Awrah might be exposed by mistake and just who see it might must look at other direction or close his eyes or cover the awrah by hands etc.

So, are there any other hadiths which show that some men at time of Muhammad showed their torso for long time and it was allowed or was not prohibited? Ie can you prove or disprove the decision of fakihs that chest is not awrah? Or can you say by hadiths that seems nobody showed his chest so that can be considered as proof that it is awrah?

(Some illustration for that it is decision of fakihs: http://islamqa.info/en/171584 : "And he said in ash-Sharh al-Kabeer, 1/457: The navel and the knees are not part of the ‘awrah. This is the view of Maalik and ash-Shaafa‘i.")

Answer 1

Well there's consensus about that the torso of a man isn't awrah. This is what you will find in any fatwa or fiqh book. For example here (Arabic) where the scholar adds that it's forbidden to a woman to look at it no matter if with lust or without!

But the fact that the awrah of a man is only between knees and naval doesn't mean that he could go along half naked all the time, because this would cause fitna and then it would be regarded as not permissible! But in cases of necessity this could be helpful and allowable. See also this fatwa in English.

References

Well as you may see most scholars don't have a proof for anything which could be awrah for a man unless the part between knees and naval. So what i could find are mostly only indications which may have been interpreted otherwise, but some of them seem to be more like a proof:

• In Sahih al Bukhari (in ghazwat al-Khandaq) it's said that the Abdomen of our Messenger (peace be upon him) was covered with dust i found in fath al-Bary an indication that there's a hadith in Musnad Ahmad (with a sane sanad according to ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani) narrated by um-Salamah (May Allah be pleased with her) clearly quoting that the hair of his torso has been covered with dust, and telling that our Messenger (peace be upon him) has been handig milk (laban) to his sahaba at the day of al-Khandaq:

قُلْتُ وَفِي حَدِيثِ أُمٍّ سَلَمَةَ عِنْدَ أَحْمَدَ بِسَنَدٍ صَحِيحٍ كَانَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يُعَاطِيهِمُ اللَّبَنَ يَوْمَ الْخَنْدَقِ وَقَدِ اغْبَرَّ شَعْرُ صَدْرِهِ

and this is also supported by an other hadith in sahih al-Bukhari where the narrator adds that our Messenger was a hairy man, so they saw his hear! Which ibn Hajar interpreted as the hair of torso and abdomen!

• In the Arabic Fatwa the scholar indicates an other hadith which is quoted in sahih al-Bukahri and sunan an-Nisa'i the narrator Sahl (May Allah be pleased with him) who was a witness of what he narrated said: that the man had no upper garment which may indicate that his torso was uncovered!

The man had no upper garment قَالَ سَهْلٌ مَا لَهُ رِدَاءٌ

Note: in the translation they: only said "The man had no upper garment" and this is said by Sahl which i put in bold in the Arabic extract of the Hadith!

• An other Hadith may also indicate that our Messenger was digging in the Khandaq (trench) with an uncovered torso is in Sunan an-Nasa'i as he toke off his upper garment!

Comment on the Hadith of our Messenger naked

As you mentioned this hadith of our Messneger (peace be upon him) naked i would like to add this comment from the sharh of Sunan at-Tirmidhi (tuhfat al-ahudi) that

stood naked, dragging his garment

means he was wearing an upper garment (covering his knees and naval at least) , but because he was so happy that Zaid came that it felt from his shoulder so that his naval was uncovered!

I did not see him naked before nor afterwards

of course doesn't mean she ('Aisha (May Allah be pleased with her) never saw him naked, but it refers to the warm welcome of Zaid (May Allah be pleased with him) and means she never saw him hug and kiss for a welcome like this!

And Allah knows best

Answer 2

It’s common sense that a man must cover his chest. His body just as the woman’s had attractions, beauty. If a million scholars don’t have common sense will you turn away from what Allah has made clear.

If Muslims want a clear answer then they have lost the key to Islam.

It’s like asking is it permissible to marry to have sexual intercourse and then divorce because it prevents a haram action. You would be quite naive, or ignorant to think that it’s true.

Or hopeful at worst. Men can not and should not walk on beach, in their neighborhood Even in the home without shirt. It’s immodest