I wrote a question "Is Allah Wearing a Loincloth" which was originally closed by multiple users, with the close reason given as "Unclear what you are asking." It was subsequently reopened by votes, but then it was closed again by a different moderator for the same reason.
Should this question be reopened? Or, if this question as written does necessitate closure, what if anything can be done to make it clear and constructive?
I think most of the users totally missed the real point of the question asked by the OP which was "making sense of" a hadith that apparently attributes physical parts or belongings to Allah.
I already know that there are some disagreements among muslim scholars (especially from different schools) on this problem which in turn might have posed a different problem to the question as it could've attracted different answers based on different schools however this problem could've been avoided if the OP had made it explicit which school (or schools) of jurisprudence he wants to answer the question.
But the question got stuck in a very different controversy because of what seems to be a confusion rising from the correct translation vs correct interpretation of the hadith which are two very different things!
As for the contested translation of the hadith which revolved mainly around the translation of the Arabic word "حَقو", Almaany Online Arabic Dictionary returns 'groin' and 'loin' as the correct Arabic equivalents. Google Translate (which admittedly doesn't have a scholarly-authored glossary but one that reflects languages as commonly used by internet users), in turn, returns 'waist' and 'loin'.
These are the common literal translations of the controversial word at least as in contemporary use.
Other advocated translations such as the one provided by Sunnah.com doesn't seem to be a literal translation as it entirely ignores the word "حقو" but probably for interpretative intention of the translator to rule out unwanted literal (mis)connotations which, in the meantime, must be understood as one way of "making sense of" the tradition as demanded by the OP, representing at least one of the approaches to the problem raised.
Therefore it was crucial to explicitly distinguish between the literal translation and interpretative understanding of the tradition in order to avoid a misleading controversy stemming from confusing between the two, while the latter was the independent problem that should've been recognized and properly addressed by answerers.
But obviously the OP himself was mainly responsible for the controversy for insisting on one alleged literal translation 'loincloth' as opposed to 'waist' (which may be one possibility and true but not yet verified for others). But the point is that regardless of the literal translation so long as the equivalent is a physical object the interpretive problem stands; a problem already wisely recognized and answered by one user!
I recommend the OP to update the question to better highlight the actual problem. Moreover as physical metaphors in Quran and Sunna are too ample to resort to a one single controversial one, I recommend producing some additional examples for making a stronger case for the problem.
The question itself doesn't really make any sense; the whole thing seems to be based on a mistranslation of the hadith, a translation which (as best I can tell) isn't espoused by anyone except the OP.
Of note, here is the entirity of the hadith using a more common translation (as provided by Sunnah.com)
The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Allah created His creation, and when He had finished it, the womb, got up and caught hold of Allah whereupon Allah said, "What is the matter?' On that, it said, 'I seek refuge with you from those who sever the ties of Kith and kin.' On that Allah said, 'Will you be satisfied if I bestow My favors on him who keeps your ties, and withhold My favors from him who severs your ties?' On that it said, 'Yes, O my Lord!' Then Allah said, 'That is for you.' " Abu Huraira added: If you wish, you can recite: "Would you then if you were given the authority. do mischief in the land and sever your ties of kinship. (47. 22)
This is word-for-word the same translation used in OP, except with the first sentence re-translated:
This suggests that, rather than asking about a particular, a common, or even a reasonable interpretation of the hadith held by any particular school of Islam (which would easily make the question on-topic and constructive) you're asking about the reasoning behind your own personal interpretation, even though you don't give any particularly compelling argument behind why you've even bothered to translate it like that (while ignoring multiple comments mentioning the peculiarity of the translation).
But that's all moot, since the question isn't really asking about the reasoning behind the translation. It isn't even asking about why your translation and the more common translation differ. Basically, all it does is presents a peculiar translation (which, by the quoted reference in the post itself, is not even the primary definition the word), then asks if we're supposed to agree with that translation.
Honestly, I can't see any constructive value to this question; as written, it looks like nothing more than a crude attempt to either lay doubt on the collection of Sahih Bukhari or the narrations of Abu Hurayrah, rather than an actual legitimate question based on an actual problem you face. That sort of polemic question is not what the site is geared toward, and such are not welcome on this site at all.
If such polemic was not your intent, then the question still needs to be reworked to make that clear, and to focus on what (if any) legitimate question you're actually asking. Otherwise, keeping it closed as "unclear" makes perfect sense.
I voted to close it down:
You got an answer, but you didn't like it.
Another person told you about the correct translation, but you declined his translation.
Thus, it is unclear what you are asking
