The Concluding Advice Regarding the Rulings of Wiping over Khuff, Shoes & Socks

The Concluding Advice Regarding the Rulings of Wiping over Khuff, Shoes & Socks

Tamam an-Nasah fee Ahkaam al-Mussah

By

Shaykh Muhammad Nasir uddeen al-Albaani

Translated By Abbas Abu Yahya

 

Table of Contents

Introduction.. 3

  1. 1. 7

Wiping over Shoes. 7

  1. 2. 9

Wiping over Torn Khuff and Socks. 9

  1. 3. 12

Does removing that which has been wiped over invalidate the Wudu?. 12

4.. 15

When does the time period for wiping begin?. 15

  1. 5. 21

When the time period for wiping over Khuff etc ends, does this invalidate Wudu?. 21

 

Introduction[1]

The great scholar Ahmad Muhammad Shakir[2] -Rahimahullaah- who revived the knowledge of hadeeth in the mid fourteenth century wrote in the introduction to the book ‘al-Massah ala al-Jorabayn’ (Wiping over the socks) by a scholar of Shaam, al-Qassimi[3] -Rahimahullaah, saying:

‘Indeed, our teacher, the scholar of Shaam, Shaykh al-Qassimi ad-Damishqi -Rahimahullaah- authored a valuable book about wiping over the socks. It was printed in Damascus in the year 1332 al-Hijri. I read it and benefitted a great deal of knowledge from it, and it gave a strong essence of spirit all that long time ago when we were on the onset of our youth, longing for authentic knowledge, the knowledge of the Book and the Sunnah.

We were the most eager that we could be for the books of the Salaf as-Salih and the books of those who followed their Manhaj from those who came later, those who adhered to the Prophetic guidance, and would follow the authentic evidence without being biased to opinions and desires, and without being rigid upon blind following.’

This work was revived by the great scholar of hadeeth who continued the effort of spreading the authentic Ahadeeth, Shaykh Muhammad Nasir ud-Deen Albaani. He researched this book by researching and grading the Ahadeeth and added a section after it calling it, ‘Tamam an-Nasah fee Ahkaam al-Massah’ (The concluding Advice Regarding the Rulings of Wiping over Khuff, shoes and socks).

A short synopsis of the book

‘al-Massah ala al-Jorabayn’ (Wiping over the socks) is a small book which the author al-Qasimi -Rahimuhullaah compiled after being asked about the issue of wiping over socks and shoes whilst making Wudu in the winter. He mentioned the Ahadeeth regarding this issue, then the statements of the Companions and those who followed them, he researched the authenticity of them and discussed them.

Shaykh Albaani added at the end of the book an appendix with very important issues connected to wiping over socks whilst making Wudu.

Date of book

al-Qasimi -Rahimuhullaah- completed this book in 1332 A.H. in Shaam. Shaykh Ahmad Shakir -Rahimuhullaah- wrote an introduction for it and Shaykh Albaani researched it.

Summary of what Shaykh Albaani says in this presentation:

A – Tirmidhi authenticated wiping over socks and shoes and he graded it Hasan from the Hadeeth of Huthail from al-Mughirah,

B –  the origin for wiping over torn Khuff and socks is that it is allowed

C –  Also, it is authentic from at-Thawri that he said:

‘Wipe over them, whatever you wear over your feet. Were not the Khuff of the Muhajiroon and the Ansaar except that they were torn, had holes and were tattered?’ 

D – Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah. He said in the book ‘Ikhteeyaraat’:

‘The person who wipes over the Khuff or head covering does not invalidate Wudu by removing them.

E – Then al-Bayhaqi narrated from al-Mughirah bin Shua’bah from the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam:

‘Wiping over the Khuff for the traveller is for three days and nights, and one day and night for the resident as long as he does not remove the Khuff.’

F – When the time period for wiping over Khuff etc ends, does this invalidate Wudu?

There is nothing upon him, rather his Taharah (purity) is correct and can pray with it as long as he does not invalidate the Wudu. This is what Nawawi -Rahimuhullaah- said.


 

Shaykh Muhammad Nasir uddeen Al-Albaani said:

In the Name of Allaah the Most Kind the Most Merciful

To proceed, after finishing from commenting on this blessed, beneficial book I thought from completely benefiting from this book that I follow the footsteps of the author -Rahimuhullaah- in verifying the correct position in many issues which people have been trialled with and have enquired about, and it has a strong connection with the subject matter. The issues are:

1 – Wiping over Shoes

2 – Wiping over Torn Khuff and Socks

3 – Does removing that which has been wiped over invalidate the Wudu?

4 – When does the time period for wiping begin?

5 – When the time period for wiping over Khuff etc ends. Does this invalidate Wudu?

So, I say seeking the assistance of Allaah alone, relying upon Him.

1

Wiping over Shoes

Wiping over the shoes [rather than washing the feet when performing Wudu] has become well-known among the later scholars that it is not permissible to wipe over them. However, we do not know a proof for their opinion, for that impermissibility, except for what al-Bayhaqi said in ‘Sunnan’:

‘The origin is the obligation of washing feet [in performing Wudu], except for that which is specified by the established Sunnah, or Ijma (consensus) in which there is no difference of opinion. There is no wiping over shoes or socks or either of them and Allaah knows best.’

This is what he said but it is not hidden -with regret- the ignorance of the preceding Ahadeeth[4] about establishing wiping over socks and shoes, some of which the chains [for the Ahadeeth] are authentic. This is why Turkimani al-Hanafi commented about him in the book ‘al-Jawhara an-Naqi’ by saying:

‘I say this is not correct. It has preceded that Tirmidhi authenticated wiping over socks and shoes and he graded it Hasan from the Hadeeth of Huthail from al-Mughirah, he also graded it Hasan from the Hadeeth of ad-Dhihak from Abu Musa.

Ibn Hibban authenticated [the hadeeth of] wiping over shoes from the hadeeth of Aws.

Ibn Khuzaimah authenticated the hadeeth of Ibn Umar about wiping over shoes made from a thick material. What al-Bayhaqi mentioned from the hadeeth of Zayed bin al-Habaab from Thawri (Meaning with his chain from Ibn Abbas) about wiping over shoes is a hadeeth which is good.

Ibn Qattan authenticated it from Ibn Umar.’

I (Albaani) say: if you know this, then it is not allowed to waver in accepting this concession after the hadeeth for it has been established, this is because like the author said previously:

‘Indeed, the hadeeth is authentic, so there is nothing except hearing and obeying.’

Especially after the clear practice of the Companions of this action, at the forefront of them was the rightly guided Khalifah Ali bin Abi Talib -RadhiAllaahu anhu, as has preceded and that was the opinion of some of the Imams of the Salaf as-Salih -RadhiAllaahu anhum ajmaeen.

Ibn Hazm -Rahimahullaah- said in his book ‘al-Muhalla’:

The issue: if the Khuff are cut to below the ankles, then wiping over them is permissible.

That is the saying of al-Awzai, it is narrated from him that he said: A person in Ihram can wipe over the Khuff which are cut below the ankles. . . . . others have said: ‘Khuff cannot be wiped over except if they cover the ankles.’

 

2

 Wiping over Torn Khuff and Socks

The scholars have differed greatly in regards to wiping over torn Khuff and socks. Most of them have forbidden it based upon a huge difference of opinion amongst them, you can see this in the larger books of Fiqh and in ‘al-Muhalla’.

Others have gone with it being permissible and that is what we have chosen. Our proof for this is that the origin for wiping over torn Khuff and socks is that it is allowed. Whoever prohibited it and made it conditional that it should be free from being torn or they placed restrictions for wiping over, then that is rejected due to the saying of the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam:

كل شرط ليس في كتاب الله فهو باطل

‘Every (religious) condition which is not in the Book of Allaah then it is invalid.’

Collected by Bukhari and Muslim.

Also, it is authentic from at-Thawri that he said:

‘Wipe over them, whatever you wear over your feet. Were not the Khuff of the Muhajiroon and the Ansaar except that they were torn, had holes and were tattered?’ 

Collected by AbdurRazzaq in al-Musanaf and al-Bayhaqi from that chain.

Ibn Hazm said:

‘If there are holes in the Khuff or what is worn on one’s feet, whether that hole is small or large, long or wide and by that some of the foot can be seen, a little of the foot or most of it or from both of them, then all of this is the same. Wiping on all these types is permissible, as long as there is some of the Khuff etc covering the feet and this is the opinion of Sufyaan at-Thawri, Dawood, Abu Thawr, Ishaaq Ibn Rahawayaa, Yazeed bin Haroon.’

Then Ibn Hazm presents the saying of the scholars who prevent from wiping over torn Khuff etc with the differences between them and contradictions, after that he refutes those statements. He explained that it is an issue for which there is no evidence, other than just an opinion and he concluded with saying:

‘However, the truth regarding this, is what the Sunnah has come with clarifying the Qur’aan, that the ruling about feet which one does not wear something over, that which could be wiped over, is that they are washed, and the ruling that if the feet are covered then you wipe over them. This is what the Sunnah came with,

وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ نَسِيّٗا

《and your Lord is never forgetful》[Maryam:64]

The Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam indeed knew when he ordered with wiping over the Khuff and what is worn on feet, and socks which are wiped over – there are Khuff, socks and footwear which could be ripped badly or slightly ripped, or not torn, whether red in colour, or black, white, new and old, the Messenger sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam did not specify some over others. If the ruling of this in the Deen was different then Allaah Ta’ala would not have been neglectful of revealing it nor would the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam have been careless of the necessity of its explanation, Allaah forbid he would do that.

So, the ruling of wiping over is correct in all these circumstances. Linguistically Al-Massa (Wiping over) does not necessitate them being completely covered as we have discussed.’

Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah said in ‘Ikhteeyaraat’:

‘There is an opinion that it is permissible to wipe over a bandage. Ibn Tameem and others mentioned this, as well as wiping over ripped Khuff, as long as they can still be called Khuff and if it is possible to continue walking in them.  It was two sayings from the past of Shafi’aee and it was chosen by Abul Barakaat and others from the scholars.’

I say: ar-Rafa’ee ascribed it in ‘Sharh al-Wajeez’ to the majority of the scholars and the evidence that was said, was that forbidding wiping over Khuff etc restricts the aspect of concession, so it is obligatory to wipe over.’

He -Rahimahullaah- was correct in this matter.

 

3

Does removing that which has been wiped over invalidate the Wudu?

The scholars have also differed about the one who removes the Khuff etc after making Wudu and having wiped over them. There are three opinions:

First – that his Wudu is correct and there is nothing upon that person.

Second – that he only has to wash his feet.

Third – that he has to repeat the Wudu.

For each of these opinions there is a group from the Salaf who held this opinion. AbdurRazzaq collected these Athaar from them in ‘al-Musannaf’, Ibn Abi Shaybah and al-Bayhaqi.

There is no doubt the first opinion is the strongest, because it corresponds to wiping over the Khuff etc which is a concession and ease from Allaah and the opinion of not allowing it invalidates this concession, as ar-Rafa’ee said in the issue before this.

What shows the strength over the other two opinions, are the following proofs:

First – that removing the Khuff etc after wiping over them is in conformity with the action of the rightly guided Khalifah Ali bin Abi Taalib, with an authentic chain from him -RadhiAllaahu anhu- that he broke his Wudu, then performed Wudu and wiped over his shoes then took them off and prayed.

Another proof: that it is in agreement with the correct understanding.  Indeed – if a person wiped over his head then shaved off his hair then it would not be obligatory upon him to repeat wiping his head but rather he has Wudu and this is what was chosen by Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah. He said in the book ‘Ikhteeyaraat’:

‘The person who wipes over the Khuff or head covering does not invalidate Wudu by removing them, nor does he invalidate the time period, and it is not obligatory to wipe over his head again, nor wash his feet again and this is the Madhab of al-Hasan al-Basri. Just as removing hair which has been wiped upon, as in the Madhab of Ahmad and the opinion of the majority.  It is also the Madhab of Ibn Hazm, so refer to his speech about this and his discussion with the one who opposed it, since it is precious.’

As for what is collected by Ibn Abi Shaybah and al-Bayhaqi from a man from the Companions of the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam about a person who wipes over his Khuff, then it appears to him to take off his Khuff.

The Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam said: ‘He should wash his feet.’

In this narration is Yazeed bin AbdurRahman ad-Dalaani. Al-Hafidh said: ‘He is truthful but makes a lot of mistakes and he used to make Tadlees[5].’

Al-Bayhaqi narrated from Abu Bakrah similarly.

Its narrations are trustworthy other than Ali bin Muhammad al-Qurashi, I do not know him.

Then al-Bayhaqi narrated from al-Mughirah bin Shua’bah from the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam:

‘Wiping over the Khuff for the traveller is for three days and nights, and one day and night for the resident as long as he does not remove the Khuff.’

Al-Bayhaqi said: ‘Umar bin Rudayh was the only one who narrated this, and he is not strong.’

I say: ‘This extra wording ‘as long as he does not remove the Khuff.’ Is Munkar (weak) due to him being a weak narrator and the only one narrating it and the absence of a supporting narration for it.’

 

4

When does the time period for wiping begin?

The scholars in this issue have two well-known opinions:

The first: it begins from the time the Wudu is invalidated after having put on the Khuff etc.

The other is: from the time of wiping over the covering after the Wudu was invalidated.

Abu Hanifah, Shafi’aee, Ahmad and their companions held the first opinion. We do not know of a correct evidence for them which can be mentioned, only an opinion.

This is why some of their companions differed with them as will be mentioned. I do not know of any of the Salaf preceding them from the Companions.
This is opposite to the second opinion because in front of them are the authentic Ahadeeth and the Fatawa of Umar bin al-Khattab –RadhiAllaahu anhu.

As for the Sunnah then there are authentic Ahadeeth which were narrated by a group of the Companions in Saheeh Muslim, in the four Sunnan, al-Masaneed and other books. In these Ahadeeth the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam commanded with wiping over [the Khuff, socks and shoes], and in some of the Ahadeeth there is a concession of wiping over [the Khuff, socks and shoes]. Also, in other Ahadeeth: he allowed for the resident to wipe over for one day and night and for the traveller three days and nights.

What is very clear is that the hadeeth is like a text regarding the beginning time period for wiping over, after having already wiped over the feet covering.

It is also like a text of refuting the first opinion, this is because what their opinion necessitates as they state in the book ‘al-Faroo’, that whoever prayed Fajr before sunrise, then he broke his Wudu at Fajr the next day, made Wudu and wiped over for the first time for the Fajr prayer, then he cannot wipe over the Khuff etc after that!

So, in this scenario, can it be said that he wiped over the feet covering for a day and night? !

As for the stronger second opinion then he can wipe over to just before Fajr on the third day.

Rather they have said something stranger than what we have mentioned; That if a person nullifies his Wudu and did not wipe over the feet covering until a day and night had passed after invalidation of the Wudu or three days and nights of the person travelling, that the time period is completed and it is not allowed to wipe over after that until he begins wearing his feet covering again upon Taharrah (purity).[6]

So, they prohibited benefiting from this concession, based upon an opinion which opposes the Sunnah!

This is why there was no room for Imam Nawawi except to oppose his Madhab – and he was concerned with not trying to oppose it as long as there was a way not to – due to the strength of the evidence, he -Rahimahullaah Ta’ala- said after mentioning the first opinion and those who held that opinion:

‘Al-Awzai and Abu Thawr said: the time period starts from the wiping over after the Wudu was nullified. It is a narration from Ahmad and Dawood, it is the chosen opinion and has the strongest evidence. This opinion was chosen by Ibn ul Mundhir, and it was reported similarly from Umar bin al-Khattab -RadhiAllaahu anhu.

However, it was reported by al-Mawardi and ash-Shashi from al-Hasan al-Basri that the beginning time is from wearing the khuff etc.

Those who said the time period starts from when one wipes over the foot covering, use as evidence the saying of the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam :

( يمسح المسافر ثلاثة أيام ) .

‘The traveller wipes over the foot covering for three days.’

These Ahadeeth are authentic as preceded. This is clear proof that wiping over is for three days, and that would not occur except if the time period was from the time the covering had been wiped over. Also, because Shafi’aee -RadhiAllaahu anhu- said:

‘If he invalidated his Wudu whilst being resident and began wiping over whilst on a journey then he completes the time period of the traveller so the ruling is connected to wiping over.

Our companions used as evidence the narration which was reported by Al-Hafidh al-Qasim bin Zakareeyah al-Matrazi with the hadeeth of Safwaan:

‘From the time of the nullification of Wudu until the next nullification of Wudu.’

But it is extra singular wording, not established and analogy is referred to.’

I say: if the analogy indicated to was acceptable by it being correct in itself, then the condition for accepting analogy and using it as an evidence is that it should not oppose the Sunnah. However, in this situation it opposes the Sunnah as you have seen, therefore, it is not allowed to turn to analogy, and this is why it has been said [in poetry]:

If there is an Athar (narration) then the debate is over.

If Allaah’s commands come they override everyone else’s.

So how about this analogy also opposing the opinion of the rightly guided Khalifah Umar bin al-Khattab. What I know of blind followers is, that they call to adhering to the authentic Sunnah when it opposes the statement of Umar RadhiAllaahu anhu, as they did in the case of the three divorces, so how can they not take this opinion when it is in agreement with the Sunnah? !

Indeed, AbdurRazzaq collected in ‘al-Musanaf’ from Abu Uthmaan an-Nahdi who said:

‘I attended when Sa’ad and Ibn Umar were debating in front of Umar regarding wiping over the Khuff, so Umar said: ‘They are wiped over till the same time from its following day and night.’

I say: Its Isnaad is Saheeh upon the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim.

This is clear that wiping over [Khuff, sock and shoe] begins from the time that you first wipe over the Khuff until that same time of the following day or night.

This is apparent from all the Athaar narrated from the Companions regarding the length of time period for wiping over [Khuff, sock and shoe] as far as we know. From what was collected by AbdurRazzaq and Ibn Abi Shaybah in ‘al-Musanaf’, for the sake of an example I will mention what was collected by Ibn Abi Shaybah from Amr ibn al-Harith who said:

‘I travelled with Abdullaah to al-Madain and he wiped over his Khuff for three days and did not remove them.’

Its Isnaad is Saheeh upon the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim.

Indeed, the Athaar as-Salafeeyah are in agreement with the Sunnah al-Muhammadeeyah about what we have mentioned, so adhere to them and you will be guided -by Allaah’s permission.

 

5

When the time period for wiping over Khuff etc ends, does this invalidate Wudu?

The scholars have different opinions about this. The most well-known of them are two in the Shafi’aee Madhab:

The first: Its obligatory to redo the Wudu.

The second: It is sufficient to wash the feet.

The third: There is nothing upon him, rather his Taharah (purity) is correct and can pray with it as long as he does not invalidate the Wudu. This is what Nawawi -Rahimuhullaah- said.

I say: ‘This third saying is the strongest and that is what Nawawi chose which is also opposite to his Madhab, he -Rahimuhullaah- said:

‘This is the Madhab which was mentioned by Ibn al-Mundhir from al-Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, Sulayman bin Harb and it was chosen by Ibn al-Mundhir and that is what is chosen and the strongest, and our companions mentioned it from Dawood.’

I say: ‘ash-Sha’arani mentioned it in ‘al-Mezaan’ from Imam Malik and was quoted by Nawawi who quoted it from him and others and it needs to be researched.

It is the opinion of Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah following Ibn Hazm and he mentioned those who held this opinion like Ibraheem an-Nakha’ee and Ibn Abu Layla, then Ibn Taymeeyah said:

‘This is the opinion of which there is no other, this is because there are no narrations which show that Tahara (purity) of Wudu is cancelled for a certain limb or a part of a limb, when the time period for wiping a Khuff etc ends.

But rather the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam prohibited a person from wiping over Khuff etc for more than three days for a traveller or one day and night for a resident.

So, whoever says any other opinion then he has implicated information which is not present, and it is fabricating against the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam that which he did not say. Whoever did so out of presumption then there is nothing upon him, whoever did that intentionally after the proof was established against him then he has committed a major sin.

Tahara is not invalidated except with that which nullifies it, and this person who wiped over Khuff etc his Tahara is correct and if he has not invalidated his Wudu then he is Tahir (pure) and a Tahir person can pray as long as he has not invalidated his Wudu. Therefore, he is Tahir (upon purity) and a Tahir person can pray as long as he has not invalidated his Wudu. This is about the person for who the time for wiping over Khuff etc has ended but he has not invalidated his Wudu. There is no text which shows that because the time period has ended that his Taharah has ended, not for some part of his limb or for the whole limb. So, he is Tahir (upon purity) until he invalidates his Wudu, then he removes his Khuff at that time or what is upon his feet and performs Wudu then he begins his wiping over the Khuff etc for another time period and like this he continues. Success is from Allaah Ta’ala.’

 

Beirut 8/12/1370                                        Muhammad Nasiruddeen al-Albaani

[1] By the translator

[2] Died 1377 A.H. – 1958 C.E.

[3] Died 1332 A.H. – 1914 C.E.

[4] The Ahadeeth about wiping over the Khuff, Shoes & Socks.

[5] TN: Not clearly mentioning names and identities of narrators in a chain of narration.

[6] Mentioned by Nawawi in Majmoo’ (1/486)

%d bloggers like this: