Abbas Abu Yahya
From Uqbah bin Aamir al-Juhni who said: ‘I left from Shaam to go to Madinah on a Friday. I visited Umar bin al-Khattab and he asked:
‘When did you put your Khuff on your feet?’
I answered: ‘Friday.’
He asked: ‘Did you take them off?’
I replied: ‘No.’
“ أصبت السنة “ .
‘You have been correct upon the Sunnah.’
Umar said this to Uqbah and he had wiped over his Khuff from a Friday to the next Friday whilst he was a traveller.’
[Collected by Tahawi in ‘Sharh al-Ma’ani’, Daraqutni in ‘Sunnan’, Al-Hakim and from him al-Bayhaqi in ‘Sunnan’, Daraqutni said: ‘Its Isnaad is Saheeh.’ Al-Hakim said: ‘Hadeeth Saheeh upon the conditions of Muslim’ and Dhahabi agreed with him. Albaani said: ‘It is as they said it is.’]
Shaykh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymeeyah Rahimahullaah Ta’ala said in a long piece of research about wiping over the Khuff. Is it a condition that they should not be torn?
‘As for the Ahadeeth about the time period for wiping over the Khuff etc is a day and night and three days and nights, there is no prohibition for wiping over, for more than this except by a way of understanding the texts, and understanding has no generality.
So, if it is possible for a person to remove the Khuff etc after the time period expires then acts upon these Ahadeeth.
This is how the hadeeth of Uqbah bin Aamir is understood when he left from Damascus to Madinah to give the people good news of the conquest of Damascus, and he wiped over the Khuff for a week without removing them, Umar said to him You have been correct upon the Sunnah. It is an authentic hadeeth.’
Shaykh ul Islaam acted upon this, whilst on some of his travels, he says:
‘When I travelled with a caravan for delivering important information, and the journey was moving along the time period for wiping over the footwear etc had expired and it was not possible to remove the footwear and perform a full Wudu except by separating from my associates, or by holding them back which would cause them harm if they stalled their journey, so I overwhelmingly assumed that most probably there is no time limit if there is a need as is the issue like when a person wears a bandage or a cast, and the hadeeth of Umar and him saying to Uqbah bin Aamir:
‘You have been correct upon the Sunnah’ Is understood to combine between the al-Aathaar.
Then I saw it clearly in the book ‘Maghazi Ibn A’idh’ that he had gone with a caravan -just as I did- when Damascus was conquered…..so I praised Allaah for being in agreement with this, and this is a very beneficial issue.’
I (Albaani) say, he has spoken the truth, may Allaah have mercy upon him. This is from his Fiqh which is rare. May Allaah reward him with goodness on our behalf.
Shaykh ‘Ala uddeen al-Muradi quoted in his book: ‘al-Insaaf’ from shaykh ul Islaam that he said in ‘al-Ikhtayaarat:
لا تتوقف مدة المسح في المسافر الذي يشق ( عليه ) اشتغاله بالخلع و اللبس ,
كالبريد المجهز في مصلحة المسلمين “
‘The time period for wiping over footwear for a journey, which would entail hardships in removing and putting on again footwear, is not limited, like in a caravan of people which is prepared on a journey for the benefit of the Muslims.’
[Silsilah Ahadeeth as-Saheehah no. 2622]
From Muhammad bin Ishaaq who said Nafa narrated to me -and his wife was the wife of the son of Abdullaah bin Umar and she narrated to him that Abdullaah bin Umar purchased a girl captive on the path to Makkah and freed her. He ordered her to perform hajj with him, and he wanted to get some shoes for her but could not find any, so he cut khuff for her so that they would be below the ankles.
Ibn Ishaaq said I mentioned this to Ibn Shihab and he said: Salim bin Abdullaah narrated to me that he used to do this then Safeeyah bint Abu Ubayd narrated to him that Aeysha narrated to her that the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam would make a concession for women to wear Khuff.’
So, Salim bin Abdullaah stopped cutting khuff.’
[Collected by Ahmad and Albaani said its Isnaad is Hasan. Silsilah Saheehah no. 2065]
From Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allaah -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam– was asked:
O Messenger of Allaah! Do you see if a person nullifies his Wudu and then performs Wudu and wipes over his Khuff, can he pray?’
The Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam– said:
‘There is no problem with this.’ Meaning wiping over the Khuff.’
[Collected by Ibn Hibban in his book ‘Saheeh’ Silsilah Saheehah no. 2940]
I (Albaani) say: this hadeeth has a supporting narration which shows that the hadeeth is correct and not weak.
From Sa’ad bin Abee Waqqas from the Messenger of Allaah -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam– that ‘there is no problem with wiping over the Khuffs.’
Collected by Nisa’ee, Ahmad and Ibn Asaakir and I say: this chain is authentic upon the conditions of Bukhari and Muslim.
Know that the Ahadeeth about wiping over the Khuffs for Wudu are Mutawatir (multiple narrations) as has been stated from the scholars of hadeeth and Sunnah.
As for the Athaar of the action of the Companions and the Salaf, there are very many and well known. As for what is narrated from some of them as it being a dislike, then this is before the knowledge about it reached them, as is the case of many of the issues of Fiqh and this is why they returned to that opinion and acted upon it when it reached them.
Some of the Islamic sects remained with rejecting this Sunnah like the Rafidah and the Khawarij and from them the Ibaadeeyah which confirms that they are indeed from the people of desires who have been promised with the saying of Allaah Ta’ala:
وَمَن يُشَاقِقِ ٱلرَّسُولَ مِنۢ بَعۡدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ ٱلۡهُدَىٰ وَيَتَّبِعۡ غَيۡرَ سَبِيلِ ٱلۡمُؤۡمِنِينَ نُوَلِّهِۦ مَا تَوَلَّىٰ وَنُصۡلِهِۦ جَهَنَّمَۖ وَسَآءَتۡ مَصِيرًا
《And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers’ way. We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell – what an evil destination 》
If astonishment is something then it is astonishing that shaykh Abdullaah bin Humayd as-Saalami al-Ebaadi is so determined to persist these people upon contradicting the Messenger and to follow a path other than that of the believers – and along with that adhere to unfounded and feeble narrations with their chains and meanings which were mentioned by so called claimant Imam ar-Rabee bin Habeeb in the ‘al-Musnad’ which is ascribed to him!
These narrations revolve around his shaykh Abu Ubaydah, who is unknown to ar-Rabee and he is not well-known to them for narrations with precision, good memory and proficiency!
Then in his explanation of wiping over the Khuffs he rejects the Mutawatir authentic Ahadeeth and the many well-known and established Athaar and he declares them to be weak in his biasedness to the Ibaadeeyah with the strike of a pen, he says: ‘You have come to know that the Sunnah is not established in this issue!!’
He is not truthful in what he said, from two angles:
The first: that he rejected that which is Mutawatir. So Allaah’s statement is true about him:
و جحدوا بها و استيقنتها أنفسهم .
<< And they belied them (those Ayaat) wrongfully and arrogantly, though their ownselves were convinced thereof >> [Naml: 14]
The other: his saying: ‘you have come to know…..’ since it is not possible to know the correctness of a claim except by presenting proof and evidence as is naturally established intellectually.
He did not bring any evidence whatsoever just a mere claim, this is the situation of their scholar who some writers claim is balanced and not biased, I swear by the truth, indeed the one who reaches to such a level of biasedness from the people of desires to where he rejects the ‘Akhbar at-Tawatur’ which the people of Hadeeth have such a concern for, which the people of desires have nothing similar to investigate and research and are too weak to establish the proofs to authenticate their Madhab which they are completely separate from the Ahl-ul-Sunnah wal Hadeeth.
This is the truth which is not hidden * so leave me from the paths of misguidance.
Before I withhold my pen, I say:
This man as-Saalami has indeed become used to bringing forth speech, rambling on without restraint to support his Madhab and his desires, and from that he linked up with the Shia and the Khawarij with some of the scholars of the Sunnah from the Dhahireeyah. He said following on from those mentioned is ‘Abu Bakr bin Dawood ad-Dhahiri’.
I say this ‘Abu Bakr’ is Muhammad bin Dawood bin Ali ad-Dhahiri. Al-Hafidh ad-Dhahabi who wrote his biography in his book ‘Seera alaam an-Nubala’:
‘He narrated from his father and Abbas ad-Doori…. and he has complete insight in hadeeth and with the sayings of the Companions. He used to derive his own opinions and not blindly follow anyone.’
I say: it is very inconceivable for the likes of him to oppose the Hadeeth and the Companions and that he would be in agreement with the Khawarij in rejecting the Sunnah of wiping over the Khuff, especially since he learnt from his father Dawood but rather he is with the Imams of Fiqh and Hadeeth in the opinion of wiping over the Khuff as was mentioned by Imam Ibn Hazm in ‘al-Muhallah’, so where did Saalami get what he attributes to Abu Bakr ad-Dhahri?!
How good is what has been said:
A claim which cannot be established ** those who explain it are mere claimants!
[Silsilah Saheehah no.2940]