DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Masah on Socks- A new book for download

**VXHLrsO1** · 11-27-2007, 01:55 AM

I was hoping that I wouldn't have to get involved in this discussion, but...

Let us discuss these conditions, one by one, in an orderly, objective manner.

Before discussing these conditions, it is imperative to bear in mind where they came from.

Masah is only permissible on a sock, if it has the qualities of a khuff.
So these conditions are, in reality, inherent qualities of a khuff, thus in order for a sock to be in the meaning of a khuff, these qualities will have to be found in the sock in the same manner as they are found in a khuff.

This is clearly mentioned in most Hanafi books of Fiqh.
Also, our discussion here is based on the hanafi madhab.

First condition
Standing on its own

This is the primary condition in a jawrab and has been mentioned in most books of fiqh.

The Fuqaha explain it to mean that the jawrab must be so thick, that is could stand up around the calf, solely on account of its thickness ie. not because of being tied, or of its elasticity or because it is so narrow.

This is an inherent quality of a khuff and a must in a jawrab if one wishes to wipe over it.

Because the brothers are insisting on practical demonstrations, I conducted a small test using a khuff, 3 different types of socks in addition to a sock that I feel meets up to the conditions mentioned.

In order for the khuff/sock to prove that it is standing upright because of its thickness, it was neccessary to have something in the sock as the "foot" with no calf to give support to the sock.
Only then would the sock be standing up because of its thickness.

Here are the results.

First, the Defending Champion, a top quality zipless khuff from www.khuffs.com. (They are really worth it, so if any of you buy one, tell them Soofi Saheb referred you. They might give me a commission :- )
Here he is:

As you can see, he is standing up perfectly, without falling down, because it is leather.

Now we have the three wannabe's.

The first, a nice spanking new dress sock:

Failed miserably!
You can even see the Vaseline Intensive Care "Foot" inside it.

As for Number Two, a slightly thicker sock, for those colder days:

Failed terribly, as you can see.

And Number Three is the thickest sock in my collection. I keep him for those really freezing days, we rarely have here on the coast.

Another disappointment. I wonder if the shop wil take him back? He failed my quality control test.

And because I know that some will argue that this condition is impossible, as no non-leather sock could ever fulfil it, I included Number Four.

He hails from India, boasting a shiny waterproof outer, with a warm inner.
Came across him in Nizamuddin, when I was there for our Mashwarah a few years back. Seemed acceptable to me, but to confirm, I smsed two of our "hot" young Muftis in South Africa, who gave the go ahead.

Here he is:

As we can all see, he is standing up hail and healthy, all on his own.
Why? Because the material he is made from is thick enough to share the qualities of a khuff.

Now, instead of discussing the other conditions, i would request brothers to show me normal thick or thin socks that meet this condition.
It is possible that a few really thick sock will meet it, so the brothers are requested to put it to the test, and if they do pass, show us the results.

Also, if anybody disagrees with this condition or the application of it, they are welcome to present their view, in a civil and amicable manner.

Jazakallah for your time.

As salamu aleykum,

Brother Soofi Saheb with respect for your investigation, as far as i know the manner of standing on its own as explained by you is not a condition, i recall this quote from a post by brother Salman:

salamu `alaykum

The general rule is that anything that fulfills the conditions of the khuff is valid to wipe on.

Water proof is *not* a condition. Neither is "standing on its own". Ibn `Abidin has a refutation of this. As for not being tied - then what this refers to is something external to the sock, not elastic or something that si aprt of it.

Wasalam
Salman

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...t=17087&page=7

Also if that the case would be what about thin leather khuffs who are so thin that it dont stand on itself?

Neither waterproof is a condition:

Again from brother Salman:

He (Imam Maydani) further states:

ولو مسح على الجوربين فإن كانا ثخينين منعلين جاز بالاتفاق

That is the socks do not absorb water it will be permissible to wipe over them by agreement (itifaaq)

However, the word "absorb" here does not mean "water proof" but rather refers to "immediate absorption". This is also understood from `Ala' Al Din `Abidin's summary of footgear valid to wipe on, taken from his father Ibn `Abidins Radd al Muhtar, because he said that the footgear must:

- Prevent water from reaching the body when wiped upon (`inda al mash)

and `inda ('when') implies immediacy, as the scholars of Arabic language confirm, especially in the precise usage of jurists.

The person who outlines the permissibilty most explicitly is Shaykh Ibrahim al Halabi in his commentary on Munyat Al Musalli - famous as al Halabi al Kabir.

Imam Ibn 'Abidin also states:

- It is also pointed to by what Tahtawi quotes from al Khaniya that anything that is akin to (fi ma`na) footgear in the possibility of extensive walking and travel is permitted to wipe over, even it is from Roman cloth (libd rumi). (Ibn `Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar 1.179, Bulaq ed.)

http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...t=11156&page=2

Also i asked this in a lenghty question to Mufti Desai:

QUESTION:

Question
Im sick of putting everytime my feets into the sink on work to wash them.

I heard that according to Imam Muhammad and Imam Abu Yusuf its aloud to make masah over socks and that Imam Abu Hanifa towards the end of his life came back to the opinion his 2 students.

Now Hanafis say that a sock fulfill these conditions;

-Its material does not let wetness through to the skin when wiping. Most cotton socks will therefore not be suitable*.
-If placed on the floor like a pair of shoes, then the it must untied stands by itself unsupported.

I recently heard that water-proof is not a condition, Neither is "standing on its own" and that Ibn Abidin has a refutation of this.

Imam Quduri in his Mukhtasar states:
ولا يجوز المسح على الجوربين عند أبي حنيفة إلا أن يكونا مجلدين أو منعلين . وقال أبو يوسف ومحمد : يجوز المسح على الجوربين إذا كانا ثخينين لا يشفان الماء ( 1 ) ولا يجوز المسح على العمامة والقلنسوة ( 2 ) والبرقع والقفازين

- Wiping is not permissible (i.e. not valid) according to Abu Hanifa unless they are covered or soled with leather. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: It is permissible and valid to wipe over socks if they are such that they dont absorb the water.
(end quote)

The position of the Sahibayn was, however, the final position of Imam Abu Hanifa. Imam Maydani in his Al Lubab fi Sharh Al Kitab quotes Imam Qulubaghas Al Tashih that it is established that Abu Hanifa returned to the position of his two students:
قال في التصحيح وعنه أنه رجع إلى قولهما وعليه الفتوى هداية
He (Imam Maydani) further states:
ولو مسح على الجوربين فإن كانا ثخينين منعلين جاز بالاتفاق
That is the socks do not absorb water it will be permissible to wipe over them by agreement (itifaaq)
However, the word "absorb" here does not mean "water proof" but rather refers to "immediate absorption". This is also understood from `Ala' Al Din `Abidin's summary of footgear valid to wipe on, taken from his father Ibn `Abidins Radd al Muhtar, because he said that the footgear must:
- Prevent water from reaching the body when wiped upon (`inda al mash)
and `inda ('when') implies immediacy, as the scholars of Arabic language confirm, especially in the precise usage of jurists.
The person who outlines the permissibilty most explicitly is Shaykh Ibrahim al Halabi in his commentary on Munyat Al Musalli - famous as al Halabi al Kabir.
Imam Ibn 'Abidin also states:
- It is also pointed to by what Tahtawi quotes from al Khaniya that anything that is akin to (fi ma`na) footgear in the possibility of extensive walking and travel is permitted to wipe over, even it is from Roman cloth (libd rumi). (Ibn `Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar 1.179, Bulaq ed.)
Whats the truth on this and do you agree on the above, can we make masah over socks, im sick of putting my feets into the sink on work, what about SkinSealz socks (which are completely waterproof, but cant stand on its own like a shoe)?

ANSWER:

Muhtaram / Muhtaramah ,

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh

It should be the attitude of every Muslim to happily accept all the injunctions of Shariah. Whatever Shariah has ordained us to do we should consider it to be a blessing and a means of achieving rewards.

The washing of feet in wudu is a direct injunction of the Qur’an. Allah Ta’ala says:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ (المائده)

O you who believe, when you rise for Salah, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and make Masah (wiping by hands) of your head and (wash) you feet up to the ankles. (al-Ma’idah – 6)

What is proven from Qur’an is Qati’ (absolute) and incumbent to follow. The alternative of masah was only taken into consideration after the ahadith reached the level of tawatur (there were so many narrators in each era that it is impossible to think that they all conspired to fabricate the hadith). Imam Sarakhsi in his al-Mabsoot writes:

ولكثرة الأخبار فيه قال أبو حنيفة رحمه الله تعالى : ما قلت بالمسح حتى جاءني فيه مثل ضوء النهار

Due to the overwhelming narrations on masah, Imam Abu Hanifa says, “I was not in the view of permissibility of masah on khufain until the proofs of it did not reach me like daylight.

Even though Shariah has given an alternative of making masah on socks with conditions, the original ruling of washing the feet must be respected. One should refrain from making such claims as “I am sick of putting every time my feet into the sink on work to wash them”.

There are three categories of socks for making masah:

1. Leather socks. All the Ulama are unanimous that it is permissible to make masah on leather socks.

2. Thin non-leather socks. All the Four Schools of Fiqh are unanimous that masah on thin socks is not permissible.

.

3. Thick non-leather socks. It is permissible with conditions. Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) was originally of the opinion of impermissibility. Later he retracted from his view and accepted the view of his two Students, Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) and Imam Muhammad (RA).

Allamah ‘Ala al-Din al-Haskafi in his al-Durr al-Mukthar mentions the conditions of making masah on thick non-leather socks as:

One is able to walk one farskh (3 Shar’ee miles) in them.
The socks cling to the feet without having to tie with anything.
The socks are not transparent.
The water does not seep through while making masah.

For the socks to be waterproof and be able to stand like shoes on floor are not conditions for permissibility of masah.

If the above mentioned conditions are found in sealskin socks, then it will be permissible to make masah on them.

Al-Durr al-Muhtar with Hashiya of Ibn Abideen (1/269) H.M. Saeed Company

Badai’ al-Sanai’ (1/83) Dar al-Kitab Deoband

Fath Bab al-‘Inayah (1/124) Shirkah Dar al-Arkam bin Abi al-Arakam

Tabyeen al-Haqa’iq (1/153) Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiya

Hashiya al-Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Fallah p. 138 Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiya

Fiqh al-Islam wa al-Adilatuhu (1/498) Dar al-Fikr al-Mu’asir

الدر المختار:

( أو جوربيه ) ولو من غزل أو شعر ( الثخينين ) بحيث يمشي فرسخا ويثبت على الساق ولا يرى ما تحته ولا يشف إلا أن ينفذ إلى الخف قدر الغرض

قال ابن عابدين:

( قوله ولو من غزل أو شعر ) دخل فيه الجوخ كما حققه في شرح المنية . وقال : وخرج عنه ما كان من كرباس بالكسر : وهو الثوب من القطن الأبيض ؛ ويلحق بالكرباس كل ما كان من نوع الخيط كالكتان والإبريسم ونحوهما . وتوقف ح في وجه عدم جواز المسح عليه إذا وجد فيه الشروط الأربعة التي ذكرها الشارح . وأقول : الظاهر أنه إذا وجدت فيه الشروط يجوز ، وأنهم أخرجوه لعدم تأتي الشروط فيه غالبا ، يدل عليه ما في كافي النسفي حيث علل جواز المسح على الجورب من كرباس بأنه لا يمكن تتابع المشي عليه ، فإنه يفيد أنه لو أمكن جاز ، ويدل عليه أيضا ما في ط عن الخانية أن كل ما كان في معنى الخف في إدمان المشي عليه وقطع السفر به ولو من لبد رومي يجوز المسح عليه . ا هـ ( قوله على الثخينين ) أي اللذين ليسا مجلدين ولا منعلين نهر ، وهذا التقييد مستفاد من عطف ما بعده عليه ، وبه يعلم أنه نعت للجوربين فقط كما هو صريح عبارة الكنز . وأما شروط الخف فقد ذكرها أول الباب ، ومثله الجرموق ولكونه من الجلد غالبا لم يقيده بالثخانة المفسرة بما ذكره الشارح ؛ لأن الجلد الملبوس لا يكون إلا كذلك عادة ( قوله بحيث يمشي فرسخا ) أي فأكثر كما مر ، وفاعل يمشي ضمير يعود على الجورب والإسناد إليه مجازي ، أو على اللابس له والعائد محذوف أي به ( قوله بنفسه ) أي من غير شد ط ( قوله ولا يشف ) بتشديد الفاء ، من شف الثوب : رق حتى رأيت ما وراءه ، من باب ضرب مغرب . وفي بعض الكتب : ينشف بالنون قبل الشين ، من نشف الثوب العرق كسمع ونصر شربه قاموس ، والثاني أولى هنا لئلا يتكرر مع قوله تبعا للزيلعي ولا يرى ما تحته ، لكن فسر في الخانية الأولى بأن لا يشف الجورب الماء إلى نفسه كالأديم والصرم ، وفسر الثاني بأن لا يجاوز الماء إلى القدم وكأن تفسيره الأول مأخوذ من قولهم اشتف ما في الإناء شربه كله كما في القاموس ، وعليه فلا تكرار فافهم...قال الرافعى : (لا يشف الجورب الماء الى نفسه) أى ماء المسح لا ماء الغسل كما فى الامداد.

بدائع الصنائع

وأما المسح على الجوربين ، فإن كانا مجلدين ، أو منعلين ، يجزيه بلا خلاف عند أصحابنا وإن لم يكونا مجلدين ، ولا منعلين فإن كانا رقيقين يشفان الماء ، لا يجوز المسح عليهما بالإجماع وإن كانا ثخينين لا يجوز عند أبي حنيفة وعند أبي يوسف ، ومحمد يجوز . وروي عن أبي حنيفة أنه رجع إلى قولهما في آخر عمره ، ، وذلك أنه مسح على جوربيه في مرضه ، ثم قال لعواده : " فعلت ما كنت أمنع الناس عنه " فاستدلوا به على رجوعه

حاشية الطحطاوى على مراقى الفلاح

(من شيء ثخين) اعلم أن المسئلة على ثلاثة وجوه إن كانا رقيقين غير منعلين لا يجوز المسح عليهما إتفاقا وإن كانا ثخينين منعلين جاز إتفاقا وإن كان ثخينين غير منعلين فهو محل الإخلاف كما في الخانية...(لا يشف الماء) أي لا يتجاوز منه الماء إلى القدم ذكره في الخانية... (وإليه رجع الإمام) أي قبل موته بثلاثة أيام وقيل بسبعة وذلك أنه مسح على جوربيه في مرضه ثم قال لعودة : فعلت ما كنت أمنع الناس عنه فاستدلوا بذلك على رجوعه كما في البدائع و التبيين

تبيين الحقائق

ويروى رجوع أبي حنيفة إلى قولهما قبل موته بثلاثة أيام وقيل بسبعة أيام وعليه الفتوى وعنه أنه مسح على جوربيه في مرضه ، ثم قال لعواده فعلت ما كنت أنهى الناس عنه فاستدلوا به على رجوعه

فتح باب العناية

ويجوز على الجرموقين و كل ما يستر الكعب به السفر...(كل ما يستر الكعب) أى ويجوز المسح على ما يستره (ويمكن به السفر) أى السفر القصير العرفى وأقله فرسخ ، سواء كانا مجلدين بأن كان الجلد أعلاهما وأسفلهما ، أو منعلين بأن كان الجلد أسفلهما فقط ، أو ثخينين مستمسكين على الساق فى قول أبى يوسف ومحمد و أبى حنيفة أخيرا قبل موته بسبعة أيام ، و فى ((النوازل)): بثلاثة أيام ، وعليه الفتوى

الفقه الاسلامي وأدلته

قال أبو حنيفة: لا يجوز المسح على الجوربين، إلا أن يكونا مجلدين أو منعلين، لأن الجورب ليس معنى الخف، لأنه لا يمكن مواظبة المشى فيه، إلا إذا كان منعلأ، وهو محمل الحديث المخير للمسح على الجورب...الا أنه رجع إلى قول الصاحبين فى آخر عمره...واشترط المالكية كأبى حنيفة: أن يكون الجوربان مجلدين ظاهرهما وباطنهما، حتى يمكن المشى فيهما عادة...وأجاز الشافعية المسح على الجورب بشرطين احدهما أن يكون صفيفا لا يشف بحيث يمكن متابعة المشى عليه. الثانى أن يكون منعلا فأن اختل أحد الشرطين لم يخز المسح عليه...وأباح الحنابلة المسح على الجورب بالشرطين المذكورين فى الخف وهما: الأول أن يكون صفيفا لا يبدو منه شئ من القدم. الثانى أن يمكن متابعة المشى فيه، وأن يثبت بنفسه...

And Allah knows best

Wassalam

Ml. Ehzaz Ajmeri,
Student Darul Iftaa

Checked and Approved by:

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.p...f63c93bfc377de

I asked also a other question which is still pending:

What is the condition of the firmness of a non leather sock to make Masah over?

In Al Hidaya (Hidaayah, Vol. 1, Pg. 61.) it states;

''If placed on the floor like a pair of shoes, then the sock must stand by itself unsupported. This includes the part going up the shin until above the ankle (i.e. it remains upright, like the leg of a leather boot)''

However in heard that "standing on its own" is not a condition and that Ibn Abidin has a refutation of this.

On other books like: Kabeeri, Pg. 118-9 / Tahtaawi, Pg. 129 / Shaami, Vol. 1, Pg. 439-440 / Umdat-us-Saalik,Pg. 4.
The following statement is mentioned:

''They must remain firm on the foreleg without being tied with laces, elastic, etc. (they should not slip down.)''

I want to know what the truth about this is; that the sock must stand on his own ON THE GROUND as mentioned in Al Hidayah, or; That the sock must stand on his own ON THE FEET.

Please also explain why is stated in Al Hidayah like that manner, and in the other books not and why the statement in Al Hidayah is refuted.

Was salaam

I think the answer will be about the same as on the first question.

11-27-2007, 01:55 AM	#34
VXHLrsO1 Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 473 Senior Member	I was hoping that I wouldn't have to get involved in this discussion, but... Let us discuss these conditions, one by one, in an orderly, objective manner. Before discussing these conditions, it is imperative to bear in mind where they came from. Masah is only permissible on a sock, if it has the qualities of a khuff. So these conditions are, in reality, inherent qualities of a khuff, thus in order for a sock to be in the meaning of a khuff, these qualities will have to be found in the sock in the same manner as they are found in a khuff. This is clearly mentioned in most Hanafi books of Fiqh. Also, our discussion here is based on the hanafi madhab. First condition Standing on its own This is the primary condition in a jawrab and has been mentioned in most books of fiqh. The Fuqaha explain it to mean that the jawrab must be so thick, that is could stand up around the calf, solely on account of its thickness ie. not because of being tied, or of its elasticity or because it is so narrow. This is an inherent quality of a khuff and a must in a jawrab if one wishes to wipe over it. Because the brothers are insisting on practical demonstrations, I conducted a small test using a khuff, 3 different types of socks in addition to a sock that I feel meets up to the conditions mentioned. In order for the khuff/sock to prove that it is standing upright because of its thickness, it was neccessary to have something in the sock as the "foot" with no calf to give support to the sock. Only then would the sock be standing up because of its thickness. Here are the results. First, the Defending Champion, a top quality zipless khuff from www.khuffs.com. (They are really worth it, so if any of you buy one, tell them Soofi Saheb referred you. They might give me a commission :- ) Here he is: As you can see, he is standing up perfectly, without falling down, because it is leather. Now we have the three wannabe's. The first, a nice spanking new dress sock: Failed miserably! You can even see the Vaseline Intensive Care "Foot" inside it. As for Number Two, a slightly thicker sock, for those colder days: Failed terribly, as you can see. And Number Three is the thickest sock in my collection. I keep him for those really freezing days, we rarely have here on the coast. Another disappointment. I wonder if the shop wil take him back? He failed my quality control test. And because I know that some will argue that this condition is impossible, as no non-leather sock could ever fulfil it, I included Number Four. He hails from India, boasting a shiny waterproof outer, with a warm inner. Came across him in Nizamuddin, when I was there for our Mashwarah a few years back. Seemed acceptable to me, but to confirm, I smsed two of our "hot" young Muftis in South Africa, who gave the go ahead. Here he is: As we can all see, he is standing up hail and healthy, all on his own. Why? Because the material he is made from is thick enough to share the qualities of a khuff. Now, instead of discussing the other conditions, i would request brothers to show me normal thick or thin socks that meet this condition. It is possible that a few really thick sock will meet it, so the brothers are requested to put it to the test, and if they do pass, show us the results. Also, if anybody disagrees with this condition or the application of it, they are welcome to present their view, in a civil and amicable manner. Jazakallah for your time. As salamu aleykum, Brother Soofi Saheb with respect for your investigation, as far as i know the manner of standing on its own as explained by you is not a condition, i recall this quote from a post by brother Salman: salamu `alaykum The general rule is that anything that fulfills the conditions of the khuff is valid to wipe on. Water proof is not a condition. Neither is "standing on its own". Ibn `Abidin has a refutation of this. As for not being tied - then what this refers to is something external to the sock, not elastic or something that si aprt of it. Wasalam Salman http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...t=17087&page=7 Also if that the case would be what about thin leather khuffs who are so thin that it dont stand on itself? Neither waterproof is a condition: Again from brother Salman: He (Imam Maydani) further states: ولو مسح على الجوربين فإن كانا ثخينين منعلين جاز بالاتفاق That is the socks do not absorb water it will be permissible to wipe over them by agreement (itifaaq) However, the word "absorb" here does not mean "water proof" but rather refers to "immediate absorption". This is also understood from `Ala' Al Din `Abidin's summary of footgear valid to wipe on, taken from his father Ibn `Abidins Radd al Muhtar, because he said that the footgear must: - Prevent water from reaching the body when wiped upon (`inda al mash) and `inda ('when') implies immediacy, as the scholars of Arabic language confirm, especially in the precise usage of jurists. The person who outlines the permissibilty most explicitly is Shaykh Ibrahim al Halabi in his commentary on Munyat Al Musalli - famous as al Halabi al Kabir. Imam Ibn 'Abidin also states: - It is also pointed to by what Tahtawi quotes from al Khaniya that anything that is akin to (fi ma`na) footgear in the possibility of extensive walking and travel is permitted to wipe over, even it is from Roman cloth (libd rumi). (Ibn `Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar 1.179, Bulaq ed.) http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/show...t=11156&page=2 Also i asked this in a lenghty question to Mufti Desai: QUESTION: Question Im sick of putting everytime my feets into the sink on work to wash them. I heard that according to Imam Muhammad and Imam Abu Yusuf its aloud to make masah over socks and that Imam Abu Hanifa towards the end of his life came back to the opinion his 2 students. Now Hanafis say that a sock fulfill these conditions; -Its material does not let wetness through to the skin when wiping. Most cotton socks will therefore not be suitable. -If placed on the floor like a pair of shoes, then the it must untied stands by itself unsupported. I recently heard that water-proof is not a condition, Neither is "standing on its own" and that Ibn Abidin has a refutation of this. Imam Quduri in his Mukhtasar states: ولا يجوز المسح على الجوربين عند أبي حنيفة إلا أن يكونا مجلدين أو منعلين . وقال أبو يوسف ومحمد : يجوز المسح على الجوربين إذا كانا ثخينين لا يشفان الماء ( 1 ) ولا يجوز المسح على العمامة والقلنسوة ( 2 ) والبرقع والقفازين - Wiping is not permissible (i.e. not valid) according to Abu Hanifa unless they are covered or soled with leather. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: It is permissible and valid to wipe over socks if they are such that they dont absorb the water. (end quote) The position of the Sahibayn was, however, the final position of Imam Abu Hanifa. Imam Maydani in his Al Lubab fi Sharh Al Kitab quotes Imam Qulubaghas Al Tashih that it is established that Abu Hanifa returned to the position of his two students: قال في التصحيح وعنه أنه رجع إلى قولهما وعليه الفتوى هداية He (Imam Maydani) further states: ولو مسح على الجوربين فإن كانا ثخينين منعلين جاز بالاتفاق That is the socks do not absorb water it will be permissible to wipe over them by agreement (itifaaq) However, the word "absorb" here does not mean "water proof" but rather refers to "immediate absorption". This is also understood from `Ala' Al Din `Abidin's summary of footgear valid to wipe on, taken from his father Ibn `Abidins Radd al Muhtar, because he said that the footgear must: - Prevent water from reaching the body when wiped upon (`inda al mash) and `inda ('when') implies immediacy, as the scholars of Arabic language confirm, especially in the precise usage of jurists. The person who outlines the permissibilty most explicitly is Shaykh Ibrahim al Halabi in his commentary on Munyat Al Musalli - famous as al Halabi al Kabir. Imam Ibn 'Abidin also states: - It is also pointed to by what Tahtawi quotes from al Khaniya that anything that is akin to (fi ma`na) footgear in the possibility of extensive walking and travel is permitted to wipe over, even it is from Roman cloth (libd rumi). (Ibn `Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar 1.179, Bulaq ed.) Whats the truth on this and do you agree on the above, can we make masah over socks, im sick of putting my feets into the sink on work, what about SkinSealz socks (which are completely waterproof, but cant stand on its own like a shoe)? ANSWER:* Muhtaram / Muhtaramah , In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh It should be the attitude of every Muslim to happily accept all the injunctions of Shariah. Whatever Shariah has ordained us to do we should consider it to be a blessing and a means of achieving rewards. The washing of feet in wudu is a direct injunction of the Qur’an. Allah Ta’ala says: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آَمَنُوا إِذَا قُمْتُمْ إِلَى الصَّلَاةِ فَاغْسِلُوا وُجُوهَكُمْ وَأَيْدِيَكُمْ إِلَى الْمَرَافِقِ وَامْسَحُوا بِرُءُوسِكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ إِلَى الْكَعْبَيْنِ (المائده) O you who believe, when you rise for Salah, wash your faces and your hands up to the elbows, and make Masah (wiping by hands) of your head and (wash) you feet up to the ankles. (al-Ma’idah – 6) What is proven from Qur’an is Qati’ (absolute) and incumbent to follow. The alternative of masah was only taken into consideration after the ahadith reached the level of tawatur (there were so many narrators in each era that it is impossible to think that they all conspired to fabricate the hadith). Imam Sarakhsi in his al-Mabsoot writes: ولكثرة الأخبار فيه قال أبو حنيفة رحمه الله تعالى : ما قلت بالمسح حتى جاءني فيه مثل ضوء النهار Due to the overwhelming narrations on masah, Imam Abu Hanifa says, “I was not in the view of permissibility of masah on khufain until the proofs of it did not reach me like daylight. Even though Shariah has given an alternative of making masah on socks with conditions, the original ruling of washing the feet must be respected. One should refrain from making such claims as “I am sick of putting every time my feet into the sink on work to wash them”. There are three categories of socks for making masah: 1. Leather socks. All the Ulama are unanimous that it is permissible to make masah on leather socks. 2. Thin non-leather socks. All the Four Schools of Fiqh are unanimous that masah on thin socks is not permissible. . 3. Thick non-leather socks. It is permissible with conditions. Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) was originally of the opinion of impermissibility. Later he retracted from his view and accepted the view of his two Students, Imam Abu Yusuf (RA) and Imam Muhammad (RA). Allamah ‘Ala al-Din al-Haskafi in his al-Durr al-Mukthar mentions the conditions of making masah on thick non-leather socks as: One is able to walk one farskh (3 Shar’ee miles) in them. The socks cling to the feet without having to tie with anything. The socks are not transparent. The water does not seep through while making masah. For the socks to be waterproof and be able to stand like shoes on floor are not conditions for permissibility of masah. If the above mentioned conditions are found in sealskin socks, then it will be permissible to make masah on them. Al-Durr al-Muhtar with Hashiya of Ibn Abideen (1/269) H.M. Saeed Company Badai’ al-Sanai’ (1/83) Dar al-Kitab Deoband Fath Bab al-‘Inayah (1/124) Shirkah Dar al-Arkam bin Abi al-Arakam Tabyeen al-Haqa’iq (1/153) Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiya Hashiya al-Tahtawi ‘ala Maraqi al-Fallah p. 138 Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiya Fiqh al-Islam wa al-Adilatuhu (1/498) Dar al-Fikr al-Mu’asir الدر المختار: ( أو جوربيه ) ولو من غزل أو شعر ( الثخينين ) بحيث يمشي فرسخا ويثبت على الساق ولا يرى ما تحته ولا يشف إلا أن ينفذ إلى الخف قدر الغرض قال ابن عابدين: ( قوله ولو من غزل أو شعر ) دخل فيه الجوخ كما حققه في شرح المنية . وقال : وخرج عنه ما كان من كرباس بالكسر : وهو الثوب من القطن الأبيض ؛ ويلحق بالكرباس كل ما كان من نوع الخيط كالكتان والإبريسم ونحوهما . وتوقف ح في وجه عدم جواز المسح عليه إذا وجد فيه الشروط الأربعة التي ذكرها الشارح . وأقول : الظاهر أنه إذا وجدت فيه الشروط يجوز ، وأنهم أخرجوه لعدم تأتي الشروط فيه غالبا ، يدل عليه ما في كافي النسفي حيث علل جواز المسح على الجورب من كرباس بأنه لا يمكن تتابع المشي عليه ، فإنه يفيد أنه لو أمكن جاز ، ويدل عليه أيضا ما في ط عن الخانية أن كل ما كان في معنى الخف في إدمان المشي عليه وقطع السفر به ولو من لبد رومي يجوز المسح عليه . ا هـ ( قوله على الثخينين ) أي اللذين ليسا مجلدين ولا منعلين نهر ، وهذا التقييد مستفاد من عطف ما بعده عليه ، وبه يعلم أنه نعت للجوربين فقط كما هو صريح عبارة الكنز . وأما شروط الخف فقد ذكرها أول الباب ، ومثله الجرموق ولكونه من الجلد غالبا لم يقيده بالثخانة المفسرة بما ذكره الشارح ؛ لأن الجلد الملبوس لا يكون إلا كذلك عادة ( قوله بحيث يمشي فرسخا ) أي فأكثر كما مر ، وفاعل يمشي ضمير يعود على الجورب والإسناد إليه مجازي ، أو على اللابس له والعائد محذوف أي به ( قوله بنفسه ) أي من غير شد ط ( قوله ولا يشف ) بتشديد الفاء ، من شف الثوب : رق حتى رأيت ما وراءه ، من باب ضرب مغرب . وفي بعض الكتب : ينشف بالنون قبل الشين ، من نشف الثوب العرق كسمع ونصر شربه قاموس ، والثاني أولى هنا لئلا يتكرر مع قوله تبعا للزيلعي ولا يرى ما تحته ، لكن فسر في الخانية الأولى بأن لا يشف الجورب الماء إلى نفسه كالأديم والصرم ، وفسر الثاني بأن لا يجاوز الماء إلى القدم وكأن تفسيره الأول مأخوذ من قولهم اشتف ما في الإناء شربه كله كما في القاموس ، وعليه فلا تكرار فافهم...قال الرافعى : (لا يشف الجورب الماء الى نفسه) أى ماء المسح لا ماء الغسل كما فى الامداد. بدائع الصنائع وأما المسح على الجوربين ، فإن كانا مجلدين ، أو منعلين ، يجزيه بلا خلاف عند أصحابنا وإن لم يكونا مجلدين ، ولا منعلين فإن كانا رقيقين يشفان الماء ، لا يجوز المسح عليهما بالإجماع وإن كانا ثخينين لا يجوز عند أبي حنيفة وعند أبي يوسف ، ومحمد يجوز . وروي عن أبي حنيفة أنه رجع إلى قولهما في آخر عمره ، ، وذلك أنه مسح على جوربيه في مرضه ، ثم قال لعواده : " فعلت ما كنت أمنع الناس عنه " فاستدلوا به على رجوعه حاشية الطحطاوى على مراقى الفلاح (من شيء ثخين) اعلم أن المسئلة على ثلاثة وجوه إن كانا رقيقين غير منعلين لا يجوز المسح عليهما إتفاقا وإن كانا ثخينين منعلين جاز إتفاقا وإن كان ثخينين غير منعلين فهو محل الإخلاف كما في الخانية...(لا يشف الماء) أي لا يتجاوز منه الماء إلى القدم ذكره في الخانية... (وإليه رجع الإمام) أي قبل موته بثلاثة أيام وقيل بسبعة وذلك أنه مسح على جوربيه في مرضه ثم قال لعودة : فعلت ما كنت أمنع الناس عنه فاستدلوا بذلك على رجوعه كما في البدائع و التبيين تبيين الحقائق ويروى رجوع أبي حنيفة إلى قولهما قبل موته بثلاثة أيام وقيل بسبعة أيام وعليه الفتوى وعنه أنه مسح على جوربيه في مرضه ، ثم قال لعواده فعلت ما كنت أنهى الناس عنه فاستدلوا به على رجوعه فتح باب العناية ويجوز على الجرموقين و كل ما يستر الكعب به السفر...(كل ما يستر الكعب) أى ويجوز المسح على ما يستره (ويمكن به السفر) أى السفر القصير العرفى وأقله فرسخ ، سواء كانا مجلدين بأن كان الجلد أعلاهما وأسفلهما ، أو منعلين بأن كان الجلد أسفلهما فقط ، أو ثخينين مستمسكين على الساق فى قول أبى يوسف ومحمد و أبى حنيفة أخيرا قبل موته بسبعة أيام ، و فى ((النوازل)): بثلاثة أيام ، وعليه الفتوى الفقه الاسلامي وأدلته قال أبو حنيفة: لا يجوز المسح على الجوربين، إلا أن يكونا مجلدين أو منعلين، لأن الجورب ليس معنى الخف، لأنه لا يمكن مواظبة المشى فيه، إلا إذا كان منعلأ، وهو محمل الحديث المخير للمسح على الجورب...الا أنه رجع إلى قول الصاحبين فى آخر عمره...واشترط المالكية كأبى حنيفة: أن يكون الجوربان مجلدين ظاهرهما وباطنهما، حتى يمكن المشى فيهما عادة...وأجاز الشافعية المسح على الجورب بشرطين احدهما أن يكون صفيفا لا يشف بحيث يمكن متابعة المشى عليه. الثانى أن يكون منعلا فأن اختل أحد الشرطين لم يخز المسح عليه...وأباح الحنابلة المسح على الجورب بالشرطين المذكورين فى الخف وهما: الأول أن يكون صفيفا لا يبدو منه شئ من القدم. الثانى أن يمكن متابعة المشى فيه، وأن يثبت بنفسه... And Allah knows best Wassalam Ml. Ehzaz Ajmeri, Student Darul Iftaa Checked and Approved by: Mufti Ebrahim Desai Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah http://www.askimam.org/fatwa/fatwa.p...f63c93bfc377de I asked also a other question which is still pending: What is the condition of the firmness of a non leather sock to make Masah over? In Al Hidaya (Hidaayah, Vol. 1, Pg. 61.) it states; ''If placed on the floor like a pair of shoes, then the sock must stand by itself unsupported. This includes the part going up the shin until above the ankle (i.e. it remains upright, like the leg of a leather boot)'' However in heard that "standing on its own" is not a condition and that Ibn Abidin has a refutation of this. On other books like: Kabeeri, Pg. 118-9 / Tahtaawi, Pg. 129 / Shaami, Vol. 1, Pg. 439-440 / Umdat-us-Saalik,Pg. 4. The following statement is mentioned: ''They must remain firm on the foreleg without being tied with laces, elastic, etc. (they should not slip down.)'' I want to know what the truth about this is; that the sock must stand on his own ON THE GROUND as mentioned in Al Hidayah, or; That the sock must stand on his own ON THE FEET. Please also explain why is stated in Al Hidayah like that manner, and in the other books not and why the statement in Al Hidayah is refuted. Was salaam I think the answer will be about the same as on the first question.
	Quote