[kaiayout]

MASAH ON SOCKS
by Maulana Zakariyya Makda

Allah Ta`ala has clearly declared in the Qur'aan Shareef: “O you who believe! When you stand towards Salaah, wash your faces, your hands up to your elbows, make masah of your heads and wash your feet up to the ankles.”

Thus the obligation of performing Wudhu for Salaah is derived directly from the Qur'aan Shareef. The four obligatory acts of Wudhu - washing the face, washing the hands up to the elbows, making masah of the head and washing the feet are clearly explained in the above verse. Hence all the four great Imaams of Fiqh and the entire Ummah are unanimous upon these four acts being compulsory in Wudhu.

While it is unanimously accepted that the feet have to be washed in Wudhu when not covered by any footwear, will the same law apply in the case where the feet are covered by some form of footwear or will masah upon such footwear suffice?

The A’immah-e-Arba`ah (four Imaams of Fiqh) and generally all the Fuqahaa are of the view that masah is only permissible upon leather socks or socks of a similar nature (details of which will follow later).

Contrary to this view, a small group of scholars have declared it permissible to make masah upon ordinary socks made of cotton, nylon and the like. This treatise is an attempt to thoroughly examine the latter view and ascertain whether it is based on acceptable proofs which render the said practice permissible or not.

Here's the book:
http://alhaadi.org.za/Download/Masah%20on%20Socks.pdf

[cheapphenonline]

The A’immah-e-Arba`ah (four Imaams of Fiqh) and generally all the Fuqahaa are of the view that masah is only permissible upon leather socks or socks of a similar nature (details of which will follow later). Insha'allah if I get a chance I'll read the whole article but this does not apply to the Hanbalis who allow thick socks that need not be waterproof [see: [http://mac.abc.se/home/onesr/h/32.html and http://www.hanbali.org/hanbali_index/wos2.php and all the relevant entries here: http://www.hanbali.org/hanbali_index/purification.php ] and for the Malikis 'socks of a similar nature' does not apply - ie. its leather or nothing ... at least thats what i've learned from Malikis.

[flanna.kersting]

Is it allowed in any schools to allow masah on dress socks (the super thin ones)? I don't do it, but I've seen a lot of people who do, same with masah over shoes and just regular thing cotton socks.

[kaiayout]

Read the book folks...read the book....

[Jadldqys]

[vodaPlaps]

the core issue is:
Principles of Shari`ah

In order to understand the answer to the above question, a brief discussion of some principles of Shari`ah is necessary. The Qur'aan Shareef is the first source of Shari`ah. Any explicit injunction of the Qur'aan must be implemented accordingly. If any Hadith apparently contradicts the explicit injunction of the Qur'aan and both cannot be reconciled, the injunction of the Qur'aan will be acted upon.

The only exception to the above rule is a Hadith-e-Mutawaatir. The injunction of the Qur'aan may be qualified with the Mutawaatir Hadith or preference could be given to the Mutawaatir Hadith subject to various conditions being fulfilled.

[GAGNAPPEAPH]

salamu `alaykum

Jazakallah Khayrun.

Some scholars would argue that certain types of cotton socks do meet the conditions stipulated, which is actually the only real consideration as the article points it i.e. any material that fulfills the condition of wiping can be wiped upon.

I actually heard that some scholars in our time (dont know names, but heard from a reliable source) *actually* tested certain cotton and thick western dress socks by walking in them extensively and so forth and said they were valid to wipe on. Allahu A`lam

Thanks for the article though, Mawlana.

wasalam
Salman

[kaiayout]

I quickly looked through the treatise and I think the scholar said it's ok to do Masah on non-leather socks if they are thick enough....

[Kolokireo]

The point behind the book was to show that masah is permissible as long as the conditions are met.

So if they are thick enough, no problem.

[cheapphenonline]

The point behind the book was to show that masah is permissible as long as the conditions are met.

So if they are thick enough, no problem.

well sidi, my point was that the conditions for thickness stipulated by the Hanafis are not necessarily the same as those stipulated by the Hanbalis are they?

for example, would the Hanafis be satisfied by the conditions for 'thick socks' mentioned by the Hanbali shaykh here:

(1) What is intended by thick?

A quick look through the literature indicates that what is intended by "thick" is that the material be thick enough that the color of the underlying skin not be discernable. Basically: thickness is a quality that is not sought in and of itself; thus it is neither sought in and of itself nor is it something quantitative. So what follows is that regardless of the "thickness" or the "thinness" of the material: as long as the color of the underlying skin is not discernable, then it is considered "thick" regarding this ruling.[1]



There are few things in the basic literature that strengthen the above. First of all: nowhere do we find it said that the material used for a man's turban or a woman's hijab be of a particular thickness. Regarding a woman's hijab, it need only be thick enough so that the hair and skin that it covers be indiscernible.



Secondly: when giving examples of what cannot be wiped over, a common example is that silken socks cannot be wiped over when worn by men. That the example is qualified by "when worn by men" is quite significant, since from this it is understood that if the silken socks are worn by a woman that there would be problem in wiping over them. The only problem with silk in and of itself is when it is worn by men, since it is unlawful for men to use something the majority of which is silk. As far as I know, silk is thin compared to most other materials, even synthetics. So if a woman can wipe over silk socks provided they meet the typical conditions for wiping over barriers, then it would follow that other materials similar to silk in thinness and rendering indiscernible the color of the skin underneath it would also be acceptable.



For the sake of completeness: there is a weak position in the mathab that making the underlying skin indiscernible is not a condition. But this is a weak position, and should only be used when necessary according to the shari`a.



(2) Do the socks need to be water resistant or water repellent?

Another quick browse through the literature shows that most books say nothing at all about this. Since the default quality of material is that it not be water resistant, the implication is that water resistance is not a condition. But it is still better for us to find this explicitly stated where possible.



A few books, like Al-Furu` and Al-Insaf, indicate that there is a weak position in the mathab that water resistance is a condition. This lends support to the lack of mention being interpreted as it not being a condition.



In Nail Al-Ma'arib, a standard commentary on Dalil Al-Talib, it is explicitly stated that being water resistant is not a condition.



And looking at the allowances for wiping over a man's turban or a woman's hijab: while being water resistant may be a desirable quality, it certainly is not a condition for the material used.



Again, for the sake of completeness: given that there is a weak position in the mathab that the material should be water resistant and that water resistance is a condition in other mathabs, like the Shafi`i, it would be better that the material be water repellent. Better, but not obligatory.



Wrap Up

From what preceded, it is clear that what is intended by "thick" is that the material be such that the color of underlying skin not be discernable, and that it is not a condition that the material be waterproof. While I showed how the literature of the mathab supports these conclusions, they are also supported by living scholars of the mathab.

http://www.hanbali.org/hanbali_index/wos2.php and, more knowledgable malikis can confirm this but they generally only masah over leather socks and not other cotton socks,etc which meet the conditions the Hanafis refer to.

so basically, i'm not sure of the point of referring to all four madhhabs as they were one is....

Maliki Conditions for Masah:

119. What are the preconditions for wiping over the khuff and jawrab?

There are eleven preconditions which must be met before a person is permitted to wipe over his socks in wudu'; six preconditions relating to that which is wiped and five preconditions relating to the person who performs the wiping:

There are six preconditions relating to that which is wiped (in other words, the khuff. If any of these preconditions is lacking then it is not permitted to wipe over it):

1. That it is made from leather. If it is made from other than leather then it is not permitted to wipe over it.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...mum.html#socks
The preconditions in what is wiped are:

That they are made of leather and are not things like cotton socks

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...ey/Page25.html [quote]


The first precondition is that the sock must either be entirely (top and bottom) made of leather which is pure
(and not impure (e.g., the skin of a pig)). This means that the external surface of sock must be leather. Thus,
leather sewn on top of cotton/nylon/etc. socks fulfills the precondition, but plain cotton/nylon/plastic/vinyl/etc.
socks without leather sewn on top of them do not. Additionally, shoes which do not have a leather bottom may
not be wiped over. Another precondition is that the leather sock should cover the entire foot from toes to the top
of the ankles. Another precondition is that one should be able to walk with the sock on. Another precondition
is that one wipes on the leather sock itself and not another fabric on top of it.

Guiding Helper note 441

and again from the Guiding Helper:

The khuff in Arabic refers to the type of leather socks which were commonly available in the Prophet's time. Leather here is the skin of an edible animal (such as a cow, goat, sheep, deer, raccoon, lion, tiger, snake, etc.). We have been unable to find an authentic recorded opinion within the Maliki school that allows the wiping over non leather socks. We do not claim that such an opinion does not exist, but what we have narrated is the popular opinion within the school. In searching for the legal ruling on this issue given by traditional scholars outside the Maliki school we found:

a) Some traditional scholars (e.g., Shafi`i / Hanafi) allow wiping over fully water-proof socks/boots (e.g., those made of plastic, vinyl, rubber, or some other flexible or rigid (e.g., wood) waterproof-material). The criteria that these non-Maliki scholars use is to see whether water will reach the skin of the foot if it is trickled on to the sock continuously. If the skin of the foot remains dry after such tricking, then the sock is permissible to wipe over according to the opinion of these traditional non-Maliki scholars.

b) One strain of scholars within the Hanbali school (reference: [AM: volume 1: page 3; line(s) 2: {Ibn Qudamah al- Maqdasi; al-Mughni, volume 1, page 298}]) allow wiping over thread woven socks (e.g., cotton/wool socks) if they are "sufficiently" thick. These scholars do not stipulate that the socks must be waterproof, but stipulate that they should be so thick that they do not allow the skin of the foot underneath to be seen (for example, transparent/translucent thin socks would be unacceptable according to the view of these scholars while thick wool socks would be acceptable).

[kaiayout]

Br. Faqir,

I get what you are saying.

[eduptultyt]

The point behind the book was to show that masah is permissible as long as the conditions are met.

So if they are thick enough, no problem.

Asslamo Allaikum Hazrat Soofi Saheb,

Its amazing as to how many books upon books and articles upon articles are written about an issue and no one (the ones writing [with the greatest respect], the ones reading and the ones commenting) actually bothers to test the modern day sock to see if it actually fulfils the conditions...

Text upon text (Modern day nylon/cotton socks don’t fulfil the conditions) is reproduced & copied from one article to another article....

This is similar to the issue with Fitrana advertised in Ramadhan in many Masajid, most people have NO IDEA HOW Fitrana in calculated and what the actual figure TODAY is....they just keep on reproducing the figure from last year’s Ramadhan timetable (or raise a bit)...no doubt people will get the reward for giving EXTRA but the Shariah has a ruling as to HOW it is calculated....

The answer to Masah on modern non-leather socks is clear to any junior (wet behind the ears) Marine or soldier or anyone in serious outdoor activities. If you discuss this with any of them (kuffar) they will simply say “Test it dude!”

There was a time when the Ummah invented sciences; NOW we refuse to acknowledge or use it!

Allahu Must’aan

P.S: Sorry for ranting Hazrat but you have given the most sensible reply on the whole issue.

P.P.S: This message is purly for Hazrat and please don't reply (ignore me) as I have no way of sending private messages.

[Kolokireo]

Br Faqir

All 4 madhahib agree on this that there are conditions and that one cannot make masah on any thin sock.

That is what all 4 are quoted as agreeing upon.

They clearly mentioned that the details of each madhab will follow.

Did they claim that all 4 madhahib stipulate the same conditions?

[horaAppagob]

My post is inspired by Muadh Khan.. :P

We actually discussed in our Fiqh class about the camping socks which are well made and water resistant etc etc and the fact that they were literally tested. I think Hazrat merely posted the Usooli Answer..

The point being, it is discussed in fiqhi classes and yes testing should be there..

[kaiayout]

Br. Faqir, in that paste you provided it says that according to the Hanbalis, it's ok to make Masah on normal socks because normal socks nowadays are not transparent/translucent i.e. you can't see the underlying skin.

But in the book in the first post, this is what is mentioned about the Hambali Mazhab:

Imaam Ahmad states regarding masah on such socks which do not have a (leather) sole: “If a person is able to walk in them and they remain firm on the feet (without anything to fasten them), then in this case performing masah upon them will be permissible.” On another occasion Imaam Ahmad stated: “It is permissible to make masah on socks provided it remains firmly attached to the feet.” In yet another place he (Imaam Ahmad ) states: “If a person walks with socks, without it slipping off the foreleg and falling to the ankles, then it is permissible to make masah on them, because if they are not firmly attached to the feet and continuously fall, the place of Wudhu will become exposed (rendering the masah invalid).”

Imaam Ahmad does not consider it necessary for the socks to be Mujallad. (i.e. entirely covered in leather.) However, he does deem it imperative that the socks be of a tough and durable nature where one can continuously walk in them.

Imaam Ahmad was once asked regarding the one who performs masah on a sock made from pieces of thin cloth. He (Imaam Ahmad ) did not approve of it. He once said: “Masah is impermissible on the socks unless it is thick (tough) and stands upright on the feet without falling, as is the case with the Khuff (leather sock). The Sahaabah  only made masah on the socks due to it resembling the Khuff in this way that a person would be able to continuously walk in them (without them tearing). And it is impermissible to make masah on pieces of thin cloth.” This has been clearly recorded from Imaam Ahmad .

End of Quote
__________________

So can we say that normal socks nowadays are thick enough according to the Hanbalis because a person is able to walk in them and they stay firmly attached to the feet? I guess so...But do the modern day normal socks come under the category of pieces of thin cloth which are impermissible according to Imam Ahmad? I guess not....

I guess the Maliki Madhab in this socks issue is the strictest because they only permit on all leather socks or they must at least be covered in leather.

[tobia]

salamu `alaykum

Jazakallah Khayrun.

Some scholars would argue that certain types of cotton socks do meet the conditions stipulated, which is actually the only real consideration as the article points it i.e. any material that fulfills the condition of wiping can be wiped upon.

I actually heard that some scholars in our time (dont know names, but heard from a reliable source) *actually* tested certain cotton and thick western dress socks by walking in them extensively and so forth and said they were valid to wipe on. Allahu A`lam

Thanks for the article though, Mawlana.

wasalam
Salman

This is indeed the case. Sidi Mostafa Azzam, a very scrupulous and knowledgeable Shafi'i brother (used to answer questions on SunniPath) did this test in Canada with several others. They walked about two or three miles, if I'm not mistaken, in several varieties of socks, including some modern day dress socks. And I believe they walked on roads that were rockier than normal just to make the results extra safe. They found most of the socks to meet the conditions for wiping for the Shafi'is, according to a strong (or maybe he said followable, I can't remember) opinion in the school. They confirmed the results with some of the top Shafi'i scholars in Yemen. According to the results of their experiment, many of the socks may have even met the conditions for the Hanafis... Anyway, I don't want to cause any controversy here, so I won't pursue that line of thought.

My main point in saying all of that is that I agree that it seems like more scholars should just test the socks like Sidi Mostafa actually did, and like Sidi Muadh suggested, instead of assuming they don't meet the conditions for wiping. They might be surprised what they find.

To be honest, I honestly hope that wiping on regular socks is valid for the sake of the Muslims that do it. I can say without exaggeration that at least in America, most of the Muslims I see in masjids don't take take their socks off when they make wudu' (very large numbers don't even take off their shoes, but that's another issue). Obviously, this issue has HUGE implications. I wouldn't be surprised if this is the case in other countries. This isn't a proof for its validity; but it's a reason for me to hope that it Allah will accept the prayers from the millions of people who do it.

wassalam,

Abdul Razak

[tobia]

I notice that there is a tendency sometimes to quote the founder of a madhab when trying to state the opinion of a madhab regarding a particular matter. Wouldn't it be more accurate to quote the books of the madhab that contain the relied upon views regarding the particular matter in question? This method of stating the founder of a madhab's opinion of a matter as the strongest proof when his view might not be the opinion the madhab follows today has always confused me. Maybe someone can help me understand why it is done.

[Kolokireo]

Wouldn't it be more accurate to quote the books of the madhab that contain the relied upon views regarding the particular matter in question?

100% correct.
Sadly, many Ulama don't properly understand how the different madhahib work, the reliable books in the madhab and how to find out the most reliable view in the madhab.

Others don't even know the reliable books in their own madhab, basing rulings upon weak positions or books that cannot be used to deduce the position of the madhab.

[abubycera]

Here's an article by Mufti Waseem Khan of Dar ul 'Uloom Trinidad and Tobago on this topic. He mentions the views of all 4 Madhahib on this.

http://www.darululoomtt.org/fatwa_104.shtml

[cheapphenonline]

If we want to find out about the four madhhabs why should we rely on Hanafis' fatwas?

According to Hanafis:

According to the Mazhab of Imam Malik (A.R.), it states that these socks, (cotton or cloth) must be made with leather inside and outside so that it resembles the leather socks (Khufain)
According to Malikis:

The first precondition is that the sock must either be entirely (top and bottom) made of leather which is pure (and not impure (e.g., the skin of a pig)). This means that the external surface of sock must be leather. Thus, leather sewn on top of cotton/nylon/etc. socks fulfills the precondition, but plain cotton/nylon/plastic/vinyl/etc. socks without leather sewn on top of them do not. Top tip:

Don't always rely on fatwas where they quote four madhhabs as they often have errors