In the Name of Allaah…
On the live radio show, Noor ‘alad-Darb, the great scholar, Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen [d.1421] – may Allaah have Mercy on him – was asked about the things that nullify the allowance to wipe over the footwear, other than the legislated time running out (one day for residents and three days for travelers).
He replied:
Removing the footwear is also something that nullifies the (allowance for) wiping over it. When a person takes off the footwear, the allowance to wipe over it ends, no matter when that occurs. However, the state of purity remains (i.e. removing the footwear does not nullify the wudhoo’).
The proof that removing the footwear nullifies (the allowance for) wiping (over it) is the hadeeth of Safwaan ibn [‘Assaal] (1) (who said): “The Messenger of Allaah – may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace – ordered us not to take off our socks…” This shows that removing them negates the allowance to wipe over them. Thus, when a person removes his socks after wiping over them, the allowance to wipe has been nullified, meaning that he may not put them back on and continue wiping over them until he makes another complete wudhoo’ and washes his feet first.
However, his state of purity after removing them remains intact, as tahaarah (purity) is not nullified by the removal of footwear that was wiped over. This is because when someone wipes over (his footwear), his purification has been completed based on legislative evidences. This state of purification is only affected by something proven to negate it by legislative evidence. There is no evidence that supports someone’s wudhoo’ becoming invalid due to the removal of footwear that was wiped over.
Rather, the evidence only proves that (the period of) wiping is nullified (once the footwear is removed), and that one may not wipe over the socks again until he has washed his feet as part of a complete wudhoo’.
Based on this, we hold that the base rule is that the wudhoo’ remains valid, being (a state of purification) proven by evidence, until evidence exists (that it becomes invalid). If there is no evidence to show that the wudhoo’ has been nullified, then it remains completely valid. This is what we hold to be the correct position.
Source: This transcript (Arabic) from his spoken answer.
And Allaah knows best. [2]
Translated by: Moosaa Richardson
FOOTNOTES:
[1] The hadeeth was collected by at-Tirmithee (96), an-Nasaa’ee (158), and Ibn Maajah (478), and others, on the authority of Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal. At-Tirmithee called the hadeeth: hasan saheeh (authentic). Al-Albaanee graded it hasan in Irwaa’ al-Ghaleel (104). Note: the original Arabic source quotes the shaykh as saying: Safwaan ibn “Ghassaan”, which is a mistake.
[2] A fatwaa that removing the socks nullifies the wudhoo’ has been incorrectly attributed to Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez ibn Baaz [d.1420], may Allaah have Mercy on him. Review his actual words carefully in his Fatwaa Collection (10/113).
I visited the muftee, Shaykh ‘Abdul-‘Azeez Aal ash-Shaykh (may Allaah preserve him) recently, and the shaykh was having the reports of the Salaf who differed over this issue read to him from the book, Musannaf Ibn Abee Shaybah. The muftee’s position was in agreement with what some of the Salaf said – that removing the socks does break the wudhoo’.
السلام عليكم
When making wudu’ is it permissible to wash one foot, dry it and then wash the other foot . Our would this break the continuation, بترك الله فيكم
As-salaam alaik. Ahsanallaahu ilayk.
I was wondering:
– If it is permissible to wipe over the socks for one day and night, should we stick to precisely 24 hours? Meaning: what if I wipe over my socks @ asr today (I sleep with my socks on), can I still wipe over my socks the next day @ dhuhr? Because technically a day and night has passed.
Also an ‘Islamic’ day so to say isn’t exactly 24 hours, because maghrib might differ each day, or should I just hold on to the ’24-hour-rule’?
wa ‘alaykas-salaam. “What if I wipe over my socks @ asr today (I sleep with my socks on), can I still wipe over my socks the next day @ dhuhr?” Yes.
Just for clarification:
I sleep in wudu with my socks on, full sleep, at Fajr time when I wake up from sleep I remove my socks and re-do wudu, because from my knowledge (what I have learnt) is that sleeping breaks your wudu?
So, sleeping breaks your wudu, you have to re-do wudu but you can just wipe over socks?
Please could you clarify this for me inshaa Allah?
Yes, that’s correct, you can wipe over them if you have not been wiping over them already for a complete day and night as a resident.
I’m sorry, another question:
so this means that even when I put one sock below my ankle for some reason, I can’t wipe over my socks anymore? So I haven’t removed my socks completely, just one sock a bit below an ankle (this happens occasionally, for example to rub or whatever reason).
I don’t know.
An answer to your question may be found here, wal-hamdulillaah.
I’ve read that we’re allowed to wipe over our socks as long as you can call it a sock, despite any holes in them. Even if the sock has many holes. I also read in temeemulminnah that there is proof for wiping over shoes/sandals (I don’t know what the best translation is).
Since it is not a condition that the entire foot is covered, does this mean that we’re also allowed to whipe over ankle socks? Socks which don’t go further than the ankle. So the socks do not cover the entire part that should be washed, but neither would socks with holes in them. Moreover shoes or sandals might also not cover the ankle.
Asalamu alaikum warehmatulahe wa brakathu
akhi musa is it permissible for a muslim to work under govt. Of democratic country lyk INDIA?
السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته
What is the ruling regarding wiping over socks? I have heard someone saying that when you wipe your socks, change them (the pair of socks) to another one, you have to make your wudu again. Is this true?
جزاك الله خيرًا
اسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
Is it necessary to make wudhoo if there is continuous discharge of urine in drops.?
As-Salaamu ‘Alaykum Wa-Rahmatullaah,
What is the Sunnah regarding the amount of times one should wash his limbs during wudhoo? Is it once, twice, three times? I’ve heard all three but I don’t know which one is correct.
Baarak Allaahu Feek.
Wa ‘alayk as-salaamu wa rahmatullaahi. All three options are Sunnah, the best being three. And Allaah knows best.
As Salam wa alaikum Moosa. I’m aware that wiping over leather socks is legislated, but what about cotton socks?
Wa ‘alayk as-salaamu wa rahmatullaah. Whoever restricts that to one material or another is required to prove that with evidence. Otherwise, this issue is about footwear, no matter what the material. And Allah knows best.
While a jowrab (sock) is a specific kind of khuff, if you wish to distinguish between the two terms, KHUFF and JOWRAB, then see this from Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah have Mercy on him): https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/3717/%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AD-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B5%D9%86%D9%88%D8%B9%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%B7%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%88-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%88%D9%81-%D8%A7%D9%88-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%A7%D9%8A%D9%84%D9%88%D9%86
I don’t know of any authentic hadeeth that the Prophet, salla Allaahu ‘alayhi wassallam, wiped over anything other than the khuffayn (leather socks). The cotton socks are not like the khuffayn; they are thin, water can penetrate, one does not usually travel in them (by foot) because they do not protect his/her feet. So I suppose if the footwear is comparable to a khuff, then one can wipe over them.
A khuff by definition is what is worn on the feet, covering up to (at least) the ankles. You seem quite convinced that it must be made of leather. Could you cite an authentic source that restricts the definition of a khuff to only leather?
No. That over which the Prophet, salla Allaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam wiped was leather and it is called khuff and it was leather if im not mistaken. You cite your source; is there a consensus on that? check Lisaan al ‘arab and also the encyclopedia
The linguistic origin of the word ‘khuff’ is from the bottom of the foot of a person, called a khuff, borrowing from the word used for the bottoms of the hooves of riding beasts. As mentioned in Lisaan al-‘Arab and the Arabic dictionaries. Sort of like calling a man’s nose a “snout”. Anyway, they just say a khuff is that thing we wear, not attempting to limit it to any material or another. That’s an argument that needs evidence. ِHere’s what should open up the issue for anyone seeking clarity (and not just something to support what they’ve been doing): In Bukhaaree and Muslim, from the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar: لا يلبس القمص، ولا العمائم، ولا السراويلات، ولا البرانس، ولا الخفاف إلا أحد لا يجد نعلين، فليلبس خفين، وليقطعهما أسفل من الكعبين He forbade us from wearing khuffs for ihraam, but said if a man doesnt have any sandals, then he can just cut his khuffs to under his ankle and wear them! Meaning: They are no longer classified as “khuffs” once they do not cover the ankles! So simply put: The khuff is whatever is worn on the foot that comes up over the ankle. Anyone who claims this has to do with a certain fabric or another is required to clarify that with clear evidence, otherwise its just a person’s opinion without daleel, and people’s opinions cannot be enforced as obligatory! And Allah knows best.
What’s wrongly attributed to Sh Bin Baaz? He says that you can only remove the socks while you’re in the state of wudu in which you washed you feet and wudu will still remain? But if you remove the socks after wiping over them then wudu doesn’t remain? Or I’m mistaken?
JazaakAllahu khayran Ustadh
The wrongly attributed stance is that removing the socks breaks the wudhoo’ without the details you have mentioned. Your understanding of his position is correct, and Allah knows best.
السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
I am getting little confused.
i am in my regular formal shoes with cotton socks under it.
This is what i usually do in office.
When the time for prayer comes( dhur/asar) , I go the washroom, do wudu for face, arm then remove my office shoes and wipe water over the cotton socks. Put the shoes back, and go to the praying area .
Then i remove my shoes and pray with my socks only.
Let me know if i am doing anything incorrect, since my colleagues also do it.
Barak allahu fekum
وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته
Seems like you are doing everything right, assuming you are also wiping over your head (which wasn’t mentioned), with the intention of purification. May Allah bless you and your colleagues.
The texts of the Sharee’ah indicate that it is permissible to wipe over that over which the Prophet, salla Allaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam, wiped. Those were leather khuffayn. Simply because they were called khuffayn, does this mean that it is permissible to wipe over anything called a khuff? You are the one who has to provide evidence that it is permissible to wipe over khuffs which are not the same as, or similar to, those over which the Prophet, salla Allaahu ‘alayhi was-sallam, wiped. I believe that this is the safest opinion. Allaah knows best.
So bonded leather, let’s say 90% leather and 10% other materials…? Does that get a pass in the “leather only” position? It is a long-held position by legitimate scholars, so I am not ridiculing it. Yet, it is weak from numerous angles, as it doesn’t seem to match the overall goal of the Sharee’ah’s gracious concessions of ease, nor the texts, nor the understanding of the Comnpanions and Taabi’oon. So then what about 80/20 bonded leather…? then 50/50? Is it enough to have a tiny amount of leather, like 90% other fabric and only 10% leather? I ask these questions, because some of the so-called leather khuffs sold today are actually bonded leather, or they have plastic straps and other things, which could not be wiped over, according to the strict “leather-only” position. Aside from not having any evidence to restrict the material, it seems that this position creates a lot of difficulties and hardships, being very impractical in today’s world. Meaning: Leather footwear was very common, so this provided a widely used and very practical and helpful concession. Today, in our world, most people do not wear leather socks, so the “leather-only” position marginalizes a concession legislated to provide ease to most people! And there are many other points, keeping in mind the Sharee’ah’s overall goals, which weaken this position. And Allah knows best.
Assalāmu ‘alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakātuhu,
Although not related to this exact issue, I wanted to ask about the topic of acne and the impure substances (blood and pus) that come out of it. Even following the view that a small amount of blood or pus is forgiven, how would such a person do wudu’? Would they not spread this small amount of blood or pus all around their face as they pass over it with wet hands? This has been difficult for me as I have acne that pops every day; and I spend a significant amount of time doing wudu’ as it will pop during it and I would grab a jar and try to pour water on my face every time it happens. The matter is causing me a lot of distress and I would appreciate if you could share any knowledge you may have about it. May Allāh reward you with good.
Wa ‘alaykum as-Salaamu wa rahmatullaah wa barakaatuh. First things first: Could you share the evidence which establishes this kind of blood and pus as impure (najas)? Jazaak Allahu khayran.