Can this not be analogized to wiping over the leather socks and wiping over the turban?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Should we not analogize this to the issue of the Imam, and the issue of the leather socks, specifically? I mean, the Messenger of Allah wiped the turban in the Shari'ah; the wiping
The Shaykh : of the socks
The questioner : Yes, indeed
The Shaykh : I mean, the connection, what is the common factor between this and that?
The questioner : The head is one of the limbs
of the ablution, and when he wiped this part and completed it on his head
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : so likewise, it is a limb of the ablution, and the need arose for
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed
The questioner : so he washes the rest
The Shaykh : My brothers, your opinion... I am not reassured by it?
The questioner : I mean, I see that the analogy is clear; this is a limb, this is a limb, the need arose to cover this, and the need arose to cover this
The Shaykh : that in some issues, as you know, I will say why, but I want to establish something before I give a direct answer. In jurisprudential issues, Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) used to say that the meaning is permissible in itself, but a person is unable to express it. Imam al-Shafi'i al-Qurashi said this, and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated it from him in his book "Adab al-Imam al-Shafi'i wa Manaqibih". Therefore, if a scholar or a student of knowledge says he is not reassured, it is not necessary that he be able to express the reason for his lack of reassurance with such an analogy, knowing that there are many issues where some Imams expressed doubt about them, like this issue, and other Imams did not adopt that analogy, and it is not easy for us to know the reason for their not adopting it. As for here, I return now to answering the question directly. I know, and you all know, that a Muslim may be wounded, especially in times when wounds are common, such as wars. This is a frequent occurrence. If that were the case, bandaging would follow these wounds. If it were obligatory by the Shari'ah to oblige these bandaged people to apply water to any part of their bodies, whether in ablution or the full ritual bath, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would have commanded it. I say, in the expression of some jurists of the principles of jurisprudence, like the Hanafis, among whom we grew up studying in their school, we would say that this is an issue where hardship is frequent. Therefore, reports must follow one after another, appearing in succession, if not to the level of mass transmission. How is it, when not even a good report has reached us that establishes the argument? So, brevity prevents saying that the analogy allows this to be a concession permitted by the Lawgiver, while He made wiping the head a necessary requirement that must be fulfilled, and made wiping over the leather socks or socks or sandals a substitute for washing. The existence of what you pointed to is what prevents adopting such an analogy, just as it prevented others before. In any case, the matter is broad. If some of you see it and your soul is reassured by such an analogy, go with it; indeed, that is his obligation. But that does not oblige others to it, because Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear.
The Shaykh : of the socks
The questioner : Yes, indeed
The Shaykh : I mean, the connection, what is the common factor between this and that?
The questioner : The head is one of the limbs
of the ablution, and when he wiped this part and completed it on his head
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : so likewise, it is a limb of the ablution, and the need arose for
The Shaykh : Yes, indeed
The questioner : so he washes the rest
The Shaykh : My brothers, your opinion... I am not reassured by it?
The questioner : I mean, I see that the analogy is clear; this is a limb, this is a limb, the need arose to cover this, and the need arose to cover this
The Shaykh : that in some issues, as you know, I will say why, but I want to establish something before I give a direct answer. In jurisprudential issues, Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) used to say that the meaning is permissible in itself, but a person is unable to express it. Imam al-Shafi'i al-Qurashi said this, and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated it from him in his book "Adab al-Imam al-Shafi'i wa Manaqibih". Therefore, if a scholar or a student of knowledge says he is not reassured, it is not necessary that he be able to express the reason for his lack of reassurance with such an analogy, knowing that there are many issues where some Imams expressed doubt about them, like this issue, and other Imams did not adopt that analogy, and it is not easy for us to know the reason for their not adopting it. As for here, I return now to answering the question directly. I know, and you all know, that a Muslim may be wounded, especially in times when wounds are common, such as wars. This is a frequent occurrence. If that were the case, bandaging would follow these wounds. If it were obligatory by the Shari'ah to oblige these bandaged people to apply water to any part of their bodies, whether in ablution or the full ritual bath, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would have commanded it. I say, in the expression of some jurists of the principles of jurisprudence, like the Hanafis, among whom we grew up studying in their school, we would say that this is an issue where hardship is frequent. Therefore, reports must follow one after another, appearing in succession, if not to the level of mass transmission. How is it, when not even a good report has reached us that establishes the argument? So, brevity prevents saying that the analogy allows this to be a concession permitted by the Lawgiver, while He made wiping the head a necessary requirement that must be fulfilled, and made wiping over the leather socks or socks or sandals a substitute for washing. The existence of what you pointed to is what prevents adopting such an analogy, just as it prevented others before. In any case, the matter is broad. If some of you see it and your soul is reassured by such an analogy, go with it; indeed, that is his obligation. But that does not oblige others to it, because Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear.