Benefits of the Hadith: (… Narrated to me al-Mughirah ibn Shu’bah, who said:
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In winter, it is common for clothes to be layered, causing the sleeves to become tight, and they may contain wool or hair, making them even tighter. In this, there is evidence that wiping is only permitted on the leather socks, while there is no wiping on the hands, even if removing them is difficult. Therefore, in wudu, only two limbs are wiped: the head and the feet.
The wisdom behind this is apparent. As for the head, it is covered with hair, and if people were required to wash it, it would be difficult for them in both winter and summer. As for the feet, they are the tools of walking; they walk and touch the ground, so removing the leather sock or stocking and washing the foot would cause hardship. Therefore, it was wise to make things easy for the servants of Allah, and wiping was made sufficient.
As for the hands and the face, there is no wiping on them. If a person covers his face due to an illness or for any other reason, he does not wipe over it. Similarly, if the hand has gloves and tight sleeves on it, there is no wiping; rather, it is obligatory to wash it.
In this hadith, there is evidence that it is necessary to wash the four limbs, and that washing any of them does not drop without dire necessity. This is because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) made the effort to remove his hands, pulling them out of the sleeves and from underneath, from the bottom of the shirt.
Does this imply that the thigh is not an awrah (part of the body that must be covered)?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Huh? I mean, if someone said: if you lower your hands from the bottom of the shirt and then want to wash them, the bottom part would rise up. Huh?
The students: … trousers.
The Shaykh : There may be trousers, or there may not be. If there are not, a person might wrap himself up. If the edge of the shirt rises, he wraps himself up. Okay, he is sitting.
Okay, does this imply that what some women believe—that if a woman wears nail polish, she can wipe over it for a day and a night—is correct? Huh?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is this derived from it, or is it not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is derived that it is not, and that there is no wiping on what is worn on the hand; rather, it is necessary to wash the hand completely.
It is also derived that if a person delays washing a limb after the one before it for a reason related to purity through wudu, there is no harm. If a person is performing wudu and finds a spot of paint on his hand, and the paint requires washing and a remover, and he spends time washing and removing it, and it is delayed and slowed down, then that does not harm, because this delay is for a benefit related to the purity itself.
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) mentioned this, but they mentioned another issue and distinguished it from this one. They said: if washing a limb is delayed after the one before it due to being occupied with obtaining water, then it is necessary to repeat the wudu from the beginning. But if washing a limb is delayed after the one before it for something related to the limbs themselves, then that does not harm. They distinguished between the two by saying that the first is being occupied with obtaining water, which is being occupied with what brings about purity, while the second is being occupied with what completes the purity, so it is related to the worship itself. The first is related to a matter external to the worship. If a person is performing wudu at the faucet, and the faucet stopped after washing some of the limbs, and he stood up to search and see what stopped it, and he found that what stopped it was a valve that held back the water, so he went to get a wrench to open the valve, yes, and he was delayed. Does he repeat it or not? Why?
The questioner : … Because it is an external matter.
The Shaykh : Because this is a matter external to the worship, so it is outside of it. Therefore, they distinguished between them in this way. And this is, of course, based on the opinion that continuity is a condition. But if we say that continuity is not a condition, then the matter is clear in that. Yes?
The wisdom behind this is apparent. As for the head, it is covered with hair, and if people were required to wash it, it would be difficult for them in both winter and summer. As for the feet, they are the tools of walking; they walk and touch the ground, so removing the leather sock or stocking and washing the foot would cause hardship. Therefore, it was wise to make things easy for the servants of Allah, and wiping was made sufficient.
As for the hands and the face, there is no wiping on them. If a person covers his face due to an illness or for any other reason, he does not wipe over it. Similarly, if the hand has gloves and tight sleeves on it, there is no wiping; rather, it is obligatory to wash it.
In this hadith, there is evidence that it is necessary to wash the four limbs, and that washing any of them does not drop without dire necessity. This is because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) made the effort to remove his hands, pulling them out of the sleeves and from underneath, from the bottom of the shirt.
Does this imply that the thigh is not an awrah (part of the body that must be covered)?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Huh? I mean, if someone said: if you lower your hands from the bottom of the shirt and then want to wash them, the bottom part would rise up. Huh?
The students: … trousers.
The Shaykh : There may be trousers, or there may not be. If there are not, a person might wrap himself up. If the edge of the shirt rises, he wraps himself up. Okay, he is sitting.
Okay, does this imply that what some women believe—that if a woman wears nail polish, she can wipe over it for a day and a night—is correct? Huh?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Is this derived from it, or is it not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It is derived that it is not, and that there is no wiping on what is worn on the hand; rather, it is necessary to wash the hand completely.
It is also derived that if a person delays washing a limb after the one before it for a reason related to purity through wudu, there is no harm. If a person is performing wudu and finds a spot of paint on his hand, and the paint requires washing and a remover, and he spends time washing and removing it, and it is delayed and slowed down, then that does not harm, because this delay is for a benefit related to the purity itself.
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) mentioned this, but they mentioned another issue and distinguished it from this one. They said: if washing a limb is delayed after the one before it due to being occupied with obtaining water, then it is necessary to repeat the wudu from the beginning. But if washing a limb is delayed after the one before it for something related to the limbs themselves, then that does not harm. They distinguished between the two by saying that the first is being occupied with obtaining water, which is being occupied with what brings about purity, while the second is being occupied with what completes the purity, so it is related to the worship itself. The first is related to a matter external to the worship. If a person is performing wudu at the faucet, and the faucet stopped after washing some of the limbs, and he stood up to search and see what stopped it, and he found that what stopped it was a valve that held back the water, so he went to get a wrench to open the valve, yes, and he was delayed. Does he repeat it or not? Why?
The questioner : … Because it is an external matter.
The Shaykh : Because this is a matter external to the worship, so it is outside of it. Therefore, they distinguished between them in this way. And this is, of course, based on the opinion that continuity is a condition. But if we say that continuity is not a condition, then the matter is clear in that. Yes?