Addendum to the benefits of the hadith: (The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) sent out a raiding party and ordered them to wipe over...)
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : In this hadith, there are benefits:
Among them is: the prescription of sending out raiding parties, whether they are cut off from the main army or sent directly from the home base, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to do so.
And among them is: the permissibility of wiping over the turbans, meaning those that are wrapped around the head.
Does it have conditions?
Let us look at what the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them) mentioned: that it is a condition that it be worn over ritual purity, by analogy to the leather socks, because the leather sock must be worn over ritual purity. They said: so it is with the turban. But this analogy is not correct:
First: it is not mentioned from the Messenger (may the prayer and peace of Allah be upon him) that he ordered a person to wear the turban over ritual purity, even though if it were a condition, it would be something for which the motives to transmit it would be abundant. So when it is not reported, we say: the original state is that there is no condition.
Second: the analogy must involve the equality of the branch to the root. Here, there is no equality, because the foot is washed and the head is wiped. The purification of the head was made easy from the start, since it is wiping. So if it was made easy from the start, it is not possible to analogize the easier to what is harder than it. It is said: just as it was made easy in its root, the root of purifying the head, so it is made easy in the branch, which is the turban that is worn over it.
Second: is it a condition that the duration be one day and one night, or is it permissible as long as one is wearing the turban that he wipes over it?
The school of thought is that it must be one day and one night for the resident, and three days for the traveler, by analogy to the leather socks. And you know that this analogy is not valid, because no hadith came from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), neither authentic nor weak, that he specified a time for wiping over the turban of one day and one night or three days.
And the analogy is also incomplete due to the difference between the root and the branch.
So, based on this, we say: wear the turban whenever you wish, and wipe over it whenever you wish. Third: is there a condition in the turban beyond it being a plain turban?
The school of thought says yes, it must be a turban with a knot under the chin or one with a tail:
The one with a knot under the chin is that a loop is made from it under the chin.
Or one with a tail: by having a tail at the back. Their evidence for that is that they said: because the wisdom of the permissibility of wiping over the turban is the hardship of removing it, and this is not realized in a turban placed on the head without being knotted under the chin, but the one knotted under the chin is hard for a person to remove. As for the one with a tail, it is because this is the famous turban among the Arabs, and the one lacking it is not called a turban. But there is a point to consider in this, and the correct view is that it is permissible to wipe over the plain turban that has no tail and is not knotted under the chin.
As for the first, we say: where is the evidence that it must be knotted under the chin?
And the reasoning that it is for the hardship of removal, it is said: this is not analogous to the leather socks, because the root of purifying the head is made light. Then it may be hard for a person to take off the turban to wipe the head, because some turbans have many loops, so if he takes it off, he remains for a time folding it. And secondly: there is harm, because the turban must give the head heat, so if he uncovers it or takes it off to wipe the head, especially in the days of winter, he is harmed by it and may be damaged because his head will face cold. So the correct view is: it is not a condition in the turban that it be knotted under the chin or have a tail. And as for these being the turbans of the Arabs, if this is conceded, the texts came absolute without restriction.
So if someone asks: do you permit wiping over the cap and the ghutrah?
The answer is: no, because it is not called a turban, and there is no slightest hardship in it. But there is something that may be analogous to the turban, which is the beanie, the beanie that is worn on the head in the days of winter, and it is a beanie of wool or cotton that a person wears on his head and has an opening for the face and a collar on the neck. So there is no doubt that wiping over it is permissible, and it is more deserving of the permissibility of wiping than the turban, because this is hard for a person to take off, and it is also more harmful to the head than taking off the turban, because it is usually used in the days of winter. So if someone asks: do you permit wiping over the head if it is covered with resin and honey and the like?
The answer is: yes, we permit this, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in the Farewell Pilgrimage covered his head with resin, and this is a concession, meaning this is what indicates that wiping over what is on the head is a matter of ease.
So if someone asks: women wear jewelry on their heads and interlock it in their hair, and sew it on it, so is it obligatory for them to remove it during ablution or do they wipe over it?
The answer is: the second, because the hardship of removing this is also severe, and as you heard, wiping over the head is a matter of lightness.
So says: they are the leather socks. From this hadith, the permissibility of wiping over socks is taken, because of the generality of his saying: And even if it is interpreted as the leather socks, it is from the category of interpreting a thing by part of its meaning, so the warmers are everything that warms the foot, from socks and leather socks and others.
So is it permissible to wipe over the thin or torn leather sock?
The answer is: yes, according to the stronger position, because this achieves the warming of the foot. And is it permissible to wipe over the wrappings?
Meaning, if there is severe cold or severe heat for the protection of the foot, and it is wrapped with wrappings, is it permissible to wipe over them?
The answer is: yes, there is no doubt in this, because removing this wrapped item is harder than taking off the leather sock or the sock.
So if someone asks: is it permissible to wipe over the torn leather sock?
We said: yes, as long as the name of the leather sock remains or the name of the sock remains, it is permissible to wipe over it, because the texts came absolute.
And the situation is one of dispensation and ease, and if the situation is one of dispensation and ease, it is not befitting for us to be strict with the servants of Allah in something that is not established in the Shari'ah of Allah. And this is a rule that a person must pay attention to: any condition you impose in any of the rulings, know that by doing so you have restricted the Shari'ah, because conditions are restrictions, and if the absolute is restricted, it becomes what? A restriction on the people. So any condition you add to any of the rulings, know that you have restricted the Shari'ah of Allah, and Allah will hold you accountable for this, because Allah made it absolute for His servants and made it easy for His servants, then you come with an added restriction or condition that was not present in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, nor in the correct analogy, so you will be held accountable for this.
Among them is: the prescription of sending out raiding parties, whether they are cut off from the main army or sent directly from the home base, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to do so.
And among them is: the permissibility of wiping over the turbans, meaning those that are wrapped around the head.
Does it have conditions?
Let us look at what the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them) mentioned: that it is a condition that it be worn over ritual purity, by analogy to the leather socks, because the leather sock must be worn over ritual purity. They said: so it is with the turban. But this analogy is not correct:
First: it is not mentioned from the Messenger (may the prayer and peace of Allah be upon him) that he ordered a person to wear the turban over ritual purity, even though if it were a condition, it would be something for which the motives to transmit it would be abundant. So when it is not reported, we say: the original state is that there is no condition.
Second: the analogy must involve the equality of the branch to the root. Here, there is no equality, because the foot is washed and the head is wiped. The purification of the head was made easy from the start, since it is wiping. So if it was made easy from the start, it is not possible to analogize the easier to what is harder than it. It is said: just as it was made easy in its root, the root of purifying the head, so it is made easy in the branch, which is the turban that is worn over it.
Second: is it a condition that the duration be one day and one night, or is it permissible as long as one is wearing the turban that he wipes over it?
The school of thought is that it must be one day and one night for the resident, and three days for the traveler, by analogy to the leather socks. And you know that this analogy is not valid, because no hadith came from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), neither authentic nor weak, that he specified a time for wiping over the turban of one day and one night or three days.
And the analogy is also incomplete due to the difference between the root and the branch.
So, based on this, we say: wear the turban whenever you wish, and wipe over it whenever you wish. Third: is there a condition in the turban beyond it being a plain turban?
The school of thought says yes, it must be a turban with a knot under the chin or one with a tail:
The one with a knot under the chin is that a loop is made from it under the chin.
Or one with a tail: by having a tail at the back. Their evidence for that is that they said: because the wisdom of the permissibility of wiping over the turban is the hardship of removing it, and this is not realized in a turban placed on the head without being knotted under the chin, but the one knotted under the chin is hard for a person to remove. As for the one with a tail, it is because this is the famous turban among the Arabs, and the one lacking it is not called a turban. But there is a point to consider in this, and the correct view is that it is permissible to wipe over the plain turban that has no tail and is not knotted under the chin.
As for the first, we say: where is the evidence that it must be knotted under the chin?
And the reasoning that it is for the hardship of removal, it is said: this is not analogous to the leather socks, because the root of purifying the head is made light. Then it may be hard for a person to take off the turban to wipe the head, because some turbans have many loops, so if he takes it off, he remains for a time folding it. And secondly: there is harm, because the turban must give the head heat, so if he uncovers it or takes it off to wipe the head, especially in the days of winter, he is harmed by it and may be damaged because his head will face cold. So the correct view is: it is not a condition in the turban that it be knotted under the chin or have a tail. And as for these being the turbans of the Arabs, if this is conceded, the texts came absolute without restriction.
So if someone asks: do you permit wiping over the cap and the ghutrah?
The answer is: no, because it is not called a turban, and there is no slightest hardship in it. But there is something that may be analogous to the turban, which is the beanie, the beanie that is worn on the head in the days of winter, and it is a beanie of wool or cotton that a person wears on his head and has an opening for the face and a collar on the neck. So there is no doubt that wiping over it is permissible, and it is more deserving of the permissibility of wiping than the turban, because this is hard for a person to take off, and it is also more harmful to the head than taking off the turban, because it is usually used in the days of winter. So if someone asks: do you permit wiping over the head if it is covered with resin and honey and the like?
The answer is: yes, we permit this, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in the Farewell Pilgrimage covered his head with resin, and this is a concession, meaning this is what indicates that wiping over what is on the head is a matter of ease.
So if someone asks: women wear jewelry on their heads and interlock it in their hair, and sew it on it, so is it obligatory for them to remove it during ablution or do they wipe over it?
The answer is: the second, because the hardship of removing this is also severe, and as you heard, wiping over the head is a matter of lightness.
So
The warmers
التساخينThe warmers
التساخينSo is it permissible to wipe over the thin or torn leather sock?
The answer is: yes, according to the stronger position, because this achieves the warming of the foot. And is it permissible to wipe over the wrappings?
Meaning, if there is severe cold or severe heat for the protection of the foot, and it is wrapped with wrappings, is it permissible to wipe over them?
The answer is: yes, there is no doubt in this, because removing this wrapped item is harder than taking off the leather sock or the sock.
So if someone asks: is it permissible to wipe over the torn leather sock?
We said: yes, as long as the name of the leather sock remains or the name of the sock remains, it is permissible to wipe over it, because the texts came absolute.
And the situation is one of dispensation and ease, and if the situation is one of dispensation and ease, it is not befitting for us to be strict with the servants of Allah in something that is not established in the Shari'ah of Allah. And this is a rule that a person must pay attention to: any condition you impose in any of the rulings, know that by doing so you have restricted the Shari'ah, because conditions are restrictions, and if the absolute is restricted, it becomes what? A restriction on the people. So any condition you add to any of the rulings, know that you have restricted the Shari'ah of Allah, and Allah will hold you accountable for this, because Allah made it absolute for His servants and made it easy for His servants, then you come with an added restriction or condition that was not present in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, nor in the correct analogy, so you will be held accountable for this.