Among the innovations in wudu is the innovation of wiping the neck (with the back of the hands) (after wiping the head and ears). Many people give great importance to this act and consider it obligatory or a emphasized Sunnah, whereas it is merely a bad and self-invented innovation.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Wiping the neck in wudu is not established from the Prophet ﷺ, nor is there any sahih hadith reported on this matter; rather, the sahih ahadith on wudu make no mention of wiping the neck. For this reason, the majority of scholars, such as (Imam) Malik, al-Shafi’i and Ahmad, did not call it recommended according to their apparent school of thought. The one who called it recommended relied on the report narrated from (Sayyidina) Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him), or on a da’if hadith that mentions wiping up to the neck (along with wiping the head). Such narrations cannot be relied upon. It is not correct to counter what is established from sahih ahadith with such narrations. There is consensus among the scholars that whoever did not wipe the neck in wudu, his wudu is valid by consensus.”
writes: “No hadith about wiping the neck is established.”
And
states: “Likewise, the hadith about wiping the neck during wudu is baseless.”
I (Amr bin Abd al-Mun’im) say that (Imam) al-Nawawi and others declared the wiping of the neck an innovation (bid’ah) and the hadith about wiping it a mawdu’ (fabricated) hadith. Those who hold that wiping the neck is permissible rely on the hadith narrated from Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), in which he is reported to have wiped his neck during wudu and said that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
((مَنْ تَوَضَّأَ وَ مَسَحَ عُنُقَہُ، لَمْ یَغُلَّ بِالْأَغْلالِ یَوْمَ الْقِیَامَۃِ))
Whoever performs wudu and wipes his neck, will not be shackled with chains on the Day of Resurrection.
Abu Nu’aym (al-Isfahani) narrated it in his book
with the following chain:
“حدثنا محمد بن أحمد بن محمد: حدثنا عبدالرحمٰن بن داود: حدثنا عثمان بن خرزاد: حدثنا عمرو بن محمد بن الحسن المکتب: حدثنا محمد بن عمرو بن عبید الأنصاري عن أنس بن سیرین عن ابن عمر بہ”
Ibn Iraq said in his book
:
“One of the narrators of this hadith, the teacher of Abu Nu’aym, Abu Bakr al-Mufid, is enough to render this narration rejected.”
I (the author) say that Abu Bakr al-Mufid is accused of fabricating hadith, as written in
.
(Its other narrator) Muhammad bin Amr bin Ubayd al-Ansari was declared severely da’if by Yahya al-Qattan and Yahya bin Ma’in.
Ibn Numayr said: “He is not equal to anything.”
And al-Maktab is probably the narrator about whom Imam al-Daraqutni said: “munkar al-hadith” (narrates rejected hadiths).
Another chain for this narration is reported as “فلیح بن سلیمان عن نافع عن ابن عمر“, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
((مَنْ تَوَضَأَ وَ مَسَحَ بِیَدَیْہِ عَلیٰ عُنُقِہٖ وُقِيَ الْغُلَ یَوْمَ الْقِیَامَۃِ)) Whoever performs wudu and wipes his neck with both hands will be safe from being fitted with a collar (and chains) on the Day of Resurrection.
Al-Ruwayani mentioned it in “al-Bahr” as is written in
. Al-Ruwayani read it in the (attributed) juz’ of Abu al-Husayn bin Faris. Ibn Faris narrated this hadith from Fulayh through his (unknown) chain.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar said: “The chain between Ibn Faris and Fulayh (to our knowledge) does not exist, so that it could be investigated” (meaning this narration is without a chain, and therefore rejected).
I (the author) say that Fulayh has weakness in his memory.
The preferred view is that Fulayh bin Sulayman is hasan al-hadith. Note that this narration is not his responsibility. Translator
Al-Shawkani attributed this narration in
to Ahmad bin Isa’s “Amali” and “Sharh al-Tajrid”, but its chain depends on al-Husayn bin Alwan from Abu Khalid al-Wasiti. The wording of the narration is as follows:
((مَنْ تَوَضَّأَ وَ مَسَحَ سَالِفَتَیْہِ وَقَفَاہُ أَمِنَ مِنَ الْغُلِّ یَوْمَ الْقِیَامَۃِ)) Whoever performs wudu and wipes the two sides of his neck and the nape, he will be safe from the collar on the Day of Resurrection.
Its narrator al-Husayn bin Alwan is a liar (kadhdhab) and a fabricator of hadiths. Ibn Ma’in and al-Nasa’i called him “کذاب“. Salih al-Jazarah said: he used to fabricate hadiths. This statement from Salih al-Jazarah is not established with a sahih chain. See
Abu Khalid al-Wasiti: he is Amr bin Khalid al-Qurashi. Hafiz Ibn Hajar said about him: “متروک، ورماہ وکیع بالکذب”
He is matruk (abandoned), and Waki’ called him a liar.
(In another narration) it is reported from the Prophet ﷺ that “wiping the neck is safety from the collar.”
Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
“This is mawdu’, it is not the speech of the Prophet ﷺ.”
Hafiz Ibn Hajar writes in
:
“Abu Muhammad al-Juwayni (Imam al-Haramayn) mentioned this hadith and said that the muhaddithun are not satisfied with the chain of this narration, so regarding this act there is doubt whether it is sunnah or adab.
Refuting this point, Imam….. said: there is no doubt regarding the ruling on this narration that it is da’if. Qadi Abu al-Tayyib said: no sunnah is established on this matter. Nearly the same has been said by Qadi Husayn and al-Furani. When al-Ghazali mentioned this hadith in “al-Wasit”, Ibn al-Salah refuted it, saying:
This hadith is not known from the Prophet ﷺ (with a sahih or hasan chain); rather it is the saying of some of the early scholars.”
By “the saying of some of the early scholars,” Ibn al-Salah probably means the narration that Abu Ubayd (al-Qasim bin Sallam) narrated in the book “al-Tahur” through Abd al-Rahman bin Mahdi from al-Mas’udi from al-Qasim bin Abd al-Rahman from Musa bin Talhah (chain):
((مَنْ مَسَحَ قَفَاہُ مَعَ رَأَسِہٖ وُقِيَ الْغُلَّ یَوْمَ الْقِیَامَۃِ)) Whoever wipes his nape with his head, he will be safe from being fitted with a collar on the Day of Resurrection.
I (Hafiz Ibn Hajar) say that there is a possibility that although this is mawquf (rather maqtu’), its ruling is that of a marfu’ hadith, because such a statement is not based on opinion. Therefore this narration is mursal.
I (the author) say that this maqtu’ narration is in
of Imam Abu Ubayd. (Its chain is also da’if, because) al-Mas’udi’s memory deteriorated in his final years. Ibn Mahdi’s hearing from him is from the later period, and there is also idtirab in this narration. Abu Ubayd narrated from Hajjaj, who narrated from Qasim bin Abd al-Rahman his statement. Hajjaj said: “I do not remember the name Musa bin Talhah in this narration.” Therefore attributing this statement to the early righteous predecessors is not correct.
Imam al-Bayhaqi narrated in
through the chain “Abu Isra’il from Fudayl bin Amr from Mujahid from Ibn Umar” that Abdullah bin Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would wipe his nape along with wiping his head; this is not established. Because its narrator Abu Isra’il Isma’il bin Khalifah al-Mala’i is da’if al-hadith. This wretched man used to curse (the Companions), and may Allah disgrace whoever curses the Companions.
Imam al-Baghawi (may Allah have mercy on him) holds that wiping the neck in wudu is recommended, but Ibn al-Rif’ah said: “They do not have any hadith or even a statement of a Companion on its being recommended, and this is a matter in which qiyas has no role.” Refuting Ibn al-Rif’ah, Hafiz Ibn Hajar says:
“It is possible that the proof of Baghawi for calling wiping the neck recommended is the hadith that Ahmad bin Hanbal and Abu Dawud narrated (through Layth bin Abi Sulaym) from Talhah bin Musarrif from his father from his grandfather, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ wiped his head until he reached the nape and the neck. (But remember that) the chain of this narration is da’if.”
The author of the book says that its narrator Musarrif is “majhul” (unknown).
and Layth bin Abi Sulaym is da’if.
From this detail it becomes known that the statement of Shawkani in
:
“This shows that Nawawi’s statement, that wiping the neck is a bid’ah and its hadith is fabricated, is baseless”
is itself baseless, because all the narrations in this regard are (baseless or) rejected. واللہ اعلم
[It should be noted that these weak narrations relate to wiping the neck together with wiping the head and ears. As for some people wiping the neck with the back of the hands after wiping the head and ears, there is not even a weak narration for it. Translator]
The most evil innovation in wudu is the restriction (and denial) concerning wiping over socks.
Many people feel great hardship (restriction) in wiping over worn socks after purification and wudu, although according to some of the righteous predecessors (salaf al-salih), socks are a substitute for leather socks (khuffs).
We have called it the most evil innovation because it contradicts the authentic hadith narrated from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, in which it is stated that the Prophet ﷺ wiped over socks. Likewise, this innovation contradicts the established practice of the companions, who regarded socks as a substitute for leather socks and wiped over them. Now listen to the details of this:
It is authentically established from Mughirah ibn Shu’bah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet ﷺ performed wudu and wiped over socks and sandals.
. In its chain, Sufyan al-Thawri is a mudallis and narrates with “an” (so this chain is weak). But this narration is authentic together with its corroborations. Especially when the consensus of the Companions also supports it, what doubt remains about its authenticity? / Translator
This hadith is sahih and established; Ibn Hazm declared it authentic. Hafiz al-Isma’ili said that its chain is sahih according to the conditions of al-Bukhari, so Imam al-Bukhari should have included it in Sahih al-Bukhari.
Hafiz Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said in
:
“And the Prophet ﷺ wiped over socks and sandals.” This statement is evidence that, in his view, the hadith of Mughirah ibn Shu’bah is authentic. The reports from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all) on this matter are very numerous.
Ibn al-Mundhir al-Naysaburi narrated in
from Imam Ahmad:
“Seven or eight Companions wiped over socks.”
Some of the narrations from these distinguished Companions are as follows:
1: Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him)
Amr ibn Hurayth said: I saw Ali urinate, then perform wudu and wipe over socks. This was narrated by
with a sahih chain.
2: al-Bara’ ibn ‘Azib (may Allah be pleased with him)
narrate through the chain “الأعمش عن إسما عیل بن رجاء عن رجاءبن ربیعۃ الزبیدی” that I (Raja’) saw al-Bara’ perform wudu and wipe over socks. Its chain is hasan. [الاعمش صرح بالسماع]
3: Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him)
Qatadah reports that Anas wiped over socks
. Its chain is sahih (Qatadah is a mudallis and narrates with “an”, so this narration is weak).
4: Abu Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him)
‘Abd al-Razzaq (777) and Ibn al-Mundhir narrated through the chain “الأعمش عن إبراھیم عن ھمام بن الحارث عن أبي مسعود” that Abu Mas’ud (Uqbah ibn ‘Amr al-Badri al-Ansari) (may Allah be pleased with him) used to wipe over socks. Its chain is sahih.
[This narration’s chain is weak due to al-A’mash’s tadlis, but it has an authentic corroboration in
, so this narration is also sahih li-ghayrihi through that corroboration.]
5: Abu Umamah al-Bahili (may Allah be pleased with him)
narrate through the hasan chain of Hammad ibn Salamah from Abi Ghalib that I (Abu Ghalib) saw Abu Umamah wiping over socks.
Sayyidina Sahl ibn Sa’d al-Sa’idi (may Allah be pleased with him) wiped over socks. See
narrated with a hasan chain from Nafi’ the mawla of Ibn ‘Umar, and with a sahih chain from Ibrahim al-Nakha’i, that socks have the ruling of leather socks. [The statement of Ibrahim al-Nakha’i was not found, but Ibn
narrated with a sahih chain that Ibrahim (al-Nakha’i) used to wipe over socks.] This is also the position of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Ibn al-Mundhir narrated it from ‘Ata’, Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib, Ibrahim al-Nakha’i, Sa’id ibn Jubayr, al-A’mash, Sufyan al-Thawri, Hasan ibn Salih, Ibn al-Mubarak, Zufar ibn al-Hudhayl and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh. (465/1)
There are many other matters among the innovations concerning wiping over socks and leather socks, for example:
1: Wiping the outer and inner (upper and lower) surfaces.
This is contrary to the Sunnah established from the Prophet ﷺ.
(Hafiz) Ibn al-Qayyim says:
“The Prophet ﷺ used to wipe over the top of the khuffs; it is not established from him with an authentic chain that he wiped beneath the khuffs. The narration regarding this has a broken chain (munqati’), and this report also contradicts authentic ahadith.”
The same applies to the hadith of Mughirah (may Allah be pleased with him) about wiping over the socks.
In the narration of Jarir ibn Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him): ((رَأَیْتُ رَسُوْلَ اللہِﷺ بَالَ ثُمَّ تَوَضَّأَ وَ مَسَحَ عَلیٰ خُفَّیْہِ)) I saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ urinate, then perform wudu and wipe over his khuffs.
The apparent meaning of “ʿalā” is “over,” so this hadith clearly proves wiping over the sock or shoe. However, it is authentically established from Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that he would wipe (over his socks or leather socks) with both hands, once only, over and under
; its chain is authentic. In it, the narrator Abd al-Razzaq is a mudallis, and the chain is ‘an’an.
narrated with a hasan chain that Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) would wipe beneath and above the sock.
This is the ijtihad of Abdullah ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), which is contrary to the authentic and established Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ, and it is most likely to be understood as meaning that the aforementioned hadith had not reached him. It is also known to ordinary people that there are some ahadith which, if known to some Companions, were not known to others. Understand this well.
It would also be worthwhile to mention here that some narrations explicitly state that the Prophet ﷺ wiped only over the top of the socks, rather than beneath, but all these narrations are weak in terms of their chains. We mention them here for two reasons:
1: To make clear that they are weak.
2: So that no one says: “You missed such authentic ahadith here, which are clear proof for your position.” Granting success is solely by the grace and favour of Allah.
The ahadith on wiping over the socks are general (in terms of the wiping itself). Only three ahadith are narrated with explicit mention of wiping beneath or above:
1: Al-Fadl ibn Mubashshir said: “I saw Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari (may Allah be pleased with him) perform wudu. He wiped over his socks only once, then prayed all the prayers (during that state of wudu) without renewing the wudu, and said: ‘I saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ do this, and I am doing it just as I saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ do.'”
This narration is also found without mention of wiping in
.
Its narrator, Al-Fadl ibn Mubashshir, is weak in hadith according to the muhaddithun.
2: Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi al-Zinad narrated from his father, from Urwah ibn al-Zubayr, from Mughirah ibn Shu’bah (may Allah be pleased with him), that he saw the Prophet ﷺ wiping over the apparent (i.e., upper) surface of the socks.
Imam al-Tirmidhi said: “No one narrated this hadith except Abd al-Rahman.” By this statement, Imam al-Tirmidhi pointed to Abd al-Rahman’s addition being rejected (munkar). The matter is as Imam al-Tirmidhi said, because Ibn Abi al-Zinad’s memory has been criticised by the muhaddithun; therefore such a narrator’s addition is not accepted. What is preserved is that the words “apparent” and “above” are not in the hadith of Mughirah (may Allah be pleased with him).
[Note: Regarding Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi al-Zinad, the preferred view is that he is sahih al-hadith in the narration of Sulayman ibn Dawud al-Hashimi, and hasan al-hadith in the narrations of his other students; see my book
. Therefore, criticism of this chain is not correct. / Translator]
3: It is narrated from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: “I saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ wiping over the top of the socks.”
Its narrator Abu Ishaq al-Sabiʿi is a mudallis, and he is narrating with ‘an’ (so this chain is weak).
It is also narrated from Mughirah ibn Shu’bah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet ﷺ wiped both beneath and above the socks.
Imam al-Tirmidhi said: “This hadith is ma’lul (i.e., weak). No one other than Walid ibn Muslim narrated it from Thawr ibn Yazid as a musnad (with a connected chain). Abu Zur’ah and Imam al-Bukhari both say that this hadith is not sahih, because Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak narrated this same report as: Thawr from Rajaʾ ibn Haywah who said: ‘I was told from the scribe of al-Mughirah, from the Prophet ﷺ’ — as a mursal report, without mentioning Mughirah.”
Imam Abu Dawud mentioned another reason (for its weakness): “I came to know that Thawr did not hear this narration from Rajaʾ ibn Haywah.”
Ibn al-Mundhir narrated from Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal that he considered this hadith weak.
2: Wiping over the socks or leather socks more than once.
The Sunnah is to wipe over the socks only once. It is not established from the Prophet ﷺ that he wiped more than once. It is established from Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that he wiped only once, as has already passed (p. 56). Also keep in mind that wiping is contrary to washing. The purpose of washing is thorough cleanliness, which is not intended in wiping; therefore, wiping repeatedly, like washing repeatedly, is not correct.
3: Removing the socks or leather socks and (unnecessarily) washing the feet.
Some people, by subjecting themselves to self-invented hardship, become guilty of compound ignorance.
A sahih hadith has already passed: “Indeed Allah loves that His concessions be acted upon, just as He dislikes that His disobedience be committed.”
In acts of worship where both options are permissible, meaningless excesses have been forbidden. Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: ((نُھِیْنَا عَنِ التَّکَلُّفِ)) “We have been forbidden from excessive burdening.”
Ibn al-Qayyim said in
: “The Prophet ﷺ (regarding socks, leather socks and the like) did not engage in unwarranted excess contrary to his own state. If his feet were in socks, he would wipe over them without removing them, and if his feet were bare, he would wash them. Regarding this matter, whether wiping is more virtuous or washing, the strongest opinion is that if the feet are bare one should wash them, and if there are socks or stockings one should wipe over them. This is also what our teacher (Imam Ibn Taymiyyah) stated.”
In the early days of my student life, a strange incident occurred to me. I set out by land with my brothers in faith from Kuwait to perform Umrah. The cold was so severe that the temperature would drop to zero degrees Celsius. I heard an announcer proclaiming: “Take off your socks and, acting upon the stricter ruling, wash your feet.” I was astonished that Satan had planted this weak and corrupt opinion in that person’s heart, due to which he was even giving it precedence over the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. Not only that, he was also inviting others to it. For those poor people who have no knowledge of these matters, there is no difference between concession and stricter ruling in their view. We complain of this conduct of people to Allah alone.
4: Not wiping over torn socks or stockings.
This conduct (of the people) is contrary to the righteous predecessors and the research scholars.
Sufyan al-Thawri said:
“Keep wiping as long as they (the socks) remain hanging on your feet. Do you not know that the socks of the Muhajirun and Ansar were indeed torn?”
Shaykh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy on him) also adopted this view. He said:
“Of the two opinions, one is that wiping over wrappings is permissible; this has been mentioned by Ibn al-Qayyim and others, and wiping over torn socks is permissible as long as it can still be called a sock and walking in it is possible. This was the older fatwa of Imam al-Shafi’i. Abu al-Barakat and other scholars also adopted this view.”
Among the innovations in wudu is the belief of some students that it is recommended not to dry the body (the washed limbs) after wudu.
Some students present, in support of this, the statement of Ibn al-Qayyim: “The Prophet ﷺ did not dry his washed limbs after wudu; no hadith on this is sahih, rather what is proven is contrary to it.”
I (the author) say that (it is accepted that) Imam Ibn al-Qayyim was a very great research imam, but the principle is that the statement of any person other than the Messenger ﷺ may be accepted or rejected.
According to the researchers, the aforementioned statement of Hafiz Ibn al-Qayyim is open to question, because permissibility of this act is narrated from Salman al-Farisi (may Allah be pleased with him), which has been narrated by
through the chain of Mahfuz ibn ‘Alqamah from Salman (al-Farisi) (may Allah be pleased with him):
“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ performed wudu. He turned over his woolen cloak and then wiped his face with it.”
Busiri wrote in
:
“Its chain is sahih; all its narrators are thiqah, but there is doubt about Mahfuz’s hearing from Salman.”
Although, to my knowledge, no one other than Imam al-Mizzi has called Mahfuz’s narration from Salman disconnected (munqati’). He wrote in “Tahdhib al-Kamal”: “It is said that Mahfuz’s narration from Salman (al-Farisi) is mursal.” Al-Mizzi said this in the form of tamrid (weak attribution), as if even in his view this statement is not established, because there is no evidence for this statement, and no imam of hadith sciences has spoken this way.
[Since Mahfuz’s meeting with Salman (may Allah be pleased with him) is not established, in the translator’s research this narration is da’if. واللہ اعلم]
There are other hadiths regarding its permissibility, but not a single one of them is established.
Imam al-Tirmidhi says: “Nothing at all has been established from the Prophet ﷺ on this subject.”
If al-Tirmidhi’s statement is due to a break in the chain (inqita’), then it is acceptable; otherwise it is not admissible.
As for Ibn al-Qayyim’s statement that “rather, the opposite is established,” it refers to the hadith in which Maymunah said: “(After wudu) a towel was brought to the Prophet ﷺ, but he did not touch it, and kept shaking off the water of wudu with his hands.”
However, this hadith relates to ghusl and not to wudu, and even if it were about wudu, it would not be evidence of prohibition. Hafiz Ibn al-Mundhir said: “This hadith is not evidence of prohibition, because he did not forbid wiping the limbs of wudu. He sometimes left permissible acts for fear of hardship for the ummah.”
How excellent is Ibn al-Mundhir’s statement! A similar statement is also established from Imam Ahmad. Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal says: “I asked my father: Can one use a towel (or cloth etc.) after wudu?” He said: Yes, there is no harm in it. I said: What about the hadith of Maymunah? He said: This narration is not clear evidence of prohibition.”
Abdullah says: “I saw many times that my father (i.e., Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal) would dry his limbs with a towel or cloth after wudu.”
Regarding this, it is established from Anas with a hasan chain that after wudu he would wipe his face with a towel.
Those scholars who called it disliked (makruh) have no evidence for that. The marfu’ hadith of Salman al-Farisi and the practice of Anas are evidence for its permissibility.
5: Extravagance in the water of wudu
This is an old innovation, from which only those upon whom Allah’s special mercy rests are saved. Note that the way of the Prophet ﷺ regarding wudu (and all acts of worship) is the best and most complete way. He ﷺ used to be completely frugal with the water of wudu. He would perform wudu with one mudd or a little less.
It is narrated from Safinah: “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ would perform ghusl of janabah with one sa’ (about two and a half kilograms of water) and perform wudu with one mudd (about a quarter sa’).”
Umm Umarah al-Ansariyyah said: “The Prophet ﷺ performed wudu. The water vessel he had contained about two-thirds of a mudd of water.” A mudd is the amount that fills a person’s two palms. Tell me, who in our time performs wudu with that much water?
Imam Ahmad (how fine) said: “A sign of a person’s lack of understanding is that he uses a great deal of water in wudu.” Al-Maymuni, a student of Imam Ahmad, said: “I used to use a great deal of water in wudu, so Imam Ahmad said to me (as a rebuke): Do you act this way, i.e., are you afflicted with waswasah?” So I gave up this practice.
