ShamelaTranslate
بحث
تسجيل الدخول
ShamelaTranslate

© 2026 ShamelaTranslate. مشروع علمي مفتوح الوصول.

حولتواصلتبرّعبيانات النشرالخصوصيةشروط الاستخدامحق الانسحابإلغاء اشتراك
المغني لابن قدامة - ت التركي
مجلد 1 · صفحة 425فصل

الترجمة · EN

they are two limbs, and thus they resemble the head and the foot. Our position is that they are in effect like a single limb, and this is why the order of one over the other is not required; therefore, the wiping of one is nullified by the appearance of the other, just like a single foot. In this respect, it differs from the head and the foot.

Section: The exposure of part of the foot due to a tear is like removing the khuff. If the outer surface is revealed while the inner lining remains, it does no harm, because the foot is covered by what follows the khuff in the sale, so it resembles the case where it has not torn.

Section: If he puts his foot out into the leg-part of the khuff, it is like taking it off. This was the view of Ishaq and the Ashab al-Ra'y. Al-Shafi'i said: It does not appear to me that he is required to perform wudu, because the foot has not appeared [outside the khuff]. Abu al-Khattab narrated in "Ru'us al-Masa'il" another narration from Ahmad to that effect. Our position is that the stability of the foot inside the khuff is a condition for the permissibility of wiping, evidenced by the fact that if he put the khuff on and then broke his wudu before the foot was stabilized inside it, he would not be permitted to wipe. Thus, when the stability changes, the condition for the permissibility of wiping ceases, and the wiping is nullified by the loss of its condition, just as the loss of its concealment [nullifies it]. If the exposure of the foot is to a point less than that, the wiping is not nullified, because it has not moved from its place of stability.

Section: Ahmad disliked wearing the khuffs while one is struggling against the need to relieve oneself, or both [the need to urinate and defecate], because prayer is disliked with this [state of] purification, and wearing them is intended for the purpose of wiping over them for prayer. Ibrahim al-Nakha'i used to put on his khuffs when he intended to urinate, and he viewed the matter as flexible, because the purification is complete, so it resembles the case if he wore them when fearing being overcome by drowsiness. The prayer is only disliked because his heart being occupied with struggling against the need to relieve oneself takes away the khushu' (humility/focus) of the prayer and prevents performing it in its perfection; this might also lead him to rush through it, but that does not cause any harm in the act of wearing [the khuffs].

81 - Issue: He said: (And if he breaks his wudu while he is a resident, but does not wipe until he travels, he completes the wiping of a traveler from the time the hadath occurred.)

الحواشي

(6) In [the original manuscripts]: "fa-yabtulu" (it is nullified). (7) In the copies: "wa-la yara" (and he does not view). And in a marginal note: In one copy, "wa-la yara al-amra fi dhalika illa wahidan" (and he does not view the matter in that as anything but one). (1) In [M]: "'ala mash" (upon wiping).

العربية (المصدر)

عُضْوَانِ، فأشْبَهَا الرَّأْسَ والقَدَمَ. ولَنا، أنَّهما في الحُكْمِ كعُضْوٍ واحِدٍ، ولهذا لا يَجِبُ تَرْتِيبُ أحَدِهِما على الآخَرِ، فبطَلَ (٦) مَسْحُ أحَدِهِما بِظُهُورِ الآخَرِ، كالرِّجْلِ الواحِدةِ، وبهذا فارَقَ الرَّأْسَ والقَدَمَ.

فصل: وانْكِشَافُ بَعْض القَدَمِ مِنْ خَرْقٍ كَنَزْعِ الخُفِّ. فإنْ انْكَشَفَتْ ظِهَارَتُهُ، وبَقِيَتْ بِطَانَتُهُ، لم تَضُرّ؛ لأنَّ القَدَمَ مَسْتُورَةٌ بما يَتْبَعُ الخُفَّ في البَيْعِ، فأشْبَهَ ما لو لم يَنْكَشِطْ.

فصل: وإنْ أَخْرَجَ رِجْلَهُ إلى سَاقِ الخُفِّ، فهو كَخَلْعِهِ. وبهذا قال إسحاقُ، وأصْحَابُ الرَّأْىِ. وقال الشَّافِعِىُّ: لا يَبينُ لي أنَّ عليه الوُضُوءَ؛ لأنَّ الرِّجْلَ لم تَظْهَرْ. وحَكَى أبو الخَطَّاب في "رُءُوسِ المَسَائِلِ"، عن أحمدَ رِوَايةً أُخْرَى كذلك. ولَنا، أنَّ اسْتِقْرَارَ الرِّجْلِ في الخُفِّ شَرْطُ جَوازِ المَسْحِ، بِدَلِيلِ ما لو أدْخَلَ الخُفَّ، فأحْدَثَ قبلَ اسْتِقْرَارِها فيه، لم يكنْ له المَسْحُ، فإذا تَغَيَّرَ الاسْتِقْرَارُ زَالَ شَرْطُ جوازِ المَسْحِ، فيَبْطُلُ المَسْحُ لِزَوَالِ شَرْطِه، كزَوالِ اسْتِتَارِهِ، وإنْ كان إخْراجُ القَدَمِ إلى ما دُونَ ذلك، لم يَبْطُل المَسْحُ، لأنَّها لَمْ تَزُلْ عَنْ مُسْتَقَرِّها.

فصل: كَرِهَ أحمدُ لُبْسَ الخُفَّيْنِ وهو يُدَافِعُ الأخْبَثَيْنِ، أو أحَدَهُما؛ لأنَّ الصَّلَاةَ مَكْرُوهَةٌ بهذه الطَّهارةِ، واللُّبْسُ يُرَادُ لِيمْسَحَ عليه لِلصَّلَاةِ. وكان إبراهيم النَّخَعِىُّ إذا أرادَ أنْ يَبُولَ لَبِسَ خُفَّيْهِ، ويرَىَ (٧) الأمْرَ في ذلك وَاسِعًا؛ لأنَّ الطَّهارةَ كامِلَةٌ، فأشْبَهَ ما لو لَبِسَهُ إذَا خافَ غَلَبَةَ النُّعَاسِ، وإنَّمَا كُرِهَتِ الصَّلَاةُ؛ لأنَّ اشْتِغَالَ قَلْبِهِ بِمُدَافَعَةِ الأَخْبَثَيْنِ يَذْهَبُ بِخُشُوعِ الصَّلَاةِ، ويَمْنَعُ الإِتْيانَ بها على الكَمَالِ، ورُبَّما حَمَلَهُ ذلك على العَجَلَةِ فيها، ولا يَضُرُّ ذَلِكَ فِي اللُّبْسِ.

٨١ - مسألة؛ قال: (ولَوْ أَحْدَثَ وَهُوَ مُقِيمٌ، فَلَمْ يَمْسَحْ حَتَّى سَافَرَ، أتَمَّ مَسْحَ (١) مُسَافِرٍ مُنْذُ كانَ الحَدَثُ)

الحواشي

(٦) في: "فيبطل".(٧) في النسخ: "ولا يرى". وفي حاشية: وفى نسخة ولا يرى الأمر في ذلك إلا واحدا.(١) في م: "على مسح".

السابقمجلد 1 · صفحة 425التالي
السابق1·425التالي