a sound (sahih) hadith. And because the obligation of ghusl is rare, so making the washing of the foot obligatory does not cause hardship, unlike minor purity. For this reason, it is mandatory to wash what is beneath thick hair, and such is the ruling regarding the turban and other barriers, except for the splint (jabirah) and what is in its meaning.

Section: If he performs ablution, then wears the khuff, then breaks his ablution before the foot reaches the foot-bed of the khuff, it is not permissible for him to wipe; because the foot has reached its place of rest while he was in a state of ritual impurity, so it becomes as if he began wearing it while in a state of ritual impurity.

Section: If he performs tayammum (dry ablution), then wears the khuff, he may not wipe it, because he wore it while in a state of incomplete purity. Furthermore, it is a purity of necessity (darurah), which is invalidated from its origin, so he is like one who wears it while in a state of no purity. Moreover, tayammum does not remove the hadath (ritual impurity), so he has worn it while in a state of hadath. If a woman experiencing istihada (irregular vaginal bleeding), one who suffers from urinary incontinence, and their likes perform ablution and wear khuffayn, they are permitted to wipe over them. Ahmad explicitly stated this; because their purity is complete in their specific case. Ibn 'Aqil said: Because she is compelled to seek a concession, and the most entitled person to seek a concession is the one who is compelled (5). If the blood ceases and the necessity is removed, the purity is invalidated from its origin, and she may not wipe, just like the one performing tayammum when he finds water.

Section: If he wears two pairs of khuffayn, then breaks his ablution, then wears another two pairs or jurmuqs (outer coverings) (6) over them, it is not permissible to wipe over them, without disagreement; because he wore them while in a state of ritual impurity. And if he wipes over the first two pairs, then wears the jurmuqs, it is not permissible to wipe over them either. Some followers of al-Shafi'i have a viewpoint permitting it; because wiping stands in the place of washing the foot. Our evidence is that the wiping over the khuff did not remove the hadath from the foot, so it is as if he wore it while in a state of hadath, and because the khuff that is wiped over is a substitute, and a substitute cannot have a substitute. Also, because he wore it while in a state of incomplete purity, thus it resembles the one performing tayammum. If he wears the outer layer before breaking his ablution, it is permissible to wipe over it in all circumstances, regardless of whether what is underneath it is intact or torn. This is the view of al-Hasan ibn Salih, al-Thawri, and al-Awza'i,