and then puts them on while in a state of complete purification. There is another narration stating that washing his feet suffices, just as if he had removed them. We will mention this and the disagreement regarding it, if Allah the Almighty wills. Al-Hasan said: The wudu is not nullified; he may pray until he breaks his wudu, after which he may no longer wipe until he removes them. Dawud said: He removes his khuffs and does not pray in them, but once he removes them, he may pray until he breaks his wudu; this is because purification is not nullified except by a hadath (ritual impurity), and removing the khuff is not a hadath, nor is the expiration of the duration. Our position is that washing the feet is a condition for prayer, and wiping only stood in its place for the duration; therefore, once it has expired, it is not permissible for it to stand in its place except by evidence. Furthermore, it is a state of purification the initiation of which is not permitted, so its continuation is prohibited, just like tayammum (9) upon seeing water.
80 - Issue: He said: (If he removes them before that, he must repeat the wudu)
This means before the expiration of the duration; if he removes his khuffs after wiping over them, his wudu is nullified. Al-Nakha'i, al-Zuhri, Makhul, al-Awza'i, and Ishaq held this view, and it is one of the two opinions of al-Shafi'i. From Ahmad, there is another narration that washing his feet suffices, which is the school of Abu Hanifa and the second opinion of al-Shafi'i. This is because wiping the khuffs replaced the washing of the feet specifically, so the purification of the two is nullified by what it replaced (1), just as tayammum is nullified upon seeing water; it becomes obligatory to perform what it replaced. This disagreement is built upon the requirement of al-muwalat (succession/immediacy) in wudu. Therefore, whoever permits intermission allows the washing of the feet, because his other limbs have been washed, and nothing remains but the washing of the feet; once he washes them, he completes his wudu. Whoever prohibits intermission deems his wudu nullified due to the loss of al-muwalat. Accordingly, if he were to remove the khuffs before the water on his hands dries, washing his feet would suffice, and it would be as if he removed them before wiping over them. Al-Hasan, Qatada, and Sulayman ibn Harb (2) said: He does not perform wudu and does not wash his feet, because he removed what was wiped over after the completion of purification, so it is similar to...
(9) In [M]: "kal-mutayammim" (like the one performing tayammum). (1) Omitted from [M]. (2) Abu Ayyub Sulayman ibn Harb ibn Bujayl al-Azdi al-Basri, who resided in Mecca and was its judge; he died in the year 224 AH. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 4/178-180.
يَلْبِسَهُما على طَهَارَةٍ كَامِلَةٍ. وفيه رِوَايةٌ أُخْرَى، أَنَّه يُجْزِئُه غَسْلُ قَدَمَيْهِ، كما لو خَلَعَهُما. وسنذْكُرُ ذلك والخِلَافَ فيه، إنْ شاءَ اللهُ تعالى. وقال الحسنُ: لا يَبْطُلُ الوُضُوءُ، ويُصَلِّى حتَّى يُحْدِثَ، ثم لا يَمْسَحُ بعدُ حتى يَنْزِعَهُما. وقال داود: يَنْزِعُ خُفَّيْهِ ولا يُصَلِّى فِيهما، فإذا نَزَعَهُما صَلَّى حتَّى يُحْدِثَ؛ لأنَّ الطَّهَارَةَ لا تَبْطُلُ إلَّا بِحَدَثٍ، ونَزْعُ الخُفِّ ليس بِحَدَثٍ، وكذلك انْقِضَاءُ المُدَّةِ. ولَنا، أنَّ غَسْلَ الرِّجْلَيْنِ شَرْطٌ لِلصَّلَاةِ، وإنَّما قَامَ المَسْحُ مَقَامَهُ في المُدَّةِ، فإذا انْقَضَتْ لم يَجُزْ أنْ يَقُومَ مَقامَهُ إلَّا بِدَلِيلٍ، ولأنَّها طَهَارَةٌ لا يَجُوزُ ابْتِدَاؤُها، فيُمْنَعُ مِن اسْتِدَامَتِها، كالتَّيَمُّمِ (٩) عندَ رُؤْيَةِ الماءِ.
٨٠ - مسألة؛ قال: (فإِنْ خَلَعَ قَبْلَ ذَلِكَ أعَادَ الوُضُوءَ)
يَعْنِى قبلَ انْقِضَاءِ المُدَّةِ، إذا خَلَعَ خُفَّيْهِ بعدَ المَسْحِ عليهما، بَطَلَ وُضُوؤُهُ. وبه قال النَّخَعِىُّ، والزُّهْرِىُّ، ومَكْحُولٌ، والأَوْزَاعِىُّ، وإسحاق، وهو أحَدُ قَوْلَىِ الشَّافِعِىِّ. وعن أحمدَ، رِوَايَة أُخْرَى، أنَّه يُجْزِئُه غَسْلُ قَدَمَيْه. وهو مَذْهَبُ أبى حنيفة، والقَوْلُ الثَّانِى للشَّافِعِىِّ؛ لأنَّ مَسْحَ الخُفَّيْنِ نَابَ عَنْ غَسْلِ الرِّجْلَيْنِ خَاصَّةً، فَطُهُورُهُما يُبْطِلُ مَا نَابَ عنه (١)، كالتَّيَمُّمِ إذا بَطَلَ بِرُؤْيَةِ الماءِ وَجَبَ ما نَابَ عنه. وهذا الاخْتِلَافُ مَبْنيٌّ على وُجُوبِ المُوَالَاةِ في الوُضُوءِ، فَمَنْ أجازَ التَّفْرِيقَ جَوَّزَ غَسْلَ القَدَمَيْنِ؛ لأنَّ سَائِرَ أَعْضَائِهِ مَغْسُولَةٌ، ولم يَبْقَ إلَّا غَسْلُ قَدَمَيْهِ، فإذا غَسَلَهُما كَمَّلَ وُضُوءَهُ. ومَنْ مَنَعَ التَّفْرِيقَ أبْطَلَ وُضُوءَهُ؛ لِفَواتِ المُوالاةِ، فعلى هذا، لو خَلَعَ الخُفَّيْنِ قبلَ جَفافِ الماءِ عَنْ يَدَيْه، أجْزَأهُ غَسْلُ قَدَمَيْهِ، وصارَ كأنَّه خَلَعَهُما قبلَ مَسْحِهِ عليهما. وقال الحسنُ، وقَتَادَةُ، وسُليمان بنُ حَرْبٍ (٢): لا يَتَوَضَّأُ، ولا يَغْسِلُ قَدَمَيْه؛ لأنَّه أزَالَ المَمْسُوحَ عليه بعدَ كَمالِ الطَّهارَةِ، فأشْبَهَ
(٩) في م: "كالمتيمم".(١) سقط من: م.(٢) أبو أيوب سليمان بن حرب بن بجيل الأزدى البصري، سكن مكة وكان قاضيها، توفى سنة أربع وعشرين ومائتين. تهذيب التهذيب ٤/ ١٧٨ - ١٨٠.