and the head covering and leather socks, he said, “in the case of minor ritual impurity.” Had he not said here, “even in the case of major ritual impurity,” someone might have supposed that wiping over it applies only in the case of minor ritual impurity, whereas wiping over it is permissible in both minor and major ritual impurity.
This is for several reasons:
- The hadith of the man with the head wound—on the basis that it is a sound hadith and may be used as evidence—for the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “It would only have been sufficient for him to perform dry ablution, bind a cloth over his wound, and then wipe over it.” (1)
This concerns major ritual impurity, because the man was in a state of major ritual impurity.
-
Wiping over a splint falls under the category of necessity, and necessity makes no distinction between major and minor ritual impurity. This differs from wiping over leather socks, which is a concession.
-
This limb, which is required to be washed, has been covered with something with which it is legally permissible to cover it; therefore, wiping over it is permissible, just as it is over leather socks