4. Wiping has been prescribed as an act of worship in principle; therefore, when we are unable to wash, we move on to wiping as the next alternative.

5. Purifying the area of the splint by wiping it with water is closer to washing than resorting to dry ablution. Although the hadiths concerning wiping over a splint are weak, some of them reinforce others.

Moreover, it is possible to draw an analogy between it and wiping over leather socks, even if only from a somewhat remote perspective. We may say: This is a limb covered by something that it is legally permissible to wear; therefore, its prescribed duty is wiping. Although this analogy has some weakness, in that wiping over leather socks is a concession and time-limited, whereas wiping over a splint is the original obligation and is not time-limited; wiping over leather socks applies in the case of minor ritual impurity, whereas this applies in both minor and major ritual impurity; and wiping over leather socks is confined to the upper surface of the foot, whereas this applies to the whole of it—despite these objections to the analogy, it is strong in principle: namely, that it is covered by something with which it is legally permissible to cover it, so wiping over it is permissible, just as it is over leather socks. This is the view held by the majority of scholars.

Some scholars, such as Ibn Hazm, held that one should not wipe over a splint (1), because the hadiths concerning it are weak. He did not hold that they reinforce one another, nor did he accept analogy.

Those who held that wiping is not permissible differed among themselves. Some of them said that washing is waived in favour of a substitute, namely dry ablution (2), by