Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

Or if he is uncertain about when it began, he observes the wiping period of a resident. If he breaks his ablution and then travels before wiping, he observes the wiping period of a traveller. Nor may he wipe over caps, ...

His statement, “Or if he is uncertain about when it began ...,” means: did he begin wiping while travelling, or while resident? In that case, he completes the wiping period of a resident as a precaution. This is the established position in the school.

According to the second narration in the previous issue, however, he completes the wiping period of a traveller, because under this narration he is permitted to complete the traveller’s wiping period even if he is certain that he began wiping while resident. The correct view regarding these three cases is that if he wipes while travelling and then takes up residence, he completes the wiping period of a resident. If he wipes while resident and then travels, or if he is uncertain about when he began wiping, he completes the wiping period of a traveller—unless the resident’s period has ended before his departure. If it has ended, he can no longer wipe.

His statement, “If he breaks his ablution and then travels before wiping, he observes the wiping period of a traveller,” means that he breaks his ablution while resident and then travels before wiping. He then observes the wiping period of a traveller, because he did not begin wiping while resident; rather, he began wiping while travelling. This demonstrates the stronger view we chose earlier: the wiping period begins from the first wiping, not from the breaking of ablution. Here, they have agreed that the ruling is connected to wiping, not to the breaking of ablution. Thus, the scholars of the school, may Allah have mercy on them, must either adopt the stronger view, or apply the principle consistently by making the ruling dependent on the breaking of ablution and saying: if one breaks his ablution and then travels, and wipes while travelling, he must observe the wiping period of a resident. Otherwise, there is a contradiction ...

His statement, “Nor may he wipe over caps,” refers to caps, the plural of a type of headwear worn on the head: a large skullcap,

أوْ شَكَّ في ابْتِدائِهِ، فَمَسْحَ مُقِيْمٍ، وإِنْ أَحْدَثَ ثُمَّ سَافَرَ قَبْلَ مَسْحِهِ فَمَسْحَ مُسَافِرٍ، ولا يَمْسَحُ قَلَانِسَ، ......... قوله: «أو شَكَّ في ابتدائه … »، يعني هل مَسَحَ وهو مسافرٌ أو مسحَ وهو مقيمٌ؟ فإِنه يُتمُّ مسح مقيم احتياطاً، وهو المذهب. وبناءً على الرِّواية الثَّانية ـ في المسألة السَّابقة ـ يتمُّ مسح مسافر؛ لأنَّ هذه الرِّواية الثَّانية يُباح عليها أن يُتمَّ مسح مسافر، ولو تيقن أنه ابتدأ المسح مقيماً. والصَّحيح في هذه المسائل الثلاث: أنَّه إِذا مسح مسافراً ثم أقام فإنه يتمُّ مسح مقيم، وإذا مسح مقيماً ثم سافر أو شَكَّ في ابتداء مسحه فإِنه يُتمُّ مسح مسافر، ما لم تنته مُدَّة الحضر قبل سفره، فإِن انتهت فلا يمكن أن يمسح. قوله: «وإن أحْدَث ثم سافر قبل مَسْحه فَمَسْحَ مسافرٍ»، أي: أحدث وهو مقيمٌ، ثم سافر قبل أن يمسحَ، فإِنَّه يمسحُ مسحَ مسافرٍ؛ لأنَّه لم يبتدئ المسحَ في الحضر، وإِنَّما كان ابتداء مسحه في السَّفر. وعلى هذا يتبيَّن لنا رُجحان القول الذي اخترناه من قبل: بأنَّ ابتداءَ مُدَّة المسحِ من المسح لا من الحَدَث، وَهُمْ هُنَا قد وافقوا على أنَّ الحُكم معلَّقٌ بالمسح لا بالحَدَث، ويُلزمُ الأصحاب ﵏ أن يقولوا بالقول الرَّاجح؛ أو يطردوا القاعدة، ويجعلوا الحكم منوطاً بالحَدَث، ويقولوا: إِذا أحدثَ ثم سافر، ومسحَ في السَّفر، فيلزمُه أن يمسحَ مسحَ مقيمٍ؛ وإِلا حصلَ التَّناقض ..... قوله: «ولا يَمْسَحُ قَلانس»، القلانس جمع قَلَنْسُوَة، نوع من اللباس الذي يُوضع على الرَّأس، وهي عبارة عن طاقيَّة كبيرة،

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies