Whoever regarded those actions as merely recommended declared that observing the stated sequence is a Sunnah. One scholar who distinguished between recommended and obligatory acts argued that binding sequencing should be confined to obligatory acts, whereas others who made no such distinction responded that legally required conditions may indeed attach to acts that are not themselves obligatory.
Twelfth issue among the conditions
The jurists also disagreed about continuity (muwālāh) in the acts of ablution. Mālik held that maintaining continuity is obligatory whenever one remembers and is able to do so; it is waived in cases of forgetfulness, and even when one remembers yet has a valid excuse, provided the lapse is not excessively long. Al-Shāfiʿī and Abū Ḥanīfah, however, did not count continuity among the obligations of ablution.
This divergence again goes back to the ambiguity inherent in the conjunctive wāw, for it can link elements that follow one another immediately or after an interval. A further proof adduced by those who drop the requirement of continuity is the authenticated report that the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—“would begin his ablution at the start of his purification and delay washing his feet until the end of the purification.”
The same debate resurfaces here in the broader question of whether the Prophet’s actions are presumed obligatory or merely recommended. Mālik’s distinction between deliberate omission and forgetfulness rests on the principle that the forgetful person is, by default, excused unless evidence proves otherwise, in accordance with his—peace and blessings be upon him—saying: “My community has been absolved of responsibility for mistakes and forgetfulness.” Likewise, the Law clearly shows that a legitimate excuse has a mitigating effect.
Some scholars even considered pronouncing the basmalah among the necessary elements of ablution, citing the marfūʿ ḥadīth in which he—peace and blessings be upon him—said, “There is no ablution for one who does not mention the name of Allah.” Yet this ḥadīth is not sound according to the hadith critics. Some interpreted it as referring to intention, while others—so far as I can tell—understood it as a recommendation rather than an obligation.
These, then, are the principal issues in this chapter that function as foundational rules. As noted earlier, they relate either to the qualities of the acts of purification, to defining their loci, or to clarifying their conditions, essential elements, and all the other matters already mentioned.
Among the topics linked to this chapter is wiping over leather socks, since it, too, is one of the acts of ablution.
Wiping over the Khuffs
A comprehensive treatment of its fundamental rulings requires addressing seven questions: its permissibility; delineating the area to be wiped; specifying that area; its manner—that is, the nature of the place to be wiped; its time limit; its conditions; and what nullifies it.