Introduction
The majority of the verses (āyāt) that serve as evidence for Allah are valid for this community. At times, transcendence (tenzih; tanzīh—declaring Allah free from all imperfection) is truly ascribed to Allah, who is perfect and supreme. This is analogous to the obligatory amount in wiping (masḥ) during ritual ablution. Ascribing transcendence to the servant is recommended (mustaḥabb) in the sense that one’s own action returns to oneself. This is akin to the view that it is obligatory to wipe the upper part of the footgear (mests), while wiping the underside is considered recommended by some scholars.
Transcendence may pertain to the Real (al-Ḥaqq; God) in terms of being manifest and hidden. This is the transcendence of the one who, due to the dominance of witnessing (mushāhada) and divine disclosures (tajalliyāt), sees nothing in existence but Allah. Such a person sees the Real as both manifest and hidden, and thus his transcendence is realized only with respect to Allah. This transcendence is not real (wujūdī), but rather a non-existent relation. This corresponds to the view of those who consider it obligatory to wipe both the inner and outer parts of the footgear.
Sometimes, transcendence may be ascribed to Allah due to His perfection in essence. In this station, the one who declares transcendence does not consider it recommended to declare the creatures transcendent, due to their inherent deficiency. If he were to declare the created transcendent, he would be lying. He observes that if a contingent being were truly transcendent by virtue of any perfection it possesses, it would be independent of Allah in that respect and would oppose Him. However, it is impossible for creatures to possess any attribute that would render them independent of Allah. In every respect, they are in need of Allah. "But Allah is the Free of need, the Praiseworthy."
The person at this station of transcendence rejects the recommendation of wiping the underside of the footgear, saying, "There is none transcendent but Allah; He is manifest to His servants with the attributes of majesty." As previously mentioned, this is the view of those who accept wiping the upper part of the footgear but do not consider wiping the underside as recommended.
Sometimes, or rather, the obligation of transcendence arises from the Name al-Bāṭin (the Hidden). In this station, the one who declares the Real transcendent says: "The Hidden, by virtue of His hiddenness, is a locus that distances knowledge of His majestic attributes. Thus, it is necessary to declare the Real transcendent in the Name al-Bāṭin from behind a veil. This veil is that which decrees Allah to be hidden and beyond comprehension. Yet Allah is too transcendent and exalted to be encompassed by any veil. For this reason, transcendence from the perspective of the Name al-Bāṭin is obligatory. This is the view of those—such as Ashhab—who consider wiping the underside of the footgear obligatory and the upper part recommended.
The source of transcendence may be the Name al-Ẓāhir (the Manifest). Al-Ẓāhir is Allah’s manifestation to His servants in forms. The servant then declares Allah transcendent from the limitation of the form. However, transcendence that does not remove Him from knowledge is that Allah is identical with that form. For Allah knows Himself better than anyone else, just as He knows Himself better than any intellect. "Nevertheless, Allah has informed that He will manifest to His servants in those forms." As Imām Muslim records in his Ṣaḥīḥ.
The transcendence of the person at this station is to express that Allah is not limited by any form, that is, no form confines Him. Allah manifests to His servants in any form He wills. Since the Real is such in Himself, after He has arranged and balanced our (bodily and spiritual) constitution, He says regarding our creation: "He forms you in whatever form He wills." Thus, He manifests to His servants in whatever form He wills. Herein lies a divine secret by which He draws your attention so that you may learn of Him. The one who holds this view, by internalizing it, desires the continuity of that manifestation in that form, and thus declares the Real transcendent in His manifestation. This is the ruling of the hidden in determining the locus of wiping.
CHAPTER
What Is Wiped: The Footgear, Socks, etc. Worn by a Person
The scholars who accept wiping over footgear (mests) are unanimously agreed that it is permissible to wipe over their upper part, but they have differed regarding wiping over socks. Some scholars have rejected it in general, some have accepted it in general, and some have permitted it only under specific conditions. These conditions are either that the item worn is of sufficient thickness and firmness to prevent water from reaching the foot, or that it is covered with leather so as to allow walking.
SECTION
The Esoteric Ruling of the Matter
As for the esoteric (bāṭinī) ruling of this matter: previously, the ruling regarding the footgear was mentioned, and the ruling regarding the sock remained. The accepted view is that the sock is equivalent to the footgear in its function as a veil. The servant is a veil before the Creator. For this reason, the hadith "Whoever knows his nafs (the lower self), knows his Lord" has come. For the human being is a proof for his Lord. Even if they are connected in a special way, the proof and the proven are opposites and cannot be joined.
We have previously said that the footgear is a good proof for removing the homonymy in the word "foot" as used for Allah. The same applies to "running," as we have mentioned before. Even if the sock covers the foot, it is not as strong as the footgear due to its holes, for water spreads through it and quickly enters through its holes, whereas the footgear is not like this.
The esoteric ruling is as follows: Any of Allah’s servants may be a stronger proof for Allah than others. The weak one is like the sock. Indeed, in a hadith describing the walī (friend of God), it is said as follows. Through a chain of transmission reaching the Prophet, several people who heard the hadith informed me that it was said to the Prophet: "O Messenger of Allah! Who are the awliyāʾ (friends of God) of Allah?" The Prophet replied: "Those who, when seen, remind one of Allah." This is mentioned by Ḥāfiẓ Abū Nuʿaym in his book Ḥilyat al-Awliyāʾ. For, as we have said, in such people the strength of being a proof for Allah is seen. They are devoted to dhikr (remembrance of God). Their every breath is in humility, obedience, and deprivation, which also demonstrates this. When people wish to declare them transcendent, this is only possible by declaring Allah transcendent. For, in order to see their true state before Allah, the awliyāʾ are only mentioned together with Allah.
If the footgear is covered with leather, such a footgear alludes to the Malāmiyya, who conceal themselves and their state before Allah from the lowly world so that people do not learn their rank of sainthood before Allah. Likewise, the sock is protected from the pain of the earth reaching it by means of the leather that comes between it and the ground. This is the quality that, in the esoteric sense, enables the Malāmī to be veiled by the permissible things of the lower world. Thus, what people perceive in the Malāmī does not differ from ordinary believers. Yet, behind this quality, he is in the station of sainthood before Allah. Thus, the upper part of the "sock" (in esoteric interpretation) remains before Allah from above, without any barrier between him and his Lord.
I have opened for you the door of religious "interpretation (iʿtibār)." This means to "pass over" from the form whose ruling is manifest to the thing related to it, either in its own essence or in the station of the Real. This is the meaning of interpretation (iʿtibār), for the word is derived from the expression ʿabartu al-wādī, meaning "I crossed the valley."
CHAPTER
The Quality of What Is Wiped Over
All those who consider it permissible to wipe over the feet are unanimously agreed on the permissibility of wiping over sound footgear, but they have differed regarding torn footgear. Some scholars say that if the tear is small, without a specific limit, wiping is permissible. Some have limited the tear to three fingers. Others have said that even if the tear is large, as long as it is still called footgear, wiping over it is permissible. In my view, this is the most correct opinion. Some have said that even if the tear is small, if it is at the front of the footgear, wiping is not permissible.
My view is this: There is no basis for this issue, nor is there any explicit text in the Book or the Sunnah on this matter. Therefore, it is best to leave this issue aside and not to concern oneself with it. There have been disagreements among the scholars of the sharia (sacred law) on this issue, which we do not consider worthy of discussion. In our opinion, the correct view is: As long as it is called footgear, it is permissible to wipe over it.
CHAPTER
The Esoteric Ruling in This Matter
The esoteric (bāṭinī) ruling in this matter can be expressed as follows: The word for footgear (huf) is derived from the root khafā, meaning "to conceal." For the footgear generally covers the foot. When it is torn and part of the foot is exposed, both the visible part of the foot and the footgear are wiped. This remains the case as long as it retains the name footgear, which is a necessary condition. There is a wondrous secret in this for the one who thinks correctly: The hidden is also the manifest. The poet Imruʾ al-Qays (using the same root khafā as footgear) says: "Khafāhunna min afqadhihinna"—meaning the most apparent and purest part.
In our view, due to the tear in the footgear, the exposed part of the foot is wiped. For in Allah’s Book, we are commanded to wipe the feet. Therefore, we also wipe the visible part of the foot.
The esoteric aspect of the matter can be expressed as follows: The outward aspect of the sharia, in that we ascribe everything to Allah, is a veil over the reality of the ruling of tawhid (the oneness of God). Thus, the subject of purification in the sharia is to accompany it with tawhid. This is realized by seeing the sharia not as a law established by the intellect of the created, but as Allah’s ruling among His creatures.
The sharia is Allah’s ruling, not the ruling of the intellect, as some people think. Therefore, the purity of the sharia is to see that it comes from the One and True Allah. For this reason, we do not have the right to criticize the ruling of the mujtahid (independent jurist). For the sharia—which is Allah’s ruling—has also validated the ruling of the mujtahid. Thus, ijtihādī rulings, by virtue of their own approval, are also Allah’s ruling. This is a problematic issue into which all adherents of the schools (madhāhib) have fallen, because, although they know the subject, they have not kept in mind what we have pointed out. Yet, even if they know, they have not brought to mind what we have highlighted.
Thus, when some of Allah’s respectful servants attain the privilege of ijtihād, those sectarians have shown disrespect to Allah. Therefore, whoever accuses a mujtahid has, without doubt, accused the Real in what he has ruled.
When the sharia, which is a veil over reality, is "torn" and a ruling of tawhid arises that abrogates a general ruling of the sharia, purification pertains to the tawhid that is effective in the abrogation of the sharia’s ruling. As an example, consider the case of a person who ascribes all actions in every respect to Allah. Such a person does not value the obedience or disobedience that appears in himself. Since this result, which abrogates the ruling of the sharia, has arisen, one must avoid such an understanding of tawhid. For such an understanding means the "tearing" of the sharia and the abrogation of Allah’s ruling. Likewise, when the footgear loses its name, it is no longer permissible to wipe over it. If the tear does not remove the name footgear, then one must wipe both over the footgear and the exposed part of the foot. We have mentioned this before. This is the religiously acceptable interpretation regarding this specific tawhid in the matter. This interpretation requires saying: "Allah is the One who created you and your deeds." Thus, although deeds are ascribed to us, they are what Allah has created. Actions cannot be ascribed to Allah in every respect. Therefore, this does not affect wiping, and the ruling is as we have stated.
Our companions have differed greatly in this matter, just as the scholars who accept wiping over the footgear have differed. As for those who limit the tear to three fingers, its esoteric interpretation is to consider the manifestation of tawhid in three stations. The three stations are the intellect, the senses, and the imagination, which are the ruling of the sharia. If tawhid spreads to all three, it is not permissible to accept such a tawhid. In this case, what must be wiped or washed is not the footgear corresponding to the sharia, but the "foot" indicating tawhid. Likewise, the deficiency of a person’s transcendence is to keep himself away from such an understanding of tawhid that abrogates the ruling of the sharia. In this case, the sharia is like something that has lost the name footgear by being completely torn.
CHAPTER
Wiping [Duration]
Some scholars have accepted that the validity period of wiping over the footgear is three days and three nights for the traveler, and one day and one night for the resident, while others have not specified a duration. As long as there is no impediment such as major ritual impurity (janāba), one may wipe over the footgear for as long as desired.
SECTION
The Esoteric Ruling
The esoteric ruling of the view that stipulates a specific period for wearing the footgear is as follows: In the section on teacher and student, we established that wiping over the footgear is a journey from the teacher to the learner. "When the Messenger of God (peace and blessings be upon him) taught the sharia to people, he would repeat the words three times so that they might understand." For the Prophet was commanded to clarify and inform. This is the meaning of the traveler being able to wipe for three [days and nights].
As for the duration for the non-traveler, it is one day and one night. The esoteric wisdom in this is that such a person can only fulfill and know that command. Therefore, he does not repeat it to himself, for he has understood it clearly and is certain that he knows it. When teaching another, however, he is not certain whether the other has understood. Therefore, to be sure that the one taught has learned, he repeats the command three times.
Not adopting a limitation of duration, in its esoteric meaning, is to take into account the nature of the students in the transmission of knowledge: some understand at the first instance, while others may need repeated and detailed explanation until they comprehend. Thus, in teaching others—which is the journey of knowledge from teacher to student—one does not specify a number and does not pay attention to one’s own state, which is the state of residence. For what appears to the teacher is uncertain. In this case, one may examine it repeatedly, without any restriction or limitation.
'The ruling of the footgear for one in a state of major ritual impurity (janāba)'