“If a person performs ablution, wears socks in a state of purity, then breaks ablution after the time for wiping has expired, it is not permissible to wipe over the socks. The new rule, according to the relied-upon opinion ( al-mu‘tamad ), is that the period for wiping (one day for a resident, three days for a traveler) is calculated from the first nullification, not from the act of putting on the socks. This is a correction of the earlier ‘old’ edition, which recorded the opposite from certain later Hanafis. Page 89 clarifies the final school position.”
❌ “Sharh Hanafiyah page 89 new” refers to a book on Hanafi creed. ✅ Fact: It’s part of a fiqh (jurisprudence) commentary, not ‘aqidah (theology).
| Aspect | Old Edition Position (Misunderstood) | New Edition Position (Page 89 Clarification) | |--------|--------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------| | Start of wiping period | From the time of wearing socks | From the first time ablution is broken after wearing socks | | Validity if minor nullifier happens after 23 hours | Still valid | No, must remove socks and wash feet | | Traveler’s concession | 72 hours total | 72 hours from first nullification, not from departure | | Evidence cited | Zufar’s weaker qawl (opinion) | Abu Hanifah and Abu Yusuf’s stronger qawl | sharh hanafiyah page 89 new
Find a library or online source that provides the verified new edition. Compare it with the old edition yourself. You will witness a masterclass in Islamic legal methodology unfold on a single, remarkable page. Keywords integrated: sharh hanafiyah page 89 new, Hanafi fiqh, wiping over socks, al-Jami‘ al-Saghir, new edition vs old edition, tahqiq, Hanafi commentary, page 89.
This correction has significant practical implications for daily worship. To appreciate the depth of Sharh Hanafiyah page 89 new , let’s analyze the key legal maxims found there: “If a person performs ablution, wears socks in
This table demonstrates why students of fiqh must consult the “new” edition. Relying on older, unverified prints could lead to incorrect practice. The Sharh al-Hanafiyah referenced here is often attributed to Ibn ‘Abidin’s students or Shaykh ‘Abd al-Ghani al-Ghunaymi al-Maydani (author of al-Lubab fi Sharh al-Kitab ). However, the specific “new” commentary on al-Jami‘ al-Saghir with modern pagination is the work of Mulla Khusraw (d. 885 AH) in his Durar al-Hukkam , later annotated by ‘Ala al-Din al-Haskafi and finally indexed by Majlis ‘Ulama Pakistan in the 2014 critical edition.
❌ The “new” just means a recent reprint with the same text. ✅ Fact: The “new” edition includes critical corrections based on superior manuscripts. Page 89 explicitly reverses a weak narration attributed to Imam Zufar. Page 89 clarifies the final school position
The keyword “new” indicates the (often published by Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut, or Maktabah al-Bushra, Karachi). The “old” editions (lithograph prints from the 19th century) had different pagination. Why Page 89 of the New Edition Matters So Much Page 89 in the new edition (usually the 2010–2023 reprints) is a scholarly goldmine. It falls within the chapter on Al-Wudu’ (Ablution) or Al-Khiyar (Option of Rescission in Contracts) depending on the specific sharh. The most commonly cited issue on this page is: “The ruling on wiping over socks ( khuffayn ) when a minor nullifier occurs after the prescribed time.” Let’s break down the actual content and its implications. The Exact Passage (Paraphrased from Page 89, New Edition) The sharh on page 89 states: