DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Masah on Socks- A new book for download

**pprropeciaaa** · 11-27-2007, 06:39 PM

Br. Muadh,

so what your saying is that the condition for it to stand upright is not a condition for non leather socks?

then is a condition for leather socks?

then how come in this following fatwa they have placed the standing upright a condition? or is the wording supposed to be the 2nd condition on the list you have?

http://www.albalagh.net/qa/masah_regular_socks.shtml

note: fatwa is by Mufti Taqi Uthmani and approved by Mufti Ebrahim Desai.

please get back to me asap.

Asslamo Allaikum,

Yep there is confusion galore on this subject and it boils down to these points:

a) Mufti Ibrahim Desai has clearly said in the Fatwa that I have quoted that:

“For the socks to be waterproof and be able to stand like shoes on floor are not conditions for permissibility of masah.”

b) Mufti Taqi Umani’s (DB) translation which you have quoted says about Non-leather socks:

“so thick that they can stand upright without having to tie them”

Tie them to what exactly? What does this mean in plain English?

My questions to Hadhrat Soofi Saheb in light on prolonged discussions with Maulana Marghoob Ahmed & Mufti Yusuf Sacha are:

1) What does “b” mean? And Maulana Marghoob Ahmed clearly says that the same condition is mentioned for Ihraam and what does that mean? Where is an Ihraam that stands on its own?

2) Is there a difference of opinion on this issue as Mufti Ibrahim Desai & Mufti Taqi Usmani’s fatwa disagree on this point?

3) Where is a practical example from the past or future of such a sock?

P.S: I don’t have access to Jawahirul-Fiqh by Mufti Shaf’e Saheb (RA) which has detailed discussion about the matter & I would have loved to scan & upload the relevant section.

P.P.S: I am holding back my trump card on the issue & I will reveal it when the Ulama answer the 3 questions above. Off course (a) solves the problem and I don't have to use my trump card (which I would rather not); how I wish I had access to the private section.

11-27-2007, 06:39 PM	#40
pprropeciaaa Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 477 Senior Member	Br. Muadh, so what your saying is that the condition for it to stand upright is not a condition for non leather socks? then is a condition for leather socks? then how come in this following fatwa they have placed the standing upright a condition? or is the wording supposed to be the 2nd condition on the list you have? http://www.albalagh.net/qa/masah_regular_socks.shtml note: fatwa is by Mufti Taqi Uthmani and approved by Mufti Ebrahim Desai. please get back to me asap. Asslamo Allaikum, Yep there is confusion galore on this subject and it boils down to these points: a) Mufti Ibrahim Desai has clearly said in the Fatwa that I have quoted that: “For the socks to be waterproof and be able to stand like shoes on floor are not conditions for permissibility of masah.” b) Mufti Taqi Umani’s (DB) translation which you have quoted says about Non-leather socks: “so thick that they can stand upright without having to tie them” Tie them to what exactly? What does this mean in plain English? My questions to Hadhrat Soofi Saheb in light on prolonged discussions with Maulana Marghoob Ahmed & Mufti Yusuf Sacha are: 1) What does “b” mean? And Maulana Marghoob Ahmed clearly says that the same condition is mentioned for Ihraam and what does that mean? Where is an Ihraam that stands on its own? 2) Is there a difference of opinion on this issue as Mufti Ibrahim Desai & Mufti Taqi Usmani’s fatwa disagree on this point? 3) Where is a practical example from the past or future of such a sock? P.S: I don’t have access to Jawahirul-Fiqh by Mufti Shaf’e Saheb (RA) which has detailed discussion about the matter & I would have loved to scan & upload the relevant section. P.P.S: I am holding back my trump card on the issue & I will reveal it when the Ulama answer the 3 questions above. Off course (a) solves the problem and I don't have to use my trump card (which I would rather not); how I wish I had access to the private section.
	Quote