6 Layers of Jahannum, as explained by Maulana Tariq Jameel.
Accept Islam for what it is, and not for what you want it to be...
Shaikh Abdul Azeez Bin Baz, is one of most popular Islamic Scholar in the Middle East. People respect his knowledge and Fatawa here in the Middle East. The following is a fatwa excerpted from his book. I am quoting him here for all my Salafi friends who respect the opinion of this scholar more than other Islamic Scholars.
The Ruling on Shaving the Cheeks
Question:
What is the ruling on shaving the beard, and the ruling on shaving the cheeks and leaving the beard and moustache?
Answer:
Shaving the beard is not permissible, according to the saying of the Prophet Salallaahu alayhi wasallam in an authentic Hadith:
"Clip your moustaches and grow your beards, differ from the polytheists." (Al-Bukhari no.5892 and Muslim no.259)
and his words:
"Pare your moustaches and leave your beards, differ from the Zoroastrians." (Muslim no.260)
The beard is what grows on the cheeks and on the chin, as defined by the author of Al-Lisan and Al-Qamus. It is obligatory to leave the hair which grows on the cheeks and chin and not to shave it or cut it. May Allaah correct the situation of all the Muslims.
___________________________________
Lisanul-'Arab and Al-Qamus al-Muhit: Two famous Arabic dictionaries.
Shaykh `Abdul-`Azeez Bin Baz
Fatawa Islamiyah vol.8, p.240, DARUSSALAM
The standard Nisab of Zakat is Two Hundred Dirhams (silver coins) equivalent to 612.35 grams of silver or Twenty Mithqals of Gold equivalent to 87.479 grams of gold or any currency that equals the value of this amount of gold and silver. If this amount of wealth remains in a person’s possession for a complete year, then on the expiry of this year it will be Wajib on him to give Zakat of two and a half percent of the total. If his wealth is lesser than 612.35 grams of silver or 87.479 grams of gold or its equivalent amount in currency then Zakat will not be Wajib on him. (Baheshti Zewar, Vol. 1 Pg. 297, Zam Zam)
Zakat is compulsory on cash, assets etc. which are in a person’s possession for an entire year. However, if perchance a person has liabilities on his cash etc. which if calculated will not qualify him as a Sahib Al-Nisab, then in such a case he will not be liable of discharging Zakat.
And Allah knows best
Extracted from Bayan of Maulana Tariq Jamil. For listening more of his bayans, check out
http://http://www.darsequran.com/
Please note that there is no video, its just an audio file, uploaded as video file.
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh
1) If one has not studied Tafseer of the Holy Quran in-depth under the guidance of a proper 'Alim, then it will not be permissible to give one's own Tafseer to others. However, if one just reads the Tafseer of an 'Alim who studied the Quran in-depth, then not only will it be permissible, but rewarding as well InshaAllah as long as one has the intention to learn and benefit from the 'Alim's Tafseer.
And Allah knows best
Wassalam
Ml. Asif Umar,
Student Darul Iftaa
Checked and Approved by:
Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh
Allah Ta’ala has made the human being the best of the creations and has granted him a lofty status. In relations to this honor, Allah Ta’ala has made it impermissible to derive any type of benefit from human parts, even if it does not cause any harm to the donor. Allama Burhan al-Din Ali bin Abi Bakr al-Marghinani in his famous treatise Al-Hidaya says:
وشعر الإنسان وعظمه طاهر وقال الشافعي نجس لأنه لا ينتفع به ولا يجوز بيعه ولنا أن عدم الانتفاع والبيع لكرامته فلا يدل على نجاسته والله أعلم (الهداية)
And human hair and bones are pure. Imam Shaf’i says [it is] impure, since benefit cannot be derived from it and it cannot be sold. Our view is that the impermissible of deriving benefit is due to it being sacred; therefore this does not give proof for it being impure. And Allah Knows Best.
Hereunder is a summarized version of Mufti Shafi’s (ra) kitab on organ transplant by Hadrat Mawlana Yusuf Ludyanwi (ra).
At the outset a few fundamental principles of Shari’a should be understood.
How does one determine whether a situation falls under ‘necessity’?
Allama Hamawi (ra) in his commentary on al-Ashbah wa al-Naza’ir classifies five levels of necessity and some of their rulings.
فالضرورة: بلوغه حدا إن لم يتناول الممنوع ،هلك أو قارب، وهذا يبيح تناول الحرام الحاجة: كالجائع الذى لو لم يجد ما يأكله لم يهلك غير أنه يكون فى جهد ومشقة، وهذا لا يبيح الحرام، ويبيح الفطر فى الصوم المنقعة: كالذى يشتهى خبز البر ولحم الغنم والطعام الدسم الزينة: كالمشتهى بحلوى والسكر الفضول: التوسع بأكل الحرام والشبهة (شرح الحموى على الاشباه والنظائر 1:252 ادارة القران والعلوم الاسلاميه)
It should be kept in mind that in Durrah in the field of medicine will only be taken into consideration with the following three conditions.
However, there are some situations wherein the unlawful entity will remain unlawful, e.g. to kill another human to save one’s life. Shari’a has given equal rights to each human being and one’s life will not be preferred over the other.
As for Hajah (in a case where the sick person is in great difficulty but it is not life threatening), there is a difference of opinion on the issue whether unlawful substance can be used. The majority of Jurist say it is permissible when the above three conditions are met.
Aap kay masa’il aur un ka hal (9:167) Maktaba Ludhyanwi
The Jurists have taken into consideration situations of dire need, hence the famous principle of Fiqh:
الضرورات تبيح المحظورات
Necessities permit the prohibited.
And
المشقة تجلب التييسر
Difficulties bring easiness.
It is from the above principles, the Jurist have stated that haram entities become permissible when there is a dire need. Ibn Abidin writes:
مطلب في التداوي بالمحرم ( قوله ورده في البدائع إلخ ) قدمنا في البيع الفاسد عند قوله ولبن امرأة أن صاحب الخانية والنهاية اختارا جوازه إن علم أن فيه شفاء ولم يجد دواء غيره قال في النهاية : وفي التهذيب يجوز للعليل شرب البول والدم والميتة للتداوي إذا أخبره طبيب مسلم أن فيه شفاءه ولم يجد من المباح ما يقوم مقامه ، وإن قال الطبيب يتعجل شفاؤك به فيه وجهان ، وهل يجوز شرب العليل من الخمر للتداوي فيه وجهان ، وكذا ذكره الإمام التمرتاشي وكذا في الذخيرة وما قيل إن الاستشفاء بالحرام حرام غير مجرى على إطلاقه وأن الاستشفاء بالحرام إنما لا يجوز إذا لم يعلم أن فيه شفاء أما إن علم وليس له دواء غيره يجوز ومعنى قول ابن مسعود رضي الله عنه لم يجعل شفاؤكم فيما حرم عليكم يحتمل أن يكون قال ذلك في داء عرف له دواء غير المحرم لأنه حينئذ يستغني بالحلال عن الحرام ويجوز أن يقال تنكشف الحرمة عند الحاجة فلا يكون الشفاء بالحرام وإنما يكون بالحلال ا هـ
Some Jurists have taken into consideration various medical circumstances and have given many leeways in the time of dire need.
In the medical field, techniques have been refined and the human body is treated with much respect during surgical procedures. Organs transplant is no longer considered desecration, neither by the medical experts nor by laymen. Mufti Kifayatullah writes, “This doubt that it is unlawful to derive benefit from human parts should not remain, because it is unlawful in situations in which there is desecration of a human. In situations where there is no desecration of a human, it will be permissible. (Kifayat al-Mufti 9/143 Maktaba Haqaniyya)
In the view of the above, our humble opinion is that if a person is in a life threatening situation in which he is in need of an organ transplantation and there happens to be a organ such as kidney, lever, etc available, it will be permissible for him to accept the organ.
Nevertheless, it will not be permissible for him to donate his organs upon his death, as he is not the owner of his body and cannot do as he wishes with his body. Being able to accept an unlawful entity in time of dire need does necessitate that to donate organs is permissible. Take for example the issue of a person dying due to hunger and thirst and does not have any lawful food available to him. Shari’a has permitted for him to consume pork and wine to the extent that his life may be saved. That does not mean it will be permissible for Muslims to sell pork and wine for this reason.
Here under is the resolution of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy (al-Majma al-Fiqhi al-Islami) which took place in 28 of Rabi’ al-Thani, Jamadi al-Ula 1405.
It is permissible to take an organ from a living individual and place it in another individual who is in need of the organ to save his life or to bring into use a limb which is from the necessary limbs of human. This is not considered as desecration in relation to the person donating the organ. It is considered as helping and aiding another in time of need, which is praiseworthy action. It will be permissible with the following conditions:
(Taken from the Urdu translation ‘Fiqhi Faslay’ p. 157)
2. Blood, once removed from the body, is also impure and due to it being part of the human body, it also has the same honor as the rest of the human body parts. However, blood is regenerating, unlike the organs. An analogy of blood can be made with breast milk. The Jurists have ruled that it is permissible to use breast milk for medical purposes when there is a high probability of cure.
Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya (5/355) Maktaba Rashidiyya
ولا بأس بأن يسعط الرجل بلبن المرأة ويشربه للدواء وفي شرب لبن المرأة للبالغ من غير ضرورة اختلاف المتأخرين كذا في القنية .
If a person’s condition is such that if he does not receive blood, his life is in danger or his health will deteriorate; then in such cases it will be permissible for the sick to accept blood and for a person to donate blood for the sick.
Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyya (5/355) Maktaba Rashidiyya
يجوز للعليل شرب الدم والبول وأكل الميتة للتداوي إذا أخبره طبيب مسلم أن شفاءه فيه ولم يجد من المباح ما يقوم مقامه وإن قال الطبيب يتعجل شفاؤك فيه وجهان .
And Allah knows best
Wassalam
Ml. Ehzaz Ajmeri,
Student Darul Iftaa
Checked and Approved by:
Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah
www.askimam.org
In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh
Fatwa #16425 specifically mentions that a nazr (vow) does not change taqdeer (pre-destiny). It is necessary to understand the difference between qadaa and qadar. Qadaa is Allah Ta'ala's foreknowledge of events prior to their occurrence, while qadar is His bringing into existence those events in accordance to His knowledge. (Al-Fiqh al-Akbar Explained, P. 109, White Thread Press)
In the Quran, Allah Ta'ala says:
وكان أمر الله مفعولا
"And Allah's decree had to be enforced." (33:37)
وكان أمر الله قدرا مقدورا
"And Allah's command is pre-determined by destiny." (33:38)
Imam Abu Hanifa (Rahmatullah Alayhi) explained qadaa and qadar in Al-Fiqh al-Akbar, his text on aqeedah (Islamic creed). He wrote:
خلق الله تعالى الأشياء لا من شيء . و كان الله تعالى عالماً في الأزل بالأشياء قبل كونها ، و هو الذي قدر الأشياء و قضاها ، و لا يكون في الدنيا و لا في الآخرة شيء إلا بمشيئته و علمه و قضائه و قدره و كتبه في اللوح المحفوظ ، و لكن كتبه بالوصف لا بالحكم . و القضاء و القدر و المشيئة صفاته في الأزل بلا كيف
"Allah Most High created all things from no thing. Allah Most High knew in pre-eternity all things prior to their being. It was He who apportioned all things and ordained them. There is in this world nothing, nor in the next, except through His will, knowledge, ordination, decree, and in accordance with His writing it in the Preserved Tablet. Yet His writing entails descriptions, not commands. Ordaining, decreeing, and willing are His attributes in pre-eternity without description."
The abovementioned is sufficient proof that every single thing that happened, is happening, or will happen has been pre-destined by Allah Ta'ala.
The following Hadith is referred to in your query:
قال رسول الله -صلى الله عليه وسلم- لا يرد القضاء إلا الدعاء
Rasulullah (SallAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) said, "Nothing can change the Divine Decree except dua." (Jami' Al-Tirmidhi, Vol. 2, P. 35, HM Saeed)
In the footnotes of this Hadith, Maulana Ahmed Ali Saharanpuri states that dua can change taqdeer. However, this act of dua which can change taqdeer is also pre-destined in itself, so it will not change what has already been written on the Tablet. For simplicity in understanding, an example is as follows:
When destiny was written, Allah Ta'ala already destined that at a certain time at such and such place, Zaid will make dua to Allah and his taqdeer will then be changed as a result of his dua.
So yes, his taqdeer was changed as a result of his dua. However, the act as a whole was already pre-destined to happen.
Finally, it is true that one should not ponder over the matter of qadar too much, as it is impossible for even the most intelligent of man to comprehend. Allah Ta'ala states in the Holy Quran:
وما أوتيتم من العلم إلا قليلا
"And of knowledge you have been given but little" (17:85)
When Ali ibn Abi Talib (RadiyAllahu Anhu) was caliph, he was asked about a matter while he was standing on the pulpit, to which he responded, "I don't know." It was said to him, "How can you ascend this pulpit and say you do not know?" His reply was, "I ascended it according to my knowledge of things, had I ascended it according to my level of ignorance, I would have reached the heavens." This statement emphasizes that mankind can only reach a certain level of understanding, even at the most advanced level, and that true knowledge is to recognize the limit of one's knowledge, intellect, and understanding.
Therefore, the matter of taqdeer is one which is impossible to comprehend. In fact, it should not be discussed excessively. Wahb ibn Munabbih (Rahmatullah Alayhi), who was amongst the Tabi'een, said, "I looked into the matter of qadar, and I was bewildered. I looked into it again, and I was still bewildered. I then concluded that the most knowledgeable of people regarding qadar are those who keep the farthest away from it, and the most ignorant of people regarding qadar are those who talk most about it." This is also supported by what Rasulullah (SallAllahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) said: "When destiny is discussed, restrain yourself from it." (Tabarani)
قال رسول الله كتب الله مقادير الخلائق جمع مقدار وهو الشيء الذي يعرف به قدر الشيء وكميته كالمكيال والميزان وقد يستعمل بمعنى القدر نفسه وهو الكمية والكيفية قبل أن يخلق السموات والأرض ومعنى كتب الله أجرى الله القلم على اللوح المحفوظ بإيجاد ما بينهما من التعلق وأثبت فيه مقادير الخلق ما كان وما هو كائن إلى الأبد على وفق ما تعلقت به إرادته أزلا كإثبات الكاتب ما في ذهنه بقلمه على لوحه وقيل أمر الله القلم أن يثبت في اللوح ما سيوجد من الخلائق ذاتا وصفة وفعلا وخيرا وشرا على ما تعلقت به إرادته
(Mirqat Al-Mafateeh, Vol. 1, P. 257, Rashidiyya)
قال في شرح السنة الإيمان بالقدر فرض لازم وهو أن يعتقد أن الله تعالى خالق أعمال العباد خيرها وشرها وكتبها في اللوح المحفوظ قبل أن خلقهم والكل بقضائه وقدره وإرادته ومشيئته غير أنه يرضى الإيمان والطاعة ووعد عليهما الثواب ولا يرضى الكفر والمعصية وأوعد عليهما العقاب والقدر سر من أسرار الله تعالى لم يطلع عليه ملكا مقربا ولا نبيا مرسلا
(Mirqat Al-Mafateeh, Vol. 1, P. 256, Rashidiyya)
وقال أبو المظفر ابن السمعاني : سبيل معرفة هذا الباب التوقيف من الكتاب والسنة دون محض القياس والعقل ، فمن عدل عن التوقيف فيه ضل وتاه في بحار الحيرة ولم يبلغ شفاء العين ولا ما يطمئن به القلب ، لأن القدر سر من أسرار الله تعالى اختص العليم الخبير به وضرب دونه الأستار وحجبه عن عقول الخلق ومعارفهم لما علمه من الحكمة ، فلم يعلمه نبي مرسل ولا ملك مقرب
(Fathul Bari, Vol. 11, P. 584, Dar al-Kutub Ilmiyya)
(و كان أمر الله مفعولاً) : أى مقضياً ما قضاء كائن..........(و كان أمر الله قدراً مقدوراً) : أى كل شيء بقضاء و قدر
(Tafseer al-Kabeer al-Mawsum, Vol. 25, P. 212-213, Dar al-Kutub Ilmiyya)
(Fatawa Mahmudiyya, Vol. 1, P. 219-221, Faruqiyya)
(Al-Fiqh al-Akbar Explained, P. 105-112, White Thread Press)
And Allah knows best
Wassalam
Ml. Asif Umar,
Student Darul Iftaa
Checked and Approved by:
The hadith in question is a narration of Ma'qil ibn Yasaar (Radhiallahu Anhu) who narrates that Nabi (Sallallahu Alaihi wasallam) said: "It is better for an iron rod (nail, needle etc) to be driven into the head of a man, than for him to touch a woman who is not permissible for him." The hadith is narrated by the great Hafiz of Hadith , at-Tabrani, in his al-Mu'jam al-Kabir (Vol.20 Pg.211) and by the Muhaddith al-Ruyaani, in his Musnad (Vol.2 Pg.323).
This narration has been classified as Sahih (authentic) by Allamah ibn Hajr al-Haitami in his az-Zawajir while both Hafiz Munzhiri in his at-Targheeb wat Tarheeb (Vol.3 Pg.26) and Hafiz Nuruddeen Haithami in Majma'uz Zawaid (Vo.4 Pg.326) have classified all its narrators as reliable narrators of Sahih Muslim.
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Husain Kadodia
STUDENT: Darul Ifta
CHECKED & APPROVED: Mufti Ebrahim Desai (Fatwa Dept.)
Following is an excerpt from Mufti Taqi Usmani's Fatwa regarding Masah Over Socks, as per my limited understanding.
Quran & Hadees are important to formulate any ruling.
The Quranic Command
Allah Ta'ala says,
"Oh Believers, when you stand up for prayer (i.e. when you intend to pray and are not in the condition of Wudhu) then (perform Wudhu and) wash your faces and (wash) your arms including your elbows, and wipe your heads (with wet hands) and (wash) your feet including the ankles".
(Al-Qur'an, Surah Al-Maidah, verse 6).
In the above verse Allah commands us to wash our feet. Therefore to perform masah of the feet should not be permissible in any situation, even if the socks are made of leather.
However, permissibility of performing masah over leather socks has been approved by the consensus of the Ummah. The consensus is based on the certainty of the matter by Tawaatur (overwhelming number of authentic narrations from the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)). Had there been only two or three narration's from the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam), then such a few Ahadith (narration's from the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)) would not have been sufficient to specify (Taqyeed) and elaborate on this Qur'anic verse.
Therefore, the Ahadith in regards to 'Performing Masah over leather socks' are established by Tawaatur (as Narrations regarding 'Masah Over Leather socks' are available from more than eighty companions of the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)), and therefore can be used in elaborating on the verse of Surah Al Maidah, that is, washing of the feet is only specific in the case that a person is not wearing leather socks.
Therefore if the masah of the leather socks (masah 'alal khuffain) was not established from the Tawaatur or Istifaadhah (overwhelming number of narration's) then an elaboration could not have been applied on the verse of the Qur'an which orders us to wash our feet during Ablution.
Statements From Hafiz Ibn Hajar(RA) and Hasan Al-Basri (RA) establishing Tawaatur
Hafiz Ibn Hajar (RA) says in Fathul-Baari, (Naylul Awtaar, first volume, p.176). "A overwhelming group of the Huffaz (Experts in Hadith) have declared that masah 'alal khuffain is established by Tawaatur), and some of them have mentioned that they collected and enumerated the narration's from the companions of the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) and found them to be more than eighty in number, from which ten of them are narrated by the Asharah-e-Mubasharah (the ten companions that were given glad tidings of Paradise in a single gathering from the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam)."(Naylul-Awtaar, first volume, p. 176). Hasan Al- Basri (R.A.) says, "I met seventy companions who participated in the Battle of Badr, all of whom believed in the performing of masah 'alal khuffain."(Talkheesul-Habeer, first volume, p., and Bada'e us-Sana'e, first volume, p.7).
Type Of Socks
Socks are of three types:
(1) KHUFFAIN, (Leather socks), it is permissible to make masah over them based on consensus supported by Tawaatur.
(2) Thin socks, not made of leather, nor having the qualities of leather, but are like the regular socks made from cotton, wool, or nylon. It is NOT permissible to make masah on such socks as it is not established with enough evidence that would enable one the leave the order of washing the feet as mentioned in the Qur'an.
(3) Thick socks, not made from leather, but have the qualities of leather. According to some Jurists, it is permissible to make masah over such socks. While others say it is not permissible.
The meaning of "KHUFF" in Arabic applies only to socks made out of leather. Socks made from cloth are not called "KHUFF" in Arabic. Therefore, the permission of making masah is only specific with the leather socks.
Regarding other types of socks (i.e. apart from leather socks) the command of the Qur'anic verse of washing the feet must be implemented as masah on other types of socks is not established by Tawaatur
Ahaadith on masah (wiping) over the socks (Jowrab)
From all the collections of Ahaadith, there are only three Hadith concerning wiping over socks (Jowrab).
One Hadith is narrated by Bilal (Radhi Allahu anhu),
The second by Abu Musa Ash'ari (Radhi Allahu anhu),
The third by Mughirah ibn Shu'bah (Radhi Allahu anhu).
The narration of Bilal has been recorded in M'ujam Sagheer Tabraani, and the narration of Abu Musa in Ibn Majah and Baihaqi. However, Hafiz Zayla'ee (a far renowned Muhaddith) in his famous works, Nasbur-Raaya, Vol. 1, pp. 183-184., has proven that both the Sanads (chain of narrators) are defective and weak.
In regards to Abu Musa's narration, Imaam Abu Dawood Sajastaani (R.A.), in his works of Abu Dawood, being one book from the Sihaah Sittah (six most authentic books of Ahaadith) has written:
"It (the Hadith's sanad) is not continuous, nor is it reliable (strong)."(Bazhlul-Mujhood, Vol. 1, p.96)
The remaining Hadith of Mughirah ibn Shu'bah is mentioned by Imaam Tirmizi as being a good and sound Hadith. Some other eminent Muhadditheen have disagreed with Imaam Tirmizi. Imaam Abu Dawood (R.A.), after recording this narration states,
"And Abdur-Rahman ibn Mahdi should not narrate this Hadith, because the authentic famous narration from Mughirah ibn Shu'bah is that the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) used to perform masah 'alal khuffain."(Bazhlul-Majhood, Vol. 1, p.96)
Allamah Nawawi (R.A.), Commentator of Sahih Muslim, (Nasbur-Raaya, Vol. I, p. 183) writes, "All the Muhadditheen who criticized this Hadith as being weak were separate in their statements (i.e. not voiced together), even then, they would be correct over the ruling of Imaam Tirmizi, as the fundamental principle is that criticism prevails over approval. All the Huffaz of Hadith agree that the narration is weak. Therefore, the statement of Imaam Tirmizi, "This Hadith is Hasan, Sahih", is not acceptable."
(Nasbur-Raaya, Vol. l, p.l83) .
Even if we assume that the statement of Imaam Tirmizi is correct, then too it is only one Hadith from the entire collection of Ahaadith. Again the same question arises, can we leave the clear command from Allah Ta'ala to wash our feet while performing Wudhu on the basis of one Hadith. Therefore the Ahaadith about masah 'alal jowrabain do not reach the level of Tawaatur. In fact, in all the collections of Ahaadith we find only three narration's, from which two are unanimously weak, and the third is criticized by majority of the Muhadditheen, only Imaam Tirmizi declares it as a Sahih Hadith. So to leave, restrict, or define the command of Allah Ta'ala on the foundation of such weak narration's is not acceptable in the Shari'ah.
A very famous 'Aalim, Allamah Shamsul Haqq Saheb Azeem Abaadi (RA.), (popular among the Ahle-Hadith) writes, "Socks can made out of leather, wool, cotton, etc., everyone of them are called "SOCKS". It is not permissible to wipe over any type of sock until it is not established that the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) used to wipe over socks of wool, etc."('Awnul-M'abood, first volume,p.62).
Masah Without Wudhu
Also people who performs Masah over socks should note that Masah can only be performed when the person is already in a state of Wudhu. The reason for this is the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) wiped over his shoes only when he already was in the state of Wudhu. He used perform a fresh Wudhu for every prayer, because he was already in the state of Wudhu, instead of washing his feet he would wipe over his shoes. The proof of this is in Sahih Ibn Khuzaimah,
"It is reported from Ali (Radhi Allahu anhu) that he asked for a glass of water, he then performed a brief ablution and wiped over his shoes. He then said, this is how the Prophet (Sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) used to perform his wudhu when his wudhu was not broken. (Sahih Ibn Khuzaimah, Vol. 1, Hadith 300, Chapter 154, p. 100).
From this Hadith we learn that a person who does not have Wudhu, can't wipe over his shoes.
Conclusion
In conclusion, all reliable Fuqaha and Muitahideen agree that thin socks that allow water to seep through them, do not stand upright without support, and can not be walked in continuously, are not permissible to make masah on. Shoes are also not allowed to be wiped over. Thin socks of today that are made out of cotton, wool, nylon, etc., do not have the features of leather socks, therefore, it is not permissible to make masah over them. If someone does, their wudhu will not be valid, according to Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal, or any other Mujtahideen.
Also by making a little bit of extra effort, if we can wash our feet rather than wiping our socks, then we are leaving no room for doubt. And we are adopting something which is very clear over something on which some doubts are raised by a majority of Ulema.
And Allah knows best.
