قَالَ اللهُ تَعَالَی:

إِنَّمَا یُرِیدُ اللَّهُ لِیُذْهِبَ عَنْکُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَیْتِ وَیُطَهِّرَکُمْ تَطْهِیرًا

Indeed, Allah desires to repel all impurity from you, O People of the Household, and purify you with a thorough purification. (Sūrah al-Aḥzāb 33:33)

The most authoritative books on Hadīth and Tafsīr (Quranic exegesis), amongst both Sunni and Shi'ah sources, cite Prophetic traditions that confirm verse 33:33 as being exclusively revealed in relation to the five who were ‘covered by the Cloak’; namely Muhammad, ‘Alī, Fātīmah, al- Hasan, and al- Husayn, (peace be upon them), to whom the term ‘Ahl al-Bayt’ (People of the House) is specifically attributed.

For instance, refer to the following reference books:

(1) Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH), al-Musnad, 1:331; 4:107; 6:292, 304. (2) Sahīh Muslim (d. 261 AH), 7:130. (3) Al-Tirmidhī (d. 279 AH), Sunan, 5:361 et al. (4) Al-Dulabī (d. 310 AH), al-Dhurriyyah at-Tāhīrah an-Nabawiyyah, p. 108. (5) An-Nassa’i (d. 303 AH), al-Sunan al-Kubrā' 5:p108, 113. (6) al- Hakīm al-Nayshābūrī (d. 405 AH), al-Mustadrak ‘alā as-Sa hīhayn, 2:416, 3:133, 146, 147. (7) al-Zarkāshī (d. 794 AH), al-Burhān, pp. 197. (8) Ibn Hājar al-Asqalānī (d. 852), Fath al-Barī Sharhh Sahīh al-Bukhārī, 7:104. (9) Al-Kulaynī (d. 328 AH), Usūl al-Kāfī, 1:287. (10) Ibn Bābaūyah (d. 329 AH), al-Imāmah wa’l-Tabsirah, pp. 47, H. 29. (11) Al-Maghribī (d. 363 AH), Da’aa’im al-Islām, pp. 35, 37. (12) As-Sadūq (d. 381 AH), al-Khisāl, pp. 403, 550. (13) At-Tūsī (d. 460 AH), al-Amaalī, H. 438, 482, 783.

For more details, refer to the exegesis of the holy verse involved in the following reference books of tafsīr: (1) At-Tabarī (d. 310 AH), book of Tafsīr. (2) Al-Jassās (d. 370 AH), Ahkām al-Qur’an. (3) Al-Wahīdī (d. 468 AH), Asbāb an-Nuzūl. (4) Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597 AH), Zād al-Masīr. (5) Al-Qurtubī (d. 671 AH), al-Jāmī’ li-ahkām al-Qur’an. (6) Ibn Kathīr (d. 774 AH), Book of Tafsīr. (7) At-Tha'albī (d. 825 AH), Book of Tafsīr. (8) As-Suyūtī (d. 911 AH), ad-Durr al-Manthūr. (9) Ash-Shawkanī (d. 1250 AH), Fath al-Qadīr. (10) Al-'Ayyāshī (d. 320 AH), Book of Tafsīr. (11) Al-Qummī (d. 329 AH), Book of Tafsīr. (12) Furt al-Kūfī (d. 352 AH), Book of Tafsīr; in the margin of the exegesis of verse 4:59. (13) Al-Tabrīzī (d. 560 AH), Majma‘al-Bayān.

p: 2

Imam Sadiq’s Jurisprudence:

Volume 1

Ritual Purity

(Taharah)

p: 3

قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ 3:

إنِّی تَارِکٌ فِیکُمُ الثَّقَلَیْنِ: کِتَابَ اللهِ وَعِتْرَتِی أهْلَ بَیْتِی، مَا إنْ تَمَسَّکْتُمْ بِهِمَا لَنْ تَضِلُّوا بَعْدِی أبَداً، وَإنَّهُمَا لَنْ یَفْتَرِقَا حَتَّی یَرِدَا عَلَیَّ الْحَوْضَ.

The Messenger of Allah (s) said:

“Verily, I am leaving among you two precious things [Thaqalayn]: The Book of Allah and my progeny [‘itrah], the members of my Household [Ahl al-Bayt]. If you hold fast onto them, you shall never go astray. These two will never separate from each other until they meet me at the Pond [haw¤] (of Kawthar).”

This holy tradition has been narrated, with different paraphrases, by numerous Sunni and Shi'ah sources:

Al­Ḥākim an­Nayshaburi, Al­Mustadrak ‘ala al-Ṣaḥīḥayn (Beirut), vol. 3, pp. 109-110, 148, 533.

Muslim, As-Sahih, (English translation), book 31, hadiths 5920-3.

At­Tirmidhi, As-Sahih, vol. 5, pp. 621-2, hadiths 3786, 3788; vol. 2, p. 219.

An-Nassa’i, Khasa’is ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, hadith 79.

Ahmad ibn hanbal, Al-Musnad, vol. 3, pp. 14, 17, 26; vol. 3, pp. 26, 59; vol. 4, p. 371; vol. 5, pp. 181-182, 189-190.

Ibn al­Athir, Jami ‘al­Usul, vol. 1, p. 277.

Ibn Kathir, Al­Bidayah wa’n­Nihayah, vol. 5, p. 209.

Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘A¨im, vol. 6, p. 199.

Nasir ad-Din al-Albani, Silsilat al-Ahadith as-Sahihah (Kuwait: Ad-Dār as-Salafiyyah), vol. 4, pp. 355-358.

p: 4

Imam Sadiq's Jurisprudence:

Volume 1

Ritual Purity

(Taharah)

Author:

Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah

Translator:

Farrokh B. Sekaleshfar

Cultural Affairs Department

The Ahl al-Bayt World Assembly

p: 5

نام کتاب: ققه الامام جعفر الصادق (ع) ج 1 (طهارت)

نویسنده:

محمد جواد مغنیه

مترجم: فرخ سکالشفر

زبان ترجمه: انگلیسی

Imam Sadiq's Jurisprudence: Part 1 Ritual Purity

Author: Muhammad Jawad Maghniyyah

Translator: Farrokh B. Sekaleshfar

Project supervisor: Translation Unit, Cultural Affairs Department/ The Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly (ABWA)

Publisher: ABWA Publishing and Printing Center

First Printing: 2009

Printed by: Neinavā Press

Copies: 5,000

© The Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly (ABWA)

www.ahl-ul-bayt.org

info@ahl-ul-bayt.org

ISBN: 978-964-529-436-4

All rights reserved

p: 6

2.6 Meetah (dead body of an animal) ---32

2.6.1 The Abomasums and the Musk Pouch ---33

2.7 In Muslim ‘Hands’ ---33

2.8 Pus and Vomit ---34

2.9 Dogs and Pigs ---34

2.10 (Grape-)Wine (Khamr) ---35

2.10.1 Boiling Grape Juice ---35

2.11 Beer (Fuqqa’) ---36

2.12 The sweat of one who becomes junub haramly (e.g. via adultery, masturbation…) ---36

2.13 Ahl al-Kitab ---37

2.14 Denying the Fundamentals of Religion ---39

2.15 Offspring of Atheists ---39

2.16 Those who attribute ghuluw (gross exaggeration that leads to blasphemy) with respect to Allah’s creation ---39

2.17 Nasibis ---40

2.18 Leftovers ---40

2.19 A Few Issues On Doubt ---40

2.20 Rules of Najasah ---41

2.20.1 May najasah be proved by means of one person’s testimony? ---41

2.20.2 Owner of Something ---42

2.21 Najis and Mutanajjis ---42

2.21.1 Najis cases that are excused during salat ---43

2.21.2 Things that aren’t sufficient for salat ---43

2.21.3 Tahirizing Mosques ---43

2.21.4 Do Mutanajjis things najisate? ---44

2.21.5 Tahirization of the body and clothes in preparation for salat ---45

2.21.6 Executing salat whilst being, unknowingly, accompanied with najasah ---45

2.21.7 The Compelled ---46

2.21.8 Doubting between a tahir and a najis ---47

2.21.9 Must one eliminate the najasah or execute wudu? ---47

p: 8

3.0 The Mutahhirat ---49

3.1 Water ---49

3.1.1 Tahirizing things najisated by dogs, pigs, desert rats and urine ---49

3.1.2 Tahirization of Vessels, Clothes and the Body ---50

3.1.3 Ghusalah ---50

3.2 Takhalli ---51

3.3 Earth: a mutahhir ---52

3.4 Sun: a mutahhir ---52

3.5 Inqilab (Transformation): a mutahhir process ---52

3.6 Istihalah (Transmutation): a mutahhir process ---52

3.7 Bodies of Animals ---53

3.8 Tannery ---53

A Final Note ---53

4.0 Minor Ablution (Wudu) ---55

4.1 Factors obliging one to wudue ---55

4.1.1 An Arising Doubt ---56

4.2 Objectives of Wudu ---56

4.3 Recommendations for executing wudu ---57

4.4 Prerequisites of Wudu ---59

4.5 Method of performing wudu ---60

4.6 Debating verse 5:6 ---64

4.7 The Usulic Principles of Faragh (Disconnection) and Tajawuz (Transition) ---65

4.8 Arising Doubts ---67

4.8.1 Excessive Doubts ---68

5.0 Jabirahs ---69

5.1 Miscellaneous Issues ---69

5.2 Doubt with respect to an Obstruction ---71

5.3 The Urinary and Faecally Incontinent ---72

p: 9

6.0 Janabah Ghusl ---75

6.1 Objectives for Ghuslating ---77

6.2 Sawm and Janabah ---78

6.3 Prohibitive Actions with respect to the Junub ---79

6.4 Method of Ghuslating ---80

6.5 Miscellaneous Issues ---82

7.0 Hayd, Istihadah and Nifas ---85

7.1 Hayd ---85

7.2 Question and Answer ---86

7.3 The Principle of Probability ---86

7.4 Classification of Hayd ---87

7.5 Surpassing the 10-day limit ---88

7.6 Pregnancy and Hayd ---88

7.7 True until proven otherwise ---89

7.8 Actions Prohibited for the Ha’id ---89

7.9 The Ha’id’s Ghusl ---89

7.10 Compensatory Salats and Sawms ---90

7.11 Istihadah ---90

7.12 Classification of the Mustahad ---91

7.13 The Nafsa’ (one discharging nifas blood) ---92

8.0 The Mayyit (Deceased) ---95

8.1 Al-Ihtidar (On the verge of dying) ---95

8.2 Al-Mawt (Death) ---95

8.3 The Mayyit’s Ghusl ---95

8.4 The Martyr and the Stoned (marjum) ---98

8.5 Kafan : Enshrouding ---98

8.6 Hunut : Embalment ---99

8.7 The Mayyit’s Salat ---100

8.7.1 The Method of the Mayyit’s Salat ---101

8.8 Burial ---101

p: 10

8.8.1 The Mayyit’s Guardian/Heir ---103

8.8.2 Touching (skin-contact with) the mayyit’s corpse ---104

8.9 Mustahabb Ghusls ---105

9.0 Tayammum ---107

9.1 That upon which tayammum is permitted ---111

9.2 Method of Tayammum ---112

Laws and Conditions of Tayammum ---1113

References ---117

Glossary ---123

Bibliography ― 137

p: 11

p: 12

Preface

In the Name of Allah, the All-beneficent, the All-merciful

The invaluable legacy of the Household [Ahl al-Bayt] of the Prophet (may peace be upon them all), as preserved by their followers, is a comprehensive school of thought that embraces all branches of Islamic knowledge. This school has produced many brilliant scholars who have drawn inspiration from this rich and pure resource. It has given many scholars to the Muslim ummah who, following in the footsteps of Imāms of the Prophet’s Household (‘a), have done their best to clear up the doubts raised by various creeds and currents within and without Muslim society and to answer their questions. Throughout the past centuries, they have given well-reasoned answers and clarifications concerning these questions and doubts.

To meet the responsibilities assigned to it, the Ahl al-Bayt World Assembly (ABWA) has embarked on a defense of the sanctity of the Islamic message and its verities, often obscured by the partisans of various sects and creeds as well as by currents hostile to Islam. The Assembly follows in the footsteps of the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) and the disciples of their school of thought in its readiness to confront these challenges and tries to be on the frontline in consonance with the demands of every age.

The arguments contained in the works of the scholars belonging to the School of the Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) are of unique significance. That is because they are based on genuine scholarship and appeal to reason, and avoid prejudice and bias. These arguments address scholars and thinkers in a manner that appeals to healthy minds and wholesome human nature.

To assist the seekers of truth, the Ahl al-Bayt World Assembly has endeavored to present a new phase of these arguments contained in the studies and translations of the works of contemporary Shī‘ah writers and those who have embraced this sublime school of thought through divine blessing.

The Assembly is also engaged in edition and publication of the valuable works of leading Shī‘ah scholars of earlier ages to assist the seekers of the truth in discovering the truths which the School of the Prophet’s Household (‘a) has offered to the entire world.

The Ahl al-Bayt World Assembly looks forward to benefit from the opinions of the readers and their suggestions and constructive criticism in this area.

We also invite scholars, translators and other institutions to assist us in propagating the genuine Islamic teachings as preached by the Prophet Muhammad (S).

p: 13

We beseech God, the Most High, to accept our humble efforts and to enable us to enhance them under the auspices of Imām al-Mahdī, His vicegerent on the earth (may Allah expedite his advent). ?

Cultural Affairs Department

The Ahl al-Bayt (‘a) World Assembly

p: 14

Translator’s Preface

Strictly speaking, one cannot term this treatise as a translation of the late M.J. Maghniyyah’s ‘Fiqh al-Imam al-Sadiq’ for the following reasons: firstly, one may take the position that it is almost impossible to thoroughly translate Arabic jurisprudent themes into a language that doesn’t possess many of the key technical terms (such as junubs, jallals and even the ‘just’ – see glossary); secondly, explanatory commentaries have been added throughout the book, in addition to the original texts, so that readers may develop a more detailed, and sometimes clearer, understanding of the main issues at stake and thirdly, the structure and layout of the book has been organized differently from that of the original.

‘Fiqh al-Imam al-Sadiq’ is an example of dynamic jurisprudence and it illustrates how fiqh evolves through the times. Books of this calibre that touch upon, and demonstrate, the ijtihad practiced by the fuqaha in relation to passing verdicts and so forth are not commonly found in English. Admittedly, this was a new experience and I hope that the readers may forgive me for the shortcomings that arise throughout the book. I am all ears with respect to any feedback our dear readers may send.

F.B. Sekaleshfar

Qum 2008

p: 15

p: 16

Inferences and Discussion

Mutlaq water eliminates (or purifies things from) concrete najasah (i.e. impurity resulting from something’s contact with a concrete najis or a mutanajjis [a najisated body]) such as blood and urine, per se, or objects polluted by them; it also removes abstract najasah (hadath: state of impurity that prevents a mukallaf [a dutybound Muslim] from executing a number of rituals, including salat, sawm, tawaf, specific Quranic recitations…), hence one may (a) wudue with it, (b) ghuslate, thus removing the states of najasah (impurity) caused by hayd (menstruation) or janabah (see glossary) and (c) wash the mayyit (the deceased) by means of mutlaq water. This is what the fuqaha are alluding to when they state mutlaq water as being tahir, per se, as well as tahirizing other things i.e. from khabath (a concrete najis or a mutanajjis) and hadath.

Taharah from concrete najasah concerns one’s body, alone, and not one’s heart or mind; therefore, it isn’t necessary to intend to gain proximity to Allah whilst tahirizing oneself from khabath for making niyyah is an attribute of the heart/mind. However, tahirizing oneself from hadath involves the body and mind and therefore the niyyah for Allah’s sake becomes a necessity.

Mudaf water is tahir per se according to (2) but it does not tahirize. Allah has declared tayammum wajib (7) on occasions where one encounters an absence of mutlaq water. Mutlaq water is implied in 5:6 for verily the word ‘water’, alone, conveys its denotation which is mutlaq water. If wudu were to be permitted with non-mutlaq water, i.e. mudaf, then tayammum wouldn’t have been declared wajib.(1) Another proof provided vis-à-vis the non-tahirizing nature of mudaf water is the following: that which is explicitly decreed najis by the shariah may not be decreed tahir unless its najasah is explicitly eliminated by the shariah. Now there does exist nass (explicit texts) that prove that mutlaq water does tahirize (1,4,5,6) and that mudaf water doesn’t tahirize. Therefore, if one beholds a mutanajjis and then washes it (eliminating the najis element) with mudaf water, since the latter does not tahirize – according to the nass of the shariah – one thus doubts as to whether the mutanajjis has become tahir or not. Doubting the taharah of the previously-known mutanajjis, one is permitted to apply the principle of istishab (presumption of continuity) i.e. where one is authorized to presume that the mutanajjis holds its previously-known, original state of najasah.

the contrary has not yet been proved”.(1)

Transmitted proof: Istishab may be canonically defined as the continuity of proof with respect to that previously proved or the continuation of refutation with respect to that previously refuted. In short, this principle declares the presumption of continuity. The fuqaha have observed this principle, counting it as being one of the standard canonical principles and have derived a whole range of laws by means of it. They have termed it istishab (literally meaning taking along, escorting) because Man remains accompanied with one’s original certainty up until certainty is disproved with respect to the contrary.

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “Certainty doesn’t become nullified by doubt, rather it becomes nullified by means of another certainty” (8)

Similarly, if one had knowledge or certainty that a given water was mudaf and later, due to some alteration, developed doubt as to whether or not that water has become mutlaq, one ought to remain with one’s previous and original certainty, thus treating the water as still being mudaf via istishab.

Now, assuming one encounters a liquid and doubts as to whether it is mutlaq or mudaf, if one beholds no previous knowledge with respect to the water’s state (i.e. not knowing whether it had previously been mutlaq or mudaf – thus beholding a primordial doubt (shakk al-badawi), then one may neither treat it as mutlaq nor mudaf; the reason being because there exists no nass that decrees and presumes any given unknown water as being mutlaq or mudaf. Istishab may not be applied because no previous certainty has been acquired. The result therefore is that one cannot (a) either wudue or ghuslate with such a given water and (b) tahirize by means of such a water; moreover, the water is regarded as not beholding any mudaf properties, hence it won’t (if qalil) become regarded as najis on encountering a khabath.

“Jari water refers to that water that has a subterranean source because were it not to be connected to a source, it would have unanimously been decreed as a kind of rakid water”(1)

Discussion

The fuqaha have a specific canonical definition for jari and rakid waters which differ from the literal definitions. Jari water is that which is connected to a source even if it has no current flow, for it always beholds the potential to have flow. Rakid water, according to them, is that water which beholds no source, even if it bears flow for a period of time; it doesn’t always behold the potential to have flow.

(a) only those alterations that occur as a result of the water’s direct contact with concrete najasah per se; hence if a mayyit of an animal lies besides a tahir water, giving the water a foul smell – albeit not in direct contact with it – then the water will not be deemed najis, rather it will still be regarded as tahir.

(b) only those alterations caused by the concrete najis’ own pivotal attributes cause najasah, not those alterations caused by the mutanajjis’ colour, taste or odour. Hence, if a mutanajjis red fruit juice encounters a water and turns it red (due to the fruit’s colour), the water is still deemed tahir provided that it doesn’t become mudaf.

(c) that alteration that leads to najasah must be sensible (hissi), not concealed (taqdiri). Hence, if a najis is of the same colour as the water it is contacting and no alteration is brought about after their encounter, the water remains tahir as before – even though an alteration would certainly have resulted were the najis’ colour different to that of the water – for the criterion with respect to alterations is that of sensation (hiss).

(d) if a najis contacts non-nabi’ qalil water, the latter becomes najis even if no alteration occurs. This shar’i law is extrapolated by (i) ijma’ (consensus) and (ii) traditions(1) (that some claim add up to three hundred) from the Ahl al-Bayt. However, if the non-nabi’ water is kurr – volume-wise – then it shares the same ruling as qalil/kurr nabi’ water i.e. it doesn’t become najis on contact with a najis unless an alteration occurs. This is clearly demonstrated by (13) that is regarded as mutawatir.

Most fuqaha declare that if a najis contacts mudaf water – whatever its quantity may be – the latter becomes najis. In his ‘al-Mustamsak’, Sayyid Hakim has appreciated a difference, with regard to this ruling, between excessive and small volumes of mudaf. He states that excessive volumes of mudaf do not wholly become najis on contact with a najis due to the lack of circulation present, according to urf i.e. urf does not regard such a contact as spreading throughout the whole excessive amount of any mudaf water. However, with small amounts of mudaf, such a circulation is considered present by urf. In accordance with such a line of reasoning, Hakim therefore concludes that interconnected voluminous oil wells do not become najis on contact with a najis.(1)

Note that Hakim’s comments are not out of place or in contradiction with that of the fuqaha due to the fact that the latter reject oil as being a mudaf water due to its different essence.

najisate such a water – it becomes tahirized once the alteration disappears and the water becomes connected to rain, kurr water or a source to such an extent that urf terms the two connecting waters as one. The mere disappearance of the alteration is not sufficient. Most fuqaha neither regard the imtizaj of all parts of the najis water with all parts of the tahir water as a prerequisite for taharah nor do they claim, as necessary, that the najis and tahir water be on the same level at the time of connection. The tahirizing water may be situated above the lower najis water but not vice versa, unless via force.

Concerning the latter two paragraphs, the issue of connection occurs after the disappearance is realized. However, note that this order is not conditional i.e. if connection and disappearance occur simultaneously, this is deemed sufficient with respect to acquiring taharah.

hence, the subject must first be realized and the predicate will succeed. A subject-less predicate is meaningless.

Moreover, if the added qalil water is najis, then mutanajjis water is added to najis water, then the resulting water may by no means become tahir; and if the added qalil water is tahir, then it becomes najis on contact with the already mutanajjis qalil water. Either way, a tahir kurr will not result.

Inferences and Discussion

(13) is uttered explicitly (thus termed mantuq); that which may be implicitly derived from the mantuq tradition is its mafhum which signifies, in this case, that that water which is less than kurr becomes najisated by a najis. The mafhum’s ruling is always contrary to that of the mantuq’s; however, this contrast does not arise under all circumstances, rather it only manifests in some instances. In other words, its not necessary for the mafhum’s decree to be in contradiction to the mantuq’s decree when analysed from different angles; hence, if the mantuq is general (as is the case in (13) for when an indefinite article is accompanied by a negatory particle, generality is generated i.e. “…nothing najisates it”) it doesn’t become necessary for the mafhum to be general too i.e. ‘if a water is less than kurr, anything can najisate it’. Hence, that is why it is said that mafhums do not imply generalities.(1)

(Note that when it is said that kurr water doesn’t become najis (13), this applies to those occasions whereby no pivotal alteration (by a najis) has occurred. Qalil water, however, becomes najis even if no alteration is realized).

So how much is kurr? (22) relates to kurr by means of volume whilst (23) focuses on weight. The recommended procedure is to rely upon those traditions focusing on volume for the following reasons:

* the ritl unit is ambiguous; one can’t be sure what was alluded to by this term during the Imam’s era

* waters may differ with one another with respect to heaviness and lightness.

* the weight criterion for determining kurr is difficult and not feasible for many, especially for those living far from urban areas, whereas the volume criterion is not difficult; its calculation is feasible by means of one’s hands and even by eye where one may approximate, with a degree of certainty, the required volume.

the latter does become tahir save in the case of a urine-means-mutanajjis that requires two pours of qalil water instead of one.

Assuming one has no previous knowledge with respect to a given water, this water may neither be decreed kurr nor qalil; hence, (a) if a mutanajjis is washed in such a water, the latter remains tahir as long as no alteration occurs; istishab has been applied i.e. the water was tahir to start off with and after the process of washing, one doubts whether or not it has become tahir and so one applies istishab. Note that asalah al-taharah may also be applied; (b) if a mutanajjis is washed within such a water, the former is decreed najis by means of executing istishab. Does a paradox arise between such a water’s taharah [in (a)] and the mutanajjis’ najasah [in (b)]? No! for the subject-matter in both cases differ. The subject-matter of the asalah al-taharah, above, is the water per se whilst that of istishab is tantamount to the mutanajjis that contacts the water.

p: 28

Inferences and Discussion

(27) therefore indicates that the urine and faeces of both halal and haram-meat animals, that fly, are tahir. One may question that the above tradition seems to be in contradiction to those traditions that claim that the excrement of all haram-meat animals are najis. The latter may include, therefore, flying haram-meat animals such as bats. With which set of traditions ought one side with? Response: One must accept those traditions that state that the urine/faeces of all birds are tahir. Hence, one can decree that the excrement of all birds, including haram-meat birds, are tahir for verily the traditions of najasah are applied specifically to non-flying animals and so no clash of traditions occur. Supposing this specific application with respect to non-flying animals is not accepted, one consequently encounters an incompatibility and conflict between the two sets of traditions. In such a case, the taharah-supporting tradition is preferred because its authenticity is stronger than those of the najasah-supporting traditions. If, however, one recognizes both sets as equal, authenticity-wise, one may, then, equally opt for either incompatible tradition in which case one may rightfully decree the urine/faeces of all flying birds as tahir. On the other hand, if one concludes that both traditions cancel each other out and that both must be dismissed, then one may apply asalah al-taharah i.e. in that all things are tahir unless one knows it to be najis.

haram-meat animal and if the jallal label is removed from it, then its prohibition is subsequently removed as well. In short, assuming an animal becomes jallal or is defiled (by Man), its meat is haram to consume, its urine/faeces are najis and its milk is not halal to drink.

Inferences and Discussion

Concerning all animals that behold a pulsating blood circulation, their blood is najis – be they halal or haram-meat animals, be the blood excessive or little. Hence, now it is understood what is meant on saying that the urine and faeces of halal-meat animals are tahir but their blood is najis.

There exists a debate amongst the fuqaha in that whether or not there exists a canonical principle that indicates that blood qua blood is presumed najis unless specified as tahir by the texts such as the blood of animals that don’t possess pulsating blood circulations or the blood remaining within the body of Islamically-slaughtered animals etc. Those who regard such a principle as valid thus decree all bloods whose najasah/taharah are not known, as being najis. Most fuqaha, however, reject such a principle and regard all bloods as being originally tahir save those textually-stipulated as being najis; their opponents’ claim is based on (34). Since the blood in (34) is mentioned in absolute terms i.e. not being specified what kind of blood it is, blood qua blood is alluded to and this indicates that blood is originally najis unless specified otherwise. In reply, it must be noted that the Imam did not intend to discuss blood qua blood, in (34), but rather intended to focus on that water contacted by blood (which was assumed najis).

their hair, horns, nails, feathers, wool and bones, unless the segments be from concrete najasah such as dogs and pigs. In (38), the lack of life is mentioned as a reason for justifying the taharah of those bodily segments – of a najis corpse – that contain no life (or blood).

The fuqaha are divided on the issue of detached limbs/bodily segments from a living animal. Some claim such detached segments to be tahir in accordance to (17) whilst others deem them to be najis by way of precaution (ihtiyat), not via the usulic principle of ‘presumption of precaution’ (asalah al-ihtiyat). Reasoning via ihtiyat, alone, doesn’t strictly constitute canonical evidence. Hence, the author of ‘al-Madarik’ writes:

“in conclusion, that which one may infer from the traditions is the najasah of ‘corpses’ and this label certainly does not qualify for detached bodily segments of living animals. These [corpses and detached bodily segments of live animals] are two mutually exclusive domains.” (1)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about a man who enters a bazaar and buys clothes that are made from animal skin, neither knowing whether or not the animal has been slaughtered islamically nor whether or not he may execute salat within them. He replied: “it’s not problematic; verily the Kharijites had imposed much restriction upon themselves due to their ignorance; and verily religion is much more lenient than such behaviour.” (42)

Inferences and Discussion

In accordance with the above traditions, the fuqaha have decreed meats and skins from Muslims and/or bazaars in which all or most of the people within it are Muslims, as tahir. They have also decreed, as tahir, those meats and skins discarded within Islamic countries e.g. on the highway, roads etc. provided that the discarded bears indication that it has been ‘Islamically’ employed (i.e. that it hasn’t been discarded by Muslims as rubbish).

Sayyid Hakim states that one may acquire animals from Muslim ‘hands’ even if the latter had obtained them from atheists or from atheist countries. Hence, according to him, ‘Muslim hands’ per se is an indication of Islamic slaughter. Kashif al-Ghita and M.H. Najafi also agree on this point. The latter states that that which may be extrapolated from the traditions is that that acquired from Muslim ‘hands’ is tahir even if knowingly preceded or passed on by atheist hands.(1)

Imam Kazim (peace be upon him) was asked what one ought to do with a vessel from which a pig has drunken from; he replied: “wash it seven times” (46)

Inferences and Discussion

The fuqaha regard the lifeless or bloodless components of these two concrete najises as najis too, without any exception. Moreover, the traditions used to prove that dogs and pigs are najis are directed towards terrestrial dogs and pigs, not sea-dogs/pigs.

haram juice only becomes halal after two-thirds of it evaporates, thus leaving a third. The author of ‘al-Madarik’ states that the ruling of boiling grape juice’s najasah is popular amongst the later fuqaha and that he hasn’t seen any reference or proof with respect to the matter, indicating such a najasah. Shahid al-Awwal also points out in his ‘al-Bayan’ and ‘al-Thikra’ that he hasn’t perceived any textual material with regards to such a najasah and that those who do claim such a najasah are few in number. Others who rule such a juice as tahir include Shahid al-Thani and MH Najafi.(1) Such rulings are based upon asalah al-taharah which is free from any complication. MJ Maghniyyah believes that those who regard boiling grape juice as najis have appended it to khamr and that such an appendage is analogical. Hence, its taharah is definite because all things, according to (17), are considered tahir until proven najis.

contributed to issuing such an ijma’ and, moreover, many of them have employed precaution with respect to the matter. It is evident that certainty with respect to a ma’soom’s statement may not be substantiated when accompanied with the probability that those who had contributed to the ijma’ had referred to traditions – accessible, and thus refutable, to us now – and had used precaution. Verily, in such a case, one must analyze those traditions for oneself and reach a conclusion oneself; furthermore, precaution isn’t acceptable as a canonical proof. Hence, if one believes or conjectures that those involved in the ijma’ have either employed traditions – known to us – or precaution, then ijma’ may never become realized because certainty will not be attained unless one analyzes those traditions for oneself.

Traditions

Those who rule the Ahl al-Kitab as najis defend themselves by authentic and explicitly indicative traditions. However, according to MJ Maghniyyah, there exists, simultaneously, authentic traditions that allude to and indicate the taharah of the Ahl al-Kitab; as a matter of fact, the latter set of traditions are greater in number, more indicative in expression and their authenticity isn’t less than those traditions that allude to the Ahl al-Kitab’s najasah. Therefore, preferring the najasah-orientated traditions is tantamount to preferring the weak to the strong. Even if one regards both sets as equal – in all aspects – one may revert to asalah al-taharah, assuming that both sets of traditions cancel each other out. Moreover, a lack of preference between the two incompatible sets enables one to opt for either. As to those who rule the Ahl al-Kitab’s najasah on the basis of precaution, due to its popularity amongst the fuqaha, MJ Maghniyyah states that neither precaution (albeit sound in action) nor popularity (albeit assuring for one) constitute canonical proof. Hence, neither texts, ijma’ nor rationality prove the najasah of the Ahl al-Kitab.(1)

Those fuqaha who regard the Ahl al-Kitab as tahir do attribute an accidental state of najasah to them i.e. in that the Ahl al-Kitab become tahirized by means of water after contact with a najis such as khamr etc. – exactly like in the case of Muslims. This accidental najasah may be deduced from (51) where the slave-woman merely required to wash herself, thus exiting the state of najasah. Tradition no. (51), and others like it(2),

explicitly demonstrates that the reason for avoiding the Ahl al-Kitab is due to their intimacy with things that the Muslims regard najis.

In short, Allah’s religion is more open than this; it was the Kharijites who had limited and restrained themselves and who were, subsequently, restrained by Allah – as Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) has described. Islam is the religion of virtue and

p: 38

justice, facilitation and rationality. The number of traditions indicating the najasah of the Ahl al-Kitab – and that have been abandoned by Shi’ah and Sunni scholars – are very limited in number. The main consensus of Sunnite scholars have ruled the Ahl al-Kitab as being tahir even though they regard as authentic the tradition narrated by Tha’labah al-Khashani where he said: “O Messenger of Allah, we live in lands inhabited by the Ahl al-Kitab; may we consume from their dishes?” The Prophet (May Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) replied: “don’t eat from their dishes save in cases where you don’t have access to any other in which case, wash them initially and then eat from them”.(1) The apparent meaning of the tradition alludes to the fact that the Ahl al-Kitab are najis for the Holy Prophet had ordered the companion not to consume from their dishes save in cases of constraint; and even then, to wash the dishes before consumption. Sunnite scholars have, however, postulated another deduction (i.e. the Ahl al-Kitab’s taharah) for this tradition. Some (Sunnite scholars) have said that the najasah in relation to the Ahl al-Kitab is one thing whilst the najasah with respect to their vessels is a totally separate matter (these two being mutually exclusive notions). Maghniyyah replies by stating that the najasah of their vessels is even more acute and that is why some Shi’ah scholars have decreed the vessels as tahir whilst deeming the Ahl al-Kitab as najis. Hence, according to the latter, assuming the vessels or dishes are deemed najis, the Ahl al-Kitab will be considered najis, a fortiori.

with respect to the ‘Islamic Identity’ of the other party e.g. burial in Muslim cemeteries, marriage to Muslim women etc. Such actions may be carried out on people only when they are known, with certainty, to be Muslims.

* Assuming one doubts whether a given red thing is blood or not, the latter is ruled tahir in accordance with asalah al-taharah.

* Assuming one doubts whether a given blood belongs to an animal that beholds a pulsating blood circulation or one that doesn’t, such a blood is deemed tahir in accordance with asalah al-taharah.

* Assuming one doubts whether a given animal is jallal or not, such an animal is deemed tahir in accordance with asalah al-taharah.

account. Hence, if one says x is najis – and no-one accuses him/her of lying etc. – is such a statement considered proof or not? Most scholars reject such statements as proof. Shaykh Hamedani writes in his ‘Misbah al-Faqih’:

“aqwa dictates such statements’ validity; this may be supported by the normative practice of rational people and by the canon in that it validates the athan recited by a single reliable person i.e. it allows one to enter salat after hearing the athan recited by a single, albeit reliable, person”(1)

Others, including MJ Maghniyyah, don’t regard such single accounts as constituting proof save in cases where they lead to one’s certainty with respect to the matter. Certainty, according to him, is proof by whatever means – be it a single account or otherwise.

means to executing another obligation that, in turn, is an ends in itself, such as salat and tawaf.

Inference and Discussion

The fuqaha unanimously agree upon the fact that if one observes a najasah in a mosque, then one is dutybound to remove it immediately. One is also obliged to remove najasah from the Holy Scriptures – its covers and pages – for verily najasah’s continuous presence on such sacred entities is tantamount to slander.

As Rida Isfahani puts it: ‘the rule of a mutanajjis’ capacity to najisate is an innovation by the newcomers, we’ve not seen its proponents from amongst the earlier scholars!’(1)

* others have kept silent on the issue, neither claiming the mutanajjis as being able to najisate nor vice versa; MJ Maghniyyah, too, opts for this alternative even though he admits that one does, nevertheless, refrain from the mutanajjis and thus wash oneself after contact with such objects as a result of custom and habit.

that the musalli is totally ignorant of such a najasah. However, assuming the musalli had knowledge of such a najasah but then carelessly forgot or neglected it, performing salat behind such a musalli, in congregation, is not permissible.

All fuqaha unanimously agree that if one performs salat, whilst accompanied with najasah – knowingly and intentionally – then his/her salat is batil. Assuming one performs salat in such clothes – that he knows bears najasah – whilst totally ignorant of the general fatwah, then such a salat is decreed batil as well e.g. if one knows that x is blood but doesn’t know that it is obligatory to remove najasah from one’s body and clothes for salat purposes.

Assuming one performs salat – whilst accompanied with najasah – knowing that its haram to do so but is totally ignorant of the fact that he/she’s accompanied with such a najis, his/her salat is deemed valid e.g. if one knows that its obligatory to remove blood etc. from one’s body/clothes for salat but isn’t aware of the fact that his/her body/clothes is in contact with such a najasah. However, assuming one is aware of both the ruling and of a particular contact with a najasah, but then forgets and performs salat in such a state, this salat is unanimously decreed as being batil. The philosophy behind the latter ruling is that one who forgets – after acknowledging the najis’ presence – is counted as one who knows, hence they aren’t excused. However, ignorance with respect to external contact with najasah is excused and in such cases, research and investigation aren’t necessary. One who is ignorant of the general ruling is not excused and must therefore research and investigate the matter; such people are not excused unless they don’t behold the capacity or access to ascertain such information in which case they will be excused.

but is able to remove it and execute salat in the nude, if he/she performs salat in such a najis clothing, the salat is valid. This may be deduced from (68). Scholars agreeing with the latter ruling include the author of ‘Urwah al-Wuthqa’(1),

Sayyid Hakim(2) and Sayyid Khui(3).

p: 48

Inferences and Discussion

The fuqaha have all issued fatwahs based on traditions (70) to (73). Concerning (74), one may deduce that if a male infant hasn’t been nourished on food, onewashing will suffice. MJ Maghniyyah, contrary to most fuqaha, claims that if a nurse had access to more than one piece of clothing, then the najisated clothing will not be tahirized by a single washing, rather two washings will be required. Most fuqaha, however, state that if such urine comes into contact with a clothing, carpet etc. – in absolute terms i.e. be there other clothings, carpets… present or not – one washing will suffice.

p: 54

Inferences and Discussion

The wudu’s voiding factors are those factors that oblige one towards executing wudu for verily they nullify and ruin one’s previous wudu. In short, these traditions indicate that defecation, urination, passing wind, janabating, hayd, istihadah, nifas and sleep that dominates over the intellect and hearing, are all factors that oblige one to execute wudu. However, the intellect’s dormancy and inactivation by means of drunkenness, insanity and coma (i.e. factors excluding natural sleep) also oblige one to wudue but this is not prescribed to us explicitly by the traditions, rather it has reached us via ijma’. Shaykh Hurr Amili writes:

“the traditions that limit such voiding factors indicate that wudu is not annulled by means of the inactivation of the intellect (via factors other than sleep), however such factors’ voiding capacity does conform with precaution”(1)

From what has been said, one may infer that the emission of worms, stones, blood, mathy, wady and vomit and any type of foreplay, do not void one’s wudu.

It’s evident that one’s wudu – like one’s other ibadah – is not deemed valid unless four factors are realized i.e. Islam, puberty, sanity and the lack of harm. Some have claimed that the salat of prepubescent, but differentiating – differentiates what salat does and doesn’t actually comprise – children are valid in accordance with the principle that their ibadah are valid.(2)

Inferences and Discussion

Objectives are those acts of worship for which one executes wudu i.e. wudu is a means to fulfilling such objectives or ‘ends’. These objectives include:

* wudu is obligatory with respect to salat – be it an obligatory or recommended salat. Salat, in general, is not valid without wudu; this is backed up by explicit traditions (85 and 86) and ijma’.

* wudu is also obligatory with respect to tawaf; this is demonstrated by explicit traditions (95 and 96) and ijma’.

* Touching the Quran’s script also necessitates having wudu (see 97). It’s worth mentioning that touching the Quran’s script may not be counted as one of wudu’s objectives in reality. Verily, such a touch is neither obligatory nor recommended per se, hence executing wudu for such an act (that is free from obligation and recommendation) is certainly neither obligatory nor recommended; after all, the means to something (an objective) can’t be obligatory if the ends itself (the objective) is not obligatory; the means can’t be supplementary in relation to the ends. In brief, executing wudu for such a touch is not canonically legitimate. Hence, that which is meant by ‘it’s haram for one, without wudu, to touch the Quran’s script’ is tantamount to ‘one who has executed wudu for a legitimate objective is permitted to touch the sacred scripture’.

* Ijma’ and explicit traditions state that it’s obligatory to wudue for the accomplishment of the salat’s iqamah just as it is obligatory to wudue for salat per se.

Inferences and Discussion

These traditions – and others similar to them in content – indicate that in addition to being a means to something else, wudu is also an ends in itself i.e. it is itself deemed a recommended act and so Man can execute wudu not as a means for another ritual but solely for the purpose of beholding taharah, during the night or day. Hence wudu may be (a) obligatory with respect to other than itself e.g. obligatory in order to perform the five daily salats or the obligatory tawaf or with respect to an oath etc. and (b) mustahabb in itself and (c) mustahabb with respect to other than itself, such as for mustahabb salats and tawafs. Wudu is also mustahabb when one aims to prepare for salat before the time for salat has arrived; after the time for salat, wudu becomes obligatory with respect to that salat. Other occasions whereby executing wudu is deemed mustahabb include:

* Before entering mosques

* Before entering holy, sacred sites, such as shrines and mausoleums of the Infallibles

* When performing sa’y during one’s Hajj

* When executing the prayer for the deceased

* When visiting the cemetery or graves

* When reciting the Holy Quran

* When supplicating

* When requesting - something desired - before Allah

* When carrying out the prostration of shukr ( i.e. thanking Allah)

* When reciting the athan

* Before sleeping

* For the judge, before seating oneself in court

* For the woman in labour

* For the bride and bridegroom, in their wedding chamber, on their first night together

* For the ha’id before sitting on one’s prayer mat and supplicating (au lieu de the time it usually takes to execute a salat)

* For the junub: before sleeping, eating, drinking or having intercourse again

* Before ceremonially washing the deceased

Re-executing wudu (i.e. carrying it out whilst already in a state of wudu) has also been deemed mustahabb; it has been described as light upon light. Imam Sadiq (peace

p: 58

be upon him) said: “Re-executing wudu is tantamount to repentance without asking for forgiveness” (1)

Furthermore, before executing wudu, traditions mention a number of actions deemed as part of the etiquette of wudu. They include reciting specific supplications, brushing one’s teeth, gargling with water thrice and partially breathing water into the nose, thrice.

* according to some fuqaha, including Maghniyyah, the water used to eliminate najasah (albeit tahir) may not be used for purposes of wudu.

* one mustn’t wudue if the Canon prohibits one from carrying out such an act, such as if using water during wudu were to cause harm, or if priority dictates water to be used for a cause other than wudu (see chapter on tayammum)

* the wudu must be accomplished in a period that beholds ample time for both fulfilling the wudu and the salat, entirely. However, if ample time does not exist and executing one’s wudu were to cause one’s whole salat, or part of it, to be fulfilled outside its stipulated time – whereas executing tayammum would have enabled one to have carried out the whole salat – then such a wudu is batil and tayammum becomes obligatory.

* one must execute all the wudu’s steps and instructions directly by oneself and not to receive assistance save in cases where necessity or a valid excuse prevails. Receiving assistance nullifies wudu because of the holy verse on wudu – together with the traditions – that command one to wash one’s face and hands and to wipe one’s head and feet; such a command indicates direct obligation, not an obligation to be carried out by means of an intermediary.

* abiding by the wudu’s ordained order is necessary. One must start by washing the face, then the right forearm (including the hand), followed by the left forearm; then, one must wipe one’s head followed by the two feet. If this order is violated and one commits an instruction earlier or later than that stipulated by the Canon – be it due to ignorance or forgetfulness – such a wudu ought to be repeated as prescribed by the Canon.

* Instantaneity is also essential during wudu i.e. where one must instantly – without the lapse of time – resort to the next limb after accomplishing and finishing with the previous limb. This instantaneity is termed muwalat by the fuqaha. Some fuqaha have said, with regards to instantaneity, that it is necessary that no (previous) limb should dry up before the whole process of wudu has terminated. Hence, if the face dries up before terminating the right hand or if the face, hands and/or head dries up before terminating the wudu of the feet, such a wudu becomes void. Imam Khumayni and others stipulate that the directly-preceding limb ought not to dry up before washing/wiping (i.e. commencing) the next limb of one’s wudu. Note that the process of ‘drying up’ that nullifies one’s wudu is tantamount to that ‘drying up’ that results from the lapse of time left between the limbs. Hence, if the dryness occurs as a result of another cause, such as hot weather etc., this is not nullifying with respect to the wudu. The criterion for muwalat in the latter cases is the average time required in normal, standard circumstances as determined and judged by urf.

Imam then asked for a vessel with some water in it and placed it in front of himself. He then pulled his sleeves up, revealing his arms. He immersed his right hand into the water and said: “this is what must be done if your hand is tahir”. He then drew a quantity of water and poured it over his face and said ‘bismillah’ and dispersed the water over his face, including the sides of the beard, and then passed his hand over his forehead and face, once, bathing it. He then immersed his left hand and drew a quantity of water and poured it over his right elbow and passed his (left) hand over his right elbow and forearm until the whole forearm, including the fingers, had been washed with water. He then drew some water with his right hand and poured it over his left elbow and, similarly, passed his hand over his left forearm covering the whole forearm, including the fingers. He then wiped the anterior part of the head and the feet’s anterior surfaces by means of that water remaining on the right and left hands. (105)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “Allah is One and He likes oneness. It is sufficient for you to use three handfuls (of water) during the wudu, one for the face and two for the forearms. Wipe the front of your heads with the water remaining on your right hand, wipe the anterior surface of your right foot with the remaining water on your right hand and wipe the anterior surface of your left foot with the remaining water present on your left hand” (106)

40:14 reads: “therefore call upon Allah, being sincere to Him in obedience…” (107)

98:5 reads: “and they were not enjoined anything except that they should serve Allah, being sincere to Him in obedience…” (108)

Imam Baqir (peace be upon him) was asked about a man who does good and who becomes delighted when others observe his goodness. He said: “its okay provided that he didn’t do such an action for the sake of people (alone), otherwise everybody likes to exhibit their goodness to people” (109)

Imam Baqir (peace be upon him) said: “worshippers are not obliged to wash all areas covered by hair, rather it is sufficient just to pour water over such hair” (110)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “executing the wudu once is obligatory, twice is insignificant but thrice is innovative” (111)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “the wiping of the head occurs at the anterior part” (112)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “during wudu, it’s not problematic to wipe (the head) either posterior-anteriorly or antero-posteriorly” (113)

p: 61

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “if you forget to wipe your head then wipe it, plus the feet, with the wetness acquired during the wudu (i.e. when washing the face and hands) and if no wetness is attained on your arms, then obtain some wetness from your beard and then wipe your head and feet; if this isn’t possible then try to obtain some wetness from the eyebrows and the area surrounding the eye and then wipe your head and feet; and if this, too, isn’t possible, then re-do your wudu anew” (114)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked concerning wiping one’s head with one finger alone. He said: “yes, it is sufficient” (115)

Inferences and Discussion

The above traditions mention the different obligations involved in the method of executing wudu. The wudu may not be realized, or even paid heed to, canonically without the accomplishment of these obligations. Numerous recommended actions also exist but won’t be mentioned, here, for reasons of brevity. These obligations include:

* the niyyah (intention): the niyyah is essentially the incentive and motive for doing something in order to attain Allah’s satisfaction or to fulfill His command... The niyyah is obligatory because wudu is an ibadah and its necessary for all ibadat to be accompanied with a niyyah – just like fasting and executing salat. 107and108, as well as ijma’, dictate that no ibadah may be realized without the necessary niyyah. The wudu cannot be accepted or validated without the presence of sincerity in intention.

It’s not necessary to express one’s niyyah in words for verily incentives and sincerity are actions of the heart. Moreover, it’s not necessary to intend the obligation/recommendation of wudu or its elimination of hadath or its legitimization with respect to entering salat. All that is required is the incentive to gain proximity to Allah or to execute His command.

Assuming one wudues for Allah’s sake and that, during wudu, he enjoys being watched by others, such a wudu is valid – unanimously amongst the fuqaha – for doing good for the sake of goodness may occur in juxtaposition with action for the sake of Allah. However, as (109) demonstrates, executing one’s wudu for the sake of people, alone, is different to being deemed virtuous before Allah and the people. The latter is acceptable.

Assuming one doubts whether or not one has intended one’s wudu, if one was in the middle of performing wudu – at the time of doubt – then one must start anew; if however the doubt occurred after the wudu, then one need not pay attention to such a doubt.

* its obligatory to wash the face once i.e. to pour the water all over the face and wash, starting from the upper part of the forehead – where one’s hairline commences – up to the end of the chin (not below it), length-wise, and wash

p: 62

the area covered between the thumb and middle fingers, breadth-wise. In short, from ‘ear-to-ear’, as some have put it, albeit inaccurately.

Most fuqaha decree that its obligatory to wash the face from the top downwards (supero-inferiorly) and that to start from the bottom or middle, upwards (infero-superiorly), is deemed incorrect. In their own words: “it’s obligatory to wash from the top of the face to the chin; and it’s not permissible to wash in the reverse direction”. One may debate that the command to wash one’s face, during wudu, has been decreed in absolute terms; in fact, no texts refer to the fact that its obligatory to start from the top, therefore the command will be enacted no matter which direction one washes one’s face. That which may be ultimately understood from the Imams’ commencing from the top, is that such an action is permissible and legitimate, not that it is obligatory and the sole determined method of action.

In any case, it is neither obligatory to wash the skin under the beard nor that hair that is lengthy to the extent that it reaches one’s forehead (i.e. passes the anterior hairline) on straightening. It is also not obligatory to wash the skin under the eyebrows and moustache. The philosophy behind such rules i.e. the lack of obligation for water to reach the skin where the beard is thick, is probably because the skin, under such circumstances, shares the ruling of internal, not external, bodily parts. This may be reflected in (110). Such reasoning is not applicable when observing the method of ghuslating; in ghusls, even the skin under such hairs as the beard ought to be washed.

* it is obligatory to wash the two arms; the right arm, first, followed by the left arm. The extent – not direction – of the arm to be washed is from, and including, the tips of the fingers to the elbow, inclusive. Direction-wise, however, the Shi’ah deem it obligatory to wash one’s arm starting from the elbow, downwards, to the tips of the fingers, inclusive. They regard the reverse as batil. All Sunnite scholars, however, deem it permissible to wash the arm in any direction i.e. they don’t regard it obligatory to start from either the elbow or the fingers. One may question the Shi’ah as to how their method of wudu – notably the specific direction in which they wash their arms – may be extrapolated from 5:6.

Reply: one reply is that the preposition إلی (to) usually indicates an ending point when accompanied by the preposition من (from), which indicates a starting point; otherwise, if إلی occurs alone, it’s meaning becomes tantamount to مع (with, including). Assuming one accepts that إلی , here, does in fact refer to an ending point – even in the absence of مِن – this ending limit may be attributed to the extent and measurement of the arm that is to be washed rather than behaving as a defining factor with respect to the direction of such a washing; otherwise, if إلی had been attributed to the washing per se (rather than the extent of the to-be-washed), then it would have been obligatory to start one’s wudu from the fingers, upwards, whereas no-one – including the Sunnis – has declared such an obligation. So the question remains as to by what means do the Shi’ah declare it obligatory to wash the arms from the elbows,

p: 63

downwards, for as we have mentioned, 5:6 indicates – according to the Shi’ah – the defining limits of the to-be-washed limb i.e. the fingers up and including the elbow. Reply: by means of ijma’ and holy traditions.

Note that the arms, as with the face, ought to be washed once as (111) illustrates. Washing them thrice with the intention that each wash constitutes part of the canonically prescribed wudu is nothing but an innovation and all innovations are deviating and, as the tradition terminates, all deviations result in Hell. However, if one washes the face and arms thrice without intending the second and/or third as part of the wudu, then one hasn’t sinned. In either case though, one’s wudu is nullified and one shouldn’t wipe one’s head and feet with the wetness acquired by means of one’s third washing.

* concerning the obligatory wiping of the head, the fuqaha have claimed that any movement that may qualify as being a ‘wipe’ is sufficient for one’s wudu (of the head), albeit mustahabb to wipe the head with three fingers, breadth-wise, and one finger’s length, length-wise. The wiping of the head is confined to the anterior part of the head and it is obligatory to wipe the head by means of the wetness acquired during the wudu’s washings, not with any new water. Assuming the water on one’s arms dry up, one must proceed towards one’s beard, eyebrows, eye orbits in order to obtain wetness for wiping purposes; if no such water is found, then one ought to repeat one’s wudu anew.

* one must wipe one’s feet from the toes (i.e. the skin area inferior to the toenails) to the foot’s dome-like bony protuberance situated in the middle of the foot’s outer surface. It is recommended – or even obligatory according to some – to wipe as far as the ankle joint itself.

Note

The fuqaha deem it obligatory to wash from the top (of the face and arms) downwards but do not regard such a direction obligatory with respect to the wiping of the head and feet. Such a difference of approach may be extracted from the traditions and by means of ijma’. Recommendation, however, dictates that the wiping of the head be done postero-anteriorly and that one wipes the outer surface of the right foot with the palmar surface of the right hand’s finger(s) and the outer surface of the left foot with the palmar surface of the left hand’s finger(s). One is permitted to wipe both feet’s outer surfaces simultaneously but is not permitted to wipe the left foot before that of the right.

conjoined to أیْدِیَکُم which is accusative both in letter and position. Concerning the genitive أرْجُلِکم recitation, its kasrah (lower case vowel) is due to its affinity i.e. its spatial proximity to the genitive بِرُؤُوْسِکم ; in other words, أرْجُلِکم has copied بِرُؤُوْسِکم , vowel-wise, due to its ‘affinity’. They add that such a phenomenon is attested amongst Arabs such as the statement: ‘حجرٌ خرب ضبٍ’(1). The term خربٍ must theoretically be read خربٌ due to the fact that its an adjective for حجرٌ ; however, it has acquired a genitive nunation (tanwin) due to its spatial proximity to ضبٍ which is annexed to حجرٌ.

The Shi’ah state that its obligatory to wipe the feet for أرْجُلکم lies in conjunction with رُؤُوس. The genitive أرْجُلِکم is evidently conjoined to رُؤُوس by means of the particle ‘باء’. However, the accusative أرْجُلَکُم is deemed to be positionally in conjunction with رُؤُوس for verily all genitives-in-letter (by means of the باء particle) are accusative, positionally. They add that the term أرْجُلَکُم may not lie in conjunction with أیْدِیَکُم for two reasons:

* bringing about a considerable gap between أرْجُلَکُم and أیْدِیَکُم is contrary to the rules of Arabic rhetoric i.e. assuming both to be in conjunction with one another is deemed below standard

* assuming أرْجُلَکُم to be in conjunction with أیْدِیَکُم , then the accusative and genitive recitations of أرْجُلکم would acquire contradictory meanings because أرْجُلَکُم would indicate the washing of the feet, whilst أرْجُلِکم would indicate wiping (as for the phenomenon of spatial proximity, it is weak to say the least). However, if أرْجُلَکُم were to be in conjunction with رُؤُوس, then both أرْجُلَکم and أرْجُلِکم would indicate the wiping of the feet.

Zurarah said: “I asked Imam Sadiq concerning one who doubts having recited the athan, whilst reciting the iqamah.

He said: ‘let him continue.’ I said: ‘what if one doubts having recited the athan and iqamah, whilst reciting the takbir?’ He said: ‘let him continue.’ I said: ‘what if one doubts having recited the takbir, whilst reciting the salat?’ He said: ‘let him continue.’ I said: ‘what if one doubts having recited the (first) unit (rak’ah), whilst in genuflexion (ruku’)?’ He said: ‘let him continue.’ I said: ‘what if one doubts having executed the genuflexion, whilst in prostration (sujud)?’ He said: ‘let him continue with his/her salat. O Zurarah! assuming one transits a certain componential action and then enters another component, doubts arising after such a transition are insignificant.’” (119)

Inferences and Discussion

In jurisprudence, there exist universal principles in which the fuqaha have extrapolated from the canonical texts, usulic semantics and rationality. From the above traditions, they have extrapolated two specific principles; one is the principle of disconnection and the other is the principle of transition. The subject-matter in both is doubt. In the principle of disconnection, doubt arises after the completion of a certain ritual or action; examples of instances include times when one acquires doubt with respect to the validity of wudu after entering salat, or acquires doubt with respect to the validity of salat after exiting it, or acquires doubt with respect to fasting after a given day in the month of Ramadan terminates, or acquires doubt with respect to the validity of Hajj after having completed it or acquires doubt with respect to the contract of a transaction or hire, after the contract has been finalized. This principle is agreed upon by all fuqaha and is observed throughout different chapters, within fiqh, namely with respect to wudu, ghusl and tayammum.

However, concerning the principle of transition, the theme here is tantamount to that doubt which arises during one of the sections or components of a given multi-componential action and thus occurs before the action, as a whole, terminates e.g. if during wudu, one doubts – whilst wiping one’s head – whether or not one has washed his arms or if during salat, one doubts – during sujud – whether or not one has recited that unit’s surah-recitation. All fuqaha unanimously agree that the principle of transition is applicable in matters concerning salat due to Zurarah’s narration (119). Moreover, all fuqaha also agree that this principle may not be applied to matters concerning wudu due to (117) and (118). However, that which the fuqaha differ upon is whether or not the principle of transition may be applied to matters concerning ghusl and tayammum. One view is that such a principle may neither be applied to ghusl nor tayammum i.e. just like its non-application with respect to wudu. The other view dictates that the principle of transition may, in fact, be applied to ghusl and tayammum. Wudu’s exemption from such a principle is textually stipulated, contrary to that of ghusl and tayammum according to the latter perspective. The former perspective defends itself by (119); this tradition indicates that later doubts acquired with respect to components of an action or the validity of

p: 66

an action – in its entirety – are insignificant and the reason why wudu is exempted from such a general ruling is the presence of other traditions that specifically exempt it (takhsees).

author of ‘al-Madarik’ puts it(1)

– verily Allah has ordered such a person to execute wudu for salat and, therefore, one is obliged to execute this order and acquire knowledge that one does have wudu, either by means of certainty or via istishab (of wudu) that is unopposed by the hadath’s istishab. Here, we have two certainties; one with respect to wudu and the other with respect to hadath. The istishab of each is in opposition with the other i.e. the istishab of wudu is in opposition to the istishab of hadath and, therefore, the two cancel each other out, both being annulled. Hence, if wudu is neither proved by certainty nor istishab – as is the case – one who doubts such, shares the same ruling as a muhdith.

either by repetitive encounters over the jabirah or by immersing the limb inside some water – without harming the wound or najisating the water – then it’s obligatory to do so; otherwise, one is obliged to wipe one’s hand over the jabirah.

* concerning open wounds, assuming contact with water harms such wounds, then one must place a piece of cloth – or something similar – over the wound and wipe over it during wudu.

* it is permissible for a jabirah to be made of silk or other materials that are not usually permissible for one to wear during salat – save usurped clothing – provided that its outer surface is tahir so that wiping over it with water becomes feasible. Sayyid Hakim writes:

“no limit has been specified for the jabirah” (1)(i.e.its stipulated in absolute terms)

* assuming a healthy hand has some irremovable najasah laid upon it, tayammum is obligatory in such cases, not jabirah, for the latter is specifically employed with respect to medically-afflicted limbs, not normal sound limbs. If the irremovable najasah was situated on a limb that is not necessary to be washed/wiped during wudu – thus being insignificant wudu-wise – then one’s duty would be to wudue, not tayammumate

* assuming a jabirah-wearing person’s justification for employing the jabirah terminates, it does not become obligatory for him/her to repeat one’s previous salats – during the period of wearing the jabirah – even if time allows for such repetitions; this is especially the case when, after executing salat, one has no hope of becoming cured, and thus removing the jabirah, before the stipulated time for salat ends.

* assuming a jabirah-wearing person wudues and wipes one’s jabirah, if after a while the wound is healed – thus ending one’s justification in wearing the jabirah – and the person’s wudu does not become batil by means of any hadath, would it be possible to enter salat with such a wudu, at hand, or not?

Reply: no it isn’t! One must wudue anew for that which removes one from a state of hadath – preparing one for salat – is tantamount to the originally complete and canonically prescribed wudu, not a defective form of wudu that may only be carried out – albeit with the Canon’s authorization – in emergency cases, thus permitting one to enter salat on the condition that such exceptional circumsatances are present. Once one’s excuse to execute the wudu of jabirah becomes defunctionalized, the effectiveness of the wudu of jabirah accordingly vanishes and ceases to be of use

* assuming a jabirah-wearing person is of the belief that water is harmful for him/her and thus wudues accordingly – wiping one’s jabirah – if it later becomes evident that removing his/her jabirah, and washing/wiping his/her limb(s) wasn’t harmful (whatsoever), is the former wudu valid or not?

p: 70

Secondly, assuming one believes that removing one’s jabirah is not harmful,

* for oneself, and that one may assign water over one’s wound and thus wudue normally, if it later becomes evident that harm did in fact exist, is such a wudu valid or not?

Reply: some fuqaha claim that the wudu executed in both cases is batil for the criteria is tantamount to that which occurs in reality, not one’s belief with respect to something. Others claim the reverse i.e. the criteria is one’s belief rather than reality per se. Maghniyyah takes stance against the latter claim and supports the former. The available evidences support the view of those who regard both wudus as batil for verily canonical instructions have been brought in order to make us aware of that which ought to be in reality; therefore, restricting oneself to one’s belief, or otherwise, requires proof and there exists none to point us in that direction. Rida Hamedani states in his ‘Misbah al-Faqih’, that such a complex issue may not be evidently solved and that precaution is better not to be abandoned and that one should therefore re-wudue.(1)

arise in between two salats i.e. after one salat’s (e.g. maghrib) completion and before the next salat’s (e.g. ‘isha) commencement.

p: 73

p: 74

two rulings. The Imam said: “verily that which exits the female is that of secretions pertaining to the male” (132)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “assuming discharge is accompanied with lust, pressure (force) and fatigue, one is then obliged to ghuslate; however, if fatigue and lust aren’t present, then it’s

okay” (133)

Inferences and Discussion and Miscellaneous Issues

There exist no differences between the fuqaha on the fact that janabah necessitates ghusl and that janabah is acquired by one of two manners: (i) entrance of at least the male glans penis (circumsized part) into the vagina and (ii) assuming one acknowledges that he/she has ejaculated or secreted, respectively – irrespective of whether the ejaculation/secretion is pulsatile or not, occuring during sleep or whilst awake (see glossary).

Issues

* assuming one dreams of performing intercourse and, after waking up, observes no traces of intercourse on oneself, ghusl therefore doesn’t become binding upon one (see 131)

* assuming semen is emitted and one accordingly executes the janabah ghusl, if one later observes a wetness and cannot acknolwedge whether its semen or not, must one re-ghuslate?

Reply: assuming one had urinated post-seminal discharge before ghuslating, it isn’t wajib to ghuslate, otherwise one must repeat. This ruling concerns men alone; women, in such corresponding cases, need not re-ghuslate – irrespective of whether they urinate or not. (see132)

* assuming a wetness is discharged from a man without performing any intercourse or sex; what is such a man’s duty were he not to know whether the liquid is sperm or not?

Reply: if the discharged liquid is accompanied by the following features, then ghusl becomes wajib for him; otherwise, its not wajib. They are (i) the sensation of lust, (ii) pulsatility of the discharged liquid and (iii) fatigue. (see133)

* assuming semen is discharged from an abnormal orifice, ghusl remains binding upon one because the texts state ‘seminal discharge’ in absolute terms, not specifying or confining it to any location.

* assuming one observes sperm on one’s clothing and then doubts whether the sperm is his or someone else’s, istishab dictates that ghusl is not incumbent upon him i.e. he has certainty that he wasn’t muhdith before and doubts whether he is muhdith or not at present.

* assuming, after ghuslating from janabah, one observes traces of janabah on one’s clothes and doubts as to whether one has become junub again or if the

p: 76

observed is the original sperm from which one had ghuslated. In such a case, ghusl is not wajib for istishab nullifies both doubts until proven otherwise. Concerning the doubt whether one has become junub again, verily one had previously beheld certainty with respect to the fact that one had ghuslated from the janabah; regarding the doubt as to whether the observed is the original sperm from which one had apparently ghuslated, note that the presence of the sperm is doubted after having ghuslated with surety. Both doubts are therefore rejected due to one’s reliance upon previous certitudes.

* assuming a single piece of clothing is worn by two people (x and y) interchangeably and that it later became evident that sperm has najisated the clothing and that the sperm is confined, with certainty, to one of the above two. Supposing it is not known whose sperm it is, would ghusl be binding upon both x and y?

Reply: No! because both x and y may presume the continuity of taharah, separately, provided that their canonical duties are mutually exclusive from one another, otherwise such a presumption cannot be made due to the fact that the effects of janabah externalize if their duties share common ground; by way of example, the fuqaha do not permit x – assuming he’s located in a mosque – to hire y to sweep the same mosque for in such a circumstance, certitude is attained with respect to the fact that a haram act (the presence of a junub within a mosque) is being committed i.e. by x [whose directly situated within the mosque or who has directly hired y to enter and sweep]. The fuqaha also do not permit either of the two to execute salat, in congregation, behind the other because certainty thus becomes attained with respect to the fact that a haram act is being carried out (executing salat in a state of janabah) either by the Imam [whereby the ma’mums salat becomes void] or by the ma’mum (note that executing salat individually wouldn’t create such an obstacle due to the lack of common ground). Here, were the Imam to be junub, then both x and y’s salats are void and were the ma’mum to be junub, then the latter’s salat is void. Hence, in such cases, neither x nor y can decide to act as ma’mum due to the fact that a haram act will definitively result. However, if a clothing is shared by three people (x, y and z) and the doubted janabah is restricted to three people, one of the three may, in fact, act as Imam for the other two ma’mums – without leading to any obstacle – for there, now, exists a probability that the junub may be one of the two ma’mums and, hence, certainty with respect to the salat’s nullification would not be acquired. In the latter case, assuming x is Imam, y (one of the two ma’mums) may deem it possible that z (the other ma’mum) is junub and z may deem it probable that y is junub. In either situation, the salats are all sound and valid.

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “Zoroastrians don’t ghuslate from janabah whilst Arabs do. Ghusls are incorporated within the divine canon” (135)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about a man who janabates and then desires to sleep. He said: “if he prefers to wudue before sleeping, then so be it, but to ghuslate is more preferable” (136)

Inferences and Discussion

These traditions – as well as others – demonstrate that ghusl per se is a mustahabb ritual and that a junub may opt to ghuslate solely for Allah’s sake whenever he/she wills, without beholding a specific purpose or objective in mind. Ghuslating for reasons of repentance, pilgrimage etc. are also mustahabb. Wajib ghusls are those that are executed with respect to wajib objectives such as the five daily salats and the wajib tawafs.

The wudu alluded to in (136) only beholds one function i.e. to remove the associated karahah were the junub to sleep (in the state of janabah) for verily if a junub wudues before eating or sleeping, no karahah becomes realized. However, to eat or sleep whilst in a state of janabah is makruh. Note that such wudus, however, do not legitimize salat or anything else.

Inferences and Discussion

The fuqaha infer, from the above evidences, that one must ghuslate from janabah in order to fast during the month of Ramadan. Assuming one intentionally remains junub until fajr – during the holy month – one must execute the required qada fast – after the month – and also execute the necessary kaffarah (expiation) for verily such an intended action nullifies one’s sawm. However, concerning the forgetful and/or ignorant, they have no duty laid upon them save that of the qada fast. However, if one aims to execute a mustahabb fast, then one may optionally remain junub even post-fajr (see 141), without any additional duty being bound upon him/her.

one to seven verses as not being makruh, eight to seventy verses as being makruh and over seventy verses as being more makruh. Hence, in either case, one observes an increase along the ‘karahah spectrum’ as one reads more verses whilst in a state of janabah. The junub is not allowed to halt in a mosque; however, he/she may just pass by, entering the entrance and leaving via the mosque’s exit. The mere act of passing by is, however, forbidden with regards to Masjid al-Haram and Masjid al-Nabi.

Assuming it is permissible for a junub to pick up something from a mosque, it follows that the junub may optionally enter a mosque and take some water in order to, by way of example, ghuslate from janabah later. However, since such a pick-up requires a brief halt, the junub must, therefore, tayammumate before entering and briefly halting inside the mosque due to the halt and not due to the mere act of entering/exiting the mosque. Now, once the junub collects the required water and exits the mosque, the effect or ‘half-life’ of the tayammum terminates due to the availability of water to tahirize oneself with. Note that this tayammum legitimizes nothing save the required, brief halt in the mosque; hence, one cannot touch the Quranic script, read the surahs of prostration….by means of such a tayammum, as is the case regarding the tayammum one executes, due to time-constriction, for wuduing/ghuslating with respect to one’s salat i.e. this latter tayammum only legitimizes that particular salat and nothing else.

ritual, as an Arafah ritual, for pilgrimage, slaughtering etc. If this is done solely for Allah’s sake then one acquires one’s due. Hence, the one ghusl will suffice for all these purposes…women, too, may ghuslate – once – for numerous purposes such as janabah, pilgrimage, hayd, eid and so forth” (150)

Inferences and Discussion

The fuqaha have necessitated pure sincerity with respect to one’s niyyah when ghuslating as well as the niyyah’s continuation up until the ghusl has ended (as was the case with wudu). The water employed in ghusls also – like wudu – have to be mutlaq, tahir and mubah (legitimate).

Two modes of action exist for executing the ghusl:

1. The Orderly Ghusl (tartibi)

The orderly ghusl starts by washing the head and neck, followed by the right half of the body – from the shoulders to the toes – and, then, followed by the left side of the body in a similar fashion. Many of the fuqaha have deemed it unnecessary to wash the body in a specific order, thus permitting one to wash one’s body as one wills – this view being wholly on par with that decreed by Sunnite scholars. After reciting a few traditions (similar to those above), the author of ‘al-Madarik’ writes:

“these traditions, narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt, may virtually be said to be explicitly alluding to the lack of necessity regarding the order one washes one’s two halves for they appear to portray the Imams as aiming to teach all that is necessary with respect to the laws surrounding ghusl and neglecting the issue of order – were it a prerequisite – would be inconceivable in such a case. So, even if ghuslating the two halves without any specific order is acceptable, nevertheless the route adopted by most fuqaha – treating order as essential – is more closer to precaution.”(1)

Shaykh Hamedani states in his ‘Misbah al-Faqih’:

“claiming the lack of order between the right and left halves of the body does indeed behold a strong case; however, going against popular consensus is difficult”(2)

Those who support the concept of order point to a tradition(3) where Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) ordered someone to wash a mayyit’s head, first, followed by its right half and finally wash its left half. Others have replied that such a method of extrapolation is tantamount to a false analogy for analogizing the living to the dead is like analogizing vegetation to the inanimate.

Those who regard order as essential do not, however, deem it wajib to wash the head and two halves of the body from top to bottom (supero-inferiorly) as was the case with the face and arms during wudu; rather, one may wash the ghusl’s bodily components from their inferior aspects, upwards. Almost all fuqaha reject consecutiveness and instantaneity as being wajib in ghusls. Hence, assuming one washes one’s head and, after the passing of some time, then washes his/her right side

p: 81

and washes his/her left side, even later, such a procedure is deemed valid by all (see 149).

2. The Immersing Ghusl (irtimasi)

Here, the junub immerses one’s whole body into tahir water to such an extent that the water covers all one’s body instantaneously, not gradually. Hence, if one places oneself under rain and intends such a ghusl, it would be deemed valid; however, its preferable to intend the tartibi option under rain, thus wiping one’s hands over one’s body – as required – during the ghusl.

washed the right side, after commencing ghuslating the left. Assuming one doubts whether or not one had ghuslated the left side after completing the ghusl, here, the principle of faragh, also, dictates one to disregard such a doubt. Otherwise, were completion yet to be achieved, one would be obliged to ghuslate the left side

* assuming after completing one’s salat, one doubts whether or not one had executed the janabah ghusl before the salat, what would one’s duty be? Reply: one’s salat is valid and there’s no need to repeat it for verily the doubt occurred after the salat had ended and so the principle of disconnection becomes applicable. However, istishab dictates that one must – post-salat – execute the janabah ghusl for future rituals. In short, one acknowledges that he was in a state of janabah and doubts at present whether one had performed the required ghusl; such a scenario demands the principle of istishab. Note that the fact that faragh dictates the salat’s validity and istishab dictates the necessity to ghuslate does not lead to any paradox because the subject-matter in both cases differ! Were the themes the same, a contradiction would result but not here where the subject-matter for the principle of faragh is tantamount to the salat’s validity and the subject-matter for the principle of istishab is that of janabah.

* (150) indicates that one may make niyyah with respect to numerous duties by means of executing a single ghusl – irrespective of whether these duties are all wajib or not, or whether they are all mustahabb or not, or if they are mixed or whether or not they include janabah.

p: 83

p: 84

Assuming one doubts whether she is a Quraishite or not, istishab dictates that she be ruled as a non-Quraishite; for verily, before birth she wasn’t a Quraishite and now, post-birth, she acquires doubt. Istishab is also applied in cases where one doubts whether or not she has reached the age of nine or whether she has completed fifty/sixty lunar years or not. The minimum time period stipulated for hayd is three consecutive days; hence blood that is discharged for less than three consecutive days – even if it’s a minute less – is not deemed as hayd. The maximum limit is ten consecutive days – anything more is not hayd. The minimum time period with respect to the state of accumulation i.e. the time separating two hayds (commencing from the completion of one hayd and terminating with the commencement of the next hayd) – which may validly be used when calculating a divorced women’s ‘iddah – that is tantamount to the observation of three hayds segregated by two states of accumulation – is that of ten days. Its maximum period is not canonically confined. As (155) indicates, hayd blood is usually tepid, viscous and black (dark red).

number of traditions that dictate that any observed blood ought to be treated as hayd, excluding all other probabilities.(1)

executing salat on merely observing blood – irrespective of whether the blood beholds the attributes of hayd or not.

(3) those whose periods are of equal duration but do not occur at the same time every month e.g. those who observe a fixed number of days of bleeding but whose commencement differs month to month. This pattern is orderly, duration-wise, but distressed with respect to timing. Such women ought to abandon their salat on siting such blood provided that – in accordance with (159) – the blood beholds the attributes of hayd. However, if the blood does not behold the required characteristics, then one must abandon those actions prohibited for the ha’id – such as entering mosques etc. – and execute those actions bound upon the mustahad, namely salat and sawm.

(4) those whose periods are neither equal, duration-wise, nor occur at the same time every month e.g. those who observe for five days at the beginning of a month, then seven days during the middle of the next month and so forth. Their pattern is wholly distressed. Their duty is similar with the ha’id in category (3) i.e. to abandon salat if the observed blood beholds the characteristics of hayd; otherwise, to observe precaution.

(5) concerning those who are experiencing their period for the first time, their duty is similar to women in categories (3) and (4) since tradition (159) may be equally applied to such first-timers.

orderly or immersing – is exactly the same as with janabah ghusls. Note that the janabah ghusl – as (163) dictates – requires no wudu and so one who becomes janabated may execute salat after ghuslating. However, the ha’id must perform wudu, in addition to ghuslating, in order to be able to execute salat. Some of the fuqaha claim that ghusls – be they wajib or not – do not require succeeding wudus for salat purposes. Sayyid Hakim writes:

“verily the law-giver has legitimized taharah by means of wudu and ghusl, assigning each of them as sufficient wherever legitimized; hence the lack of necessity in annexing one with the other. Therefore, the Imam’s tradition that: “all ghusls are followed by wudu, for salat purposes, save that of janabah” may be construed as implying the permissibility, not obligation, of wudu.”(1)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “Istihadah blood is essentially different to that of hayd blood” (167)

Inferences and Discussion

As has been mentioned, the vaginally discharged blood observed by women – excluding that of wounds and abscesses – is either that of hayd, nifas or istihadah. Hence, assuming hayd and nifas bloods are ruled out, the blood is automatically deemed as being that of istihadah. The principle of probability had stated that any vaginally-discharged blood is considered hayd until demonstrated otherwise; now, if one acknowledges that a certain blood is neither hayd nor related to child-birth nor associated with wounds or abscesses etc., istihadah blood is concluded. Blood that is discharged for more than ten days, for less than three consecutive days, before nine years of age, post-menopause (i.e. fifty or sixty years of age) etc. may be categorically affirmed as not being hayd; therefore, if such a blood is observed on occasions other than child-birth, it must be recognized as istihadah blood. Hence we come up with a second principle i.e. ‘any blood that cannot be theoretically regarded as being hayd or nifas, is tantamount to istihadah provided that its not brought about by wounds and abscesses’. Istihadah blood is usually cool and less viscous; its red colour is less ‘black’ (lighter) than that of hayd. Its pulsatility is relatively inert compared to the pulsatile nature of hayd blood. Note, however, that hayd blood may sometimes be light red in colour – i.e. if observed during one’s menses – and istihadah blood may often be ‘black’ – i.e. if observed after or before one’s menses.

She must also wudue for every salat – assuming she bleeds – after cleansing and re-padding her vagina.

Those hadaths that require ghusls are termed hadath al-akbar; therefore, the moderate and excessive istihadahs fit into this category of hadaths, just like hayd. Assuming one doesn’t carry out her required duty, with respect to istihadah (i.e. the ghusls and wudus etc.), all those actions that were prohibited for the ha’id equally apply to the mustahad, such as entering mosques, touching the Quranic script, reciting the surahs of prostration, intercourse…salat, too, ought not to be executed; concerning her sawms, however, assuming the mustahad has not executed a necessary ghusl, her sawm becomes void, however if she hasn’t executed a necessary wudu, the sawm will be sound for verily wudu is not a pre-requisite with respect to the sawm’s validity. If the mustahad, however, manages to fulfill her duty she may execute salat, sawm and the tawaf as well as performing intercourse and all those actions permitted for the tahir. The mustahad who bleeds only slightly is regarded as being afflicted with hadath al-asghar – such as urine, faeces etc. – for she requires only wudus (no ghusls) to accomplish taharah. Her sawm is, therefore, valid and intercourse is not forbidden for verily intercourse and sawm do not depend on the execution of wudu. Her salats are valid assuming she wudues provided that she doesn’t execute two salats with a single wudu, as has been alluded to (see beginning of 7.12’s second paragraph). The istihadah ghusl is exactly the same as that of the hayd and janabah ghusls.

child is delivered non-vaginallly by means of surgery, such as the Caesarean Delivery, the woman would not be termed a nafsa’ were any blood to be observed even though such an occasion would lead to the expiration of a divorced woman’s ‘iddah.

The nafsa’ shares all the rulings of the ha’id such as being prohibited from touching the Quranic script, reciting the surahs of prostration, stopping by in mosques, intercourse, being divorced, executing one’s salat and sawm (having to compensate for the sawms, not salats) and so forth. The procedure of ghuslating from nifas is identical to that of hayd, istihadah and janabah ghusls.

p: 93

p: 94

completed four months of its (gestational) development. He said: “all these are obligatory assuming normal development” (174)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “the mayyit ought to be washed thrice; once with lotus, once with camphor – small amounts mixed in water – and once with pure water; the mayyit may then be kafanated” (175)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “the ceremonial bathing of the deceased is obligatory for all those who declare that there exists no deity save Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Messenger, even if the deceased (a) were to have openly exhibited vice, corrupt behaviour, (b) was illegitimate and (c) is an aborted foetus, provided that it had completed four lunar months” (176)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “the ruling with regards to an unidentified human corpse in an Islamic country is similar to that of a Muslim, burial-wise” (177)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “It is not permissible to ceremonially bath the maghalis, nasibis and the kharijites” (178)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “carefully ghaslate his head…then lie him down with his right side facing you and wash half his head down to his two feet with water; then lie him up with his left side facing you and carry out the same procedure as for the right side” (179)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about a woman who had died whilst travelling and who was neither accompanied by close relatives (maharim) nor by women; he said: “bury her as she is, with her clothes on”. He was also asked about the duty with respect to a deceased male who wasn’t accompanied by any-one save non-mahram women; he said: “bury him as he is with his clothes on” (180)

Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about a Muslim man who had died and there being neither Muslim men nor Muslim women, there, related to the deceased; only a Christian man and Muslim women unrelated to the deceased were present. He said: “the

Christian ought to ghuslate himself first and then ghuslate the Muslim man for this is an exceptional situation after all. Likewise, assuming a Muslim woman had died and that there were neither Muslim women nor Muslim men related to the deceased and that only a Christian woman and Muslim men unrelated to the deceased were present; here, the Christian woman ought to ghuslate herself first and then ghuslate the Muslim woman.” (181)

Inferences and Discussion

It is obligatory to ghuslate one who bears testimony to the fact there exists no deity save Allah and that Muhammad is His Messenger, upon his/her demise, even (i) those who used to commit sins openly, (ii) those who were of illegitimate birth

p: 96

(offspring of an adulterous encounter) or (iii) with respect to an aborted foetus who has completed four lunar months of development; moreover, unidentifiable corpses found in an Islamic country are appended to the above Muslims. However, it is not permissible to ghuslate maghalis, nasibis and kharijites.

It is obligatory to ghuslate Muslims thrice: once with water mixed with small amounts of lotus, once with water mixed with small amounts of camphor – save on occasions where the deceased has passed away in a state of ihram – and once with pure water alone. Note that the two earlier ghusls ought to be carried out with mutlaq water and so the amounts of added lotus and camphor ought not convert the mutlaq to mudaf water; otherwise, mudaf water does not behold the mutlaq’s purifying properties. The three ghusls must be executed in order i.e. lotus, camphor and, finally, pure water. Likewise, the bodily parts ought to be ghuslated in a specific order i.e. one starts with the head and neck, proceeds to the right half of the body and finally ghuslates the left half just like the sequence in janabah, hayd, istahadah and nifas ghusls. This order is more emphasized with respect to mayyit ghusls, than with others, due to the fact that the traditions stipulate the order with regards the mayyit ghusl, alone, and not with regards to the other ghusls. Most fuqaha have analogically deducted the order of the non-mayyit’s ghusls by reference to the mayyit’s ghusl.

Ghuslating the deceased requires the intention to seek proximity to Allah for verily it is deemed as an act of worship. The employed water must be mutlaq, tahir and mubah (legitimate). Also required, is the removal and elimination of any najasah from the deceased’s body - before the ghusl is effectuated - and the absence of anything that prevents water from reaching the deceased’s skin. Ghuslating with hot water is makruh.

Men ought to ghuslate men and women ought to ghuslate women. Husbands and wives, however, may ghuslate one another; this also applies to revocable divorced women as long as their ‘iddah has not terminated. Children less than three years of age may be ghuslated by the opposite sex; however, even this is preferable solely in exceptional cases. Exceptional situations (e.g. where no-one of the same sex is found), too, do permit maharim relatives (of the opposite sex) – be they related by blood or milk - to ghuslate one another provided that the ghusl is carried out without the removal of the deceased’s clothing. Assuming (i) no-one from the same sex and (ii) no family relatives of the opposite sex exist, then the obligation to ghuslate is removed as is extrapolated from (180). Most fuqaha decree that, assuming a Muslim passes away and that there’s no Muslim of the same sex present but, rather there are Christians or Jews of the same sex as the deceased present, the Ahl al-Kitab ought to ghuslate themselves first and then proceed with ghuslating the deceased Muslim, based on (181). Hence, where (180) commands the man or woman to be buried without any ghusl, this arises in circumstances where absolutely no-one from the same sex is present, even women from the Ahl al-Kitab. It is worth noting that traditions that allude to the legislated ghuslating of Muslims, by the Ahl al-Kitab, in fact explicitly indicate the taharah of the Ahl al-Kitab. Therefore, the latter’s najasah is accidental (e.g. by means of touching alcohol etc.) not intrinsic for verily if they were najis then surely exceptional circumstances per se does not and can not

p: 98

designate the intrinsically najis as tahir. In summary, when a Muslim passes away, priority to ghuslate initially lies with Muslims of the same sex, then with mahram Muslims of the opposite sex and then with the Ahl al-Kitab of the same sex.

1. a loin cloth (mi’zar) that must be wrapped round the body from the navel to the knees; its preferable to be wrapped, however, from the chest to the feet

2. a tunic (qamid) that is worn from the shoulders to half way down the calves (or preferably down to the feet)

3. an izar which is a full cover, wrapped over the entire body

It’s mustahabb for men to wear a turban around the head with each side of the turban descending to the inferior aspect of the chin. Also mustahabb is the tightening of a khirqah, centrally. For women, its mustahabb to wear a maqna’ah (head scarf) instead of the men’s turban, together with the central khirqah and an additional khirqah wrapped round her two thighs. The kafan’s materials ought to be tahir, mubah, neither containing gold nor silk (even for women) nor the skin of haram-meat animals. The ruling with respect to the aborted foetus is similar to that of humans provided that four lunar months of development has been completed; otherwise, it will suffice to wrap the foetus within a khirqah and then bury it. The married woman’s kafan ought to be paid by her husband; the kafan for anyone else must be paid from one’s untouched inheritance (i.e. before one’s inheritance is spent to pay off debts and being allocated to one’s inheritors).

he beholds a canonical excuse not to do so. After fulfilling one’s intention, the musalli gradually recites the takbir five times – each takbir representing one of the five daily salats. Certain formulae may be recited after each of the first four takbirs; the actual salat terminates on reciting the fifth. After the first takbir, the shahadatayn is read; blessings upon the Prophet are recited after the second takbir; after the third, one supplicates for the faithful Muslim men and women and after the fourth the mayyit itself is supplicated for. Assuming the mayyit is of pre-pubescent age, supplications are realized for his/her parents.

Taharah is not a prerequisite with respect to this salat for verily this salat is, in reality, a supplication for the deceased hoping to assign the mayyit under Allah’s mercy; and as is evident, supplications do not necessitate taharah from khabaths and hadaths. Verily there exists no ruku’-less and/or sajdah-less salat. This salat may be carried out individually or congregationally; however, concerning the latter, the leader does not represent, or act on behalf of, the followers (ma’mumin) as is the case during the daily salats. Hence, here, each person is responsible for reciting the formulae themselves. The salat’s accomplishment before the burial procedure constitutes one of religion’s fundamental rituals. However, if the mayyit is buried before salat, then this won’t justify any disintering; rather, in such cases, the salat ought to be read with the mayyit inside the grave.

Inferences and Discussion

It’s obligatory to bury the deceased in such a manner as to protect them from wild animals and to prevent their odour from reaching the people. It’s not permissible to position them onto the earth and then build something over them, even if the two aforementioned goals are achieved (i.e. protection from wild animals and safeguarding the people from their odour). It’s mustahabb for the grave’s depth to be equal to the deceased’s height or up to the deceased’s clavicle. It’s mustahabb to place the deceased into a specifically-designated receptacle (lahad).

It’s obligatory to bury any bodily parts that become detached from the mayyit (after death) including one’s teeth, hair and nails. Assuming a part of the body – be it of a live or deceased person – is detached from the body, if that part is boneless flesh then one ought to wrap some cloth around it and then bury it; and if the detached part comprises bones that do not contain the heart, then they must be ghuslated, wrapped up and then buried; however, if the bones are of the chest i.e. containing the heart – completely or partially so – then one ought to ghuslate, kafanate, pray and finally bury that part just as is done with respect to humans.

Assuming one passes away in a boat, the deceased must be placed into a vessel container that ought to be sealed tightly and then thrown into the sea. This ruling is extrapolated from authentic traditions narrated from Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him).(1) Other narrations indicate that the deceased ought to be tied to a heavy stone and then be thrown into the sea.(2) The author of ‘al-Madarik’ regards the latter traditions as weak.(3) Assuming one passes away in a well, if the body’s extraction is not possible, then the well must be sealed off, thus acting as the deceased’s grave.

It’s obligatory to position the mayyit up upon his/her right side with its whole anterior surface facing the Qiblah, its head pointed towards the West and its legs towards the East. The author of ‘al-Madarik’ claims that this law is deducted by means of reverting to the normative practice and conduct of the Prophet and Imams (May Allah's peace and blessings be upon them all).(4)

Women ought to be buried by their husbands or their maharim or by other women; assuming none of these are present, they ought to be buried by righteous men.

The deceased may neither be buried in usurped earth nor bequested earths that are not cemeteries. Disintering graves is prohibited save where (a) one knows that the deceased’s body has wholly transformed into earth and (b) the best interests of the mayyit dictate such an action e.g. if a torrential storm is threatening to damage the grave, if the mayyit had been buried in usurped land, if the land’s owner is no longer satisfied with the grave’s presence, if the mayyit had been enshrouded with a prohibited kafan or if the mayyit had been buried with costly material – belonging either to the inheritors or others.

p: 102

(xi) the maternal uncle: precedes the religious authority

(xii) the religious authority: precedes the general Muslim population

There are three categories of people who will be regarded as non-existent with respect to this order of guardianship i.e. infants, the insane and the absent (uncontactable). One who is linked to the mayyit via both father and mother precedes one who is related to the mayyit solely mother-wise or father-wise. One who is related to the mayyit father-wise precedes – in guardianship – one who is related to the mayyit mother-wise. Assuming any of the above categories involves a number of members e.g. grandchildren, paternal uncles etc., the guardianship ought to be equally shared by all of them for verily all members of a specific category will equally qualify according to the tradition’s stipulation e.g. ‘grandchildren’ implies all of them rather than the eldest etc.; theres no canonical proof implying that, for example, the eldest son has priority-in-guardianship over the other sons.

Assuming the mayyit specified a certain person (other than the guardian) to carry out his/her burial preparations, this will not cancel the guardian’s authoritative right; therefore, both the guardian’s permission ought to be attained – as ordered by the Canon – and the specified person in the mayyit’s will ought to carry out the required arrangements e.g. the ghusl, kafan, salat etc.

p: 106

1. The lack of water

The texts and ijma’ dictate that the lack of that amount of water that is necessary for the execution of wudu and ghusls – be it during travelling or not – stimulates the obligation with respect to tayammum. Question: assuming one has no water with oneself, but regards it as possible (not unlikely) that he/she may encounter some water assuming he/she searches for it; is such a search wajib for him/her to such an extent that were he/she to tayammumate (without having undergone the search) such an action would be deemed void? Reply: assuming one had ample time (left for salat), such a search would be deemed necessary for verily the lack of water is a prerequisite with respect to the validity of tayammum; evidently, definitively acknowledging this prerequisite is necessary and such an acknowledgement can’t be acquired save by a search that ultimately leads to despair (with respect to finding any water). As the fuqaha say, any doubt concerning the presence of water carries doubt concerning the legitimacy of the tayammum. Such a doubt, therefore, isn’t rationally considered enough. Also see (211).

The area of exploitation for a traveller, who is searching for water in a desert, ought to be the area covered by an arrow’s fling if the desert is uneven beholding many troughs or by two arrow flings if the desert is plane. The traveller must cover all four directions. However, this exploitation may only take place provided that (a) the traveller doesn’t despair the presence of water before starting his search and (b) his life and capital won’t be put in any danger. Maghniyyah believes that since these rulings were legislated at a time when people used to travel by feet or with camels and that today one has access to cars and planes, as a result, the subject-matter has essentially been removed thus deleting the ruling’s legitimacy. The aformentioned obligatory search is a mere result of a rational principle that states that: ‘whatever the validity of an obligatory act (e.g. tayammum) depends upon (acknowledging that no water is available), the latter becomes obligatory once the time of obligation (in this case of salat) is realized’. By means of this principle, it becomes clear why - assuming one (a) has a small quantity of water that is just sufficient to carry out a wudu or ghusl and (b) knows that one won’t locate any water when the time for salat comes - one must preserve it for salat and ought not use it for other non-emergency purposes even if the time for salat has not yet arrived. One may enquire as to how the means may become obligatory before the ends’ time of realization has occurred? This, however, is just playing with words for verily one knows that (a) the time for salat will definitely come and (b) salat won’t be valid via tayammum whilst one is capable of executing wudu i.e. with the water one beholds at present, and since this latter possession is a reasonable option, the obligation to preserve such a water is effectuated just like the obligation to travel in order to execute pilgrimage, the obligation to become informed before committing a canonical ritual or the obligation to ghuslate before commencing a day’s fast during the month of Ramadan etc.

2. Harm

Assuming the use of water harms one’s health, this obliges one to tayammumate. The mere speculation of harm, either acquired by oneself or by a doctor, will suffice.

p: 108

Assuming a doctor informs you that the employment of water is harmful and you yourself are sure that it isn’t and that the doctor is mistaken in his/her diagnosis, then one ought to act according to one’s own knowledge. However, assuming one doesn’t know whether the use of water does or doesn’t lead to harm, if the doctor’s diagnosis leads to one’s assurance or speculation that harm may arise then the doctor’s advice ought to be taken not because of the doctor per se but rather due to the produced knowledge/speculation that arose from the doctor’s words. Assuming one acquires nothing new from the doctor’s words thus remaining in a state of doubt, the doctor’s words may still be adhered in accordance with the principle that a single report constitutes proof with regards to particulars as well as general rulings. Not regarding ‘particular’ single reports as proof prohibits one, in this case, to adhere to the doctor’s advice.

Supposing that the use of water does not harm one but rather places a burden – of an extraordinary nature - upon one due to its sheer coldness but after terminating one’s wudu or ghusl, one accordingly returns to one’s normal previous state without the least harm caused to one’s health; is one, in such burdensome cases, obliged to tahirize oneself with water or is it necessary to tayammumate or is one free to choose either? Reply: One has the option either to wudu/ghuslate or to tayammumate; both acts will be counted as valid. However, if one uses water knowing that it is harmful, one’s ritual will be deemed void. The difference underlying the harmful versus burdensome instances is as follows: the harmful situation is specifically prohibited as 2:195 reads: “don’t encounter harm by your own hands” and prohibition, in acts of worship, indicates nullity; however, tolerating burden during rituals is not strictly prohibited; hence, if one tahirizes oneself and executes salat, both one’s taharah and salat will be acceptable. In short, disassociating oneself with respect to burden is permissible whilst it is binding with respect to harm.

Enquiry: Executing the wudu/ghusl, albeit with burden, is neither prohibited but nor is it ordered; hence, it cannot be valid for verily a ritual’s validity depends on the fact that it is done to seek proximity to Allah which, in other words, means to comply with that which is ordered to be done. Therefore, the consequence of such a taharah is equal to the taharah yielded by wudu/ghusl where the water is harmful i.e. prohibited. Response: Acts of worship per se are desirable and deemed proper by the Canon and so these acts (e.g. wudu/ghusl) suffice with respect to attaining proximity in that they are not prohibited; rather, Allah has gracefully alleviated the law by removing such acts during times of difficulty – according to one’s will - and if one still decides to execute such, optional, acts during such periods, then there’s nothing to stand in one’s way; one would still be considered obedient before Allah. However, these acts of worship are specifically to be abandoned when the element of harm exists, there being no option in the matter for verily harm per se is prohibited and disliked by the Law-Giver, irrespective of whether its carried out in sin or obedience.

p: 109

3. Limited Volume of Water

Assuming one beholds a limited quantity of water that one requires, at present or in the future, for more important purposes than wudu/ghusl, such as satiation, life-threatening conditions etc., (217) demonstrates the necessity to tayammumate in such circumstances. Assuming one executes wudu/ghusl – albeit fearing one’s limited volume of water – one has indeed sinned; however, the executed wudu/ghusl nevertheless remain valid for verily the order to tayammumate does not require the prohibition to execute wudu/ghusl for the latter’s use of water does not harm the executor, rather the executor fears thirst alone. Fear is one category whilst harm is another. In summary, executing wudu/ghusl when fearing one’s limited water supply is tantamount to executing salat when one is simultaneously in the process of drowning. Both executions are deemed sinful, albeit valid.

4. Limited Time

Assuming one’s time for salat is limited to the extent that if one (a) wudues/ghuslates and then executes salat, some or all of one’s salat will fall outside the stipulated time and (b) were to tayammumate, instead, and then perform one’s salat, one’s salat would then fall completely within the stipulated time limitations, such circumstances would bind one to tayammumate. Wuduing/ghuslating in such situations would make one’s wudu/ghusl and salat void and one ought to subsequently compensate that salat. The rationale behind such a law is as follows: the preservation and abidance by the time restriction is more significant, canonically, than the abidance with respect to taharah by water; therefore, the latter becomes cancelled by the former. Once the time limitation of an obligatory act, such as salat, terminates the essential binding execution of the act becomes eliminated; however, with taharah by water, assuming no water is to be found, there remains an alternative to taharah i.e. by earth. Emanating from the above argument, the following may be deducted:

(i) as has been mentioned, the wudu in such circumstances (where time is limited) is not valid were it to be specifically intended in relation to the salat for verily that which is obligatory is tayammum; however, if one wudues for another purpose, albeit to attain general taharah, then such a wudu would be deemed valid for wudu per se is a desirable ritual and the order to execute an action does not prohibit the execution of other than that action. All that can be said is that the act of wudu involves sinning albeit valid per se e.g. executing salat in a mosque where one knows there exists a piece of najasah is valid albeit involving sinning.

(ii) assuming one wudues/ghuslates ignorant of the fact that the remaining time is not sufficient for both wudu/ghusl and salat, if it becomes evident to one that the time is indeed limited, his/her wudu/ghusl will be valid if it is intended for purposes other than that salat per se

(iii) the tayammum executed due to limited time bears benefit to that salat alone and not for other salats or other taharah-requiring actions due to the presence of water for the latter.

p: 110

women’s compensatory salat even though their non-execution of the time-restricted salat was legitimate.(1)

the tayammum. They base their decree upon (222), claiming that the Imam had intended to educate the second person with regards to the reality of tayammum and that he would most certainly have gone into more detail were there to be any differences of procedure depending on the taymmum’s reason (i.e. acting either as a substitute to a wudu or ghusl). The mere lack of further detail indicates the tayammum’s universal nature.

In (222), the janabah ghusl is at issue; therefore, one may conclude that if such a ghusl is substituted by a one–strike tayammum, other ghusls as well as wudus may be substituted like-wise, without the need of a supplementary strike. R. Hamaedani writes in his 'Misbah al-Faqih':

"Aqwa dictates that tayammumating with a single strike, as a substitute to the ghusl, is sufficient”(1)

This is in accordance with the numerous traditions that are likely to be on a tawatur scale; these traditions were narrated in response to how the method of tayammum ought to be executed in general. Due to this tawatur, those traditions that indicate two strikes may not be declared as conflicting in light of the aforementioned tawatur traditions. Hence, one must either discard the non-tawatur traditions or assign them as indicating istihbab; the latter indication is more on par with jurisprudential principles and precaution.

There’s a third, albeit abandoned and weak, set of traditions(2) that mention the necessity of three strikes: one for the face, one for the right hand and one for the left hand.

placed at one of the 'wiping locations' of tayammum, merely wiping over the jabirah will suffice.

(5) The limbs involved in the process of tayammum must be tahir.

(6) Ijma’ dictates that performing the tayammum before the salat’s time of arrival is not valid; furthermore, it becomes binding when the remaining time for salat is restricted i.e. time is only available to execute the tayammum and salat alone. Assuming the time for salat has arrived and ample time persists before its limit ends, debate exists as to whether or not one may execute the tayammum and salat during this ample period with time even remaining thereafter. Maghniyyah answers in the affirmative and bases his answer on the tradition whereby Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about a man who tayammumated and executed salat and then encountered water whilst the time for salat hadn't terminated. He said: “verily his salat has been accomplished” (224). The salat’s validity and the lack of necessity to repeat the salat, during the stipulated time-period, in cases where water becomes available undoubtedly indicates the salat’s validity and lack of necessity to repeat it at times where water does not become available. It is not, therefore, necessary to wait towards the end of the salat’s time-period in order to tayammumate and perform salat even if one considers it possible that ones legitimate excuse in tayammumating will be eliminated. However, this anticipation would be necessary if one were to know, definitively, that one’s legitimacy for executing tayammum is to cease before the salat’s time restriction.

(7) One is permitted to execute several salats by means of a single tayammum. Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked whether one may execute a whole day and night's salats with a single tayammum. He said: “Yes” (225). The fuqaha have explicitly stated that the one who tayammumates becomes tahir after tayammum and is, thereafter, permitted to carry out all taharah-requiring deeds e.g. salat, tawaf, reciting the aza’im verses, touching the Quran’s script etc. The Holy Messenger (May Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) said: “earth will suffice for ten years” (226). Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) said: “soil is one of the tahurs” (227) and that “soil is a tahur that may substitute water” (228). The aforementioned legitimate tayammum bears one exception i.e. that tayammum that occurs as a result of time limitation with respect to executing wudu/ghusl for a specific salat; once this salat is completed, the scope and half-life of the tayammum ends and one is treated as one, who had no access to water, but has now gained access to water.

(8) Concerning one who tayammumates due to lack of water and then finds water, three possibilities may arise:

(i) Assuming one finds water after tayammum but before the time of salat had arrived, the tayammum simply becomes void not solely due to the excuse’s elimination/lack of legitimacy but rather because tayammum becomes a means to an ends that hasn’t been realized, yet, in order to accomplish.

p: 114

(ii) Assuming one finds water after terminating one’s salat, repeating the salat is not necessary even if there remains ample time before the stipulated time arrives – as is illustrated in (224); moreover, repetition is not necessary even if one finds water after completing a single unit (rak’ah).

(iii)Assuming one finds water during salat, the fuqaha have differentiated different phases to such cases i.e. if one finds water (a) before accomplishing the first genuflexion, then one must repeat one’s salat by performing wudu first and then one’s salat anew; (b) after the first genuflexion, then the salat is to be continued with no repetition required. Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about a man who hadn't found any water and so tayammumated and started salat; his slave then entered claiming to have water. The Imam said: “if he hadn't completed the genuflexion, he ought to exit his salat, then execute wudu; if however he had completed the genuflexion, he ought to continue with his salat” (229). It is worth noting that this law i.e. where the validity of a ritual by means of tayammum depends on the stage of the ritual where water is found is specific to salat alone and does not apply to other acts of worship where hydro-taharah is a prerequisite e.g. assuming one tayammumates and executes tawaf (due to the lack of water), if one finds water during tawaf – albeit during the seventh circumbulation – the tawaf automatically becomes void; one must then gain hydro-taharah and re-execute the tawaf. Likewise, assuming a mayyit is tayammumated (due to a lack of water) and its salat accomplished, if water is then found before the burial itself one becomes obliged to ghuslate, embalm and re-execute its salat. This exception is explictly indicated by the texts and refers to salat alone and may not be applied to other acts of worship via analogical deduction.

(9) Imam Kazim (peace be upon him) was asked about a situation where three people were travelling: a junub, mayyit and one without wudu; time for salat had arrived and they only had enough water for one. Who has priority with respect to the water? And what must the others do? He said: “the junub ought to ghuslate with the water; the mayyit must be tayammumated and the remaining person must tayammumate instead of executing wudu.” (230) This tradition is popularly accepted by the fuqaha in contrast to weak traditions(1) that give priority to the mayyit. The author of ‘al-Madarik’ adds that such weak traditions can't conflict with the former explicit traditions.(2)

p: 115

p: 116

(51) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 498, section 54 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 2

(52) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 226, section 1 on ‘liquid leftovers’, hadith no. 4

(53) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 467, section 37 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 4

(54) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 467, section 37 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 5

(55) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 17:89, section 4 on ‘transactions’, hadith no. 4

(56) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 438, section 24 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 4

(57) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 441, section 26 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1

(58) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 443, section 26 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 8

(59) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 434, section 22 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 4

(60) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 430, section 20 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 4

(61) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 457, section 31 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 5

(62) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 5: 229, section 24 on ‘Rulings of Mosques’, hadith no. 2

(63) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 351, section 31 on ‘Rulings in relation to Lavatories’, hadith no. 5

(64) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 142, section 4 on ‘mutlaq water’, hadith no. 1

(65) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 487, section 47 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1

(66) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 476, section 40 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 7

(67) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 485, section 45 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 7

(68) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 484, section 45 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 5

(69) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 505, section 64 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1

(70) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 225, section 1 on ‘liquid leftovers’, hadith no. 2

(71) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 497, section 53 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1

(72) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 516, section 70 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1 [the word ‘twice’ isn’t observed]

(73) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 395, section 1 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 3

(74) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 398, section 3 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 2

(75) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 469, section 38 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 3

(76) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 494, section 51 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1

(77) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 302, section 2 on ‘Rulings in relation to Lavatories’, hadith no. 5

(78) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 315, section 9 on ‘Rulings in relation to Lavatories’, hadith no. 1

(79) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 321, section 12 on ‘Rulings in relation to Lavatories’, hadith no. 1

(80) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 299, section 1 on ‘Rulings in relation to Lavatories’, hadith no. 2

(81) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 459, section 32 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 9

(82) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 453, section 29 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 6

(83) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 451, section 29 on ‘najasat’, hadith no. 1

(84) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 25:370, section 31 on ‘Haram Drinks’, hadith no. 1

Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 25: 371, section 31 on ‘Haram Drinks’, hadith no. 5

(85) Holy Quran, surah al-Ma’idah (5), verse 6.

(86) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 315, section 9 on ‘Rulings in relation to Lavatories’, hadith no. 1

(87) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 365, section 1 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 2

(88) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 366, section 1 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 4

(89) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 367, section 1 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 9

(90) Ibid.;

(91) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 245, section 1 on ‘things that nullify wudu’, hadith no. 2

(92) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 245, section 1 on ‘things that nullify wudu’, hadith no. 1

(93) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 249, section 2 on ‘things that nullify wudu’, hadith no. 2

(94) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 251, section 2 on ‘things that nullify wudu’, hadith no. 8

(95) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 13: 376, section 38 on ‘tawaf’, hadith no. 6

(96) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 13: 375, section 38 on ‘tawaf’, hadith no. 4

(97) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 384, section 12 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 2

(98) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 5: 392, section 9 on ‘athan and iqamah’, hadith no. 3

(99) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 383, section 11 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 3

(100) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 382, section 11 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 2

(101) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 381, section 10 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 5

(102) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 366, section 1 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 5

(103) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 483, section 51 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 1

(104) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 169, section 13 on ‘mutlaq water’, hadith no. 1

p: 118

(105) Not specified in text

(106) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 387-8, section 15 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 2

(107) Holy Quran, surah Ghafir (40), verse 14

(108) Holy Quran, surah al-Bayyanah (98), verse 5

(109) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 75, section 15 on ‘the preliminaries of ‘ibadat’, hadith no. 1

(110) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 476, section 46 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 3

(111) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 436, section 31 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 3

(112) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 410, section 22 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 1

(113) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 406, section 20 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 1

(114) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 409, section 21 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 8

(115) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 411, section 22 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 4

(116) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 470, section 42 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 2

(117) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 471, section 42 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 7

(118) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 8: 237, section 23 on ‘defects occurring during salat’, hadith no. 1

(119) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 469, section 42 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 1

(120) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 8: 228, section 16 on ‘defects occurring during salat’, hadith no. 2

(121) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 465, section 39 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 7

(122) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 463-4, section 39 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 2

(123) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 297, section 19 on ‘things that nullify wudu’, hadith no. 2

(124) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 7: 237, section 1 on ‘things that nullify salat’, hadith no. 11

(125) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 298, section 19 on ‘things that nullify wudu’, hadith no. 4

(126) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 174-5, section 1 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 3 and 5

(127) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 182, section 6 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(128) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 183, section 6 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 2

(129) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 186, section 7 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(130) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 187, section 7 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 5

(131) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 196, section 9 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(132) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 252, section 36 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 10

(133) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 194, section 8 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(134) Holy Quran, surah al-Tawbah (9), verse 108

(135) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 177, section 1 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 14

(136) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 228, section 25 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 6

(137) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 10:63, section 16 on ‘things refrained from by those who fast’, hadith no. 1

(138) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 10:63, section 16 on ‘things refrained from by those who fast’, hadith no. 2

(139) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 10:67, section 19 on ‘things refrained from by those who fast’, hadith no. 1

(140) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 10:238, section 30 on ‘things that are valid during fasting’, hadith no. 3

(141) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 10:68, section 20 on ‘things refrained from by those who fast’, hadith no. 1

(142) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 216, section 19 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 4

(143) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 217-8, section 19 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 6, 9 and 10

(144) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 214, section 18 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(145) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 206, section 15 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 5

(146) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 213, section 17 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(147) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 230, section 26 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 5

(148) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 231, section 26 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 10

(149) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 238, section 29 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 3

(150) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 261, section 43 on ‘janabah’, hadith no. 1

(151) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 335, section 31 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 2

(152) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 19: 365, section 44 on ‘Wills’, hadith no. 12

(153) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 294, section 10 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(154) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 297, section 11 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(155) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 275, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 2

(156) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 305, section 14 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(157) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 287, section 7 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 2

(158) Not specified in text

(159) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 275, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 2

p: 119

(160) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 330, section 30 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(161) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 358, section 47 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(162) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 327, section 28 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(163) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 493, section 6 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 5

(164) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 347, section 41 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(165) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 275, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 2

(166) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 371, section 1 on ‘istihadah’, hadith no. 1

(167) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 276, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 3

(168) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 382, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 1

(169) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 384, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 5

(170) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 383, section 3 on ‘hayd’, hadith no. 2

(171) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 452, section 35 on ‘ihtidar’, hadith no. 2

(172) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 453, section 35 on ‘ihtidar’, hadith no. 4

(173) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 472, section 47 on ‘ihtidar’, hadith no. 1

(174) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 502, section 12 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(175) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 481, section 2 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 4

(176) Not specified in text

(177) Not specified in text

(178) Not specified in text

(179) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 480, section 2 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 3

(180) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 520, section 21 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(181) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 515, section 19 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(182) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 510, section 14 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 9

(183) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 513, section 17 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(184) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 7-8, section 2 on ‘kafanating’, hadith no. 6

(185) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 9, section 2 on ‘kafanating’, hadith no. 12

(186) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 36, section 16 on ‘kafanating’, hadith no. 1

(187) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 60, section 2 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, hadith no. 1

(188) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 72, section 5 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, hadith no. 1

(189) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 73, section 5 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, hadith no. 3

(190) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 133, section 37 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, hadith no. 2

(191) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 133, section 37 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, hadith no. 3

(192) Holy Quran, surah al-Mursalat (77), verses 25-26

(193) Holy Quran, surah Taha (20), verse 55

(194) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 141, section 1 on ‘burying’, hadith no. 1

(195) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 165, section 14 on ‘burying’, hadith no. 2

(196) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 165, section 14 on ‘burying’, hadith no. 1

(197) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 135, section 38 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, hadith no. 1

(198) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 136, section 38 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, under hadith no. 5

(199) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 2: 535, section 26 on ‘ghuslating the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(200) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 114, section 23 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, under hadith no. 1 and 2

(201) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 116, section 24 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, under hadith no. 3

Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 115, section 24 on ‘the mayyit’s salat’, under hadith no. 1

(202) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 290, section 1 on ‘ghuslating after touching the deceased’, hadith no. 2

(203) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 295, section 3 on ‘ghuslating after touching the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(204) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 294, section 2 on ‘ghuslating after touching the deceased’, hadith no. 1

(205) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 312, section 6 on ‘mustahabb ghusls’, hadith no. 1

(206) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 312, section 6 on ‘mustahabb ghusls’, hadith no. 4

(207) Holy Quran, surah al-Baqarah (2), verse 222

(208) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 1: 383, section 11 on ‘wudu’, hadith no. 3

(209) Holy Quran, surah al-Nisa’ (4), verse 43

(210) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 350, section 7 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 2

(211) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 341, section 1 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 1

(212) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 342, section 2 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 2

(213) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 343, section 3 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 1

p: 120

(214) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 386, section 23 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 6

Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 385, section 23 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 1

(215) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 348, section on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 11

(216) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 341, section 1 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 2

(217) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 388, section 25 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 3

(218) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 354, section 9 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 5

(219) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 354, section 9 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 7

(220) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 354, section 9 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 4

(221) Holy Quran, surah al-Nisa’ (4), verse 43

(222) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 359, section 11 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 2 and 4

(223) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 359, section 11 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 3

(224) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 370, section 14 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 14

(225) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 378, section 20 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 1

(226) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 369, section 14 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 12

(227) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 386, section 23 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 5

(228) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 385, section 23 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 2

(229) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 381, section 21 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 2

(230) Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, 3: 375, section 18 on ‘tayammum’, hadith no. 1

p: 121

p: 122

asalah al-taharah: a procedural principle indicating the presumption of purity; the principle deems a given thing as tahir on the condition that (i) one beholds no previous knowledge in relation to its state of purity (i.e. whether it was previously najis or not) and (ii) the given thing isn’t explicitly stipulated (by the Canon) as being najis (such as blood, dogs, pigs…and things polluted by them). Furthermore, this presumption is made only when one has doubt with respect to something’s previous state of purity (otherwise, istishab will qualify).

athan: a specific set of formulae – signalling the arrival of a salat’s stipulated time e.g. dawn in relation to the fajr salat etc. – revealed to the Holy Prophet of Islam. All in all, the athan beholds 18 sentences in the following order: Allahu akbar (4 times), ash-hadu an laa ilaaha illallah (2 times), ash-hadu anna Muhammadan rasu-lullah (2 times), hayya alas-salaah (2 times), hayya alal-falaah (2 times), hayya ala khay-ril amal (2 times), Allahu akbar (2 times) and laa ilaaha illallah (2 times). The popular verdict amongst fuqaha dictates that the phrase ash-hadu anna Aliyyan waliy-yullah is not part of the athan, albeit desirable to recite it (as well as reciting the testimony to the wilayah of the other successors) after ash-hadu anna Muhammadan rasu-lullah. The athan may be classified into (i) an athan of declaration, whereby the reciter’s aim is to inform others that the time of salat has arrived, and (ii) an athan for salat, which is recited before the salat’s actual execution. The latter athan may be further divided into individual and congregational athans.

atheist: see kafir

awrah: genitalia. In the male, the awrah includes the penis, scrotum and the anal orifice; with females, it includes the vagina, the urinary orifice and the anal orifice. One’s awrah may not be viewed by anyone (including one’s maharim) except for one’s spouse.

B

batil: void, null

bayyanah: a testimony provided by two, just male persons; a valid form of canonical evidence which is applicable to all subject-matters – according to most fuqaha – throughout fiqh.

bismillah: a formula meaning ‘in the name of Allah’ or, more technically, ‘I start with the name of Allah’.

bulugh: canonical puberty; its occurrence has been canonically assigned as starting whenever (i) one’s pubic hair commences in growth, irrespective of age, or (ii) one’s first ejaculation occurs (be it during sleep

p: 124

or wakefulness, with or without copulation). Assuming one’s ejaculation or pubic hair growth is delayed, for some reason, puberty for men ought to commence at (the completion of) fifteen lunar years no matter what. Concerning women, puberty is stipulated at the completion of nine lunar years. One becomes duty-bound at puberty. Nine lunar years is equal to nine solar years minus 96 days and 18 hours. Fifteen lunar years is equal to fifteen solar years minus 161 days and 6 hours. One lunar year is equal to 354 days and 6 hours i.e. 10 days and 18 hours less than a solar year.

C

camphor: a white substance which is mixed, in very small amounts, with water to ceremonially wash (ghuslate) the deceased.

circulating blood: that animal blood which beholds pulsatility (a pulsatile circulation) and thus spurts out on dissection of a given part of the body, namely the blood vessels of the neck.

compensatory: see qada

consecutiveness: see muwalat.

D

daruriyyat: fundamentals of religion, be it a matter of doctrine (aqa’id) or fiqh. Examples of doctrinal fundamentals include the belief of Allah’s Unity, Prophethood of Prophet Muhammad (and all previous Prophets), the Day of Resurrection etc. Examples of fiqhi fundamentals include believing in the obligation, imposed by the Canon, to execute one’s salat, wear hijab etc. In short, fundamentals are those matters unanimously agreed upon by all Islamic schools of thought.

dinar: golden coins used for daily transactions during the era of the Holy Prophet and Imams.

dirham: silver coins used for daily transactions during the era of the Holy Prophet and Imams.

disconnection, principle of: see faragh

distressed: an adjective used to classify the ha’id’s periods i.e. two or more periods which neither share the same duration nor do they occur at the same time every month.

divorce: separation of the husband and wife from one another, realised by fulfilling a set of conditions associated with the divorce contract and the two parties. Divorce is divided into two types: (i) a revocable divorce where the man may make up with the woman during the latter’s ‘iddah

p: 125

period i.e. assuming they decide to re-marry, executing a new marriage contract won’t be necessary; consent alone will suffice; and (ii) an irrevocable divorce whereby the two parties may not re-unite, during ‘iddah, after being divorced. Each of the two forms of divorce beholds several conditions and stipulations attached to them.

dowry: a present (in the form of money, property, Hajj trip etc.) that is offered by the man to the woman after their marriage contract is realised. Stipulating the dowry isn’t a prerequisite in permanent marriage contracts; however, it must be stipulated in temporary marriage contracts.

E

earth: a general term which includes soil (top layer of the earth in which vegetation grow), mud (soft and wet earth), clay (heavy and sticky earth) and the ground (natural layers of stone or solid mineral substances e.g. marble, natural chalk etc.). The process of tayammum may be executed upon such earths.

eid: religious celebration or festival.

eid al-Fitr: a religious festival held on the 1st Shawwal, every year, after the completion of one month of fasting (during Ramadan month, which precedes Shawwal)

ejaculation: the ejecting or emission of semen – be one male/female, awake/asleep or be it via masturbation, a legitimate or illegitimate encounter. Ejaculation is one of the causes of the state of janabah as well as a sign of puberty. Note that female semen implies those secretions associated with, and accompanying, a woman’s climax – by whatever means.

embalm: see hunut

F

fajr: dawn; a salat which ought to be executed every day within a stipulated time period i.e. from daybreak to sunrise.

faragh: a principle which dictates to the duty-bound, who acquires doubt with respect to an action’s validity after having completed it, to neglect such a doubt and assume that one has in fact accomplished it validly. In short, after having been disassociated (or disconnected) from an action, any later doubts with respect to its validity ought to be put aside.

fatwah: verdict decreed by fuqaha

fiqh: Jurisprudence

p: 126

fitrah: man’s divinely-incorporated innate nature which leads Man instinctively to acquire a number of attributes, such as longing for justice, searching for truth, being kind, wanting to survive, doing good, desiring happiness…

foetus: in fiqh, the foetus signifies the developing human being from conception to birth.

fuqaha: jurisprudents (sing. faqih); scholars who are specialists in the science of jurisprudence and, thus, able to independently extrapolate the law via the relevant sources; the term is synonymous to a mujtahid.

fuqqa’: barley water which possesses a degree of intoxicating properties, albeit weak; beer.

G

ghasl: the mere act of washing something, with water, with or without the intention to tahirize it. The Canon sometimes asks the duty-bound to merely wash something once, twice or thrice; sometimes it obliges the duty-bound to wash something with mutlaq water, such as clothes, but in a prescribed manner, namely by wringing them out.

ghaslate: to carry out a washing (ghasl)

ghaybah: absence; this concept constitutes one of the many mutahhirs classified by the fuqaha. Assuming a Muslim’s belongings (e.g. clothes, utensils, carpet or even body) becomes najis, the latter object may be deemed tahir, by a second person, via ghaybah (absence i.e. the former Muslim’s absence from the second person) on the condition that the latter believes that the Muslim, in question, is of a character who would have tahirized the object (i.e. who isn’t indifferent to such canonical matters).

ghuluw: followers of denominations – essentially outside the realms of Islam – whose beliefs vis-à-vis the Ahl al-Bayt (namely their attributes) were, unacceptably, grossly exaggerated.

ghusalah: a water (employed for wudu/ghusl purposes) which usually pours – either spontaneously or by force – from something which is being washed with it. In other words, the used water of one’s wudu or ghusl.

ghusl: a canonically-ordained ceremonial washing of the human body’s external surfaces. It is indicated at stipulated times and occasions (see chapter 6).

ghuslate: to execute a ghusl

p: 127

H

habrah: an Arabic traditional piece of clothing encouraged to be employed for kafan purposes

hadath: abstract causes of ritual impurity (see najasah)

al-hadath al-akbar: major hadath; (see najasah)

al-hadath al-asghar: minor hadath; (see najasah)

hadith: tradition narrated by the Holy Prophet or Imams

ha’id: a menstruating woman i.e. during her periods

hajj: an act of worship whereby one intends to make pilgrimage to the Holy Ka’bah in order to execute the stipulated rites ordained by the Canon.

halal: permissible (to commit or consume); lawful.

halal-meat animals: animals whose meat is permissible to consume, assuming they have been slaughtered in accordance to the Canon e.g. sheep, cows…

half-life: the period whereby a given tayammum’s functional efficacy lasts (see section 6.3)

haram: forbidden (to commit or consume); prohibited by the Canon.

haram-meat animals: animals whose meat is impermissible to consume irrespective of whether they have been slaughtered in accordance to the Canon or not e.g. rabbits, elephants…

hayd: menstruation

hilliyyah: permission (see halal)

hissi: sensible i.e. colour, odour and taste sensed by the eyes, nose and tongue, repectively.

hunut: the process of applying camphor to the seven bodily areas which have contact with the ground during prostration, namely the forehead, palms, knees and anterior aspects of the big toes

hurmah: prohibition (see haram)

hydro-taharah: that taharah whose realization is dependent upon water (not earth) i.e. wudus or ghusls

p: 128

I

‘ibadah (pl. ‘ibadat): acts of worship or total submission which require one’s intention to gain proximity to Allah. Some ibadat require such an intention as a prerequisite to their validity e.g. salat, sawm, Hajj, zakat and khums, whilst in others the intention is not essential to its validity – such as helping others, working one’s occupation, making transactions etc. – albeit essential to one’s attainment of spiritual perfection.

‘iddah: a specific and canonically-determined period – after divorce or the death of a woman’s husband – whereby she ought to wait the full period before being permitted to re-marry.

ihram: a ritual state required to be maintained during episodes of the Hajj pilgrimage; the ihram state (i) must be acquired before executing a number of essential deeds e.g. specific tawafs, salats… and (ii) obliges one to refrain from a number of actions during these stipulated episodes e.g. sexual intercourse, applying perfumes, ornamentation etc.

ihtiyat: precaution; where a duty-bound acts in such a manner as to ensure (100%) that he/she has fulfilled his/her particular duty even though its contrary may be legitimately derived via canonical principles e.g. assuming there is a given water previously known to be tahir and that one intends to wudue with it, if one acquires doubt vis-à-vis the water’s najasah one may legitimately apply istishab and therefore wudue with the water. Practising precaution, here, is tantamount to leaving the water aside and wuduing with another water.

ijma’: a consensus of opinion, amongst all the fuqaha, in relation to a canonical ruling. It can be employed as a source of extrapolating Islamic law as long as it reveals and unveils an Infallible’s tradition, with certitude.

Imam: leader; either in relation to salat i.e. congregational leader or in relation to the Holy Prophet’s Successorship.

Imam Rida: the eighth leader and successor to the Holy Prophet of Islam as specified in Sunnite and Shi’ah sources.

Imam Sadiq: the sixth leader and successor to the Holy Prophet of Islam as specified in Sunnite and Shi’ah sources.

immersing ghusl: see irtimasi

imtizaj: the blending or mixing together of two waters

p: 129

innovation: legislating actions and beliefs as wajib, haram etc. – when they aren’t – without any (or with incorrect) reference to the sources of the Canon.

instantaneity: see muwalat

iqamah: a specific set of formulae, revealed to the Holy Prophet of Islam, to be recited (albeit mustahabb to do so) immediately before executing one’s salat. All in all, the iqamah beholds 17 sentences in the following order: Allahu akbar (2 times), ash-hadu an laa ilaaha illallah (2 times), ash-hadu anna Muhammadan rasu-lullah (2 times), hayya alas-salaah (2 times), hayya alal-falaah (2 times), hayya ala khay-ril amal (2 times), qad qaamatis-salah (2 times), Allahu akbar (2 times) and laa ilaaha illallah (1 time). The popular verdict amongst fuqaha dictates that the phrase ash-hadu anna Aliyyan waliy-yullah is not part of the iqamah, albeit mustahabb to recite it (as well as reciting the testimony to the wilayah of the other successors) after ash-hadu anna Muhammadan rasu-lullah.

irtimasi: a method of executing one’s ghusl whereby one immerses one’s whole body into tahir water to such an extent that the water covers all one’s body instantaneously, not gradually.

‘isha: a salat which ought to be executed every day within a stipulated time period i.e. from after completing one’s maghrib salat until the canonical midnight.

islamically-slaughtered: slaughtering of halal-meat animals in accordance with the Canon

istinja: the processes of tahirizing the urinary and anal orifices after urinating and defecating, respectively.

istihbab: being mustahabb

itlaq: state of being mutlaq

izar: a full cover, wrapped over the entire body of the deceased

J

jabirah: a bandage (patch, cloth etc.) which is placed over a medically-afflicted limb, be it by means of a fracture or otherwise.

jallal: adjective describing previously halal-meat animals whose nutrition mostly comprises human faeces and who develop – meat-wise – in proportion to that eaten.

janabah: the state of being junub

p: 130

janabating: one who actively brings about janabah.

jari: a water which is connected to a source even if it has no flow for it always beholds the capacity/potential to have flow.

junub: a duty-bound person upon whom the state of major hadath has occurred as a result of ejaculation and/or coitus (intercourse). Note that female ejaculation is on a par with those secretions secreted during her climax and not those secreted during foreplay or before climax. Male ejaculation involves the emission of sperm. Both male and female ejaculation may occur whilst awake or asleep, via masturbation or coitus. Coitus, too, leads to the man/woman’s janabah even if no ejaculation, in either, arises. Coitus per se (partial entrance of the male glans penis suffices) leads to a man/woman becoming junub – irrespective if the coitus occurs vaginally or anally, between man and woman or between two homosexual men.

jurisprudence: see fiqh

just: one who refrains from committing a major sin; and assuming a just person does commit such a sin, his attribute justice will be nullified before a given mukallaf until the latter attains assurance that the just person has indeed repented. Repeating minor sins, without repenting in between, also nullifies one in relation to beholding justice.

K

kafan: shroud

kafanating: the process of enshrouding the deceased as required by the Canon

kaffarah: atonement; making amends for having carried out an impermissible action, vis-à-vis the Canon, intentionally or, sometimes, unintentionally. The nature of the amends depends on the given action; they may be financial (e.g. feeding a number of indigent people), involve fasting for a number of days or both.

kafir: athiest; however, canonically, it refers to one who (i) believes in a religion other than Islam or (ii) is qualified as a Muslim but denies one of Islam’s daruriyyat – whilst knowing that it is fundamental – in such a manner that such a denial were to lead to (a) one’s denial of Prophethood, (b) one attributing lies to the Holy Prophet or (c) one regarding the Prophet’s Canon as deficient. Canonical athiests – not literal athiests – may be divided into the Ahl al-Kitab, polytheists and apostates.

karahah: see makruh

p: 131

khabath: substances/bodies which are najis per se or which have become najis as a result of contact with intrinsically najis substances.

Kharijites: applies to those who rebel and wage war against the just Imam e.g. those who fought against Imam Ali in the battle of Jamal are termed Kharijites.

khirqah: an extra piece of cloth wrapped round the centre area of the body over the three pieces of kafan in order to prevent anything from being disclosed

kurr: a canonically-defined volume of water

kurrization: the process of becoming kurr

L

lahad: a receptacle-like niche formed by part of the grave being built farther laterally in order to provide a nook-like environment for the deceased

lahadate: to build a lahad

leftovers: the water/liquid left over after an animal drinks it from any given vessel

life: those bodily parts of animals which contain red blood are termed ‘alive’ or ‘with life’ whilst those which don’t are regarded life-less e.g. bones, nails and hair.

lotus: powder extracted from the lotus flower, employed during the ghuslating of the deceased

lunar years: see bulugh

M

mabtun: faecally incontinent

maghrib: a salat which ought to be executed every day within a stipulated time period i.e. from the disappearance of the redness of the eastern horizon until a few minutes preceding the canonical midnight (where one has the time to execute one’s isha’ salat).

mahram (pl. maharim): those relatives whom (a) one is forbidden to marry and /or (b) one is permitted to see without hijab. The maharim may be classified into three divisions: mahrams by consaguinity, marriage and breastfeeding. Non-mahrams, therefore, aren’t mahram to one another by either of the above three routes.

p: 132

makruh: disliked; discouraged by the Canon. In acts of worship such as salat and sawm, makruh deeds implies that the given deeds behold less reward on completion (i.e. they aren’t intrinsically bad acts); executing them however bears no punishment whatsoever. In actions other than rituals of worship, such as transactions, makruh deeds per se behold an element of badness, albeit not forbidden by the Canon.

ma’mum (pl. ma’mumin): one who prays in congregation behind the leader (imam).

mantuq: a directly explicit statement

maqna’ah: head scarf

Masjid al-Haram: (lit. Mosque of Consecration); Mosque of Mecca where the Ka’bah is situated.

Masjid al-Nabi: the Holy Prophet’s Mosque, situated in Medinah

maslus: suffering from urinary incontinence

martyr: one who dies during a jihad, either (i) at the battlefield or (ii) outside the battlefield but before the war has terminated. Such people need not be ghuslated or kafanated.

mathy: a whitish semi-viscous liquid which is secreted during foreplay or after deliberating on intercourse etc. Man often does not sense that such a liquid has been excreted (i.e. its not felt/sensed as is the ejaculation of sperm).

mawrud: an adjective describing the static status of a najis water upon which a given source of water falls upon.

mayyit: the deceased

meetah: carcass; corpse

menses: see hayd

minor hadath: see najasah

mi’zar: a loin cloth wrapped round the body from the navel to the knees when kafanating the deceased.

mubah: legitimate; permissible

mudaf: (c.f. mutlaq) any liquid which isn’t mutlaq water irrespective of whether it is mixed with something else or extracted from something

mughal: one who practises ghuluw

muhdith: one who is in a state of hadath

p: 133

muhrim: one who has entered the state of ihram

mukallaf: the duty-bound; a person who has reached the age of puberty and must, therefore, execute one’s duties as required by the Canon.

musalli: one who is executing salat

Muslim ‘hands’: when something e.g. meat is in Muslim hands (bazaars, shopping precincts etc.), in Islamic countries, one ought to presume that the given meat has been treated in accordance with the Canon.

mustahabb: preferable; encouraged by the Canon. In acts of worship such as salat and sawm, mustahabb deeds implies that the given deeds behold more reward on completion; not executing them however bears no punishment whatsoever. In actions other than rituals of worship, such as transactions, mustahabb deeds per se behold propriety and decency; they are good per se.

mustahad: a woman experiencing istihadah blood (see chapter 7).

mutahhir: a purifier (see tahirizing; see chapter 3)

mutanajjis: see najasah

mutawatir: a term attributed to holy traditions that are repeatedly transmitted through excessive uninterrupted chains (of transmissions) via successive authentic narrators to such an extent that the probability of such a tradition being inauthentic is virtually zero.

mutlaq: absolute; pure; it alludes to water per se i.e. that which the common layman labels ‘water’. ‘Absolute’ because it signifies water in absolute terms; ‘pure’ because no additional artificial elements or properties are added to it. In short, a given water is deemd mutlaq whenever the common layman calls it ‘water’.

muwalat: carrying out the wudu’s sequence of actions (a) consecutively (one after the other) and (b) instantaneously (without leaving gaps of time in between the separate actions)

N

nabi’: describing a water which beholds a subterranean source

nabith: an alcoholic drink made from the juice of raisins left to ferment

nafsa’: one who discharges nifas blood

najasah: a state of ritual impurity caused by (a) contact with concrete najis substances per se and (b) contact with objects/subjects polluted by concrete najises (i.e. mutanajjis) and (c) abstract causes.

p: 134

Concrete najises are substances which are impure per se and may, under certain circumstances, pollute other things. There are eleven concrete najises in all i.e. urine, faeces, semen, carcass/corpse, blood, dogs, pigs, athiests, intoxicating drinks, fuqqa’ and the sweat of jallal animals.

Mutanajjises (najisated bodies/objects) are previously pure but acquire najasah as a result of contact with concrete najises (via a wet medium).

Abstract najasah is that ritual impurity which arises as a result of abstract (non-concrete) causes. These causes are termed hadath and may be divided into minor and major divisions. Minor hadaths include: passing wind, urinating, defecating, being intoxicated, sleeping, being comatosed and minor istihadah. Minor hadaths may be removed by means of executing wudu and thus preparing oneself for salat. Major hadaths – which may be removed by means of ghuslating – include ejaculation, intercourse, touching corpses, menstruation and intermediary/major istihadahs

najis: impure (see najasah)

najisate: to make something najis

naql: canonical sources which have been transmitted by Allah either by revelation (Qur’an) or via the Holy Prophet and Imams (traditions)

nasibis: a Muslim denomination which expresses hostility towards the Holy Messenger’s Ahl al-Bayt

nass: texts from the Qur’an or fully authentic traditions of the Holy Prophet and Imams

nifas: that blood which exits the vagina during child-birth

niyyah: intention; to make niyyah is to intend an action with the aim to either execute one’s duty as ordained by Allah or to seek proximity to one’s Lord

O

orderly ghusl: see tartibi

P

polytheist: a believer in more than one god

pre-pubescent: the age preceding one’s puberty

problematic: if a food’s/clothing’s taharah is deemed problematic, obligatory precaution dictates that one refrain from eating or wearing it for salat purposes, respectively. Assuming an action’s execution is

p: 135

deemed problematic, obligatory precaution dictates one to refrain from performing that action

puberty: see bulugh

Q

qada: compensatory; obligatory salats/sawms which aren’t performed on time (within the stipulated period) ought to be compensated for outside the stipulated time

qalil: a volume of water less than kurr

Qiblah: the direction that all Muslims pray towards five times a day i.e. towards the Holy Ka’bah

qiyas: analogy; two types exist i.e. true and false analogies. Analogical deduction entails the process of extending a given ruling (extrapolated from the Qur’an and/or traditions) to a new case due to the presence of an effective cause common to both the new and original cases. Assuming such a cause’s presence is weakly/highly probable, such an analogy is deemed void; however, if the cause is found to be definitive (a ratio legis) and common to both instances, a valid analogy would result

Quraishite: attributed to the tribe of Quraish

R

rakid: stationary

Ramadan: ninth month of the Islamic Calendar, succeeding and preceding the holy months of Sha’ban and Shawwal, respectively.

ratl: one Iraqi ritl is approximately equal to 130 dirhams in weight

revocable: see divorce

ruku’: genuflexion

S

Sahari: an Arabic traditional piece of clothing encouraged to be employed for kafan purposes

sajdah: prostration, an element of salat whereby seven parts of the body make contact with earth

salat: a ritual prayer and act of worship in contrast to supplication (dua’). The salat involves the execution of particular acts (carrying out and reading repetitive postures and formulae) in a state of taharah at

p: 136

stipulated times of the day as well as stipulated events (both conventional and natural) during the year.

sawm: fasting; an act of worship which involves the duty-bound Muslim(ah) to refrain from several actions – 8-9 in all, such as eating/drinking, committing blasphemy against the Lord, the Holy Prophet… - from dawn until dusk, during the month of Ramadan.

semen: sperm

shakk-ul badawi: a primordial doubt; acquired when one has no knowledge of something’s previous state of taharah, itlaq etc. (see text, 1.3.1)

shar’i: canonical; pertaining to the shariah (Islamic Canon). Note that canonical sources, in Islam, may be divided into the transmitted (which includes the Holy Qur’an and traditions of the Infallible Prophet/Imams) and the rational which involves the use of rationality. Hence, rationality is a branch of shar’i reasoning and not contrary to it.

shariah: the Islamic Canon; see shar’i.

shibr: a measure of length roughly equal to the length from the tip of the thumb to the tip of the small finger when one’s hand is spread out i.e. one’s fingers being fully distanced from one another. Some religious authorities, such as Sayyid al-Sistani, have stated that one shibr is approximately equal to 22 cm.

T

taba’iyyah: the relationship and dependence of one thing (taabi’) upon another (matbu’) e.g. assuming one washes najis clothes in a basin, once the clothes (matbu’) become purified, the once najis basin (taabi’) automatically becomes purified too; another example is if a glass is najis due to its containing wine, assuming the wine is transformed into vinegar – over time – the glass is automatically deemed tahir.

taharah: purity;

tahir: pure; an adjective describing something/one’s state of purity

tahirization: the process of becoming purified

tahirizing: purifying; enabling (a) one to attain ritual purity or (b) an impure (najis) body/object to become pure (tahir)

tahur: a term used for water and earth which have the capacity to tahirize somebody/thing.

p: 137

tajawuz: a principle which dictates to the duty-bound who acquires doubt with respect to the execution of an action’s section, part or component after having passed on to the succeeding component of that action (but not having terminated the whole action per se), to neglect such a doubt and assume that one has in fact accomplished it. In short, after having transcended from an action’s component, any later doubts with respect to that components accomplishment ought to be put aside.

takbir: saying “Allahu Akbar”

takhalli: the act of urinating and/or defecating

takhsees: the process of expelling a number of individuals from a general, comprehensive ruling such that were the takhsees absent, the aforementioned individuals would have remained incorporated within the general ruling e.g. the statement ‘do not pay respect to a corrupt scholar’ excludes some individuals from the general statement ‘pay respect to scholars’.

tannery: making animal skin into leather via chemical treatment

taqdiri: concealed; where a colour, odour or taste is not sensed by the eyes, nose or tongue (cf. hissi)

tartibi: orderly ghusl; a sequential manner of executing one’s ghusl

taslim: the end component of salats, consisting of three phrases. One’s salat terminates on reciting the taslim.

tawaf: the process of circumambulating the Holy Ka’bah seven times in a state of taharah. It is an act of worship and an essential part of the Hajj pilgrimage.

tayammum: a specific manner of acquiring taharah for salat purposes – like wudu and ghusls – by means of earth. This method may be employed in specific circumstances.

tayammumate: to execute tayammum

thira: a measurement of approximately 50cm, the length of an average forearm.

transformation: the process whereby a najis liquid completely alters into another, tahir, liquid.

transition, principle of: see tajawuz

transmissions: see naql

p: 138

transmutation: the process whereby a najis substance undergoes an essential state-to-state alteration into a non-najis substance; porcine bone elements to gelatine may be considered one such example.

traveller: a canonically-defined term which obliges the travelling duty-bound to shorten one’s salat

U

unrelated: see mahram

urf: laity; the common layman (Joe Bloggs)

urine-means-mutanajjis: a previously tahir object/subject that/who becomes najis by means of contact with urine.

usul: legal theory; principles of Islamic Jurisprudence.

W

wady: an opaque and semi-viscous liquid; it’s often excreted after urination or during episodes of infection.

wajib: obligatory, as ordained by the Canon

warid: (lit. falling over, entering upon) an adjective describing the dynamics of a najis water when contacting a given source of water.

wudu: a canonically-ordained ceremonial washing of particular parts of the human body with water. It is indicated at stipulated times and occasions.

wudue: to execute wudu

Z

zann: speculation or conjecture; beholding zann with respect to a matter (e.g. direction of the Qiblah, najasah of clothes etc.), may be weak (1-49% sure), doubtful (50% sure) or strong (51-95% sure).

p: 139

p: 140