In al-Bukhari's narration: (Washing on Friday is obligatory for every pubescent person). He mentioned the siwak and perfume with it; are they also obligatory?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : The narration in al-Bukhari: The washing is obligatory.
The Shaykh : Yes, in the two Sahihs.
The questioner : And he mentioned the perfume and the siwak with it, and the conjunction implies obligation... So if the washing is obligatory, is the siwak obligatory?
The Shaykh : No, because the washing was reported in several wordings, including the hadith of Ibn 'Umar here: "Let him wash." Such a wording was not reported regarding the siwak.
He says: In al-Bukhari, the siwak and perfume are mentioned with it, and it is known that the siwak and perfume are not obligatory.
So we say: The indication of conjunction is weak, and if evidence is found that specifies one of the conjoined items with a ruling, it must be acted upon. Did not Allah the Exalted say: "And horses, mules, and donkeys for you to ride and as an adornment"? Yet the texts came regarding the permissibility of horses, even though they were conjoined with donkeys and mules. If other texts indicate that the washing is obligatory, we take that, and the siwak is from the category of what is recommended. However, it is clear to me that: the siwak on Friday is not like the usual siwak, but it is a siwak that is more intense and more thorough in the act of siwak. For example, using a toothbrush now may be more preferable than using the usual siwak on Friday, because specifying Friday with siwak indicates that it is a siwak specific to it, whereas the general siwak is at any time a person performs siwak.
The Shaykh : Yes, in the two Sahihs.
The questioner : And he mentioned the perfume and the siwak with it, and the conjunction implies obligation... So if the washing is obligatory, is the siwak obligatory?
The Shaykh : No, because the washing was reported in several wordings, including the hadith of Ibn 'Umar here: "Let him wash." Such a wording was not reported regarding the siwak.
He says: In al-Bukhari, the siwak and perfume are mentioned with it, and it is known that the siwak and perfume are not obligatory.
So we say: The indication of conjunction is weak, and if evidence is found that specifies one of the conjoined items with a ruling, it must be acted upon. Did not Allah the Exalted say: "And horses, mules, and donkeys for you to ride and as an adornment"? Yet the texts came regarding the permissibility of horses, even though they were conjoined with donkeys and mules. If other texts indicate that the washing is obligatory, we take that, and the siwak is from the category of what is recommended. However, it is clear to me that: the siwak on Friday is not like the usual siwak, but it is a siwak that is more intense and more thorough in the act of siwak. For example, using a toothbrush now may be more preferable than using the usual siwak on Friday, because specifying Friday with siwak indicates that it is a siwak specific to it, whereas the general siwak is at any time a person performs siwak.