Continuation of the explanation of the hadith: “None of you should urinate in stagnant water that does not flow, and then bathe in it.”

The Shaykh : "

You should not pass urine in stagnant water which is not flowing then (you may need to) wash in it.

لا يبولنّ أحدكم في الماء الدّائم الذي لا يجري ثمّ يغتسل فيه

Sahih al-Bukhari 239

".
This “la” is a prohibitive particle, and “yabul” is a present tense verb in the accusative case governed by the prohibitive “la.” If I make a mistake, correct me.
The student: No...

The Shaykh : No? Why?
The student: The prohibitive “la” puts the verb in the jussive case.

The Shaykh : In the jussive case?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Why is it in the nominative case?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : Yes?
The student: Because it is connected to the emphatic nun.

The Shaykh : Because it is connected to the emphatic nun. All right, and if it is connected to the emphatic nun both in form and in meaning, it is built on the nominative case. But if it is connected to it in form only, not in meaning, then it is in the nominative case, meaning it is not built. For example: And he did not say “liyaqulanna” because the nun was separated from the verb by separators, but it was deleted for morphological reasons. All right, and he explained it by saying: The hadith scholars mentioned that this last phrase was narrated in three ways: in the nominative, accusative, and jussive cases. So in the narration of the jussive case, we read it like this: and it is conjoined to “yabulanna,” but it is in the jussive case because the emphatic nun was not connected to it. And the meaning of the hadith is: None of you should urinate in stagnant water that does not flow, and not bathe in it. So this hadith contains two issues, each independent of the other. The first is the prohibition of urination, and the second is the prohibition of bathing in stagnant water that does not flow. Did you understand? In the narration of the accusative case, “thumma” here is treated like the conjunction “wa” (and) of accompaniment, and the verb following the conjunction of accompaniment after a prohibition is in the accusative case. You say: “Do not eat fish and drink milk,” meaning: along with drinking milk. They treated “thumma” here in terms of its grammatical function as what? As the conjunction “wa.” So they said: “None of you should urinate, and then bathe” (in the accusative). And on this basis, the meaning is: Do not combine urination and bathing. Do not combine urination and bathing.
All right, in the narration of the nominative case, the prohibition is of one issue, which is urination, and “yaghtasil” is a new sentence, not conjoined to “yabulanna” nor in the accusative case by treating “thumma” like the conjunction of accompaniment. But it is a new sentence, meaning: then he bathes in it. The meaning is that it is one of the ugliest things for a person to urinate in water and then go and bathe from it. This is contrary to fitrah (innate disposition), because the assumption is that the water is either made ritually impure by the urine or the soul is disgusted by it. So how do you urinate in something and then go and purify yourself with it? This is contrary to fitrah. Its parallel is that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited a man from beating his wife like a slave and then lying with her, like this: The meaning is: then he lies with her. What does this mean? It is contrary to fitrah and human nature. How do you beat her like a slave in the morning and come at night to lie with her to have intercourse with her? In reality, human nature rejects this. And on this basis, it is as if he is saying: None of you should urinate in stagnant water, and then afterwards need to bathe in it. And this is something that human nature rejects and is disgusted by.
In any case, let us take it as the first meaning. So this hadith contains the prohibition of two issues. The first is urination in stagnant water that does not flow, because if he urinates in it, human nature finds it disgusting, and perhaps with much urination and little water, what happens? The water changes due to impurity and becomes corrupt. The second issue is: do not bathe in stagnant water. Its apparent meaning is: do not bathe, neither from major ritual impurity nor for cleanliness, but the prohibition is general. The prohibition is general. But in some wordings of the hadith, it will be restricted to major ritual impurity to match the hadith of Abu Hurayrah that Muslim narrated. All right, so in this hadith there is a prohibition of two issues: urination in stagnant water and bathing in it. Is it restricted to major ritual impurity or taken in its general sense? It is taken in its general sense, because if we take it in its general sense, it includes bathing from major ritual impurity, bathing for cooling, and the like. This is an interjected phrase.
Then he said in the narration of Muslim: “And Muslim has:

from it

منه

” The difference between “minhu” (from it) and “fiihi” (in it) is that “fiihi” indicates immersion in the water, while “minhu” indicates scooping, and there is a difference between them.
He said: “And Abu Dawud has:

then wash in it after sexual defilement

ولا يغتسل فيه من الجنابة

Sunan Abi Dawud 70Hasan Sahih (Al-Albani)

” So it matches the narration of Muslim in the preposition “min” (from). Is that what you have?
The student: ...

The Shaykh : No, “fiihi” (in it). All right, and “wa laa yaghtasilu fiihi” (and not bathe in it) matches the narration of al-Bukhari, except that it is restricted by the fact that the intended meaning is to bathe in it from major ritual impurity. And with this restriction, it matches the wording of Muslim, which the author made the basis, which is his saying (peace and blessings be upon him): .