Explanation of the Book of Purification-03

The Shaykh : As for today's lesson, the author says, regarding the hadiths he cited in this chapter: "From Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said:

The purification of the utensil belonging to any one of you, after it is licked by a dog, lies in washing it seven times

طهور إناء أحدكم إذا ولغ فيه الكلب أن يغسله سبع مرات

Sahih Muslim 279d

".
His saying: with the dammah on the ta, meaning purification. Know that the forms fa'ul and fu'ul occur frequently in expressions like this, such as sahur and suhur, and wajur and wujur. The scholars say: the one with the fathah is the name for the thing by which the action is accomplished, and the one with the dammah is the action itself. Accordingly, al-tahur is the water by which one purifies oneself, and al-tuhur is the purity itself. Al-sahur is what one eats for the pre-dawn meal, such as dates or otherwise, and al-suhur with the dammah is the act of eating that pre-dawn meal.
The vessel is well known; it is the container used for eating, drinking, or other purposes. If a dog has drunk from it, "drinking" here means drinking with the tip of the tongue. The dog and the cat drink with their tongues; that is, it dips its tongue into the water and then lifts it, as if lapping up the water. This is the meaning of "lugh." And in a wording: .
And his saying: This is for clarification, and the possessive is not for specification. That is to say, if it drank from another vessel belonging to someone else, the ruling is the same. But this is a matter of clarification. "That he wash it": this is a verbal noun (masdar) construction; I mean that "an" is attached to the verb. When the verbal particle enters a verb, the verb is interpreted from the verbal noun. Accordingly, the meaning is "washing it seven times." So what is its grammatical status in that case?
The student: It is a predicate (khabar).

The Shaykh : A predicate for what? A predicate for "tahur." The verbal particle "an" attached to a verb is sometimes a subject (mubtada') and sometimes a predicate (khabar). So in His saying, the Exalted: it is a subject, and in this hadith it is a predicate. means the first of these seven washings is with soil. But how can the first of them be with soil? There are two ways: the first way is to wash it first with water, then sprinkle soil on it. The second way is to sprinkle soil on it, then pour water on it. Some mentioned a third form: mixing the soil with the water. The important thing is that the first washing is the one with soil. Muslim narrated it. In reality, al-Bukhari and Muslim and others also narrated it, but sometimes the scholars say "Muslim narrated it" even though it is narrated by all of them, because this is his wording. Okay, and in a wording of his, meaning of Muslim, means before he washes it, then he washes it. The scholars of hadith said that this wording is not authentic from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), but even if it is not authentic in wording, it is correct in meaning. Because this water from which the dog drank cannot be washed seven times, the first with soil, without usually pouring it out. We do not say "pour the water and drink it, then wash the vessel," because that is far from the intent of the Shari'ah. So even if it is not authentic in chain, it is correct in meaning.
And al-Tirmidhi has: The author brought the wording of al-Tirmidhi here because the author wants "or" here to indicate choice, even though it can be said that it indicates doubt. If it indicates doubt, then the wording of Muslim has no doubt, so the doubtful one is carried over to the one without doubt. In that case, the washing with soil is the?
The student: The first one.

The Shaykh : The first one. But if someone says: if it can be carried over to choice or variation, that is better than carrying it over to doubt, because carrying it over to doubt is a criticism of the narrator's memory. So why not make it for choice? We say: this is true. If the matter is in doubt, and this is a useful rule: if the matter revolves around whether "or" is for variation, or for choice, or for doubt, the best is to carry it over to what?
The student: To variation.

The Shaykh : Yes, to variation or choice, according to the context and the indication. Why is this better? Because carrying it over to doubt is a criticism of the narrator's memory, and the original state is the absence of criticism. But if we find a narration in the same hadith, then here we carry it over to doubt, because the narration without doubt is considered of the clear (muhkam) type, and the absence of doubt is of the ambiguous (mutashabih) type.