Explanation of the author's statement: "And the impure is that which has changed due to impurity, or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount, or that which separated from a place of impurity before its removal."

The Shaykh : The impure is that which has changed due to impurity "The impure is that which, 'ma' here is a negation, not a relative pronoun, meaning the impure thing that has changed" that which has changed due to impurity "The author (may Allah have mercy on him) clarified what is meant by 'changed,' but it is understood from his previous statement in the section on the pure that the intended meaning is taste, color, or smell. So, that which has changed due to impurity in its taste, color, or smell. An exception to that which has changed by smell is what was mentioned previously: if it changed by being adjacent to carrion, it was stated that it does not become impure because the impurity was not in it. This statement, or this ruling, is agreed upon that that which has changed due to impurity is impure by consensus. There are also hadiths, though weak, that indicate this, such as

Water is purifying...

الماء طهور ...

the hadith of Abu Umamah

Water is purifying, nothing makes it impure except that which overpowers its taste, color, or smell. Impurity that occurs in it.

الماء طهور لا ينجسه شيء إلا ما غلب على طعمه أو لونه أو ريحه ينجاسة تحدث فيه

"Impurity is that which has changed due to impurity, whatever kind of impurity it is, even if it is human urine or liquid excrement, even if it is so, even if the impurity is one for which a small amount is excused, like blood. Yes, that which has changed due to impurity is impure. This is the first. He said, ' or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount ' 'Came into contact with it' means it came into contact with the impurity while it was a small amount. The phrase 'while it was a small amount' is a circumstantial clause, meaning while the state is that it is a small amount. What is a small amount? Less than two qullahs. So, if it came into contact with it while it was a small amount, whether it changed or not, what is the evidence? If it changed, the evidence is clear: consensus and the hadiths we mentioned, and the reasoning, because when it changed due to filth, it became filthy, so that is its evidence: the athar and the reasoning. But 'or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount,' what is the evidence that that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount, even if it did not change, is impure?

If water reaches two qullahs, it does not carry impurity

إذا بلغ الماء قلتين لم يحمل الخبث

Sunan ad-Daraqutni 1:11

In one wording, it does not become impure . We have previously discussed this and clarified that this indicates, by its explicit wording, that it does not become impure if it reaches this amount. But if it does not reach it, it indicates, by its implied meaning, that it becomes impure. However, the explicit wording of takes precedence over it. And thus, the correct view regarding his statement 'came into contact with it while it was a small amount ' is that this is not part of the category of the impure until it changes. An exception to this, according to the madhhab, is 'or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount' . An exception to this is if it came into contact with it in a place of purification, in which case it does not become impure. How? In a place of purification, for example, a person has impurity on his garment and he can put a lot of water on it, or a little, less than two qullahs, which comes into contact with the impurity. If I say it is impure from the moment of contact, it becomes difficult; it would not be possible to purify it, it would not be possible to purify this impure thing. If we say that if it comes into contact with it in a place of purification it becomes impure, it means that the water has now become impure and does not purify. Pouring a second water would become impure and purify, and so on, it would always remain impure. But they exclude this and say 'in other than a place of purification,' and they reasoned that if we ruled it impure in a place of purification, whether it changed or not, we would not be able to rule anything as pure. The third, he said, "or that which separated from a place". Yes, note that the phrase 'in a place other than a place of purification' means that from the day the water separates from this place, what will it be? It will be impure. He said, "or that which separated from a place of impurity before its removal". This is the third: that which separated from a place of impurity before its removal. Removal of its substance or removal of its ruling? The first is to say removal of its ruling, because if we said removal of its substance, it would be true that it came into contact with it while it was a small amount, so in the phrase it would be somewhat repetitive. So we say 'or that which came into contact with it, or that which separated from a place of impurity before its removal,' meaning its removal, meaning the removal of its ruling. If you ask why not make it removal of its substance or its ruling? We say because if it separated before the removal of its substance, it had come into contact with it while it was a small amount, and the ruling is known from the previous phrase. This impure thing now, Khalid, how many categories of impurity are there? Three: that which changed due to impurity, or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount, or that which separated from a place of impurity before its removal. Okay, this is water to purify an impure garment. The impurity was removed in the first washing, and its effect was finally removed in the second washing. So we washed it the third, fourth, fifth, and sixth times. What is the water separating from these washings? Is it impure because it came into contact with the impurity? I ask you, no. But it separated from the place of impurity before its removal, before the removal of its ruling. It is not that it came into contact with it, but it separated before the removal of the ruling of impurity, so it is impure. So the categories of impure, or types of impure, are three. The first.

The questioner : That which changed due to impurity.

The Shaykh : And the second.

The questioner : Contact in ...

The Shaykh : And the third is that which separated from a place of impurity before its removal. Okay, then when the author (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned the impure, how do we purify this impure thing? We now have impure water and we want to perform wudu' and keep this water. How do we purify it? The author says there is a note before his statement "or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount". The implication is that if it came into contact with it while it was a large amount, it is not impure unless it changes. But it was previously stated that human urine and liquid excrement are not limited by the large amount; what are they limited by? By what is difficult to remove. And thus, if it came into contact with urine while it was a large amount, but it is not difficult to remove, it becomes impure merely by contact. The author's statement here should be noted in light of what was mentioned previously, and it is said 'or that which came into contact with it while it was a small amount,' the implication of which is that if it came into contact with it while it was a large amount, it does not become impure. But an exception to this is human urine and liquid excrement. As for how it is purified.