Explanation of the author's statement: "And if it is mixed with pure water, he performs one ablution from both, taking a handful from this and a handful from that, and prays one prayer."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Yes, he says "And if it is mixed with pure water, he performs one ablution from both, taking a handful from this and a handful from that, and prays one prayer". Is this mixed with pure water? Does this apply according to the correct opinion?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Why? Because there is no pure water; there is no pure water that is not purifying. However, according to the school of thought, if it is mixed with pure water, how is it mixed? How can it be mixed with pure water? Pure water does not change... or if it is dropped in, it becomes changed. But we say that the pure water is more than this. He dipped his hand in it while standing up from a night sleep, which invalidates the ablution. It is possible that this is not the case; he thought it was purifying water. He dipped his hand in it while standing up from a night sleep, which invalidates the ablution, so it is pure but not purifying. So this man has two waters: one of which he is certain that he first dipped his hand in it when he woke up from sleep, but he does not know whether it is number one or number two. Now the purifying water is mixed with what? With pure water. What does he do? Do we say like the first case, that he does not investigate? We say he does not investigate. Yes, he does not investigate because there is no investigation. So what does he do? He performs dry ablution? No, because using pure water here does not harm him, unlike the first issue. In the first issue, it harms him; it makes his clothes impure and his body impure. But this does not harm him. So how does he do it? He performs one ablution, not two, taking a handful from this and a handful from that, obligatorily. A handful from this and a handful from that, obligatorily. And in this case, it is possible to pose a riddle in this issue and say: A man is obligated to repeat the ablution. Repeating is not permissible; the ablution is once. But this man must perform the ablution twice, taking two handfuls. He takes a handful from this to wash his hands and forearms, then takes a handful from this to wash his forearms, then takes a handful from this to wash his face, and a handful from this to wash his face, and a handful from this to wash his right hand, and a handful from this to wash his right hand, and so on until he completes it. He must also wipe the head; he takes from this and says his hand, and from this and says his hand. It must be clear. Why? Because some scholars say—I say why—for the sake of the fact that if he completes his ablution, he becomes certain that he performed the ablution with purifying water. If he finishes and washes his feet, he is now certain that he performed the ablution with purifying water, so his ablution is valid. So if someone asks, why does he not perform a complete ablution from this, then return and perform a complete ablution from that? We say it is not possible. Why? Because each of them is possible to be the purifying water, and in that case, the order between the limbs is disrupted. It is possible, like if you washed a complete ablution from number one, it might be the purifying water or the pure water. So you have now performed this ablution while in doubt about it, yes or no? In doubt about it. You come to the second and say, "I will perform a complete ablution from it." You have now performed the ablution; are you in doubt or not? In doubt. So you performed the ablution while in doubt about it. This is from one aspect. From another aspect, it is possible that this purifying water is what you washed your face with, and then the second one is the purifying water, and you washed with it after you completed washing your face. Or if you washed the hand, we can say the opposite, and this results in a disruption of the order. So now this is based on two things regarding the invalidity, or there are two reasons for the invalidity. The first reason is that every ablution you perform, you are in doubt about it. You did not perform an ablution that is equal to the second. If we assume that I performed a complete ablution, and then we assume that the pure water is the first one from which I performed the ablution, meaning the purifying water, and then I performed the complete ablution from the second one, which is the pure water, this is not possible to be certain about in every limb. You might be certain about the first one, or it might be predominant in your mind that this is the purifying water when washing the face, and in the second one, it might be predominant in your mind that this is the purifying water when washing the face or when washing the hand. And the opposite is the same. There will be a difference in the order, meaning that your assumption that this is the pure water or this is the purifying water may differ according to the limbs. The order will differ. Is that clear?
The questioner : Is it not clear? Clarify, O our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Now, I performed a complete ablution from this and finished, then I wanted to perform a complete ablution from the second one. For every limb of my limbs, I assume that this is the purifying water or that this is the pure water. For every limb, is that not so? So if we assume that the first one is the purifying water, it is possible that we followed the order. If we assume that the second one is the purifying water, did we follow the order or not? We did not follow the order, because it differed. For example, I washed my hand in the first one assuming that that was the purifying water, and now I washed my face assuming that this is the purifying water. Because for every limb I wash, I assume that this is the purifying water or that this is the pure water.
The questioner : And if they agree, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : It is not possible for them to agree while I am in doubt about it.
The questioner : What is the ruling for the one who forgets?
The Shaykh : The reality is other than what I believe. So the important thing is that the first reason is clear to you: that you are performing a purification while in doubt about it. It is not said that certainty is achieved by their combination. You say, "Because when I performed one of them, I was in doubt about it; I do not have certainty." Therefore, he says he performs one ablution, not two. He also prays one prayer. Some scholars said he performs two ablutions and prays two prayers: he performs an ablution with this, then prays, then performs an ablution with the second one, then prays, in order to be certain by the two actions that he performed a valid ablution and prayed a valid prayer. But according to the stronger and correct opinion, this is not applicable at all, because the correct view is that water does not become pure but not purifying; rather, it is either purifying or impure.
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Why? Because there is no pure water; there is no pure water that is not purifying. However, according to the school of thought, if it is mixed with pure water, how is it mixed? How can it be mixed with pure water? Pure water does not change... or if it is dropped in, it becomes changed. But we say that the pure water is more than this. He dipped his hand in it while standing up from a night sleep, which invalidates the ablution. It is possible that this is not the case; he thought it was purifying water. He dipped his hand in it while standing up from a night sleep, which invalidates the ablution, so it is pure but not purifying. So this man has two waters: one of which he is certain that he first dipped his hand in it when he woke up from sleep, but he does not know whether it is number one or number two. Now the purifying water is mixed with what? With pure water. What does he do? Do we say like the first case, that he does not investigate? We say he does not investigate. Yes, he does not investigate because there is no investigation. So what does he do? He performs dry ablution? No, because using pure water here does not harm him, unlike the first issue. In the first issue, it harms him; it makes his clothes impure and his body impure. But this does not harm him. So how does he do it? He performs one ablution, not two, taking a handful from this and a handful from that, obligatorily. A handful from this and a handful from that, obligatorily. And in this case, it is possible to pose a riddle in this issue and say: A man is obligated to repeat the ablution. Repeating is not permissible; the ablution is once. But this man must perform the ablution twice, taking two handfuls. He takes a handful from this to wash his hands and forearms, then takes a handful from this to wash his forearms, then takes a handful from this to wash his face, and a handful from this to wash his face, and a handful from this to wash his right hand, and a handful from this to wash his right hand, and so on until he completes it. He must also wipe the head; he takes from this and says his hand, and from this and says his hand. It must be clear. Why? Because some scholars say—I say why—for the sake of the fact that if he completes his ablution, he becomes certain that he performed the ablution with purifying water. If he finishes and washes his feet, he is now certain that he performed the ablution with purifying water, so his ablution is valid. So if someone asks, why does he not perform a complete ablution from this, then return and perform a complete ablution from that? We say it is not possible. Why? Because each of them is possible to be the purifying water, and in that case, the order between the limbs is disrupted. It is possible, like if you washed a complete ablution from number one, it might be the purifying water or the pure water. So you have now performed this ablution while in doubt about it, yes or no? In doubt about it. You come to the second and say, "I will perform a complete ablution from it." You have now performed the ablution; are you in doubt or not? In doubt. So you performed the ablution while in doubt about it. This is from one aspect. From another aspect, it is possible that this purifying water is what you washed your face with, and then the second one is the purifying water, and you washed with it after you completed washing your face. Or if you washed the hand, we can say the opposite, and this results in a disruption of the order. So now this is based on two things regarding the invalidity, or there are two reasons for the invalidity. The first reason is that every ablution you perform, you are in doubt about it. You did not perform an ablution that is equal to the second. If we assume that I performed a complete ablution, and then we assume that the pure water is the first one from which I performed the ablution, meaning the purifying water, and then I performed the complete ablution from the second one, which is the pure water, this is not possible to be certain about in every limb. You might be certain about the first one, or it might be predominant in your mind that this is the purifying water when washing the face, and in the second one, it might be predominant in your mind that this is the purifying water when washing the face or when washing the hand. And the opposite is the same. There will be a difference in the order, meaning that your assumption that this is the pure water or this is the purifying water may differ according to the limbs. The order will differ. Is that clear?
The questioner : Is it not clear? Clarify, O our Shaykh.
The Shaykh : Now, I performed a complete ablution from this and finished, then I wanted to perform a complete ablution from the second one. For every limb of my limbs, I assume that this is the purifying water or that this is the pure water. For every limb, is that not so? So if we assume that the first one is the purifying water, it is possible that we followed the order. If we assume that the second one is the purifying water, did we follow the order or not? We did not follow the order, because it differed. For example, I washed my hand in the first one assuming that that was the purifying water, and now I washed my face assuming that this is the purifying water. Because for every limb I wash, I assume that this is the purifying water or that this is the pure water.
The questioner : And if they agree, O Shaykh?
The Shaykh : It is not possible for them to agree while I am in doubt about it.
The questioner : What is the ruling for the one who forgets?
The Shaykh : The reality is other than what I believe. So the important thing is that the first reason is clear to you: that you are performing a purification while in doubt about it. It is not said that certainty is achieved by their combination. You say, "Because when I performed one of them, I was in doubt about it; I do not have certainty." Therefore, he says he performs one ablution, not two. He also prays one prayer. Some scholars said he performs two ablutions and prays two prayers: he performs an ablution with this, then prays, then performs an ablution with the second one, then prays, in order to be certain by the two actions that he performed a valid ablution and prayed a valid prayer. But according to the stronger and correct opinion, this is not applicable at all, because the correct view is that water does not become pure but not purifying; rather, it is either purifying or impure.