Explanation of the author's statement: "And among the sunnahs of wudu' are the siwak and washing the two hands three times, and it is obligatory from sleep at night that invalidates the wudu'."

The questioner : He said "And among the sunnahs of wudu' are the siwak". "Among the sunnahs" is a fronted predicate, and "the siwak" is a deferred subject. "Sunnahs" is the plural of "sunnah." The term "sunnah" is used for the way, which consists of the words, deeds, and approvals of the Messenger, (peace and blessings be upon him). The distinction here is between the obligatory and the recommended. The obligatory is called a sunnah, and the recommended is called a sunnah. An example of the obligatory is that Anas said, "It is a sunnah that when a man marries a virgin to a woman who has been married before, he stays with her for seven days". This is an obligatory sunnah. And an example of the recommended sunnah is the hadith of Ibn Mas'ud: "It is a sunnah to place the right hand over the left hand in prayer." This is a recommended sunnah. As for the sunnah according to the jurists and the scholars of legal theory, they mean by it what is other than the obligatory, meaning that which is commanded not by way of compulsion. Its ruling is that its doer is rewarded and its leaver is not punished. The intended meaning of "sunnah" in the speech of the jurists, whenever it comes to you, is the sunnah of voluntary acts, not the obligatory, because this is their terminology. "Among the sunnahs of wudu' is the siwak." It was mentioned earlier that it is emphasized in it. Its evidence is the saying of the Prophet, (peace and blessings be upon him), . "And washing the two hands three times". This is because the Prophet, (peace and blessings be upon him), when he performed wudu', began by washing the two hands three times. And because they are the instrument of washing, for by them the water is transferred and by them the limbs are rubbed, so it is more fitting that their purification precede. This is, in his view, evidence and reasoning. If you ask, "Why do you not say that it is obligatory given the Prophet's, (peace and blessings be upon him), constant practice of it?" We say that Allah says, , and He did not mention the two hands. He said, "And washing the two hands three times". And it is obligatory from sleep at night that invalidates the wudu'. "It is obligatory"—the pronoun refers to washing the two hands three times. It is obligatory from sleep at night that invalidates the wudu', but only for one who intends to immerse them in the vessel. Its evidence is the hadith of Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah, (peace and blessings be upon him), said, . The second time in the hadith, . So his saying "do not immerse until you wash" indicates the obligation of preceding the washing, because he must perform wudu'. And the author's saying, "from sleep at night", excludes sleep during the day, so washing the two hands is not obligatory from it. Here, if someone were to say, "In the hadith, , 'sleep' is a singular noun with a possessive, which includes all sleep. And 'if' in his saying, , is an absolute adverb of time, which includes the hours of the night and the hours of the day. Why do you restrict it to the night?" They said, "We restrict it to the night by the reasoning with which the Prophet, (peace and blessings be upon him), reasoned in his saying, . And staying overnight does not occur except at night. This is from the category of specifying the general by what? By the cause. Specifying the general by the cause. This is its method. So if someone asks you, "Give me an example of specifying the general by the cause," this is the example. They say, "Because the Messenger, (peace and blessings be upon him), reasoned with a cause that is not suitable except for sleep at night, the intended meaning of the general in his saying 'from his sleep' is what? Sleep at night. It is general, but I intend by it, O Husayn, I intend by it the specific. Good. And his saying, "from sleep at night", that invalidates the wudu', is to avoid what if it were not invalidating. And what is the invalidating factor? Every sleep, according to the madhhab, is invalidating, except a little sleep of one who is standing or sitting. And the correct view is that the criterion in invalidating the wudu' is what? It is the sense. As long as a person is aware of himself, if he were to pass wind, his sleep does not invalidate his wudu'. And if he is not aware of himself if he were to pass wind, then his sleep is invalidated. And this is what the jurists mentioned here where they said "that invalidates the wudu'," which supports that the stronger opinion is that the sleep that invalidates the wudu' is that in which a person loses his sense. The indication of this is that his saying, , means that his sense is lost. And on this basis, if a person is aware such that he has not lost his sense, then his wudu' is not invalidated, even though the jurists in the chapter of the invalidators of wudu' contradict that. If it is obligatory to wash the two hands before putting them in the vessel three times if one wakes up from sleep at night that invalidates the wudu'.