Explanation of the author's statement: "And if multiple states of ritual impurity that require wudu' or ghusl occur together, and he intends with his purification to remove one of them, the rest are removed."

The Shaykh : Then he said "And if multiple states of ritual impurity that require wudu' or ghusl occur together, and he intends with his purification to remove one of them, the rest are removed". If multiple states of ritual impurity that require wudu' occur together, meaning a person commits several things that break wudu', such as urinating, passing wind, eating camel meat, or sleeping deeply. These are five things. If he does all five of these things, these are the states of ritual impurity that require wudu'. If he intends purification from urination only, it suffices for all of them. However, if he intends purification from urination only, meaning with the condition that the others are not removed, then it does not suffice except for the urination. They said this is due to the generality of His saying . It was also said that it suffices for it and the others, because the state of ritual impurity is a single description, and even if its causes are multiple, the state of ritual impurity does not actually become multiple. It is a single description; if its causes are multiple, it does not become multiple. So if he intends to remove it, it is removed, even if he specifies only one cause from among them. It was also said that if he specifies the first one, the rest are removed, but if he specifies the second one, nothing of them is removed. The basis for this opinion is that the second one occurred upon a state of ritual impurity, not upon a state of purity. For example, he urinated first, then passed wind, then performed wudu' for the passing wind only. They say this does not suffice for the cause, because the second one occurred upon a state of ritual impurity, so it had no effect. Consequently, if he intends to remove the state of ritual impurity from the second one, it is not removed, because there is no state of ritual impurity from it, since the state of ritual impurity is from the first one. All of these, as you see, are merely independent legal reasoning and explanations. The correct view is that if he intends to remove the state of ritual impurity from one of them, it is removed from all of them, even if he intends that the others are not removed. Because we say that the state of ritual impurity is a single description, and even if its causes are multiple, if he intends to remove it from the urination, it is removed and he is cleansed. We do not say that this contradicts the saying of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) , because he did not intend except for the state of ritual impurity from the urination. Because we say that the state of ritual impurity is one thing, so if he intends to remove it, it is removed. It is not the case that if a person urinates at one o'clock, he has a state of ritual impurity, and then if he passes wind at one-thirty, he has another state of ritual impurity, and a third, and a fourth, and so on. No, the state of ritual impurity is one, and the causes are multiple. Whatever you intend to remove the state of ritual impurity with, or to remove the state of ritual impurity from, it suffices for you. If states of ritual impurity that require ghusl occur together, for example, intercourse and the emission of semen... in any case, two are sufficient, and for example, menstruation and post-natal bleeding in a woman. If these states of ritual impurity occur together and she intends with her ghusl to remove one of them, then all of them are removed, just as we said regarding the minor state of ritual impurity. The major state of ritual impurity or the state of ritual impurity is removed from all of them if there is menstruation and post-natal bleeding. And for this reason, the author said "the rest are removed". And the reason is what we mentioned, that the state of ritual impurity is a single description, and if it is removed, it is removed from all of them.