Is it permissible to drink from the spout of a jug or a water skin? And does this include a transparent glass bottle?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Another student: Our brother has a connection in the issue.
The questioner: ... meaning, we limited it to a water skin, for example. This jug, if we place this mouth of the jug, steam and breath also enter it.
The Shaykh: No, it does not enter; it enters anywhere, even here. But the point is whether this touches it or not, meaning that with frequent use, it gets what affects the skin, namely foulness. "The ruling revolves with the cause, in its presence and absence," as you know.
The questioner: Do we limit the cause to what you mentioned, which is the foulness, or could there be something else in the water skin or the jug, meaning something like an insect entered it or something similar?
The Shaykh: Yes, that is possible. As for the foulness, this is explicitly stated in the texts.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: As for the foulness, this is explicitly stated in the texts, but the second cause you are mentioning does not apply, because its meaning is reasonable in clear glass vessels, for example.
The questioner: No, I am saying ... .
The Shaykh: I am bringing you the statement, I am bringing you the statement.
The questioner : Yes, yes.
The Shaykh: So it does not apply to open glass vessels, but rather to vessels in which what is inside is not visible. This is correct, this is correct. And I think this occurred in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); I think a snake or a viper was found.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Yes, yes, that is fine. What else?
The questioner: ... meaning, we limited it to a water skin, for example. This jug, if we place this mouth of the jug, steam and breath also enter it.
The Shaykh: No, it does not enter; it enters anywhere, even here. But the point is whether this touches it or not, meaning that with frequent use, it gets what affects the skin, namely foulness. "The ruling revolves with the cause, in its presence and absence," as you know.
The questioner: Do we limit the cause to what you mentioned, which is the foulness, or could there be something else in the water skin or the jug, meaning something like an insect entered it or something similar?
The Shaykh: Yes, that is possible. As for the foulness, this is explicitly stated in the texts.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: As for the foulness, this is explicitly stated in the texts, but the second cause you are mentioning does not apply, because its meaning is reasonable in clear glass vessels, for example.
The questioner: No, I am saying ... .
The Shaykh: I am bringing you the statement, I am bringing you the statement.
The questioner : Yes, yes.
The Shaykh: So it does not apply to open glass vessels, but rather to vessels in which what is inside is not visible. This is correct, this is correct. And I think this occurred in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); I think a snake or a viper was found.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh: Yes, yes, that is fine. What else?
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.