The Distinguished Jurists Primer by Ibn Rushd

The basis of this chapter are the words of the Exalted, UO ye who believe! When ye rise up for prayer, wash your faces, and your hands up to the elbows, and lightly rub your heads and (wash) your feet up to the ankles”,56 and the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “Allah does not accept prayer without purification nor charity from misappropriated proceeds”.

The jurists, therefore, agreed that purification is one of the conditions of prayer, because of these evidences, though they differed on whether it is 3 condition of validity or a condition of obligation. They did not disagree that it is a condition for all forms of prayer, except the funeral prayer and prostration, that is, the prostration of recitation, for there is some deviant disagreement about that. The reason for this are the different possibilities in the meaning of the term “salah” (prayer). They differed as to whether the term applies to the funeral prayer and prostration on reciting certain QuPanic verses. Those who maintained that the term “salah” applies to the funeral prayer and to prostration (of recitation) itself, and these are the majority, stipulated this form of purification for it, while those who held that the term does not apply to them, as the funeral does not involve bowing or prostrations, and there is no standing or bowing in prostrations (of recitation) either, they did not stipulate this form of purification for it. There are four issues related to this chapter under this main issue.

Malik, Abu HanTfa, and al-ShafiT held that it is a condition for touching the mushaf (copy of the Qur’an), while the Zahirites held that it is not. The reason for disagreement is whether the meaning of the words of the Exalted, “Which none toucheth save the purified”,57 refers to humans or angels, or whether this statement implies a prohibition or is just a report. Those who deemed the word “purified” to mean humans, and interpreted the statement as a prohibition, said that it is not permitted for anyone, but the purified to touch the mushaf. Those who interpreted it as a report and interpreted the word “purified” as an allusion to angels said that there is no indication in the verse about the stipulation of purification as a condition for touching the mushaf And as there is no evidence in the Book or in the sunna, the matter is to be left to the original rule of non-liability, which is permissibility.

The majority argued for their opinion on the basis of the tradition of cAmr ihn Hazm “that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) wrote: ‘None but the purified touch the Qur’an.’”. The traditions of cAmr ibn Hazm are disputed among the scholars with respect to the obligation of acting upon them, as a writing error (tashif) occurred in them, though I have seen Ibn abMufawwaz declaring them as sahih when reported by reliable narrators, for they are letters of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him). The Sarne is said about the traditions of cAmr ibn Shu^yb from his father from his grandfather, though the Zahirites reject them. Malik made an exemption in the case of minors touching the mushaf when they are not purified, as they have not reached the age of liability.

The jurists disagreed about the obligation of (performing the minor) ablution or a person who was sexually defiled, in certain cases. The first is when, a ving committed a major hadath, he wishes to continue sleeping. The Majority upheld the recommendation of ablution, but not its obligation. The Zahirites maintain that it is obligatory, because it is established from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) through the tradition of (Umar that he asked the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) what he had to do when he is involved in a major hadath (like intercourse or seminal discharge) during the night. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said to him, “Perform ablution and wash your penis, and then go to sleep”. This is also related from him through <A isha. The majority chose 5

to construe the command as a recommendation and to relegate the literal meaning due to its incompatibility with the obligation of purification when the intention is to go to sleep, that is, legal compatibility.

They (the majority) also argued for this on the basis of other traditions, the most authentic of which is the tradition of Ibn cAbbas that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) once returned from the privy and was brought food. It was said to him, “Should we not bring you (water for) purification?” He replied, “Am I going to pray that I should perform ablution?” In some versions, it was said to him, “Would you perform ablution?” He replied, “I have not resolved to pray as yet, so that I may perform ablution”. Seeking support from this is weak, for it is one of the weakest kinds of implication of the text. They also argued on the basis of the tradition of <A>isha “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to go to sleep after being involved in a major hadath without touching water”. This, however, is a weak tradition.

Likewise, they disagreed about the obligation of ablution for the person with a major hadath when he wishes to eat or drink, or one who wishes to re­ copulate. The majority decided to drop the obligation due to the lack of (legal) compatibility of purification with all these things, as purification has been prescribed in the law for solemn occasions (ritual) like prayers. In addition to this, there is a conflict of traditions on this issue. It is related from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings Be upon him) “that he ordered that a person with janaba, wishing to repeat intercourse, should perform ablution”. It is also related that he used to cohabit and then repeat it without performing ablution. Similarly, the prohibition of eating and drinking for a person with janaba is related from him, unless the person performed ablution. Its permissibility is also related from him.

Malik and al-ShafiT stipulated ablution for circumambulation, while Abu Harnfa held it to be unnecessary. The reason for disagreement is the vacillation of the hukm of circumambulation whether it should be associated with the hukm of prayers. On the one hand, there is the established report “that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited circumambulation to the menstruating woman, just as he prohibited her to pray”. From this aspect tawaf resembles prayer. In some traditions circumambulation has been called prayer.

Abu Hanifa’s argument is that purification is not a condition for everything that is prohibited during menstruation, when it is to be performed after the cessation of menstruation. For example, fasting in the opinion of-the majority (does not need ablution).

The majority maintained that it is permitted for a person who has not performed ablution to recite the Qur’an and engage in the remembrance of Allah. A group of jurist said that this is not permitted, unless he performs ablution.

The reason for disagreement are two established conflicting traditions. The first is the tradition of Abu Jahm, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) was coming from the side of BPr Jamal when he met a man who greeted him (with a salam). The Prophet did not return the greeting till he reached the side of the wall, where he rubbed his face and hands, and then returned the greeting”. The second tradition is that of CAIT, “that nothing prevented the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) from the recitation of the Qur’an, except janaba”.

The majority maintained that the second tradition had abrogated the first, while those who made ablution obligatory for the remembrance of Allah preferred the first tradition.