净化用水成为义务的依据，是至高者的话语："他从天上降下水来，借以洁净你们"，44 以及他的话语："……如果你们找不到水，就去找洁净的泥土，用它擦你们的脸和手。"45

The basis for the obligation of purification with water are the words of the Exalted, “And (He) sends down water from the sky upon you, that thereby He might purify you”,44 and His words, “.. . and then ye find not water, then go to high clean soil and rub your faces and your hands (therewith)”.45

学者们一致认为，各种水本身都是洁净的，并且能够洁净其他物体，唯独海水除外。关于海水，在早期曾有一些分歧。持异议者的观点被驳倒，理由是：海水包含在“水”这一不加限定的通用称谓之内；此外，还有马立克所记载的圣训，即先知ﷺ所说的：“它的水是洁净的，它的死物是可食的。”尽管这段圣训的真实性存在争议，但从法理上看，它显然是支持这一观点的。

The jurists agreed that all kinds of water are pure in themselves, purifying other things, except for the water of the sea, about which there was some disagreement in the first period. They (the dissenters) are defeated by the fact that sea-water is included within the unqualified use of the term “water” and also by the tradition recorded by Malik, which is the saying of the Prophet, “Its water is pure, and its dead creatures are lawful”. Although, this is a tradition whose authenticity is disputed, the law apparently supports it.

学者们similarly也一致认为：那些改变水的性状、且通常存在于水中（或通常不会与水分离，如青苔）的物质，并不会剥夺水的洁净性和净化能力。关于静止水，伊本·西林曾有轻微的不同意见，但此处他的观点也被驳斥，理由是“水”一词的绝对用法同样适用于静止水。 学者们一致认为：若水因不洁之物而在味道、颜色或气味上发生改变，或在其中两种及以上性状上发生改变，则不得用于小净、大净或其他净化用途。他们还一致认为：大量的水即使遇到不洁之物，只要没有改变上述任一性状，便不会因此受到污染，仍然是洁净的。

The jurists, similarly, agreed about things that alter the water and that are normally found in it (or that are not normally separated from it, like green moss), do not usurp its purification and the quality of purifying, except for slight disagreement recounted about stagnant water by Ibn Sirin, whose opinion here is also rejected on the ground that the absolute use of the term “water” applies to stagnant water as well. They agreed about water that has been altered by impurity with respect to taste, colour, or smell, or with respect to more than one of these qualities, that it is not permitted for purposes of ablution or purification. They agreed that water in large quantities is not defiled by impurities that do not alter one of its (mentioned) qualities, and that it remains pure.

这是他们在这个议题上达成一致的内容，但对六个类似该议题规则和原则的问题存在分歧。

This is what they agreed upon in this topic, but they disagreed about six issues that are like rules and principles of the topic.

他们对含有杂质但其任何属性未被改变的水存在分歧。一派法学家认为，无论水量多少，这种水都是洁净的。这是马立克的一种传述，也为追随字面义的学派（Zahirites）所主张。另一派则区分水量的多少：若水量少，则为不洁；若水量多，则不为不洁。随后他们又在区分少量与大量之水的界限上产生了分歧。艾布·哈尼法的观点是，大量之水是指一端有人搅动时，其波纹不能到达另一端的水。依沙斐仪的见解，其界限是两个“古拉”（容器）的容量，约重五百“拉提”（磅）。另有一些法学家没有设定任何界限，但他们认为，即使水的属性未被改变，落入少量水中的杂质仍会使水不洁。这一说法传自马立克。也有传述称，这种水并不因此而不洁，只是使用它是可憎的。因此，关于在其中落入小件不洁之物的少量水的使用，马立克有三种观点：第一，这种水已经因此而不洁，或已不可使用；第二，只要其属性没有改变，它就没有不洁；第三，使用它是可憎的。

They disagreed about water that contains impurities, but where none of its attributes is altered. One group of jurists said that it is pure irrespective of large or small quantities. This is one of the narrations from Malik and is also upheld by the Zahirites. Another group made a distinction between water in large and small quantities, saying that if there is little of it, it is impure and if there is much of it, it is not. They disagreed then about the demarcation separating small from large quantities (of water). Abu HanTfa’s opinion is that a large quantity of water is that in which a ripple caused by a person at one end does not reach the other side. According to al-ShafiT the limit is the fill of two qullas (containers), which weigh about five hundred rati (pounds). Some jurists did not impose any limit, though they held that impurities defile water in small quantities, even if its attributes are not changed. This is related from Malik. It is also related that such water is riot defiled, but that its use is undesirable. Thus, there are three opinions from Malik about the use of small Quantities of water in which small impure objects have been dropped. First, that it has thus been defiled, or it has been rendered unusable. Second, that it has not been defiled, so long as its attributes have not changed. Third, that its use is reprehensible.

这一分歧的根源在于关于此事所传圣训表面含义之间的冲突。在前述阿布·胡莱赖(Abu Hurayra)的圣训中——“你们中任何一人从睡眠中醒来时”——其表面含义是少量不洁会污染少量的水。同样，阿布·胡莱赖传自先知ﷺ的圣训中，他说：“任何人都不应在静止的水中小便，然后又用它来洗涤。”从其表面含义可以理解，少量不洁会弄脏少量的水。同样，对于已有大污的人在静水中洗涤的禁止，也是基于这一理解。这与安斯(Anas)所传圣训的含义相悖，该圣训称：“一个贝都因人走到清真寺的一侧去小便，人们对他大声呵斥。安拉的使者ﷺ说：‘让他去吧。’那人小便完毕后，安拉的使者ﷺ命人取来一桶水浇在他的尿液上。”这段圣训从其表面含义表明，少量的小污并不会污染少量的水，因为显然这块地方是用一桶水洗净的。此外还有阿布·赛义德·胡德里(Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri)所传、由艾布·达乌德(Abu Dawud)记录的圣训。他说：“我听到安拉的使者ﷺ被问及布扎阿井(the well of Buda‘a)的水能否使用，那是一口人们往里丢弃狗肉、月经布和污物的井。先知ﷺ说：‘没有任何东西能污染水。’”

The reason for disagreement here is based upon the conflict of the apparent meanings of traditions recounted on this matter. In the preceding tradition of Abu Hurayra—“When one of you wakes up from sleep”—the apparent meaning is that a small amount of impurity defiles a small amount of water. Similarly, in the tradition of Abu Hurayra established form the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) where he said, “No one should urinate in standing water and then use it for washing”, from the apparent meaning of w hich it is understood that a small amount of impurity soils a small quantity of water. So also the proscription of washing in still water by the person who has acquired a major impurity. This is opposed to the implications of the tradition Anas, which reports: “A bedouin went to the side of the mosque to relieve l mself, and the people shouted at him. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace an d blessings be upon him) said, ‘Leave him alone’. After the man had relieved himself the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) ordered a pitcher of water to be poured over his urine”. This tradition indicates through its apparent meaning that a minor impurity does not defile a small quantity of water, as it is obvious that this spot became clean with a pitcher of water. There is also the tradition of Abu SaTd al-Khudri, recorded by Abu Dawud. He said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) being asked whether the water of the well of Buda<a could be used, and it was a well in which dog flesh, menstrual clothes, and dirt were cast. The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Nothing defiles water’”.

在藏红花或其他通常可以免费获得之物掺入水中，改变了水的某一属性，按照所有法学家的意见，这水仍是洁净的，但按照马立克和沙斐仪的意见，它失去了净化的能力。按照艾卜·哈尼法的意见，只要属性的改变不是通过加热造成的，它仍能净化。分歧的根源在于对绝对术语“水”如何适用于这种混合水的理解。那些认为混合后的水不再属于无限定的“水”这一术语范围，而是要以所加之物来描述，如“某某物之水”的人，不允许用它做小净，因为小净必须用未掺杂的水进行。那些认为“水”这一术语仍适用于混合水的人，则允许用它做小净。对于用未被污染之物加热的水，显然不适用该术语，因此他们也不允许用它；同样，对于从植物中提取的水，他们也不允许，但伊本·沙罕之书中记载的关于在聚礼日沐浴时可以使用玫瑰水的许可除外。 事实上，裁决取决于所加之物的数量。若混合过度，水可能达到不再适用绝对术语“水”、而需要加上限定词的状态，例如称为“浴水”；也可能未达到这种状态，尤其是当仅仅是气味发生了改变时。正因如此，一些法学家在禁止混合水时并不将气味纳入考虑。据传，先知（愿真主赐他平安与祝福）曾对乌姆·阿提雅说，当她准备为（已故的）他的女儿沐浴时：“用水和西德尔树叶给她洗，在最后一次洗涤时加入一些樟脑。”这便是混合水，但这种混合并未达到否定绝对术语“水”的程度。 马立克依据混合物的浓度作出判断，将混合物区分为稀薄与浓厚两类。他允许使用稀薄的混合物，即使水的属性因此改变；但对于浓厚的混合物，则不允许使用。

Water in which saffron or other things of which water is often free, are mixed, altering one of its attributes, is pure according to all the jurists, but loses its power to purify according to Malik and al-ShafiT It purifies according to Abu HanTfa as long as the change (in attributes) is not achieved through heating. The reason for disagreement stems from the understanding of the absolute term “water” as applied to such mixed water. Those who held that water so mixed is not covered by the unqualified term water, but is described by the things added, such as “the water of such and such thing”, did not allow ablution with it, as ablution is to be performed with unadulterated water. Those who said that the term water still applies to water so mixed, allowed ablution with it. For the obvious inapplicability of the term to water heated with a non-polluted thing, they did not permit ablution with it; similarly, they did not permit it in the case of water extracted from vegetation, except for what is recorded in the book of Ibn Shahan about the permissibility of using rose-water in the jumu'a washing. The truth is that the verdict depends upon the quantities of the additives. With excessive mixing, the water may reach a state where the absolute term for water will not apply t0 it and will acquire a qualifying term, like the term bath water; or it may not reach such a state, especially when it is only the smell that has been altered. It is for this reason that some jurists did not take smell into account when prohibiting mixed water. The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have said to Umm cAtiyya, when she was about to bathe his (dead) daughter, “Bathe her with water and sidr (lotus), and in the last course of washing add some camphor”. This is mixed water, but the mixture did not reach a state where it would negate the absolute term for water. Malik, basing his judgment on the intensity of the mixture, made a distinction between weak and strong mixtures. He permitted weak mixtures, even when the attributes of the water were altered, but did not permit it in strong ones.

法学家们对已经用于净化的水存在分歧，并形成了三种观点。一派法学家认为，这种水在任何情况下都不得用于净化，这是沙斐仪和艾卜·哈尼法的观点。另一派法学家认为这种水是可憎的，但在有水可用时不允许改用泥土净化（tayammum），这是马立克及其门徒的观点。还有一派法学家认为这种水与绝对意义上的水没有区别，这是艾卜·萨尔、达五德及其门徒的观点。艾卜·优素福则偏离了上述所有观点，认为这种水是不洁净的。

The jurists disagreed about water (already) used for purification and held three opinions. A group of jurists did not permit its use in purification under any circumstances, which is the opinion of al-ShaficT and Abu HanTfa. Another group considered it undesirable, but did not permit tayammum when it existed, which is the view of Malik and his disciples. A group of jurists did not find any difference between this water and water in its absolute meaning, which was the opinion of Abu Thawr, Dawud, and his disciples. Abu Yusuf deviated from all this and said that it is impure.

引起分歧的原因还在于：这种液体是否包含在"水"这一不加限定的词语之内。有人甚至主张，对它而言，"洗浴水"这一称呼比"水"更为恰当。先知的圣伴们过去常常争相接取先知礼拜净身后剩下的余水，而很显然，所用之水的几滴必然会落入盛放剩余之水的器皿中。

The reason for disagreement here also arises from the question of whether it is included in the unqualified term for water; some went as far as saying that the term bath-water is more appropriate for it than the term water. The Companions of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to compete for the excess left over from the ablution of the Prophet, and it is obvious that some drops of the water used would fall into the utensil that contained the surplus.

总体而言，它是纯净的水，不会因为所洗肢体上的污垢而其属性发生改变；但如果它被玷污了，那么它的裁定与其某一属性被某种纯净之物改变的水相同，尽管它本质上是令人厌恶的东西。这正是那些认为它令人厌恶者所考虑的。至于认为它不洁者，则没有证据支持他的说法。

On the whole, it is absolute water and does not end up with changed attributes through the dirt of the limbs that are washed with it, but if it is sullied, then its hukm is the same as that of water one of whose attributes has changed with something pure, though it is something repelling by nature; this is what was taken into account by those who considered it abominable. As for one who considered it filthy, there is no evidence to support him.

众学者对穆斯林和牲畜的剩余之物（即其口水遗留物）的洁净性意见一致，但在其他类别上则存在广泛分歧。有人认为，任何动物的剩余之物都是洁净的，而另一些人则唯独将猪除外。这两种观点都可追溯至马立克。有学者将猪和狗作为例外，这是沙斐仪的观点。有些人则将猛兽整体排除在外，这是伊本·阿卜杜拉·盖西姆的观点。另有学者主张，动物的剩余之物随其肉的律例而定：若其肉被禁止食用，则其剩余之物不洁；若其肉为可憎之物，其剩余之物亦为可憎；若其肉为许可食用之物，则其剩余之物为洁净。至于多神教徒的剩余之物，有人说它是不洁的，也有人说只有当他饮用khamr（酒）时才是可憎的，这是伊本·盖西姆的观点。对于所有不惯于食用污秽之物的动物，情况亦复如此，例如食污秽的野鸡、骆驼和狗。

The jurists agreed about the purity of the leftovers of Muslims and cattle, but J he? disagreed extensively about other categories. Some believed that the e ^°ver of every animal is pure, while others made an exception in the case of SWlne alone. These two views are related from Malik. Some jurists made an excePtion in the case of swine and dogs, which is al-Shafi Fs opinion. Some c ai deluded the beasts of prey generally, which is Ibn al-Qasim’s opinion. Others Jp ntained that leftovers of animals are subservient to the hukm of (their) flesh; I hc A sh is prohibited the leftover is impure, if the flesh is abominable the e over is abominable too, but if the flesh is permissible the leftover is pure. t0 the leftover of an idolater, it is said that it is impure, while it is said that it is abominable only if he drinks khamr (wine), which is Ibn al-Qasinf. opinion. The same is the case for him of all animals that do not normally avok filth, like filth-consuming wild hens, camels, and dogs.

他们的分歧基于三点。第一，是类比（qiyas）与《古兰经》的明显含义相冲突。第二，是类比与圣训字面含义相冲突。第三，是圣训之间相互冲突。

Their disagreement is based on three points. First is the conflict of analog) with the obvious meaning of the Book. Second is its conflict with the literal meaning of the traditions. The third is the conflict of the traditions among themselves.

如果死亡而未经宰杀导致动物尸体不洁，这一点为类比提供了依据：动物身体的洁净应以生命为基础。若果真如此，则每一个有生命的事物都是洁净的，而凡洁净之物，其剩余物也必然洁净。然而，经文的表面含义在猪和多神教徒的问题上与此类比相悖。安拉至高无上地说到猪：“猪肉——因为它确实是污秽的”，凡本质上污秽之物，也就是不洁之物。因此，一派法学家只将猪从所有有生命的动物中排除，而不排除猪的人则将此节经文解释为对猪的减免。至于多神教徒，至高者的话是：“信道的人啊！多神教徒确是不洁的，所以不要让他们接近禁寺。”那些同样按字面意义理解此节的人，将多神教徒排除在类比的适用范围之外；而那些认为此节只是对他们的贬抑的人，则重新确立了类比的要求。

The point that death resulting without slaughter is legally the cause oi impurity of the animal’s carcass provides the basis for the analogy that life must be the basis for the purity of the body of the animal. If this is the case, then each living thing is pure, and whatever is pure its leftover must also be pure. The apparent meaning of the Book opposes this analogy in the case of swine and polytheists, as Allah, the Exalted, has said about swine, “swine­ flesh—for that verily is foul”,47 and that which is filthy in its essence is also impure. Thus, one group of jurists have excluded only swine from all living animals, while those who do not exclude it interpret the verse to imply derogation for it. As to the polytheists, the words of the Exalted are, “0 ye who believe! The idolaters are unclean. So let them not come near the Inviolable Place of Worship”.48 Those who interpreted this too in its literal sense excluded the idolaters from the implication of the analogy, while those who considered this to be merely derogatory for them reimposed the requirement of analogy.

学者们对洁净后剩余的水（即净身后的剩水）存在五种不同观点。一派认为，净身后的剩水绝对洁净且可用于净身，这是马立克、沙斐仪和艾布·哈尼法的观点。另一派认为，男子不得用女子的剩水净身，但女子可以用男子的剩水净身。第三派认为，只要女子没有处于不洁（遗精或月经）状态，男子就可以用她的剩水净身。第四派认为，除非男女双方同时开始使用，否则两者都不得用对方的剩水净身。还有一派认为，即使同时开始使用也不允许，这是艾哈迈德·本·罕百勒的观点。

The jurists disagreed about the leftovers from purification expressing five °Pmions. One group held that the leftovers of purification are clean absolutely (and purifying). This is the opinion of Malik, al-Shafi T, and Abu HanTfa. c Another group said that it is not permitted for a man to purify himself with leftover of a woman, but it is permitted for a woman to purify herself with the leftover of a man. A third group said that it is permitted for a man to Purify himself with the leftover of a woman as long as she is not sexually ^efiled or menstruating. The fourth group maintained that it is not permitted Or either one of them to undertake purification with the surplus water of the ot her, unless they started using it at the same time. Another group said that it not permitted even if they commenced at the same time, which is Ahmad 1 n Hanbal’s opinion.

分歧的原因在于相关圣训的差异。关于此事有四段相关的圣训。第一段是先知（愿安拉赐福于他并使他平安）曾与妻子们使用同一个器皿洗去大净所需的污秽的圣训ﷺ。第二段是迈蒙娜的圣训，即他用妻子剩余的水洗浴ﷺ。第三段是阿勒-哈坎·安-吉法里的圣训，即先知（愿安拉赐福于他并使他平安）禁止男子用女子剩余的水净身ﷺ；此圣训由艾卜·达伍德和提尔米兹者记录。第四段是阿卜杜拉·伊本·萨尔加斯的圣训，他说："安拉的使者（愿安拉赐福于他并使他平安）禁止男子用女子剩余的水洗浴，也禁止女子用男子剩余的水洗浴，除非两人同时开始。"法学家们对这些圣训的解释采用了两种方法：一种是取舍法，另一种是调和部分圣训而取舍其他圣训的方法。

The reason for disagreement is based upon the differences in the relevant traditions. There are four related traditions about this. First, the tradition that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) used to wash away major ritual impurities along with his wives using the same utensil. Second, the tradition of Maymuna that he washed with the surplus left by his wife. Third, the tradition of al-Hakam al-Ghifari that the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited the ablution by a man with the surplus left by a woman; this is recorded by Abu Dawud and al-TirmidhT. Fourth is the tradition of cAbd Allah ibn Sarjas, who said, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited that a man may wash with the surplus left by a woman, or that a woman may wash with the surplus left by a man, unless they commence at the same time”. The jurists adopted two kinds of methods for the interpretation of these traditions: a method of preference, and a method of reconciling some and' preferring others.

一些法学家认为,先知与其妻子们一同沐浴、从同一器皿中取水的圣训,比其他圣训更可取。这是因为该圣训为圣训辑录者们共同认可,而且在他们看来,同时沐浴与使用他人剩余的水沐浴并无区别。原因在于,同时沐浴意味着每人都在使用对方剩余的水;此外,玛蒙娜的圣训与这一圣训同被证实为可靠,并优于艾哈里的圣训。因此,他们坚持认为净洁用水的剩余部分保持绝对洁净。 那些认为艾哈里的圣训优于玛蒙娜的圣训的人,即阿布·穆罕默德·伊本·哈兹姆的观点,则将艾哈里的圣训与先知与其妻子们从同一器皿中取水一同沐浴的圣训相调和。他们还区分了从同一器皿中取水共同沐浴与使用他人剩余的水沐浴两种情况。因此,仅依据这两则圣训,他们允许男子与女子在同一器皿中一同净身,并允许女子使用男子剩余的水净身;但他们不允许男子使用女子净身后剩余的水。

Some jurists preferred the tradition about the Prophet’s bathing along with his wives, drawing from the same vessel, over the rest of the traditions, for it was a tradition agreed upon by the compilers of the sahth traditions, and because there was no distinction in their view between bathing at the same time or bathing with the surplus left by others. This is because bathing at the same time means that each is bathing with the surplus left by the other person, and further, because the tradition of Maymuna proved authentic along with this tradition, and was preferred over .the tradition of al-Ghifari. They, therefore, maintained the absolute purity of the leftovers of purification. Those who preferred the tradition of al-Ghifari over the tradition of Maymuna, which is the opinion of Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm, reconciled the tradition of al-Ghifari with the tradition about the Prophet’s bathing along with his wives, drawing from the same vessel. They also made a distinction between bathing together while drawing from the same vessel and bathing with a surplus left by the other. Thus, acting upon these two traditions alone, they permitted a man to undertake purification along with a woman drawing from the same vessel, and permitted her to purify herself with a surplus left by him; however, they did not permit him to do so with a surplus left over from her purification.

阿布·哈尼法（Abu Hanifa）曾就在旅途中用枣椰浸泡液（nabidh）进行小净的问题发表意见，这一意见遭到其弟子以及各地所有法学家的反对。他的依据是伊本·阿拔斯（Ibn cAbbas）的一段圣训，其中说：“伊本·麦斯欧德（Ibn Mascud）与安拉的使者一同外出，那是精灵之夜。安拉的使者问他：‘你有水吗？’他说：‘我的容器里有枣椰浸泡液（nabidh）。’安拉的使者（愿安拉的赞颂与平安降临于他）说：‘倒一些出来。’他（先知）便用它进行了小净，并说：‘这是饮品，也是洁净之物。’”他还引用了伊本·欧麦尔的被释奴阿布·拉菲尔（Abu Rafic）所传、源自伊本·麦斯欧德的一段内容几近相同的圣训：安拉的使者（愿安拉的赞颂与平安降临于他）说：“这很好；是果实，也是洁净之水。”他们还主张，此意见归于阿里（cAli）和伊本·阿拔斯等圣门弟子，而且既然没有其他圣门弟子反对，便构成了共识。 然而，圣训学家们因其传述链（isnad）中传述人薄弱而拒绝了这段圣训。此外，更可靠的传述途径表明，伊本·麦斯欧德当夜并未与安拉的使者（愿安拉的赞颂与平安降临于他）同在精灵之夜。大多数学者根据至高者的话拒绝了这段圣训：“如果你们找不到水，就你们去洁净的沙土上，摩擦你们的脸和手。”他们说，安拉并未允许使用水和洁净沙土之外的任何东西。他们还以先知（愿安拉的赞颂与平安降临于他）的话作为依据：“洁净的沙土是穆斯林的小净，即使十个季节都找不到水，一旦他找到水，就让他用水触及自己的皮肤。” 他们（哈乃斐派）本可以说，圣训中“水”一词是在绝对意义上使用的（因而包括枣椰浸泡水 nabidh），而这是一种并不构成废止的补充性“附加”，所以《古兰经》不应与之相冲突；但这又与他们的原则相悖，因为他们认为附加内容构成废止。

Abu HanTfa, in an opinion opposed by his disciples and all the jurists of the regions, permitted ablution with the nabidh of dates during a journey on the basis of the tradition of Ibn cAbbas, which says: “Ibn Mascud went out with the Messenger of Allah on the night of the jinn and the Messenger of Allah asked him, ‘Do you have any water?’ He said, ‘I have nabidh in my container’. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Pour out some’. He (the Prophet) performed ablution with it saying, Tt is a beverage and a purifying element’”. He also quoted the tradition of Abu Rafic, the client of Ibn TJmar, derived from Ibn Macud—which is almost the same—as follows: The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, “It is good; fruit and purifying water”. They also claimed that this opinion is attributed to Companions like cAIi and Ibn cAbbas, and as there was no other Companion opposing them it amounted to a consensus. The traditionists, however, rejected this tradition because of the weak line of narrators (in its isndd). Furthermore, more reliable channels have related that Ibn Mas ud was not with the Messenger c of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) on the night of the jinn. The majority rejected this tradition on the basis of the words of the Exalted, “And ye find not water, then go to high clean soil and rub your faces and your hands (therewith)”.50 They said that He not permit the use of anything beside water and clean soil. They also ar gued on the basis of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be u P°n him), “Clean soil constitutes the ablution of a Muslim, even if water is ° ot t0 ke found for ten seasons, and as soon as he finds water let him touch his , ce with it”. They (the Hanafites) could have said that the term water is used 10 the absolute sense in the tradition (thus, including nabidh), and it is an ltl °n that does not constitute abrogation so that the Book should conflict it, but then it is against their principle that an addition constitutes * br°gation.