这种净化的依据是至高者的话语:“如果你们处于大污染(大混乱,即大洁净需要的状态),就要洁净自己。”58 关于其规定的讨论,在了解其义务、义务的承担者以及所用之物(即未掺杂的清水)之后,分为三章展开。第一章讲述此净化所包含的行为。第二章讲述使其有效的因素。第三章涵盖使此净化失效的裁决。 关于承担义务的人,凡是负有礼拜义务的每一个人都有责任进行此净化,对此没有任何争议。同样,对其义务也没有争议,其证据与我们已经提到的小净(宜都)的证据相同。同样,关于水的类别的裁决,其讨论已在前面进行过。

The basis for this kind of purification are the words of the Exalted, “And if ye are involved in a major hadath, purify yourself’.58 The discussion covering its rules—after having learned its obligation, on whom it is obligatory, and the ^entification of the thing to be used, which is unadulterated water—is undertaken in three chapters. The first chapter relates to the identification of acts involved in this purification. The second relates to the factors ^validating it. The third chapter covers the ahkdm of the invalidation of this Purification. 4’ About the person on whom it is obligatory, it is incumbent upon each Person who is under an obligation to pray, and there is no dispute about this. Similarly, there is no dispute about its obligation, and its evidences are the same as those for ablution, which we have mentioned. Likewise, the ahkam relating to the categories of water, whose discussion has preceded.

法学家们对此存在分歧：这种净化（沐浴）是否需要用手擦遍全身（即在水流过皮肤时搓揉皮肤），如同洗小净时清洗肢体那样，还是只要让水流遍全身即可，而不必用手擦抹身体。大多数法学家认为，让水流过身体就足够了。马立克、他的大多数弟子，以及沙斐仪弟子中的穆扎尼，则认为如果行净者遗漏了身上任何一处，没有用手经过，他的净化就是不完整的。

The jurists disagreed over whether running the hand over the entire body (i.e. massaging the skin while water is running over it) is a condition for this purification, as is the case in the purification of limbs while performing ablution, or whether it is sufficient to let water flow over the entire body without running the hand over the body. The majority of the jurists maintained that letting water flow over the body is enough. Malik, most of his disciples, and al-MuzanT from among the disciples of al-ShafiT held that if the person undertaking purification misses a single spot of his body over which he does not pass his hand, his purification remains incomplete.

分歧的原因在于“ghusl”（沐浴）一词含义具有多义性，以及关于沐浴描述的圣训在表面含义上存在冲突，这些圣训将沐浴比作以小净为基础的洗涤。在与先知沐浴相关、并经由阿伊莎和迈蒙娜传述的公认圣训中，并没有提到按摩身体，只提到让水流过身体。在阿伊莎的圣训中，她说：“安拉的使者ﷺ在房事之后沐浴时，会先洗手。然后他用右手倒水到左手上，用左手清洗下体。接着，他像为日常拜功小净那样进行小净。之后，他取水，将手指插入发根，往头上倒三捧水。最后，他让水流遍全身。”

The reason for disagreement is the equivocality of the term *ghu$T\ and the conflict of the apparent meanings of the traditions related about the description of bathing with the analogy of bathing based upon ablution. In the established traditions relevant to the subject of the Prophet’s bath, and which are related through ‘A’isha and Maymuna, there is no mention of massaging the body; they only mention the flowing of water over it. In the tradition of ^isha, she says, “When the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) took a bath after sexual engagement, he would first wash his hands. He then poured water from his right hand over to the left hand with which he washed his genitals. Then he performed a minor ablution, like he did for his regular daily prayers. Thereafter, taking up water he would insert his fingers down to the roots of his hair and pour three handfuls of water over his head. Finally, he would let water flow over his entire body”.

玛written: 玛 is not used here. Translation: 按照玛拉穆纳（Maymuna）的圣训所述，其描述与此类似，只是此处他将洗脚推迟到洁净过程的最后才进行。在乌姆·萨拉玛（Umm Salama）的圣训中也是如此：她问先知（愿主赐他平安与祝福）在因房事后沐浴时是否需要解开发辫。先知（愿主赐他平安与祝福）说：“你只需向头上浇三捧水，然后让水流遍全身，如此便得洁净。”与其他圣训相比，这段圣训是关于免除搓揉要求的最有说服力的圣训，因为一个描述自己洁净过程的人，如果她所描述的这一净身的全部条件中包括搓揉，就不可能省略不提。因此，法学家们一致认为，艾莎（cA*isha）和玛拉穆纳的圣训所描述的是完整的净身方式，而乌姆·萨拉玛的圣训所载则涵盖了必要的基本要素（arkān）。小净（在大净之前进行的小净）并非其条件，但归于沙斐仪（al-Shāfi‘ī）的一种特殊观点除外，尽管他的观点因圣训的表面含义而具有一定力量。多数学者的观点则具有论证上的力量，因为显然洁净是礼拜有效的条件，而礼拜并非洁净有效的条件。这是类比推理与圣训表面含义之间的冲突，而沙斐仪的方法是优先采用圣训的表面含义而非类比推理。

The description given in the tradition of Maymuna is similar to this, except that here he delayed washing his feet up to the end of the purification. In the tradition of Umm Salama too, when she asked the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) “whether she should undo her plaits while bathing after sexual engagement. The Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘It is enough if you splash over your head three handfuls of water, then let water flow over yourself, and with that you are purified’ This is the most persuasive tradition about dropping the requirement of massaging as compared to the other traditions, for it is not possible that a person describing her own purification would omit mentioning massage if it were included in his description for her of all the conditions of this ablution. Because of this, the jurists agreed that the descriptions provided in the traditions of cA*isha and Maymuna are complete descriptions, but what is laid down in the tradition of Umm Salama covers the obligatory essential elements (arkdn), and minor ablution performed before the major ablution (bathing) is not a condition for it, except for an odd opinion attributed to al-ShafiT, although his opinion exhibits some strength derived from the apparent meaning of the traditions The opinion of the majority exhibits analytical strength, for it is obvious that purification is a condition for the validity of ablution, and it is not ablution that is a condition for the validity of purification. This is a case of conflict between analogy and the apparent meaning of a tradition, and al-Shafi Fs method is c to give predominance to the apparent meaning of a tradition over analogy.

他们对于意图是否属于这种洁净（沐浴/ghusl）的条件之一存在分歧，正如他们在小净（wudu'）问题上的分歧一样。马立克、沙斐仪、艾哈迈德、艾布·thawr、达五德及其弟子们认为意图是其条件之一。艾布·哈尼法、其弟子以及赛understanding 萨里（al-Thawri）认为，与小净的情况一样，不需要意图。

They disagreed on whether intention is included in the conditions of this purification (gAus/), just like their disagreement in the case of the minor ablution. Malik, al-Shafi T, Ahmad, Abu Thawr, Dawud, and his c disciples held that intention is one of its conditions. Abu HanTfa, his disciples, and al- Thawri held that intention is not required, as in the case of minor ablution.

关于意图问题上出现分歧的原因，与前面已经提到的小净（wudu'）的情况相同。

The reason for disagreement on the question of intention is the same as that ln the case of the minor ablution, which has preceded.

他们在洁净这一类中对漱口（madmada）与吸水洗鼻（istinshaq）存在分歧，正如他们在小净中的分歧一样，即这两者是否为必做的功课。一部分法学家认为，在沐浴中这两者都不是必须的；另一部分则认为它们是必须的。主张不必须的有马立克和沙斐仪，而主张必须的则有艾布·哈尼法及其门徒。

They disagreed about madmada and istinshaq in this category of purification like their disagreement in the case of the minor ablution, that is whether they are obligatory. A group of jurists held that these are not obligatory in bathing, while another group considered them obligatory. Those who maintained a negation of obligation include Malik and al-ShaficT, while those who made it obligatory include Abu HanTfa and his disciples.

分歧的原因在于：乌姆·赛莱姆的圣训表面含义，与关于先知在沐浴前小净描述的那些圣训相冲突。因为传述的关于先知沐浴前小净的描述中提到了漱口（madmada）和吸水入鼻（istinshaq），而乌姆·赛莱姆的圣训既未提到漱口，也未提到吸水入鼻。 那些将阿伊莎和迈蒙那的圣训视为对乌姆·赛莱姆圣训中未作说明之处的补充，同时也视为对至高者经文“如果你们身受大污，就当洁净自己”的解释的人，认为漱口和吸水入鼻是必须的。而那些认为这些圣训相互冲突的人，则调和它们：将阿伊莎和迈蒙那圣训的含义理解为劝勉性的（推荐），而将乌姆·赛莱姆圣训的含义理解为义务性的。

The reason for disagreement is the conflict of the apparent meaning of the tradition of Umm Salama with the traditions that were transmitted about the description of the Prophet’s performance of minor ablution prior to his purification (bathing), because the traditions transmitted about the description of his minor ablution prior to his purification mention madmada and istinshaq, while the tradition of Umm Salama mentions neither madmada nor istinshdq. Those who considered the traditions of cA*isha and Maymuna as elaborations of the unexplained parts of the tradition of Umm Salama, and also as an explanation of the words of the Exalted, “And if ye are involved in a major hadath, purify yourselves”,59 made rinsing of the mouth, and snuffing of water into the nostrils obligatory, while those who considered ‘ them as conflicting reconciled them so as to construe the implication of the traditions of cA*isha and Maymuna for a recommendation, and the implication of the tradition of Umm Salama as an obligation.

因此,他们对于松开头发(takhlil,即让水到达头部发根)是否属于此类洁净的必要条件存在分歧:马立克认为这是可取的(mustahabb),而其他人则认为这是必须的(wajib)。主张松开头发为必须的人,以先知的一段圣训作为依据:“每根头发之下都有大净(janaba),所以要洁净皮肤,并让头发湿透。”

Because of this, they disagreed about the hukm of letting the hair loose, so as to let water reach its roots on the head (lakhlil), whether it is obligatory for this category of purification. Malik deems it recommended, while others view it as obligatory. Those who made takhlil obligatory supported their opinion with the report from the Prophet, “Under each hair is janaba (major hadath), so beautify the skin and let the hair get wet”.

他们对于这类洁净（沐浴）是否要求连续且有次序地进行存在分歧，这与小净中的分歧相同。分歧的原因在于先知的行为应当被理解为义务还是推荐。从未有传述说先知（愿真主的赞颂与安宁临于他）曾以不按次序、不连贯的方式进行过小净。一部分法学家认为，在这类洁净（沐浴）中，次序比小净中头部与身体其余部分的次序更为重要，其依据是先知（愿真主的赞颂与安宁临于他ﷺ）在乌姆·萨莱玛的圣训中所说的话：“你只需用三捧水浇在头上，然后让水流遍全身即可。”据词汇学家一致的看法，连词“thumma”（然后）表示次序，这一点没有争议。

They disagreed on whether a condition for this category of purification is continuous and sequential performance, as was their disagreement in the case of the minor ablution. The reason for disagreement is whether the acts of the Prophet are to be construed as obligatory or recommended. It has not been transmitted from the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) that he ever performed ablution, except in an ordered and sequential manner. A group of jurists held that sequence in this category of purification (ghusl) is more pertinent than it is in the minor ablution with respect to the head and the rest of the body, because of the words of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) in the tradition of Umm Salama, “It is enough for you to splash over your head three handfuls of water, and then let water flow over your body”. The conjunction particle “thumma” (then) implies sequence, without dispute, according to lexicologists.