Chapter on Purifying Clothes and Other Items From Impurities

Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan commented: “What this narration implies about the urine of a male infant not requiring the washing of clothes before he eats solid food (weaned) means that it is sufficient to pour water over it without wringing, as explained by Al-Halabi in his earlier narration.”

Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan, the compiler of this book, commented: “These two narrations are understood as recommendations rather than obligations, based on the previously mentioned reports.” This interpretation is further clarified by another narration transmitted by this same narrator, which follows.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "If blood touches his clothing and its amount is the size of a dirham wafiy (equivalent to a dirham and a third), he must wash it, and it is not permissible for him to pray in it. If the amount is less than that, such as the size of a lentil or a fingernail, it is permissible for him to pray in it before washing it, although washing it for prayer is preferable. However, if the blood is menstrual blood, then it is not permissible to pray in the garment, whether the amount is small or large. Washing the garment is obligatory, even if the amount is as small as the tip of a needle."

These two narrations indicate the obligation to remove blood from clothing. As for the amount of blood that requires removal, the first narration has clarified this, and it is further supported by other evidence.

This narration is seen as recommended (mustahabb) rather than obligatory (wajib). What supports this interpretation is the earlier narrations indicating that as long as the blood does not exceed the size of a dirham, it is permissible to pray in a garment containing such blood. This is further supported by additional evidence.

This narration is understood to refer to a persistent wound, ulcer, or sore. We will explain later that the blood from wounds, sores, and injuries, which cannot be easily removed or causes hardship to cleanse, does not affect the validity of prayer, whether the amount is small or large. This interpretation is supported by other evidence related to this matter.

As for the distinction of menstrual blood among all types of blood, it is based on the established ruling in Shariah regarding the impurity of blood. However, the allowance to pray with certain specific types of blood in small amounts is supported by evidence provided in earlier narrations. Menstrual blood, however, is considered impure in both small and large quantities, and therefore its removal is mandatory in all cases. This ensures that a person enters prayer in a state of certainty and purity. Additional evidence also supports this ruling.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, further commented: "If a person has boils that constantly ooze blood, there is no harm in praying in the clothes affected by that blood, even if it is abundant. Similarly, if someone has wounds that discharge and stain their clothes with blood or pus, they are permitted to pray in those clothes, regardless of how much is affected." This is supported by the verse: 'He has not laid upon you in religion any hardship.' (Surah Al-Hajj 22:78) We also know that if a person were obligated to remove such persistent blood from their clothing, it would cause hardship, burden, and even lead to missing prayers. Allah سبحانه وتعالى, the Exalted, has allowed this out of mercy and compassion for His servants. This ruling is also supported by other narrations.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, further commented: "The same ruling applies to clothing stained with the blood of fleas and bedbugs. There is no harm if a person prays in such clothing, even if the amount of blood on it is large." This ruling is supported by the previously mentioned verse: 'He has not laid upon you in religion any hardship.' (Surah Al-Hajj 22:78) It is evident that flea blood is something that cannot easily be avoided. If a person were obligated to remove it completely, it would result in difficulty and hardship, especially since even after washing, the blood may reappear when the clothing is worn again. Thus, obligating constant washing would cause ongoing burden and prevent a person from fulfilling their prayers with ease. This ruling is also supported by other narrations indicating the removal of hardship in such cases.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "If a dog or pig touches a person's clothing and both are dry, he should sprinkle water on the spot where it was touched. However, if they were wet, he should wash the affected area with water." This ruling is supported by additional evidence.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "The same ruling applies to a rat or a lizard. If they touch clothing and do not leave a mark, the affected area should be sprinkled with water. However, if they are wet and leave a mark, it should be washed with water." This ruling is supported by further evidence.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "Similarly, if any of the mentioned things - such as a mouse or dog - touches a person’s body or his hand, and it is wet, he should wash the affected area. But if it is dry, he should wipe it with soil." This ruling is supported by previous narrations and is further clarified by additional evidence.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "If a disbeliever shakes hands with a Muslim and his hand is wet with sweat or anything else, the Muslim should wash it with water. But if there is no moisture, he should wipe it on a wall or soil." This ruling is supported by the verse: "Indeed, the polytheists are impure." (Surah At-Tawbah 9:28) Since the verse explicitly declares their impurity, anything they touch is considered impure, except for cases specifically permitted by Shariah. This interpretation is further supported by other narrations and evidence.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "A garment should also be washed if it is stained with the sweat of a camel that eats filth (jallalah), just as it is washed from other impurities." This ruling is supported by additional evidence.

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, commented: "A garment should also be washed if it is stained with the droppings of chickens specifically. However, it does not need to be washed if stained with the droppings of pigeons or other birds that are permissible to eat, as previously explained." This ruling is supported by earlier narrations and additional evidence.

This indicates that washing is not obligatory for the urine of animals whose meat is permissible to eat, as has been explained in other places.

Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan commented: "This narration clarifies the apparent dislike (karahah) rather than an obligation to wash the clothing affected by the urine or dung of such animals. It explains the other narrations that mention washing as being for recommended cleanliness, not as a strict requirement."

This does not contradict what has been narrated elsewhere.

This narration is considered unusual (shadh) and may have been reported due to taqiyyah (dissimulation).

As for what indicates the specification of chicken droppings:

The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If a person suspects that impurity has touched his garment but is not certain, he should sprinkle it with water. However, if he is certain that impurity has occurred and knows its exact location, he must wash it with water. If the exact spot is unknown, then he must wash the entire garment with water to ensure its purity and eliminate any doubt or uncertainty." The foundation of this matter is that if impurity occurs on a garment, it is forbidden to pray in it. If the location of the impurity is unknown, washing the entire garment guarantees its purification, removing any uncertainty regarding its cleanliness. And this also indicates it.

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "There is no harm in the sweat of a menstruating woman or a junub (someone in a state of major ritual impurity). It is not obligatory to wash the garment from it unless the janabah (impurity) is from something unlawful (e.g., fornication). In that case, what has been affected by their sweat, whether it be the body or garment, should be washed, and precaution should be exercised in purification."

This implies that if the sweat is accompanied by impurity, it must be washed. Notice that he specified the area beneath the garment, indicating that the usual condition for women in that state might include impurity in that region. This is why he instructed to wash it. The explanation clarifies that the need for washing depends on the likelihood of impurity being present with the sweat, particularly in areas most prone to such impurity.

The correct understanding of this narration is similar to what we mentioned regarding the first report, or it may be interpreted as a recommended practice (mustahabb). What indicates this is (following hadith):

As for what indicates that if janabah (ritual impurity) occurs due to something forbidden, then the garment should be washed out of precaution

It is not permissible for this narration to refer to anything except sweating in the garment due to janabah (ritual impurity) if it occurred from something forbidden. This is because we have already explained that the state of janabah itself does not transfer to the garment. We also mentioned that the sweat of a person in janabah does not render the garment impure. Therefore, the meaning of the narration must refer to sweat from janabah caused by something forbidden, and we interpreted it as such. Moreover, it is possible that the meaning refers to a situation where the garment is affected by impurity. In that case, he should pray in it and then repeat the prayer, as we have explained. The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: If a garment is washed from menstrual blood and some stains remain that cannot be removed by washing, then there is no problem in praying in it. However, it is recommended to dye it in a way that removes its color, so that one may pray in it with full purification. This is supported by the verse: "He has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty." (Surah Al-Hajj 22:78) The traces of menstrual blood may cause hardship for a person and may not be easily removed. Therefore, praying in it was permitted. As for what indicates the recommendation of dyeing the affected area

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If impurity affects any of the vessels, they are purified by washing." This has already been explained previously. The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, also said: "If urine falls on the ground and the sun dries it, then it becomes purified by that, and the same applies to mats and woven reeds."

This refers to a situation where the sun has not dried it. What supports this interpretation is the earlier narration, which states: "If impurity affects the ground, and the sun rises over it and then it dries, there is no harm in praying on it. But if it has not dried, then it is not permissible to pray on it." The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: There is no harm if a person prays on a mattress that has been affected by semen or other impurities, provided that the place of his prostration is pure. This is supported by (following hadith):

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "There is no harm in praying in leather socks (khuff) even if they have some impurity, and the same applies to sandals. However, avoiding such situations is preferable. If a person steps on impurity with his shoes or socks and then wipes them on the ground, they are purified by that." This is supported by (following hadith):

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If his belt or sock is affected by impurity, there is no difficulty in praying in them, because they are not garments in which prayer is completed without other clothing." This is supported by (following hadith):

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If a person’s garment comes into contact with the body of a deceased person before it has been purified by washing, it becomes impure, and it must be purified with water. However, if it comes into contact after the deceased has been washed, it does not harm him, and he is permitted to pray in it without washing it." This is supported by (following hadith);

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If it comes into contact with the carcass of something other than a human, it also renders the garment impure, and it must be washed with water." The principle here is that a dead body is impure without dispute. Therefore, if a garment comes into contact with impurity, it must be purified to ensure one enters prayer with certainty about the purity of the garment. This is also supported by (following hadith):

The interpretation of this narration is that it should be understood as referring to a situation where a long time has passed, and the carcass has decomposed and turned into bones. In such a case, it is not necessary to wash the garment, as clarified by what has been mentioned.

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If a person touches a deceased human being with his hand or any part of his body before it has been washed, then ghusl is obligatory upon him, as we have previously explained." This has already been clarified earlier, and there is no need to repeat it. Then he Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "If a person touches the carcass of something other than a human, he is only required to wash the part of his body that touched the carcass, and ghusl is not obligatory as it is for someone who touches a deceased human." This is supported by (following hadith):

Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: “Insects and creeping creatures that do not have flowing blood, such as wasps, flies, locusts, beetles, and ladybugs, if they come into contact with a person's hand, body, or clothes, do not render them impure. It is not obligatory to wash what comes into contact with them. Similarly, if such creatures fall into food or drink, they do not render it impure, and it is allowed to consume the food or drink and use water for purification. This explanation has already been provided earlier, and it is sufficient, if Allah سبحانه وتعالى wills. Then the Shaykh (Al-Mufid), said: “Wine, date wine, and any intoxicating beverage are impure. If any amount, whether small or large, comes into contact with a person’s garment, it is not allowed to pray in it until washed with water. This is supported by the verse: "Indeed, intoxicants, gambling, [sacrificing on] stone alters [to other than Allah سبحانه وتعالى], and divining arrows are but defilement from the work of Satan, so avoid it..." (Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:90). The verse describes it as rijs (defilement), and rijs means impurity without any dispute. Once it is proven to be impure, it must be removed. Then He said: "Avoid it..." indicating a command for avoidance in all situations. The apparent meaning of Allah’s سبحانه وتعالى command implies obligation, and avoiding what falls under this term is required in every respect. This is also supported by narrations.

As for the narrations that permit praying in a garment contaminated by wine or any intoxicant, they are interpreted as being based on taqiyyah (dissimulation) similar to what has been reported elsewhere.

The first point regarding this narration is that it does not explicitly indicate whether the nabidh mentioned was the intoxicating, prohibited type or the non-intoxicating type. Since both possibilities exist, we interpret it as referring to non-intoxicating nabidh, which we have previously described as water infused with dates to soften its taste.

What indicates that these narrations are based on taqiyyah (dissimulation) is what has been previously mentioned in the verse where Allah سبحانه وتعالى, the Exalted, described wine as rijs (impurity). It is not permissible for anything to be reported from them عليه السلام that contradicts or opposes the Quran. Additionally, we have already presented other narrations that contradict these, and reconciliation between them is only possible by interpreting these as cases of taqiyyah. If we were to act upon these reports, it would negate the rulings established by those other narrations entirely. However, by following the other narrations, we act in accordance with the apparent meaning of the Quran. Therefore, we interpret these narrations as being reported under taqiyyah, since taqiyyah is one of the valid reasons for the transmission of such reports from them عليه السلام, ensuring that we act upon all the narrations in a way that avoids contradiction. This also supports the understanding that these reports were issued under the principle of taqiyyah.

The reasoning behind this report is that Abu Al-Hasan عليه السلام instructed to adhere solely to the ruling of Abu Abdullah عليه السلام and to disregard the earlier ruling that included Abu Ja’far عليه السلام. This indicates that the earlier ruling, which permitted prayer in garments contaminated by wine, was issued under taqiyyah (dissimulation). Otherwise, it would have been preferable and more appropriate to follow both statements together. Furthermore, the later narrations do not explicitly permit prayer in garments stained by wine. Rather, the question was about whether wearing such garments or benefitting from them is prohibited, and the response negated such prohibition without affirming their permissibility for prayer.

Muhammad bin Al-Hasan said: “This narration poses no doubt, as the question was specifically about the spit of someone who drank wine, and He عليه السلام said there is no harm in it. Spit itself is not impure; rather, the impurity lies in the wine.” The Shaykh (Al-Mufid), may Allah سبحانه وتعالى support him, said: "The same ruling applies to fuqqa' (a type of fermented drink)." This is supported by (following hadith)