Appendix to Bahaar-e-Shariat Volume
2
بِسْمِ
اللہِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِیْم
نحمدہ ونصلی
علی رسولہ الکریم
In the section wherein this humble servant listed the
Juziyaat (fine points and details) regarding Aab Mutlaq (water which is
absolutely pure and can be used to purify) and Aab Muqay’yad (restricted water)
one of the laws stipulated there was in regards to the water of the Huqqa being
regarded as pure, even though there maybe some alteration to the colour, smell
or taste of the water.
Wudu with such water is permissible. If there is a
sufficient amount of this water available, tayammum is not permitted. There was
unnecessary difference in this regard, amongst some of the general public in
certain areas of Kathiawar and a letter was sent here by them in which they requested
proof in this regard.
In actual fact, those opposing this ruling should be the
ones furnishing the proof against it, as furnishing the proof is their responsibility
and not ours because water in reality is pure and purifying. Almighty Allah عزوجل says
(وَ اَنۡزَلْنَا مِنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً
طَہُوۡرًا)
‘And We sent down from the sky
water, (as) a purifier’ [Surah 25, Verse 48]
And Almighty Allah عزوجل
says
( یُنَزِّلُ عَلَیۡکُمۡ
مِّنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً لِّیُطَہِّرَکُمۡ بِہٖ ) ـ2ـ
He (Allah) caused water to rain down upon you from the
sky, so you that you may be purified through it’ [Surah 8, Verse 11]
It is mentioned in Raddul Muhtar as follows:
ویستدل بالآیۃ ایضا علیٰ طہارتہ اذ لا منۃ بالنجس
That ruling of Jurisprudence states that if a kaafir
gives information with regards to any water being impure (najis), his word will
not be accepted and Wudu with that water is permissible because Najaasat is
conditional and the statement of an unbeliever in the issues of Diyanaat
(Issues of Faith i.e. Religious Issues) is not regarded as reliable; thus the
water will remain in its natural state of being pure. This alone, is sufficient
in support of our statement but all this is only of benefit to one who says or
is intending to say that which is in accordance with the rules and theories of
Shariat and nowadays this can hardly be found ''الاماشاء اﷲ''
Nowadays, the manner of people is to utter anything and
then cause dispute and confusion amongst the general masses. They do not even
care whether (what they are saying) is correct or incorrect, even though those
who are objecting regard (water) as being impure. Thus, it was sufficient for
us to merely present this evidence in regards to its Tahaarat, that it is water
and water by itself (naturally) is not impure, until such time that it is not
contaminated or mixed with anything which is Najis (impure). Only then will it
be regarded as becoming impure (due to contamination). Contamination due to
impurity is in the case of it being contaminated through alcohol, urine or
other such impurities which become mixed in it. So, if the (water) is a little,
in other words, if it is less than that which is in a Dah-Dardah then in this
case it will be regarded as becoming impure (due to such contamination). However,
if it is a Dah-Dardah, then contamination (mixing in it) of any impurity will
only cause the water to become impure if that impure thing caused the colour,
smell or taste of the water to be altered. It is in Durr-e-Mukhtar:
وینجس بتغیر احد اوصافہ من لون او طعم او ریح ینجس الکثیر ولو جاریا
اجماعا أماالقلیل فینجس وان لم یتغیر۔
It is in Fatawa Alamgiri
الماء الراکد اذاکان کثیرا فھو بمنزلۃ الجاری لا یتنجس جمیعہ بوقوع
النجاسۃ فی طرف منہ الا ان یتغیر لونہ او طعمہ اوریحہ وعلی ھذا اتفق العلماء وبہ
اخذ عامۃ المشائخ رحمہم اللہ تعالیٰ کذا فی " المحیط ".
Touching the water (i.e. mixing) means that the impurity
should touch the water; even if its pieces or parts do not mix in the water (touching
the water is sufficient). Little water (i.e. less than Dah-Dardah) will become
impure; such as in the case of any part of the body of a pig touching the water
even if it be only the hair; even if it was immediately moved away and even if
no saliva or anything else from its body fell into the water.
It is mentioned in Hindiya:
وان کان نجس العین کا لخنزیر فانہ یتنجس وان لم یدخل فاہ .
It is mentioned in Hindiya as well:
اما الخنزیر فجمیع اجزائہ نجسۃ .
It is mentioned in Raddul Muhtar:
وظاھر الروایۃ ان شعرہ نجس وصححہ فی البدائع ورجحہ فی الاختیار فلو
صلی ومعہ منہ اکثر من قدرالدرھم لا تجوز ولو وقع فی ماء قلیل نجسہ۔
Similarly, if any Damawi animal dies after falling into
the water or if it falls in already dead then the water will be regarded as
being impure, even if its saliva etc. does not mix with the water, as the contact
of the corpse with the water, causes ‘Aab-e-Qaleel’ (water less than that of a
Dah-Dardah) to become impure. It is mentioned in Durr-e-Mukhtar:
اومات فیھا ( ای فی بئردون القدر الکثیر ) او خارجھا والقی فیھا
حیوان دموی .
With the exception of a pig, if any other animal falls in
then the saliva of which is impure and that animal emerged alive then until one
cannot confirm that its mouth touched the water, it will not be regarded as
being impure.
It is mentioned in Fatawa Alamgiri:
والصحیح ان الکلب لیس بنجس العین فلا یفسد الماء مالم یدخل فاہ ھکذا
فی التبیین وھکذا سائر ما لا یوکل لحمہ من سباع الوحش والطیر لا یتنجس الماء اذا
اخرج حیا ولم یصل فاہ فی الصحیح ھکذا فی " محیط السرخسی ".
It is mentioned in Durr-e-Mukhtar:
لو اخرج حیا ولیس بنجس العین ولا بہ حدث او خبث لم ینزح شیئ الا ان
یدخل فمہ الماء فیعتبر بسؤرہ فان نجسا نزح الکل والا لا ھو الصحیح
0 comments:
Post a Comment