6 – Washing the deceased.
Uthaymeen explains the linguistic differences between:
-Ghasl (غَسل): this is the name given to the action of washing or bathing
(noun).
-Ghusl (غُسل): this is the action of washing or bathing (verb).
So here, washing the deceased is a nullifier
of Wudhoo.
-The opinion of the
Hanbalees is that this nullifies the Wudhoo, this is irrespective of age or
gender, or whether one physically touches the deceased or washes them from
behind a barrier. The majority of the scholars (Hanafees, Shafi'ees and
Maalikees) state that it is not a nullifier of Wudhoo.
-The Hanbalees state
that that there is no difference between washing (غسل) and
touching (مس), as long as one washes even if he doesn’t physically touch the
deceased, his Wudhoo is broken.
Benefit in
terminologies: opinions that Imaam Ahmad held which disagreed with the majority
are often referred to as Mufradaat Madhab Ahmad.
-The evidences for the
Hanbalees:
-The Hadeeth of Ibn 'Abbaas, Ibn 'Umar and Aboo Hurayah [may Allaah be
Pleased with them all] [reported by 'Abdur-Razzaaq in his Musannaf (6101), Ibn
Abee Shaybah in his Musannaf (11134) and al-Bayhaqee (305-306)] that washing
the deceased nullifies the Wudhoo.
-Washing the deceased often involves touching impurities and the private
parts.
The evidences for the
majority:
-
There is no sound evidence to support Wudhoo being nullified by washing
the deceased.
-
As for the narrations of the Companions mentioned, then even if we take
this as a source of legislation the maximum we can say is that it is
recommended to perform Wudhoo again and not Waajib.
Uthaymeen supports the
view of the majority.
No comments:
Post a Comment