One of the Opponents Presented This Question to Me as an Objection to the Knowledge of — Jurisprudential Answers — Miscellaneous Issues, Vol. 5
From WikiSavior, a source-grounded reference
published translation
Question and answer [link]
Question 14
One of the opponents presented this question to me as an objection to the knowledge of Sayyid Ahmad al-Hasan (peace be upon him): Your Imam says in The Laws of Islam, p. 10, regarding well water, that it becomes impure through contact and that purification is by drawing an amount of water according to what fell into it; for a scorpion, snake, or gecko, between 30 and 70 liters are drawn according to the animal’s size and condition. This, he says, means the gecko is impure. Yet elsewhere, on p. 34 when listing impurities, he says that the gecko is pure, but a small amount of water into which a mouse, rat, or gecko has fallen is not used for drinking or purification, nor is a small amount of water in which a gecko, scorpion, or viper has died. A scorpion, snake, and gecko do not have spurting blood, and if they die in a well they do not make it impure because they are not impure. So why is drawing water from the well required if one dies in it even though it is pure? He calls this an obvious contradiction. My master, we ask you to answer so that this objection may be removed.
Ahmed al-Hasan Response:
Drawing water for a scorpion, gecko, or viper is not because it is impure. I did not say that it is impure and that water is therefore drawn for it. Rather, when I listed the impurities I made clear that these are not ruled impure, and I also explained that water in which they die is not valid for use in drinking or purification; that is why I previously said water is drawn for them. Placing the ruling of drawing water for them together with the ruling of drawing water for impurities causes no problem, just as addressing Iblis—although he was one of the jinn—under the general address ‘the angels,’ which included most of those present, causes no problem: ‘And when We said to the angels, “Prostrate to Adam,” they prostrated except Iblis; he refused...’ As you can see, if an objection to what I wrote in The Laws on the basis of this naive and foolish form were valid, then the objection to the Quran would be even more obligatory. I say only: May God disgrace the crooked minds of those who can scarcely understand a word.
published translation. Source [1]
Source: الأجوبة الفقهية (مسائل متفرقة - ج5); Question 14; Page Not available; FIQH-MISC-V5-Q014. View Arabic source · Open the original Arabic source ↗
More in Purification
- A Woman Who Finds the Man's Semen After She Had Removed It Before Performing Ghusl
- Does Touching the Body of a Deceased Person Through Gloves or Hand Coverings, or
- Do the Children of the Ansar Who Have Reached Puberty Have to Perform the Ghusl of
- Person in a State of Janaba or a Menstruating Woman Enter Husayniyyas and the Shrines
References
- ↑ السيد أحمد الحسن. الأجوبة الفقهية (مسائل متفرقة - ج5). Question 14; Page Not available. FIQH-MISC-V5-Q014. View Arabic source
Cite this page
الأجوبة الفقهية (مسائل متفرقة - ج5) — السيد أحمد الحسن. Question: 14. Page: Not available. FIQH-MISC-V5-Q014. https://almahdyoon.com/arabic/documents/books-saed/214-Ajwiba-fi9h-5.pdf
Changing the interface language does not translate or approve a ruling.
Editorial notes
The page title and topic labels are WikiSavior editorial wording, not quotations from the author.
Changing the interface language does not translate or approve a ruling.
View source · Page information
{
"id": "FIQH-MISC-V5-Q014",
"book_title_ar": "الأجوبة الفقهية (مسائل متفرقة - ج5)",
"author": "السيد أحمد الحسن",
"question_number": 14,
"page_number": null,
"source_url": "https://almahdyoon.com/arabic/documents/books-saed/214-Ajwiba-fi9h-5.pdf",
"source_language": "ar"
}