Articles

The Conservation of Water in the Maliki School of Thought
Author : Dr. Mufti Sa`eid Farhan
Date Added : 04-03-2024

The Conservation of Water in the Maliki School of Thought

 

 

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds. May His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

Verily, water is the backbone of livelihood. This is attested to in the following verse where Allah the Almighty says {What means}: "And We made from water every living thing" (Al-`Anbiyaa`, 30). Given the importance of water in human life, it has been a matter of interest for jurists of all Islamic schools of thought. Just as water is the key to life, it is also the key to worship. Purity is the means for a Muslim to perform his/her worship, and worship is the ultimate purpose of human existence.

 

The Islamic schools of thought have paid great attention to water in terms of its Sharia rulings because of its importance in the worship of the Muslim. This is in addition to paying attention to its conservation considering its importance and sensing the prophetic guidance in that regard. This guidance is clearly reflected in the situation in which the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw a man performing ablution and said to him: "Do not be extravagant, do not be extravagant." (Narrated by Ibn Majah).

 

Among those who have excelled in this field is the Maliki school of thought, especially in many rulings related to water. One of these is the clarification of when water becomes impure, as we will explain, God willing. There is no better evidence for this than the words of the Proof of Islam, Imam Al-Ghazali (may Allah have mercy on him), where he said in his book "Revival of the Religious Sciences" [Vol.1/P.129]: 'I wished his [i.e., Imam Shafi'i's] school of thought to be like that of Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) in that water, even if it is little, does not become impure except through a noticeable change, as there is a dire necessity for it. The insistence on a specific quantity (Two Qollas) is a cause of obsessive doubts, and for this reason, it caused hardship for people. I swear, in my opinion, it is the source of hardship, recognized by those who have experienced it and pondered over it.' He concluded his words."

 

 I will mention two jurisprudential/Fiqh rulings in the Maliki school of thought regarding purification, clarifying the aspect of water conservation compared to other jurisprudential schools. Through these two rulings, the Maliki school has distinguished itself from other schools, and they have become one of its unique features.

 

First: When does water become impure?

 

The Hanafi, Shafi'i, and Hanbali schools concur that if impurity falls into a large quantity of water, the water becomes impure if any of its characteristics change. However, if its characteristics do not change, it remains pure. As for a small quantity of water, it becomes impure as soon as impurity falls into it, even if its characteristics do not change. The threshold for a large quantity of water that does not become impure according to the Shafi'i and Hanbali schools is approximately 190 liters. However, according to the Hanafi school, it is significantly more than that, roughly multiples thereof.

 

The scholars of the Maliki school have a different criterion regarding the impurity of water. They do not differentiate between large and small quantities of water. Instead, they have another criterion for determining the impurity of water, which is the alteration of any of its three characteristics. As long as none of its characteristics changes, the water remains pure even if impurity falls into it, even if it's a small quantity. If the quantity of water is less than the amount typically used for ablution (approximately one liter), there is no dislike (karaha) in using it as long as its characteristics remain unchanged, even if it becomes impure. However, if the quantity is less than that, it becomes disliked (makruh) to use it, although purification with it is still permissible.

 

This opinion clearly emphasizes the conservation of water. If we consider that the threshold for a large quantity of water in other schools of thought is around 190 liters at the minimum, as stated by Imam Al-Hattab in "Mawahib al-Jalil," then this opinion provides a more lenient approach.

 

Imam Al-Hattab stated: "If the water is impure, its abundance and scarcity are considered. If the water is abundant, more than the vessel used for ablution and bathing, then it remains pure without dislike. Otherwise, it becomes disliked because it is a small amount of water whose condition has been affected by impurity without changing it."

 

Second: Using used water for purification

 

The water used in matters of purification is the water that has been used for obligatory acts of worship, such as ablution (wudu) for someone who is in a state of minor ritual impurity (hadath) and ritual bathing (ghusl) for someone who is in a state of major ritual impurity (janabah).

 

The Hanafi, Shafi'i, and Hanbali schools of thought consider used water to be ritually pure (tahir) but not purifying (mutahir), meaning it is not suitable for performing ablution or ritual bathing. This is in contrast to the Maliki school, which permits the use of used water for purification with dislike (karaha) if other water is available. However, if no other water is available, there is no dislike in using it. Expanding the scope of permissible water—water that is inherently pure and purifying for others—undoubtedly ensures water conservation.

 

The perspective of the Maliki scholars on water is only a drop in the ocean compared to the vast treasures found in the four schools of Islamic jurisprudence. Therefore, it is incumbent upon us to give them due consideration, as they constitute our religion through which we worship and uphold the teachings of Allah the Almighty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible for a woman to uncover her face while performing Umrah (minor Hajj)?

The woman while in a state of Ihram (ritual consecration) is obligated to uncover her face and hands, but at the same time permitted to let her head-covering garment drape from her head down over her face when non-Mahram (i.e., marriageable) men pass by her. And Allah Knows Best.

What is the ruling on someone who curses the religion or commits an act of disbelief during the day in Ramadan?

Whoever apostatizes (leaves Islam) while fasting, their fast is invalid. Cursing the religion is an act of apostasy (may Allah protect us from it). Such a person must return to Islam by pronouncing the Shahadah (testimony of faith), seek Allah’s forgiveness, refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day, and make up for that day’s fast later.

Must a woman seek her husband's permission to fast a make up fast (qada)?

● If there is ample time to make up for the missed fasts, a woman should seek her husband's permission before fasting.
● However, if the time is running out—such as when only the remaining days of Sha'ban are sufficient to complete the qada—she does not need his permission and must fast, because Allah’s command takes precedence over the husband's consent.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.