عربي
Home


Articles

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

I work overtime after regular working hours and may become occupied with my phone or the work computer for personal matters — what is the ruling on this?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is obligatory upon an employee to abide by the instructions and regulations governing overtime hours, and equally obligatory to uphold honesty and avoid all forms of deception and dishonesty. Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, be mindful of Allah and be with the truthful." [Al-Tawbah/ 119]
Whoever is assigned to work overtime must be present at his workplace — even if he has no specific tasks to carry out at that time. In such a case, he should strive as best he can to spend that time in a manner that benefits the institution he works for. If there is genuinely no work for him to do, there is no objection to occupying his time with something beneficial — such as reciting the Holy Qurʾān, reading, or listening to educational lessons — provided he has already completed all the responsibilities assigned to him.
If, however, he does have work to complete, he must spend that time fulfilling it. He may attend to phone calls or other personal matters to the extent that is customarily acceptable, as long as this does not result in delaying or postponing his work. If he delays his work on account of personal preoccupations, the wages he received for that wasted time are not lawfully his to keep, and he is obliged to return the equivalent amount to the institution by whatever means available to him. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

A man led the people in prayer as imam, and at the end of the prayer he performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because he had omitted a short *sūrah* after al-Fātiḥah. What is the ruling on his prayer and that of those praying behind him?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to the Shāfiʿī school, it is sunnah to recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah in the prayer. One who omits it has a valid prayer, and no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) is prescribed for omitting it. If someone performs sujūd al-sahw for its omission while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. But one who is ignorant of the ruling, or who did so out of forgetfulness, his prayer is not invalidated, because this is among the matters that are obscure to people, and ignorance of it is not restricted to those who recently entered Islam.
Shaykh al-Islām al-Shams al-Ramlī said in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj ilā Sharḥ al-Minhāj (Vol.2/p.70): “The remaining sunnahs are not compensated for by prostration, such as the remembrances (adhkār) of bowing and prostration, that is, the opening supplication (duʿāʾ al-iftitāḥ) and the sūrah, in accordance with the base rule, because they are not of the same nature as what has been reported [as compensable]. If one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to ignorance. As for the objection raised that the ignorant person does not know that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed, and whoever knows it knows its place, this is refuted by denying such a necessary connection, for the ignorant person may hear only that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed before the salām, and so assume that it applies to every sunnah and is not restricted to its prescribed place.”
This is among the matters that are obscure, in which the mukallaf is excused for ignorance, as stated by al-Shabrāmallisī in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.70).
However, if the imam prostrates, and the follower (maʾmūm) presumes that his imam’s prostration is for a reason for which one does not prostrate, it is not permissible to follow him in it, so long as the follower knows the ruling.
Accordingly, the prayer of one who did not recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah is valid, and sujūd al-sahw is not prescribed for it. Whoever prostrates out of ignorance or forgetfulness, his prayer is valid, because this is among the issues hidden from the general public. But whoever prostrates while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on waiving a debt owed by a debtor and counting it toward zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Waiving a debt owed by a debtor, with the intention of counting it toward zakāh, does not fulfill the zakāh obligation. Rather, it constitutes an ordinary act of charity, for which Allah rewards the giver generously — since one of the conditions for the validity of zakāh is that the person paying it must form the intention of zakāh at the actual moment the wealth is paid out. In this case, the debt has already been established as a standing obligation upon the borrower, so it is not valid to simply redirect the intention toward zakāh after the fact.
It is preferable, instead, for the creditor to first collect the debt from the debtor, and then return to him the amount of money he is required to pay as zakāh — or a portion of it — if the debtor happens to fall under one of the eight categories that Allah, the Exalted, has commanded be given from zakāh.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone gives [money] to a poor person, stipulating that the recipient return it to him in payment of a debt owed to him, or says, 'I am making what you owe me into zakāh, so take it [as such]' — this is not valid. But if he gives it to him with the [unstated] intention that the recipient will use it to repay him, or says, 'Repay what you owe me, so that I may [then separately] give it to you as zakāh,' or the debtor himself says, 'Give it to me, so that I may [then] repay you with it' — this is valid, and there is no binding obligation for the recipient to actually fulfill this [informal understanding]." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on participating in the prize draws (raffles) that commercial stores hold for their customers?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no objection to participating in the prize draws (raffles) that commercial stores hold for their customers, provided that the buyer's intention in purchasing is not merely to enter the competition without any need for what is bought — rather, the purchase must be genuinely intended for the item itself, and one must not pay more than the item's fair market price. This is because paying an amount above the market price would effectively be paying a fee to enter the prize draw, which would render it a form of gambling (qimār).
These prizes are, in essence, gifts that businesses offer through a random drawing (qur'ah) to those who purchase from them, as a means of encouraging sales, without the customer bearing any additional monetary cost for participation. So long as the aforementioned conditions are met, there is no objection to benefiting from the prize offered by the store, as it is considered a lawful prize from the viewpoint of Islamic Law.
It is stated in the resolutions of the "Jordanian Iftaa' Board" (Resolution No. 47), in the context of outlining the conditions for permissible prizes: "The price of the ticket [or item purchased] for the sake of the prize must not exceed its original price, so that there is no payment of money in exchange for participation in the draw." And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More