The same applies to the ground: if it is affected by an impurity and rain falls upon it, it becomes pure.

What the author mentioned is the position of Malik (1), al-Shafi‘i (2), and Ahmad (3).

Abu Hanifah, may Allah have mercy on him, held that intention is not a condition for purification from ritual impurity (4), because it is not an act of worship intended for its own sake; rather, it is intended to render the prayer valid. This is like someone who puts on a garment that covers his private parts: he is not required to intend thereby to cover them. Rather, if he puts it on for adornment, to ward off the cold, or the like, that suffices. This view is weak. The correct view is that ablution is an independent act of worship, as evidenced by the fact that Allah, Exalted is He, has attached virtue, reward, and recompense to it. Whatever is of this nature is an independent act of worship. This is the view of the majority of scholars.

Since it is an independent act of worship, intention is a condition for it. This differs from removing a physical impurity, for that is not an act in itself, but rather the relinquishing of something whose removal is required. It is therefore not an independent act of worship, and intention is not stipulated for it.

By his statement, “all of them,” he meant that this includes both minor and major ritual impurity, and purification with water as well as dry ablution.

“So he intends to remove the state of ritual impurity, …”

His statement, “So he intends to remove the state of ritual impurity”: this is the first form of intention. Thus, if he performs ablution intending to remove the state of ritual impurity that occurred, for example, as a result of urination, his ablution is valid. This is the purpose of ablution.