such that he loses awareness completely. He may perhaps see something in his sleep, but it is slight, because he wakes quickly; and if anything were to come out of him, he would smell it.

At other times, it is slight in itself, in that he does not become deeply unaware in his sleep. For example, he can hear people speaking, or if someone speaks to him, he wakes quickly; or if he were to experience a nullifying occurrence, he would perceive it . . .

The apparent meaning of his statement, “while sitting or standing,” is unrestricted. However, they excluded the case in which he is sitting with his legs drawn up, reclining, or leaning against something, for then his ablution is invalidated, since he will generally fall into deep sleep. When he falls into deep sleep, he may pass wind without being aware of himself.

If a man sleeps lightly while prostrating, the established position in the madhhab is that his ablution is invalidated, because he is neither sitting nor standing.

According to the preponderant view, however, it is invalidated only when he is in a state such that, were he to pass wind, he would not be aware of himself.

“And touching an attached penis, or a woman’s private part, with the back or palm of his hand, . . .”

His statement, “and touching an attached penis”: this is the fourth of the acts that invalidate ablution. Touching must take place without a barrier, because touch through a barrier is not considered touching.

His statement, “a penis,” means that what invalidates ablution is touching the penis itself, not the area around it.

His statement, “attached”: the author stipulates that it must be attached, thereby excluding what has been detached. Thus, if a person’s penis were severed due to an assault, medical treatment, or the like, and someone took it in order to bury it, touching it would not invalidate his ablution.