indicate prohibition, and when a command occurs in a weak hadith, it does not indicate obligation. This is because binding people to refrain from something or to do something requires evidence sufficient to discharge one’s responsibility before Allah for imposing it upon His servants ………

Ibn Muflih referred to this principle in al-Nukat ‘ala al-Muharrar, in the chapter on the position of the imam and the follower in prayer (1). What he means is where the weakness is not severe, but rather where the report may possibly be authentic. In that case, doing what is commanded and refraining from what is forbidden fall under the heading of precaution; and precaution does not make an act or omission obligatory.

2. It is reported from Abu Hurayrah that he instructed the one who washes a deceased person to perform ghusl (2).

This view, which the author has adopted, is the moderate view and the one closest to what is correct.

Some scholars said that he must perform ghusl (3). They cited the aforementioned hadith of Abu Hurayrah as evidence, arguing that the basic principle regarding a command is that it denotes obligation.

Others said: It is neither obligatory nor recommended for him to perform ghusl (653).

They cited the following evidence:

1. The weakness of the hadith of Abu Hurayrah. Imam Ahmad said: “Nothing in this chapter is established.” If nothing is established, then claiming that it is legislated requires evidence—and there is no evidence.

2. A believer is ritually pure, whether alive or dead. Thus, if ghusl is not recommended after washing a living person, then washing a deceased person is even more clearly not a reason for it.

If it is said: Most of those who used to wash the dead during the time of the Prophet ﷺ were women, as in the hadith of the man whose camel threw him and broke his neck, and the hadith of Umm ‘Atiyyah and those with her among the