That which has no flowing blood and is produced from something pure …

His statement, “That which has no flowing blood and is produced from something pure”: Grammatically, the correct form of “produced” should be in the accusative, since it functions as a circumstantial qualifier. This is why the author of al-Rawḍ supplied an implied subject so that the nominative form would be grammatically sound, saying: “And it is produced …” (1).

His statement, “blood,” means blood; and “flowing” means that it flows when the creature is wounded or killed.

His statement, “produced from something pure,” means created from something pure.

Thus, the author stipulated two conditions:

First: that it should not have flowing blood.

…

Second: that it should be produced from something pure. Such a creature does not become impure through death; indeed, it is all the more certainly not impure while alive.

Examples include cockroaches, beetles, scorpions, bedbugs (small gnats), mosquitoes, and locusts.

If a beetle falls into water and dies in it, the water does not become impure, because the beetle is pure.

As for the gecko, Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “It has flowing blood” (2). Accordingly, its carcass is impure. A mouse likewise has flowing blood, so if it dies, it is impure.

The implication of his statement, “produced from something pure,” is that if it is produced from something impure, then it is impure. This is based on the view that an impure substance does not become pure through transformation.