skin—even if the barrier is nothing more than clay or muddy water. The soundest opinion is that anyone who owns no garment must smear himself with mud; he must cover the upper part and the two sides of the ʿawrah, not the underside. Thus, if his nakedness can be seen through the opening of his collar while he is bowing or otherwise, the covering is inadequate, and he must fasten the opening or tie something round his waist. According to the preponderant view, he may conceal part of the ʿawrah with his hand. If the cloth he finds is large enough to cover both the front and the back private parts, it must be used for both; if it will only cover one of them, priority—on the strongest position—goes to the front, while a second view prefers the rear and a third gives him the choice.
Ritual purity from hadath is likewise indispensable: if it is lost during the prayer, the prayer is nullified. In Imām al-Shāfiʿī’s earlier opinion, however, he may resume the prayer after renewing his ablution. A worshipper is excused for every sudden nullifier that occurs without negligence and cannot be warded off at that moment. If avoidance is possible—for instance, a gust of wind lifts his garment and he replaces it immediately—the prayer is not invalidated; but if he is remiss and allows a span of time to pass in which he could have covered himself, the prayer is void.
Purity from physical filth (najāsah) on the clothing, body, and place of prayer is equally required. When a pure and an impure item are confused, he must exercise judgment. If part of his garment or body is contaminated and he cannot locate the spot, he must wash the whole; merely washing the side he suspects is, on the sound view, insufficient. Should he wash half of the soiled area and later wash the rest, the stronger opinion is that if, when washing the latter portion, he also re-washes the adjoining part of the first half, the entire item becomes pure; otherwise, whatever was not washed together with its neighbour remains impure.
The prayer is invalid when any section of the clothing that touches the worshipper carries impurity, even if that section does not move with him. The same ruling applies when he is holding the edge of an impure object if it moves when he moves and—according to the sounder view—even if it does not. If he merely places it under his foot, however, the prayer remains valid. Impurity that happens to be level with his chest while bowing or prostrating does not harm, on the preponderant opinion.
If a bone is fastened with something impure because no pure material is available, he is excused; otherwise he must remove it, provided he does not fear manifest harm. Some say removal is obligatory even when harm is feared. If he dies, the sounder view is that it is not removed.
The area cleansed with stones after relieving oneself is excused, but carrying a stone that has been used for istijmār invalidates the prayer according to the sounder position. Street mud whose impurity is certain is overlooked in the amount that is ordinarily hard to avoid; the ruling varies with time and with the place where it appears on one’s clothing or body.
A small amount of flea blood and the specks left by flies are excused; the stronger view is that neither a large amount nor a small amount that has spread through perspiration is excused, and what counts as “large” is determined by custom.
I say: according to the more exacting scholars, it is excused in all cases, and Allah knows best.
The blood that issues from pimples is treated like flea blood—though some say the ruling changes if one intentionally squeezes the pimple. As for the blood from boils, ulcers, and the site of venesection or cupping, one view treats it the same as pimple blood.