“…and he instructed her to bathe and then perform the prayer; consequently she used to bathe for every prayer.” Yet that was only what she herself understood from his words, not a wording directly transmitted from the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him. It is this version that al-Bukhārī recorded.

The third report is the ḥadīth of Asmāʾ bint ʿUmays, who said:

“O Messenger of Allah, Fatimah daughter of Abū Ḥubaysh is suffering continuous bleeding.” The Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—replied, “Let her take one bath for Ẓuhr and ʿAṣr together, another single bath for Maghrib and ʿIshāʾ together, then bathe for the Dawn prayer, and perform ablution in between.”

Abū Dāwūd transmitted this narration, and Abū Muḥammad Ibn Ḥazm declared it sound.

The fourth is the ḥadīth of Ḥamna bint Jaḥsh, in which

“The Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—gave her the choice between praying all of the obligatory prayers with one purification once she observed that her menstrual blood had ceased, and bathing three times during every day and night.”

Its wording resembles the report of Asmāʾ bint ʿUmays, except that in the latter the ruling appears obligatory, whereas here it is offered as an option.

Because the outward purport of these ḥadīths diverges, the jurists have interpreted them by four different methodologies: abrogation, preference, reconciliation, and construction. The difference between reconciliation and construction is that the “constructor” sees no conflict at all and therefore simply combines the two ḥadīths, whereas the reconciler acknowledges an apparent contradiction and then harmonizes between them. Reflect on this, for the distinction is plain.

Those who adopted the method of preference are the scholars who prioritized the ḥadīth of Fatimah bint Abī Ḥubaysh, owing to the consensus on its authenticity. They acted on its apparent meaning—that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, did not command her to bathe for every prayer, nor to combine prayers under a single bath, nor anything else from the views already mentioned. This is the position of Mālik, Abū Ḥanīfah, al-Shāfiʿī and their disciples; they constitute the majority. Whoever among them accepted as sound the additional clause found in some versions—namely, the instruction to perform ablution before each prayer—deemed that obligatory for her, while whoever did not consider the addition authentic did not impose it.

Those who followed the method of construction say that there is no contradiction whatsoever between the ḥadīth of Fatimah and that of Umm Ḥabībah—whose chain includes Ibn Isḥāq. What is found in the latter is simply an addition to the former. The ḥadīth of Fatimah merely answers the question of whether that blood is menstrual, thereby preventing prayer; the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—informed her that it was not menstrual blood and did not therein impose any obligation of purification, whether for each prayer or upon the cessation of menstruation. In the ḥadīth of Umm Ḥabībah, however, he instructed her in one matter only: to purify herself for every prayer—yet, according to the majority it is