The jurists disagreed as to whether the entire penis must be washed when soiled by pre-ejaculatory fluid (madhy) or only the affected portion. The point of contention stems from the Prophet’s—peace and blessings be upon him—statement in the famous ḥadīth of ʿAlī, who was asked about madhy and replied:
“Let him wash his penis and perform ablution.”
The dispute revolves around a methodological issue: when the Law names something, are we to take that name according to its broadest possible referent or its narrowest? Those who adopt the broader, terminal sense—the fullest extent to which the word “penis” applies—say the whole organ must be washed. Those who adopt the minimal sense rule that only the soiled part need be cleansed, by analogy with urine and with madhy itself.
Chapter Four
On the agents by which impurities are removed
As for the substances that remove impurity, Muslims unanimously agree that pure, purifying water removes it from all three loci mentioned earlier, and they likewise agree that stones suffice for removing impurity from the two exits. They differed, however, concerning other pure liquids and solids.
One group—Abū Ḥanīfah and his companions—held that any pure substance, liquid or solid, that eliminates the physical filth may be used in any place.
Another group maintained that nothing but water removes impurity, except in the unanimously recognised practice of istijmār (wiping with stones); this is the view of Mālik and al-Shāfiʿī. Within istijmār they further disagreed about bone and dung: some forbade them, allowing any other cleansing material; Mālik excepted whatever is edible and therefore inviolable, such as bread, and some extended the exception to items whose use would be wasteful, like gold or rubies.
A third group restricted effective cleansing to stones alone; this is the school of the literalists (Ahl al-Ẓāhir).
A fourth allowed istinjāʾ with bone but not with dung, though they still deemed it disliked. al-Ṭabarī held an isolated view, permitting wiping with any substance, whether pure or impure.
The root of their disagreement over non-water cleansing agents outside the two exits is this: Is the aim of removing impurity with water merely the elimination of the filth itself—so that anything capable of removing it is equivalent to water—or does water possess an additional quality not shared by other substances? Those who saw no special quality in water allowed all pure liquids and solids. They supported their view with the unanimous concession that impurity may be removed from the two exits without water, and with the report of Umm Salamah: “I have a long hem that drags on the ground, and I walk through filthy places.” The Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—said, “What comes after it will purify it.”
They also cited the narrations recorded by Abū Dāwūd, such as the Prophet’s—peace and blessings be upon him—saying, “If one of you steps in filth with his sandals, the earth will cleanse them,” along with other reports of similar purport.