ritual impurity. They excuse an amount of heavy impurity equivalent to a baghlī dirham, and light impurity covering a quarter of the affected area. Al-Shāfi‘ī takes the opposite position: he excuses no impurities except traces remaining after cleansing oneself following relief, fly droppings, and the like. He excuses neither blood nor other impurities, apart from flea blood and similar things. Moreover, he regards animal dung and urine, among other things, as impure. Thus, regarding both the kinds of impurity and the amounts excused, his position is the strictest of the four imams.

Mālik takes a middle course regarding both the kinds of impurity and their amounts. He does not regard the dung and urine of animals whose meat may be eaten as impure, and he excuses small amounts of blood and other impurities. Ahmad likewise takes a middle course regarding impurities: he does not regard dung and urine as impure, and he excuses small amounts of impurities that are difficult to avoid. Indeed, according to one of the two positions reported from him, he excuses small amounts of mule and donkey dung, bat urine, and other impurities that are difficult to avoid. According to one of the two reported positions, he even excuses small amounts of dung and urine from any animal that is itself ritually pure, as al-Qādī Abū Ya‘lā mentioned in his exposition of the school’s doctrine.

Nevertheless, Ahmad requires, as a general rule, that impurity be avoided during prayer, with no contrary position reported from him. His position on this did not vary, whereas Mālik’s followers differed over it. If someone were to pray with impurity on him, unaware of it or having forgotten it, he would not be required to repeat the prayer according to the sounder of the two positions reported from Ahmad. This accords with Mālik’s position, as indicated by the hadith of