cases where what is obligatory or recommended is difficult to distinguish from what is prohibited. Abū Tālib al-Makkī and Ibn Hāmid mentioned this. Thus, Imam Ahmad was asked about a man whose father had died owing a debt, while also having debts owed to him whose legitimacy was doubtful: should his son use these to repay his father’s debt? He replied, “Should he leave his father bound by his outstanding debt?” This is a sound answer: repaying a debt is obligatory, and neglecting an obligation is grounds for punishment. It should therefore not be neglected on account of something that may or may not entail punishment.

It is well known that some ritual baths are obligatory, such as bathing to remove major ritual impurity following sexual activity, menstruation, or postnatal bleeding. Others are strongly emphasized, though their obligatory status is disputed, such as the Friday bath. Still others are recommended. In cold lands, these baths can only be taken in a bathhouse. Bathing elsewhere could expose a person to death or illness, so bathing outside a bathhouse is then impermissible. Nor is it permissible to resort to dry ablution when one can bathe with water in a bathhouse, even supposing that this involves something disliked.

An example is water heated using impure substances, according to those who consider its use disliked without qualification, or those who consider it disliked when there is no effective barrier between the water and the smoke. The jurists of Ahmad’s school and others have differed over this, on the view that using water heated with impure substances is disliked. In any event, such water must be used if no other water can be used, because purification with water from major ritual impurity is obligatory when one is able to do so. Even if the water has a characteristic that makes its use disliked, its use ceases to be disliked in these circumstances.