to a man who asked him, “What is this dispute between you two about?” He replied, “I want to establish that his origin is pure, but he insists that it is impure.”

Moreover, semen is not like bodily waste; rather, it resembles the substances that nourish and constitute the body, since it is the basis of procreation. It thus has more in common with essential bodily constituents than with waste.

The sixth argument:

There are several responses to it.

First, we do not concede that semen passes through the urinary passage. It has been said that a thin membrane separates the two passages and that urine emerges only by seepage. This is a well-known view. In any event, it must be demonstrated that the two passages connect. This is known only at the opening of the penis, which is pure, or whose impurity is excused.

The second response:

Even if semen passes through the urinary passage, we do not concede that urine is impure before it emerges, as previously explained regarding blood. This is clearer in the case of blood than of urine, since blood is an essential constituent and part of the body, whereas urine is waste.

The third response:

Even if urine is impure, we do not concede that contact inside a living creature renders something impure. The same point has already been made concerning transformation, and it is clearer still in the case of mere contact. This is supported by the words of Allah, Exalted is He:

“From between digested matter and blood, pure milk, pleasant for those who drink it.”

If internal contact with digested matter, for example, caused impurity, the milk would become impure.