Majmu' al-FatawaIbn Taimiya

He was also asked: (*)

Is semen pure or not? If it is pure, what is the ruling on a woman’s vaginal moisture when it mixes with it?

He replied:

As for semen, the correct view is that it is pure. This is the position of al-Shāfi‘ī and the well-known view reported from Ahmad.

It has also been said that it is impure, but rubbing it off suffices. This is the position of Abū Hanīfa and another view reported from Ahmad. Is a small amount of it excused, as with blood, or not excused, as with urine? There are two views, both reported from Ahmad.

It has also been said that it must be washed off, as Mālik held. The first view, however, is correct. It is well known that the Companions experienced nocturnal emissions during the Prophet’s lifetime, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and that semen would get onto their bodies and clothes. This was a widespread occurrence. Had it been impure, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would have been obliged to instruct them to remove it from their bodies and clothes, just as he instructed them to cleanse themselves after relieving themselves and instructed menstruating women to wash menstrual blood from their clothes. Indeed, people come into contact with semen far more often than

Shaykh Nāsir ibn Hamad al-Fahd stated (p. 176): There are two points here: First: This same fatwa is repeated immediately after this passage in the same volume, 21:606–607, but with thirteen lines omitted: from “It has been said that it is impure” (the sixth line of 21:604) to “This is conclusive for anyone who reflects on it” (the fourth line of 21:605). Second: At 21:606, the wording is: “And where avoidance is difficult—and semen is difficult to avoid—it was accorded the same ruling as the outlet.” At 21:607, however, it reads: “And where avoidance is difficult, it was accorded the same ruling as the outlet.” Thus, the phrase “and semen is difficult to avoid” was omitted because the copyist’s eye skipped between the repeated phrases. And Allah Most High knows best.
وَسُئِلَ: (*) عَنْ الْمَنِيِّ هَلْ هُوَ طَاهِرٌ أَمْ لَا؟ وَإِذَا كَانَ طَاهِرًا فَمَا حُكْمُ رُطُوبَةِ فَرْجِ الْمَرْأَةِ إذَا خَالَطَهُ؟. فَأَجَابَ: وَأَمَّا الْمَنِيُّ فَالصَّحِيحُ أَنَّهُ طَاهِرٌ كَمَا هُوَ مَذْهَبُ الشَّافِعِيِّ وَأَحْمَد فِي الْمَشْهُورِ عَنْهُ. وَقَدْ قِيلَ: إنَّهُ نَجِسٌ يُجْزِئُ فَرْكُهُ؛ كَقَوْلِ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ وَأَحْمَد فِي رِوَايَةٍ أُخْرَى وَهَلْ يُعْفَى عَنْ يَسِيرِهِ كَالدَّمِ أَوْ لَا يُعْفَى عَنْهُ كَالْبَوْلِ؟ عَلَى قَوْلَيْنِ هُمَا رِوَايَتَانِ عَنْ أَحْمَد. وَقِيلَ: إنَّهُ يَجِبُ غَسْلُهُ كَقَوْلِ مَالِكٍ وَالْأَوَّلُ هُوَ الصَّوَابُ فَإِنَّهُ مِنْ الْمَعْلُومِ أَنَّ الصَّحَابَةَ كَانُوا يَحْتَلِمُونَ عَلَى عَهْدِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَأَنَّ الْمَنِيَّ يُصِيبُ بَدَنَ أَحَدِهِمْ وَثِيَابَهُ وَهَذَا مِمَّا تَعُمُّ بِهِ الْبَلْوَى فَلَوْ كَانَ ذَلِكَ نَجِسًا لَكَانَ يَجِبُ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَمْرُهُمْ بِإِزَالَةِ ذَلِكَ مِنْ أَبْدَانِهِمْ وَثِيَابِهِمْ كَمَا أَمَرَهُمْ بِالِاسْتِنْجَاءِ وَكَمَا أَمَرَ الْحَائِضَ بِأَنْ تَغْسِلَ دَمَ الْحَيْضِ مِنْ ثَوْبِهَا بَلْ إصَابَةُ النَّاسِ الْمَنِيَّ أَعْظَمُ بِكَثِيرِ مِنْ
قال الشيخ ناصر بن حمد الفهد (ص ١٧٦): هنا أمران: الأول: كررت هذه الفتوى نفسها بعد هذا الموضه مباشرة في نفس المجلد: ٢١/ ٦٠٦، ٦٠٧، ولكن بعد أن أسقط منها ثلاثة عشر سطراً: من قوله (وقد قيل: إنه نجس) (السطر السادس في ٢١/ ٦٠٤)، إلى قوله (وهذا قاطع لمن تدبره) (السطر الرابع في ٢١/ ٦٠٥). والثاني: وقع في ٢١/ ٦٠٦ (وفيما يشق الاحتراز منه، والمني يشق الاحتراز منه، فألحق بالمخرج)، وفي ٢١/ ٦٠٧ (وفيما يشق الاحتراز منه، فألحق بالمخرج) فسقطت جملة (والمني يشق الاحتراز منه) بسبب انتقال النظر، والله تعالى أعلم.

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies