Things that break Wudhu questions.

[Sunni_Student786]

As salaamu alaykum.

I was reading through a book entitled "The Essential Hanafi Handbook of Fiqh" and came across the chapter on "Things that Break Wudhu". I have a few q uestions regarding it.

1) The second thing that it mentions as breaking Wudhu is the following,

"That Najaasat which comes out from any part of the body and then flows to a place (on the body) which (in either Wudhu or Ghusl) must be washed. (The, the blood or pus which wells to the surface of a wound and congeals without following out over the surface will not break Wudhu)."

Does this then mean if one were to bleed from an area not washed during Wudhu, the thigh for example, and the blood, however much, did not flow onto an area washed during Wudhu, our Wudhu would not break?

Furthemore, what if one were wounded in an area that one normally had to wash during Wudhu, such as the forearm, but the blood welled up to the surface but not out onto the non-wounded portions of the forearm. Would one have to make Wudhu? And does the answer differ based on just how large the wound is?

2) The third thing listed as a nullifier of wudhu is "More than a moutful of vomit". It then says,

"If one should vomit a number of times, a little amount each time (less than a mouthful) then, according to Imam Muhammad, if there should be (for all the instances of vomiting) only one cause, (nausea for example), the amounts should be added together (and if the total comes to more than a mouthful, then Wudhu breaks)."

In order for one to add the little amounts of vomit that one may have brought up each time, is one obliged to spit out the vomit so that one can observe with one's eyes exactly how much came up? Or should one merely estimate without necessarily spitting it out?

3) The fourth nullifier of wudhu listed was

"Sleeping; either on one's back or side, or propped up againts something which, if removed would lead to one's falling. However, sleeping in a standing or sitting position without any kind of prop, or in the prescribed Sunnat positions of Ruku or Sajda, will not break Wudhu".

What if one were to sleep on one's stomach? Would that also break wudhu, even though no mention of sleeping on one's stomach has been made in the above?

If some of our Ulema who frequent this board or other knowledgeable brothers and/or sisters could answer the questions that I have asked above, I would appreciate it.

Jazakallahu Khair.

Wa'salaam.

[ze leetle elper]

Wa alaykum salam,

Sorry I'm not a knowledgeble person astagfirullah, but from my understanding:

1. It also mentions ghusl. And in ghusl the whole body is washed? Therefore, regardless fo whether one bled on an area not washed during wudhu, I think it would still break the wudhu?

2. I think you just estimate whether it was more than a mouthful or not? I'm a bit confused as to what you mean by 'actually spit it out..' I thought you would do this anyway lol!

3. From my understanding yes it would since the body is in a reclined position/ leaning on something. Your quote does specifically mention 'without any kind of prop...' from which one assumes this.

[Sunni_Student786]

Wa alaykum salam,

Sorry I'm not a knowledgeble person astagfirullah, but from my understanding:

1. It also mentions ghusl. And in ghusl the whole body is washed? Therefore, regardless fo whether one bled on an area not washed during wudhu, I think it would still break the wudhu?

I can't believe that I overlooked the part which said "in either Wudhu or Ghusl". Thanks for bringing it to my attention, but now I have another question:

Is there any part of the body that one does not have to wash in neither wudhu nor ghusl? If not, why do you think that the author chose to restrict, as a nullifier of wudhu, the flowing of najaasat ony to those parts of the body that must be washed in either wudhu or ghusl if there is no body part that would not fit into that category?

And my question about as to whether or not the size of the wound and/or the amount of blood welling up to the surface has an effect on whether or not the wudhu is nullified has still been left unanswered.

2. I think you just estimate whether it was more than a mouthful or not? I'm a bit confused as to what you mean by 'actually spit it out..' I thought you would do this anyway lol!

By "spit out" I meant whether or not one was obliged to spit it out in such a place that the vomit would be in plain view in order for one to be able to estimate whether or not all the separate amounts of vomit, if put together, totaled more than a mouthful.

3. From my understanding yes it would since the body is in a reclined position/ leaning on something. Your quote does specifically mention 'without any kind of prop...' from which one assumes this.

But if one is to infer from the quote "without any prop" that if one were to be sleeping on their stomach they would fall within this category, why did the author mention those sleeping on their backs or sides, who would also, under this understanding, be asleep on props, apart from those who were asleep and "propped up againts something which, if removed would lead to one's falling"?

Regardless, Jazakallahu Khair for your response.

Wa'salaam.

[MRahman]

I can't believe that I overlooked the part which said "in either Wudhu or Ghusl". Thanks for bringing it to my attention, but now I have another question:

Is there any part of the body that one does not have to wash in neither wudhu nor ghusl? If not, why do you think that the author chose to restrict, as a nullifier of wudhu, the flowing of najaasat ony to those parts of the body that must be washed in either wudhu or ghusl if there is no body part that would not fit into that category?

Places like the eyes and in side the ears are places where blood was to touch, than it would be ok.

And my question about as to whether or not the size of the wound and/or the amount of blood welling up to the surface has an effect on whether or not the wudhu is nullified has still been left unanswered.

if blood comes of the body and it moves from its place to a place it is fard to wash in a natural manner, than wudhu will be broken.

By "spit out" I meant whether or not one was obliged to spit it out in such a place that the vomit would be in plain view in order for one to be able to estimate whether or not all the separate amounts of vomit, if put together, totaled more than a mouthful.

Just estimate how much you have vomited.

But if one is to infer from the quote "without any prop" that if one were to be sleeping on their stomach they would fall within this category, why did the author mention those sleeping on their backs or sides, who would also, under this understanding, be asleep on props, apart from those who were asleep and "propped up againts something which, if removed would lead to one's falling"?

The arabic words that have been translated give simmilar meanings, one is lying down, reclining and leaning. If one was to be on thier belly than there is leaning, and another condition where both the buttocks shoulds remain firm on the bround.

Wa'salaam

Allah Knows Best!!!!

[Sunni_Student786]

Jazakallahu Khair for the answers, but I still need yet another clarification.

You said, in response to my question about as to whether or not the size of one's wound, even if blood does not flow from it, had any bearing on whether or not one's wudhu breaks,

if blood comes of the body and it moves from its place to a place it is fard to wash in a natural manner, than wudhu will be broken.

I am still a bit confused. Does this mean that even if I had a wound on my forearm, for example, that was about 6 inches across, but blood did not flow from it, but instead welled up to the surface, my wudhu would not be broken? I mean, what type of wound, save for the smallest of nicks and cuts, does not lead to blood flowing? Or is it these small nicks, cuts, and abrasions that the author is making reference when talking about "wounds" that do not break wudhu?

Regardless, Jazakallahu khair to everybody who has responded thus far.

Wa'salaam.

[MRahman]

I am still a bit confused. Does this mean that even if I had a wound on my forearm, for example, that was about 6 inches across, but blood did not flow from it, but instead welled up to the surface, my wudhu would not be broken? I mean, what type of wound, save for the smallest of nicks and cuts, does not lead to blood flowing? Or is it these small nicks, cuts, and abrasions that the author is making reference when talking about "wounds" that do not break wudhu?

What is meant with 'wound such blood does not flow' is that a small graze or cut, where blood will not flow unless one touches it or rubs it etc.

Allah knows best!!!

[Sunni_Student786]

What is meant with 'wound such blood does not flow' is that a small graze or cut, where blood will not flow unless one touches it or rubs it etc.

Allah knows best!!!

May Allah reward you for taking the time to answer my questions.

One last (insha'allah) question:

Assume that someone has a wound from which blood IS flowing. I know that one's wudhu would break as a result of it, but can one make a new wudhu while the blood is flowing from the wound in order to pray? Or must one wait until the blood stops flowing in order to make wudhu and pray, even if it means praying the Salah as a missed (Qada) prayer?

Also, would wrapping the wound suffice as a means for stopping the blood from flowing?

What if one does not have the material or means to wrap one's wound from which blood is flowing? What does one do in that situation?

Regardless, Jazakallahu Khair once more for answering my questions.

Wa'salaam.

[MRahman]

May Allah reward you for taking the time to answer my questions.

One last (insha'allah) question:

Assume that someone has a wound from which blood IS flowing. I know that one's wudhu would break as a result of it, but can one make a new wudhu while the blood is flowing from the wound in order to pray? Or must one wait until the blood stops flowing in order to make wudhu and pray, even if it means praying the Salah as a missed (Qada) prayer?

Also, would wrapping the wound suffice as a means for stopping the blood from flowing?

What if one does not have the material or means to wrap one's wound from which blood is flowing? What does one do in that situation?

One last (insha'allah) question:

Assume that someone has a wound from which blood IS flowing. I know that one's wudhu would break as a result of it, but can one make a new wudhu while the blood is flowing from the wound in order to pray? Or must one wait until the blood stops flowing in order to make wudhu and pray, even if it means praying the Salah as a missed (Qada) prayer?

Also, would wrapping the wound suffice as a means for stopping the blood from flowing?

What if one does not have the material or means to wrap one's wound from which blood is flowing? What does one do in that situation?

In this situation if one is able to stop the blood by putting a bandage on or something, then if one is able to do so will put a bandage on to stop the blood. One cannot pray or make wudhu while blood is still flowing.

However here the concept of ma'zuur (excused person) comes in, a person who is excused (i.e. due continous flow of blood) will make wufhu before every salah, which means will make wudhu before the salah he wishes to pray and then pray it even though blood is flowing. But as soon as the time for the prayer has passed his wudhu is invalid, even though it may be that at that time blood stopped temporarily so may think wudhu is retained, as a ma'zur makes wudhu before every salah unconditionally, thus needs to renew is wudhu for every prayer.

Now how does one become ma'zur (excused), ma'zur is one who is in this state (continous blood flow or continous urine drop) for one whole salah time. This means that from the time of his blood flow one whole salah needs to pass, which means that the current salah he is praying will be delayed to the end of its time and the pray in the state he is in (blood flowing). Then if during the next salah time the blood stops, then he needs to repeat his previous salah as he was not ma'zur. But during the second salah time if blood was flowing continuosly then he will be ma'zur.

Same again he stops being a ma'zur after one whole salah time passes without any blood coming out.

Imam Ibn Abidin says: "if a chronic excuse occurs after a fard prayer time had entered, one waits until the end of the time. If the excuse does not discontinue, one performs wudu and prays. Then, if it discontinues within the second time, one repeats that prayer [f: that one prayed in the first time]. If it remains through the second time, one does not repeat.

For example, Khalid gets a nosebleed twenty minutes into dhur. He tries to stop the bleeding, but he can't, so he waits until just before the end of dhur time to see if the bleeding will stop. It continues to bleed, so he makes wudu and prays. When Asr comes in, his nose is still bleeding. It bleeds throughout the time, without giving him a chance to perform a minimal wudu and pray without blood dripping. Khalid is now legally considered to be someone with a chronic excuse, and he does not have to repeat the dhur and asr prayers. If Khalid had time during asr to perform a minimal wudu and pray without his nose bleeding, then he will not be considered as someone with a chronic excuse, and he will have to repeat his dhur prayer.

And Allah knows best

[ze leetle elper]

^^ Ahh mashaAllah -- now I remember this because the same applies to a woman who may be experiencing chronic bleeding (istihada). Because the bleeding is not counted as menstruation, she can make wudhu for each salah and pray as normal, even though blood may be flowing.

[Sunni_Student786]

May Allah reward you brother MRahman for your detailed answer(s).