Why did the jurists equate the rulings concerning سلس (incontinence) with those of istihada (non-menstrual vaginal bleeding)? And did the Companions equate urinary and flatal incontinence with what the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said to the woman with istihada, or did they act as if incontinence was among the matters left unaddressed? And is incontinence considered not to invalidate purity?

The one whom Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) commanded to ask the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about madhy (prostatic fluid) was Al-Miqdad, not Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her). The meaning of the aforementioned hadith (definition) is the command to perform ablution (wudu) and wash the male organ when madhy exits, not a full ritual bath (ghusl (definition)), as Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) had thought. Scholars have clarified that if the discharge of madhy becomes frequent, reaching the point of incontinence (sals), it then becomes like other impurities and necessitates wudu, unless it is due to a specific medical condition.