Should the fatwa mandating waiting for the cessation of the delayed drop of urine be reconsidered due to the hardship and obsessive thoughts it causes, and should the methodology of the Iraqi Malikis be adopted in this regard?
A student of knowledge is directed to several matters:
Firstly: Regarding what is attributed to Ibn Rushd concerning (cleaning oneself after relieving oneself) and wudu (ablution), that the default is the non-emission of that which is doubtful. This is a (school of thought) that goes against the relied-upon opinion to alleviate hardship.
Secondly: The relied-upon madhhab of the Malikis considers that your brother is not afflicted with sals (incontinence) and is obligated to perform wudu after the cessation of urination. He is excused for any impurity that affected him. There is no harm in adopting the Maliki madhhab in this regard when there is hardship.
Thirdly: What is attributed to the Iraqi Malikis is correct, for they do not consider sals to nullify wudu absolutely. However, this opinion is neither the most preponderant nor the relied-upon one among the Malikis.
Fourthly: In matters of (independent reasoning), one should not censure those who differ, nor do we compel anyone to follow what we issue in our . The fatwa is based on what is preponderant, and whoever finds a different opinion, there is no harm upon him.
Fifthly: This fatwa might be more arduous than what the Iraqis chose, but the may contain some hardship to distinguish the bad from the good. This hardship is bearable and contains benefit for the servant.
Summarized from the full answer at Ftawy · imported
Read the full answer on Ftawyhttps://ftawy.com/en/questions/121634
Where this answer came from
- Source platform
- Ftawy
- Original fatwa ID
- 121634
- Imported
- Translation status
- Source text, unreviewed
- Read the full ruling
- Read the full answer on Ftawy