The Ruling of the Ḥanbalī Madh`hab

If someone is certain that he has performed wuḍūʾ and that an invalidator of it has occurred but cannot remember which of the two have preceded the other, then it should be said to him: What was your condition before this period of time in which you are certain that an invalidator and a performance of wuḍūʾ had occurred?

If he says: I was not in a state of purity, then we say: Then you are now in a state of purity (wuḍūʾ). If he says: I was in a state of purity (wuḍūʾ), then we say: You are now in a state of impurity.

Hanbalī Stance: When Previously Certain of Being in a State of Wuḍūʾ

For example, a man is certain that he is in a state of wuḍūʾ from the time of Ṣalāt al-Fajr until sunrise. An hour after sunrise, he wishes to pray Ṣalāh al-Ḍuḥá. So he says: I am certain that since sunrise I made wudu and lost it but I cannot remember which came first. We say to him: You are now in a state of impurity.

Hanbalī Stance: When Previously Certain of Not Being in a State of Wuḍūʾ

If he says: I am certain that after Ṣalāt al-Fajr I invalidated my wuḍūʾ and that after sunrise both wuḍūʾ and an invalidator of it occurred. We say to him: Then you are now in a state of purity.

The Wisdom Behind the Ḥanbalī Ruling

The wisdom behind this ruling is that he is certain of his change from a pure to an impure state, but is doubtful regarding whether this impure state persists. We should assume it remains as this is the fundamentally established state.

In the first example, the man was assured of being in a state of wuḍūʾ until sunrise. He also had certainty regarding the occurrence of an invalidator after sunrise but doubted whether this invalidator was removed or not [through the performance of wuḍūʾ]. So it is said to him: You are now in a state of impurity because the original state of invalidation of which you have certainty should remain. This is applied similarly to the opposing situation and so on.

Ḥanbalī Stance: The Ruling of Being Unsure of One’s Prior Condition (With or Without Wudu

If a man is certain he performed wuḍūʾ and subsequently invalidated it, but cannot recall the order, and cannot remember his condition before the time period in question, then it is obligatory for him to perform wuḍūʾ. This is because there is no condition to which certainty can be attached and from which a ruling derived. This is the opinion of the Ḥanbalī madh`hab.

The Correct Opinion: Performing Wuḍūʾ When in Doubt

Other scholars take the opinion that he should perform wuḍūʾ regardless of the situation. Their wisdom is that he is assured of the occurrence of two conditions that oppose one another and the order cannot be ascertained. There exists no way of knowing which one has cancelled out the other, so they are both void. Insofar as he is assured that his first state has been nullified, he should perform wuḍūʾ as a precautionary measure similar to the ruling of one ignorant of his former state before the time period in question.

The opinion that obligates performing wuḍūʾ is more encompassing. This is because, for example, someone is certain that after sunrise he has performed wuḍūʾ and an invalidator has occurred but cannot recall the former of the two. There exists the possibility that after sunrise he renewed his existing wuḍūʾ then invalidated it. In that case, he would currently require wuḍūʾ. As long as this possibility exists, he cannot leave the sphere of doubt except through performing another wuḍūʾ. This wuḍūʾ is either obligatory, in which case he has performed it, or, at the very least, it is Sunnah. As the jurists (رحمهم الله) say:

​

Whenever strong doubt [regarding a state of purification] occurs, it becomes Sunnah to perform wuḍūʾ such that the state of purification becomes a condition of certainty.

The Four Scenarios of Doubt

From this, we can appreciate that there are four scenarios:

1. To be assured of the state of purity, doubtful of its invalidation.
2. To be assured of the state of invalidation, doubtful of purity.
3. To be assured of both (purity and invalidation), ignorant of the order, but knowledgeable of the condition before the period of doubt.
4. To be assured of the occurrence of both (purity and invalidation), ignorant of the former of the two, and also ignorant of the condition before the period of doubt.

The individual ruling for each of these scenarios has been clarified.¹

The way in which these situations are divided shows the scrutiny of the people of knowledge and that there is almost no scenario that could possibly occur except that they have already mentioned a ruling regarding it. This is from the protection of Allāh, the Most High, over this Sharīʿah. For had it not been for these exalted scholars who have deduced these derivative judicial issues from the Book of Allāh and the Sunnah of His Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم), we would have remained ignorant of a great multitude of them.

Endnotes:

[1] For scenarios 1 and 2: See article:“Dealing with Doubts Regarding the State of Purification.

Source: Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ 1:312-315
Translated by: Riyāḍ al-Kanadī