Impurity of Madhī and Wadhī: Consensus of Scholars and Juristic Evidences

Source: Fatāwā Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mubārakpūrī, Vol. 1, p. 178

Question:​

Is there any scholarly difference regarding the impurity (najāsah) of madhī (pre-seminal fluid) and wadhī (post-urinal discharge)?

Answer:​

Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu wa-s-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!

Scholarly Consensus on Madhī and Wadhī​

◈ There is no difference of opinion among scholars regarding the impurity of madhī and wadhī.
◈ As mentioned: “هذا في أتذكر وأعلم وأحفظ” — “I recall, I know, and I have preserved knowledge that all scholars agree.”
◈ Thus, if madhī or wadhī comes into contact with the body or clothes, washing is obligatory.

Ruling of Istinjāʾ with Stones​

◈ According to the Ḥanafī jurists, just as istinjāʾ with stones (ḥajar) suffices after urination, it also suffices after the emission of madhī or wadhī.
◈ A narration from Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (رحمه الله) also supports this view.
◈ Imām al-Nawawī (رحمه الله) validated this opinion in Sharḥ Muslim and in his other works.

Difference Between Manī, Madhī, and Wadhī​

• The consensus on the impurity of madhī and wadhī exists because the scholarly debate only concerns manī (semen), not madhī or wadhī.

Juristic Principles Across Madhāhib​

• Ḥanafī and Ḥanbalī view: “Qalīl najāsah ghalīẓah maʿfū ʿanhā” — A small quantity of severe impurity is excused.
• Shāfiʿī view: All impurity, whether small or large, must be completely removed. Even the slightest trace is not excused.

Effect of Ḥadīth on Manī’s Purity​

• Aḥādīth indicate that if manī dries on clothing, scraping or rubbing suffices for purification.
• Clearly, not all traces are removed this way.
• Therefore, Shāfiʿīs were compelled to classify manī as ṭāhir (pure), since their principle does not allow excusing even a small impurity.
• Ḥanafīs and Ḥanbalīs considered the remaining traces as minor impurity, thus excusable.

Sharīʿah’s Ease​

• Regarding manī, Sharīʿah has allowed concession and ease, similar to the purification of shoes by rubbing on the ground.
• But in the case of madhī and wadhī, such ease is not reported in the aḥādīth.
• In fact, explicit rulings about madhī show that washing is obligatory.

Nature and Ruling of Madhī and Wadhī​

• Both are closer in nature and consistency to urine.
• Hence, their ruling is the same as urine — impure and requiring cleansing.

Note on the Report of Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib (رحمه الله)​

• The cited narration is attributed to Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib, not to al-Zuhrī.
• It is found in al-Muwaṭṭaʾ, not in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī.
• This report is interpreted as:
  
  • Either an expression of exaggeration to remove obsessive doubts (wasāwis),
  • Or it applies to one who suffers from a chronic condition of frequent discharge.
• This aligns only with the madhhab of Imām Mālik (رحمه الله), not with the other three Imāms (Abū Ḥanīfah, al-Shāfiʿī, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal), who all unanimously consider madhī and wadhī impure.

Conclusion​

✔ There is complete agreement among scholars on the impurity of madhī and wadhī.
✔ If they come in contact with the body or clothes, washing is obligatory.
✔ The rulings of the four Imāms confirm this consensus, though their approaches to minor impurities differ.


ھذا ما عندي والله أعلم بالصواب