Question:
Can one do wudhu with Nabidh al-Tamr in the absence of water
The Fatwa
In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
The Answer
The Fiqh of the Answer
The Aṣl of Ṭahārah is as narrated by Imam al-Ṭaḥāwī (d.321 AH) that Imam Abū Ḥanīfah (d.150 AH) stated that for a healthy person, the only means of attaining purity is through water1. Imam al-Atqānī (d.758 AH) clarifies that this refers specifically to plain, natural water, known as Māʾ al-Muṭlaq in the Fiqh texts. Any plain and natural water, however and wherever it is sourced from, can be used for Ṭahārah purposes.
Given that the Aṣl of Ṭahārah is the use of plain water and that is the principle of cleansing oneself, anything other than what is known to be plain, and natural water would not be acceptable. Hence, Wuḍūʾ would not be valid with Nabīdh al-Tamr or any other Nabīdh, since these are not known to be water and Māʾ in contemporary parlance.
However, a question is raised on why there is a departure from the above principle in a narration from Imam Abū Ḥanīfah (d.150 AH) that in the scenario where one finds nothing but Nabīdh al-Tamr, it is permissible to perform Wuḍūʾ with it, without resorting to Tayammum.
Imam al-Marghīnānī (d.593 AH) explains that this is due to a Ḥadīth in which the Prophet ﷺ performed Wuḍūʾ with Nabīdh al-Tamr in the absence of plain and natural water. Yet, two further opinions are also narrated from Imam Abū Ḥanīfah (d.150 AH). One aligns with what is narrated from Imam Abū Yūsuf (d.182 AH) that Tayammum must be performed in this instance, not Wuḍūʾ. Another aligns with what is narrated by Imam Muḥammad (d.189 AH): that both Tayammum and Wuḍūʾ must be performed. Imam al-Atqānī (d.758 AH) mentions his correct and final opinion is the one in line with Imam Abū Yūsuf (d.182 AH).
Imam al-ʿAynī (d.855 AH) narrates from Abū Ṭāhir al-Dabbās (d.493 AH) that the differing answers of Imam Abū Ḥanīfah were due to the differing questions posed to him. When asked about a case where the Ḥalāwah (sweetness) was predominant, he said one should perform Tayammum and not Wuḍūʾ. When asked about a case where Māʾ and Ḥalāwah were equal, he said one should combine between Tayammum and Wuḍūʾ. And when asked about a case where Māʾ was predominant, he said Wuḍūʾ should be performed without Tayammum. Al-Sughnāqī (d.714 AH) added that according to this method, there is no difference in ruling between Nabīdh al-Tamr and other types of Anbidhah (fermented juices).
Al-Sighnāqī (d.711 AH) narrates how the Ḥanafī tradition preserves three reports from Imam Abū Ḥanīfah (d.150 AH) on purification with a sweetened infusion with dates (Nabīdh) in place of plain water. Al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaghīr and al-Ziyādāt record that one may perform Wuḍūʾ with such a liquid and that Tayammum is not required. By contrast, Kitāb al-Ṣalāh in al-Aṣl states that performing Wuḍūʾ with it together with tayammum is more preferable. Al-Bazdawī (d.493 AH) clarifies that this latter wording implies validity if one were to do Wuḍūʾ alone and invalidity if one were to do Tayammum alone without attempting Wuḍūʾ; the recommended course, however, is to combine both as a precaution.
A third report—transmitted by Nūḥ b. Abī Maryam (d.173 AH) and al-Ḥasan b. Ziyād (d.204 AH) from Imam Abū Ḥanīfah and cited by Imām al-Maḥbūbī (d.630 AH) that one should perform tayammum and not use the date-infused water for Wuḍūʾ. Abū Ṭāhir al-Dabbās (d.493 AH) reconciles the apparent divergence by tying each response to a different factual matrix: when sweetness predominates so that the mixture is no longer properly “water,” the ruling is Tayammum only; when water and sweetness are roughly equal, the recommended course is to combine Wuḍūʾ and tayammum as this liquid is not certainly water, and nor is it certainly sweetened date-infused water; and when water predominates, Wuḍūʾ with the mixture suffices and Tayammum is unnecessary, as this is just plain water with dates in it. That does not dispel it from being water and the dates being capable of being removed. On this reading, the answers vary not in principle but with the underlying ratios. Imām al-Tumarṭāshī (d.1004 AH) adds that, on this approach, the ruling does not differ between date-based nabīdh and other analogous infusions: the operative factor is predominance, not the specific fruit or substance infused.
And Almighty Allah Alone Knows Best
Maulana Ahmad Kapadia
Trainee Mufti
Reviewed and approved by
Mufti Faraz Adam
www.darulfiqh.com
DISCLAIMER:
The views and opinions expressed in this answer belong only to the author and do not in any way represent or reflect the views of any institutions to which he may be affiliated.
Arguments and ideas propounded in this answer are based on the juristic interpretations and reasoning of the author. Given that contemporary issues and interpretations of contemporary issues are subjective in nature, another Mufti may reach different conclusions to the one expressed by the author. Whilst every effort has been taken to ensure total accuracy and soundness from a Shari’ah perspective, the author is open to any correction or juristic guidance. On the event of any juristic shortcomings, the author will retract any or all of the conclusions expressed within this answer.
The Shari’ah ruling given herein is based specifically on the scenario in question. The author bears no responsibility towards any party that acts or does not act on this answer and is exempted from any and all forms of loss or damage. This answer may not be used as evidence in any court of law without prior written consent from the author. Consideration is only given and is restricted to the specific links provided, the author does not endorse nor approve of any other content the website may contain.
قال أبو حنيفة رحمه الله: لا طهارة للصحيح إلا بالماء (مختصر الطحاوي)
﴿فلم تجدوا ماء فتيمموا﴾: دل على أن حكم الغسل المأمور به مقصور على ما جعل التيمم بدلا منه، وأبيح استعماله عند عدمه. (شرح مختصر الطحاوي)
ثم وجه التمسك بالآيةِ والحَديثِ : أنَّ الماءَ ذُكِرَ فِيهِما مُطلقًا مِن غَيْرِ قَيْدٍ بواحدٍ من هذه المياه، والمطلق ينصرف إلى ما هو المُعْتَادُ، والمُعتاد في الغُسْلِ: هذه المياه المذكورة ؛ فينصرف إليها ، كما إذا اشترى بعشرة دراهم مُطلقة ، ينصرفُ إلى نَقْدِ البلد (غاية البيان)
فإن لم يجد إلا نبيذ التمر. قال أبو حنيفة رحمه الله تعالى يتوضأبه ولا يتيمم ” لحديث ليلة الجن فإن النبي عليه الصلاة والسلام توضأ به حين لم يجد الماء (الهداية في شرح بداية المبتدي)
ولا يجوز التوضي بما سواه من الأبنذة جريا على قضية القياس. (الهداية في شرح بداية المبتدي)
وحكي عن ابن طاهر الدباس رحمه الله أنه قال: إنما اختلفت أجوبة أبي حنيفة رحمه الله لاختلاف الأسئلة فإنه سئل عن التوضؤ إذا كانت الغلبة للحلاوة، قال: يتيمم ولا يتوضأ، وسئل عنه أيضا إذا كان الماء والحلاوة سواء ولم يغلب أحدهما على الآخر، قال: يجمع بينهما، وقال السغناقي: وعلى هذه الطريقة لا يختلف الحكم بين نبيذ التمر وسائر الأنبذة، وسئل عنه أيضا إذا كانت الغلبة للماء فقيل يتوضأ به ولا يتيمم. (البناية قي شرح الهداية)
-أما الأول: فعن أبي حنيفة [فيه] ثلاث روايات:
ذكر في «الجامع الصغير» والزيادات أنه يتوضأ به ولا يتيمم
وذكر في كتاب الصلاة أنه إن توضأ [به] وتيمم أحب إلي
قال شيخ الإسلام: وما ذكر في كتاب الصلاة إشارة إلى أنه لو توضأ به ولم يتيمم يجوز، ولو تيمم ولم يتوضأ به لا يجوز، والمستحب أن يجمع بينهما.
والثالثة: هي ما روى نوح بن أبي مريم والحسن بن زياد عن أبي حنيفة-﵏: أنه يتيمم ولا يتوضأ به، كذا في «الجامع الصغير» للإمام المحبوبي، [وفيه]: وحكي عن أبي طاهر الدباس أنه قال: إنما اختلفت أجوبة أبي حنيفة لاختلاف الأسئلة؛ فإنه سئل عن التوضي إذا كانت الغلبة للحلاوة. قال: يتيمم ولا يتوضأ. وسئل عنه أيضًا إذا كان الماء والحلاوة سواء ولم يغلب أحدهما على الآخر قال: يجمع بينهما.
قال الإمام التمرتاشي: قلت: وعلى هذه الطريقة لا يختلف الحكم بين نبيذ التمر وسائر الأنبذة.
وسئل عنه أيضًا ما إذا كانت الغلبة للماء فقال: يتوضأ به ولا يتيمم. (النهاية)