اسْمُ مَاءٍ بِلَا قَيْدٍ (ش) يَعْنِي أَنَّ الْمَاءَ الْمُطْلَقَ هُوَ الذَّاتُ الَّتِي يُقَالُ لَهَا هَذَا مَاءٌ فَيَصْدُقُ عَلَيْهَا اسْمُ الْمَاءِ بِلَا قَيْدٍ زَائِدٍ عَلَى ذَلِكَ اللَّفْظِ فَمَا صَدَقَ عَلَيْهِ اسْمُ مَاءٍ كَالْجِنْسِ؛ لِأَنَّ لَفْظَةَ مَاءٍ عِنْدَهُمْ عَرَضٌ عَامٌّ وَبِلَا قَيْدٍ كَالْفَصْلِ يَخْرُجُ مَا عَدَا الْمُطْلَقِ مِنْ أَقْسَامِ الْمِيَاهِ لَا يُقَالُ فِي كُلٍّ مِنْهَا مَاءٌ إلَّا بِزِيَادَةِ قَيْدٍ آخَرَ مِنْ إضَافَةٍ أَوْ وَصْفٍ أَوْ غَيْرِهِمَا كَقَوْلِنَا مَاءُ وَرْدٍ وَمَاءُ رَيْحَانٍ وَلَا يَكْفِي الِاقْتِصَارُ فِي الْإِخْبَارِ عَنْ ذَوَاتِهَا بِاسْمِ الْمَاءِ خَاصَّةً مِنْ غَيْرِ تَقْيِيدٍ بِشَيْءٍ كَمَا فِي الْمُطْلَقِ وَدَخَلَ فِي تَعْرِيفِ الْمُؤَلِّفِ لِلْمُطْلَقِ مَا إضَافَتُهُ بَيَانِيَّةٌ كَمَاءِ الْمَطَرِ وَمَا أُضِيفَ لِمَحَلِّهِ كَمَاءِ السَّمَاءِ وَالْآبَارِ وَالْعُيُونِ وَالْبَحْرِ فَقَدْ انْعَقَدَ الْإِجْمَاعُ عَلَى جَوَازِ التَّطْهِيرِ بِهِ، ثُمَّ إنَّهُ يُسْتَثْنَى مِنْ الْآبَارِ آبَارُ ثَمُودَ فَلَا يَجُوزُ الْوُضُوءُ بِمَائِهَا وَلَا الِانْتِفَاعُ بِهِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَاءُ عَذَابٍ لَا لِنَجَاسَتِهِ وَكَمَا يُمْنَعُ الْوُضُوءُ بِمَائِهَا يُمْنَعُ التَّيَمُّمُ بِأَرْضِهَا وَهِيَ مَسِيرَةُ خَمْسَةِ أَمْيَالٍ وَعَلَى الْقَوْلِ بِمَنْعِ الِاسْتِعْمَالِ بِالْمَاءِ الْمَذْكُورِ، فَإِنْ تَطَهَّرَ بِهِ وَصَلَّى صَحَّتْ صَلَاتُهُ كَذَا يَنْبَغِي كَمَا قَالَهُ الشَّيْخُ عَلِيٌّ الْأُجْهُورِيُّ فِي شَرْحِهِ وَدَخَلَ فِي حَدِّ الْمُطْلَقِ الْمَاءُ الْعَذْبُ وَلَا خِلَافَ فِيهِ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ وَدَخَلَ فِيهِ أَيْضًا جَمِيعُ الْمِيَاهِ الْمَكْرُوهَةِ الْآتِيَةِ.
The name of water without a qualifier. (Sh) Meaning that absolute water is the essence of which it is said, “This is water,” so the name of water is true of it without a qualifier added to that word. So that of which the name “water” is true is like the genus, because the word “water” according to them is a general accident, and “without a qualifier” is like the differentia, which excludes what is other than absolute from the types of water. It is not said of any of them “water” except with the addition of another qualifier, from a genitive construction or a description or other than them, like our saying “rose water” and “basil water.” It is not sufficient to limit oneself in reporting about their essences with the name “water” specifically without qualifying it with anything, as is the case with absolute water. And what enters into the author’s definition of absolute water is that whose genitive construction is explanatory, like “rain water,” and what is annexed to its place, like “water of the sky,” and of wells, and springs, and the sea. Consensus has been established on the permissibility of purifying with it. Then, it is excepted from the wells the wells of Thamud, so it is not permissible to perform ablution with its water nor to benefit from it, because it is the water of punishment, not because of its impurity. And just as ablution with its water is forbidden, tayammum with its earth is forbidden, and it is a distance of five miles. And according to the opinion of forbidding the use of the aforementioned water, if one purifies himself with it and prays, his prayer is valid. This is how it should be, as said by Sheikh `Ali al-Ujhuri in his commentary. And fresh water enters into the definition of absolute water, and there is no disagreement about it in the madhhab. And also entering into it are all of the disliked waters that will be mentioned.
(ص) ، وَإِنْ جُمِعَ مِنْ نَدًى (ش) هَذَا وَمَا بَعْدَهُ
(S), And if it is collected from dew. (Sh) This and what is after it…
ــ
[حاشية العدوي]
[Gloss of al-`Adawi]
الْحَطَّابُ وَيَرِدُ مَا ذَكَرَهُ تت، ثُمَّ إنَّك خَبِيرٌ بِأَنَّ الْحَمْلَ إنَّمَا يَكُونُ عَلَى الْمُفْرَدَاتِ الَّتِي هِيَ الْجُزْئِيَّاتُ لَا عَلَى الْحَقِيقَةِ الَّتِي تُرَادُ فِي التَّعْرِيفِ فَإِذَنْ إمَّا أَنْ يُقَدَّرَ مُضَافٌ أَيْ مَا صَدَقَ عَلَى أَفْرَادِهِ أَوْ يُوقَعُ مَا عَلَى أَفْرَادٍ وَلَا يُجْعَلُ تَعْرِيفًا بَلْ ضَابِطًا، ثُمَّ لَا يَخْفَى أَنَّ فِي كَلَامِهِ الْحُكْمَ ضِمْنًا عَلَى الْمُطْلَقِ وَكَيْفَ يُحْكَمُ عَلَى الشَّيْءِ بِدُونِ تَصَوُّرِهِ وَالْجَوَابُ أَنَّ مَا هُنَا مِنْ قَبِيلِ تَقْدِيمِ الْحُكْمِ عَلَى التَّصْوِيرِ لَا عَلَى التَّصَوُّرِ فَافْهَمْ
al-Hattab, and what Tat mentioned is raised as an objection. Then, you are aware that predication is only upon the individuals which are the particulars, not upon the reality which is intended in the definition. Therefore, either a possessive is implied, meaning “that which is true of its individuals,” or “that” is made to apply to individuals and it is not made a definition but rather a regulating principle. Then, it is not hidden that in his statement is an implicit ruling on the absolute, and how can a thing be ruled upon without its conceptualization? The answer is that what is here is of the category of presenting the ruling before the depiction, not before the conceptualization, so understand.
(قَوْلُهُ اسْمُ مَاءٍ) أَيْ اسْمٌ هُوَ لَفْظُ مَاءٍ أَيْ الَّذِي يُكْتَفَى فِي الْإِخْبَارِ عَنْهُ بِمُجَرَّدِ إطْلَاقِ اسْمِ الْمَاءِ عَلَيْهِ
(His statement: the name of water) Meaning a name that is the word “water,” i.e., that for which it is sufficient in reporting about it to merely apply the name of water to it.
(قَوْلُهُ بِلَا قَيْدٍ) أَيْ مَعَ عَدَمِ ذِكْرِ الْقَيْدِ
(His statement: without a qualifier) i.e., with the non-mention of the qualifier.
(قَوْلُهُ الَّتِي يُقَالُ هَذَا مَاءٌ) كَذَا فِي نُسْخَتِهِ نَفَعَنَا اللَّهُ بِهِ أَيْ الَّتِي يُقَالُ فِي شَأْنِهَا هَذَا مَاءٌ.
(His statement: of which it is said, “This is water”) Thus it is in his copy, may Allah benefit us by him, meaning that of which it is said regarding it, “This is water.”
(قَوْلُهُ فَيَصْدُقُ) أَيْ فَيُحْمَلُ
(His statement: so it is true of it) i.e., so it is predicated.
(قَوْلُهُ فَمَا صَدَقَ إلَخْ) هَذَا يَدُلُّ عَلَى أَنَّ مَا إمَّا مَوْصُوفَةٌ أَوْ نَكِرَةٌ مَوْصُوفَةٌ لَا مَاءٌ بِالْمَدِّ
(His statement: So that of which is true, etc.) This indicates that “mā” is either a relative pronoun or an indefinite noun followed by a description, not “mā’” with a madd.
(قَوْلُهُ كَالْجِنْسِ) ؛ لِأَنَّ الْمُرَادَ مِنْ مَا لَيْسَ جِنْسًا
(His statement: like the genus); because what is meant by “mā” is not a genus.
(قَوْلُهُ؛ لِأَنَّ لَفْظَةَ مَاءٍ) أَيْ مَدْلُولَ لَفْظَةِ مَاءٍ
(His statement: because the word “water”) i.e., the meaning of the word “water.”
(قَوْلُهُ عَرَضٌ) أَيْ لَا جِنْسٌ أَيْ وَصْفٌ عَامٌّ خَارِجٌ عَنْ الْمَاهِيَّةِ وَذَلِكَ؛ لِأَنَّهُ يُوصَفُ بِهِ تَعَالَى وَقَوْلُهُ عَامٌّ أَيْ لَا خَاصٌّ
(His statement: an accident) i.e., not a genus, meaning a general quality extrinsic to the essence, and that is because He, the Exalted, is described with it. And his statement “general” means not specific.
(قَوْلُهُ كَالْفَصْلِ) لَمْ يَقُلْ فَصْلٌ؛ لِأَنَّ الْفُصُولَ إنَّمَا تَكُونُ مِنْ الْأَنْوَاعِ الْمُحْتَوِيَةِ عَلَى الْأَجْنَاسِ
(His statement: like the differentia) He did not say “a differentia” because differentiae are only from the species that contain genera.
(قَوْلُهُ إذْ لَا يُقَالُ) أَيْ إذْ لَا يُحْمَلُ
(His statement: as it is not said) i.e., as it is not predicated.
(قَوْلُهُ أَوْ وَصْفٌ إلَخْ) أَيْ كَقَوْلِك هَذَا مَاءٌ مُضَافٌ هَذَا مَاءٌ نَجِسٌ هَذَا مَا أَفَادَهُ الْحَطَّابُ أَوْ هَذَا مَاءُ مَطَرٍ أَوْ مَاءُ نَدًى أَيْ مَمْطُورٌ وَمُنَدًّى كَمَا أَفَادَهُ الشَّيْخُ أَحْمَدُ الزَّرْقَانِيُّ
(His statement: or a description, etc.) i.e., like your saying, “This is annexed water,” “This is impure water.” This is what al-Hattab reported. Or “This is rain water” or “dew water,” i.e., rained upon and bedewed, as reported by Sheikh Ahmad al-Zarqani.
(قَوْلُهُ أَوْ غَيْرِهِمَا) أَيْ كَالْأَلِفِ وَاللَّامِ الَّتِي لِلْعَهْدِ كَقَوْلِهِ - عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاةُ وَالسَّلَامُ - «إذَا رَأَتْ الْمَاءَ» وَذَلِكَ؛ لِأَنَّ «عَائِشَةَ قَالَتْ لِلنَّبِيِّ - عَلَيْهِ الصَّلَاةُ وَالسَّلَامُ - هَلْ عَلَى الْمَرْأَةِ إذَا هِيَ احْتَلَمَتْ غُسْلٌ قَالَ - عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ - نَعَمْ إذَا رَأَتْ الْمَاءَ فَعَلَيْهَا الْغُسْلُ» أَوْ كَمَا قَالَ فَأَلْ فِي الْمَاءِ دَاخِلَةٌ عَلَى مَاءٍ مَخْصُوصٍ، وَهُوَ الْمَنِيُّ
(His statement: or other than them) i.e., like the alif and lām which are for specifying a known referent, as in his statement—peace and blessings be upon him—“if she sees the water.” And that is because `A’ishah said to the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—“Is ghusl required of a woman if she has a wet dream?” He said—peace be upon him—“Yes, if she sees the water, then ghusl is required of her,” or as he said. So the “al” in “al-mā’” (the water) refers to a specific water, which is semen.
(قَوْلُهُ كَقَوْلِنَا مَاءِ وَرْدٍ إلَخْ) تَمْثِيلٌ لِلْإِضَافَةِ
(His statement: like our saying “rose water,” etc.) An example of the genitive construction.
(قَوْلُهُ مَا إضَافَتُهُ بَيَانِيَّةٌ) الرَّاجِحُ أَنَّهَا لِلْبَيَانِ لَا بَيَانِيَّةٌ؛ لِأَنَّ الْإِضَافَةَ الْبَيَانِيَّةَ أَنْ يَكُونَ بَيْنَ الْمُضَافِ وَالْمُضَافِ إلَيْهِ عُمُومٌ وَخُصُوصٌ مِنْ وَجْهٍ كَخَاتَمِ حَدِيدٍ
(His statement: that whose genitive construction is explanatory) The preponderant view is that it is for explanation (li-l-bayān), not explanatory (bayāniyya), because the explanatory genitive construction is when there is between the annexed and the one it is annexed to a generality and specificity from one aspect, like “a ring of iron.”
(قَوْلُهُ كَمَاءِ السَّمَاءِ) أَيْ أَنَّ السَّمَاءَ مَحَلُّ الْمَاءِ وَالسَّمَاءُ كُلُّ مَا عَلَاك وَمِنْهُ قِيلَ لِسَقْفِ الْبَيْتِ سَمَاءٌ فَخُلَاصَتُهُ أَنَّ الْمَحَلَّ هُنَا هُوَ السَّحَابُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ يُقَالُ لَهُ سَمَاءٌ أَوْ أَنَّ الْمَاءَ نَزَلَ مِنْ السَّمَاءِ، ثُمَّ نَزَلَ إلَى السَّحَابِ فَيَكُونُ السَّمَاءُ الْحَقِيقِيُّ مَحَلًّا أَوَّلِيًّا هَذَا مَا أَفَادَهُ أَبُو السُّعُودِ.
(His statement: like water of the sky) i.e., that the sky is the place of the water, and the sky is everything that is above you, and from this, the ceiling of a house is called a sky. So its summary is that the place here is the cloud, because it is called a sky, or that the water descended from the sky, then descended to the cloud, so the real sky would be the primary place. This is what Abu al-Su`ud reported.
(قَوْلُهُ وَالْآبَارِ) بِهَمْزَةٍ مَمْدُودَةٍ بَعْدَ اللَّامِ السَّاكِنَةِ عَلَى وَزْنِ الْأَمْثَالِ جَمْعُ بِئْرٍ جَمْعُ قِلَّةٍ وَإِذَا كَثُرَتْ فَهِيَ الْبِئَارُ عَلَى وَزْنِ الْفِعَالِ
(His statement: and the wells) With an extended hamza after the silent lām, on the pattern of al-amthāl, the plural of bi’r, a plural of paucity. And if they are many, then it is al-bi’ār, on the pattern of al-fi`āl.
(قَوْلُهُ وَالْعُيُونِ) جَمْعُ عَيْنٍ هِيَ مُشْتَرَكَةٌ تَقَعُ عَلَى الْبَاصِرَةِ وَالذَّهَبِ وَالشَّمْسِ وَالْمَالِ وَالنَّقْدِ وَالْجَاسُوسِ وَوَلَدِ الْبَقَرِ الْوَحْشِيِّ وَخِيَارِ الشَّيْءِ وَنَفْسِ الشَّيْءِ وَالْيَنْبُوعِ وَغَيْرِ ذَلِكَ وَالْمُرَادُ هُنَا الْيَنْبُوعُ
(His statement: and the springs) The plural of `ayn, which is a homonym that applies to the sense of sight, gold, the sun, wealth, cash, a spy, the calf of a wild cow, the best of a thing, the thing itself, a spring, and other than that. And what is meant here is the spring.
(قَوْلُهُ وَالْبَحْرِ) لَا يَخْفَى أَنَّ الْبَحْرَ هُوَ الْمَاءُ الْمُتَّسِعُ فَلَيْسَ ذَلِكَ مِنْ إضَافَةِ الشَّيْءِ إلَى مَحَلِّهِ بَلْ هُوَ مِثْلُ مَاءِ الْمَطَرِ
(His statement: and the sea) It is not hidden that the sea is the vast water, so that is not from the annexation of a thing to its place, but rather it is like rain water.
(قَوْلُهُ فَقَدْ انْعَقَدَ الْإِجْمَاعُ عَلَى جَوَازِ التَّطْهِيرِ بِهِ) أَيْ بِالْبَحْرِ إنَّمَا احْتَاجَ إلَى ذَلِكَ؛ لِأَنَّهُ حُكِيَ عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ كَرَاهَةُ الْوُضُوءِ بِهِ فَقَدْ انْعَقَدَ الْإِجْمَاعُ عَلَى خِلَافِهِ
(His statement: Consensus has been established on the permissibility of purifying with it) i.e., with the sea. He only needed this because it was narrated from Ibn `Umar the dislike of performing ablution with it, so consensus was established contrary to him.
(قَوْلُهُ: ثُمَّ أَنَّهُ يُسْتَثْنَى) لَا حَاجَةَ؛ لِهَذَا الِاسْتِثْنَاءِ؛ لِأَنَّ الْكَلَامَ فِيمَا يَصِحُّ التَّطْهِيرُ بِهِ وَمَا لَا لَا فِيمَا يَجُوزُ دُونَ مَا يَحْرُمُ، وَهُوَ يَصِحُّ التَّطْهِيرُ بِهِ كَمَا قَالَ
(His statement: Then, it is excepted) There is no need for this exception, because the discussion is about what purification is valid with and what it is not, not about what is permissible versus what is forbidden, and purification is valid with it as he said.
(قَوْلُهُ آبَارُ ثَمُودَ) لَا خُصُوصِيَّةَ لِآبَارِ ثَمُودَ بِالذِّكْرِ وَمِثْلُهُ آبَارُ قَوْمِ لُوطٍ وَكُلِّ قَوْمٍ أَهْلَكَهُمْ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى
(His statement: the wells of Thamud) There is no specificity to mentioning the wells of Thamud, and like it are the wells of the people of Lot and every people whom Allah, the Exalted, destroyed.
(قَوْلُهُ وَلَا الِانْتِفَاعُ) أَيْ فِي عَجْنٍ أَوْ طَبْخٍ
(His statement: nor to benefit) i.e., in kneading or cooking.
(قَوْلُهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَاءُ عَذَابٍ) أَيْ مَاءُ قَوْمٍ وَقَعَ بِهِمْ الْعَذَابُ فَرُبَّمَا يَحْصُلُ لِلْمُسْتَعْمِلِ آثَارٌ مِنْ ذَلِكَ الْعَذَابِ أَوْ كَرَاهَةً فِيهِمْ وَبُغْضًا لَهُمْ؛ لِأَنَّ اللَّهَ أَبْغَضَهُمْ
(His statement: because it is the water of punishment) i.e., the water of a people upon whom punishment befell, so perhaps the user may experience effects from that punishment, or out of dislike for them and hatred of them, because Allah hated them.
(قَوْلُهُ لَا لِنَجَاسَتِهِ) أَيْ فَهُوَ طَهُورٌ نَعَمْ بِئْرُ النَّاقَةِ الَّتِي كَانَتْ تَرِدُهَا لَا مَنْعَ فِيهَا
(His statement: not because of its impurity) i.e., so it is purifying. Yes, the well of the she-camel which she used to frequent, there is no prohibition regarding it.
(قَوْلُهُ يُمْنَعُ التَّيَمُّمُ بِأَرْضِهَا) هَذَا أَحَدُ قَوْلَيْنِ ذَكَرَهُ الْحَطَّابُ عَنْ أَلْغَازِ ابْنِ فَرْحُونٍ قَالَ عج.
(His statement: tayammum with its earth is forbidden) This is one of two opinions mentioned by al-Hattab from the “Riddles of Ibn Farhun.” `Aj said.
وَذَكَرَ تت فِي فَصْلِ التَّيَمُّمِ أَنَّهُ صَحَّحَ الْقَوْلَ بِجَوَازِ التَّيَمُّمِ عَلَى تُرَابِ أَرْضِ ثَمُودَ
And Tat mentioned in the chapter on tayammum that he authenticated the opinion of the permissibility of tayammum on the soil of the land of Thamud.
(قَوْلُهُ وَعَلَى الْقَوْلِ بِمَنْعِ الِاسْتِعْمَالِ) مُقَابَلَةُ الْقَوْلِ بِالْكَرَاهَةِ يُعْلَمُ مِنْ عج
(His statement: And according to the opinion of forbidding the use) This is in contrast to the opinion of dislike, as is known from `Aj.
(قَوْلُهُ صَحَّتْ) كَذَا يَنْبَغِي وَذَكَرَ أَنَّ شَارِحَ حُدُودِ ابْنِ عَرَفَةَ صَرَّحَ بِبُطْلَانِ الصَّلَاةِ وَكَذَا د وَلَمْ يَعْزُهُ لِمَنْ تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْمَذْهَبِ وَلَكِنَّ الظَّاهِرَ التَّعْوِيلُ عَلَيْهِ
(His statement: is valid) This is how it should be. And he mentioned that the commentator of “Hudud Ibn `Arafah” explicitly stated the invalidity of the prayer, and likewise D, and he did not attribute it to any of the preceding people of the madhhab, but what is apparent is reliance upon it.
(قَوْلُهُ وَلَا خِلَافَ فِيهِ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ) إنَّمَا قَالَ رَدًّا عَلَى مَا نَقَلَهُ ابْنُ حَجَرٍ فِي فَتْحِ الْبَارِي عَنْ ابْنِ التِّينِ أَنَّهُ نَقَلَ عَنْ ابْنِ حَبِيبٍ مَنْعَ الِاسْتِنْجَاءِ بِالْمَاءِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَطْعُومٌ قَالَ ح قُلْت تَعْلِيلُهُ بِأَنَّهُ مَطْعُومٌ يَقْتَضِي أَنَّهُ أَرَادَ الْعَذْبَ وَهَذَا غَيْرُ مَعْرُوفٍ فِي الْمَذْهَبِ اهـ.
(His statement: and there is no disagreement about it in the madhhab) He only said this in refutation of what Ibn Hajar transmitted in Fath al-Bari from Ibn al-Tin, that he transmitted from Ibn Habib the prohibition of istinja’ with water because it is something to be eaten. H said: I say: his reasoning that it is something to be eaten necessitates that he meant fresh water, and this is not known in the madhhab. End quote.
(قَوْلُهُ: وَإِنْ جُمِعَ مِنْ نَدًى) أَيْ جُمِعَ فِي يَدِ الْمُتَوَضِّئِ أَوْ الْمُغْتَسِلِ وَلَيْسَ الْمُرَادُ جُمِعَ فِي إنَاءٍ؛ لِأَنَّ هَذَا لَيْسَ بِشَرْطٍ كَذَا فِي ك (فَإِنْ قُلْت) هَلْ يَرِدُ هَذَا عَلَى تَعْرِيفِ الشَّيْخِ لِلْمُطْلَقِ فَإِنَّهُ لَا يَصْدُقُ عَلَيْهِ اسْمُ الْمَاءِ إلَّا مَعَ كَوْنِهِ مَاءَ نَدًى (قُلْت) لَا يَرِدُ عَلَيْهِ ذَلِكَ؛ لِأَنَّ النَّدَى لَيْسَ شَيْئًا انْضَافَ إلَى الْمَاءِ
(His statement: And if it is collected from dew) i.e., collected in the hand of the one performing ablution or ghusl, and what is not meant is collected in a vessel, because this is not a condition, thus it is in K. (If you were to say:) Does this raise an objection to the Sheikh’s definition of absolute water, for the name of water is not true of it except with it being “dew water”? (I would say:) That does not raise an objection to it, because dew is not something that has been added to the water.