- Earth purifies the sole of one’s foot or shoe on four conditions:
- The earth is pure;
- The earth is dry;
- Based on obligatory precaution, the impurity has come onto the sole of one’s foot or shoe from the earth;
- an intrinsic impurity – such as blood and urine – or an object that has become impure – such as mud that has become impure and is on the sole of one’s foot or shoe – is removed by walking or by rubbing the foot on earth; and in the event that the intrinsic impurity had previously been removed, then based on obligatory precaution the sole of one’s foot or shoe does not become pure by walking or by rubbing the foot on earth. Furthermore, the earth must be of soil, stone, brick, or something similar; therefore, walking on a rug, ḥaṣīr, and on grass does not purify the impure sole of one’s foot or shoe.
- To consider the impure sole of one’s foot or shoe as having become pure after walking on asphalt and ground paved with wood is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, it must not be considered as having become pure].
- In order to purify the sole of one’s foot or shoe, it is better to walk a distance of fifteen cubits (dhirāʿs) or more, even if the impurity is removed by walking less than fifteen cubits or by rubbing the sole of one’s foot or shoe on earth.
- It is not necessary for the impure sole of one’s foot or shoe to be wet; rather, even if it is dry it becomes pure by walking.
- After the impure sole of one’s foot or shoe has become pure by walking, the area on the sides of the sole that usually becomes dirty with mud also becomes pure.
- If the palms or knees of someone who moves around on his hands and knees become impure, then to consider them as having become pure as a result of him moving around on them is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, they must not be considered as having become pure]. The same applies to the bottom of a walking stick, the bottom of an artificial leg, the shoe of a quadruped animal, the wheel of a car or cart, and similar things.
- There is no problem if after walking, the smell, colour, or small particles of impurity that cannot be seen remain on the sole of one’s foot or shoe. However, the recommended precaution is that one should walk to the extent that this is also removed.
- The inside of a shoe does not become pure by walking. To consider the sole of socks as having become pure as a result of walking is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, it must not be considered as having become pure], unless the sole is made of leather and suchlike and walking on them is considered normal.
- The sun purifies earth, buildings, and walls on five conditions:
- The impure object is sufficiently wet, such that if another thing would come into contact with it, the latter would become wet. Therefore, if the object is dry, it must be wetted by some means so that the sun can then dry it;
- No intrinsic impurity remains on the impure object;
- Nothing prevents the sun from shining on the impure object. Therefore, if the sun shines on the impure object from behind a curtain or cloud etc. and makes it dry, the object does not become pure. However, there is no problem if the cloud is so thin that it does not prevent the sun from shining on the object;
- The sun must dry the impure object by itself. Therefore, if, for example, an impure object is dried by both the wind and the sun, it does not become pure. However, there is no problem if the drying of the object can be commonly attributed to the sun shining on it;
- The sun must dry the building that is impure in one go. Therefore, if one time the sun shines on impure earth or a building and it dries the surface of it and another time it dries the underside of it, then only its surface becomes pure and its underside remains impure.
- The sun can purify an impure ḥaṣīr mat; but if it is woven with thread, the sun does not purify the threads. To say that trees, grass, doors, and windows become pure by means of the sun is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, they do not become pure in this way].
- If the sun shines on impure earth and afterwards a person doubts whether or not the earth was wet when the sun shone on it, or whether or not the wetness of the earth has dried by means of the sun, then that earth is impure. The same applies if one doubts whether or not the intrinsic impurity has been removed. And if a person doubts whether or not something prevented the sun from shining on the impure object, then to consider it as having become pure is problematic [i.e. based on obligatory precaution, it must not be considered as having become pure].
- If the sun shines on one side of an impure wall and as a result the other side of the wall – on which the sun did not shine – also becomes dry, it is not farfetched (baʿīd) to consider both sides as having become pure [i.e. both sides are deemed to be pure]. However, if one day the sun dries the exterior of a wall or some earth and another day its interior, then only its exterior becomes pure.
- If the essence of an impure object changes in such a way that it transforms into a pure object, it becomes pure; for example, if impure wood burns and transforms into ash, or a dog falls into a salt marsh and transforms into salt [the ash and the salt are pure]. However, if the essence of the object does not change – for example, if impure wheat is turned into flour or made into bread – it does not become pure.
- A clay pitcher or something similar that is made from impure clay is impure. As for charcoal that is made from impure wood, in the event that none of the former physical properties are in it, it is pure. And if impure clay is changed by fire into crockery or bricks, then based on obligatory precaution it remains impure.
- An impure object about which it is not known whether it has undergone a transformation or not is impure.
- If wine turns into vinegar by itself or by pouring something like vinegar or salt into it, it becomes pure.
- Wine that is made from impure grapes and suchlike, or wine that has come into contact with some other impurity, does not become pure by turning into vinegar.
- Vinegar that is made from impure grapes, raisins, or dates is impure.
- There is no problem if the stalks of grapes or dates remain on them and vinegar is produced. Similarly, there is no problem in adding cucumber, aubergine, or suchlike even before it turns into vinegar, unless it becomes an intoxicant before turning into vinegar.
- Grape juice becomes unlawful to drink if it bubbles either by heating or by itself [through fermentation]. If grape juice bubbles so much that two-thirds of it reduces and only one-third of it remains, it becomes lawful to drink. Furthermore, if it is established that the grape juice is intoxicating, as some [jurists (fuqahāʾ)] have said with regard to when it bubbles by itself, it can only become lawful to drink if it turns into vinegar. As mentioned in Ruling 110, grape juice does not become impure by bubbling.
- If two-thirds of grape juice reduces without bubbling, in the event that the remainder bubbles and is commonly called ‘grape juice’ and not ‘grape syrup’, then based on obligatory precaution it is unlawful to drink.
- Grape juice about which it is not known whether it has bubbled or not is lawful to drink. However, if it bubbles, it does not become lawful to drink until one is certain that two-thirds of it has reduced.
- If, for example, there are some ripe grapes in a bunch of unripe grapes and the juice that is extracted from the bunch is not regarded as being grape juice and it bubbles, then drinking it is lawful.
- If a grape falls into something that is boiling by means of heat and it boils and does not dissolve, then based on obligatory precaution only eating that grape is unlawful.
- If a person wants to cook grape syrup in several pots, it is permitted to use the spatula that was previously used in a pot that has boiled, in a pot that has not boiled.
- If it is not known whether something is an unripe grape or a ripe grape and it bubbles, then eating it is lawful.
- If the blood of a human being, or of an animal whose blood gushes out when its jugular vein is cut, is sucked by an animal that is commonly known to have no blood, such that it may be absorbed in that animal’s body – like when a mosquito sucks blood from a human being or from an animal – then that blood is pure. This is called ‘transfer’. As for the blood that a leech sucks from a human being for the purposes of treatment, as it is not known whether or not that blood becomes part of its body, it is impure.
- If a person kills a mosquito that had sat on his body and the blood sucked by the mosquito comes out of it, that blood is pure – even if the time that elapsed between the sucking of the blood and killing the mosquito was very little – because the blood was in the process of becoming food for the mosquito. However, the recommended precaution is that in this situation, one should avoid the blood [i.e. it is better not to treat it as being pure].