and his companions performed wudu from the water skin (mazada) (27) of a polytheist woman." [Agreed upon] (28). And because the default state is purity, which is not removed by doubt.
The apparent position of Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, is like the opinion of al-Qadi, for he said regarding the Magians: "Nothing of their food should be eaten except fruit," because the default assumption is the impurity of their utensils used for their food, so they are similar to the trousers among their garments.
Whoever among the Christians eats swine in a place where they are able to eat it, or eats carrion (maytah), or slaughters using a tooth, a nail, or the like, then his ruling is that of those who are not People of the Scripture, due to their agreement on the impurity of their food. And whenever one doubts regarding a utensil—whether they used it for their food or did not use it—it is pure, because the default state is its purity.
We are not aware of any disagreement among the scholars regarding the permissibility of praying in a garment woven by the disbelievers, for the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions, their clothing was merely from the weaving of the disbelievers.
As for their garments which they wear, al-Thawri and the People of Reason (Ahl al-Ra'y) permitted prayer in them. Malik said regarding the garment of the disbelievers: "He may wear it in any case, but if he prays in it, he should repeat [the prayer] as long as he is within the time."
Our evidence is that the default state is purity, and the aspect of impurity therein has not become preponderant, so it is similar to what the disbelievers have woven.
Section: Prayer is permitted in the garments of children as long as their impurity is not certain. Al-Thawri, al-Shafi'i, and the People of Reason (Ahl al-Ra'y) held this view, because Abu Qatada narrated that the Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed.
(27) In the original: "idawa" (a small water skin). (28) From M. We did not find it in al-Bukhari or Muslim. See the commentary of Shaykh Nasir al-Din al-Albani on it in: Irwa' al-Ghalil 1/72-74. As for his statement: "The author—meaning Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Salim ibn Duwayyan—followed Majd al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah in this," it is subject to scrutiny; for the author of al-Mughni (Ibn Qudama) precedes Majd al-Din Ibn Taymiyyah, as he passed away in the year 620 AH, while Majd al-Din Abd al-Salam ibn Abd Allah ibn al-Khidr, Ibn Taymiyyah, passed away in the year 652 AH.
وأصْحابَه توَضَّؤوا من مَزَادةِ (٢٧) مُشْرِكَةٍ. [مُتَّفَقٌ عليه] (٢٨). ولأن الأصْلَ الطهارةُ، فلا تزولُ بالشَّكِّ.
وظاهرُ كلامِ أحمدَ، رحمَه اللَّه، مثلُ قَوْلِ القاضي، فإنَّه قال في الْمَجُوسِ: لا يُؤْكَلُ مِن طَعامِهم إلَّا الفاكهةُ. لأن الظاهرَ نجاسةُ آنيتِهم المستعملةِ في أَطعمتِهم، فأشْبَهَتِ السَّراويلاتِ مِن ثِيَابِهم.
ومن يأكلُ الخنزيرَ مِن النَّصَارَى، في مَوْضِعٍ يُمْكِنُهم أَكْلُه، أو يأكلُ الميتةَ، أو يذبحُ بالسِّنِّ والظُّفُرِ ونحوِه، فحكمهُ حكمُ غيرِ أهلِ الكتاب؛ لِاتِّفاقِهم في نجاسةِ أطْعِمَتِهم. ومتى شَكَّ في الإِناءِ؛ هل استعملُوه في أطعمتِهم، أو لم يستعملوه، فهو طاهِر؛ لأنَّ الأصلَ طَهارتُه.
ولا نعلمُ خلافًا بين أهلِ العلمِ في إباحةِ الصَّلاةِ في الثوبِ الذي يَنْسِجُه الكُفَّارُ؛ فإنَّ النبيَّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- وأصْحابَه، إنَّما كان لِباسُهم مِن نَسْجِ الكُفَّارِ.
فأمَّا ثِيابُهم، التي يَلْبَسُونَها، فأباحَ الصلاةَ فيها الثَّوْرِيُّ، وأصحابُ الرَّأْىِ. وقال مالك في ثَوْبِ الكُفَّارِ: يَلْبَسُه علَى كلِّ حالٍ، وإن صَلَّى فيه يُعِيدُ، ما دام في الوقتِ.
ولنا أن الأصْلَ الطهارةُ، ولم تتَرجَّحْ جِهَةُ التَّنْجِيسِ فيه، فأشْبَهَ ما نسَجه الكُفَّارُ.
فصل: وتُباحُ الصلاةُ في ثيابِ الصِّبْيَانِ، ما لم تُتَيَقَّنْ نَجاستُها. وبذلك قال الثَّوْرِيُّ، والشافعيُّ، وأصْحابُ الرَّأْىِ؛ لأنَّ أبا قَتادةَ روَى، أن النبيَّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- صلَّى
(٢٧) في الأصل: "إداوة".(٢٨) من: م.ولم نجده في البخاري ومسلم. وانظر تعليق الشيخ ناصر الدين الألباني عليه، في: إرواء الغليل ١/ ٧٢ - ٧٤. وقوله: "والمؤلف - أي إبراهيم بن محمد بن سالم بن ضويان - تبع فيه مجد الدين ابن تيمية" فيه نظر؛ لأن صاحب المغنى أسبق من مجد الدين ابن تيمية، حيث توفى سنة عشرين وستمائة، وتوفي مجد الدين عبد السلام بن عبد اللَّه بن الخضر، ابن تيمية، سنة اثنتين وخمسين وستمائة.
