or blood from his nose, or it might have been impure before his sleep and he forgot its impurity due to the length of his sleep. Moreover, the apparent view according to those who made the washing obligatory is that it is an act of devotional worship (ta‘abbud), not due to the cause of impurity (tanjis). For this reason, they did not rule that the hand or the water became impure; thus, the obligation extends to everyone to whom the report applies.

Section: If the one waking from [night sleep] (50) is a child, a person of unsound mind, or a non-Muslim, there are two views regarding it: One is that he is like the accountable, sane Muslim adult (51); one does not know where his hand spent the night. The second is that his submerging [the hand] has no effect because the prohibition against submerging is established [by address] (52), and there is no such address for these individuals; furthermore, the obligation of washing here is a devotional act, and there is no devotional act binding upon these individuals. Also, if their submerging affected the water, it would affect it throughout their entire time, because the washing that removes the rule of (53) prohibition is conditional upon intention, and they are not among those who are capable of it. We know of no one who maintains that view.

Section: The sleep to which the command to wash the hand is attached is that which invalidates wudu’ (ablution). The Qadi mentioned this due to the generality of the report regarding sleep. Ibn ‘Aqil said: It is that which exceeds half the night, because one is not considered a "bather" (ba’it) except by that, as evidenced by the fact that whoever leaves Muzdalifah before the middle of the night is not considered a bather there, and for this reason, he is liable for a blood sacrifice (dam), unlike one who departs after the middle of the night. The first [view] is more correct, and what he mentioned is invalidated by the case where one arrives at Muzdalifah after the middle of the night; he is considered a bather there, yet he owes no blood sacrifice, even though he spent less than half the night there.

Section: Washing the hands requires intention according to the one who made it obligatory, in one of the two views, because it is an act of ritual purification of devotion (54), thus resembling wudu’ and ghusl. The second view is that it does not require [intention] (55) because it is reasoned based on the assumption of impurity, and intention is not considered in washing it away; and because what is commanded is the washing, and he has performed...