the washing of the members; so in whatever way he washes them, it is valid. Furthermore, it is one of the two purifications, so immediacy is not mandatory in it, like [the case of] ghusl (major ritual washing). Malik said: If he intentionally separates [the actions], it is void; otherwise, it is not. As for us, we have what we mentioned from the narration of 'Umar, that the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of God be upon him) saw a man praying and on the back of his foot was a spot the size of a dirham that the water had not reached. The Prophet (may the peace and blessings of God be upon him) ordered him to repeat his wudu' and his prayer (4). Had immediacy not been mandatory, washing the spot would have sufficed him. Also, because it is an act of worship rendered invalid by hadath (impurity), immediacy is a condition for it, like prayer. The verse indicated the obligation of washing, and the Prophet (may the peace and blessings of God be upon him) clarified its manner and interpreted its general command through his own actions and orders, for he never performed wudu' except sequentially, and he ordered those who left off sequence to repeat the wudu'. Ghusl for janaba (major ritual impurity) is equivalent to washing a single member, unlike wudu'.

Section: The mandatory sequence (al-muwalat) is that one should not stop washing a member until a time has elapsed during which the preceding member would dry in moderate weather; because the drying of a member might accelerate in some weather conditions rather than others, and this is not considered between the two extremes of purification. Ibn 'Aqil said: There is another narration regarding it, that the limit of the invalidating separation is what is deemed excessive in custom; because it was not limited in the Shari'a, so one refers back to custom regarding it, like the protection of property and the separation [of parties] in a sale.

Section: If his members become dry due to his being occupied with something mandatory or recommended in the purification, it is not considered a separation, just as if one were to prolong the pillars of prayer. Ahmad said: If he is in the process of attending to the wudu', there is no harm, and if it is due to an obsessive compulsion (waswasa) that befalls him, it is likewise; because he is [still] in the process of attending to the wudu'. If that is for play or something additional to what is recommended and the like, it is considered a separation. It is also possible that obsessive compulsion is [treated] the same; because he is occupied with what is neither obligatory nor recommended.

31 - Issue: He said: (And performing wudu' once [for each member] suffices, and three times is better.)

This is the opinion of most scholars, except that Malik did not time it once or three times; he said: He only said: