is more appropriate, because it is a ghusl in which order is not obligatory, so sequence is not obligatory, just like washing away impurities. If one performs ghusl but misses the limbs of his wudu, order is not obligatory for those limbs because the ruling of the Janaba remains. Ibn 'Aqil and al-Amidi said regarding one who washed his entire body except for his feet, then broke his state of purity (hadath): Order is obligatory for the three limbs because they are uniquely affected by the minor hadath, but order is not obligatory for the feet because the two hadaths are combined in them.

Section: According to this, the obligations of ghusl are two things and nothing else: the intention and washing the entire body. As for the Basmalah (saying "Bismillah"), its ruling is the same as the ruling of the Basmalah in wudu, as previously discussed. In fact, its ruling in the case of Janaba is even lighter, because the hadith regarding the Basmalah explicitly addresses wudu only.

Section: If two things that require ghusl coincide, such as menstruation and Janaba, or the meeting of the two circumcised parts (intercourse) and emission, and one intends both with his purification, it suffices for both. This is stated by most scholars, among them 'Ata', Abu al-Zinad, Rabi'ah, Malik, al-Shafi'i, Ishaq, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y). It is narrated from al-Hasan and al-Nakha'i, regarding a menstruating woman who is also in a state of Janaba, that she should perform two ghusls. Our evidence is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not perform more than one ghusl after sexual intercourse, and it encompasses two things, as it is associated with emission in most cases. Furthermore, they are two causes that require ghusl, so one ghusl suffices for both, like a hadath and impurities. The same ruling applies if multiple acts occur that require minor purification, such as sleeping, the exit of impurities, or touching; if one intends them with his purification, or intends the removal of hadath, or the permissibility of prayer, it suffices for all of them. If one intends only one of them, or a woman intends [the ghusl for] menstruation but not Janaba, does it suffice for the other? There are two views: one is that it suffices for the other because it is a valid ghusl for which the obligatory act was intended, so it suffices, just as if he had intended the permissibility of prayer. The second is that it suffices only for what he intended and not for what he did not intend, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him): "Verily, every person shall have what he intended." Likewise, if one performs ghusl for Friday prayer, does it suffice for Janaba? There are two views, the reasoning for which has already passed.

Section: If a spot remains on his body that water did not reach, it is narrated from Ahmad that he was asked about