The interpretation of it as a command invalidates the benefit of the specification. Furthermore, because he is one of the two spouses, it is permitted for him to wash his partner, just like the other. The reasoning for this is that it is easier for each spouse to allow the other to see their private parts compared to anyone else, given what existed between them during life, and they will perform the washing in the most perfect manner possible due to the affection and mercy between them. As for what they used as an analogy, it is not valid, because that prohibits the wife from looking, whereas this is the opposite. Also, there is no difference between the two spouses except for the continuation of the waiting period ('iddah), which has no effect, as evidenced by the fact that if a man who has divorced his wife three times dies, it is not permissible for her to wash him despite the waiting period. Moreover, if a woman were to give birth to her child immediately after his death, she would be permitted to wash him, yet there would be no waiting period upon her. Al-Khiraqi’s statement: "And if necessity dictates that a man should wash his wife, there is no harm," means(4) that it is disliked for him to wash her when there is someone else who can wash her besides him, due to the disagreement and ambiguity surrounding it, and he did not intend that it is forbidden; for if washing her were forbidden, necessity would not make it permissible, just like washing one's female mahram (unmarriageable relatives) or unrelated women.

Section: If a man divorces his wife, and then one of them dies during the waiting period, and the divorce was revocable (raj'i), their ruling is the same as the ruling of the spouses before the divorce; because she is a wife who observes the waiting period for the death of her husband, she inherits from him and he inherits from her, and it is permissible for him to have intercourse with her. If the divorce was irrevocable (ba'in), it is not permitted, because touching and looking were forbidden during life, so it is even more so after death. And if we say that a revocable divorcee is considered forbidden, it is not permitted for either of them to wash the other, for the reason we mentioned.

Section: The ruling for a mother of a child (umm al-walad) is the same as the ruling for a wife regarding what we have mentioned. Ibn 'Aqil said: It is possible that it is not permitted for her to wash her master, because her emancipation occurs at his death, and no bond of inheritance or other remains. This is the view of Abu Hanifah. Our evidence is that she is in the meaning of a wife regarding touching, looking,