During prayer, when I see that I am bleeding or due to infection, there is a discharge, I break my prayer an redo wudu. Is this correct or can we continue with our prayers.
Based on hadiths below, women can continue prayers even when bleeding during or between periods. Can this be applied to males as well?
Your input is appreciated.
Volume 1, Book 6, Number 306:
Narrated 'Aisha:
Once one of the wives of the Prophet did Itikaf along with him and she was getting bleeding in between her periods. She used to see the blood (from her private parts) and she would perhaps put a dish under her for the blood. (The sub-narrator 'Ikrima added, 'Aisha once saw the liquid of safflower and said, “It looks like what so and so used to have.”)
Volume 1, Book 6, Number 307:
Narrated 'Aisha:
“One of the wives of Allah’s Apostle joined him in l’tikaf and she noticed blood and yellowish discharge (from her private parts) and put a dish under her when she prayed.”
Volume 1, Book 6, Number 308:
Narrated 'Aisha:
One of the mothers of the faithful believers (i.e. the wives of the Prophet ) did l’tikaf while she was having bleeding in between her periods.
either these narrations have later been proven to be incorrect.. or people haven't realized they show menstruating women can offer prayers.
much has been written only to malign noble personalities.. one must not promote hatred and division but invite towardsa a reconciliation...
btw Gandalf.. why would you want to know something in the light of these narrations?? i thought you have already come to a conclusion that these are not authentic... if so .. wouldn't it help all of us if you'd rather present your arguments and share with us your research on how and why Shia scholars have arrived at that decision so we can all gravitate towards one set of post Qur'anic literature ratified by scholars from both sects??
rather than get defensive and assume a hostile stance.. just treat his question(s) on it's merits..
Gandalf, I am saying that many narrations were created only to malign certain personalities.. the fabricators knew that if you attach the name of a respected personality, few would have the knowledge or wisdom to challenge it's authenticity..
All compilers of hadith were in essence 'munkar-e-hadith' where they rejected more hadiths than they declared authentic and there is disagreement amongst them too..
Just as there is a major disagreement viz a viz the authenticity of narrations between the Sunni and the Shia sect.. while both can argue till the cows come home on who's correct.. the point to take home is that none is perfect and not all scholars in Islam agree on all narrations.. hence we should invite all to the one divine Book which unites us all than argue on the differences which are just a result of an insistence on the part of some to blindly follow (taqleed) opinions of early scholars as the last word.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
rather than get defensive and assume a hostile stance.. just treat his question(s) on it's merits..
Gandalf, I am saying that many narrations were created only to malign certain personalities.. the fabricators knew that if you attach the name of a respected personality, few would have the knowledge or wisdom to challenge it's authenticity..
All compilers of hadith were in essence 'munkar-e-hadith' where they rejected more hadiths than they declared authentic and there is disagreement amongst them too..
Just as there is a major disagreement viz a viz the authenticity of narrations between the Sunni and the Shia sect.. while both can argue till the cows come home on who's correct.. the point to take home is that none is perfect and not all scholars in Islam agree on all narrations.. hence we should invite all to the one divine Book which unites us all than argue on the differences which are just a result of an insistence on the part of some to blindly follow (taqleed) opinions of early scholars as the last word.
[/QUOTE]
MR advocate's word
All compilers of hadith were in essence 'munkar-e-hadith' where they rejected more hadiths than they declared authentic and there is disagreement amongst them too..
Please, further explain yourself.
DEVIL's ADVOCATE
I know what you are trying to do. People of certain sects use
FALSAFA to make their point. But during the last 1400 years people
like you have failed and failed miserably.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
rather than get defensive and assume a hostile stance.. just treat his question(s) on it's merits..
Gandalf, I am saying that many narrations were created only to malign certain personalities.. the fabricators knew that if you attach the name of a respected personality, few would have the knowledge or wisdom to challenge it's authenticity..
All compilers of hadith were in essence 'munkar-e-hadith' where they rejected more hadiths than they declared authentic and there is disagreement amongst them too..
Just as there is a major disagreement viz a viz the authenticity of narrations between the Sunni and the Shia sect.. while both can argue till the cows come home on who's correct.. the point to take home is that none is perfect and not all scholars in Islam agree on all narrations.. hence we should invite all to the one divine Book which unites us all than argue on the differences which are just a result of an insistence on the part of some to blindly follow (taqleed) opinions of early scholars as the last word.
[/QUOTE]
Dear brother,
The hadith is from Sahih Bukhari. Are you saying the hadith is incorrect. If so, I would question other hadiths being sahih as well.
As for me, I will continue to practise what I have been taught to do - perform wudu again if there is a discharge.
Rehman, why are you getting so defensive? The hadith is from Sahih Bukhari. Are you telling me the there are hadiths there that is insulting the prophet (pbuh)?
Shia hadiths, for this very reason, do not claim to be authentic, unless it agrees with the qur'an.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rehman1: *
dear muslims
i highly recommend that do not reply to these 2 people.
one of emm doesn't even believe in Hadith.
so why should we even reply.
[/QUOTE]
Dear brother;
I would love to hear your views on these Sahih Bukhari hadiths, on the authority of Umm Momineen Aisha , that permit women to continue prayers during the menses bleeding.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by rehman1: *
Please, further explain yourself.
[/quote]
it's not that difficult to understand.. compilers start by assuming nothing is authentic and devise a method using their abilities and possibly available evidence to declare something authentic in their opinion.. thus the end result is them having to reject more narrations that are circulating and only declaring a very small percentage of them as authentic in their opinion.
[quote]
I know what you are trying to do. People of certain sects use
FALSAFA to make their point. But during the last 1400 years people
like you have failed and failed miserably.....
dear muslims
i highly recommend that do not reply to these 2 people.
one of emm doesn't even believe in Hadith.
so why should we even reply
[/QUOTE]
contribute something to the discussion according to your knowledge or stay at the sidelines and learn rather than inject inciteful slogans for the 'Ummah'..
[quote] posted by Gandalf
Dear brother,
The hadith is from Sahih Bukhari. Are you saying the hadith is incorrect. If so, I would question other hadiths being sahih as well.
[/quote]
You know very well that it's possible.. nothing is set in stone. Later scholars can research and find flaws in earlier opinions. It's not something unheard of. At times in different copies the full text may not be available.. or an incorrect translation is presented.. maybe someone more knowledgable can let us know if these hadiths are correctly quoted and/or if there have been any later opinions challenging their authenticity.
Not all ahadith in the saheehayn are considered sahih (considered sahih by the respective compilers, and not by everyone). Only a blind shia would be unaware of this.
As for the ahadith in question, they are talking about istihadah (the blood between menses), as it clearly states, not the actual menses.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ammarr: *
Not all ahadith in the saheehayn are considered sahih (considered sahih by the respective compilers, and not by everyone). Only a blind shia would be unaware of this.
As for the ahadith in question, they are talking about istihadah (the blood between menses), as it clearly states, not the actual menses.
[/QUOTE]
Brother,
It is a common fact amongst ahl-sunnat that every hadith in the sahih sittahs - bukhari, muslim, tirmidhi, etc - are authentic. Please consult your imams.
But to get back to the point of this thread, from what I gather, it is ok to continue prayers while in a state where blood is dripping from the body.
it's not that difficult to understand.. compilers start by assuming nothing is authentic and devise a method using their abilities and possibly available evidence to declare something authentic in their opinion.. thus the end result is them having to reject more narrations that are circulating and only declaring a very small percentage of them as authentic in their opinion.
contribute something to the discussion according to your knowledge or stay at the sidelines and learn rather than inject inciteful slogans for the 'Ummah'..
You know very well that it's possible.. nothing is set in stone. Later scholars can research and find flaws in earlier opinions. It's not something unheard of. At times in different copies the full text may not be available.. or an incorrect translation is presented.. maybe someone more knowledgable can let us know if these hadiths are correctly quoted and/or if there have been any later opinions challenging their authenticity.
[/QUOTE]
Thank you brother PA for your insght in this matter.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ammarr: *
Gandalf, stop lying. Not every hadith in the saheehs is considered fault free. Get that out of your head. No one claims that.
And if you are bleeding you can finish your prayer. Bleeding is not one of the things which breaks the wudoo as far as i know.
[/QUOTE]
Amonst the imamiyah, prayer is valid unless bleeding is found, at which case wudu becomes necessary again.
Irregular Bleeding (istihadah)
Q12: Is a woman with light (qalilah) or moderate (mutawassitah) bleeding (istihadah) obligated to perform the wudu' between two prayers even if no blood is found between them (the prayers)? How about tawaf and its prayer?
A: It is not obligatory, assuming that the blood has stopped and the cotton was not stained by it. (MMS, p. 21, Q31)
If there is signs of blood dripping, then that is a heavy form of istihadah, where ghusl becomes obligatory.
If you can see yourself bleeding, prayer is to be discontinued and ghusl performed again.