( Arrived in the chapter on the washing of those who died from a relative )

The sayings of some imams regarding those with mahrams differed, so they say that the man washes the woman and the woman washes the man, and the saying that neither of them washes his companion, and the saying that the woman washes the man and the man does not wash the woman, and we have presented in the chapter before this our doctrine on this

( Arrived in mind )

Dhul-mahrams are all people of Sharia, so the perfect man among them is the one who rules knowledge and action, so he combined the apparent and the hidden, and the imperfect among them.

[ Suspicion and lust in beliefs and rulings ]

If a mahram falls into doubt or lust of perfection or imperfection, then if it is in the beliefs, then each one of them will wash his companion, i.e. he knows him with the correctness of that, whether the knowledge of it is incomplete or complete, and if it is in the rulings, each of them does not wash his companion, then it is a ruling established in the Sharia and whether was complete or incomplete

[ The whole imperfection is washed off sometimes ]

Whoever dreams that the woman washes the man, which is the washing of the imperfectly complete, then the imperfect person may purify the complete if it is verified that the complete has fallen into suspicion and must be like the jurist. That purification is through his repentance and reversal of it, even if it is in the innermost part of the matter that it is correct and that the jurist gave a fatwa on the form and did not know the inner matter of the matter.

[ The incomplete part is not washed off sometimes ]

The incomplete is not cleansed in a matter like this, which is to reveal the complete by the innocence of a person who is attributed to him, which necessitates the hadd punishment.

[ A man does not wash a woman ]

Likewise, it is not for a man to wash a woman if she dies because she is an awrah

He, may God s prayers and peace be upon him, said about the woman who cursed her husband and lied, and he knew that, and God had decreed the curse, and in the same matter the man was true and the woman lied.

( Prayer in the chapter on the washing of the woman by her husband and his washing of her )

They were unanimously agreed that the woman should wash her husband, and they differed about him washing her

( considered in this chapter )

The sheikh s disciple if he sees the sheikh doing what the path of the sheikh does not necessitate, then the disciple has to warn the sheikh on that because of the possibility that he may be unaware and he has no right to remain silent about him, and it is not for the sheikh if he sees the disciple that obedience has occurred from him in view of his doctrine, and it is a disobedience in view of the Sheikh s doctrine and the rule of Sharia with its validity Looking at the one from whom it occurred, then it took place on the basis of ijtihad, so it is not for the perfect, and he is the sheikh.

[ The muqallid disciple, the diligent disciple, and his sheikh on the road ]

Whoever went to the point that he washes it, said that since the sheikh must know the murid who is the deficient, that this matter has been mistaken by the mujtahid, this is the limit of his washing. That issue is unless the Sheikh s words take the place of the opposition in significance, in which case the Sheikh s words will be stronger than the evidence of the mujtahid, so the mujtahid is obliged to refer to the words of his Sheikh, which is from his ijtihad, I mean his reference to the preponderance of that evidence, which is the Sheikh s belief in the evidence he had due to the possibility that the narrator was lying or imagining a mistake. From him in his comparison of what affected him in the Sheikh's sincerity in that

( Arrived in the separation of the divorced woman in washing )

They are unanimously agreed that a divorced woman who has been abducted does not wash her husband, and they differed in the matter of recourse, so they said she should be washed, and they said she should not

(Consideration) [It is not for the murid to slander his sheikh]

The aspirant deviates from the rule of his sheikh in totality. He does not have the right to slander against his sheikh, and if he slanders it, it will not be accepted from him. He is in a state of accusation of apostasy while he is deficient.

[ The disciple failed to follow his sheikh due to a slip in which he fell ]

If the aspirant s failure to follow his sheikh was out of shame from him due to a misstep in which he occurred or a period that occurred to him, then it is like a revocable divorce.

[ At the time of a slip, the murid needs his sheikh ]

Some of the sheikhs met a student of his who had slipped, and he was ashamed to meet the Sheikh, so he left him.