Wudoo’ is not invalidated by bleeding from the body

If impure substances come out of the body, one of the
following three scenarios must apply: 

-1- 

It is urine or stools
and comes out from the usual exit. This invalidates wudoo’, according to
evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and scholarly consensus. 

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“But if you are ill or on
a journey, or any of you comes after answering the call of nature, or you
have been in contact with women (i.e. sexual intercourse), and you find no
water, then perform Tayammum with clean earth and rub therewith your faces
and hands”

[al-Maa’idah 5:6] 

Al-Tirmidhi (96) narrated that Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal (may
Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to command us, if we were travelling,
not to take off our khufoof (leather slippers, socks and the like) for three
days and three nights except in the case of janaabah, but not stools, urine
or sleep. Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi. 

Stools, urine or sleep are things that invalidate wudoo’.  

-2- 

If urine or stools come
out from a place other than the usual exit, such as one who has had surgery
and they now come out from an opening in his stomach, for example. This
invalidates wudoo’ because the evidence quoted above indicates that wudoo’
is invalidated when urine and stools come out, and the general meaning
indicates that this applies whether they come out of the usual exit or
elsewhere. 

-3- 

The impurity that is coming out of the body is not urine or
stools, such as blood and vomit, according to those scholars who say that
vomit is impure. 

This is a matter concerning which the scholars differed. Some
of them – such as Imam Abu Haneefah and Ahmad – were of the view that they
do invalidate wudoo’, although they differed concerning the details.  

They quoted a number of texts as evidence for that: 

1 – The words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) to the woman who was suffering from istihaadah
(non-menstrual vaginal bleeding): “That is from a vein, so do wudoo’ for
every prayer.” They said: The reason why wudoo’ is required may be that it
is bleeding from a vein, and this applies to every kind of bleeding. 

2 – The report narrated by al-Tirmidhi (87) from Ma’daan ibn
Abi Talhah from Abu’l-Darda’ (may Allaah be pleased with him), that the
Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) vomited
and broke his fast, then he did wudoo’. I met Thawbaan in the mosque of
Damascus and mentioned that to him. He said: That is right; I poured the
water for his wudoo’. Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh
al-Tirmidhi. 

Many scholars are of the
view that the emission of impurities from the body does not invalidate
wudoo’, and they quoted as evidence the fact that the basic principle is
that wudoo’ is not invalidated, and there is no saheeh evidence to indicate
that wudoo’ is invalidated by that. 

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: 

My inclination concerning this matter is to say that the
basic principle is that wudoo’ is not invalidated unless there is proof in
sharee’ah, and there is no proof in this case. End quote. 

They responded to the evidence quoted by those who say that
it does invalidate wudoo’ by noting the following: 

With regard to the hadeeth about the woman who was suffering
from istihaadah, they responded that what the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) meant by that was to point out that it was
not menstrual blood, rather it was bleeding from a vein, and as that was the
case, she should not stop praying, rather she should pray, but she should do
wudoo ‘ for every prayer. 

Al-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’: If it – the hadeeth
about the woman who was suffering from istihaadah – is saheeh, what it means
is that this bleeding is not menstrual blood, rather it requires wudoo’
because it comes out from the same area as urine comes out. It does not mean
that the emission of blood, from any site, requires wudoo’. End quote. 

With regard to the hadeeth of Thawbaan, they noted several
points in response to it: 

1 – That it is da’eef (weak). Al-Nawawi said in al-Majmoo’:
As for the response to their quoting the hadeeth of Abu Darda’ as evidence,
the response to that can be made in several ways, the best of which is that
it is da’eef mudtarab (weak). This was stated by al-Bayhaqi and other
scholars. End quote.

2 – Even if it is saheeh, it does not indicate that wudoo’ is
invalidated by vomiting, because it is simply a report of something that the
Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did. It indicates
that it is mustahabb to do wudoo’ after vomiting, not that it is
obligatory. 

Moreover, quoting this hadeeth as evidence is based on the
view that vomit is impure (najis), and in the answer to question no
42929
we have stated that the scholars differed
concerning this matter, but the most likely view is that it is pure, because
there is no evidence to support the view that it is impure. 

See: al-Majmoo’ 2/63-65; al-Mughni, 1/233, 234
and 1/247-250; al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 1/185-189 

And Allaah knows best.