Does Touching Your Private Parts Break Your Wudhu?

This issue is a trivial matter that often occurs in daily life. Especially for mothers who, sometimes after performing wudhu(ablution), find their child has relieved themselves, requiring them to clean (wash) the child from impurities, inevitably touching the child's private parts. Or some people who sometimes accidentally touch their private parts for certain reasons. The question is, does touching the private parts invalidate wudhu? The scholars are divided into 3 authoritative views on this matter.

First Opinion

Touching the private parts does not invalidate wudhu at all. Whether touched intentionally or unintentionally, whether the private part of a male or female, whether a small child or an adult. Whether due to lust or not due to lust, and whether it is one's own private part or someone else's. This is the opinion agreed upon in the Hanafi school (1) and by Ath-Thawri (2), one of the narrations from Ahmad (3), and one of the narrations from Malik (4). This is also the opinion of several Companions of the Prophet such as Ali bin Abi Talib, Abdullah bin Mas’ud, Hudhayfah bin Al-Yaman, Ammar bin Yasir, Imran bin Husain, Abu Hurayrah, one of the opinions of Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas from the path of Qais bin Hazim, one of the opinions of Ibn Abbas followed by some of his students namely Said bin Jubair (5), and the opinion of Abu Darda (6). This is the opinion chosen by Sahnun and one of the opinions of Ibn al-Qasim from the Malikis (7), Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Khuzaymah from the Shafi'is (8), as well as Ibn Taymiyyah (9) and Ibn al-Uthaymeen from the Hanbalis (10), only that these scholars recommend performing wudhu as a precautionary measure. Imam At-Tahawi Al-Hanafi said:

“Al-Hasan (Al-Basri) held the view that there is no obligation of wudhu for touching the penis. This is what we adopt. It is the opinion of Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf, and Muhammad bin Al-Hasan rahimahullah ta’ala.” (Sharh Ma’ani Al-Athar, 1/79)

Imam Az-Zamakhshari Al-Hanafi said:

“Touching the private part does not invalidate wudhu according to us (the Hanafi school).” (Ru-us Al-Masail, 1/110)

Imam At-Tirmidhi said:

“It has been narrated from more than one of the Companions of the Prophet shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam and some of the Tabi’in that they did not see (a need for) wudhu from touching the penis. This is the opinion of the people of Kufah (Hanafis) and Ibn al-Mubarak.” (Sunan At-Tirmidhi, 1/142)

Evidence & Reasoning This is based on the narration from Talq bin Ali who said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah being asked about touching the penis.” The Messenger of Allah replied:

“There is no wudhu in that. It is only a part of you.” (HR. An-Nasa'i: 165, Abu Dawud: 182, At-Tirmidhi: 85, and Ibn Majah: 483. This is Ibn Majah's wording).

Second Opinion

Touching the private parts invalidates wudhu absolutely as long as there is no barrier. Whether touching it with lust or not. Whether one's own private part or someone else's. Whether female or male. This is the opinion of the Zahiris, the Shafi'i school, and the correct opinion in the Hanbali school. This is also the opinion of Imam Al-Awza'i, Ishaq bin Rahuyah (11), Al-Layth bin Sa’ad, and Abu Thawr (12), as well as one of the narrated opinions of Imam Malik (13). Generally, this is also the opinion of some of the Prophet's Companions such as Abdullah bin Umar (14), Abu Hurayrah (15), Aishah (16), narrated as the opinion of Umar (17), one of the opinions of Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas from the path of his own son (Mus’ab) (18), and one of the opinions of Abdullah bin Abbas from the path of some of his students, namely ‘Ata (19). Imam At-Tirmidhi said after narrating the Hadith of Busrah:

“This is the opinion of more than one of the Companions of the Prophet shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam and the Tabi’in. It is also stated by Al-Awza'i, Ash-Shafi'i, Ahmad, and Ishaq.” (Sunan At-Tirmidhi, 1/141)

Ibn Hazm Adh-Dhahiri said:

“Issue: And a man touching his own penis specifically, intentionally, with anything he touches it with from the inner palm of his hand or the outer part or with his forearm - excluding touching it with his own thigh, calf, or foot, for that does not necessitate wudhu - and a woman touching her own private part intentionally is likewise exactly the same. And none of that invalidates wudhu if done out of forgetfulness. Likewise, a man touching the penis of another, whether small or large, dead or alive, with any limb he touches it with intentionally from his entire body, whether [the person touched] is a mahram relative or otherwise. And a woman touching the private part of another intentionally is also likewise exactly the same.” (Al-Muhalla bi Al-Athar, 1/220-221)

Al-Karmi Al-Hanbali said when discussing wudhu nullifiers:

“Touching with his hand - not his nail - the private part of a human that is attached (not severed) without a barrier.” (Dalil At-Talib, 1/14)

Imam Ibn Qudamah Al-Hanbali said when explaining wudhu nullifiers:

“Touching the penis with his hand or with the inner part of his palm or with its back. But touching it with his forearm does not invalidate [wudhu].” (Al-Muqni’, 1/31)

Al-Buhuti Al-Hanbali added:

“Among the nullifiers of wudhu is (touching the human penis up to the roots of the testicles absolutely), meaning regardless of whether the toucher is male or female, with lust or otherwise, his own penis or another's, whether [the touched] is small or large.” (Kashshaf Al-Qina’, 1/126)

An-Nawawi Ash-Shafi'i said when explaining wudhu nullifiers:

“Touching the human private part, so wudhu is invalidated if one touches with the inner palm of his hand the private part of a human, whether of himself or another, male or female, small or large, living or dead. Whether the part touched is the qubul (front private part) or the dubur (anus).” (Rawdat At-Talibin, 1/75)

Ash-Shafi'i said:

“If a man brings the inner part of his palm to his penis with no barrier between them, then wudhu is obligatory upon him. He said: It is the same whether intentional or unintentional; because whatever necessitates wudhu intentionally also necessitates it unintentionally. He said: It is the same whether what he touched of his penis is little or much.” (Al-Umm, 1/34)

Evidence & Reasoning The second opinion or the scholars who view wudhu as obligatory if touching the private parts absolutely rely on the Prophet's saying:

“Whoever touches his penis, let him perform wudhu, and whichever woman touches her private part, let her perform wudhu.” (HR. Ahmad in Al-Musnad: 7076 from Abdullah bin Amru)

Differences Although the Shafi'is, Hanbalis, and Zahiris agree on the invalidation of wudhu due to touching the private parts absolutely without a barrier, there are slight differences between each of these schools if we understand the citations above:

1. Shafi'is only consider it invalidating if the touching is done with the inner palm of the hand only (the part used for grasping). Whether intentional or forgotten. This is also one of Imam Malik's opinions (20). The evidence is the Prophet's saying:

   مَنْ أَفْضَى بِيَدِهِ إِلَى ذَكَرِهِ لَيْسَ دُونَهُ سِتْرٌ ، فَقَدْ وَجَبَ عَلَيْهِ الْوُضُوءُ

   “Whoever brings his hand to his penis with no barrier underneath it, then wudhu has become obligatory upon him.” (HR. Ahmad in Al-Musnad: 8404 from Abu Hurayrah). Imam Ash-Shafi'i said, “Al-ifdha (bringing/touching) with the hand means placing the hand using the inner palm.” (Al-Umm, 1/34). Among the Salaf who held this view is Mak-hul. Mak-hul said:

   إِذَا أَمْسَكَ ذَكَرَهُ تَوَضَّأَ

   “If he holds his penis, he performs wudhu.” (Narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in Al-Musannaf: 1728 and 1729)

2. Hanbalis: Touching invalidates wudhu if touched using the palm, either inner or outer, except the nails. Whether intentional or forgotten. The evidence is the generality of the Prophet's saying:

   مَنْ مَسَّ ذَكَرَهُ فَلاَ يُصَلِّ حَتَّى يَتَوَضَّأَ

   “Whoever touches his penis, let him not pray until he performs wudhu.” (HR. An-Nasa'i: 163, Abu Dawud: 181, At-Tirmidhi: 82, Ibn Majah: 479 from Busrah bin Shafwan. This is At-Tirmidhi's wording). Ibn Muflih Al-Hanbali said, “With the hand, meaning touching from the fingertips to the wrist, like the limit for the thief's hand amputation and tayammum. Or the inner palm or its outer part. Based on the generality (of the hadith).” (Al-Mubdi’, 1/136) Among the Salaf specifically holding this view is ‘Ata bin Abi Rabah. He was asked by Ibn Juraij, “I touched the penis from behind clothes?” ‘Ata answered:

   "فَلَا وُضُوءَ إِلَّا مِنْ مُبَاشَرَةٍ ثُمَّ بِالْمَسِيسِ" قُلْتُ: "بِالْفَخِذِ أَوِ السَّاقِ" قَالَ: "فَلَا وُضُوءَ إِلَّا بِالْيَدِ"

   “There is no wudhu except from direct contact, then by touching.” I asked, “With the thigh or calf?” ‘Ata replied, “There is no wudhu except with the hand.” (Musannaf Abdur Razzaq, 1/116)

3. Zahiris: Touching the private part invalidates wudhu if one intentionally touches the private part with the entire part of the hand including the forearm (the part of the arm from wrist to elbow), especially if touching one's own private part. If touching another's private part, then wudhu is obligatory regardless of which body limb touches it (including the foot) as long as it is another's private part. Meaning, the Zahiris stipulate the presence of intentionality. This condition of intentionality is also the opinion of Imam Al-Layth (21) and one narration from Imam Ahmad (22), and one narration from Imam Malik specifically regarding the male penis, not the female (23). Regarding touching with the forearm, it is narrated as Al-Awza'i's opinion (24). The evidence is the generality of the Prophet's command as stated by Marwan bin Al-Hakam:

   حَدَّثَتْنِي بُسْرَةُ بِنْتُ صَفْوَانَ، أَنَّهَا سَمِعَتْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ "يَأْمُرُ بِالْوُضُوءِ مِنْ مَسِّ الْفَرْجِ"

   “Busrah binti Shafwan told me that she heard the Messenger of Allah ordering wudhu for touching the private part.” (HR. Abdur Razzaq in Al-Musannaf: 411) As for the stipulation of intentionality, it is based on Allah's word:

   وَلَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ فِيمَا أَخْطَأْتُمْ بِهِ وَلَكِنْ مَا تَعَمَّدَتْ قُلُوبُكُمْ

   “And there is no blame upon you for that in which you have erred but [only for] what your hearts intended.” (QS. Al-Ahzab: 5) Some Salaf who held this specific view include Jabir bin Zaid:

   إِذَا مَسَّهُ مُتَعَمِّدًا أَعَادَ الْوُضُوءَ

   “If he touches it intentionally, he repeats the wudhu.” (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, 1/150). Also the opinion of Ikrimah as narrated by Ibn Hazm (25). Wallahu a’lam.

Third Opinion

Differentiating between the private part of an adult male and an adult female. If the part touched is the private part of an adult male, it invalidates wudhu (26). If the part touched is the private part of an adult female, it does not invalidate wudhu – unless one feels pleasure or due to lust (27). This is the famous and authoritative (mu'tamad) opinion among the later (muta'akhkhirin) Maliki scholars. It is also one of the narrated opinions of Imam Ahmad (28) and favored by Ibn Qudamah from the Hanbalis (29). However, the Malikis stipulate that touching the male penis invalidates wudhu if touched by the inner palm (bottom). This is similar to the Shafi'i opinion, but specific to the case of the male penis (30). Imam Al-Khalil Al-Maliki explained regarding wudhu nullifiers:

“And absolutely touching the attached penis, even of a problematic hermaphrodite (31), with the inner palm or side of the palm or fingers.” (Mukhtasar Al-Khalil, 1/22)

Ad-Dardir Al-Maliki said:

“Not (invalidating if touched) with the back of the hand nor with the forearm, ‘or’ (invalidating if with) the inner part or side ‘of the finger’, and the fingertips are like the side, not with the nail (32).” (Ash-Sharh Al-Kabir, 1/121)

Al-Kharashi Al-Maliki said when explaining things that do not invalidate wudhu:

“Among them is a woman touching her private part, i.e., her qubul. Whether she grasps it or not, whether she inserts [her hand] or not.” (Sharh Al-Mukhtasar, 1/158)

However, if the woman inserts her hand into her private part and feels pleasure due to it or due to lust, it invalidates wudhu according to the Maliki school without dispute. Ibn Rushd Al-Jadd said:

“If a woman touches her private part without inserting [her hand] and does not desire pleasure from it, then there is no wudhu upon her according to Malik and there is no varying report from him on this. If she inserts it and feels pleasure, then wudhu is obligatory upon her according to Malik without dispute.” (Al-Muqaddimah Al-Mumahhidat, 1/103)

However, all of this excludes the private parts of children. Meaning, touching a child's private part does not invalidate wudhu in any circumstance. Whether the child is male or female. ‘Illish Al-Maliki said:

“There is no wudhu in touching the private part of a young boy or young girl intentionally, unless he desires pleasure. And it is said it does not invalidate, and this is the apparent meaning of the author (Al-Khalil) and Adh-Dhakhirah, and favored by Bahram.” (Manh Al-Jalil, 1/116)

This is the final conclusion of the Maliki school regarding this issue. Due to the many narrations and interpretations emerging from Malik and his followers on this issue, it cannot be ascertained which is truly his original opinion. This is acknowledged by the Maliki scholars themselves. Ibn Abdil Barr said:

“Malik's opinion is inconsistent regarding the obligation of wudhu from it, and his school differs regarding it.” (Al-Istidhkar, 1/249)

Regardless of that, the authoritative opinion in the Maliki school is differentiating between the ruling of touching the male penis and the adult female private part. This is preferred by the later Maliki scholars (33). This accords with the narration cited by Sahnun from Ibn al-Qasim from Imam Malik. Ibn al-Baradzi’i Al-Maliki said in his summary of the book Al-Mudawwanah:

“And wudhu is not invalidated by touching anything of the body, except from touching the penis alone with the inner palm or inner fingers, then his wudhu is invalidated. If he touches it with the outer palm or forearm, his wudhu is not invalidated. And the wudhu of a woman is not invalidated if she touches her private part.” (At-Tahdhib fi Ikhtisar Al-Mudawwanah, 1/176)

This is the opinion of the majority of early Maliki scholars in the Maghreb region (Morocco and surroundings) as cited by Imam Al-Qarafi Al-Maliki (34). This is also what is established by the later Maliki scholars. However, this contradicts another narration from Ibn al-Qasim in Al-Mudawwanah which stipulates the presence of lust:

“Malik said regarding a woman touching a man's penis: He said, ‘If she touched it out of lust, then wudhu is upon her. And if she touched it not out of lust, such as for illness or the like, then there is no wudhu upon her.’” (Narrated by Sahnun in Al-Mudawwanah, 1/121). The narration of the condition of lust is followed by some early Baghdad Malikis, namely Ibn Bukair, Ibn al-Muntab, Abul Faraj, and Al-Abhari. This narration is the same as the authoritative Maliki opinion regarding the invalidation of wudhu if touching the opposite gender.

Evidence & Reasoning We do not know the basis and reasoning for this differentiation, except what was mentioned by Al-Qarafi Al-Maliki, “Because the farj (female private part) is different from the male penis intended in the hadith.” (Adh-Dhakhirah, 1/224). Meaning, as stated by Abdul Wahhab Al-Maliki, because the female private part is a part of (united with) her body (cannot be separated from it), its ruling becomes the same as other body parts (like the anus and mouth opening) (35). Unlike the penis which cannot be equated with the form of any other body part. However, this differentiation contradicts the hadith which also demands the application of wudhu for women if they touch their private parts, and this differentiation has no precedent from any of the Salaf. From the aspect of the hadith:

“Whoever touches his penis let him perform wudhu, and whichever woman touches her private part let her perform wudhu.” (HR. Ahmad in Al-Musnad: 7076 from Abdullah bin Amru) In this hadith, there is no differentiation whatsoever. The command for wudhu applies whether touching the male or female private part. As for a precedent from the Salaf, indeed none is found, neither from the Companions nor the Tabi’in. This was subtly alluded to by Ibn Rushd Al-Hafid Al-Maliki when presenting the opinions stating it invalidates absolutely and does not invalidate absolutely:

“The fourth issue, touching the penis. The scholars differed on it into 3 madhhabs. Some of them view that wudhu is required regardless of how he touches it, and this is the madhhab of Ash-Shafi'i and his companions, Ahmad, and Dawud (Adh-Dhahiri). Some of them view there is no wudhu in it at all, and this is Abu Hanifah and his companions. Both of these groups have precedents from the Companions and Tabi’in. (Third), a group that differentiated between touching it in a certain state or not touching it in that state. These people are divided into several groups. Among them are those who differentiated between feeling pleasure or not feeling pleasure...” (Bidayatul Mujtahid 1/45) (36). The group referred to as differentiating is the narration from Imam Malik and the followers of his madhhab (Malikis). Yet Ibn Rushd Al-Hafid is a great Maliki scholar and his book Bidayatul Mujtahid is one of the Maliki books. This shows his objectivity (insaf) and honesty in the scientific realm, even if it must touch upon his own madhhab. In reality, he stated the same thing when discussing touching women (opposite gender) in terms of invalidating wudhu and satirized the Malikis and Hanbalis who have no precedent from the Companions: “Every opinion in this matter has a precedent from the Prophet's Companions except the opinion that stipulates it must be accompanied by pleasure (lust), because I do not recall any Companion stipulating it.” (Bidayah Al-Mujtahid, 1/144)

Conclusion

The scholars are divided into 3 general opinions on this matter. Some say wudhu is not invalidated, namely the Hanafis. Some say wudhu is invalidated, namely the Shafi'is, Hanbalis, and Zahiris with slight differences between each of these madhhabs. Some differentiate between male and female private parts, namely the Malikis – except the private part of a small child. As for us (the author), we incline towards the first opinion, which is the opinion of the Hanafis, and it is one of the opinions of Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad, Sahnun from the Malikis, Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Khuzaymah from the Shafi'is, and Ibn Taymiyyah from the Hanbalis, namely that wudhu is not invalidated and it is only recommended to perform wudhu (37).