Love this post! It's a subject that I've long thought about. I don't really have a great solution, although some masjids in South Africa had an effective system whose details are now a bit fuzzy. I think the wudu area had rubber mats with no shoes, and the sandals lived in the individual bathrooms and could not be taken out of the stall. They also had eastern style squat toilets, which is closer to the sunnah and cuts down on "spillage." JAK for drawing attention to an oft-overlooked aspect of Muslim life!
I second brother Hamzah’s example. Let’s extend brother Ibn Abee Omar’s concern about possibility of splatter from children. The next obvious step after leaving the same possibly soiled slippers in the stall is to then perform wudhu whereby the possibility of filth is removed.
But if we widen the circle of concern a bit more to take a principles first approach, another principle to apply would be to act based on what is apparent and evident, while minimising concern around what is merely possible or requires further dependent possibilities to become reality.
The tangential example would be that one’s wudhu is intact when walking barefoot through a passage based on the apparent observation of the passage being dry and free from observable filth. Thoughts of the possibility of secondary contact here would be minimised to favor the observable and apparent default assumption that the area is clean.
Thus, walking out of the bathroom stall while leaving the slipper in the stall, then cleaning the feet with water, leaving only apparently clean water on the rubber mats, would seem to satisfy a casual observer’s assumption that the general wudhu area is clean and the wudhu maker’s observance complete and intact to proceed to prayer.
However, if we were to stick to Ibn Abee Omar’s example of using designated slippers through the bathroom area: 1) we would have the option of seeking an apparently dry and clean pair to our best observation 2) applying the principle of defaulting assumptions towards what is apparent, assume that the select clean and dry pair is clean from possible filth unless otherwise observable 3) other mitigating possibilities further exist that can allay the fears of possible filth on the slippers. For example, the one wearing it will observe the filth and clean it, or by virtue of actively cleaning and pouring water over their feet, the residual water will clean any residual filth on the slippers as well. 4) finally by the time the wudhu maker reachers the prayer area, they would have left behind the slipper even if it were to have residual filth. Then the filth on their feet would have been minimised by already carrying out the washing, and their walking over the area towards the prayer hall would have via friction rubbed off traces of filth sufficiently enough to fall within the observably accepted condition of cleanliness for prayer.
The point being at the end of this, that the various practical elements, and dependent occurrences needed to retain a large enough amount of filth to cause a problem are being mitigated. Thus, the solution being applied is at least reasonably satisfactory to solve the root problem being addressed.
Given that so many dependant conditions are needed to consider the possibilities to resolve for the obtainment of a valid wudhu by a maker and clean place of prayer for all prayers, every location should have its own consideration of how to most effectively design a strategy to this end. For example, if the outside environment is dry, dusty, and relatively isolated, it seems more likely that shoes from outside will be clean enough by the time they reach the inside of the masjid foyer. But a wet environment close by the hustle and bustle of a busy city will reach a different conclusion based on observable matters.
The principles based approach would allow for as many considerations as needed to obtain the end result.
Love this post! It's a subject that I've long thought about. I don't really have a great solution, although some masjids in South Africa had an effective system whose details are now a bit fuzzy. I think the wudu area had rubber mats with no shoes, and the sandals lived in the individual bathrooms and could not be taken out of the stall. They also had eastern style squat toilets, which is closer to the sunnah and cuts down on "spillage." JAK for drawing attention to an oft-overlooked aspect of Muslim life!
Assalam Alaikum,
I second brother Hamzah’s example. Let’s extend brother Ibn Abee Omar’s concern about possibility of splatter from children. The next obvious step after leaving the same possibly soiled slippers in the stall is to then perform wudhu whereby the possibility of filth is removed.
But if we widen the circle of concern a bit more to take a principles first approach, another principle to apply would be to act based on what is apparent and evident, while minimising concern around what is merely possible or requires further dependent possibilities to become reality.
The tangential example would be that one’s wudhu is intact when walking barefoot through a passage based on the apparent observation of the passage being dry and free from observable filth. Thoughts of the possibility of secondary contact here would be minimised to favor the observable and apparent default assumption that the area is clean.
Thus, walking out of the bathroom stall while leaving the slipper in the stall, then cleaning the feet with water, leaving only apparently clean water on the rubber mats, would seem to satisfy a casual observer’s assumption that the general wudhu area is clean and the wudhu maker’s observance complete and intact to proceed to prayer.
However, if we were to stick to Ibn Abee Omar’s example of using designated slippers through the bathroom area: 1) we would have the option of seeking an apparently dry and clean pair to our best observation 2) applying the principle of defaulting assumptions towards what is apparent, assume that the select clean and dry pair is clean from possible filth unless otherwise observable 3) other mitigating possibilities further exist that can allay the fears of possible filth on the slippers. For example, the one wearing it will observe the filth and clean it, or by virtue of actively cleaning and pouring water over their feet, the residual water will clean any residual filth on the slippers as well. 4) finally by the time the wudhu maker reachers the prayer area, they would have left behind the slipper even if it were to have residual filth. Then the filth on their feet would have been minimised by already carrying out the washing, and their walking over the area towards the prayer hall would have via friction rubbed off traces of filth sufficiently enough to fall within the observably accepted condition of cleanliness for prayer.
The point being at the end of this, that the various practical elements, and dependent occurrences needed to retain a large enough amount of filth to cause a problem are being mitigated. Thus, the solution being applied is at least reasonably satisfactory to solve the root problem being addressed.
Given that so many dependant conditions are needed to consider the possibilities to resolve for the obtainment of a valid wudhu by a maker and clean place of prayer for all prayers, every location should have its own consideration of how to most effectively design a strategy to this end. For example, if the outside environment is dry, dusty, and relatively isolated, it seems more likely that shoes from outside will be clean enough by the time they reach the inside of the masjid foyer. But a wet environment close by the hustle and bustle of a busy city will reach a different conclusion based on observable matters.
The principles based approach would allow for as many considerations as needed to obtain the end result.