LessonsArgument Without New Proof: Absence of a Cause and Presumption of ContinuityQuiz

القيء غير ناقض؛ لأنه لم يخرج من السبيلين
Vomiting does not invalidate ablution, because it did not exit through the two specified passages.

This argument uses one recognized basis for invalidation to deny the possibility of another. Its defect is that exit through the two passages being a cause does not prove that every possible cause of invalidation must be confined to it.

If independent evidence establishes a rule about vomiting, merely saying it does not originate from the two passages is insufficient to reject that evidence. This concerns a particular argument in Hanafi jurisprudence, not a claim of agreement among all schools about vomiting.

Opening interactive controls...

The example of vomiting and ablution

Argument Without New Proof: Absence of a Cause and Presumption of Continuity

القيء غير ناقض؛ لأنه لم يخرج من السبيلين
Vomiting does not invalidate ablution, because it did not exit through the two specified passages.

This argument uses one recognized basis for invalidation to deny the possibility of another. Its defect is that exit through the two passages being a cause does not prove that every possible cause of invalidation must be confined to it.

If independent evidence establishes a rule about vomiting, merely saying it does not originate from the two passages is insufficient to reject that evidence. This concerns a particular argument in Hanafi jurisprudence, not a claim of agreement among all schools about vomiting.