Nail lacquer used to treat nail fungus
Question:
What’s the ruling for nail lacquer used to treat nail fungus. Fungal nail lacquer (like Amorolfine 5%) is a topical antifungal treatment applied like nail polish to kill nail fungus, working by damaging the fungal cell membrane, and is used for mild infections affecting one or two nails, requiring consistent application (weekly/bi-weekly) for several months (6-12) until healthy nail grows in, often involving filing the nail first for better penetration. It’s basically like nail polish so water will not penetrate whilst doing Wuḍū.
The Fatwa
In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful
The Answer
It is permissible to use nail lacquer, as the Wuḍūʾ will be valid by performing Masḥ (wiping) over the nail lacquer with water instead of washing the nails.
The Fiqh of the Answer
Fungal nail lacquer, such as Amorolfine 5%, is a topical antifungal treatment applied directly to the affected nail. When the lacquer is applied, the solvent evaporates and leaves a concentrated deposit of the active ingredient in an occlusive film on the surface of the nail. The Amorolfine then diffuses through the nail plate over the following seven days, allowing it to reach the nail bed and treat the fungal infection. It is normally applied once weekly, with the affected nail filed and cleaned before application.
Imam al-Qudūrī (d.428 AH) mentions that the Farāʾiḍ (obligations) of Wuḍūʾ are washing the three limbs, the face, arms, and feet, and performing Masḥ over the headii. From this we understand that the hands and feet must be washed during Wuḍūʾ. Imam al-ʿAynī (d.855 AH) explains that washing means allowing water to flow over the entire limbiii, and thus every part must be touched by water for Wuḍūʾ to be complete. Imam Ibn al-Nujaym (d.970 AH) mentions that, according to Imam Abū Ḥanīfah (d.150 AH) and Imam Muḥammad (d.189 AH), the Ḥaqīqah (reality) of washing in Wuḍūʾ is that water flows over the limb with Taqāṭur (the dripping of water), even if this is only one drop. This distinguishes Ghasl (washing) from Masḥ (wiping). Imam al-Ṭaḥṭāwī (d.1231 AH) further clarifies that even if a needle-tip-sized portion is left untouched by water, the Wuḍūʾ is not valid.
Based on this principle, if something adheres to the skin and prevents water from reaching it, the Wuḍūʾ would not be valid. Imam al-Shurunbulālī (d.1069 AH) illustrates this by stating that if there is something on a limb that prevents water from reaching the skin, such as dough, wax, or dried rheum at the corner of the eye, then it is obligatory to remove it before washing. Based on this Qiyās (the logic of the law), Wuḍūʾwill not be valid if anything covers the nails in a manner that prevents water from reaching them.
However, Imam al-Qudūrī (d.428 AH) mentions: if a person’s nail breaks and he applies ʿAlak (resinous adhesive) over it, then wiping over it is unanimously permitted if he fears harm from removing it or fearsthat removing it would worsen the ailmentvii. This demonstrates that the Fuqahāʾ (jurists) recognised exceptions to this Qiyās and departed from it in cases of hardship or necessity.
This permissibility is established through Istiḥsān (principled exception), and therefore this ruling may be applied to any situation that shares the same underlying meaning. Accordingly, if a person suffers from a fungal nail condition and requires medication that would be removed by water, such that washing would delay recovery or prevent healing, then performing Wuḍūʾ while wiping over the affected nail is permissible, and only Masḥ would be required. Furthermore, the principle of departing from the apparent ruling of Qiyās in cases of genuine need is also supported by the discussion of Muftī Riḍā-ul-Ḥaqq, who explains that where a wound is present and water would be harmful, Masḥ may be performed over the affected area while the remainder of the limb is washed, ensuring that water does not reach the woundviii.
And Almighty Allah Taʿālā Alone Knows Best
Mawlānā Ahmad Kapadia
Birmingham, UK
Trainee Mufti
Reviewed and approved by
Mufti Asim Patel
Darul Iftaa Mu’adh Ibn Jabal
DISCLAIMER:
The views and opinions expressed in this answer belong only to the author and do not in any way represent or reflect the views of any institutions to which he may be affiliated. Arguments and ideas propounded in this answer are based on the juristic interpretations and reasoning of the author. Given that contemporary issues and interpretations of contemporary issues are subjective in nature, another Mufti may reach different conclusions to the one expressed by the author. Whilst every effort has been taken to ensure total accuracy and soundness from a Shari’ah perspective, the author is open to any correction or juristic guidance. On the event of any juristic shortcomings, the author will retract any or all of the conclusions expressed within this answer. The Shari’ah ruling given herein is based specifically on the scenario in question. The author bears no responsibility towards any party that acts or does not act on this answer and is exempted from any and all forms of loss or damage. This answer may not be used as evidence in any court of law without prior written consent from the author. Consideration is only given and is restricted to the specific links provided, the author does not endorse nor approve of any other content the website may contain
i https://www.rcpharm.org/pharmacy-guides/amorolfine/
" ففرض الطهارة: غسل الأعضاء الثلاثة ومسح الرأس والمرفقان والكعبان يدخلان في الغسل (مختصر القدوري) ii
ومعناه الشرعي: إسالة الماء على العضو (البناية في شرح الهداية) iii
قَالَ فِي الْبَحْرِ: وَاخْتُلِفَ في مَعْنَاهُ الشَّرْعِيِّ، فَقَالَ أَبُو حَنِيفَةَ وَمُحَمَّدٌ: هُوَ الْإِسَالَةُ مَعَ التَّقَاطُرِ وَلَوْ قَطْرَةً (حاشية بن عابدين) iv
" (وشرط صحته) أي الوضوء (ثلاثة) الأول: (عموم البشرة بالماء الطهور) حتى لو بقي مقدار مغرز إبرة لم يصبه الماء من المفروض غسله لم يصح الوضوء (حاشية الطحطاوي على. الفلاح شرح نور الإيضاح)
'" وصول الماء إلى ما تحته «أو كان فيه» يعني المحل المفروض غسله «ما» أي شيء «يمنع الماء» أن يصل إلى الجسد «كعجين» وشمع ورمص بخارج العين بتغميضها «وجب» أيvii افترض «غسل ما تحته بعد إزالته المانع» ولا يمنع الدرن «أي وسخ الأظفار سواء القروي والمصري في الأصح فيصح الغسل مع وجوده»و «لا يمنع» خرء البراغيث ونحوها «كونيم الذباب وصول الماء إلى البدن لنفوذه فيه لقلته وعدم لزوجته ولا ما على ظفر الصباغ من صبغ للضرورة وعليه الفتوى (مراقي الفلاح شرح نور الإيضاح)
لو انكسر ظُفْره فجعل عليه العَلَك، فإنه يجوز المسح على ذلك أجمع، إذا خاف على نفسه من نزعه، أو خاف زيادة العلة (شرح مختصر الكرخي )
إول كى جس حصه پرزخم ے اور پانى نقصان ده ے اس حصه پرمسح كرليا جائ يعنى ترہات پهير ليا جاے اور بقيه كودهو ليا جائ اس طرح که زخم پر پانى نه پہونچہ
Fatawa Darul Uloom Zakariyya, vol. 1, p. 658, Zam Zam Publishers