Praise be to Allah.
The fuqaha’ differed as to whether wudoo’ is invalidated by the emission of wind from a woman’s front passage. There are two views:
1.That it does invalidate wudoo’. This is the view of the Shaafa‘is and Hanbalis.
Imam an-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Anything that comes out of the front or back passage of a man or woman invalidates wudoo’, whether it is stools, urine, wind, worms, pus, blood, stones or anything else. There is no differentiation in that regard between what happens rarely and what happens regularly, and there is no differentiation between wind coming out of the front passage of a man or woman or from the back passage. This was stated by ash-Shaafa‘i (may Allah have mercy on him) in al-Umm, and our companions are unanimously agreed on that.
End quote from al-Majmoo‘, 2/3; see also Tuhfat al-Muhtaaj by Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, 1/127
Ibn Qudaamah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Saalih narrated from his father concerning a woman from whose vagina wind is emitted: Whatever comes out of either (the front or back) passage, wudoo’ is required for it. al-Qaadi said: Emission of wind from the penis or the woman’s vagina invalidates wudoo’.
End quote from al-Mughni, 1/125. See also al-Insaaf by al-Mirdaawi, 1/195
2.That it does not invalidate wudoo’. This is the view of the Hanafis and Maalikis.
It says in Radd al-Muhtaar ‘ala ad-Durr al-Mukhtaar, 1/136: Wudoo’ is not invalidated by emission of wind from the front passage or penis, because it is a twitch or tremor, i.e., it is not really wind; even if we say that it is wind, it does not come from a site of impurity, therefore it does not invalidate wudoo’.
End quote. See Badaa’i‘ as-Sanaa’i‘ by al-Kasaani, 1/25
Al-‘Allaamah ad-Dardeer al-Maaliki (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
If something usual is emitted from somewhere other than the two usual passages, such as if it is it emitted from the mouth, or if urine is emitted from the back passage, or wind is emitted from the front passage or even from the woman’s vagina, or from a hole, then it does not invalidate wudoo’.
End quote from ash-Sharh al-Kabeer ma‘a Haashiyat ad-Dasooqi, 1/118
Undoubtedly in order to be on the safe side and to ensure that one has discharged one’s duty it is better to do wudoo’ in the event of this wind, because there is such a strong difference of opinion concerning it and because this is more on the safe side, as we have said. It is also closer to the apparent meaning of the evidence, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There is no wudoo’ unless there is a sound or a smell.” Narrated by at-Tirmidhi, 74; he said: a hasan saheeh hadeeth.
This hadeeth and similar hadeeths on this topic were quoted as evidence by Imam Ibn al-Mubaarak and others to show that wudoo’ is rendered invalid by emission of wind from the front passage.
Imam at-Tirmidhi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
This is the view of the scholars, that he does not have to do wudoo’ except if he breaks wind and hears a sound or notices a smell. ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubaarak said: If he is uncertain as to whether he has broken wind, he does not have to do wudoo’ unless he is so certain that he would swear to it. And he said: If wind is emitted from a woman’s front passage, she has to do wudoo’.
This is also the view of ash-Shaafa‘i and Ishaaq. End quote.
The view that wudoo’ is required becomes stronger in the case of uncertainty as to whether it came from the front passage or the back passage. It is known that wind emitted from the back passage invalidates wudoo’ according to scholarly consensus. If the source of the wind is uncertain – is it from the back passage, which invalidates wudoo’ according to scholarly consensus, or is it from the front passage, which invalidates wudoo’ according to many of the scholars? – the view that it does invalidate wudoo’ becomes very strong, especially since the basic principle concerning wind is that it comes from the back passage. As for that which is emitted from the front passage, it is rare and is not a regular occurrence; this is the basis on which those who said that it does not invalidate wudoo’ based their opinion.
If this wind is continual and happens in all situations, then this woman comes under the heading of those who are excused, even if she is certain that it comes from the back passage. So she should do wudoo’ for each prayer after the time for it has begun, then offer the obligatory prayer and whatever she wants of naafil (supererogatory) prayers, and she does not have to repeat wudoo’ every time she passes wind.
Shaykh ash-Shanqeeti (may Allah preserve him) was asked:
The wind that comes out of a woman’s front passage happens a great deal at different times; should she do wudoo’ for each prayer?
There is a well-known difference of opinion among the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) concerning this issue: does the front passage come under the same ruling as the back passage with regard to emission of wind? Some of the scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) said that emission of wind from the front passage comes under the same ruling as emission of wind from the back passage. This is by way of judging like by like; it is a strong opinion and is undoubtedly more on the safe side.
But if it happens with a woman in a way that it is out of control, or it causes her hardship and difficulty, in that case she comes under the same ruling as the woman who is suffering from istihaadah (irregular non-menstrual bleeding), such as when her bleeding is persistent. She should do wudoo’ when the time for each prayer begins, and after that it will not matter if she passes wind. The same also applies if she continually passes wind from the back passage. It is more appropriate to be on the safe side concerning her religious commitment and worship. And Allah knows best.
End quote from Sharh Zaad al-Mustaqni‘.
And Allah knows best.