Points derived from the two ḥadiths:
-
Both narrations are sound, and as long as it is possible to reconcile them and act upon them together, that is preferable to setting one aside because of the other.
-
The ḥadith of Ṭalq indicates that touching the male member does not nullify ablution, for the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) explained: innamā huwa baḍʿatun minka ("It is nothing but a part of you"). The term baḍʿah means “a piece taken from any limb of your body.”
-
The ḥadith of Busrah indicates that touching the male member does nullify ablution.
-
The best way to harmonize the two narrations is through one of two approaches:
a. Ablution is broken if it is touched directly, without a barrier; if it is touched through a covering, it is not. This view is supported by the wording, “A man touches his private part while praying,” for prayer is not a situation in which the genitals would normally be touched without a barrier.
b. Touching it with sexual desire invalidates ablution, whereas touching it without desire does not.The second reconciliation is weightier and closer to the truth. Since the penis is but a limb, an ordinary touch unaccompanied by desire does not in itself invalidate ablution; what nullifies it is the discharge that may issue from either outlet as a result of the touch. When no desire is present, such discharge is unlikely. If desire is present, however, the emission of pre-seminal fluid (madhy) becomes probable, and that does invalidate ablution. Moreover, the surge and heat of desire—so incompatible with worship—are only subdued by water, especially when one intends to perform ablution, an act of devotion accompanied by intent and prescribed supplications that calm the passion.