Al-Qawa'id al-NuraniyyaIbn Taimiya

it would have been a disgrace to the ummah to abandon teachings of this kind and instead adopt views that were no match for them in either transmitted evidence or reasoned judgment.

Ahmad—may Allah have mercy on him—was indeed astonished by those who set aside the authentic hadith requiring ablution after eating camel meat, whose authenticity is beyond doubt and which has no opposing evidence, yet perform ablution after touching the penis, even though the hadiths concerning the latter conflict and their chains of transmission are not comparable to those requiring ablution after eating camel meat. This is why the two Shaykhs—al-Bukhārī and Muslim—did not include them. Although, according to the position most commonly reported from Ahmad, he gave preference to the hadiths requiring ablution after touching the penis, his point was that the evidence for ablution after eating camel meat is stronger than the evidence for ablution after touching the penis.

I have already explained that the former is also more clearly grounded in analogy than the latter: what is ingested and mingles with the body has a greater effect than mere physical contact. Accordingly, everything impure is unlawful to eat, whereas not everything unlawful to eat is impure.

Ahmad was likewise astonished by those who do not perform ablution after eating camel meat but do perform it because of laughing during prayer, even though this is further removed from both analogy and transmitted evidence. The report supporting that ruling is one in which a Successor narrates directly from the Prophet; most scholars have deemed it weak, and authentic reports from the Companions contradict it.

Those who rejected the hadiths stating that such things invalidate the prayer countered them only by citing some scholars’ grading of them as weak. That grading, however, came from someone unversed in hadith, as his own associates noted; or they countered them with weak reports attributed to the Prophet—may Allah’s blessings and peace be upon him—that he said, “Nothing invalidates the prayer”; or with reports transmitted from the Companions concerning the matter.

لَكَانَ وَصْمًا عَلَى الْأُمَّةِ تَرْكُ مِثْلِ ذَلِكَ وَالْأَخْذُ بِمَا لَيْسَ بِمِثْلِهِ لَا أَثَرًا وَلَا رَأْيًا. وَلَقَدْ كَانَ أحمد ﵀ يَعْجَبُ مِمَّنْ يَدَعُ حَدِيثَ " الْوُضُوءِ مِنْ لُحُومِ الْإِبِلِ " مَعَ صِحَّتِهِ الَّتِي لَا شَكَّ فِيهَا وَعَدَمِ الْمُعَارِضِ لَهُ، وَيَتَوَضَّأُ مِنْ مَسِّ الذَّكَرِ مَعَ تَعَارُضِ الْأَحَادِيثِ فِيهِ وَأَنَّ أَسَانِيدَهَا لَيْسَتْ كَأَحَادِيثِ الْوُضُوءِ مِنْ لُحُومِ الْإِبِلِ، وَلِذَلِكَ أَعْرَضَ عَنْهَا الشَّيْخَانِ: الْبُخَارِيُّ ومسلم، وَإِنْ كَانَ أحمد عَلَى الْمَشْهُورِ عَنْهُ يُرَجِّحُ أَحَادِيثَ الْوُضُوءِ مِنْ مَسِّ الذَّكَرِ، لَكِنَّ غَرَضَهُ: أَنَّ الْوُضُوءَ مِنْ لُحُومِ الْإِبِلِ أَقْوَى فِي الْحُجَّةِ مِنَ الْوُضُوءِ مِنْ مَسِّ الذَّكَرِ. وَقَدْ ذَكَرْتُ مَا يُبَيِّنُ أَنَّهُ أَظْهَرُ فِي الْقِيَاسِ مِنْهُ، فَإِنَّ تَأْثِيرَ الْمُخَالَطَةِ أَعْظَمُ مِنْ تَأْثِيرِ الْمُلَامَسَةِ، وَلِهَذَا كَانَ كُلُّ نَجِسٍ مُحَرَّمَ الْأَكْلِ، وَلَيْسَ كُلُّ مُحَرَّمِ الْأَكْلِ نَجِسًا. وَكَانَ أحمد يَعْجَبُ أَيْضًا مِمَّنْ لَا يَتَوَضَّأُ مِنْ لُحُومِ الْإِبِلِ وَيَتَوَضَّأُ مِنَ الضَّحِكِ فِي الصَّلَاةِ، مَعَ أَنَّهُ أَبْعَدُ عَنِ الْقِيَاسِ وَالْأَثَرِ، وَالْأَثَرُ فِيهِ مُرْسَلٌ قَدْ ضَعَّفَهُ أَكْثَرُ النَّاسِ، وَقَدْ صَحَّ عَنِ الصَّحَابَةِ مَا يُخَالِفُهُ. وَالَّذِينَ خَالَفُوا أَحَادِيثَ الْقَطْعِ لِلصَّلَاةِ لَمْ يُعَارِضُوهَا إِلَّا بِتَضْعِيفِ بَعْضِهِمْ، وَهُوَ تَضْعِيفُ مَنْ لَمْ يَعْرِفِ الْحَدِيثَ كَمَا ذَكَرَ أَصْحَابُهُ، أَوْ بِأَنْ عَارَضُوهَا بِرِوَايَاتٍ ضَعِيفَةٍ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ ﷺ أَنَّهُ قَالَ: «لَا يَقْطَعُ الصَّلَاةَ شَيْءٌ» ، أَوْ بِمَا رُوِيَ فِي ذَلِكَ عَنِ الصَّحَابَةِ.

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies