obliged wuḍūʾ in one situation and did not oblige it in another, or else treated Busrah’s report as a recommendation and Ṭalq ibn ʿAlī’s report as binding.

The proofs each side cites in favor of the ḥadith it prefers are many, and recounting them would take too long; they are readily found in their respective works. The essence of their disagreement, however, is precisely what we have just indicated.

Fifth Issue
The earliest generation differed over whether ablution is required after eating food that has been exposed to fire, because the traditions reported from the Messenger of God—peace and blessings be upon him—on the matter conflict. The great majority of the jurists of the provincial centers who came after that first generation agreed that the requirement had lapsed, for it was soundly established with them that this was the practice of the four Rightly Guided Caliphs. They also relied on the ḥadith of Jābir, who said,

“The last of the two commands from the Messenger of God—peace and blessings be upon him—was to forego ablution for whatever has been touched by fire.”

Abū Dāwūd recorded it. Yet a number of scholars of ḥadith—among them Aḥmad, Isḥāq, and others—held that ablution is obligatory only after eating camel meat, on account of the authentic ḥadith to that effect from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him.

Sixth Issue
Abū Ḥanīfah adopted an isolated view, making ablution obligatory for laughing during the prayer, basing himself on the mursal report of Abū al-ʿĀliyah:

“Some people laughed during the prayer, so the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—ordered them to repeat both their ablution and their prayer.”

The majority rejected this report because it is mursal and because it conflicts with foundational principles, for it would make something nullify ritual purity inside the prayer without nullifying it outside the prayer, even though as a mursal it is sound.

Seventh Issue
Another minority view obliged ablution for carrying a deceased person, relying on a weak report:

“Whoever washes a dead body should perform a full bath, and whoever carries it should perform ablution.”

You should also know that the overwhelming majority of scholars require ablution after any loss of consciousness—whether through fainting, insanity, or intoxication—drawing an analogy with sleep. Their reasoning is that if sleep necessitates ablution in the circumstance most likely to cause a state of ritual impurity, namely deep slumber, then the loss of consciousness is even more deserving of being treated as a cause.

These, then, are the agreed-upon issues of the chapter and the well-known points of dispute within it. We shall now proceed to the fifth chapter.