Ahmad—is that touching invalidates ablution if accompanied by desire, but not otherwise. Al-Shāfi'ī’s position is that it requires ablution in all cases.

There is no doubt that the positions of Abū Hanīfah and Mālik are the two well-known positions among the early generations. As for requiring ablution after touching women without desire, this is an anomalous position with no basis in the Quran, the Sunnah, or any report from the early generations of this community. Nor does it accord with the fundamental principles of Islamic law. Touching without desire has no effect on pilgrimage consecration or devotional retreat in the mosque, whereas touching with desire does. It is not disliked for someone who is fasting, does not establish a relationship of marital affinity, and has no effect on any act of worship or other legal ruling. Whoever makes it invalidate ritual purity has therefore departed from the established principles.

As for the Most High’s words:

“Or have touched women,”

if they mean sexual intercourse alone, as stated by ‘Umar and others, then it is clear that His words “or have touched women” concerning ablution are like His words concerning devotional retreat:

“And do not have relations with them while you are staying for worship in the mosques.”

Physical contact without desire has no effect there; likewise, it has no effect here. The same applies to His words:

“Then divorce them before you have touched them.”

Moreover, we know that men have always touched women without desire. Had ablution been obligatory because of this, the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would have commanded the Muslims to perform it, and this would have been transmitted and reported.