after touching the penis, his point was nevertheless that the evidence for ablution after eating camel meat is stronger than that for ablution after touching the penis. I have already explained why the former is also more clearly supported by analogy: intermingling has a greater effect than mere contact. Hence, everything ritually impure is forbidden to eat, but not everything forbidden to eat is ritually impure. Ahmad was also astonished by those who do not perform ablution after eating camel meat but do so after laughing during prayer, although the latter ruling has less support in either analogy or transmitted reports. The report concerning it has a disconnected chain of transmission and has been judged weak by most scholars, while reports to the contrary have been authentically transmitted from the Companions.

Those who opposed the hadiths concerning the invalidation of prayer countered them only with some among them declaring them weak—a judgment made by someone unfamiliar with hadith, as his own followers mentioned—or with weak reports attributing to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) the statement:

“Nothing invalidates the prayer.”

Alternatively, they relied on reports from the Companions concerning this matter, although the Companions themselves differed over it; or on weak reasoning which, even if sound, could not outweigh this evidence, particularly according to Ahmad’s school.

This, then, is one principle concerning physical and spiritual impurities.

Another principle is that the Kufan scholars are known for their leniency in overlooking