and the former is correct, while the latter is false by consensus. If these things have a ruling, then obligation, reprehensibility, and recommendation are all known to be entirely inapplicable; only permissibility remains. Prohibition is invalid because there is no evidence for it, whether explicit or inferred. Thus, only permissibility remains, which is the point to be established.

Having established this principle, we say: the default ruling concerning physical substances is ritual purity, for three reasons.

First:

A ritually pure substance is one that a person may come into contact with, touch directly, and carry during prayer. An impure substance is the opposite. Most of the preceding evidence encompasses every way of benefiting from things: eating, drinking, wearing, touching, and so forth. Thus, ritual purity is shown to be included within permissibility, which is the point to be established. The other two arguments are supplementary.

Second:

If it is established that the default ruling is that these things may be eaten and drunk, then their coming into contact and mingling with people is all the more deserving of being deemed permissible by default. This is because food mingles and blends with the body, which grows from it, so that it becomes the body's substance and constituent material. If it is foul, the body becomes foul and consequently deserves the Fire. Hence the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said:

“Every body nourished by ill-gotten gains is more deserving of the Fire.”

Paradise is pure, and none but the pure will enter it.

As for whatever touches the body and comes into direct contact with it, this too affects the body externally, just as impurities affect our bodies and the clothes in contact with them. Their effect, however, is less than that of something that mingles and blends with the body. Thus, if it is established that a thing may permissibly mingle and blend with the body, then the permissibility of