What is the ruling on the moisture that comes from a woman’s private parts?

The questioner : What is possible? Like what? Other than illness and the like. And urination. Yes.

The Shaykh : The moisture, the moisture of the private parts, is pure according to the correct view. The evidence for this is that it is not obligatory for a person to wash what is affected by this moisture. This is the apparent meaning of the Sunnah. However, the question remains: does it break the wudu (ablution) or not? Ibn Hazm holds that it does not break the time. He holds that only urination breaks the wudu, and that nothing coming from the lower passage breaks the wudu except urination, defecation, and passing wind. His statement offers relief for women. But I have not seen any predecessor (Salaf) for him in this. If you find a predecessor for him, that would be excellent, so that it can be said that only what is customary breaks the wudu.
As for women, we issue fatwas to them that it is pure, meaning the moisture of a woman’s private parts is pure, as the jurists said, but it breaks the wudu. However, some of them are jurists who say this existed in the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), and it is something that needs clarification, and all women in the time of the Messenger were like the women of their era. So bring us evidence that it breaks the wudu. We said because it is the servant of the two passages. Who established this premise? They have strange arguments; sometimes a person stands confused. Yes. And they also ask: how do you say it is pure and then say it breaks the wudu? We said there is no necessary connection between purity and not breaking the wudu, for passing wind breaks the wudu and it is pure, is it not? Yes. It is pure, and for this reason, if wind comes out of you and your clothing is affected, it does not become impure.
Semen is a cause for the obligation of ghusl (full ritual bath), and yet it is pure. But the question remains: in my time, I have not found a predecessor for Ibn Hazm. If I had found a predecessor from the Companions or the Tabi'un (the generation after the Companions) who were people of jurisprudence, I would have agreed with him that it does not break the wudu. But I have not found one. And you, may Allah reward you with good, help us if you can. What? Any research? No matter how I search, these arguments come back to me?