The ruling on one who is certain of purity and ritual impurity but uncertain which came first

The questioner : And if you are traveling together.

The Shaykh : Yes. If the one you mentioned said that it is cut off. If one is certain of purity and ritual impurity but uncertain which came first, he is in the opposite state of what he was in before them. The reasoning is that he has become certain that that state has ceased and turned into its opposite, while he is uncertain about the continuation of that opposite state, and the default is that it continues. There is another opinion that says wudu is obligatory in all cases. Another opinion says wudu is obligatory in all cases. Its reasoning is that he has become certain that a state occurred for him, a state occurred for him, and these two states are contradictory. No, no? If they are contradictory, they cancel each other out because he does not know which one came first; he does not know which one overtook the other, so they cancel each other out. And he has become certain that the first state, which was purity, has ceased, so he must perform wudu as a precaution, just as if he were ignorant. If he is ignorant, there is one opinion that he must perform wudu in order to perform the prayer with certainty. But if he knows, the school, as you know, provides reasoning. And there is no doubt in my mind that the opinion that wudu is obligatory is the most cautious, because the reality of the matter is that, for example, until the sunrise he was in a state of wudu. He does not know; he is certain that he became ritually impure and performed wudu, but he does not know which came first. Is that not so? We say there is a possibility that the man performed wudu for renewal and there is no possibility? There is a possibility that he performed wudu for renewal and then became ritually impure, so now he must, he must perform wudu.