Is the ablution obligatory for one who eats camel meat? Or is it abrogated by the hadith of Jabir?

The questioner : The next question: Is the ablution obligatory for one who eats camel meat? Or is it abrogated by the hadith of Jabir: "The last of the two matters from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was leaving the ablution from what fire touched"?

The Shaykh : There is no abrogation in this subject or in this issue at all. All that can be said—and it is not the stronger position—is that the command is to be understood as recommended rather than obligatory. However, this interpretation is the weaker position for us, and the correct view is that the command to perform ablution from camel meat is a fixed, decisive command until the Day of Judgment. What is claimed to abrogate it does not stand to prove the claim, for two reasons. The first reason is that the hadith of Jabir referred to in the question is, first of all, a general text: "The last of the two matters was leaving the ablution from what fire touched." If this general text had been a statement issued by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and not a report by Jabir about a specific incident or incidents he witnessed, then it would have been possible to reconcile this statement with the command to perform ablution from camel meat by saying: this is general and that is specific.
That is to say, his command (peace be upon him) to leave the ablution from what fire touched could be said to be a general text. But the detail provided in the hadith of Jabir ibn Samurah and al-Bara' ibn 'Azib overrides this general text and specifies it as excluding camel meat. The hadith of Jabir ibn Samurah and al-Bara' ibn 'Azib is well known; the first is in "Sahih Muslim," and the other is in "Sunan Abu Dawud" and others. A man said: "O Messenger of Allah, may I pray in the grazing places of sheep?" He said: . He said: "May I pray in the grazing places of camels?" He said: . Then he said: "Do I perform ablution from the meat of camels?" He said: . He said: "Do I perform ablution from the meat of sheep?" He said: .
This hadith distinguishes between camel meat and sheep meat, commanding ablution from camel meat and giving a choice regarding ablution from sheep meat. So his saying: "Perform ablution if you wish..." is a command qualified by "if you wish." As for his saying regarding camel meat , without leaving it to the choice of the one obligated, this distinction between the two meats is decisive proof of the distinction between the two rulings. The ruling on ablution from camel meat is obligatory, and the ruling on ablution from other than camel meat is a matter of choice and recommendation.
This is a clear and explicit preference for this hadith. If the hadith of Jabir had been a ruling issued by the Messenger (peace be upon him), the answer to it would be that it is general and specified by the hadith of Jabir ibn Samurah and the hadith of al-Bara' ibn 'Azib. How, then, when the first hadith of Jabir, which is Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah al-Ansari, is not a clarification from the Messenger (peace be upon him) of his saying, nor even of his action? How can it be said to be an abrogation of his command (peace be upon him)? All that can be said is that this is a report by Jabir that the Messenger (peace be upon him) left the ablution from eating meat in general. But it can be said that this report may not be precise, because it is a report of his own observation. Perhaps he did not witness the Messenger (peace be upon him) eating camel meat at all afterwards, or perhaps he did not witness that he ate and then performed ablution. However, we go to what is more precise than this answer and say: The hadith of Jabir is not a report about the absolute life of the Messenger (peace be upon him) regarding his eating camel meat and leaving the ablution from it, but rather it is a report about a specific incident on a specific day. That is, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was invited to food, ate from the meat that was placed before him, and performed ablution afterwards. Then, in another instance on that same day, the same food was placed before him, and he ate but did not perform ablution. So the hadith of Jabir reports a specific incident on a specific day and does not report on the entire life of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), his days, and the meals he ate, as if in every instance he ate meat and did not perform ablution. This generality is not what Jabir means; because this phrase is a fragment of a long hadith narrated by Imam Ahmad in "Al-Musnad," and it contains this detail that his saying: "The last of the two matters was leaving the ablution from what fire touched" was on that day which Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah (may Allah be pleased with him and his father) witnessed.
At that point, another objection arises to this hadith, although it has no proof at all in opposing the hadith of Jabir ibn Samurah and the hadith of al-Bara' which commands ablution from camel meat. It is not in the hadith of Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah that the meat which the Messenger (peace be upon him) ate was camel meat; there is no mention of camels at all. And at that point, where is the contradiction between the hadith of Jabir ibn Samurah and al-Bara' on one hand, and this hadith of Jabir ibn 'Abd Allah which does not mention that the meat was camel meat, but only that the first time he performed ablution and the second time he did not? And this is the nature of meats other than camel meat, which is what was clarified in the two previous hadiths, the hadith of Ibn Samurah and al-Bara' ibn 'Azib; where he (peace be upon him) was asked about the meat of camels and said: ; so he (peace be upon him) applied this in that incident, performing ablution the first time and not performing ablution the second time; so what is there in this?
In summary: The hadith of Jabir ibn Samurah does not contain the text that the meat from which the ablution was left was camel meat. Second, it is not general regarding what is implied by this phrase; because it is a phrase excerpted from a story. If the story is taken in its entirety, it means that the first time he performed ablution from the meat, whose type was not named, and the second time in this incident he did not perform ablution.
And finally, it is said: An action does not stand to negate a statement, as previously explained in the story of... And similarly, this is also the answer to an old disagreement among Muslim scholars regarding his saying (peace be upon him) in the hadith of Anas and 'A'ishah... in "The Two Sahihs" and others: .
...