An example of how to handle issues on which the schools of jurisprudence differ: Does the emergence of blood invalidate the ablution or not?

The questioner: Professor, regarding blood on ... the schools of jurisprudence have ... I know that, but perhaps?

The Shaykh: All right, for example, how do the scholars handle disputed issues? We brought up the example of blood. The first school, the Hanafi, says: The emergence of blood invalidates the ablution. They say: By analogy to what comes out of the two passages, by analogy to what comes out of the woman's private part in the case of irregular bleeding. This is all the argument the Hanafis make in terms of derivation and analogy.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: I didn't get it, Professor. No, but in terms of derivation and analogy, if someone else had said it!

Another questioner: I didn't notice.

The Shaykh: I wasn't paying attention, so please pay attention.
This is all the argument of the Hanafis in terms of analogy and derivation. They have hadiths that do not constitute proof according to the masters of hadith, , this is a denounced hadith with no authenticity. Here is where specialization comes in; we need to see what the masters of hadith said about this hadith? They said: This hadith cannot be used as evidence. Therefore, we find that the early jurists were forced to resort to analogy because they did not have an authentic hadith on the subject. We come to the argument of the Maliki and Hanbali schools, which said: If it is a lot, it invalidates, and if it is a little, it does not invalidate. They said that.

The questioner: Excuse me - Professor - ... The hadith of Abu Hurayrah was narrated by al-Bayhaqi, he is mentioning issues other than ... he is mentioning ... .

The Shaykh: What is qalas? What is qalas? Yes, that's right.

The questioner: He is mentioning five issues.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: Yes, and this is definitely weak according to al-Bayhaqi.

Another questioner: The ablution is renewed for seven things.

The questioner: The ablution is renewed for seven things.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: The ablution is renewed for seven things, and he mentioned among them the emergence of blood from the mouth ... in prayer, and that is the issue.

The Shaykh: Yes.
The Malikis and Hanbalis say the same thing as the Hanafis, but with some expansion; that the blood of irregular bleeding, when it is determined that she is a woman with irregular bleeding, is as it came in the hadith: ; meaning it is a lot. So they followed the path of analogy, but with another consideration. The point is that the group also does not have a clear hadith that a person can submit his head to, as is obligatory.
We come to Imam al-Shafi'i. He has a hadith that you will find in "Sunan Abu Dawud," in "Sunan al-Daraqutni," in "Sunan al-Bayhaqi," in "al-Mustadrak" of al-Hakim, and in the books of biography as well; this hadith is narrated through the route of Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari. He said: We went on a military expedition with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). We captured a woman from among the polytheists, and her husband was absent from the town. When he came and was informed of the news, he swore that he would not enter the village until he took revenge on the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). So he followed the tracks of the people until the track led him to a valley where the Messenger (peace be upon him) and his companions had descended. He hid behind a rock, waiting for an opportunity to carry out his oath. When the Messenger (peace be upon him) reached that valley, according to the first Islamic military system, he said to the companions: - meaning: guard us - So two young men from the Ansar, one Aws and one Khazraj, stood up and said: We are here, O Messenger of Allah. He said to them: - a path in the mountain - So they went, then they agreed to take turns guarding; one would guard for half the night while the other slept, and vice versa. So one of them slept and the other stood up to guard.
Then it occurred to him not to waste his time, even in guarding, without another act of worship, so he stood up to pray. The polytheist man was waiting, and lo, he saw this man from the companions standing upright like a clear target in front of him. So he did nothing but place his spear in his bow and shoot it at him. He placed it in his leg - this is what the narrator says - he placed it in his leg. The placement would be by hand, but this is an idiom for the precision of the shooting, as if he placed it with his hand. So the praying man bent down, took it, and threw it to the ground, and he continued to pray while blood was spurting from him. When the polytheist saw that his target was still standing upright, he shot the second one, and he placed it in him, so he threw it to the ground while praying. And so the third, and it hit him and he placed it in him, so he threw it to the ground, until he prayed two units. Then either his companion woke up or he woke him up. When he saw what was on his companion, the matter shocked him, and it seems he asked him about the news. He said: I was in a surah I was reciting, and by Him in whose hand is my soul, had I not feared that I would neglect a post that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had placed me to guard, my soul would have been in it!
Meaning that this man, he was praying, he was conversing with his Lord (Blessed and Exalted is He) in that quiet night. And he was, as the Sufis sometimes express it, as if he was in a state, meaning, completely immersed in the feeling of submission and worship to Allah (Mighty and Majestic). So he did not yield to the first, second, or third spear, nor did he care that it might be his destruction, but his concern was one thing, and that is that he remembered that he had an obligation; which is guarding the camp of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). So if he had continued in prayer, the enemy who shot at him three times would have continued shooting until he was destroyed in this prayer, and thereby he would have neglected the duty that the Messenger (peace be upon him) had ordered him to perform, and thereby the entire Muhammadan army might have been exposed to extermination, and his sin would have been very serious. So he made a decision and did not respond to his religious emotion, but to his Muslim intellect, and he limited the prayer to two units, and had he not feared neglecting the duty, his destruction would have been in this prayer.
Up to here ends the hadith as it is narrated in the previous sources. We find here important and very many benefits, but what concerns us now is to know the school of this companion regarding the emergence of blood. With which of the three jurisprudential schools? With the school of al-Shafi'i.
All right, if I were someone like the story, who has studied hadith for thirty years, saw this hadith and became proud of it, and said: This means that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not teach the companions that a lot of blood invalidates the ablution, otherwise this companion would not have been allowed to continue in his prayer. As proof, imagine a Hanafi man who is prostrating and a thorn enters his hand, we don't say his enemy threw it, a thorn enters his hand and blood comes out, what does he do with his prayer? His prayer is invalid. Why? Because his school tells him: The emergence of blood is an invalidator of the ablution. I don't care about his school now that he lived in, but when do I care? He heard this hadith and got excited as if he hadn't heard it! For the sake of Allah, he says: , we understood, we told you: Be a Hanafi before you hear this hadith, and we said: We have an opinion on following a school, and we said at the beginning - but our brother, may Allah forgive him, cut off our speech -; we said that following a school is permissible if it was a path that blocked the way for us and we didn't know what the path was, and we have nothing in this. The important thing is that it doesn't matter if his school is Hanafi or Shafi'i in this issue or otherwise, but this Hanafi read in the books of Sunnah, if Allah wills; because there is no one left who reads in the books of Sunnah! He read in the books of Sunnah this hadith, and a new jurisprudence ignited in him; that the companions of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) were wounded with injuries from which blood spurts like rivers and they continued in their prayer. What does this mean? It means that the prayer is valid based on the fact that the ablution was not spoiled by the emergence of blood. This is what we want from the young Muslim, as we concluded the message completely, that the hadith reached you from the Messenger of Allah contrary to the school. Do not say school. The school is a means, not a goal. The goal is the Messenger of Allah, that you single him out for following.
Yes.

The questioner: A person might argue with His saying (the Exalted): ; that is, is the prayer, for example ... invalid?

The Shaykh: Which prayer?

The questioner: The prayer of the companion who continued in his prayer despite the emergence of blood from him.

The Shaykh: What is this question?

The questioner : One might say, or one might argue, that we need an answer to this doubt. One might argue that this Companion continued his prayer based on His saying, the Exalted: ; he started an act and wanted to complete this act?

The Shaykh : I mean, if his wudu' was broken ... by the prayer? What is this question?