The Shaykh’s illustration of some issues on which there is disagreement, such as (ablution from touching a woman, eating camel meat, and kissing a woman, and others).

So what does a Muslim do when he sees that within the Hanafi school alone there are three opinions? What does he do about them? Have you now moved from one school that has three opinions to three schools that have three opinions, and you take the issue based on what your soul finds peace with? You see, but first, you did not hit upon the Sunnah, and second, you will encounter an issue where you contradict the evidence. For example, does camel meat invalidate the ablution or not? Have you come across this issue?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good, what did you base it on? The majority opinion, of course.

The questioner : Camel meat, yes, it invalidates the ablution.

The Shaykh : It invalidates the ablution, why?

The questioner : The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said in a hadith that it invalidates the ablution.

The Shaykh : Good, did you verify the authenticity of this hadith?The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : This is the problem. I am saying this not to cast doubt. Here, you hit upon the Sunnah, and the hadith you are asking about is an authentic hadith in Muslim, narrated by Jabir ibn Samurah This is an authentic hadith; but in the first issue, you contradicted the Sunnah because you took the issue based on what your soul found peace with. Sometimes your soul may find peace with the truth, as in the second case, and sometimes it may find peace with other than the truth. Because it is established that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to kiss Lady Aisha and then stand up to pray without performing ablution. What do you think? Does kissing involve desire or not?

The questioner : She is a woman.

The Shaykh : I mean, his wife, no problem, ... .

Another questioner : Abu Tahir, something came out of him expressing this, meaning he no longer has desire for his wife; ... .

The Shaykh : But in any case, he agreed with "what level did he agree with, so he embraced him." This is his school, the Hanafi school is like this, so his statement came out with full confidence: this is his wife. But the Shafi'is do not say this.

The questioner : ...

The Shaykh : Well, did you not read that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered ablution from camel meat?

The questioner : I forgot about that.

The Shaykh : I forgot about that, of course, that does not suit you, so you forgot about it ...

The questioner : Our Shaykh, do you remember regarding the Hanafis, once it was mentioned that it invalidates the ablution.

The Shaykh : What is it?

The questioner : Touching a woman.

The Shaykh : The Hanafis do not; rather, it is the Shafi'is who say it invalidates the ablution. The schools, as the brother mentioned here, are three schools. So the Hanafis say it does not invalidate the ablution; the Shafi'is say it invalidates the ablution absolutely; the Malikis and Hanbalis say it invalidates the ablution if there is desire, otherwise not.

The questioner : A non-mahram woman.

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : A non-mahram woman invalidates the ablution?

The Shaykh : No, whether she is lawful or unlawful, that is why Abu Tahir liked it, ..., this is his school, ...

The questioner : Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) did not have the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); how did he base his ruling on shaking hands invalidating the ablution?

The Shaykh : This question that you directed to me, I direct it to you. Why did you contradict Imam al-Shafi'i and say that if there is desire it invalidates the ablution, otherwise not? Imam al-Shafi'i did not have knowledge of this. Why did you contradict him? This is the problem. We are asking a question now, and based on that question, we will reach the answer to it. Do you believe that Imam al-Shafi'i encompassed all knowledge? Of course, the answer is no. Let us narrow the question a little: did he encompass all hadiths in knowledge? Also no, even though everything is vast, Allah is the Greatest. Now we have made it very small: did he encompass all hadiths in knowledge? No. So what is the point of the question? That Imam al-Shafi'i was not aware of this hadith. Such a question is not answered, but what should be said on this occasion is: let the one who contradicts this hadith present to us a stronger argument than it; ... All that can be said is that the hadith is weak or authentic, this is a valid question; but because you are now imagining an Islamic conference, and there are many conferences, God willing, in the end times, and in this Islamic conference there are representatives from all four schools, that is enough for us without gathering the Ibadi, Zaydi, and Shi'ah, and so on. Four schools, the schools of the people of the Sunnah and the community, and an issue is raised. If each of these people is not a scholar, and one of the attendees from one of the schools proposes an opinion and adopts it, the one who opposes him in the school will say, "Our imam did not have knowledge of this," and the second and third will stand up, and each will make the same claim, and they will not reach a result. Why? Because each one is biased toward his school. But if they had established scientific, usuli, fiqhi, and hadithi rules and adopted them, whether they agreed with the school or not, they could easily reach an agreement.