Is there a difference in the ruling between one whose ablution is broken during the prayer and one who entered it forgetting that he was not in a state of ritual purity, then remembered during the prayer?

The questioner : If you permit me, is there a difference if the ablution is broken, does he exit, perform ablution, then return and complete it, and if he entered forgetting that he was not in a state of ritual purity?

The Shaykh : I think the question is incomplete. One who entered forgetting the state of ritual purity.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Okay, and when did he remember?

The questioner : During the prayer, in the first unit, for example.

The Shaykh : Yes, there is no harm, he completes it.

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : One who entered the prayer forgetting the ablution and remembered, we tell him to perform ablution and build upon what has passed. So I thought you were asking that he remembered after he had prayed that he was not in a state of ablution. Here the ruling differs for that reason.

The questioner : Here he repeats the prayer.

The Shaykh : He repeats the prayer.

The questioner : As for the first question, both of them ... .

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner : May Allah reward you.

The Shaykh : You are welcome.

The questioner : ... the hadith of Abu Bakrah, and there is nothing clearer than it.

The Shaykh : No, the hadith of Abu Bakrah.

The questioner : I mean, the Shaykh, may Allah reward him with good, was teaching the previous lesson, so he distinguished between the two cases: if he entered forgetting, then he does not build; but if it was broken, then he builds ... and he said, even Abu Bakrah, that he came and was ...

The Shaykh : The hadith of Abu Bakrah does not contain a case where the ablution was broken.

The questioner : Excuse me, excuse me, the opposite.

The Shaykh : The opposite.

The questioner : The opposite, yes, the opposite. Do you remember now? He said he came with his head dripping water. So Abu Bakrah was forgetting. He said this is suitable for forgetting, it is not suitable for the breaking of the ablution during the prayer.

The Shaykh : ... but this does not mean that there is no evidence that the one whose ablution was broken during the prayer does not build. There is a difference, there is a difference, there is no doubt.
The student : Shaykh, did Umm Fadl leave?

The Shaykh : No, she did not leave ... .

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : By saying that it does not negate that there is evidence that gives the ruling for the one whose ablution was broken the same as the ruling for the one who forgot his ablution. The fact that the hadith of Abu Bakrah is not about the one whose ablution was broken during the prayer, this difference, this is not in doubt that this is different. But what is the intended meaning of this difference? The intended meaning is that that does not invalidate his prayer, meaning the one whose ablution was broken, his prayer is invalid, he goes to perform ablution and renew it, is this not the intended meaning?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Yes, regarding ... that the difference does not ... but this does not mean that there is no evidence that rules that this one builds just as the one who forgot built.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : You are welcome.