Proof No. 1:
عن جابر بن سمرۃ: أن رجلاً سال رسول اللہ ﷺ : أأتوضأ من لحوم الغنم؟ قال : ان شئت فتوضا، وان شئت فلا توضا: قال أتوضا من لحوم الابل؟ قال: نعم ، فتوضا من لحوم الابل، قال: أصلی فی مرابض الغنم؟ قال: نعم ، قال أصلی فی مبارک الابل؟ قال: لا.
Sayyidna Jabir bin Samurah (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates that a man asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: “Should I perform wudu after eating the meat of sheep?” He said: “If you wish, perform wudu, and if you do not wish, do not perform wudu.” He asked: “Should I perform wudu after eating the meat of camels?” He said: “Yes, perform wudu after eating the meat of camels.” He asked: “Should I pray in the sheep pens?” He said: “Yes.” He asked: “Should I pray in the camel pens?” He said: “No.”
Proof No. 2:
عن البراءبن عازب قال : سئل رسول اللہ ﷺ عن الوضوء من لحوم الابل، فقال : توضؤوا منھا، وسئل عن الوضوء من لحوم الغنم، فقال: لا توضؤوا منھا.
Sayyidna Bara’ bin Azib (may Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was asked about performing wudu after eating the meat of camels, and he said: “Perform wudu from it.” Then he was asked about performing wudu after eating the meat of sheep, and he said: “Do not perform wudu from it.”
This hadith has been declared sahih by Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, Imam Ibn Hibban, Imam Ibn al-Jarud, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, and Imam Ishaq bin Rahawayh (may Allah have mercy on them). In Musnad Abi Dawud al-Tayalisi and Sunan al-Kubra of al-Bayhaqi, al-A’mash has explicitly stated his hearing (from the narrator).
Proof No. 3:
عن جابر بن سمرۃ قال: کنا نتوضأ من لحوم الابل ولا نتوضأ من لحوم الغنم.
Sayyidna Jabir bin Samurah (may Allah be pleased with him) says that we (the Companions of the Prophet) used to perform wudu after eating the meat of camels, but we did not perform wudu after eating the meat of sheep.
Sayyidna Jabir bin Samurah (may Allah be pleased with him) also narrated the above-mentioned marfu’ hadith from the Prophet ﷺ on this matter, and it is an established principle that the narrator of a hadith knows his own narration better than others. The narrator is relating the practice of the Companions, so it is as if there is a consensus of the Companions that eating camel meat breaks wudu.
Opinions of the Imams of Hadith and the Jurists
♦ 1 Imam al-Tirmidhi (may Allah have mercy on him) (200-279 AH) establishes a chapter as follows:
باب ماجاء فی الوضوء من لحوم الابل.
“Narrations about performing wudu from eating camel meat.”
He further writes:
وھو قول أحمد و اسحاق، وقد روی عن بعض أھل العلم من التابعین و غیرھم: انھم لم یروا الوضوء من لحوم الابل، وھو قول سفیان الثوری و أھل الکوفۃ.
“This is the view of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Imam Ishaq bin Rahawayh (that eating camel meat breaks wudu). However, it is narrated from some scholars among the Tabi’un and others that they did not consider wudu (to be obligatory) from eating camel meat; this is the view of Sufyan al-Thawri and the people of Kufa.”
2♦ Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Imam Ishaq bin Rahawayh (may Allah have mercy on them) hold this view, that eating camel meat breaks wudu.
3♦ Imam Abu Dawud (may Allah have mercy on him) (202-275 AH) establishes the chapter as follows: باب الوضوء من لحوم الابل.
Chapter on wudu from eating camel meat
4♦ Imam Ibn Majah (may Allah have mercy on him) (209-273 AH) writes: باب ماجاء فی الوضوء من لحوم الابل.
Chapter on narrations about performing wudu from eating camel meat
5♦ Imam al-A’immah Ibn Khuzaymah (223-311 AH) establishes the chapter as follows:
باب الأمر بالوضوء من أکل لحوم الابل.
Chapter on the ruling of performing wudu from eating camel meat
6♦ Imam Ibn Hibban (d. 304 AH) writes:
ذکر الأمر بالوضوء من أکل لحم الجزور ضد قول من نفیٰ عنہ ذالک.
Chapter on the ruling of performing wudu from eating camel meat, contrary to the one who denies it.
7♦ Hafiz Ibn Hazm (d. 456 AH) writes:
واکل لحوم الابل نیئۃ و مطبوخۃ أو مشویۃ وھو یدری أنہ لحم جمل أو ناقۃ فانہ ینقض الوضوء.
Eating camel meat, whether raw, cooked, or roasted, breaks wudu, provided the one eating knows that it is the meat of a male or female camel.
8♦ Imam al-Bayhaqi (d. 458 AH) has the following chapter heading: باب التوضی من لحوم الابل.
Chapter on performing wudu from eating camel meat
Also, after mentioning the weak arguments of the opponents, he writes:
وبمثل ھٰذا لا یترک ماثبت عن رسول اللہ ﷺ.
“Due to such (unreliable evidence), a hadith established from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ cannot be abandoned.”
9♦ Imam Ibn al-Mundhir (d. 318 AH) says:
والوضوء من لحوم الابل یجب، لثبوت ھٰذین الحدیثین وجودۃ اسنادھما.
Due to the authenticity of these two hadiths and the soundness of their chains, wudu becomes obligatory after eating camel meat.
10♦ Hafiz al-Nawawi writes:
وھٰذا المذھب أقوی دلیلاً.
“This view (that eating camel meat breaks wudu) is stronger in terms of evidence.”
تلک عشرۃ کاملۃ.
“These are ten full testimonies.”
The Hanafi Position and Its Evidences
Dear readers! You have seen from the clear statements of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, the practice of the Companions, and the classifications, opinions and fatwas of the scholars of hadith that this issue is as clear as the light of day. On the contrary, our muqallid brothers do not hold that wudu is required after eating camel meat, and they have no evidence for it either. As is their habit, in this matter too they attempt, through interpretive stretches against sahih and explicit hadiths, to prop up their broken school of thought, but without success.
Benefit:
Mr. Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, the Deobandi Hayati, writes:
“Imam al-Nawawi in Sharh Muslim (1/158) writes: The view of the majority of scholars is that wudu is not broken by the consumption of camel meat, and he writes that this was the view of the Four Caliphs.”
Safdar Sahib is so enamoured of “democracy” that he will not tolerate even the slightest hesitation on the matter. The moment someone mentions the majority (jumhur), Safdar Sahib immediately takes it up. Yet, firstly, very often the rulings of Hanafi fiqh contradict the majority. By reflecting on the research we keep presenting in defence of hadith, the reality becomes clear. In many places, never mind the majority, even consensus (ijma’) is not heeded.
Secondly, a view of the majority that is contrary to the Sunnah cannot be accepted. For this reason, among Ahl al-Hadith, agreeing with the majority is not necessary in matters of law. Religion is the name of the sayings of Muhammad ﷺ, not the opinions of the majority. If even one person acts in accordance with the command of Muhammad ﷺ, then his view will be authoritative. Even Mr. Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Deobandi himself writes:
فما علیٰ أبی حنیفۃ من ملام اذا کان متمسکا بالحدیث الصحیح أو الحسن ان خالفہ الناس فافھم!
“No blame falls upon Abu Hanifah when he acts upon a sahih or hasan hadith, even if others (the muhaddithun) oppose him. This must be understood.”
Thirdly, on reflection, it will become clear that on this matter too the majority is in agreement with the hadith. Hafiz Nawawi’s statement that according to the majority, eating camel meat does not break wudu, and that this was also the position of the four Rightly Guided Caliphs, is not correct.
Let the Hanafis be asked to establish with a sahih chain that not only the four caliphs, but even a single Rightly Guided Caliph held this view.
ھانوا برھانکم ان کنتم صادقین!.
Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) writes:
واما من نقل عن الخلفاء الراشدین أو جمھور الصحابۃ انھم لم یکونوا یتوضّئوون من لحوم الابل ، فقد غلط علیھم.
“Whoever reports from the Rightly Guided Caliphs or the majority of the Companions that they did not perform wudu from camel meat has attributed a falsehood to them.”
If only Safdar Sahib would reflect.
No sahih chain from Imam Malik or Imam al-Shafi’i establishes this view. If some people have the audacity, let them try. Remarkably, these people are also unable to establish this view from Imam Abu Hanifah with a sahih chain.
On the contrary, we have established with sahih chains from more than a dozen imams and muhaddithun that eating camel meat breaks wudu. Let anyone object to their chains!
The Hanafi Evidence:
Mr. Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi Hayati writes:
“Imam Nawawi, in Sharh Muslim (158/1), gave the argument that the hadith “Abandon wudu from what fire has touched” abrogates this as well, but at the same time he writes that the narration about camel meat is specific and this is general, so in this case abrogation is difficult.”
Commentary:
Be aware that Hafiz Nawawi did not give this argument. Rather, he related it from those who do not make wudu obligatory after eating camel meat, because he himself writes that this does not even constitute an argument, since the narration requiring wudu is specific, and abrogation of the specific by general wording is difficult.
Then Safdar Sahib has also written:
“But this argument presented by the majority does not appear to be sound……”
This was the entire stock of arguments of some people, the outcome of which you have seen. Now that they have been left without evidence, they have come up with the idea of responding to the hadiths establishing wudu by making corrupt interpretations. Let us look at their interpretations and their sufficient and complete answers:
Interpretation No. 1:
“Maulana Usmani, in Fath al-Mulhim (490/1), answers these narrations by saying that these hadiths are not for obligation of wudu, because in Majma’ al-Zawa’id (205/1) there is a narration from Hadrat Samurah Suwa’i, who says that we came into the presence of the Prophet ﷺ and we said that انا أھل بادیۃ و ماشیۃ فھل نتوضأ من لحوم الابل والبانھا قال : نعم أو کما قال. Allamah Haythami says: its isnad is hasan ان شاء اللہ تعالیٰ.
Maulana Usmani says that not requiring wudu from drinking camel’s milk is an agreed matter among all, so the same ruling applies to camel meat. And Mubarakpuri in Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi (84/1) and Maulana Saharanpuri in Bazl al-Majhud (112/1) write that there is consensus of the ummah on the absence of wudu from drinking camel’s milk. Hafiz Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari (150/1), citing Tabarani, writes that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: rinse your mouths after milk… So just as in those narrations rinsing the mouth after drinking milk is not obligatory and necessary but only recommended, similarly after camel meat it is not necessary but recommended……”
Commentary:
Imam Ibn Hibban says: ذکر البیان بأن الأمر بالوضوء مما مست النار منسوخ خلالحم الابل و حدھا. “The statement that the command to perform wudu from what fire has touched is abrogated, except for camel meat.”
He also writes:
ذکر خبر قدیوھم غیر المتبحر فی صناعۃ العلم أنہ ناسخ لأمرہ بالوضوء من لحوم الابل.
“The mention of this hadith (ترک الوضوء مما مست النار), which gives the deficient person in the field of knowledge the illusion that the ruling of wudu from eating camel meat has been abrogated by it.”
Commentary:
Safdar Sahib, citing his Maulana Usmani, and Usmani Sahib himself while reasoning, have tried to prove that wudu after eating camel meat is recommended, not obligatory. However:
1٭ The narration on which Safdar Sahib and Usmani Sahib base their argument is severely “da’if”, indeed “mawdu'” (fabricated) in level; its narrator Sulayman ibn Dawud al-Shadhakuni is “kadhdhab wa matruk” (a liar and abandoned) according to the majority.
Remarkably, Safdar Sahib has already devoted all his energy in Ahsan al-Kalam (204/1) to declaring this narrator weak, yet here his memory failed him and he argued from his narration. Arguing from such liars, abandoned and corrupt narrators is precisely the hallmark of the muqallids.
2. Because external indicators (the narrating Companion and the Prophet ﷺ himself not rinsing the mouth after drinking milk) show that the rinsing after drinking milk is recommended, it has been understood as recommended. However, there is no reliable indicator to show that wudu is not obligatory after eating camel meat.
3. The muhaddithun have explicitly stated that rinsing after drinking milk is recommended, as Usmani himself has written. On the contrary, the muhaddithun have declared wudu obligatory after eating camel meat.
See the statements and rulings of Imam Ahmad, Imam Ishaq ibn Rahwayh, Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, Imam Ibn Hibban, and Hafiz Ibn Hazm (may Allah have mercy on them all) and others, which we have mentioned earlier.
It is a requirement of fairness: how can a matter that the muhaddithun declared obligatory be analogized to a matter that the muhaddithun unanimously declared recommended?
Warning:
Safdar’s statement that Mubarakpuri, in Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi, recorded a consensus that rinsing after drinking camel’s milk is recommended appears to be the result of a lack of study and of caution, because Mubarakpuri, may Allah have mercy on him, refutes the one who said this (Saharanpuri) and writes:
Saying: ھٰذا محمول عند جمیع الأمۃ علیٰ شربھا بأن یستحب لہ الخ مبنی علیٰ غفلتہ عن مذاھب الأمۃ، قال ابن قدامۃ: وفی شرب لبن الابل روایتان، أحداھما ینقض الوضوء،
“Saharanpuri’s statement that the ruling on rinsing after camel’s milk is recommended according to the whole Ummah is the result of his neglect of the positions of the Ummah, for Ibn Qudamah says: regarding drinking camel’s milk there are two positions; according to one of them it breaks wudu.”
Interpretation No. 2:
Mr. Safdar writes:
“And al-Khattabi in Ma’alim al-Sunan (136/1) writes that after eating camel meat, wudu is recommended, or the linguistic wudu is meant, i.e., washing the hands and mouth.”
Mr. Taqi Usmani in Dars Tirmidhi (300/1), and Mr. Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Deobandi in I’la al-Sunan (177/1), have also said this.
Furthermore, Imam al-Tahawi the Hanafi writes: قد یجوز أن یکون الوضوء الذی ارادہ النبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ھو غسل الید. It is possible that the wudu the Prophet ﷺ intended was the linguistic wudu, i.e., washing the hands.”
Comment:
There is no proof that wudu is linguistic in this matter.
Allamah Ibn Qudamah writes:
ان الوضوء اذا جاء فی لسان الشارع وجب حملہ علی الموضوع الشرعی دون اللغوی لأن الظاھر منہ أنہ انما یتکلم بموضوعاتہ.
“When the word wudu comes from the tongue of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, it must be understood in its legal sense rather than its linguistic sense, because it is well known from him that he speaks in legal terms.”
He also writes:
ثم لابد من دلیل نصرف بہ اللفظ عن ظاھرہ ویجب أن یکون الدلیل لہ من القوۃ بقدر قوۃ الظاھر المتروکۃ واقوی منھا ولیس لھم دلیل.
“Then there must be a proof by which we turn the word away from its apparent meaning (the legal meaning), and that proof must be at least as strong as the apparent meaning being abandoned, or stronger than it, while these Hanafis have no such proof.”
Hafiz Ibn Hazm writes:
فانہ لا یطلق الوضوء فی الشرعیۃ الا لوضوء الصلاۃ فقط.
“In the Shariah, the word wudu is used only for the wudu of prayer.”
He also writes:
ولو أن المعترض بھٰذا ینکر علی نفسہ القول بالوضوء من القھقۃ فی الصلاۃ ولا یری فیھا الوضوء فی غیر الصلاۃ، لکان أولیٰ بہ.
“It would have been more fitting for the one raising this objection to condemn his own view that loud laughter breaks wudu inside prayer but not outside prayer.”
Imam Ibn Hibban sets up a chapter on the hadith of al-Bara’ as follows:
ذکر الخبر الدال علی أن الامر بالوضوء من أکل لحوم الابل، انما ھو الوضوء المفروض للصلاۃ دون غسل الیدین.
“Chapter: the report indicating that the command to perform wudu from eating camel meat is the wudu made obligatory for prayer, not washing the two hands.”
2. At this point, the word wudu actually came in response to the questioner’s question, and there is no reason why it should be taken in its linguistic sense here.
Allamah Ibn Qudamah writes:
انہ خرج جواباً لسؤال السائل عن حکم الوضوء من لحومھا و الصلوۃ فی مبارکھا، فلایفھم من ذالک سوی الوضوء المراد للصلوۃ.
“This word came in answer to a questioner’s question about wudu from camel meat and prayer in their resting places (camel pens), so nothing other than the wudu for prayer can be understood from it.”
Did the questioner ask the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about linguistic wudu? And if only washing the hands were meant, what would have been the point of asking?
3. If we take wudu here to mean washing the hands, then the question arises: why did the Prophet ﷺ distinguish between sheep and camels? And does the fact that wudu and prayer were asked about together, and answered together, not also refute this interpretation?
Allamah Ibn Qudamah writes:
انہ لو أراد غسل الید لما فرق بینہ و بین الغنم فان غسل الید منھا مستحب و لھٰذا قال من بات وفی یدہ ریح غمر فاصابہ شیٔ فلا یلومن الا نفسہ وما ذکروہ من زیادۃ الزھومۃ فأمر یسیر لا یقتضی التفریق.
“If washing the hands were what was meant, then he would not have distinguished between camel meat and sheep meat, because washing the hands is recommended even after eating sheep meat. That is why he said that whoever spends the night with the smell of meat on his hand and something harmful afflicts him should blame no one but himself. As for the Hanafis’ claim that camel meat has a stronger odour, this is not a matter that could cause a distinction.”
Imam Ibn Hibban says:
فی سؤال السائل عن الوضوء من لحوم الابل و عن الصلوۃ فی أعطانھا، وتفریق النبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم بین الجوابین، أری البیان أنہ أراد الوضوء المفروض للصلوۃ، دون غسل الیدین، ولو کان ذالک غسل الیدین من الغمر لا سئوی فیہ لحوم الابل و الغنم جمیعا.
“The questioner’s question about performing wudu from camel meat and praying in their resting places (camel pens), and the Prophet ﷺ’s separate answers to the two questions, are clear evidence that what he meant was the wudu for prayer, not merely washing the two hands. If the meaning were washing the hands because of the smell of the meat, then camel meat and sheep meat would be equal in this respect.”
Some reports that came on this subject, and their analysis, are as follows:
Yahya ibn Qays says:
رأیت ابن عمر أکل لحوم جزور و شرب لبن ابل و صلی ولم یتوضا.
“I saw Abdullah ibn Umar eat camel meat and drink camel milk, then pray without performing wudu.”
Comment:
Its chain is “ضعیف“. Yahya ibn Qays al-Ta’ifi was not declared reliable (tawthiq) by anyone except Ibn Hibban, so he is “مجہول الحال“.
It is narrated about Sayyidna Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) that he ate camel meat, then stood and prayed, but did not perform wudu.
Commentary:
The chain of this report is the most severely “ضعیف”” because:
1. In it is Jabir al-Ju’fi, who is “ضعیف، رافضی“.
2. Sufyan is “مدلس“.
3. Abu Sabr al-Nakha’i is “maqbul” (acceptable when corroborated) “(مجہول الحال)“.
It is narrated about Sayyidna Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) that he ate camel meat and then prayed, but did not perform wudu.
Commentary:
This report is also severely “ضعیف“, because in it:
1. Jabir al-Ju’fi is “ضعیف ،رافضی“.
2. Sharik al-Qadi is “مدلس” and is narrating with “an” (from).
Benefit:
Nafa’ah ibn Muslim says that Suwayd ibn Ghaflah, a Tabi’i, ate camel meat, then prayed, but did not perform wudu.
Commentary:
This is neither the Qur’an, nor a hadith, nor the statement of a Companion, but rather the ijtihad of a Muslim, which is unacceptable because it conflicts with the hadith of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Imam Ibrahim al-Nakha’i (may Allah have mercy on him) says that there is no wudu after eating camel, cow and sheep meat.
Commentary:
This is neither the Qur’an, nor a hadith, nor the statement of a Companion, nor the statement of Abu Hanifah, and it is unacceptable because it conflicts with authentic hadiths, the practice of the Companions, and the explicit statements of the majority of the imams of hadith scholars.
Dear readers, you have seen that the hadiths of the Messenger clearly order wudu after eating camel meat, the Companions state this explicitly, the muhaddithin openly announce it and refute the opponents thoroughly, and there is no evidence against it. Yet despite this, the muqallids refuse to accept it and have resorted to all sorts of baseless interpretations of the hadiths of the Messenger. It would have been right that, if they had no evidence, they should have removed the leash of taqlid and followed the Prophet ﷺ; but instead of accepting it, they have fully proven their own taqlid.
Dear readers! Judge fairly: is this agreement with the hadith or opposition to it???
