Praise be to Allaah.

The correct view is that the one who eats the meat of a camel – old or young, male or female, cooked or raw – has to do wudoo’. There are several reports which serve as evidence (daleel) for this:

The hadeeth of Jaabir: the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was asked, “Should I do wudoo’ after eating camel meat?” He said, “Yes.” The person said: “Should I do wudoo’ after eating mutton?” He said, “If you wish.” (Narrated by Muslim, 360).

The hadeeth of al-Baraa’: the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was asked about eating camel meat. He said, “Do wudoo’ after eating it.” He was asked about mutton, and he said, “Do not do wudoo’.” (Narrated by Abu Dawood, 184; al-Tirmidhi, 81. Classed as saheeh by Imaam Ahmad and Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh).

The view of those who do not regard it as obligatory to do wudoo’ after eating camel meat is based on several points, such as:

This ruling is mansookh (abrogated). Their evidence (daleel) is:

The hadeeth of Jaabir; the last of the two commands from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was that there was no need to do wudoo’ after eating food that had been touched by fire. (Narrated by Abu Dawood, 192; al-Nisaa’i, 185).

But this does not refute the specific meaning of the hadeeth quoted above from Saheeh Muslim.

Moreover, there is no evidence here of anything being abrogated, because they asked whether they should do wudoo’ after eating mutton, and he said, “If you wish.”

If this hadeeth were abrogated, the ruling on mutton would also be abrogated. The fact that he said, “If you wish” indicates that these ahaadeeth came after the hadeeth of Jaabir.

In cases of abrogation there must be evidence that what is being abrogated came first chronologically, and there is no such evidence here.

Moreover, the hadeeth of abrogation is general in meaning, but this hadeeth (about camel meat) is more specific, and thus excludes (camel meat) from the general ruling.

The fact that he also asked about mutton makes it clear that the issue here is not whether the meat has been touched by fire; if that were the case then camel meat and mutton would be regarded in the same way.

(B) They also take their evidence from the hadeeth, “Wudoo’ has to do with what comes out, not what goes in.”

Response:

This hadeeth was narrated and classed as da’eef (weak) by al-Bayhaqi (1/116) and al-Daaraqutni (p. 55). It a weak hadeeth with three faults (‘ilal); for more information see al-Silsilah al-Da’eefah, 959.

Even if it were saheeh – for the sake of argument – it is general in meaning, and the hadeeth which says that wudoo’ is obligatory (after eating camel meat) is specific.

(C) Some of them said that what is meant by the phrase “do wudoo’ [perform ablution] after eating it” is to wash the hands and mouth, because camel meat has an unpleasant odour and is very greasy, unlike mutton!

Response:

This is unlikely, because the apparent meaning here is wudoo’ as prescribed in sharee’ah, not ablutions in a linguistic sense (i.e., merely washing one's hands and mouth). It is obligatory to interpret the terminology of sharee’ah in accordance with the meanings of sharee’ah.

(D) Some of them take as evidence a story that has no basis; the story in question may be summed up as follows:

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was addressing the people one day, and one of them emitted an odour (i.e., passed wind), but he felt too shy to get up from among the people. He had also eaten camel meat, so the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, covering for him, “Whoever has eaten camel meat, let him do wudoo’.” So a group of people who had eaten camel meat got up and went and did wudoo’.

Response:

Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

This story has no basis anywhere in the books of Sunnah or elsewhere in the books of Fiqh and Tafseer, as far as I know.

(al-Silsilah al-Da’eefah, 3/268).

The correct view regarding this matter is that the ruling on doing wudoo’ after eating anything that has been touched by fire has been abrogated, but it is obligatory to do wudoo’ after eating camel meat.

Al-Nawawi said:

Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Yahyaa ibn Yahyaa, Abu Bakr ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Khuzaymah thought that it (eating camel meat) breaks wudoo’; this was also the view favoured by al-Haafiz Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi. It was reported from the scholars of hadeeth and from a group of the Sahaabah.

They took as evidence the hadeeth of Jaabir ibn Samurah which was narrated by Muslim. Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh said: “It has been reported from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in these two saheeh hadeeths, the hadeeth of Jaabir and the hadeeth of al-Baraa’. This view has stronger evidence even though the majority follow the opposite.”

The majority responded to this with the hadeeth of Jaabir: the last of the two commands from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was that there was no need to do wudoo’ after eating meat that had been touched by fire. But this hadeeth is general, whereas the hadeeth about doing wudoo’ after eating camel meat is specific, and a specific ruling takes precedence over a general one. (Sharh Muslim, 4/49).

Among modern scholars, Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen and Shaykh al-Albaani also said this.

And Allaah knows best.