Is adopting the easier of the scholarly opinions in jurisprudential matters—such as one who omits a condition of prayer out of ignorance, or the emission of semen due to contemplation, or madhi (pre-seminal fluid) affecting one's clothes, or praying with a ritually impure garment out of forgetfulness—considered an impermissible pursuit of dispensations? And what is the meaning of the hadith: "Whenever the Messenger of Allah was given a choice between two matters, he would always choose the easier of the two, as long as it was not a sin"?

"Madhī" (pre-seminal fluid) is impure by the consensus of the majority of scholars. The disagreement lies in how to purify clothes from it. The preponderant opinion is that sprinkling (naḍḥ) is sufficient, and washing is not obligatory. As for habitually seeking out easier opinions (rukhsa), it is blameworthy if it becomes a regular practice. However, if someone adopts the easier opinion in one or two matters due to necessity, there is no harm in it, provided that those who permit the easier opinion are trustworthy scholars, the issue is one of ijtihad (definition) (independent reasoning) and not addressed by a definitive text, and that following the easier opinion does not become a constant habit.