Isn't there a contradiction, lack of clarity, and opposition to the legitimate jurisprudential rules in the previous fatwa, based on the hadith of Ibn Abbas: "Indeed, my wife does not reject the hand of a toucher," and his saying, peace and blessings be upon him: "The child is for the bed"?

It is not permissible for a man to keep his unchaste wife who commits indecency; otherwise, he would be a pimp (dayyuth). This ruling is well-established in Islamic law and in human nature.

The objection based on the hadith: "I have a woman who is among the dearest people to me, but she does not prevent the hand of a toucher. He (the Prophet) said: 'Divorce her.' He said: 'I cannot bear to be without her.' He said: 'Then enjoy her.'" is rejected due to the weakness of the hadith. And even if it were authentic, it does not indicate that the woman was committing adultery.

The objection based on the hadith: "The child belongs to the bed, and for the fornicator is the stone," is rejected because it relates to establishing the lineage of the child to the husband, and has no connection to keeping an adulterous wife or separating from her.

This ruling does not contradict the principles of Islamic jurisprudence; rather, it aligns with the Holy Quran, which forbade marriage to prostitutes. Allah Almighty says: "The fornicator does not marry except a [female] fornicator or polytheist, and none marries her except a fornicator or a polytheist, and that has been made unlawful for the believers." (An-Nur/3). Based on this verse, Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah adduced evidence for the impermissibility of keeping an adulterous wife.