Is acting upon the Maliki opinion that ablution (wudu') is not obligatory for every prayer for someone afflicted with chronic flatulence, as long as no other impurity occurs apart from the perpetual one, considered a sin? Is the Maliki school of thought not a valid reference, and how can it differ from the other schools of thought?

The Maliki school of thought holds that if an impurity (hadath) is continuous for half of the time or more, it does not nullify ablution (wudu'). This includes urinary incontinence, fecal incontinence, continuous release of gas, seminal discharge, prostatic fluid (madhy), and pre-seminal fluid (wady). They based this on the principle that anything that deviates from the norm, is recurrent, and difficult to observe falls under the category of excused continuous impurity (sals). They also argued that if such a discharge occurs in a healthy state, ritual purity (tahara) becomes obligatory; however, if it is due to continuous incontinence, such purity is not obligatory, similar to menstrual blood. Ibn Taymiyyah supported this school of thought.