Is the general evidence sufficient in place of the specific?

The questioner : Is it sufficient, O 'Abd al-Salam al-Sulaymani, is the general evidence sufficient in place of the specific?

The Shaykh : Okay, and what are the topics?

The questioner : Like this. I mean, for example, if there is a specific piece of evidence and a general piece of evidence, do we suffice with the general in place of the specific?

The Shaykh : We suffice with it.

The questioner : Well, if al-Bukhari and Muslim narrated a hadith, and others narrated it as well, do we suffice with the others in place of them?

The Shaykh : All right.

The questioner : Can you now change your first answer, or not?

The Shaykh : Yes.

The questioner : The specific. In the places where the specific did not come.

The Shaykh : The important thing is: if two pieces of evidence, a specific and a general, are found for the ruling of an issue, do we suffice with the general in place of the specific?

The questioner : Do you have?

The Shaykh : With the specific, and the general remains.

The questioner : I mean, it is preferable that we argue from the specific, because it is possible that a person will come and say, "This is general and may not include all individuals; perhaps it does not include all of its individuals." So when the specific evidence comes to us, no one can claim that it is not specific to this evidence or this ruling.