Mentioning a principle of jurisprudence; namely, that it is not permissible to turn away from a specific text because it contradicts a general text.

The Shaykh : It is established in the principles of jurisprudence that it is not permissible to turn away from a specific hadith because it contradicts a general text. It is not permissible to turn away from a specific text because it conflicts with a general text; rather, it is obligatory to exclude the specific from the general. There are many, many examples of this. When our Lord (Mighty and Majestic) mentioned the women who are forbidden in the verse: , then He mentioned (Blessed and Exalted is He): , and then He continued explaining the forbidden women until He said: . This is a general text that implies the permissibility of all women other than those mentioned in this Quranic context. However, we find in this context that Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) mentioned among the forbidden: . He did not mention daughters and sisters through breastfeeding. So what do we say, taking the text of: ? Do we say that it is permissible for a man to marry his sister through breastfeeding because Allah permitted, with absolute permission, all women other than these forbidden women?
The answer is: No; because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: . So this hadith expanded the meaning of the prohibition mentioned in the verse, and one of its examples was the prohibition of mothers through breastfeeding. So the daughter and sister through breastfeeding are also forbidden by the indication of the hadith. Likewise, all texts of the Book and the Sunnah are treated this way: when a general text indicates a general meaning, and then a specific text comes that contradicts this general indication, this specific text is excluded from that general text. And one of the clearest proofs is: . This includes fish and locusts. Do we forbid fish and locusts because the verse includes them? The answer is: The Messenger said: . Do we then forbid blood absolutely, or do we say: We exclude the liver and the spleen, because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) excluded them?
And so, for the sake of such a matter, the science of the principles of jurisprudence was established. Now, we have a text that permits women gold with an absolute, general permission. So if the Messenger (peace be upon him) forbade—let us give an agreed-upon example—if he forbade women from eating in gold vessels, do we say: This is specific to men because he permitted gold for women? No one says this. They said: This is a ruling that includes women as well, so it is not permissible for the Muslim woman to eat in gold vessels, or to eat with a gold spoon and a gold cup, and the like. So what do we do regarding the hadith: ? We say: This is excluded from that. Likewise, the rest of the exclusions: he forbade the bracelet and the necklace by the explicit hadith of Fatimah. So we say: This is excluded from the absolute permission, and we do not strike some hadiths against others.
So the point is that every Muslim man and woman who is accountable must listen to the evidence of both sides. After that, she returns to her heart. It is not just that we heard there is disagreement in the issue, oh Allah !! And without a doubt, especially here in your lands, the heart will be inclined toward adornment; because—what Allah willed!—according to what we have been told, the arms are all filled with what? With gold. So what kind of soul would be a strong, very strong believer if she were referred to consulting her heart and forbidding herself this jewelry that has become widespread and common in these lands? It is necessary to be discerning so that we are as He (the Exalted) said regarding His Prophet: .