Continuation of the discussion on the issue of the conflict between the statement and the action, illustrated by the issue of drinking while standing.

The Shaykh : What did Hamzah ibn 'Abd al-Muttalib do? He slit the belly of 'Ali's camel. 'Ali was preparing at that time to marry his wife Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her). He had tied his camel in front of the house of one of the Ansar, where some of the Companions had gathered in a time when intoxicants had not yet been forbidden. They gathered to drink intoxicants, and there was a slave girl singing and encouraging them. In her encouragement, she singled out Hamzah for his heroism, bravery, and strength. So, in his state of intoxication, he went out to 'Ali's camel, which was tied in front of the house, and slit its belly. When 'Ali came and found this tragedy, he went to complain to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), saying that Hamzah had done this to him. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) came quickly, entered, and spoke to Hamzah. Hamzah became angry and said, "Look at what he did." Hamzah said to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): "Are you nothing but slaves to our fathers?" This is disbelief itself. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not report anything; this is called an admission. But this is an admission in a specific situation: he was intoxicated, and intoxicants had not yet been forbidden. Then the prohibition came, as we know, gradually in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. An admission may be valid for a ruling, but we do not have a text stating that this admission was with the knowledge of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him); it only occurred during the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). Here the issue is different. In a hadith in the Sunan, from the hadith of Ibn 'Umar, he said: Here he mentioned two things and attributed them to the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), but there is no explicit statement that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was aware of it. We know that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) became aware of people drinking while standing and forbade them; we know this. But we do not know that he saw people eating while walking and either approved of it or forbade it; we do not know this. Therefore, the ruling on these two issues in this single hadith is completely different. As for the ruling on eating while walking, it is sufficient for us that the original ruling is permissibility; the original ruling is permissibility. Add to that that this occurred during the time of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and was not condemned. As for drinking while standing, it occurred among many people, the first of whom was the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) himself, who drank while standing. Authentic hadiths have come regarding this, but other hadiths have come in which he forbade drinking while standing. So what is the course of action? He forbade drinking while standing and drank while standing. Here the principle applies. The reason is that the statement is a general legislation, whereas the action of drinking while standing—look at the possibilities that apply to his drinking while standing, which we mentioned earlier and said are the reason why the legitimacy of the action is weaker than the legitimacy of the statement. It is possible that the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) drinking while standing was before the prohibition. It is possible that it was after the prohibition but out of need, as came in the Sunan of al-Tirmidhi: It is known among the Arabs that they used to hang their water skins in the tent so that air would circulate and cool the water. So the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) needed to drink and found this water skin. Untying the water skin, lowering it, and drinking from it is not an easy task, so he drank from it while standing. Thus, there was an excuse here. So we have now mentioned two possibilities. A third possibility remains: the first possibility is that this drinking may have been before the prohibition; the second is that this drinking may have been out of need, as with the hanging water skin; the third is that it may have been a specific privilege for him (may the prayer and peace of Allah be upon him) that no one else shares. Therefore, it is not permissible for anyone to argue for the permissibility of drinking while standing by saying that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) drank while standing, because he forbade this very thing that he did, and his action is subject to one of those three possibilities. Especially since the statement containing the prohibition of drinking while standing was accompanied in some hadiths with a reason that cannot be abrogated or that the ruling is merely disliked, namely that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to the one he saw drinking while standing: So Satan participates with the person when he drinks while standing. Then he (peace be upon him) affirmed this matter, stating that it is not merely a disliked act (makruh tanzihi), but affirmed that it is forbidden when he said to him: meaning, vomit up this water that you drank while standing. In summary, for these reasons, the scholars of usul al-fiqh said that if the statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) conflicts with his action, his statement is given precedence over his action, because the action is subject to and surrounded by several possibilities, whereas the statement is a general legislation.