The Shaykh mentioned a principle of jurisprudence, which is 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, Blessed and Exalted is He, mentioned , and then continued to explain the forbidden women until He said . This is a general text that implies the permissibility of all women other than those mentioned in this Qur'anic context. However, we find in this context that Allah, Blessed and Exalted is He, mentioned among the forbidden women . So, what do we say regarding the text of ? Do we say that it is permissible for a man to marry his sister through breastfeeding because Allah permitted all women absolutely, except for these forbidden women? The answer is no, because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said . Thus, this hadith expanded the meaning of the prohibition mentioned in the verse, and one of its examples was the prohibition of mothers through breastfeeding. Therefore, a daughter and a 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: if a general text indicates a general meaning, and then a specific text contradicts this general indication, that specific text is excluded from that general text. One of the clearest proofs is . Does this include fish and locusts? Do we forbid fish and locusts because the verse includes them? The answer is that the Messenger said . Do we then forbid blood absolutely, or do we say we exclude the liver and spleen because the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) excluded them? And so on. It is for matters like this that the science of the principles of jurisprudence was established. Now, we have a text that permits women gold, an absolute and general permission. If the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade it—for example, in a matter on which there is consensus—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 a Muslim woman to eat in gold vessels, or to eat with a gold spoon, a gold cup, or the like. What do we do regarding the hadith that it is permissible for females to wear it? We say this is an exception to that [general permission], as are the other exceptions. He forbade bracelets and necklaces by the explicit hadith of Fatimah, so we say this is an exception to the absolute permission. We do not strike some hadiths against others. The point is that every Muslim man and woman who is accountable must listen to the evidence of both sides, and then refer to their heart. It is not just that we hear there is disagreement in the issue and then say, "Oh, consult your heart," and if the one who issued the ruling says so. And without a doubt, especially here in your lands, the heart will lean toward adornment, because, as Allah willed, according to what you told us, all the arms are full of what? Gold. What kind of soul is this that would be a strong, very strong believer if it were referred to consulting its heart and then forbidding itself these ornaments that are widespread and common in these lands? One must be discerning so that we are as He, the Exalted, said regarding His Prophet .