The hadith of Abu Sa'id, in which he said: (Two men went out on a journey, and the time for prayer arrived while they had no water with them. They performed tayammum with clean earth and prayed. Then they found water within the time, so one of them repeated the prayer and the wudu, while the other did not repeat it. Then they came to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and mentioned this to him. He said to the one who did not repeat it: "You have hit the mark of the Sunnah, and your prayer is sufficient for you." And he said to the one who performed wudu and repeated it: "You have two rewards.")

The Shaykh : As for the question about the two men who performed tayammum and prayed, then found water, where one of them repeated the prayer after performing wudu and the other did not repeat the prayer, the Messenger of Allah (may the prayers and peace of Allah be upon him) said to the one who did not repeat the prayer and he said to the one who repeated the prayer As for this phrase that was inserted into this hadith "so you have the reward of a share of the army", this phrase is strange.

The questioner : Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh : And upon you be peace.
First, I do not know of it being reported in an authentic hadith, and second, I do not know the meaning of this statement. As for the hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud and others, that he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to the one who repeated the prayer after finding water and performing wudu .
Some people imagine, as mentioned at the end of the question, that the truth is multiple in this hadith. We say that there is absolutely nothing of that in this hadith; rather, it confirms Islamic principles and legal rules. Among these is the statement of the Blessed and Exalted and his statement (peace and blessings be upon him) , meaning that the one who exercises independent legal reasoning (ijtihad) in a matter, even if he is wrong, is rewarded. Here we find two people who were companions on a journey, and the time for prayer caught up with them, so they performed tayammum and prayed because they did not find water. When they found water, one of them was content with his prayer of tayammum, and the other performed wudu and repeated the prayer. We do not doubt that this other person did an act that the first one did not do. This one who repeated the prayer with wudu did an act that the first one did not do. So does Allah (Mighty and Majestic) waste the work of this person? We mentioned the previous verse . What did this person do? He prayed and performed wudu. This is all good, especially since he did not have revelation descending upon him to inform him of what his position should be. So the man exercised independent legal reasoning and said, "Since I have found water now, I will perform wudu and pray." So he prayed. Allah does not waste the work of those who do good. This man did good, so he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to him . The first time, when you did not find water, you performed tayammum, and this is by the explicit text of the Qur'an , so you executed the Qur'anic text. The second time, you exercised independent legal reasoning and saw that you were performing the prayer in what you thought was the most complete manner, so you performed wudu and prayed. One reward for your prayer with tayammum and another reward for your prayer with wudu. But he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to the first man .
Now, the issue here is: which of them was correct? The one to whom he (peace and blessings be upon him) said , or the one to whom he said ? Here the matter becomes confused for some people. Some say, "By Allah, the correct truth was with the first one, to whom he (peace be upon him) said , because whoever hits the mark of the Sunnah, his opposite has hit the mark of religious innovation (bid'ah), opposing the Sunnah. The one who hits the mark of the Sunnah, the one who explicitly opposes him has opposed the Sunnah." But we find that the Messenger (peace be upon him) said to the second one what he said, and he did not say to him, "You have opposed the Sunnah." The reason is very clear, because this second one did not have the Sunnah at that time. He did not have the Sunnah to be told, "You have opposed the Sunnah." Rather, he exercised independent legal reasoning just as the first one did. But we today must apply this incident to ourselves. Suppose we are on a journey, the time for prayer catches up with us, and we do not find water, so we perform tayammum, and then shortly after we find water. Do we repeat the prayer? If we remember that the Messenger said to the one who did not repeat it , then we want to hit the mark of the Sunnah, so we do not repeat the prayer. The other one might say, "He performs wudu and repeats the prayer, saying, 'I have a precedent in the second one to whom the Messenger (peace be upon him) said .'" We say, "No, you do not have a precedent to follow that one who exercised independent legal reasoning, because there is no independent legal reasoning in the place of an explicit text. When a person does not have an explicit text before him, he is rewarded if he is right with two rewards, and if he is wrong with one reward. But when there is an explicit text before him, there is no independent legal reasoning in the place of an explicit text. And we, praise be to Allah, have received the Sunnah now, and we know that whoever prays with tayammum within the time has fulfilled his obligation, and it is not upon him to repeat the prayer with wudu, because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) prescribed, through the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), two hadiths. The first hadith is . So when you prayed with tayammum, did you do what Allah obligated upon you? The answer is yes . So if you know that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said , why do you repeat this prayer without permission from Allah or His Messenger? This is the first hadith. The second hadith is when the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), in one of his battles, and it was perhaps the Battle of Khaybar, when they descended into the valley tired and slept, and he entrusted Bilal to wake him for the Fajr prayer. Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him), out of his eagerness to perform this duty that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) entrusted him with, leaned against the back of his camel and faced the east. When the dawn broke with the light of the morning, he felt it and got up and woke the people. But the wisdom and will of Allah (Mighty and Majestic) decreed that none of the people of the camp woke up until the sun had struck their backs. The point is that the hadith is long and well-known. But when they all woke up after the sun had risen, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) ordered the adhan and iqamah, and they prayed the Sunnah of Fajr and they prayed the obligatory prayer. But he saw on the faces of the people some sadness, perhaps because they were being blamed by Allah (Blessed and Exalted is He) for having prayed the prayer outside its time. So he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to them , or as he (peace be upon him) said. Here the question came, and here is the point. They said to him, "O Messenger of Allah, do we pray it tomorrow?" Meaning, again. He said , meaning, "It is not ordered of you now so that you pray the prayer twice" . This is the first hadith and this is the second hadith.
So, this one who prayed the prayer with tayammum because he did not find water has fulfilled what Allah obligated upon him. Therefore, it is not permissible for him to repeat this prayer, because he knows the Sunnah, and it says .
So, this hadith does not mean that the Messenger approved the independent legal reasoning of this one and that one. No, rather it means that the Messenger (peace be upon him) clarified the correct path for each of them. But he clarified at the same time that Allah does not waste the reward of one who does good. This second man exercised independent legal reasoning, so the reward of this prayer was recorded for him in addition to his first prayer. Therefore, it is not permissible to use this incident as evidence that the wise Lawgiver has multiple truths, as this incident occurred in two different ways, one of whom did not pray and the other prayed. We said that the Messenger ruled with an explicit ruling, saying to the one who did not repeat it , and opposing the Sunnah is religious innovation (bid'ah). So it is not permissible to repeat the prayer for the one who prayed with tayammum. He did not repeat it because he was unaware of the Sunnah, and therefore they said, "There is no independent legal reasoning in the place of an explicit text."