When is the action of a Companion a proof, and when is it not? What is the criterion in this matter?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Shaykh, when is the action of a Companion a proof, and when is it not? We see that sometimes, for example, if a person wipes over his leather socks and then takes them off and wants to pray, we tell him there is no harm, as it is established that 'Ali did this. But if he wants to wipe over a bandage, we tell him not to, even though it is established that Ibn 'Umar wiped over a bandage. What is the criterion in such a case?
The Shaykh : The criterion is, of course, applying the general legal rules. When a Companion's statement includes a new legislation, it is not sufficient to adopt it unless there are other people with him. But if he brings something that is supported by a rule from the rules of the Shari'ah, then we adopt it. The two examples you mentioned are good examples of what we are saying. The original principle regarding invalidating the prayer or ruining the ablution is that it does not happen except by an explicit text, because invalidating an act of worship without a text is not permissible. So when the authentic report came from 'Ali that he took off his sandals, over which he had wiped, and prayed as imam for the people, this aligns with the presumption of original permissibility. If we did not have such a report, we would say that taking off the sandals does not invalidate the wiping, but this requires a text. Since there is no text, we return to the presumption of original permissibility. Thus, 'Ali's report aligns with this rule. It is not so with Ibn 'Umar when he wiped over a bandage; this is a new ruling that is an alternative, neither ablution nor dry ablution. Here we need something to support this report. If the same thing came from a group of Companions, the heart would be reassured by them, and then we would say they are more knowledgeable than us. However, a single Companion being unique in something that includes legislating a new issue that does not fall under a general rule, and the heart is not reassured by following him in such a detail. And Allah knows best.
The Shaykh : The criterion is, of course, applying the general legal rules. When a Companion's statement includes a new legislation, it is not sufficient to adopt it unless there are other people with him. But if he brings something that is supported by a rule from the rules of the Shari'ah, then we adopt it. The two examples you mentioned are good examples of what we are saying. The original principle regarding invalidating the prayer or ruining the ablution is that it does not happen except by an explicit text, because invalidating an act of worship without a text is not permissible. So when the authentic report came from 'Ali that he took off his sandals, over which he had wiped, and prayed as imam for the people, this aligns with the presumption of original permissibility. If we did not have such a report, we would say that taking off the sandals does not invalidate the wiping, but this requires a text. Since there is no text, we return to the presumption of original permissibility. Thus, 'Ali's report aligns with this rule. It is not so with Ibn 'Umar when he wiped over a bandage; this is a new ruling that is an alternative, neither ablution nor dry ablution. Here we need something to support this report. If the same thing came from a group of Companions, the heart would be reassured by them, and then we would say they are more knowledgeable than us. However, a single Companion being unique in something that includes legislating a new issue that does not fall under a general rule, and the heart is not reassured by following him in such a detail. And Allah knows best.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.