How to reconcile the general and specific texts? With examples.

The questioner : I would like to know the point of agreement between the two authentic hadiths, though I have not memorized their exact wording. The first hadith is the famous long one in the Sahih, narrated by Tamim al-Dari (may Allah be pleased with him), in which he says that he was lost in his ship at sea.The Shaykh : Etc. Yes.

The questioner : The continuation of the hadith indicates that the Messenger (peace be upon him) said that what Tamim al-Dari said agrees with what I am telling you...

The Shaykh : I was telling you.

The questioner : I did not know that. Another hadith, which I do not have memorized, says that not a single soul, meaning anything with life, will remain on this earth after a hundred years from this time. So what is the point of reconciliation, given that we understand from the first hadith that the one bound is the Dajjal, shackled with chains in that monastery? How do you reconcile the two hadiths, since he has been there since ancient times and is still alive?

The Shaykh : I am going to add a problem to your problem, so that we can blow it up all at once. What do you think? Trust completely.

The questioner : Better.

The Shaykh : Jesus (peace be upon him) is also alive.

The questioner : I understand that, but he was raised to the sky by the explicit text of the Qur'an, and we believe in the word of Allah.

The Shaykh : But is he not alive?

The questioner : Yes, he is alive.

The Shaykh : Well, how is the reconciliation?

The questioner : He is in the lowest heaven, and the hadith of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) is about this world.

The Shaykh : No, that is not the case.

The questioner : If that were the case, would he have died...?

The Shaykh : No, that is not in the hadith. It is about the world; have you seen your night?

The questioner : This has increased the difficulty, O our Shaykh; because in the theories, Allah took his soul a hundred years after this hadith, and the angels and so on.

The Shaykh : Therefore, I want to answer you radically about this problem and others. Your question is exactly like: How do you reconcile the saying of the Exalted: with: How is the reconciliation?

The questioner : This is by explicit text, and this is by explicit text.

The Shaykh : That is not the answer. I am answering you in your manner: this is a text and this is a text. Is the problem solved?

The questioner: No.

The Shaykh : If the problem is not solved, the reconciliation that the science of usul (principles of jurisprudence) knows is that the verse: to the end of the verse is a general text, meaning...

The questioner : The aspect of generality.

The Shaykh : Be patient. You are resting now, take a breath, relax. You have thrown what you have, and my turn will come. I will throw what I have, right?

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And what is the reward for goodness but goodness? You have thrown what you have, and I am going to throw what I have. The meaning of the verse is that every carrion and every blood is forbidden. Is this meaning clear up to here?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : Good, but a hadith comes and contradicts it, in your expression. You are saying it contradicts it. I do not say that...

The questioner : No, I say by agreement.

The Shaykh : No, you are now going to take a long breath. The hadith says: There it says every carrion and every blood is forbidden. Here I say we have made lawful for you two carrions and two bloods: the fish and the locust, and the liver and the spleen. How is the reconciliation? It does not work to say this is a text and this is a text; because this is a text and this is a text, just as you did. I do it this way, but it does not solve the problem. The reconciliation is: every carrion except the carrion of the locust and the fish, and every blood except the blood of the liver and the spleen. The jurists call the Qur'anic text general and the hadith text specific to this general text. Have you heard of this philosophy in your time?

The questioner : But here in the hadith...?

The Shaykh : No, but what did I ask you? A question, and you did not give me an answer. This is a problem. You did not understand the question, and yet you are rushing like others and saying "but." But this is a corrective phrase; what is it correcting? And you did not understand the question. I am asking: Have you heard this philosophy that this is a general text and this is a specific hadith, and the specific specifies the general text, and the result comes out different from the result you understand when you read the general text? I explained the general text to you clearly: It is forbidden for you every carrion and every blood. That is the Qur'anic text. If a questioner asked you: Is it permissible to eat dead fish in the sea or not? What do you tell him?

The questioner : According to the specification of the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)...

The Shaykh : Do not say "according to." What do you say to him? Does that man know "according to"? He is a layman who came to ask you a question about a fish floating in the sea...

The questioner : It is permissible.

The Shaykh : Yes, it is permissible. Then a philosopher comes to you, like my story, and says to you: What do we do with the verse? The verse says every carrion is forbidden?

The questioner : We give him the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Shaykh : Yes, we strike the verse with the hadith, meaning?

The questioner : No, we want the point of agreement between them.

The Shaykh : What is the point of agreement? The philosophy I mentioned is the point of agreement. Did you understand?

The questioner : Specification here, O Shaykh...

The Shaykh : Did you understand, my brother? I am asking you?

The questioner : The aspect of generality and the aspect of specificity in this issue.

The Shaykh : Meaning, did you understand?

The questioner : Yes, I understood.

The Shaykh : If you understand this, you will understand that.

The questioner : Well, people come to us here...

The Shaykh : Not well... If you understand this, you understand that, and the job is done, right?

The questioner : The issue is raised by the general public specifically regarding this issue. They attach it to their own matters and come to say to you: My brother, well, the specification for al-Khidr that he is alive in hadiths they cite, we do not know their authenticity.

The Shaykh : Is this a second question or what?

The questioner : No, this is new.

The Shaykh : Meaning, are we done with the old one?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good. How did the reconciliation turn out for you regarding the first question?

The questioner : The aspect of generality in the Qur'anic verse.

The Shaykh : No, your question is not my question. Did you not bring a verse?

The questioner : The Dajjal is mentioned here and appears in a hadith specifying the Dajjal from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that he is alive, and the aspect of generality is for the rest of the creatures, except what is specified that they will die.

The Shaykh : Good, meaning the problem is gone.

The questioner : Yes, the problem is gone.

The Shaykh : May Allah reward you with good. What do you have?

The questioner : There are people who invoke and cite hadiths, I do not know their authenticity, and I have not come across an authentic hadith in this issue, from which al-Khidr (peace be upon him) is still alive. Is this correct?

The Shaykh : Was not this your second question? Is it developing now?

The questioner : Yes, the question is developing, and the answer is going to develop.

The Shaykh : Subhan Allah. I thought it would be more beneficial for you to stay with your second question in your first expression. Do you see how this philosophy works?

The questioner : I intended in the question: Is this correct?

The Shaykh : My dear, this is your question in the second form. But your first form was better for me. If you had returned to it, I would have asked you: What did you say? There are people who say and bring us a problem, saying that this al-Khidr is alive. If we exclude al-Khidr, just as you excluded the Dajjal from that general hadith, that is what you said at first, and then your second question developed.

The questioner : This is what I want.

The Shaykh : I want to bring you back here. And you returned to ask me: Is there an authentic hadith about al-Khidr? No, there is no authentic hadith.

The questioner : So it is over, meaning he died.

The Shaykh : No, it is not over, because the problem you raised at first did not get its answer. So we need to teach you how to ask and how to answer. Your first question, may Allah bless you, is what you say: We exclude al-Khidr. We tell them: The matter is not up to you, and it is not up to us. When we excluded the Dajjal, we brought you a hadith. We do not say directly: This hadith is not authentic. No, we let them move a little with us. We tell them: We brought you a hadith from Sahih Muslim. You bring us a hadith so we can see, other than from Sahih Muslim. Good? We are generous, meaning... We tell them: Bring the hadith that excludes al-Khidr from the first general hadith. Meaning, they are not going to bring a hadith, do you know how? Because they do not have a hadith.

The questioner : And therefore I asked you, because your look in the science of hadith is more than ours, so I wanted to make sure if there is a hadith in this, because we are not finding a hadith with this.

The Shaykh : You are not understanding me. I am not blaming you for asking whether there is a hadith or not on this matter. I am not blaming you, if I have any blame to assign, and I have no blame for you or anyone else. Rather, I am guiding the questioner on how he should ask, so that he does not get confused in his question, starting from here and ending there. Your first question was the best, and you realized that this question was the best. It is to say to this Sufi or anyone else: We have excluded the hadith regarding the Dajjal from the general hadith by another hadith, correct?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : So, you bring your hadith regarding al-Khidr so that we can tell you what we said about the Dajjal: that al-Khidr is also excluded, but it is not in their texts.

The questioner : We have asked many people about this issue, but the majority slip up when you ask them to provide the evidence. They tell you it is in Sahih so-and-so, but when you look for it, you do not find it. So, I wanted to ask you on the basis that the answer would be satisfactory.