Are the texts that prohibit oaths abrogating the texts that report the Prophet’s (peace and blessings be upon him) alliances?

The questioner : Well, our dear professor, regarding oaths, some say that the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): The strongest of these narrations is the saying of Allah the Exalted: Some people hold that these texts abrogate the alliances the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made with the Khuzaa’ah and others. They also cite the Verse of the Sword in Surat al-Bara’ah: We cannot say that these texts abrogate the alliances the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made initially, when he was in a state of weakness, for example, or in one of the stages of his mission. The same hadith has a continuation to that effect, so we cannot say that these texts abrogate the alliances the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made?

The Shaykh : Abrogation, my brother, has conditions according to the scholars. First, a specific text is not abrogated by a general text; rather, the general text is specified by the specific text. For example, you mentioned in your statement: This is a general text. So the Messenger of Allah’s (peace and blessings be upon him) deviation, or the deviation of one who acts on his behalf in some particulars, as we explained earlier...

The questioner : The reason for the revelation of the verse is perhaps clear.

The Shaykh : My brother, it is not permissible to rely on the reason for revelation to restrict a general text. You would be returning to the same issue we mentioned earlier regarding the previous text, which is general, namely: You are reminding us of a reason. The reason for the occurrence does not specify the general text uttered by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Therefore, the scholars said: "The consideration is the generality of the wording, not the specificity of the reason." There are many examples of this, many indeed. For example, the saying of Allah the Exalted: This verse was revealed, as is agreed upon by scholars of exegesis, regarding the fact that it was the custom of the polytheists in the pre-Islamic age of ignorance that when one of them circumambulated the Ka'bah—there was no distinction between male and female—they would circumambulate naked. So the woman among them, when she circumambulated, would say: "Today some of it or all of it is exposed; whatever is exposed, I do not make lawful." Lower your gazes, O men. This is how religion followed them; the woman would circumambulate as Allah the Mighty and Majestic created her. So Allah revealed: Meaning, cover your private parts, O men and women. Allah is the Greatest! Where is the text of the Qur'an? Where is the occasion? The greatest thing related to adornment is covering the private parts, but we do not stop here. As he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ; The reason for the occurrence has passed and ended. The polytheists in the pre-Islamic age of ignorance lived in this misguidance. Allah revealed this to educate those who had embraced Islam, to free them from this misguidance. Yes, we have covered our private parts. What is the private part of a man? It is well known to all scholars that it is between the navel and the knee. Well, do you pray with your whole body naked? No. He (peace and blessings be upon him) said: And he said: It is not just covering his private part; he wraps himself in it. Finally, he says: So the noble verse here is not looked at in terms of its reason for occurrence, which is covering the private parts, so that we would nullify its general implication. Likewise, the previous examples, including the noble verse: "Turning" is a general text. But by Allah, if a Muslim ruler allies with a group of polytheists, this can be considered what? Turning? No, it is not necessarily turning. If it is, it is an exception, like the seeking of aid we spoke of earlier, which relates to his (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: The conclusion is that the scholar’s role is to reconcile the texts and not to strike some against others, saying that such-and-such a ruling is abrogated. We ask: What abrogated it? If the abrogating text has a specific ruling that is the opposite, and it is established that it came later and reconciliation between them is not possible in any way, then we say it is abrogated. But if reconciliation is possible—may Allah reward you with good—between the text and the text, we do not resort to abrogation, because they said that it is only resorted to when all paths of reconciliation are blocked. The scholars of hadith reached a level of concern regarding not resorting to abrogation such that, through precise scientific research, it became clear to them that there are more than one hundred ways in which two conflicting texts can be reconciled. If all these means are blocked before the researcher...

The questioner : ...he is compelled to abrogation.

The Shaykh : He is compelled, on the condition that he knows it is later. If he does not know, he leaves the knowledge to its scholar. He does not come to demolish a text just because he is unable to reconcile it with another.

The questioner : Our dear professor, I can understand, as a summary, the truth. If my understanding is wrong, please correct it for me.

The Shaykh: Go ahead.

The questioner : I can understand that the original ruling is that seeking aid is not permissible and allying with disbelievers is not permissible; but out of necessity, the Muslim ruler may seek aid or ally. ?

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : But those below the Muslim ruler, who are called Islamic groups or parties or such, are not permitted to have the ruler’s position based on such a matter?

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : May Allah preserve you. Yes.