He spoke on the rule (that it is not permissible to act on a part of a general text unless the practice of the Salaf was in accordance with it . . . . ).

The Shaykh : And I found it very, very important to point out this specific point: that it is not permissible to act on a part of a general text on which the practice of the Salaf did not proceed, because they understood better than we do. And the strange thing is, I say, that all good lies in following those who came before, and all evil lies in the innovation of those who came after; if it had been good, they would have preceded us to it. Many of our brothers repeat this statement with their tongues, but its meaning has not yet entered their hearts. Therefore, I am extremely eager, in the path of carrying the people of the Sunnah truly to follow it truly, that they keep this reality before their eyes: that it is not permissible to act on a part of a general text as long as we do not know that the Salaf acted upon it. Otherwise, we would open the door of religious innovation wide open, and our argument against the innovators would fall, because this is their argument. Allah said: My brother, the Companions received this verse directly through the Messenger, and they truly understood it, so why did they not do it? What is in it, my brother? And so, it is obligatory upon us to block this gap before the Sunnah by saying: if a general text indicates a specific issue, and we know that the Salaf did not act upon it, let alone that we know they acted contrary to it, then it is not permissible to act upon this particular detail at all, and

The questioner : The same topic: Abu Hurayrah asked that he made the seven into three, and it was explained that this was his opinion.

The Shaykh : It is a statement, not an issue of opinion. Do you mean his opinion? He says, "This is my opinion." Abu Hurayrah said so; this is how the narration is. Yes.