What is your opinion of the one who claims the abrogation of the hadith (The prayer of one of you is cut off if there is not in front of him something like the back of a saddle, namely a woman, a donkey, or a black dog)?

The questioner : What is your opinion of the one who claims implicit abrogation of the hadith by what he cited as evidence from the position of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was praying and she was in front of him, and by what Imam Ahmad narrated when a donkey passed in front of him in the hadith of Anas, so a man glorified Allah, and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: He said: I heard that the prayer is cut off by the passing of a donkey, so the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ?

The Shaykh : Your second hadith is weak and does not merit investigation; it is weak in chain and false in text because it contradicts the authentic hadith of Muslim, which was the subject of the question from Abu Ahmad at the beginning of this session. Its wording is: He (peace and blessings be upon him) said: They asked: What is the matter with the black dog? He said: This is an authentic hadith. Your second hadith is weak in chain and false in text because it contradicts this authentic hadith. As for the first hadith, regarding the prayer of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in the night prayer with Aisha crossing in front of him, this is an authentic hadith with no defect. However, it is not valid to cite it as evidence because it contradicts the authentic statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him): to the end of the hadith, which I mentioned earlier. Rest, my brother, so that we may rest with you. There are two reasons why the contradiction is not valid. The first reason is very clear and does not require much elaboration. The Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) did not say, "The prayer of one of you is cut off if he prays facing a woman," but rather he said, "If it passes in front of him." The authentic hadith does not mention passing; it only mentions the prayer of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) facing his wife who was sleeping in front of him. Therefore, it is not permissible to invalidate the authentic hadith that is explicit in indicating that the passing of a woman cuts off the prayer with an authentic hadith that does not clearly mention passing. Is that clear?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Now, the second point remains. If there were an authentic hadith—and there is no such hadith—that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was praying, and I repeat, there is no such hadith, but I say this to clarify how the authentic hadiths can be reconciled and that it is not permissible to invalidate some of them with others. If we assume there is an authentic hadith stating that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was praying when a woman passed in front of him, this is explicit on its surface in contradicting the authentic hadith regarding passing in prayer? No. In that case, it is also not valid to say that this hadith contradicts the first hadith. It can be reconciled in many ways, and very many ways. I do not want to dwell here so that we can see what our brothers have in terms of other questions. I only say that in this assumed hadith, it is clear that the woman passed between him and the place of his prostration. Judge accordingly. Please.