Explanation of the author's statement: "The first: the two definitive proofs: and they are those whose meanings the intellect is certain of, so their contradiction is impossible"

The Shaykh :"The first: the two definitive proofs, and they are those whose meanings the intellect is certain of", meaning that the intellect is certain, with no possibility of doubt, of the existence of their meanings. "So their contradiction is impossible". Therefore, there is no contradiction between two definitive proofs; this is an impossible thing. The reason for this impossibility is "because claiming that their contradiction is possible necessitates one of two things, both of which are impossible: it necessitates either the abrogation of one of them, which is impossible". How is it impossible? Because we say they are definitive; if their contradiction necessitates the abrogation of one of them, it means it necessitates the abrogation of a definitive matter, which is an impossible thing. It is impossible "because a definitive proof is obligated to remain valid". The second thing that it necessitates is "or the validity of both of them despite the contradiction, which is impossible". For example, if one indicates that this is white and the other indicates that it is black, can they both be true? Why not? "Because it is a combination of two opposites". And so, the contradiction between two definitive proofs is an impossible matter. Yes, now. "If a contradiction between them is suspected", it may occur to the mind that they are contradictory and both are definitive, so what do we do? "If a contradiction between them is suspected, then either they are not both definitive". And if they are not both definitive, then the contradiction between them exists; so I may have thought they were definitive, while in reality they are not definitive. This is a possible scenario. "Or there is no contradiction between them - but I suspected a contradiction, while the reality is that there is no contradiction - such that one is understood in one sense and the other in another sense". And if it is established that one can be understood in one sense and the other in another, is there a contradiction? No.
Now he says: "And this is not contradicted by what is established - or what is established with you? - what is established from the definitive texts of the Book and the Sunnah regarding abrogation, because the abrogated proof is no longer in effect, so there is no opponent for the abrogating proof". For example, there are definitive texts that exist and appear contradictory, but one of them is abrogated. For instance, the saying of Allah the Exalted Is this a definitive text or not? It is definitive, specified by a number. Then the verse that follows it came: Is this definitive in its indication or not? It is definitive in its indication. Is it contradictory to the first one or not? It is contradictory. So how do we deal with this? We say that the second is the abrogating one, because Allah said So it is now clear that the second abrogates the first. At that point, the second is in effect and has no opponent; it has no opponent, because the ruling of the abrogated text has been abrogated and cancelled. So at that point, the abrogating text has no opponent, and no contradiction occurs. So the rule is sound: between any two definitive proofs, it is impossible for there to be a contradiction. Or is it not? Why? Because claiming that a contradiction is possible necessitates either the abrogation of one of them or the coexistence of both, and both are impossible. The abrogation of one is impossible because it is definitive, and the coexistence of both is impossible because it combines two opposites. And abrogation does not contradict this, as you have learned. But if it were assumed that a person insisted that there is a contradiction between them and they are both definitive, and he did not reach a reconciliation, then we say that this is a wrong-headed insistence. It is obligatory for you, if you do not know the reconciliation and you are still insisting on the contradiction, to say "I believe in Allah and His Messenger" and not to believe in this contradiction.