Is it permissible to act contrary to the apparent meaning of a hadith?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
Is it correct for someone to say: "The fact that the Salaf acted contrary to a hadith confirms that the hadith is not to be taken at its apparent meaning"? If that were the case when the Salaf agreed to act contrary to the apparent meaning of a hadith, what is the situation when they disagreed, as is the case with the evidence for tamattu' from (......) 'Imran ibn Husayn, such as his statement: "We performed tamattu' with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and we performed tamattu' with Abu Bakr, then a man came and expressed his opinion as he wished"—referring to 'Umar. Please clarify this for us.
Answer:
This is an incorrect justification. There is no consensus (ijma') from the Salaf, nor agreement from the Salaf, to act contrary to an authentic hadith. Whoever claims otherwise must provide evidence.
The Salaf, with the praise of Allah, were protected by Allah from contradicting the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). He said:, and 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) and al-Siddiq, when they were called to perform ifrad Hajj, did so as an exercise of their independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). The Salaf did not agree to follow them, nor did they agree to contradict them. This is a matter of ijtihad by al-Siddiq, 'Umar, and 'Uthman regarding ifrad Hajj. They said: "Let the visitors to the House increase." This was for 'Umrah, and this was for Hajj; it was an exercise of their ijtihad, and they did not deny the Sunnah.
So when al-Aswad ibn Makhram al-Taghlibi came to 'Umar and said: "O Commander of the Faithful, I entered the state of ihram for Hajj and 'Umrah," and a group of people said to me: "So and so," he said: "You have been guided to the Sunnah of your Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)." And likewise, when 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) heard 'Uthman calling for ifrad Hajj, he entered the state of ihram for both Hajj and 'Umrah and said: "I will not leave them, for I heard the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) enter the state of ihram for both."
So the conclusion is that the Salaf did not agree to act contrary to the Sunnah, and they will never agree to act contrary to the Sunnah. And this issue, which is the issue of 'Umar, does not involve consensus. Rather, this is the ijtihad of al-Siddiq, 'Umar, and 'Uthman regarding ifrad Hajj (may Allah be pleased with them). They have their ijtihad, and Allah will give them their reward (may Allah be pleased with them). But what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did is better than what al-Siddiq, 'Umar, and 'Uthman did, from entering the state of ihram for 'Umrah and then for Hajj, when he commanded his companions to do so, and by combining (qiran) Hajj and 'Umrah when he had sacrificial animals with him (peace and blessings be upon him).
So the conclusion is that what he did and commanded is the best, (peace and blessings be upon him).
Is it correct for someone to say: "The fact that the Salaf acted contrary to a hadith confirms that the hadith is not to be taken at its apparent meaning"? If that were the case when the Salaf agreed to act contrary to the apparent meaning of a hadith, what is the situation when they disagreed, as is the case with the evidence for tamattu' from (......) 'Imran ibn Husayn, such as his statement: "We performed tamattu' with the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and we performed tamattu' with Abu Bakr, then a man came and expressed his opinion as he wished"—referring to 'Umar. Please clarify this for us.
Answer:
This is an incorrect justification. There is no consensus (ijma') from the Salaf, nor agreement from the Salaf, to act contrary to an authentic hadith. Whoever claims otherwise must provide evidence.
The Salaf, with the praise of Allah, were protected by Allah from contradicting the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). He said:
A group from my Ummah will remain upon the truth, supported, and those who abandon them or contradict them will not harm them until the command of Allah comes.
لا تزال طائفةٌ من أمتي على الحقِّ منصورة، لا يضرُّهم مَن خذلهم، ولا مَن خالفهم حتى يأتي أمر اللهSo when al-Aswad ibn Makhram al-Taghlibi came to 'Umar and said: "O Commander of the Faithful, I entered the state of ihram for Hajj and 'Umrah," and a group of people said to me: "So and so," he said: "You have been guided to the Sunnah of your Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)." And likewise, when 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) heard 'Uthman calling for ifrad Hajj, he entered the state of ihram for both Hajj and 'Umrah and said: "I will not leave them, for I heard the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) enter the state of ihram for both."
So the conclusion is that the Salaf did not agree to act contrary to the Sunnah, and they will never agree to act contrary to the Sunnah. And this issue, which is the issue of 'Umar, does not involve consensus. Rather, this is the ijtihad of al-Siddiq, 'Umar, and 'Uthman regarding ifrad Hajj (may Allah be pleased with them). They have their ijtihad, and Allah will give them their reward (may Allah be pleased with them). But what the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did is better than what al-Siddiq, 'Umar, and 'Uthman did, from entering the state of ihram for 'Umrah and then for Hajj, when he commanded his companions to do so, and by combining (qiran) Hajj and 'Umrah when he had sacrificial animals with him (peace and blessings be upon him).
So the conclusion is that what he did and commanded is the best, (peace and blessings be upon him).
Source
binbaz.org.sa
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.