Conditions for Ruling on a Hadith as Abrogated

The Shaykh : Following this statement, he says that it is an abrogated hadith, and this is what you mentioned earlier by way of quotation. Well, what abrogated it? From the rules of the hadith scholars, if two hadiths appear to contradict each other, it is obligatory to reconcile them in one of the ways of reconciliation. This is the statement of the Imam of the hadith scholars in his era to this day, without any dispute; I mean Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Asqalani. He mentioned this in "Sharh al-Nukhba" that if there are two acceptable narrations from the category of the acceptable, meaning the authentic and the good, and they differ, it is obligatory to reconcile them in one of the ways of reconciliation. He points to these ways because his book... as is known, is a treatise. But al-Hafiz al-Iraqi, who was the teacher of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, brought the ways of reconciliation to more than one hundred ways in his book "Fi al-Ta'liq 'ala Muqaddimat Ibn al-Salah." So, if it is not possible to reconcile the two differing hadiths in any of these hundred-plus ways, Ibn Hajar said: "At that point, one proceeds to seeking the abrogating and the abrogated." And here is a pause to say: this is the abrogating and this is the abrogated. It is necessary to know the earlier and the later date. There is nothing of this in our subject matter at all. Although there is another perspective: if there is a statement that contradicts a statement and they cannot be reconciled, or an action that contradicts an action and they cannot be reconciled, one proceeds to seeking the abrogating and the abrogated. If it is not possible because the earlier and the later are not known, it is not permissible scientifically to say that this is the abrogating and this is the abrogated. So, this is the second stage. The third stage: he said, "One proceeds to preferring one over the other." So, the first is reconciliation, the second is seeking the abrogating and the abrogated, and the third is preferring one of the differing ones over the other. For example, if one of the texts is authentic and the other is good, the good is left and the authentic is taken. If one is authentic but the other is authentic and famous, the authentic is left and the famous is taken. If one is famous but the other is mass-transmitted, that one is left and the mass-transmitted is taken, and so on. He said: "If it is not possible, and all knowledge belongs to its knower, we say, Allah knows best." So, there is great difficulty for the scholars in saying that a hadith differing from another hadith is abrogated, because it is necessary to seek the date that determines the earlier from the later. And as I said, if a statement contradicts a statement, or an action contradicts an action. For example, in the authentic Sunnah, the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) used to stand when a funeral passed by him. There are hadiths that he did not stand. So, it was said to Ali when it was seen that he did not stand, he said: Then he left this text because it was later in leaving than the earlier one. There is, for example, a verbal hadith where the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) said: And I think you understand with me the meaning of "water from water," is that so?

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh : No, is it not so?

The questioner : ... .

The Shaykh : Ah, this is explained by a hadith that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) knocked on the door of one of the Companions. I have forgotten his name now, and it might be Abu Rafi'. He delayed in responding to him, then he came out quickly. It appears that (peace and blessings be upon him) sensed from him that he was with his wife, and that in order to respond to the one knocking, he got up from her. So he said to him (peace and blessings be upon him): Meaning, if the water did not come out, even if you had intercourse, there is no ghusl (ritual bath) required of you. This hadith is contrary to what the scholars unanimously hold now. But there is a hadith from the Lady Aisha. First, she said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Then there is a hadith similar to the hadith of Ali mentioned earlier, from the hadith of Abu ibn Ka'b, who said: "The ruling was that water is from water in the early days of Islam." With such texts, it can be said that this abrogates that, and that is abrogated. But mere contradiction between a statement and an action, where it is said that the action abrogates the statement, has no parallel in Islam. And for that reason, I read thirty years ago a wonderful research on this fine point in another issue by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him), regarding the hadith we mentioned before. We mention the hadith briefly now. This hadith has been hit by the same criticism that hit the hadith of the Day of Saturday, where it was said that it is abrogated. What is its abrogator? That the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prayed in his illness of death with the Companions sitting, while they were standing behind him. Here is a witness to the statement of Ibn Taymiyyah, who says: "His action (peace and blessings be upon him) does not stand as an abrogation of his statement: " He said: That is because the statement, all its indication is that this action is permissible. But the hadith commands that people pray behind the sitting imam sitting. So, if it is necessary to apply the hadith of action in this issue to the hadith of statement, and it is known that the hadith of action is later than the hadith of statement, we say his action indicated permissibility, but the command indicates recommendation. That is: the action removed the indication of the command of obligation, but it does not abrogate it, because the action does not have the strength to abrogate the command, even to the meaning of recommendation. This is the statement of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. Therefore, he says: "The best I have read or seen." And the meaning of his statement, in reconciling the prayer of the Messenger sitting and his hadith in prohibiting the followers from praying standing behind the sitting imam, is as Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "The hadith of prohibition is understood as applying to the imam who began the prayer sitting, and the hadith of the prayer of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) sitting is understood as applying to the imam who began the prayer standing, then was compelled to sit, so the praying people behind him continue standing." This is one of the ways of reconciliation that al-Hafiz al-Iraqi pointed to, as I mentioned earlier, that the ways of reconciliation are more than one hundred ways. So, this is a way of reconciliation. Thus, his action (peace and blessings be upon him) does not stand as an abrogation of his statement, but rather to restrict the command to being for recommendation, not for obligation.