Those familiar with collections of ahadith are aware of the diversity of opinion and the need to evaluate the accuracy of sometimes widely opposed statements. The Prophet (S) and error-free Imams (‘a) predicted that problems would occur as the result of fabricated narrations and incorrect transmissions being included in the body of ahadith that are purported to be from them. Thus, it is, that we sometimes find diametrically opposed versions of a hadith: one that claims a certain action is permitted, and another that claims it is not. What do we do about this?

Zurarah asked Imam al-Baqir (‘a), 'If two traditions narrated from you are in conflict, how do we know which one to accept?'

Imam al-Baqir (‘a) replied, 'Take the one that is well known to your companions (i.e. the Shi’ah) and leave the one with which you are unfamiliar.'

He then asked, 'What should we do if both traditions are equally well known?'

To which Imam al-Baqir (‘a) replied, 'Take the one whose narrator is recognized to be the more reliable.'

Zurarah then asked, 'What if both of them are regarded as equally reliable?'

Imam al-Baqir replied, 'Ascertain which one accords with the standpoint of the 'masses' - and reject it in favour of the opposite view - for truth lies in that which contradicts them.'

Sayyid Muhammad Taqi al-Hakim clarifies that this rejection was recommended because, during the Umayyad and Abbasid periods, scholars were not permitted to gainsay opinions propagated by the state.1

Zurarah then said, 'There are sometimes two traditions, both of which either agree or disagree with the view held by the 'masses'. What should we to do in those instances?'

Imam al-Baqir (‘a) replied, 'Select the tradition that is closer to 'precaution' and reject the other.'

Zurarah then asked, 'How do we fulfil our duty if both traditions accord with 'precaution?'

Imam al-Baqir (‘a) replied, 'In such cases you may choose either.'2

It is safe to conclude that the sequence of criteria for choosing one conflicting hadith over another is that it should be well known, that its narrator is considered the most reliable, that it does not concur with the viewpoint of the 'masses', and that its content is closer to precaution.

These measures are accepted by all fuqaha of the school of Ahl al-Bayt for the assessment of conflicting ahadith. However, it is reasonable to say that the crux of all such decisions rests upon the issues of reliability and precaution.

The Definitive Qat’i – And The Speculative – Zanni

We have already explained the textual terms 'unequivocal', 'manifest' and 'ambivalent' (see chapter 8), from which it is apparent that 'unequivocal' texts have definitive content, while 'ambivalent' and 'manifest' texts have speculative content. It follows that no conflicts exist between the definitive and the speculative and that fuqaha give preference to the definitive over the speculative.

A hadith that has successive reliable narrators is classified as mutawater. Mutawater ahadith can never be challenged by single conflicting reports - khabar wahid - because mutawater texts are definitive and khabar wahid texts are speculative.

An example of this is the renowned hadith that rigorous factual analysis has established as being mutawater, 'Two Precious Things' - Thaqalain - that states that the Qur'an and the Prophet's progeny are the 'two most precious things', and the khabar wahid narration that claims the Qur'an and the Prophet's Sunnah are the two most precious things.

Reconciling Differences

When conflicting views appear in two different ahadith, fuqaha investigate the people who narrated them as well as the circumstances behind both reports, before deciding if their differing views are able to be reconciled.

• For example, one hadith records that it is unlawful to sell excrement while another records that this is permissible. Fuqaha investigation reveals that both narrators are reliable and that both ahadith are authentic, but discloses that the contexts to which each refer are entirely different. The subject of one concerns the illegality of selling human excrement; the subject of the other is the legality of selling ‘manure’, that is, the excrement of those animals that are permitted for human consumption.

This is the basis of Shaykh Al-Tusi's statement, 'It is illegal to sell the excrement of animals that are not regarded as suitable for human consumption.' Human excrement clearly falls within this category.3

• When one ayah/hadith indicates that a certain action is required and another indicates that it may be omitted, fuqaha resolve the conflicting statements by establishing if the requirement is a 'categorical' or 'recommended' one. While it is clear that categorical statements are not to be ignored, statements that are recommendations are not obligatory. Consider, for example, the Qur'anic statement regarding the documentation of loans:

“O' you who have Faith! when you contract a debt for a stated term, then write it down; and let a scribe write it down justly between you….” (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:282)

However, from the subsequent ayah, fuqaha understand that the statement is a recommendation and not an obligation, for it reads:

'And if one of you deposit anything on trust, let the trustee discharge his/her trust.'(Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:283).

Here the word 'trust' implies that creditors may trust debtors in the absence of written records being made.

• A text that makes general comments concerning a subject can be reconciled with another that is directed to a specific issue. For example, one text states, 'You must respect scholars', another, 'Do not respect scholars who follow the commands of unjust rulers.'

There is no conflict or disagreement between these texts because the latter is specifically focused on, 'the commands of unjust rulers'.

• While all know that rules and exceptions exist, none claim that exceptions negate or contradict rules. However, exceptions need to be understood in the context of the rules to which they apply. For example, Islamic law dictates that interest may not be levied on loans. Despite this, there are ahadith that report that no usury exists between a father and a son. Thus, a loan made by a father to his son may specify that a payment of interest be made at the time the son repays the loan to his father.

Another example: Muslims are not permitted to consume meat of the pig or of any animal that has not been slaughtered in accordance with Islamic requirements. However, an exception is made in circumstances in which it is deemed that such prohibition might result in death4.

It is apparent that rules of reconciliation and preference are grounded on the presupposition that conflict does not occur in Divine Law. Therefore, it follows that if two pieces of textual evidence cannot be implemented, one of them will be able to be. Should a faqih determine that it is not possible to reconcile two specific texts, he rejects both of them and seeks further sources.

Can Consensus Conflict With The Qur'an Or Ahadith?

All schools of thought acknowledge the Qur'an and ahadith to be the primary sources of Islamic law. Reference to consensus amongst fuqaha is only permissible in circumstances in which no clear text exists within both these primary sources.

It is inconceivable that consensus could exist about matters that conflict with either the Qur'an or a clear text. This is discussed in chapter 8, ‘when a text is clear, interpretations are not acceptable’.

Abrogator And Abrogated

No Islamic scholar denies that the Divine revelation of Islam has abrogated Jewish and Christian injunctions, nor that a few initial prophetic injunctions have been abrogated by later injunctions. For instance, the Qur'an records the abrogation of Jerusalem as the direction of prayer when Divine Will changed that to Makkah.

However, Islamic scholars are not in agreement regarding the prospect of one Qur'anic ruling abrogating another, or of authentic hadith and consensual opinion abrogating Qur'anic rulings.

In Al-Nasikh wal Mansukh, Abu Bakr al-Nahhas claimed that 137 ayat have been abrogated. However, the factual analysis of Ayatollah Al-Khoei shows none of those to be de facto abrogations. In arriving at his conclusions Ayatollah Al-Khoei referred to Qur'an, in which Allah tells us:

“Will they not then ponder on the Qur'an? If it had been from any other than Allah, they would have found therein much incongruity.” (Surah An-Nisa’, 4:83) 5

In Qur'an 2:2346 we learn that widows must observe ‘iddah of four months and ten days followingthe death of their husband. This applies to all widows, regardless of their being pregnant or not at the time of their husband's death. However, in Qur'an 65:47 we learn that the ‘iddah of pregnant women ends when their child is delivered. This ruling applies equally to widows who are pregnant and must wait until the birth of the child. According to this second ayah, a pregnant woman whose husband dies the day she gives birth could be considered to have completed her ‘iddah, while, according to the first ayah, her ‘iddah is still four months and ten days.

Imamiyah jurists, in considering both rulings - the time that the widow still has to carry her child, and the prescribed period of four months and ten days - conclude that a pregnant widow's ‘iddah is the longer of these two periods.

Contradiction Between Obligation And Prohibition

While a single act cannot be both obligatory and prohibited, there is a possibility of obligatory acts being combined with prohibited acts in the fulfilment of certain duties.

For example:

• Listening to music while offering an obligatory daily prayer.

• Holding a glass of wine in one hand at a fund-raising event while giving an envelope that contains a donation - zakat - with the other.

• Performing ablution with usurped water (taking it without the permission of its owner), etc.

In all of the above examples, texts that refer to each of the described actions are clear. However, it is in their being combined that the clarity of what is right and what is wrong becomes confused.

Does listening to music during prayer invalidate the prayer? Does drinking wine while giving zakat render such zakat unacceptable? And, is ablution performed with usurped water valid?

This issue is known by scholars of the Principles of Jurisprudence as 'The combination of command and prohibition' – ljtima al-amr wal-nahy. There are two differing opinions - some opine that it is impossible to combine opposites; others understand it to represent the two sides of the same coin, each with its own ruling. One is to be rewarded for one's obligatory actions and at the same time be punished for one's sinful actions.

We know that an essential requirement for an act of worship is for it to be performed with the intention of drawing closer to the Almighty - in utter submission to Him. How is it possible for an act of disobedience to achieve such an objective? Piety and righteousness are the only criteria for the acceptability of actions.8

The behaviour of those who employ unlawful means to achieve an objective does not meet the criteria of acceptability and thus, the combination of obedience and disobedience in the above examples renders them invalid and nullifies all benefits.

• 1. Comparative Principles of Jurisprudence Al-Usul-al-Ammah Iil Fiqh al-Muqarin p.162.
• 2. Awali al la ‘ali Vol. 4, p. 133. A similar tradition is recorded in Wasa'il al-Shi’ah, Vol. 27, p. 106.
• 3. Refer to Al-Mabsut Vol. 2, p. 167.
• 4. Refer to the following Verse:
  "Verily, He has forbidden you only carrion, blood, swine flesh, and whatever has other (name) than Allah's been invoked upon it. But whoever is forced (by necessity), not desiring nor transgressing, no sin shall be on him; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:173).
• 5. Refer to ‘The Prolegomena to the Qur'an’ (Oxford University Press), p. 193.
• 6. The full Verse reads:
  "And those of you who die, and leave widows behind, they should keep themselves in waiting for four months and ten (days); when they have completed their waiting period, then it is no sin on you for what they do for themselves in a fair manner. And Allah is fully aware of what you do." (Surah Al-Baqarah, 2:234).
• 7. The full Verse reads:
  “and those of your women who are hopeless of having monthly courses, for them the prescribed period, if you have doubt about their periods, is three months; and for those who have no courses their prescribed period is three months likewise, except in case of death. And for those who are pregnant, their prescribed period is until they lay down their burden; and whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to Him, He will make his matter easy for him”. (Surah Al-Talaq, 65:4).
• 8. Referring to the following verse of the Holy Qur’an:
  "(O' Prophet!) Recite to them the truth of the story of the two sons of Adam when they offered each a sacrifice, hut it was accepted from one of them and was not accepted from the other, (The one) said: 'I shall certainly slay you,' (The other) said: 'verily Allah accepts only from the pious ones." (Surah Al-Ma’idah, 5:27).