was it meant to remain confined to that very particular, or is it one of those particulars that were intended to carry a general import? Whoever understands the text to refer only to the explicitly named ʿAṣr and Fajr prayers holds it to be “a particular intended as a particular.” But whoever sees that it points, not to ʿAṣr or Fajr alone, rather to every obligatory prayer, deems it “a particular intended as a general.” On either reading, there is no decisive proof that the obligatory prayers as such are singled out from the generic term “the missed prayer,” just as there is absolutely no evidence—conclusive or otherwise—for exempting the specific times mentioned in the traditions of prohibition from the general times mentioned in the traditions of command, without likewise exempting the specific prayer named in the texts of command from the general prayer named in the texts of prohibition.
This is self-evident. When two ḥadiths oppose one another and each contains both a general and a particular element, one side cannot be given precedence over the other unless supported by evidence—that is, by excluding the particular of this report from the generality of that one, or the particular of that from the generality of this. The matter is clear, and Allah knows best.
Chapter Two
On the Adhān and the Iqāmah
This chapter, too, is divided into two sections:
- The Adhān
- The Iqāmah
Section One: The Adhān
Discussion of the Adhān falls under five headings:
- Its wording (ṣifah)
- Its legal ruling
- Its appointed time
- Its conditions
- What the hearer should reply
Heading One: The Wording of the Adhān
The scholars have differed over four well-known forms of the Adhān:
- Saying “Allāhu akbar” twice at the beginning, reciting each of the two testimonies four times, and pronouncing the remaining phrases twice. This is the practice of the people of Madinah and the position of Mālik.