The proper way to proceed in such situations is to survey all the possible relationships that can arise between the two specific texts and the two general ones. They fall under four headings:

1. Two general texts of equal strength, and two specific texts of equal strength. In this case, neither may be excepted by the other unless conclusive evidence dictates it.

2. The converse: a specific text at the height of strength confronting a general text at the height of weakness. Here one must inevitably give precedence to the specific, that is, exclude it from the general.

3. Two specific texts of equal strength, but one of the two general texts is weaker than the other. In such a case the weaker general text should be restricted.

4. Two general texts of equal strength, but one of the two specific texts is stronger than the other. The ruling must then follow the stronger specific text.

All of this applies only when the commands involved carry an equal degree of emphasis. If they differ, assorted combinations appear, and one must also compare the force of the wording with the force of the command. Because these matters are so difficult to pin down, some have said that every mujtahid attains the truth—or at the very least incurs no blame.

Issue Four
The jurists disagreed about a person who arrives for Friday prayer while the imam is on the pulpit: should he pray two rakʿahs or not? Some maintained that he should not; this is the position of Mālik. Others held that he should.

The source of their dispute is a clash between analogy and the general sense of transmitted evidence. The general wording of the Prophet’s—peace and blessings be upon him—statement, “When one of you enters the mosque, let him pray two rakʿahs,” requires the entrant to pray on Friday even when the imam is preaching. On the other hand, the command to listen attentively to the sermon, by its very import, obliges one to refrain from anything that would distract him from listening, even if that act is a form of worship.

Reinforcing the general sense of the first report is the authenticated ḥadīth: “If one of you enters the mosque while the imam is delivering the sermon, let him pray two light rakʿahs,” transmitted by Muslim. In some—and indeed in most—of his chains the wording is: “The Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—ordered the man who entered to pray,” without the phrase “When one of you enters….”

The disagreement thus turns on whether an additional wording reported by a single narrator may be accepted when his fellow transmitters from the same original teacher omit it. If the addition is sound, it must be acted upon, for it is a decisive text on the very point in dispute, and a decisive text is not to be opposed by analogy. It would appear, however, that what Mālik took into consideration here was the established practice (ʿamal).