—such as the rejection of the hadiths concerning khiyār al-majlis (the option for buyer and seller to revoke the sale while they remain in the same session) on the strength of that principle, even though most researchers affirm that the scholars of Madinah themselves disagreed over the issue, and that even had they been unanimous and others opposed them, the decisive proof would still lie with the report. The same applies to the attitude of certain scholars from the two Iraqi cities, who set some hadiths aside in favour of manifest qiyās (clear-cut analogy), contending that universal legal maxims cannot be overturned by a single report of this kind. There are many other such forms of opposition, whether the objector happens to be right or mistaken.

These, then, are the ten obvious causes.

Furthermore, with many hadiths it is perfectly possible that a scholar has evidence for abandoning practice based on the report—evidence to which we have no access—for the avenues of knowledge are wide-ranging, and we have not been privy to everything that lies within the scholars’ minds.

A scholar may disclose his proof or keep it to himself; if he discloses it, it may reach us or it may not; and if it does reach us, we may understand the force of his argument or we may fail to do so—whether that proof is in fact correct or not.

Yet although we allow for this possibility, it is not permissible for us to turn away from a position whose evidence has clearly been established by a sound hadith that is supported by a group of the people of