An example is someone who says: “I know of no one who has allowed a slave’s testimony.” Yet its acceptance is reliably reported from ʿAlī, Anas, Shurayh, and others. He also says: “They unanimously agree that a partially emancipated slave does not inherit.” Yet allowing such a person to inherit is reliably reported from ʿAlī and Ibn Masʿūd, and there is a hadith graded good on this matter from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

Another says: “I know of no one who has made invoking blessings upon the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, obligatory during prayer.” Yet this obligation is reliably reported from Abū Jaʿfar al-Bāqir.

This is because many scholars’ knowledge extends no further than the views of the scholars they encountered in their own lands and those of certain other groups. Thus, many earlier scholars knew only the views of the scholars of Medina and Kufa, while many later scholars know only the views of two or three of the imams whose teachings are followed. Whatever falls outside those views is, in their judgment, contrary to consensus: they know of no one who holds it, and they have continually heard the opposite. Such a scholar cannot bring himself to follow a hadith that conflicts with these views, either because he fears that doing so might violate consensus or because he believes that it does—and consensus is the strongest proof.

This is the excuse of many people for much of what they leave aside. Some are genuinely excused in this regard; others are excused in it, yet are not, in reality, excused. The same applies to many of the reasons discussed before and after this one.

The tenth reason:

He counters the hadith with evidence indicating its weakness, its abrogation, or the need to interpret it differently