and a revealed proof cannot be erroneous when no other proof opposes it, whereas a scholar’s opinion is not so. If it were permissible to act on this possibility, we would be left with none of the proofs to which such a possibility could apply. The point, however, is that the scholar himself may be excused for not acting upon it, while we are excused for declining to follow him in that omission. Allah, Exalted is He, says:

“That was a nation that has passed away; theirs is what they earned”—and so on to the end of the verse.

He, Exalted is He, also says:

“If you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger.”

No one may counter a hadith from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, with anyone else’s statement. Thus, when a man asked Ibn ʿAbbās, may Allah be pleased with him and his father, about an issue, he answered him with a hadith. The man replied, “But Abū Bakr and ʿUmar said…” Ibn ʿAbbās responded, “Stones may soon rain down upon you from heaven! I say, ‘The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said,’ and you say, ‘Abū Bakr and ʿUmar said’?”

Since a scholar may refrain from acting upon a hadith for some of these reasons, then, when an authentic hadith establishes that something is lawful or unlawful, or lays down a ruling, it is not permissible to believe that a scholar who does not act upon it—one of those whose reasons we have described—will be punished for declaring the unlawful lawful, declaring the lawful unlawful, or judging by something other than what Allah has revealed.

Likewise, if the hadith contains a threat of a curse, wrath, punishment, or the like for an action, it is not permissible to say: “That scholar who permitted