This report states only that they visit the market, where they increase in beauty and loveliness, and that their families likewise increase in beauty and loveliness during their absence, even though they have not visited the market of Paradise.

If additional details found in some hadiths but not others are unacceptable, and are instead treated as a kind of contradiction, then no hadith concerning seeing Allah on Friday should be accepted in this discussion. None of those reports can match this hadith of Anas, for it alone, among all these reports, was included by the compilers of the Sahīh collections. Indeed, one might argue: if seeing Allah were exclusive, and the increase in the faces’ beauty and loveliness resulted from it, he would have mentioned that in this hadith. One might even argue that its apparent meaning is that their increased beauty and loveliness resulted only from the wind blowing over their faces and clothes.

If, however, the proper position is to say that the additional details in those hadiths do not contradict this report—even though this one is more authentic—because preference is given to one report over another only when they conflict, whereas, if one hadith relates something and another provides an additional detail that does not contradict it, that detail has the standing of an independent report, then this is indeed correct.

This is not the issue over which jurists differed when asking whether an addition to a scriptural text constitutes abrogation. That question concerns only legal rulings: commands, prohibitions, permissions, and their related matters. For example, Allah Most High says:

“As for the woman and the man guilty of unlawful sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred lashes.”

And the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

“For the unmarried with the unmarried: one hundred lashes and a year’s banishment.”

He also said to another man:

“Your son is liable to one hundred lashes and a year’s banishment.”

Here the scholars differed over whether this addition abrogates His words:

“As for the woman and the man guilty of unlawful sexual intercourse, flog each of them.”

The majority, however, hold that it does not constitute abrogation. This is the correct view, as established in the appropriate discussion.