The conflict between the saying of the Messenger (SAW) and his action does not happen except in one situation: that is the abrogation (al-naskh), and except this there is no conflict between the saying and the action at all. But it may appear for the first sight at some of his sayings and actions that there is conflict between the saying and the action, but the scrutinizing shows that the situation of every one of them is different from the other, so there is no conflict, therefore is possible to gather (harmonize) between them. And that which appears to be conflict has three situations:

One of them is: the saying is precedent, i.e. if the Prophet (SAW) did an action and there is no daleel that it is of his specialties, then it abrogates the preceded saying that conflicts it, whether the saying is common like if he said: fasting a particular day is obligatory upon us, then he broke the fasting on that day, and the daleel has been furnished to follow him (SAW) as we proved, or it was specially for him by a daleel which denotes that, or specially for us by a daleel which denotes that. It means that his action which is affirmed to be repeated, and which must be imitated, if it is belated from the saying it conflicts with and which is his specialty, our specialty, or common for him and for us; it abrogates the saying that is concerning him, or concerning us, or both him and us. As for action which is his specialty; the abrogation is apparent in it, and as for the action which is our specialty; that is for the obligation of the imitation, and as for the action which is common for him and us; that also is for the obligation of the imitation.

The second of them is: if the saying is belated from the mentioned action, that which the daleel denoted that we must follow him in it, because there is no evidence that it is his specialty; it should be looked at, if the daleel does not show the obligation of repeating the action, then there is no conflict between it and the belated saying, because the action occurred once only and it is over, and its repetition is not requested, and it became none, so the saying is not in conflict with it because its repetition is not requested. And if the evidence denoted the obligation of its repetition upon him (SAW) and his nation, then the belated saying could be common for him and his nation, and it could be his specialty, or our specialty. So if the saying is common, then it abrogates the precedent action, for example if he (SAW) fasted the day of Aashuraa', and the daleel obliges its repetition and assigned us with it, then he ((SAW) said: it is not obligatory upon us to fast it, this is if it is common. And as if the belated saying is specially for the Prophet ((SAW), then the belated saying abrogates the precedent action concerning him, not concerning us, and if the belated saying is concerning us the nation, like if he said: it is not obligatory upon you to fast it, then there is no conflict in that concerning the Prophet ((SAW), so his assignment with it continues. And it shows the none assignment for us with that action, and if it came before the Ummah performed the action, then it is a specifier, i.e. a clarifier for the none obligation, i.e. we are exempted from the action, and if the saying came after the Ummah performed the action, then it is not possible to consider it a specifier, because it necessitates the delay of the clarification from the time it is needed, so it abrogates his precedent action. The third of them is: if the belated is unknown whether it is the saying or the action, i.e. it is unknown if the action is the precedent or the saying. In this situation we look, if it is possible to gather them both, there will be no conflict, but if it is impossible to gather them, then we take the saying in that which is concerning us, or common for him ((SAW) and us, without that which is concerning him, if so the saying must be forwarded and taken, and the action will be left, that is because the saying is particular for the denotation and set for it, unlike the action, it is not set for the denotation, and if it denotes; it is but with the aid of the saying, and because the saying has more common denotation because it includes the nonexistent and the existent, the rational and the tangible, unlike the action for it is only for the existent and the tangible.