Sebab perselisihan mereka berpunca daripada percanggahan makna zahir hadis-hadis tersebut. Hadis-hadis yang terdahulu menunjukkan larangan am bercakap ketika solat, dan kelihatan bertentangan dengan hadis Abu Hurayrah, yang berbunyi, "Rasulullah ﷺ pernah mengakhiri solatnya selepas dua rakaat. Dhu al-Yadayn [seorang lelaki yang digelar demikian] bertanya kepadanya, 'Adakah solat telah diringkaskan, atau tuan terlupa, wahai Rasulullah?' Rasulullah ﷺ bersabda, 'Adakah Dhu al-Yadayn bercakap benar?' Mereka menjawab, 'Ya.' Rasulullah ﷺ lalu bangun dan menunaikan dua rakaat yang tinggal, kemudian mengakhirinya dengan salam." Makna zahir di sini ialah Rasulullah ﷺ bercakap, dan orang-orang yang bersama baginda juga bercakap, dan mereka meneruskan solat selepas percakapan itu, yang tidak memutuskan solat mereka. Mereka yang mengikuti makna zahir ini dan berpendapat bahawa percakapan tersebut khusus untuk membetulkan solat, mengecualikannya daripada implikasi am (larangan) itu; ini ialah pendapat Malik bin Anas. Sebahagian pula berpendapat bahawa tiada bukti dalam hadis tersebut yang menunjukkan bahawa mereka bercakap dengan sengaja ketika solat, dan mereka berkata bahawa nampaknya mereka bercakap kerana menyangka solat telah diringkaskan, manakala Nabi ﷺ bercakap kerana menyangka solat telah sempurna. Selain itu, mereka menambah bahawa riwayat bahawa orang-orang itu bercakap selepas kenyataan Nabi ﷺ, "Solat tidak diringkaskan dan aku tidak lupa", tidak terbukti sahih pada pandangan mereka; oleh itu, hadis tersebut menunjukkan keharusan bercakap bagi orang yang tidak bercakap dengan sengaja. Oleh itu, sebab perselisihan antara Malik dan al-Shafi'i tentang pengecualian daripada implikasi umum ialah perbezaan mereka tentang maksud hadis ini, walaupun al-Shafi'i juga bersandar untuk ini pada satu prinsip umum, iaitu sabda Nabi ﷺ, "Tanggungan bagi kesilapan dan kelupaan telah diangkat daripada umatku". Abu Hanifah pula mentafsirkan hadis-hadis larangan mengikut maksud umumnya dan berpendapat bahawa hadis-hadis tersebut telah memansuhkan hadis Dhu al-Yadayn, serta lebih diutamakan daripadanya.
The reason for their disagreement stems from the conflict of the apparent meaning of the traditions. The preceding traditions imply the general prohibition of speech, and appear to conflict with Abu Hurayra’s tradition, which says, “The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) once concluded his prayer after two ra&as, Dhu al-Yadayn [a man so called] asked him, ‘Has the prayer been shortened, or did you forget, O Messenger of Allah?’ The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Did Dhu al-Yadayn speak the truth?’ They said, ‘Yes’. The Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) stood up and prayed the remaining two rak'as and then concluded with the salutation’”. The apparent meaning here is that the Messenger of Allah (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) spoke'and so did the people with him, and they continued the prayer after this speech, which did not cut off their prayer. Those who followed this apparent meaning, and maintained that this speech was specific to the rectification of prayer, exempted it from the general implication (of prohibition); This is Malik ibn Anas’s opinion. Some maintained that there is no evidence in the tradition to indicate that they spoke intentionally during prayer, and said that it appears they spoke thinking that the prayer had been shortened, while the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him) spoke thinking that the prayer had been completed. Further, they added that the report that the people spoke after the statement of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “The prayer has not been shortened nor did I forget”, was not proved authentic in their view; therefore the tradition implies the permissibility of speech for a person who is not speaking intentionally. Thus, the reason for the disagreement between Malik and al-ShaficT about the exemption from the general implication is their dispute over the meaning of this tradition, though al-ShaficT also relied for this upon a general principle, which is the saying of the Prophet (God’s peace and blessings be upon him), “Liability for mistake and forgetfulness has been removed from my umma”. Abu HanTfa, on the other hand, interpreted the proscribing traditions in their general meaning and held them to have abrogated the tradition of Dhu al- Yadayn, and as being preferred over it.