The second of them is: if the saying is later than the mentioned action, then what the daleel indicated, that we must follow him in it, since there is no evidence that it is his specialty, should be examined. If the daleel does not show the obligation of repeating the action, then there is no conflict between it and the later saying, because the action occurred once only and is over, its repetition is not requested, and it has ceased to exist, so the saying does not conflict with it, since its repetition is not requested. And if the evidence indicated the obligation of its repetition upon him ﷺ and his nation, then the later saying could be common to him and his nation, and it could be his specialty or our specialty. So if the saying is common, then it abrogates the preceding action. For example, if he ﷺ fasted the day of 'Aashuraa', and the daleel obliged its repetition and assigned us to it, then he ﷺ said: it is not obligatory upon us to fast it; this is if it is common. And if the later saying is specifically for the Prophet ﷺ, then the later saying abrogates the preceding action concerning him, not concerning us. And if the later saying concerns us, the nation, like if he ﷺ said: it is not obligatory upon you to fast it, then there is no conflict in that concerning the Prophet ﷺ, so his assignment to it continues. And it shows the non-assignment of us to that action. If it came before the Ummah performed the action, then it is a specifier, i.e. a clarifier of the non-obligation, i.e. we are exempted from the action. If the saying came after the Ummah performed the action, then it is not possible to consider it a specifier, because that would necessitate delaying the clarification beyond the time it is needed, so it abrogates his preceding action.
The third of them is: if it is unknown whether the later one is the saying or the action, i.e. it is unknown whether the action is the earlier or the saying. Nesta situação, observamos se é possível conciliar ambos; se for possível, não haverá conflito. Mas, se for impossível conciliá-los, então tomamos o dito naquilo que nos diz respeito, ou que é comum a ele ﷺ e a nós, sem aquilo que é específico dele ﷺ. Se assim for, o dito deve ser priorizado e aceito, e a ação será deixada de lado. Isso acontece porque o dito é específico para a denotação e foi estabelecido para ela, diferentemente da ação, que não foi estabelecida para a denotação; e, se denota algo, é somente com o auxílio do dito. Além disso, o dito possui uma denotação mais abrangente, pois inclui o inexistente e o existente, o racional e o tangível, ao passo que a ação é apenas para o existente e o tangível.
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.