先知（SAW）的言行之间的冲突，只会在一种情况下发生，那就是废止（al-naskh）；除此之外，他的言语与行为之间根本不存在冲突。然而，乍看之下，他的某些言语和行为似乎存在冲突，但经过仔细考察便会发现，每一种情况各不相同，因此并不存在冲突，从而可以将它们加以调和。那些看似冲突的情况共有三种：

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:

一种说法是：先前的言语所确立的规定，若先知（SAW）的行为与之相悖，且没有证据表明该行为是他的特殊之事，那么该行为就会废止与之冲突的、在先的言语。这种言语可以是普遍性的，例如他说："禁食某一天是我们的义务"，随后他却在那一天破斋——而我们已经证明了跟从他的证据。或者，该行为是专为他而设，有证据表明如此；或者专为我们而设，有证据表明如此。也就是说，他的行为若被确认为可以重复、必须效仿，并且它在时间上晚于与之冲突的言语，那么无论该行为是他的特殊之事、我们的特殊之事，还是他与我们共有之事，它都会废止与之相关的言语：或是关于他的言语，或是关于我们的言语，或是关于他与我们二者的言语。至于他的特殊之事，其废止作用是显而易见的；至于我们的特殊之事，则是为了确立效仿的义务；至于他与我们共有之事，同样是为了确立效仿的义务。

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.

其次，如果言论是在所述行为之后才出现的，那么就要看：经据所示，我们是否必须在该行为上效法他。因为没有证据表明这是他的特权。应当考察：如果经据并未表明重复该行为是义务，那么它与其后出现的言论之间就不存在冲突，因为该行为只发生过一次，已经过去，并且不要求重复，既然不要求重复，言论也就与之不相抵触。如果经据表明重复该行为是他（愿主赐福并使其平安）及其宗教共同体的义务，那么其后的言论可能对他和他的宗教共同体都适用，也可能是他的特权，或是我们的特权。 因此，如果言论是普遍适用的，那么它就废止了在前的行为。例如，他（愿主赐福并使其平安）曾斋戒阿舒拉日，而经据要求重复这一行为并使我们也承担此义务，然后他（愿主赐福并使其平安）说：“我们不必斋戒此日。”这便是普遍适用的情况。 如果其后的言论是专为先知（愿主赐福并使其平安）而设的，那么它只废止该行为对他的约束，而不废止对我们的约束，言论与先知（愿主赐福并使其平安）之间没有冲突，他所承担的义务依然有效。如果其后的言论针对的是我们这一宗教共同体，例如他说：“你们不必斋戒此日。”那么这表明我们不负有该行为的义务，而先知（愿主赐福并使其平安）的义务依然存在。 如果这一言论是在共同体实施该行为之前出现的，那么它就是一种限定，即对免除义务的澄清，也就是说我们可以免除此行为。如果言论是在共同体实施该行为之后出现的，那么就不能将它视为限定，因为这会导致在需要澄清的时候延迟澄清，因此它废止了他在前的行为。 第三种情况是：不能确定其后出现的是言论还是行为，即不清楚在先的是行为还是言论。 在这种情况下，我们先看两者是否可以相互结合；若能结合，则不存在冲突。若不能结合，则我们应当采取与我们相关、或与他（ﷺ）和我们共同相关、而不涉及他个人的那一条表述。如果是这样，就应当采用并依据该表述，而将行为搁置，原因在于：表述是专为所指含义而设立的，而行为并非为所指含义而设立；行为若有所指，也只是借助于表述而有所指。此外，表述的所指范围更为普遍，因为它既包括不存在之物，也包括存在之物，既包括理性认知之物，也包括可感知之物；而行为则只针对存在之物与可感知之物。

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.

在这种情况下，若某一行为与某一言语可能相互冲突，而该行为是对先前经文的说明，例如先知（SAW）在关于朝觐的经文之后所说的话：“谁将朝觐与副朝结合，应当进行一次环绕天房（塔瓦夫）和一次萨法与麦尔沃之间的奔走（赛义，即往返七次的步行）。”阿米迪在其著作《Al-Ihkaam》中提到了此言。而达拉古特尼所传述的是：“他（SAW）将朝觐与副朝结合，于是他进行了两次环绕天房和两次赛义。”在这种情况下，行为与言语之间的协调，正如《古兰经》与圣训的分类中所详述的那样，即说明者与被说明者之间的关系。

In the situation where the action and the saying that are likely to be in conflict are clarifier for a previous text like his (SAW) saying after the verse of the Hajj: combines whoever the Hajj to the Umrah should perform one tawaaf and one sa'i (the seven courses walk between the Safa and the Marwa)" the Aamidi mentioned it in his book Al-Ihkaam. And that which the Daraqutny narrated that" he ((SAW) combined (joined the Hajj to the Umrah) so he performed two tawaaf and two sa'i". Gathering between the action and the saying in this situation is as it is detailed in the divisions of the Kitaab and the Sunnah -the clarification and the clarified matter-.

这些是言行之间看似矛盾的情况，其中一个例子是艾布·达伍德从阿尔-鲁拜尔（穆阿瓦兹之女、阿夫拉之子的女儿）的传述中所载：“拉苏勒·安拉（愿安拉赐福并使其平安）用手中剩余的水擦了头部”；苏夫扬·阿尔-萨瑞说：穆阿瓦兹之子阿夫拉之女阿尔-鲁拜尔告诉我：“先知（愿安拉赐福并使其平安）曾亲吻他的某些妻子，然后便不重新洗小净就去拜了”，此段由奈萨仪辑录。这段圣训被评定为弱（da'if）。有人认为它弱，是因为它是中断圣训（mursal）。然而中断圣训属于被采信的证据之一。奈萨仪说：“关于此事，没有比这段圣训更好的了，尽管它是中断的。”达拉古特尼又以连贯的传述路线载录了这段圣训，他说：从易卜拉欣，从其父，从阿伊莎（愿安拉喜悦她）。还有，阿伊莎（愿安拉喜悦她）说：“一天夜里我在床上找不到拉苏勒·安拉（愿安拉赐福并使其平安），于是我伸手去摸，手触到了他的脚底，当时他正在拜，脚是竖着的。”此段由穆斯林辑录。 这些显示先知行为的圣训，与经文“……或你们与女人接触，而找不到水，那就你们应当去取洁净的土”（《妇女章》第43节）相关联。这节经文说明，触摸是使小净失效的事项之一，其本义是用手触摸；而其引申义则是性交。除非本义不可能成立，否则不应转向引申义。这里本义并非不可能，而是确定可行，且没有迹象（qarina）指向引申义，因此应当确定其为本义。 {或者你们触摸了女人}这段经文支持真正的含义，因为很清楚，指的只是用手触摸，而不是性交。据此，先知ﷺ触摸女人、女人触摸他的行为，尤其是先知ﷺ触摸阿伊莎脚底的事，有确凿的圣训依据，既可追溯到先知ﷺ（marfu'），也有止于门徒的记载（mawquf）；而溯源至先知ﷺ（al-rafa'）则是增加其可信度的因素，它决定了这段圣训是否被采纳。这段圣训与经文的字面表述似有冲突，即经文所说：{或者你们触摸了女人}。两者的调和之处在于：经文所说的是特指给乌玛的，尽管先知ﷺ也包含在其泛指之内；他的行为与经文字面相反，表明该行为是专属于他的，而经文的字面指示则针对乌玛。因此，先知ﷺ用手触摸的行为没有坏大小便，也没有重新做小净（wudu'），这是因为此事专属于他ﷺ。所以他的行为并不与针对乌玛的字面经文相矛盾，而是专属于他。因为经文与先知ﷺ与之相反的行为相结合，说明该经文专属于乌玛。由此，先知ﷺ的某些行为可能看似与他的言论相矛盾，因此我们尽力加以调和；但如果调和不可能，我们则依据三种情况的原则来处理。

These are the situations of the conflict between the saying and the action, and an examples for that is that which Abu Dawood narrated from the way of Al-Rubay' the daughter of Mu'awwith Ibn Afraa': That Rasoul Allah (SAW) wiped his head with a remainder of water that was in his hand", and Sufyan Al-Thawry said: Al Rubay' the daughter of Mu'awwith Ibn Afraa' told me: " That the Prophet (SAW) used to kiss some of his wives, then he used to pray without performing the ablution" compiled by Al-Nassa'i. This hadeeth has been certified as weak (dha'ief), but it became clear that who said it is weak; said it is because this hadeeth is mursal. But the mursal is of the considered proves, Al-Nssa'i said about this hadeeth: "There is nothing in this subject better than this hadeeth, even though it is mursal" and Al-Daraqutny narrated this hadeeth with a linked narration, he said: from Ibraaheem from his father from Aa'ishah (RA). And from Aa'ishah (RA) that she said: ِ " ِ" I missed Rasoul Allah (SAW) one night of the bed, so I searched for him then my hand touched the bottom of his feet while he was in his prayer and they were erected" compiled by Muslim. So these ahaadeeth that show his Aayah the conflict action have you or been in contact with women, and you find no water, then perform the tayammom…) 43 Surat Al-Nisaa', so this Aayah clarifies that the touching is of the things which necessitate the wadhu', and the real meaning is touching by the hand, where as metaphorically it is the sexual intercourse, and it should not end up to the metaphor (majaaz) unless the real meaning is impossible, and the real meaning here is not impossible but it is certainty, and we don't end up to the metaphor without an indication (qareenah), and there is no indication here to render it to the metaphoric meaning, so this determines the real meaning of it. And the recitation: {or if you touch) supports the remaining of the real meaning because it is clear only the touching by hand not the SI. Accordingly, the action of the Messenger (SAW) in touching the woman and the woman touching him, particularly touching Aa'ishah the bottom of the foot of the prophet is authentically proven with reference to the Messenger (marfu') and pending on the companion (mawquf), and the reference to the Messenger (al-rafa') is an additional authenticity which determines the acceptance of the hadeeth. This hadeeth conflicts saying text of the Aayah, i.e. the Qur'aan. The gathering between them is that the Aayah says: {or if you touch), so it is special for the Ummah, although the Messenger is included in its generality; his action contrary to the text is an indication that the action is concerning him, and the saying text is concerning the Ummah. So the touch by the hand occurred by the Messenger and he did not perform wadhu' that is because it is especially for him (SAW). So his action does not contradict the saying text which is concerning the Ummah, but it is especially for him, because the conjunction of the Aayah and the action of the Messenger that is contrary to it is an indication that the Aayah is especially for the Ummah. And thus some actions of the Prophet (SAW) may appear that they contradict his saying, so we try to reconcile between them, but if the reconciling is impossible; we apply on them the principles of the three situations.