To Continue with the differences and strongest opinion, for a recap click here

What, When, Why, Who, How, If, But.

How can we deduce which is the Strongest opinion when we weren't present or if there was no explanation of the narration.

Differences and contradictory narrations are quite obviously destined to follow from this. A few examples are listed below which demonstrate this fact even more explicitly.

Imam Muslim narrates on the authority of Abdullah ibn Umar that a blind Companion once approached Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) and submitted: “I did not have anyone to guide me to the masjid, please excuse my absence from the masjid for the congregational salat and permit me to perform my salat at home.’ The Messenger of Allah granted him permission. However, when he learnt that this Companion lived in close proximity to the masjid and he was able to hear the adhan, the Messenger (PBUH) withdrew his permission and ordered the man to join the congregational salat in the masjid.

But in the case of Itban ibn Malik., Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) accepted his excuse of blindness and exempted him from attending the congregational salat.

Another example
Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) had permitted Abdullah ibn Zayd, who had heard the words of the adhan in a dream to make the call to commence [iqama] inspite of Bilal calling out the adhan.
However, once on a journey Ziyad ibn Harith al-Suda’i called out the adhan and Bilal was about to call out the iqama when the Messenger of Allah said, “Whosoever calls out the adhan, has the right to call out the iqama as well.” Saying this, he restrained Bilal from calling out the iqama.

Another Example
Once, Abu Bakr gave his entire wealth in charity and Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) accepted it. However, when certain other Companions decided to give their entire wealth in charity Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) did not accept it.

These are not isolated incidents. There are thousands of such incidents, which clearly demonstrate that the Messenger of Allah issued varying orders for different people.

Another Example
Abu Hurayra narrates that a person once asked Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) if he was permitted to hug and kiss his wife while fasting. The Messenger (PBUH) granted him permission. However, when another Companion sought permission to do the same, he was declined permission. Abu Hurayra said, “I immediately understood the reason for the disparity between the two. The one who was permitted was an old man while the other Companion was a young man.”

In cases like the above-mentioned incident, each narrator will narrate what he heard directly from Allah’s Messenger (PBUH). The person who was granted permission to kiss his wife while fasting will obviously narrate that hugging and kissing does not nullify the fast. However, the other person will narrate his hadith in direct contrast to this and will vehemently deny the permissibility of kissing and hugging while fasting. This apparent contradiction between the two narrations is not only confined to two isolated narrators. In fact, there were always groups of students, devoted followers, enquirers, visitors, delegates, and others in the presence of Allah's Messenger (PBUH) who would have heard these exchanges and related them according to their own understanding.

For this reason, the two groups who heard two conflicting laws would narrate only what they heard from Allah’s Messenger (PBUH). Any number of conflicting rations falling under this fundamental rule will still be considered negligible because every gathering consisted of various people, the exempted as well as the healthy, the able-bodied as well as the weak. The Law took into consideration the health of one and the weakness of the other. This is the reason for the apparent contradiction.
So how can one say that he is following the storngest opinion,how does he know he has seen ALL the evidences



Another Example
For a traveler who is quite strong and able, it is most appropriate for him to fast in the holy month of Ramadan. He should not postpone the fast when traveling, thereby forfeiting the great virtues of this month. On the other hand, if a person is extremely weak and fasting while traveling will most probably be detrimental to him, he is not permitted to fast, Due to such differences, the hadiths narrating laws pertinent to fasting while traveling are sure to differ as well.

Sa’id al-Khudri narrates, “On the sixteenth of Ramadan we set out for a battle in the company of Allah’s Messenger (PBUH). Some of our friends observed the fasts of Ramadan, while others decided not to fast. However, each group had no objection against the other. Those fasting did not accuse chose abstaining nor did the latter challenge the former.”

Hamza ibn ‘Amr Aslami narrates that he once asked the Messenger of Allah (saw) whether, since he was in a habit of fasting excessively it would be permissible for him to fast while traveling. Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) replied, “You are at liberty to fast or to abstain from fasting. You may do as you please.”

However, Jabir narrates that Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) said, “There is no good in fasting while traveling”

In fact, one hadith even refers to those who fast when traveling are sinners.

Notwithstanding this, Abd aI-Rahman lbn Awf narrates that Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) said, “The one who fasts while traveling is like a person who breaks his fast while at home.”

In short, the disparity of narrations stems from the disparity of conditions. As you can see, the Messenger of Allah (sometimes) issued two utterly different orders for different individuals. The group that was present when the first order was given will obviously differ from the group that was present when the second order was issued. As a result, two large groups became narrators of two totally conflicting rulings.

There could have been, in fact there were, some people who were present in both gatherings, and they were most certainly compelled to ponder over the disparity between the rulings and reach a decision whereby both rulings are taken into account. As explained above, Abu Hurayra provided the conflicting narrations about kissing and hugging while fasting. He narrated the reason for the disparity as well.

There are thousands of other similar incidents, which cannot be contained here wholly.

Following such diverging narrations, the responsibility now falls upon the Sahaba, the Tabi'in, and the mujtahid Imams to determine the source, occasion and correct juncture of each narration, and they should interpret each narration according to the demands of the occasion.

The Messenger of Allah issued an exclusive order for a particular person due to some special reason, and the audience [majlis] was led to believe that it was a general order and not a restricted order. Thus, they started narrating it as a general rule.

Now see why this is confusing, and how one is able to take the strongest evidence
I Used to keep stressing, Follow one school you cant go wrong. But know that I have been given better advice I know would like to stress "there is safety in following just one madhab". (Jazakallah Ummi Taalib)

For example, according to the Hanafi school of thought, Tahiyyat al-Masjid is
prohibited while the Friday khutba is in progress. However, one hadith makes mention of a very poor Sahaba named Sulayk al-Ghatafani who entered the masjid while the khutba was in progress. Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) ordered the Companion to perform Tahiyyat al-Masjid so that the people could witness his
poverty and constrained circumstances. Together with this, they also witnessed this special concession awarded to this particular Companion in that Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) ordered him to perform Nafl salat while the Khutba was in progress. According certain narrations, Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) brought the sermon to a halt and remained standing to enable this Companion to complete his salat.

On the basis of this narration, many people considered this action as a general ruling, and as an all-encompassing principle they narrate that a person who enters the masjid while the Friday sermon is in progress should perform two rakats of Tahiyyat al-Masjid.

Another Example (Strange how Mufti Abdur Raheem Limbada mentioned this in his talk (@ Masjid-e-Quba, Stamford Hil, Reality of the Salaf part 1) regarding a new fatwa passed in Saudi about a woman breast feeding her work collegue in order to become a Mahrim, SubhanAllah)
The story of suckling Salim, the slave of Abu Hudhayfa is also a similar nature. A’isha narrates that Sahla bint Suhayl came to Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) and submitted, “O Messenger of Allah, I perceive a feeling of displeasure on (my husband) Abu Hudhayfa’s face whenever Salim, our freed slave, comes before me.” Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) advised: “Breastfeed him.” She replied, “He is a bearded adult.” He said, “Go ahead and breastfeed him. You will not perceive any displeasure on. Abu Hudhayfas face thereafter.”

On the basis of this narration, A’isha, considered this a general rule while the other wives of Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) rejected this opinion. Umm Salama, the wife of Allah’s Messenger (PBUH), comments on this: “We are not aware of the actual reason for this command. However, we are confident that this rule was specifically confined to Salim only.”

Did we Learn anything from the above

Quite often, there are apparent contradictions in the narrations simply various people saw Allah's Messenger (PBUH) doing a certain thing and they all narrated according to their own understanding of things. The beholders of any deed are obviously of diverse perception. Some of the witnesses were very discerning. They were able to understand every incident according, to the occasion. On the other hand, some of them were not as discerning, but they had very retentive memories. They narrated certain events according to the way they understood them.

If an ordinary layman is confronted with all these apparently contradictory narrations, the unfortunate person will be left perturbed and dumbfounded. Objections and various complications are thereafter bound to follow. At the end of it all, even the people who do not adhere to any School of thought, in spite of their
vehemence and prejudice, have no retreat but to make taqlid (i.e. resort to a school of thought).