Muhkam, Apparently Conflicting Reports, and Abrogation

Read-only question overview. Answers and scoring remain inside authenticated learner attempts.

• What chiefly distinguishes a muhkam report?
• If a rejected report opposes an accepted one, what is the basic ruling?
• What is the first principal step in analyzing mukhtalif al-hadith?
• Which question most directly tests whether a contradiction is real?
• Which is an acceptable form of reconciliation?
• What is the central reconciliation between la ‘adwa and avoiding leprosy?
• What is clarified by “Who infected the first one?”
• What particularly distinguishes mukhtalif al-hadith from the broader mushkil al-hadith?
• Which feature is essential to naskh?
• Which correctly distinguishes abrogation from specification?
• How does the grave-visitation report indicate chronological change?
• What does “the later of the two practices” demonstrate?
• Why is a later convert’s report not automatically the abrogating report?
• What is the correct relation between consensus and naskh?
• What especially matters when examining cupping-and-fasting reports?
• If reconciliation fails and reliable chronology is lacking, what comes next?
• Is a larger number of chains always sufficient for preference?
• What is the fundamental difference between tarjih and naskh?
• When is tawaqquf appropriate?
• Why is “suspension” preferable to “both reports falling away”?
• What is the preferred first step for a general rule and a well-evidenced specific exception?
• An accepted report faces an opposing report whose defect is established. What follows?
• Which is the appropriate order for resolving apparent conflict?
• Two reports are accepted, but their applications are to different situations. What follows?
• A muhkam report is an accepted narration without effective contradictory evidence.
• Any verbal difference between two sound reports proves abrogation even when reconciliation is possible.
• La ‘adwa can coexist with precautions against leprosy because autonomous causation and prudent avoidance are distinct.
• A Companion converting later automatically makes all that Companion’s reports abrogating.
• Consensus is not itself an abrogating legal text but may indicate that abrogation occurred.
• Tawaqquf means both accepted reports are permanently judged false and rejected.