three times. It was narrated by Yahya ibn Adam, but Waki' disagreed with him and said: 'He performed wudu three times,' only (22). The correct report from Uthman is that he performed wudu three times and wiped his head (23) without mentioning a number. This is how it was narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim. Abu Dawud said: 'This is the correct [account].' As for those other than Uthman from whom this [the three-time wiping] is narrated, it is not authentic; for they are the same ones who narrated (24) our hadiths, which are authentic, and thus the weakness of anything that contradicts them necessarily follows. As for the hadiths in which they mentioned that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) performed wudu three times each, they meant by that everything other than wiping, for when those narrators provided details (25), they said: 'And he wiped his head once.' A specific detail takes precedence over a general statement and serves as its interpretation; it is not contradicted by it, just as a specific (khass) text relates to a general (amm) one. Furthermore, their analogy is invalidated by [the case of] tayammum.

If it is said: It is permissible that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) wiped once to demonstrate permissibility, and wiped three times (26) to demonstrate what is most excellent (27), just as he did in washing, such that both matters were transmitted authentically without any contradiction between the reports. We respond: The statement of the narrator, 'This is the purification of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him),' indicates that it was his constant purification. Moreover, the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) only described the wudu of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to inform their questioner and those present about the manner of his constant wudu. If they had witnessed his wudu performed in another way, they would not have made this absolute statement from which it is understood that they had not witnessed anything else, for that would be deceit (tadlis) and misleading, and such is not to be thought of them. It is therefore determined that the circumstance of a narrator [reporting] other than the authentic practice must be attributed to error and nothing else. Additionally, when narrators report a single hadith from a single person and the memorizers (huffaz) among them agree on a description, while one person contradicts them in it, they judge him to be in error, even if he were a reliable memorizer, so how much more so if he were not known for that!

Section: If the water reaches the skin of the head but he does not wipe over the hair, it does not suffice him, because