فليس بينه وبين ما قدمناه من الاخبار تناقض لان قوله عليه السلام في كل خمس شاة الى أن تبلغ خمسا وعشرين يقتضي أن يكونوا سواءا في هذا الحكم وانه يجب في كل خمس شاة الى هذا العدد ثم قوله عليه السلام بعد ذلك فإذا بلغت خمسا وعشرين ففيها ابنة مخاض يحتمل أن يكون أراد وزادت واحدة وانما لم يذكر في اللفظ لعلمه بفهم المخاطب ذلك ولو صرح فقال: في كل خمس شاة الى خمس وعشرين ففيها خمس شياه وإذا بلغت خمسا وعشرين وزادت واحدة ففيها ابنة مخاض لم يكن فيه تناقض وكل ما لو صرح به لم يؤد الى التناقض جاز تقديره في الكلام ولم يقدر في الخبر الا ما وردت به الاخبار المفصلة قدمناها، فلا تنافي بين جميع ألفاظها ومعانيها فعملنا على جميعها، ولو لم يحتمل ما ذكرناه لجاز لنا أن نحمل هذه الرواية على ضرب من التقية لانها موافقة لمذاهب العامة، وقد صرح عبد الرحمن ابن الحجاج بذلك فيما رواه:
There is no contradiction between this report and the reports we have already presented, because the saying of the Imam عليه السلام: “For every five there is a sheep until they reach twenty-five,” requires that they are equal in this ruling, and that for every five camels, one sheep is due up to this number. Then the saying of the Imam عليه السلام after that: “When they reach twenty-five, then in them there is a she-camel in its second year (ibnat makhad),” may mean that he intended: when one more is added to them. He only did not mention this explicitly in the wording because he knew that the addressee would understand it. If Imam عليه السلام had stated it clearly and said: “For every five there is a sheep up to twenty-five, and in them there are five sheep; and when they reach twenty-five and one more is added, then in them there is a she-camel in its second year (ibnat makhad),” there would be no contradiction in it. Anything which, if stated explicitly, would not cause contradiction, may be assumed within the speech. And nothing is being assumed in this report except what has already been mentioned in the detailed reports which we have presented. Thus, there is no contradiction between all of their wordings and meanings, so we act upon all of them. Even if the report did not allow the interpretation we have mentioned, it would be permissible for us to carry this narration upon a form of precautionary dissimulation (taqiyyah), because it agrees with the schools of the generality (al-ammah). Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Hajjaj has explicitly stated this in what he narrated (in the following hadith):
