Dear Dorian,

Thank you for your question.

Answering your question, Dr. Jasser Auda, Professor and Al-Shatibi Chair of Maqasid Studies at the International Peace College South Africa, states:

Scholars of Islamic law differentiated between two types of prophetic actions and sayings (peace be upon him): Actions and sayings that are meant to be part of the Shariah (Islamic way of life), and others that are only part of the Prophet's life as a human, and are not meant to be a law for every Muslim to follow. They call these two kinds of tradition: al-sunnah al-tashri`yyah (legislative tradition) and al-sunnah ghair al-tashri`yyah (non-legislative tradition). For example, Imam Muslim narrates in his authentic collection:

Talha narrates: I was walking with the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he passed by some people at the tops of their palm trees. He asked: 'What are they doing?' They answered: 'Pollinating the male into the female.' He replied: 'I do not think that this will be of benefit.' When they were told about what the Prophet said, they stopped what they were doing. Later, when the trees shed down their fruits prematurely, the Prophet was told about that. He said: 'If it is good for them they should do it. I was just speculating. So, pardon me. But if I tell you something about God, then take it because I would never lie about God.' Another narrator said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) added: 'You know your worldly affairs better than me.'

This Hadith shows one such non-legislative judgment given by the Prophet (peace be upon him), which he made to the best of his knowledge. The Hadith even shows an error in that judgment, which the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions discovered later via human experience, rather than divine revelation. I believe that the rationale behind this Hadith is to show that it is not part of the Prophet's mission to contribute to 'technology,' and other similar worldly affairs, through the revelation. Rather, human empirical experience is meant to be the only means for these developments.

Regarding the error that happened, the word `ismah (literally: protection) is mentioned in the Quran in the context of the Prophet (peace be upon him) being protected from people's whims and Satan's delusions. The protection of all prophets, in the above sense, is an Islamic belief which is a pre-condition to trusting the prophets' message and following their example. However, the Islamic definition of 'infallibility' does not necessarily include protection from forgetting or misjudgment in matters that are not part of conveying the message, as the example above shows.

Furthermore, if the tradition is from the legislative type, it is not always necessarily and literally meant for all Muslims. Some rulings are for rulers only; some are for judges only, and so on. The following is one example:

Hind Bint Utbah complained to the Prophet (peace be upon him) from the greediness of Abu Sufyan (her husband), and asked whether she is allowed to take from his money without his knowledge. So, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: 'Take what you and your children normally need (without telling Abu Sufyan).'

Scholars commented on that Hadith that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was acting here as a judge rather than a prophet. In other words, he (peace be upon him) allowed Hind in her specific case to do that, but the Hadith that does not give every woman a right to take whatever she wants from her husband's money without his knowledge. So, scholars maintained that this Hadith is for judges to learn from when they make a similar judgment, but not for every Muslim.

Regarding your question about the possibility of error in the narrators' accounts, it is true that there is a chance of error (which is, by the way, more than the 0001% that you mentioned, depending on the narrator). That is why scholars differentiated different levels of authenticity of Hadith. The following are two of these levels that are related to your question:

1. Mutawatir (Recurring, Most famous): These are narrations that are conveyed through a 'large number of people who could not possibly agree to lie'. The Quran as a whole and a few prophetic traditions fall under this category. The Quran, for example, was narrated in almost a hundred different ways through thousands of people, and their narrations are the same. It is a logical conclusion that one can build firm beliefs and true obligations on this level of authenticity.
2. Ahad (Individual single-chained narrations): These are narrations according to one or two narrators, and hence are less 'confirmed' than the first kind. Scholars judged that these kinds of narrations could teach us about halal and haram, but could not be evidence of faith (aqeedah) in their own right. This is because of the possibility of error in something that is narrated by a person or two. But a possibility of error in a companion's narration should not 'discredit them completely,' as you say in your question. It is not a matter of black-or-white judgment, is it? There is a range and levels of authenticity and there are many sources of error that do not necessarily 'discredit' a person. So, if the person is trustworthy, we accept his/her individual account, but not build matters of faith on it, unless it is confirmed by a number of other narrators or witnesses.

In addition, there are many Hadiths that scholars rejected because they were not up to the level of authenticity that implies any credibility, for example, when the narrator is known to be forgetful, ill-intentioned, or biased one way or another. That is why it is important to check the authenticity of a Hadith before we apply it.

We hope this answers your question.

Keep in touch.