If authentic Ahadith are narrated—by Bukhari or Muslim—and their wordings are similar or different yet pertain to the same issue, then which Hadith should be adopted, especially if one narration is absolute and another restricted? And does a Muslim earn reward for removing harm from peaceful disbelievers?

When there is a discrepancy in the wording of a Hadith (definition), one must refer to the commentaries of the Imams to clarify the ambiguity and reconcile the different versions. The wordings may differ, but the meanings may be in agreement. The اصوليون (scholars of legal theory) have mentioned rules for reconciliation. Some scholars have written works on interpreting divergent Hadith, such as Imam al-Shafi'i and Ibn Qutaybah. The narrations of the Hadith about removing harm are reconciled by understanding that the mention of "Muslims" was a statement referring to the common case and has no restrictive implication. Therefore, it applies to others as well, because that is a form of kindness encouraged by Islamic law, and the reward for removing harm from any path is hoped for as an act of drawing closer to Allah.