the other, the damage he causes will outweigh any benefit.

Moreover, if he does not possess an intuitive legal acumen for signs, situational indicators, their corroborating proofs, and the contextual clues of both circumstance and speech—equal to his mastery of the general principles of rulings—he will squander many people’s rights. He will issue verdicts that all know to be invalid, relying on a single outward indication while ignoring its inner reality and the surrounding circumstances. Recourse to circumstantial evidence in adjudication is, in fact, unanimously acknowledged by the jurists.

Tenth: Al-Tanwīr states, “The judge should be trusted with respect to his chastity, sound mind, uprightness, insight, and knowledge of the Sunnah, of transmitted reports, of the branches of jurisprudence, and of the methods of ijtihād. He must not be harsh or coarse.”

Radd al-Muḥtār for the Ḥanafīs and Sharḥ al-Iqnāʿ for the Ḥanbalīs add: “The judge ought to be strict without brutality, gentle without weakness. Thus, whoever is more knowledgeable, more capable, more dignified, more awe-inspiring, and more patient with what he faces from the people is the worthier candidate.”

Eleventh: We seal these benefits with a fragrance of musk—the Prophet’s ﷺ advice to Abū Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him): “I counsel you to fear Allah in private and in public. When you ask, ask properly, and never ask anyone for anything—even if your whip falls. Do not accept a trust, and do not judge between two people.” Reported by Aḥmad (21063).