and He forbids its use when the person advancing it speaks without knowledge, as Allah Most High says:

“Do not pursue that of which you have no knowledge.” [Al-Isrā’: 36]

And in His words:

“and that you say about Allah what you do not know.” [Al-A‘rāf: 33]

And:

“Here you are—you have argued about what you have knowledge of; why, then, do you argue about what you have no knowledge of?” Āl ‘Imrān: 66]

He also forbids its use when it constitutes disputing the truth after it has become clear, as Allah Most High says:

“They dispute with you concerning the truth after it has become clear.” Al-Anfāl: 6]

And Allah Most High says:

“Those who disbelieve dispute with falsehood to refute the truth thereby.” [Al-Kahf: 56]

Accordingly, Sharia-based evidence cannot be opposed by evidence that is not Sharia-based and given precedence over it. That would be like saying that an innovation Allah Most High has not prescribed takes precedence over the revealed law He has commanded; that falsehood takes precedence over truth; that someone else’s report takes precedence over the Prophet’s report, may Allah bless him and grant him peace; or that what Allah has forbidden is better than what He has commanded, and other such claims. All of this is impossible.

As for evidence based on reason or received through hearing without being Sharia-based, it may sometimes carry greater weight and sometimes less, just as it may sometimes be sound evidence and sometimes a fallacious argument. Nothing may be set against what the messengers brought from Allah Most High, whether reports or commands. What people say, however, may be opposed by other statements of the same kind, since it may sometimes be true and sometimes false. There is no doubt about this. Yet some people include among Sharia-based evidence things that do not belong to it, while others exclude things that do. The discussion here concerns evidence in general, not its particular instances.