the issue before us. For if two scholars differ in their independent legal judgments, one concluding that something is permissible and the other that it is forbidden, each is personally bound to follow the conclusion reached through his own judgment. There is nothing impossible in this, since a revealed text from Allah Most High could prescribe it. Since such a text could come from Allah without entailing any impossibility, and since the evidence establishes that Allah cannot command someone to do something and make it his religious duty while it is erroneous in His sight, we must maintain that all scholars exercising independent legal judgment are correct.

Even if someone exercises his judgment to determine the direction of the qiblah, prays in that direction, and misses the Kaʿbah, he is nevertheless correct in Allah’s sight, though his prayer was directed elsewhere. For his task is to exercise judgment in seeking its direction, not necessarily to determine it correctly. Thus, those whose judgments differ when seeking the direction of the qiblah are all correct in Allah’s sight in this sense. This brief explanation suffices, for anyone whom Allah grants insight and understanding, to establish the soundness of the position that all scholars exercising independent legal judgment are correct. This is one of the matters that admit of certainty.

Section

Once it is established that all scholars exercising independent legal judgment are correct, and the evidence rules out the position that only one judgment is right, the saying of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, “When a judge exercises independent legal judgment and errs, he receives one reward,” must be interpreted in a manner consistent with that evidence. We therefore say that “errs” in this hadith does not mean that he fails to reach what is right in Allah’s sight, for what is right in His sight lies in what He has made the judge’s religious duty. Or it simply means that he missed a revealed text, if there was one concerning the matter of which he was unaware, or that he erred in awarding money to someone who was not actually entitled to it.

This can occur even when a ruling rests on a revealed text rather than independent legal judgment. For example, a man has a claim against another, attested by two upright witnesses. He then remits the debt or receives payment, without the witnesses knowing about it. Later, he brings his claim against the debtor or his heirs on the testimony of those two witnesses. The judge rules in his favour on the strength of their testimony and enforces his claim. The judge is thus correct in Allah’s sight in issuing his ruling, since he has ruled according to the explicit text of the Book, yet mistaken in handing the money over to someone who is not actually entitled to it.

Since the hadith admits of these interpretations, it cannot serve as evidence that only one judgment is right. Likewise, all their other arguments can be answered in many ways, but this is not the place to set them out.