travel, contrary to analogical reasoning, and upon the hadith concerning laughing aloud during prayer, although it too conflicts with analogical reasoning. He did so because he believed both hadiths to be authentic, even though the leading hadith scholars did not authenticate them.

We have explained this in the treatise Removing Blame from the Eminent Imams, showing that none of the imams of Islam departs from an authentic hadith without an excuse. Indeed, they have some twenty grounds for excuse: a hadith may not have reached an imam; it may have reached him through a route he did not trust; he may not have believed that it established the ruling in question; or he may have believed that this evidence was opposed by stronger evidence, such as an abrogating text or evidence indicating abrogation, and so forth.

In some of these cases, the scholar is correct and receives two rewards. In others, he errs after exercising independent judgment; he is rewarded for his effort, and his error is forgiven, for Allah Most High says:

“Our Lord, do not hold us accountable if we forget or make a mistake.”

It is established in an authentic report that Allah answered this supplication, saying, “I have done so.” Moreover, scholars are the heirs of the prophets. Allah relates that David and Solomon both passed judgment in a case, and that He granted one of them understanding of it, without censuring the other. Rather, He praised both, stating that He had given each judgment and knowledge. He said:

“And remember David and Solomon, when they passed judgment concerning the field into which some people’s sheep had strayed by night. We were witnesses to their judgment.”

“So We gave Solomon understanding of the case, and to each We gave judgment and knowledge.”