and rule that his own view is correct. Yet it is impossible for both of two opposing views to be binding upon all Muslims. This is unlike what the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) brought, for it is from Allah: truth, guidance, and clarification, containing no error whatsoever, no inconsistency, and no contradiction. Allah Most High says:

“Do they not reflect upon the Quran? Had it been from anyone other than Allah, they would have found in it much contradiction.”

Those in authority must prevent them from wronging one another. If some transgress against others, they must stop that aggression. They are already obliged to prevent oppression of protected non-Muslim subjects and to ensure that no Jew or Christian in their lands who observes the stipulated conditions is compelled to abandon his religion—even though it is known that his religion entails punishment. How, then, can those in authority permit groups of Muslims to transgress against one another and impose rulings on one another according to their own views and schools of law? This is among the things that bring about the upheaval and collapse of states, for people cannot fare well under such conditions.

All this applies when the judges have ruled on a matter subject to independent legal reasoning and recognized disagreement. But if the position on which they have ruled was never held by any of the leading Muslim scholars, is not the position of the imams whose followers they claim to be, was never expressed by any of the Companions or Successors, and has no support in any verse of Allah’s Book or in the Sunnah of His Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace)—indeed, their position contradicts the Quran, the Sunnah, and the consensus of the imams—how, despite all this, can it be lawful to compel Muslim scholars