whatsoever, he must not take it, for I am only allotting him a portion of the Fire.”

A judge rules according to the evidence and admissions he hears, while the other party may have arguments he has not presented, and so forth. Thus, the Sharia as it actually stands concerns the underlying reality, whereas the judge’s ruling is enforced outwardly.

In many matters, the underlying reality may differ from what appears to some people. The story of Moses and al-Khidr is an example. What al-Khidr did served a beneficial purpose and was an ordinance Allah had commanded him to carry out; it did not contravene Allah’s Law. But because Moses did not know the underlying reality, it appeared to him that this was impermissible. When al-Khidr explained matters to him, he agreed with him. Thus, this did not contravene the divine Law.

Regarding such matters, it may be said that the underlying reality can differ from outward appearances, and this is correct. However, calling the inward aspect “reality” and the outward aspect “Sharia” is a matter of terminological convention. Some people use “reality” for the inward aspect in general, and “Sharia” for outward matters.

This is like the term “Islam”: when paired with faith, it refers to outward deeds, while “faith” refers to the faith within the heart, as in the hadith of Gabriel. Thus, when the two are brought together in the expression “the ordinances of Islam and the realities of faith,” this is a valid statement. But whenever