fall within areas of independent judgment over which people of knowledge and faith have differed, such matters may be definitively settled for someone to whom Allah has made the truth clear. Yet he cannot bind others to what has become clear to him but not to them. Thus, in one respect, such a matter belongs to the first category, and in another to the second. These matters may also remain open to independent judgment in his own view. In such cases, those exercising independent judgment, together with those who follow them, are allowed their respective approaches as a general concession, without being censured for them, just as an individual concession is granted in the first category.

As for someone whose state is not to be accepted as an excuse, this includes one who is known to be of sound mind but feigns derangement to escape blame—as do many who affiliate themselves with Shaykh Ahmad ibn al-Rifāʿī and the “Yūnusiyya” regarding the forbidden acts they commit and the obligations they neglect. It also includes one who is known to affect ecstasy and feign intoxication in that state so that others will think well of him and excuse the objectionable acts he commits; or one who is known to have recognized the truth but follows his own desires; or one who is known to regard deviation from the requirements of Muhammad’s revealed law as permissible, who may utter statements contrary to it, and who holds that some men can dispense with the Messenger, oppose him, or simply go along with the divine decree in opposition to religion.

Thus, some misguided liars relate that the people of the Suffa fought against the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, alongside the disbelievers when his Companions were defeated, saying: “We are with Allah; whoever prevails, we are with him.” They also relate that, on the morning following the Night Journey, the intimate discourse that had taken place between him and his Lord was heard from him,