This is analogous to the case in which the evidence concerning a “question of religious law” appears conflicting to a jurist exercising independent legal judgment or to a follower seeking a legal ruling: they do not give preference to either position. Rather, they accept whatever divine decree brings about and do not object to it.

At other times, one of them gives preference to a course of action on the basis of a dream, the opinion of a sincere adviser, or a benefit he perceives in one of the two courses. As for giving preference merely through personal choice—so that, when the evidence appears evenly balanced, a person favors one position solely through his own will and choice—this is not the position of any of the imams of Islam. It is only the position of a group of speculative theologians. Some jurists, however, have held this view regarding a layperson seeking a legal ruling, saying that he may choose between muftis whose rulings differ.

Likewise, some who follow the spiritual path, when two courses appear equal to them under religious law, give preference solely on the basis of their own spiritual feeling and will. Yet none of the leading authorities in religious learning and asceticism endorses giving preference solely through a will that rests on no inward or outward basis in knowledge. The leading jurists and Sufis do not hold this view. Whoever permits a jurist exercising independent legal judgment, or a follower, to give preference merely through personal choice and will is like someone who prescribes for the spiritual wayfarer giving preference merely through his own will and spiritual feeling.

It may, however, be said: when a heart filled with piety gives preference according to its will, that preference is sanctioned by religious law. Under this assumption, it does not fall into the category just discussed. Thus, if someone whose heart is dominated by the desire for what Allah loves and aversion to what Allah dislikes does not know, concerning a particular matter,