and my livelihood and the outcome of my affairs, then decree it for me, make it easy for me, and bless it for me. And if You know that this matter is bad for me in my religion, my livelihood, and the outcome of my affairs, then turn it away from me and turn me away from it. Decree good for me wherever it may be, then make me content with it.”

When he seeks Allah’s guidance, whatever Allah opens his heart to and makes easy for him is what Allah has chosen for him. For he has no evidence from Islamic law indicating that this particular act is commanded in these circumstances. The evidences of Islamic law prescribe in unrestricted, general terms, rather than specifying every individual act by every individual person, as that would be impossible. A particular act may nevertheless fall within the scope of some general pronouncement of the Lawgiver, when the specific instances come under a general, universal command. But not everyone can bring this to mind or recall the various kinds of the Lawgiver’s pronouncements. This is why jurists turn to analogical reasoning when this is unclear to them.

Furthermore, analogical reasoning may not be available in every case. Even the leading scholars qualified to exercise independent legal judgment among the Companions and those who followed them in righteousness may fail to recognize that a particular case falls under a general pronouncement, or that it can be assessed by comparison with an analogous case. They may thus know of neither a basis for it nor an analogous case. This is despite their extensive study of the Lawgiver’s pronouncements and their knowledge of their meanings and the rulings they indicate. What, then, of someone who is not like them?