is awarded by me anything that rightfully belongs to his brother must not take it, for I am only assigning him a piece of the Fire.”

Thus, the foremost of creation explained that if he gives a judgment based on what he has heard, while the actual facts are otherwise, the person in whose favour he rules may not take what he has been awarded: he is only assigning him a piece of the Fire. The scholars agree on this concerning cases of outright ownership. If a judge rules on the basis of what he considers legally valid proof, such as witness testimony or an admission, while the actual facts differ from what appears outwardly, the person in whose favour he rules may not take what he has been awarded, by scholarly agreement. If he rules on contracts and annulments on a similar basis, most scholars hold that the same applies. This is the position of Mālik, al-Shāfi‘ī and Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Abū Hanīfa, may Allah be pleased with him, distinguished between the two categories.

Thus, when the terms “religious law” and “Sharia” mean the Quran and Sunnah, neither any of Allah’s allies nor anyone else may depart from them. Whoever thinks that any of Allah’s allies has a path to Allah other than following Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, inwardly and outwardly, and does not follow him inwardly and outwardly, is a disbeliever.

Whoever invokes the account of Moses and al-Khidr to support this is mistaken on two counts.

The first is that Moses was not sent to al-Khidr, nor was al-Khidr obliged to follow him, for Moses was sent to the Children of Israel. As for Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, his message encompasses both kinds of accountable beings, jinn and humans; and even if