religious law, when he has only contravened what that student supposes to be religious law. The student’s understanding may be mistaken, in which case he is rewarded for his scholarly effort and forgiven for his error. The other person, too, may have exercised scholarly judgment and been mistaken.

As for “altered law,” it includes fabricated hadiths, corrupt interpretations, invalid analogies, and forbidden adherence to another’s authority. This, too, is prohibited. This is one source of dispute: many students of jurisprudence and speculative theologians may require Sufis and those who profess spiritual poverty to follow their particular school, adhere to the authority of their chosen scholar, and accept their judge’s ruling as binding both inwardly and outwardly. They regard departure from this as departure from the law brought by Muhammad. This is ignorance and injustice on their part; indeed, making such an unrestricted claim is disbelief and hypocrisy. Likewise, many Sufis and those who profess spiritual poverty hold a similar view concerning their shaykh and the authority they follow. In this respect, they are no different from the others.

Each of these groups may permit departure from what the Quran and Sunnah have brought on account of something they suppose contradicts them: what one calls spiritual experience, ecstasy, unveilings, and communications, or what the other calls analogy, opinion, rational arguments, and conclusive proofs. All of this belongs to the branches of hypocrisy. Rather, everyone must believe the Messenger, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, in everything he has reported and obey him in everything he has commanded. No one may oppose him by drawing comparisons or appealing to people’s opinions. Everything that contradicts him is error and misguidance.