religious innovations, and to shunning sinners and anyone who associates with any of these people or assists them. The same applies to anyone who abandons jihad when their welfare cannot be secured without it: he is punished by their shunning him because he failed to assist them in righteousness and piety. Those who engage in unlawful sexual intercourse, those who practise sodomy, those who abandon jihad, proponents of religious innovations, and wine-drinkers—all these people, and association with them, are harmful to the religion of Islam. They offer no assistance in righteousness or piety. Whoever does not shun them neglects what is commanded and does what is forbidden. Thus, in one case the commanded form of association is neglected, while in the other a forbidden form is practised. Each is therefore punished in a manner appropriate to his offence, for punishment is imposed only for neglecting a command or committing a prohibition. As the jurists have said:

“Discretionary punishment is prescribed only for a sin for which there is no prescribed fixed punishment. If it entails an expiation, there are two opinions within the school of Ahmad and among others.”

He said:

The commands, punishments, expiations, and other provisions laid down by the Sharia are to be implemented according to one’s ability. If a Muslim cannot wage jihad against all the polytheists, he wages jihad against those whom he can. Likewise, if he cannot punish all transgressors, he punishes those whom he can. If banishment and confinement away from everyone are not possible, then banishment and confinement are carried out to the extent possible. For example, he may be confined to a house, having contact only with its residents and not leaving it, or he may have contact with only one or two people. Since this is what is possible, it is what is commanded. If he can be placed somewhere where reprehensible conduct is reduced, though not eliminated altogether, then that is what is commanded, for the Sharia came to secure