The same applies to general evidence: an independent jurist may rule according to its general purport without having received the evidence that qualifies it; or according to a text that has been abrogated without his knowing it; or he may adopt an analogy that appears to establish equivalence, although the case in question has a legally significant distinguishing feature that he has been unable to discern. The significance of that distinction may be established by a text that has not reached him, or it may consist in a subtle characteristic.

In short, he is rewarded for following the truth to the best of his ability through independent reasoning, even if the actual truth contradicts his conclusion and would have a greater claim to be followed had he been able to ascertain it. But he was unable to do so. His case is therefore like that of those who strive to determine the direction of the Kaaba.

The same applies to anyone who performs a prohibited act of worship without knowing of the prohibition, provided that it belongs to a generally prescribed category of worship. An example is someone who prays at prohibited times, having learned of the general command to pray but not of the prohibition. Another is someone who relies on specific evidence that is outweighed by stronger evidence, as did a number of the early Muslims who prayed two units after the afternoon prayer because the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, had prayed them. Other examples include prayers concerning which weak or fabricated hadiths have been transmitted, such as the Alfiyyah prayer of mid-Shaʿbān, the prayer at the beginning of Rajab, and the prayer of glorification, which Ibn al-Mubārak permitted, as well as other such prayers.

If such a prayer falls within the general recommendation to pray, and the person has not received evidence establishing its prohibition, he is rewarded for it—even if it is prohibited in a respect unknown to him, owing to its being an innovation adopted as an established observance for which people gather every year. This is like introducing a sixth prayer. Thus, if someone wished to perform such a prayer without a hadith to support it, he would not be entitled to do so. But when the hadith was transmitted, he believed it to be authentic and was mistaken in that; such a person is forgiven