—peace and blessings be upon him—were still numerous, and they unanimously agreed that every case involving bloodshed, property, or sexual relations arising from an interpretation of the Quran incurred no liability. They treated those involved as being in the same position as the people of the Age of Ignorance.” He thus made clear that they regarded such cases as giving rise to no liability, just as no liability attached to what the people of the Age of Ignorance did to one another. Liability arises only when a person knows that the act is forbidden. When the prohibition is unknown—as in the case of disbelievers, apostates, and those among the people of the qiblah who act upon an interpretation—liability does not arise.

For this reason, the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—did not hold Usāmah ibn Zayd (1) liable for the blood of the man he killed on the basis of an interpretive judgment, even though he said to him:

“Did you kill him after he had said, ‘There is no god but Allah’? Did you kill him after he had said, ‘There is no god but Allah’? Did you kill him after he had said, ‘There is no god but Allah’?” (2)

For this reason, prescribed punishments are imposed only upon someone who knew that the act was forbidden (3).

The second period of good was the people’s reunification when al-Hasan and Muāwiyah made peace. Yet it was (4) a reconciliation tainted by hidden rancor and a united community marred by impurities, and in people’s hearts there was