May Allah bless you. I’ve found this series to be beneficial. However, I found the first part of this article (i.e. Part 6) to be a bit vague and confusing. I couldn’t quite grasp whether it was advocating that there is more than one correct opinion or not or addressing something different altogether.

I say this as the article starts off by highlighting that it is a mistake to assume that “There is only one right answer for every issue”. However, it then addresses the issue of difference of opinion being a mercy. While that is interesting and a very important issue in and of itself, it doesn’t clearly address what the title alluded to (i.e. whether “There is only one right answer for every issue”). Maybe I misunderstood or missed something?

I was taught that the Prophet (sal Allah alayhi wa sallam) said:

“When a judge gives a decision, having tried his best to decide correctly and is right, there are two rewards for him; and if he gave a judgment after having tried his best (to arrive at a correct decision) but erred, there is one reward for him.”
[Sahih Muslim]

This narration indicates that there is one juristic ruling that will ultimately be correct. Some will use sound juristic methods and find the correct ruling, while others may also employ sound juristic methods but come to an incorrect ruling. Nonetheless, Allah will reward both parties. However, the party who holds the correct ruling will receive a greater reward.

Furthermore, regardless of the fact that there is ultimately only one ruling that will be correct, it is important to realise that it is Allah who truly knows which ruling is the correct one. Mankind on the other hand are in no position to unequivocally dismiss a valid difference of opinion when it is based on sound juristic methods and/or behave with intolerance toward it. After all, mankind is prone to errors – even when we don’t intend to make errors, are sincere and do our best to adhere to sound principles of jurisprudence. As such, we need to show these valid jurisprudential opinions the respect they rightly deserve, considering each valid viewpoint on its merits and considering each one to possibly be the one that is ultimately correct. I’m guessing this is what the author is advocating?

On a related note, the article did a great job of highlighting the respectful manner in which we should address differences of opinion and how differences of opinion are a mercy. May Allah reward the author abundantly

Again, thank you for the articles. May Allah bless you and unite us all in Jannatul-Firdaus. May peace and blessing be upon Prophet Muhammad (sal Allah alayhi wa sallam)

It seems to me that a good jurist when giving his ruling generally or advice to a person, would exhibit listening or observing behaviour first because it is necessary to check that the circumstances match the ‘established’ ruling, or if it is sufficiently different. He/she would be able to detect correctly what things are different that matter to the ruling and what does not, with understanding both of jurisprudence and the local customs and current difficulties of his/her people (he/she is not removed from the people’s lives).

Also a good jurist when giving his advice to a particular person, if the ruling is not changed by the person’s circumstance but it is causing the person distress, has the empathy and compassion to recognise when there is an underlying issue preventing the asker from applying established ruling with ease of mind, and may consider to approach/assist resolution of that issue first instead of simply providing the ruling that was asked for, academically. in this way the religious rulings do not feel like merely constrictions left and right, leaving someone in difficulty with nowhere to go, which can happen even when all the rulings in a situation are – academically – correct.