A hadith reports that once, during a journey, a companion of the Prophet suffered a head injury. While he was still badly wounded, he needed to perform ghusl, a full ritual bath required in certain religious situations, the next morning. Pouring water over his head was extremely dangerous. He asked his fellow Muslims about the ruling, but they told him that since water was available, there was no allowance for him to avoid it. Seeing no other option, the wounded man performed the ritual bath in that condition. As a result, his condition worsened, and he died. When the Messenger of God e was informed of this incident, he was deeply distressed. He said very strongly, “They caused his death—may God deal with them accordingly.” (Sunan Abi Dawud, Hadith No. 336)
This issue was clearly a matter of ijtihad. Even so, the Prophet e used such severe words about them. This shows that there is a limit to excusing mistakes made in ijtihad. Under normal circumstances, an error in ijtihad is not held against a person. But when the matter is extremely serious—when it involves a question of life and death—one should refrain from giving a personal juristic opinion. At such a time, offering a religious opinion (fatwa) lacking consideration for the individual and insisting upon it is a sign of insensitivity, and insensitivity indicates that the spirit of faith has weakened.
The above hadith relates to an ijtihadi error, the harm of which appeared at the individual level. The matter becomes even more serious when a community leader insists on an ijtihadi opinion that results in the collective destruction for the community.
For example, if a religious scholar gives an incorrect ruling on whether a person should face the qiblah (the direction of prayer) during ritual bathing, there is no risk to anyone’s life or property. But if a severely injured person is wrongly told that he must perform a full ritual bath for purification, such a ruling can put his life in danger. Therefore, mistakes in these two kinds of matters cannot be treated in the same way.
The first type of issue is one in which even an error in independent judgment may earn a person a reward because of good intention. But in the second type of issue, making such an error is an unforgivable fault. In sensitive matters that affect the fate of individuals or entire communities, a religious scholar should remain silent until the very end. If he does speak, he should do so only when he is truly confident that, before God, he is free of responsibility—that is, that his guidance will cause no harm to anyone. (Al-Risala, September 1983)
