Ijtihad in its general concept according to al-Aamudi is...

Ijtihad in its general concept according to al-Aamudi is trying the best to suppose something of the legal verdicts in a way that it is felt that that one is unable to get more than it.[2] Some jurisprudents of Usool adopted this definition with doing some reform to it and changing some of its words.

Ad-Dahlawi defines it as: trying the best to understand the legal sub-verdicts from their detailed evidences that all belong to four sources; the Book, the Sunna, consensus and analogy.[3] Muhammad al-Khudhari defines it as: trying the best by a jurisprudent to know the verdicts of the Sharia then he adds full ijtihad is to try all that he can until he feels that he is unable to get anything more.[4] All these definitions and their likes are not skilled if they have meant to define the concept logically but if they have intended to explain the word like the linguists so it is no matter to depend on any of them.

Perhaps the closer skilled definition that is away from criticism somehow is the ability, by which one can join the little [1] Nass means proviso, text or wording. [2] Refer to al-Ahkam, vol.4 p.218. [3] The thesis of al-Insaf fee Bayan al-Ikhtilaf by allama Shah Waliyullah ad-Dahlawi mentioned in the Encyclopedia of Fareed Wajdi. This definition is in vol. 3 p.236. [4] Usool al-Fiqh by Muhammad al-Khudhari p.357.

matters to the greater ones in order to produce a legal verdict or a legal or rational practical function and it somehow avoids the defects of the previous definitions.

Being limited to demand supposing the legal verdict, as in al-Aamudis definition, excludes analogy,[1] which produces the legal conclusions, if its little and greater matters are certain and being limited to knowledge as in al-Khudharis definition excludes the results that lead to the real verdict if its premises or some of them lead to accepted supposition legally and rationally because the result -as it is said- follows in its verdict the least of premises.

And being limited to legal verdicts- as in all definitions-excludes the results, to which a mujtahid reaches via trying some rules and usools and especially the ones that annul its obligation like the legal acquittance derived from this tradition the people of my umma are not responsible for what they do not know and the rational acquittance derived from the decision of mind that decides the ugliness of punishing without an evidence and the likes.