[6] The terms mentioned in this part of the ruling refer to concepts discussed in the Islamic science known as the ‘Principles of Jurisprudence’ (uṣūl al‑fiqh). Although the scope of the present work does not allow for a detailed explanation of these concepts, it would be appropriate to expand a little on the example used in the text concerning ‘non-specific knowledge’.
Suppose a person finds himself in a situation where he is certain that he must perform prayers but he does not know whether his duty is to perform prayers in their shortened form – as a traveller would be required to – or in their complete form. This state of knowledge (i.e. the certainty of the general duty to perform prayers) that is accompanied by doubt concerning one’s exact duty (i.e. whether to perform the shortened or the complete form of the prayer) is known as ‘non-specific knowledge’.
In this example, the person would need to perform both possibilities – i.e. the shortened and complete forms of the prayer – in order to be certain that he has fulfilled his duty. As for ‘non-specific authority’ (al‑ḥujjah al‑ijmāliyyah), this is similar to ‘non-specific knowledge’ except that the mukallaf is not certain himself about there being a duty in general but comes to know it though other authoritative evidence that he is obligated to follow (Tawḍīḥ al‑Masāʾil‑i Jāmiʿ, vol. 1, p.
47, Ruling 12, footnotes 1 and 2). [7] Therefore, one is considered a muqallid from the time he makes the intention to follow a particular mujtahid, even if he has not yet acted according to that mujtahid’s fatwas. [8] A marjaʿ is a jurist who has the necessary qualifications to be followed in matters of Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh). See