And he leaves out the ruling on it, and in what calamities this will happen, and who is right in this issue? Is there anyone who says that he rules with his knowledge or someone who disagrees? In my opinion, on this issue, if I were knowledgeable about a matter and the witnesses testified contrary to my knowledge, and it is not permissible for me to rule with my knowledge if I am one of those who say so. In judging the matter, I chose someone who has no knowledge of the matter and left the ruling on it. This is the correct approach in my opinion and what I work by, even if there is something in the soul, and this is what I have in ruling on wealth. As for ruling on bodies, I do not rule except with my knowledge if I know of innocence, and if there is no innocence and I know it is true. The slanderer: I ruled by the witnesses and abandoned my knowledge and the knowledge of the reason for this which I went to is included in this verse, and in it is the knowledge of what the world ha