<strong>ملخص الدراسة:</strong>

This study aimed at investigating a significant fundamental issue, i.e., the consistency between excuse and ignorance. It explained both of them and whether this sin requires attributing disbelief; hence it requires penalty. On the other hand, does excuse impose reward if the contradiction is based on an evidence, though it might be weak, or does it require forgiveness? The study concluded that the relation between what is necessarily know from religion and extent of excuse due to ignorance is not forward, but requiring specification. This issue is relevant to difference in ruling in terms of circumstances related to scholarly issues, to people i.e. scholars, laymen, new converts, dwellers in remote desert areas, or related to times and places, in terms of learning, spread or scarcity of learning or learners. ] : 53 [ :

<strong>توثيق المرجعي (APA)</strong>

ملخص الدراسة:

This study aimed at investigating a significant fundamental issue, i.e., the consistency between excuse and ignorance. It explained both of them and whether this sin requires attributing disbelief; hence it requires penalty. On the other hand, does excuse impose reward if the contradiction is based on an evidence, though it might be weak, or does it require forgiveness? The study concluded that the relation between what is necessarily know from religion and extent of excuse due to ignorance is not forward, but requiring specification. This issue is relevant to difference in ruling in terms of circumstances related to scholarly issues, to people i.e. scholars, laymen, new converts, dwellers in remote desert areas, or related to times and places, in terms of learning, spread or scarcity of learning or learners. ] : 53 [ :

توثيق المرجعي (APA)