تَقْلِيدُ الْمُجْتَهِدِ
Following a qualified jurist.
Adopting a competent jurist’s position for religious practice differs from claiming that every possibility of error in that position has been eliminated. Reliance on legal scholarship involves recognized expertise and methods, but disagreement among qualified interpreters shows why the justification for acting and decisive theoretical knowledge must be distinguished.
Suppose two scholars reach different judgments on a matter resting on probabilistic evidence. It can still be permissible, under applicable legal rules, to act upon one view. That does not make both positions demonstratively certain or make the existence of scholarly disagreement impossible.