Working on a Matter with Two Sides or Opinions

Abstract

Research Objectives: To clarify the correct approach for a follower when a mujtahid (qualified jurist) has two equality valid opinions in terms of source and basis. Research Methodology: We explained the criteria for choosing between differing opinions, what is required of someone examining the disagreements among jurists, the method of investigation in issuing fatwas on a matter without considering which opinion is preferable, and the approach to dealing with the differing opinions of a weak jurist. We also addressed whether a judge should rule contrary to his own belied, what he is obligated to do if the imam compels him to do so, and whether a Maliki scholar is permitted to issue fatwas or rule contrary to the established school of thought. Results: One who adheres to the school of thought of an imam on a matter with two opinions or interpretations is not permitted to choose and act or issue a fatwa based on whichever he pleases. Rather, if there are two different opinions and their dates are known, the second is considered a retraction of the first. The obligation in cases of disagreement is to seek evidence from its sources if the evidence is equally strong then one must incline towards the opinion most similar to the two revelations selection without preference is not permissible. Rather, the follower is obligated to search for the well-known opinion. Choice is for one who intends to act, not to issue a ruling. Ruling based on the less preferred opinion Is contrary to consensus. The follower must follow in determining preference, just as he must follow in starting the opinion, unless he is qualified to determine preference. No one is obligated to follow in matters of new issues and rulings the one to whom he ascribes himself. The decisive factor is the opinion of the imam, and the follower is subordinate. Even if the judge or multi is qualified for ijtihad, it is permissible for him to rule contrary to his school of thought. There is consensus that one who errs in subsidiary matters is not considered sinful. Originality: A study on the verification of action on a matter with two interpretations or interpretations has not been published so that the follower may be informed of the legal ruling by which God had obligated him, without confusion or hesitation.