If the Companions differed on two opinions, is it not permissible to introduce a third opinion? Is it permissible to reach a consensus on one of the two opinions?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Question:
He says: If the Companions differed on two opinions, is it not permissible to introduce a third opinion? Is it permissible to reach a consensus on one of the two opinions?
Answer:
This question is well-posed. If the Companions differed among themselves, the opinion of some of them is not a proof against the others. The issue becomes a matter of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). The issue becomes a matter of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). A Companion’s opinion is only a proof if no other Companion contradicted it. It is a proof according to some scholars of the principles of jurisprudence. But if another Companion contradicted it, the issue becomes a matter of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad).
He says: If the Companions differed on two opinions, is it not permissible to introduce a third opinion? Is it permissible to reach a consensus on one of the two opinions?
Answer:
This question is well-posed. If the Companions differed among themselves, the opinion of some of them is not a proof against the others. The issue becomes a matter of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). The issue becomes a matter of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad). A Companion’s opinion is only a proof if no other Companion contradicted it. It is a proof according to some scholars of the principles of jurisprudence. But if another Companion contradicted it, the issue becomes a matter of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad).
Source
قناة «العلامة الدكتور صالح الفوزان»، إذا اختلف الصحابة على قولين فلا يجوز إحداث قول ثالث، فهل يجوز الإجماع على أحد القولين؟ — youtube.com
The Arabic text is a machine transcription of the audio recording.