Is there a difference between the methodology and the fatwa?

Question:
He says: Honorable Shaykh, may Allah grant you success. Some people, when I tell them that it is obligatory to adhere to the religion upon which the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) died and what the righteous Salaf did, want to say that Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned in *Al-A'lam al-Muqin* cases where the fatwa changes, and that it changes from one time to another.

Answer:
He says: So what is the answer to what they have brought up? The fatwa is not the methodology. The methodology is the methodology of the righteous Salaf. As for the fatwa, which is the one based on ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), the scholar exerts his effort and then issues a fatwa. Then, knowledge reaches him that he had not reached before, or something becomes clear to him that had not been clear before, so he issues another fatwa according to what appears to him. He does not freeze on the first fatwa only. Rather, if knowledge becomes clear to him and new knowledge is renewed for him, he acts upon it. This is not a negation of the first fatwa; rather, that one was according to what appeared to him at that time, and this one is according to what appears to him at this time. And this is what is obligatory. So he revolves with the truth, not departing from the truth. The change of time is a change of ijtihad. This is a change of ijtihad, not a change of time. The scholar becomes clear to him at one time what had not been clear to him at another time. He does not freeze on what he said, but he moves and seeks the truth. And if it becomes clear to him that this fatwa is stronger than the first one, he takes it. And ijtihad is not negated by ijtihad, as they say: the first one is correct, and this one is also correct. Yes. For this reason, when 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) judged in a matter of the law of inheritance shares with a judgment that contradicted his previous judgment, he was asked about it. He said: "That was according to what we judged, and this is according to what we judge." He did not say our first judgment is invalid, or that that one was according to what we judged at its time according to what appeared to us, and this is according to what we judge now according to what appears to us. Yes.