Is there a Shari'ah benefit in the difference of fatwas among scholars?

Question:
He asks: Is there a Shari'ah benefit in the difference of fatwas among scholars that confirms the breadth of legal opinion, or is it a means of discord and disagreement?

Answer:
The difference among scholars, and we mean scholars who have a deep understanding and firmness in knowledge, not those who pretend to be scholars, or those who follow their desires and issue fatwas according to their wishes rather than according to the evidence, we do not mean them and we do not consider their fatwas to be anything. We mean the firmly grounded scholars; it is necessary for there to be difference among them in matters of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), but as for matters of 'aqidah (creed), it is not permissible to differ in them.
The 'aqidah of the people of the Sunnah and the community is one, and it is what the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) and his Companions were upon, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: So there is no difference in 'aqidah. The 'aqidah is as it came in the Book of Allah and in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); it is received and it is not permissible to differ in it. Rather, agreement and scholarly consensus (ijma') upon it are obligatory, and whoever opposes it in this is misguided. Whoever opposes in 'aqidah is misguided because it is not a place for independent legal reasoning (ijtihad) and difference does not enter it. What enters into difference are matters of fiqh. As for the difference in matters of fiqh.
So if the evidence becomes clear with one of the differing parties, it is obligatory to take what the evidence indicates and leave aside the opinions of the jurists that contradict the evidence. We must take from the opinions of scholars what is established by evidence from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), or the consensus of scholars, and we do not take the difference, but we take what is established by evidence. Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said: Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "The Muslims have agreed that if the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) becomes clear to a person, he has no right to leave it for the saying of anyone." Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I answered a group who knew the chain of narration and its authenticity, but they went to the opinion of Sufyan." Allah the Exalted says: . Rather, before that, Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said when they differed regarding changing Hajj to 'Umrah, and Ibn 'Abbas held that it was obligatory to change Hajj to 'Umrah by taking the evidence of the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). He said: "It is near that stones will fall from the sky upon you. I say to you: 'The Messenger of Allah said,' and you say: 'Abu Bakr and 'Umar said.' So if the evidence becomes clear, no one's saying is to be followed; the obligatory thing is to follow the evidence. But if the evidence does not become clear and the independent legal reasonings are all possible, each having a possibility, then there is no blame in these matters of independent legal reasoning. This is the matter they say: 'There is no blame in matters of independent legal reasoning' if the evidence does not become clear with one of the scholars, and rather each one is possible as being the correct one. So at that time, whoever takes the saying of one of them, there is no blame on him, if he is not able to research and know the evidences, there is no blame on him, because this is the limit of his ability. Yes.