Is it permissible to justify a ruling based on scholarly disagreement?

The questioner : It is very large, for example, from the purification of the noble one, or from its evidence, and so on. So, it is I who did them.

The Shaykh : We say that justifying a ruling based on disagreement is not correct. That is, we do not say, "This is forbidden because there is disagreement about it," or "This is disliked because there is disagreement about it." No, we do not say any of that. But we say that it is preferable to avoid this matter. As for saying it is forbidden because of the disagreement, we do not say it is forbidden because of the disagreement.

The questioner : I mean, it is possible to justify it to me.

The Shaykh : We say that there is no obligation to support [a specific view], and even if you act [according to the other view], there is no harm and you are not to be blamed. But we say that since there is disagreement in the issue and the majority of scholars are on the side of prohibition, and you do not have a need or dire necessity, there is no harm.