Affiliation with a specific school of jurisprudence and following the evidence

The questioner:
If a person follows a specific school of jurisprudence such that when the evidence comes, he acts upon it and leaves the school,

The Shaykh:
No, and may Allah reward you with good. If he takes the evidence, he affiliates with it, for example, like Shaykh Ahmad, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Qayyim, and others. He affiliates with the evidence of Ahmad, and he is a mujtahid (a scholar qualified to derive rulings). And when the evidence comes, like the imams of the Dawah, Shaykh Ahmad ibn Abd al-Wahhab and his companions, affiliation with the school of so-and-so—Shafi'i, Maliki, Hanbali, or Zahiri—if the goal is the Sunnah and following the truth, then the affiliation does no harm.

The questioner:
All right, if a mujtahid (a scholar qualified to derive rulings) exerts independent legal reasoning and does not prefer one of the two opinions, does he follow his school?

The Shaykh:
He follows what is most likely in his opinion, what he is most convinced is the correct one, he follows it.

Another questioner:
So what is the purpose of his affiliation with the school, Honorable Shaykh, may Allah reward you? What is the purpose of his affiliation, I mean, from the days of?

The Shaykh:
So everyone, I mean, lived among them and lived with them, visiting them.

Another questioner:
He agrees with.

The Shaykh:
He affiliates with them; the Shaykh al-Islam is attributed to them, even if it is different, even if it is much, and even if it is otherwise.