What is the ruling on the ijtihad of the Companions, and does it have the status of marfu' if it is related to the unseen, with clarification of some examples of this

The Shaykh : It is by ijtihad, and only by a ruling from the Messenger (peace be upon him). Some opinions, or ijtihad, may be from the Companions based on ijtihad, but it is acceptable ijtihad because there is nothing to contradict it. It may also be from the category of a ruling from the Prophet (peace be upon him), but the ruling may not be apparent and clear, as is the case with the athar of Ibn Abbas, for example. In Sahih Muslim, there is a hadith of Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) forbade drinking while standing." In another narration: "The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) warned against drinking while standing. He was asked: 'What about eating?' He said: 'It is worse.'" This could be his ijtihad, or it could be a ruling from the Messenger (peace be upon him). But we do not have the apparent evidence as is the case with the athar of Ibn Abbas, where it is unlikely to be his ijtihad. It is possible that it is ijtihad in the sense that he analogized eating to drinking because they are of the same nature. Since he heard the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) forbidding drinking while standing, eating is like it or worse than it. This is because people are more likely to be affected by drinking while standing, whereas the common practice for eating is to do so while sitting or seated. So if he eats while standing, this eating is worse than drinking while standing. It is as if he is saying: This is a qiyas of priority, as we said: . But I return to say: It is not like the athar of Ibn Abbas, because the soul is reassured, approximately ninety percent, that this athar is what he received from the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), because it is from matters of the unseen. Here is a nuance that must be noted: Not everything that a Companion narrates or says, if it is related to the unseen, necessarily has the status of marfu'. Rather, it must be detailed. If this matter of the unseen that the Companion spoke about is related to the Shari'ah of Islam and to what Allah revealed to the heart of Muhammad (peace be upon him), then it has the status of marfu'. But if it has no relation to the Shari'ah of Islam, but rather has a relation to what happened in ancient times, then it is possible that it is from the Isra'iliyyat, meaning that this athar is what the Companion received from some of the People of the Book who became Muslims. If this possibility enters the athar, it exits from our saying that it has the status of marfu'. This is an observation that students of knowledge must note, as a difference between the athar that may have the status of marfu' and the athar that does not necessarily have the status of marfu'. This is what I intended to clarify.