A story about a wealthy, devout man from Damascus and an Armenian Christian.

The Shaykh : A man in Damascus, who appears to be devout, is a large merchant with refrigerators for storing vegetables and meat. One day, an Armenian man came to him. These are a group of Christians who migrated from Russia to Syria; they are known as Armenians, from the inhabitants of Armenia, meaning... He said to him: "I have meat... I want to store it with you for a fee, and I will give you whatever you want." As a Muslim, first, and as one committed to his religion and the rulings of his Shari'ah, second, the mere mention of the word "pig" made the hair on his body stand on end. But there was something in this generous offer that tempted him, so a discussion arose between his intellect and his soul that incites to evil. Then the religious intellect overcame the soul that incites to evil. He said: "I must ask the people of knowledge." So he went to the Mufti of the Syrian lands and presented the story to him, wanting to know from him whether it is permissible or not. He said to him: "Write your question." So he wrote the question and submitted it to the presence of the Mufti. This Mufti is the Mufti of Syria, not the Mufti of a district or a court, but the Mufti of all of Syria. He said to him: "Come back in a week to get the answer." By Allah's will, a battle that requires a week of preparation!! If only it had succeeded. He came back after a week, and he said to him: "By Allah, the answer is not yet ready." This happened three times, each trip taking a week to endure. On the third week, he knocked on the door and no one answered. He took the liberty of opening the door, and there he found the Grand Mufti sitting there at the table, absorbed in sleep. He made a coughing motion, "Ahem," and the Mufti woke up. "Peace be upon you, and upon you be peace." He found the answer for him, meaning he was glad to inform him. After three weeks, he found the answer!! He gave him the answer. May Allah reward you with good.
He left the office and followed the Mufti to the courtyard. He stood there reading, unable to understand whether it was halal or haram. Storing this pig meat, is it haram or halal? He did not understand. He read from the beginning, went back from the beginning to the end, from the end to the beginning... He had an employee who was a car driver, one of our Salafi brothers in Damascus, named "Salah al-Jazairi." He said to him: "O Salah, look at this fatwa for me; I do not understand it, nor is it making itself understood." Our friend Salah took it and read the story, the same story, and he did not understand whether it was halal or haram. They were perplexed. Our friend said to him: "Come, I will take you to men who are not the Mufti, but they are my hourly workers, yet they will understand the matter for you." By Allah, I was in the shop as usual. "Peace be upon you, and upon you be peace." They told us the story and the fatwa, and we did not understand whether it was halal or haram. I read it and said to them: "The truth is with you; because the Shaykh does not understand haram or halal, and one who lacks a thing cannot give it!!"

The questioner : There are two opinions in this issue.

The Shaykh : What is the Grand Mufti doing—Allahu Akbar!—he is transmitting opinions from some books of fiqh, which are not, of course, explicit on the subject of the issue, but what do they have? Examples. For instance, he transmitted the ruling on carrying khamr (intoxicants) on a Muslim's donkey: is it permissible or not? And as our friend said: "There are two opinions in the issue!!" It was stated in such-and-such a book: "If a dhimmi (a non-Muslim under Muslim protection) hires a Muslim to carry khamr for him on his donkey; so-and-so said: It is not permissible, and the fee is haram for him. And so-and-so said: It is permissible, and the fee is lawful for him." And so it was stated in such-and-such a book: "If a dhimmi hires a Muslim to build a church for him; is it permissible and the fee lawful for him, or not?" Again, we say the opinions are contradictory. And the strange thing, regarding the general public like our friend, these two friends of ours, is that they are transmitting opinions from books with strange names. He tells you—for example: "It was stated..."
Please, be comfortable, take your share.Another questioner : ... . The Shaykh : Why?Another questioner : ... . The Shaykh : To be a medical fasting worker?!
The point is: he is transmitting from books with strange names. It was stated in "al-Wajwajiyyah" such-and-such, and it was stated in "al-Bazzaziyyah" such-and-such. These are contradictory opinions. And unfortunately, with the contradiction of the transmissions that the presence of the Mufti transmitted, he does not summarize in a way that gives his personal opinion to this questioner. Rather, he concludes the fatwa by saying: "And from what has preceded, the answer to the question is known!!" ... The answer to the question. He did not give an answer. Why? Because as long as there are two opinions in the issue, he cannot exercise ijtihad (independent legal reasoning); because ijtihad is forbidden for them. Their duty is to transmit the text and nothing else. So by this method, it is absolutely impossible for him to give an answer to such an issue.