How is reasoning by scholarly disagreement defective if it has no share of consideration?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : We said that reasoning by scholarly disagreement is defective unless the evidence allows for it and it has a share of consideration. Is there a case where reasoning by scholarly disagreement has a share of consideration?
The Shaykh : A share of consideration? Yes, very often the evidence is ambiguous regarding obligation or recommendation, and scholars differ on it, with some viewing it as obligatory and others as recommended. So we say, as a precaution, that one should perform it and we adopt the view of obligation, for example. There is evidence that allows for prohibition or dislike, and scholars differ on it. Sometimes the disagreement has no share of consideration at all, such as the dislike of a man performing wudu' with the leftover water of a woman's wudu' and the like. This has no share of consideration.
The Shaykh : A share of consideration? Yes, very often the evidence is ambiguous regarding obligation or recommendation, and scholars differ on it, with some viewing it as obligatory and others as recommended. So we say, as a precaution, that one should perform it and we adopt the view of obligation, for example. There is evidence that allows for prohibition or dislike, and scholars differ on it. Sometimes the disagreement has no share of consideration at all, such as the dislike of a man performing wudu' with the leftover water of a woman's wudu' and the like. This has no share of consideration.