Is it obligatory for a student to follow the opinion of his shaykh if it contradicts the evidence?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : And you heard from your shaykh that zakah is not obligatory except on what amounts to five wasqs or more. The scholar who told you that ten percent is due on what the sky has watered ruled based on what appeared to him. He had a general hadith that was not restricted or specified, but your teacher had broader knowledge. He said this hadith is general and is specified by the condition that the nisab is reached. What reaches the nisab has zakah due on it, and what is below that does not have zakah due on it. Did you understand? Did you understand my words now? What is the answer?
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : What?
The questioner : ... and the tapes
The Shaykh : What contradicts [the evidence], the books and tapes are undoubtedly [reliable], meaning, if you recognize the scholar's voice and know that this is his voice, and you trust his knowledge and his trustworthiness, then take it. But my point is that a person, for example, trusts a scholar and becomes a student under him, attends his lessons, reads to him, and relies on his statements. Then he hears another scholar say something contrary to his statement and provide evidence. He has no right to go to the second scholar until he consults his shaykh. Do you understand? If he consults his shaykh, he will have more knowledge than the first one. Do you understand now? Good.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : What?
The questioner : ... and the tapes
The Shaykh : What contradicts [the evidence], the books and tapes are undoubtedly [reliable], meaning, if you recognize the scholar's voice and know that this is his voice, and you trust his knowledge and his trustworthiness, then take it. But my point is that a person, for example, trusts a scholar and becomes a student under him, attends his lessons, reads to him, and relies on his statements. Then he hears another scholar say something contrary to his statement and provide evidence. He has no right to go to the second scholar until he consults his shaykh. Do you understand? If he consults his shaykh, he will have more knowledge than the first one. Do you understand now? Good.