The agreement and unity of opinion among Islamic scholars on a specific issue.

“Consensus, which also conveys the meanings of agreement, intention, determination, and mutual consent, refers to the consensus of the qualified scholars (mujtahids) of a given era on a religious matter. This is a special distinction granted to the Muslim community. Consensus is not the concern of everyone, nor especially of ordinary people; it is the mutual agreement of experts capable of determining and evaluating an issue based on the fundamental sources of Islam. Therefore, the agreement of the common people on any matter cannot be regarded as consensus, nor can there be consensus on any point that contradicts the Sharia’s primary evidences.”¹⁾

“In the Qur’an, the noble hadiths, and the works of the jurists, there is no command stating that no one should benefit directly from the Qur’an or refer to the hadiths, and that everyone must merely follow the great mujtahids. For us, the adillah al-shar‘iyyah—the fundamental evidences of the religion—are four: the Qur’an, the Sunnah, ijma al-ummah (consensus of the community), and qiyas al-fuqaha (analogical reasoning by jurists). These four sources are to be consulted in all religious matters. However, understanding issues through these four sources depends on having the intellectual and spiritual capacity to do so.”²⁾

“The fundamental sources through which we can understand and interpret our faith and culture are, first and foremost, the Qur’an, the Sunnah, scholarly consensus (ijma), and analogy qiyas—collectively called the adillah al-shar‘iyyah al-asliyyah (primary evidences). Then come the adillah al-shar‘iyyah al-far‘iyyah (secondary evidences), such as custom (‘urf), tradition (‘adah), public interest (maslaḥah), and juristic preference (istiḥsan). To approach other sources without first studying these and identifying their muḥkamat—the clear and decisive principles—often leads to confusion and misunderstanding.”³⁾

“The noble Companions of the Prophet had the unique honor of learning the Qur’an directly from the source of revelation. They witnessed its descent, and during the very period of revelation, they engraved it—with all its vitality, meaning, and spirit—upon their hearts and minds. Whenever they encountered something they could not understand, they immediately referred to the Prophet himself, and thus had no need for the systematic principles of interpretation that we require today. Furthermore, they would discuss and implement each newly revealed verse among themselves, which naturally led to a form of consensus among them. Although the term consensus was not yet used in their time, their practice laid the foundation for the formal terminology developed by later scholars.”⁴⁾

“Time itself is an important interpreter. Depending on conditions and circumstances, it acts as a pointer in interpreting and contextualizing certain issues. In other words, in the Qur’an and Sunnah there are areas entrusted to human reasoning (ijtihad and istinbaṭ), and their interpretation has been left to the ‘mufti of time.’ However, those who interpret such matters according to their era must first ascertain whether there is any explicit statement in the Qur’an or authentic Sunnah regarding the issue. Nothing can be said that contradicts the revealed texts (naṣṣ). Likewise, if the great mujtahids—who determine and assess matters in light of the primary sources—have reached a consensus on a point, any interpretation opposing it cannot be accepted. Although some have claimed that consensus is not a binding proof, it is, in fact, a very strong one, as indicated in the luminous sayings: ‘My community will not agree upon misguidance’ (Ibn Majah, Fitan, 8); ‘God’s help and power are with the community’; and ‘I asked my Lord that my Ummah would not unite upon error, and He granted my request.’ Furthermore, the fact that people of sound heart, soul, intellect, and conscience—free from bias and self-interest—can agree upon something unanimously is itself a rational proof of consensus’ validity as binding evidence.”⁵⁾

“Just as it is impermissible to oppose the Qur’an and Sunnah in the name of ijtihad, it is equally impermissible to oppose the proof of consensus—which shows us how the definitive texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah are to be understood and interpreted. Ignoring the fundamental sources and speaking merely from whim and personal opinion is one thing; expressing a view grounded in deep knowledge, fidelity to the foundational texts, and awareness of the muhkamat (core principles) is another. Therefore, whether in addressing personal, familial, political, social, or economic issues, one must first turn to the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and consensus. If no direct solution is found in these, then any ideas proposed to fill the gap must not contradict the essential, established principles of the religion.”⁶⁾

Nederlands

Türkçe