The subject of this research is the Ijmah (consensus) which is the third evidence from the unanimous evidence of legal rules. It explains if it's true that Imam Ahmed denies the occurrence of ljmah (consensus), as is understood by some from his statements. 1. In the first topic we defined that consensus, in linguistic terms, means agreement. Whilst in Islamic terms it is more correct to say that it is an agreement about a religious matter made by pious Muslim scholars in the time after the prophet 's (SAW) death until the present day. 2. In the second topic we clarified the great position of Ijmah (consensus) as the third evidence of Allah's legislative evidences, after the Quran and the Sunnah. This was the opinion of the earliest Muslims and scholars (the Salaf of this Ummah).
The First Chapter: 3. in the first topic we mentioned that there is no complete agreement about the occurrence of limah (consensus) in legal matters except regarding matters about which it's rules are already known (Such as the pillars of Islam; pray, Fasting, Zakat, Hajj) and there is no argument t about those matters. However, the most frequent opinion is that Ijmah (consensus) can occur. 4. In the second topic we clarified that those who agreed with The occurrence of Ijmah (consensus) had differed in the possibility of knowing if it actually occurred in reality or not. However, the Osouleen) Scholars in the field of Islamic law principles) had limited these differences to three schools or madhabs. These are: - It can be known. - It cannot be known. - It can be known only certain times, and these were divided into two groups. One said it can be known only in the ago of the prophet's (SAW) Companions and not at any other time. The second said that it could be known in the first three generations. We concluded that the most frequent opinion if the first. In this way we denied what some people said about the impossibility of Ijmah (consensus) occurring as the Osooleen considered as it proof.
The Second Chapter 5. In the first topic we clarified that the Osooleen had some discrepancies in reporting what Imam Ahmed said. ome said that he considered the Ijmah (consensus) while others said not. There are also some that said that both are Correct. 6. In the second topic we related some versions of Imam Ahmed which indicated that he adopted the Ijmah (consensus), while in the second point we related some version in which it appears that he denies the Ijmah (consensus). 7. In the third topic we mentioned the scholar’s interpretation of the versions apparently denying Ijmah (consensus). It becomes obvious to us that there are five awas to interpret these versions. 8. In the fourth topic we brought some objections about the previous five ways. So it becomes obvious in fact that Imam Ahmed considers Ijmah (consensus). And the reports related from him explain that Imam Ahmed considers it extremely difficult to achieve Ijmah other than that of the Comanions. The reason for this being both the greater numbers of the Ummah and the wide distances separating them. Conclusion: Thus it denies what some people say about Imam Ahmed on the subject of denying Ijmah (consensus) and the fact is that he considers Ijmah (consensus) as a proof and adppted it as legal evidence. Alhamd ulillah first and last. Peace and blessings on the Prophet Mohammed (SAW) and his companions.
Al Ankary, Dr. Ahmed bin Mohammaed
"Vision of Consensus, and Imam Ahmed's Investigation -تصور وجود الإجماع وتحقيق مذهب الإمام أحمد,"
Journal Sharia and Law: Vol. 2000
, Article 2.
Available at: https://scholarworks.uaeu.ac.ae/sharia_and_law/vol2000/iss13/2