Is it permissible to differ after the Companions have reached a consensus on an issue, or after scholars have reached a consensus on an issue regarding which the Companions differed, and what is the ruling on violating this consensus?

We previously explained the issue of consensus (ijma') after a divergence of opinion (khilaf), and whether it resolves the divergence or not. We also explained its occurrence after the divergence among the Companions and others. Sheikh al-Islam does not contradict consensus; rather, he faults those who incorrectly transmit it. He only states opinions that have been previously held by scholars, citing Imam Ahmad's saying: "Beware of speaking on an issue for which you have no imam (predecessor)." Consensus after the era of the Companions is considered a proof by the majority of scholars, and there is no difference between one era and another in the authoritative nature of consensus. Anyone who claims consensus on an issue about which predecessors differed may simply be unaware of the existing divergence of opinion.