Is it obligatory for one who understands the scholars' evidences and whose heart is reassured by one of the preferred views to always examine their evidences and preferences, or is it sufficient to follow trustworthy scholars in matters of disagreement? And is it permissible to follow a trustworthy scholar like "Al-Nawawi" even if there is clearer and stronger evidence with another scholar? And is it obligatory to act upon the Hadith: "Sin is that which wavers in your breast..." in matters of disagreement?

Whoever has the ability to discern evidence and to weigh between the sayings of scholars, upon him is to follow the evidence. As for one who does not possess this qualification, it is permissible for him to follow a specific madhhab or to imitate a reputable scholar. If the muftis differ, he may imitate whomever he wishes among them, and the more cautious approach is to act with piety.

As for acting upon the hadith, "Sin is that which wavers in your chest," it applies to what the sound heart disapproves of without lawful evidence, or if the mufti issues a fatwa based merely on assumption or caprice. However, if there is lawful evidence, it is obligatory to follow it, even if the heart does not feel at ease with it, such as breaking the fast during travel or shortening prayers. The criterion for what is lawful and unlawful lies in the lawful evidences, not in what arises in one's soul. If no evidences are available, it is permissible to act upon the hadith specifically for oneself.