Ijma
*Ijma* is the agreement of every qualified scholar of an era on a ruling, with no recorded dissent among them at all.
What it means for me: Ijma is the heaviest word used about a ruling, because a genuine one closes further debate on that exact question. When you read 'this is ijma', it is worth asking who reported it. Claiming ijma is a careful, narrow claim, not a loose description of popularity.
Example: An answer states this matter has no disagreement among scholars at all. That single sentence is reporting an ijma, not offering one opinion among several. If a real alternative view existed, the answer would have named it instead.
Do not confuse with: *Jumhur*, the majority. Jumhur is a majority that still leaves a minority standing; ijma is agreement with no dissent recorded at all.
If scholars differ: Scholars differ on whether genuine ijma can still form after the Companions' generation. They also differ on whether silence, with no scholar objecting, counts as real agreement. The difference is named here as a difference and not decided; the mufti is the reference.
Often appears in
See the term in context
How should one deal with a group that claims to uphold Tawhid and is characterized by the following: not praying in the main mosque on the pretext that the worshippers are innovators, fasting and breaking fast with Saudi Arabia despite the geographical distance, denying sorcery, leniency in lowering garments below the ankles, permitting the trimming of beards, not praying behind the Tablighi Jamaat, and not recognizing ijma' (consensus) and qiyas (analogical reasoning)?
One should not abandon congregational prayer in the mosque over a matter of jurisprudential difference, such as the Qunut supplication. It is obligatory to advise those who err with gentleness and kindness. Abandoning…
What is the difference between ittifaq (agreement) and ijma' (consensus) in Fiqh, 'Aqidah, and 'Ilm al-Kalam from the perspective of doctrine?
Linguistically, Ijma' (consensus) is defined as determination and agreement. Technically, it is the agreement of the scholars of an era from the Ummah of Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, on a matter of…
Is it considered disbelief (kufr) or unlawful (haram) not to believe in the consensus (ijma') of the Ummah after the first three centuries, or not to adopt analogical reasoning (qiyas) after the Tabi'in and their successors, while believing in the consensus and analogical reasoning of the Companions and the first three centuries, and holding the view that the hadith "My Ummah will not agree upon error" is weak?
The person mentioned does not deny the authority of ijma' (consensus) absolutely, but rather denies its occurrence after the era of the Companions and the Successors. This is due to his view that it is difficult to…
Questions that use it
Why is scholarly consensus (Ijma') exclusive to scholars and not to the entire Ummah, despite the Hadith: "My Ummah would not agree upon anything except that it would be good for them," noting that there are imams who have abandoned the Qur'an, so are these among the Ummah?
Is the sister's statement: "It is not by the consensus of the Ummah, but Allah is One according to the Qur'an and Sunnah; because the consensus of the Ummah might say something wrong, so it is not valid for us to adopt it" considered unlawful? And is consensus (Ijma') in matters of creed or jurisprudence? And is the brother's statement that "the consensus of the Ummah is in jurisprudence and not creed; because they can be right and they can be wrong" unlawful?
What is the meaning of Ijma' (consensus) and its status in Islam, how is it applied in the current era, and what are the methods of deduction when evidences contradict?