Is it permissible for an ordinary person to issue a fatwa on an issue that he has researched and in which he knows all its evidence and the sayings of scholars, as well as the most preponderant evidence? And is he permitted to object to the fatwa of another shaykh if he has knowledge of the more preponderant evidence in that issue?

He who is knowledgeable about the proofs, the opinions of scholars and their schools of thought, and discerns what is preponderant among them, is not an unlearned person; rather, he is a distinguished student of knowledge who acts upon what he deems preponderant and issues rulings accordingly. For the preponderant view among most scholars is that ijtihad (definition) (independent reasoning) is divisible. And whoever holds a different preponderant view should not be opposed, but rather debated with proofs, because preferring one view over another is relative. And a distinction must be made between permissible, valid disagreement, which is a difference in understanding and does not contradict a text or a consensus, and impermissible disagreement, which is not based on legitimate proofs.