beliefs leads to this prohibition. For anyone who knows that the earlier disagreement remains valid—since views do not die with those who held them—a scholar qualified to exercise independent legal judgment may adopt the other view if it accords with his judgment. As for following another scholar’s legal authority, this depends on the question of following a deceased scholar, on which there are likewise two well-known views within the schools of al-Shāfiʿī and Ahmad, and among others.

If, however, a view held by these imams or others has also been held by scholars whose schools survive, then there is no doubt that their agreement supports and strengthens that view. Their authority may be cited against that of their peers who disagreed: thus, al-Thawrī and al-Awzāʿī may be cited against Abū Hanīfah and Mālik. For the Muslim community agrees that when Mālik, al-Awzāʿī, al-Thawrī, and Abū Hanīfah differ, it is not permissible to declare one scholar’s view correct rather than another’s without evidence. And Allah knows best.