blameworthy, He would have attached the threat of punishment to two qualities: one blameworthy and the other not. This cannot be the case.

A similar example is His statement, Exalted is He:

“And those who do not invoke another god besides Allah, nor kill a soul whom Allah has forbidden to be killed, except by right, nor commit unlawful sexual intercourse. Whoever does these things will face a penalty. His punishment will be doubled on the Day of Resurrection, and he will remain therein forever, humiliated.” [Surah al-Furqān: 68, 69]

This implies that each of these three acts is blameworthy according to Islamic law.

Accordingly, if the believers have deemed certain things obligatory and others forbidden, and someone opposes them, saying, “What they have deemed obligatory is not obligatory, and what they have deemed forbidden is not forbidden,” then he has followed a path other than theirs. For their path means their beliefs and actions. That being so, he is blameworthy. Were their path not correct and true, whoever opposed them would not be blameworthy.

Further evidence is His statement, Exalted is He:

“Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. If you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger.” [Surah al-Nisā’: 59]

He thus made the obligation to refer matters to Allah and the Messenger (1) conditional (2) upon disagreement. A ruling contingent upon a condition does not apply when that condition is absent. It follows that, when there is no disagreement, referring the matter to Allah and His Messenger is not obligatory. This indicates that their consensus can only be upon what is true and correct. Were it upon falsehood and error, their falsehood and error would not relieve them of the obligation to refer the matter to the Quran and the Sunnah; and because the command of Allah and His Messenger remains valid when they are in agreement