CONSENSUS AND DISAGREEMENT  97

of traditions which had to overcome opposition, and we can safely conclude that this tradition originated in the time of Yazīd, that is, in the generation before Mālik. It found its way into the classical collections.¹ A later form, not yet known to Shāfi'ī, which gives spurious circumstantial detail and mentions ten rewards as against one, is quoted by Ibn Qutaiba, 182.²

Shāfi'ī acknowledges disagreement as the necessary result of systematic reasoning (ijtihād); it existed already in the time of the Companions, and it is to be resolved by reference to Koran and sunna; referring to the tradition on one and two rewards, he denies the existence of a fundamental disagreement even when there are contradictory opinions, because every mujtahid fulfils his duty by drawing the conclusion which he considers right.³

All this is meant to justify Shāfi'ī's break with the doctrine of the ancient schools and his insistence on the supreme authority of the traditions from the Prophet, beside which the results of systematic reasoning become irrelevant. He says in Tr. IV, 261: 'On points on which there exists an explicit decision of Allah or a sunna of the Prophet or a consensus of the Muslims, no disagreement is allowed; on the other points, scholars must exert their own judgment in search of an indication (shubha) in one of these three sources; he who is qualified for this research is entitled to hold the opinion which he finds implied in Koran, sunna, or consensus; if a problem is capable of two solutions, either opinion may be held as the result of systematic reasoning, but this occurs only rarely.'

To sum up: Shāfi'ī advances a fresh and independent study of traditions from the Prophet as against the established doctrine of the ancient schools.