Dr Shabbir Ally Questions The Ijma Argumentum Ad Populum And Surah 6 116

---

 To my non-Muslim readers you may not be able to follow this discussion at all. So you can skip the video (its about 12 minutes long). You may also not be able to follow my comments below. 
The guy in this YouTube video is Dr Shabbir Ally (I believe he is in Canada). Dr Shabbir is speaking about a concept called 'ijma' or the consensus of the religious scholars. 
The concept of ijma is extremely important because the entire understanding about the religion is based on what is termed the ijma or the consensus.

My comments follow:



 
Disclaimer: I do not agree with everything that Dr Shabbir Ally says.

I have often heard this 'comparison' to medical science by the religious people before. There is a very big difference between medical science and religion. 
You cannot compare religion with medical science. The doctor's medical knowledge is based on science and evidence. The doctor depends entirely on 'menggunakan akal'. Medical science is based on science, questioning, experimentation, reason, logic, proofs, evidence, the scientific method etc.  Religion is not. Religion and logic have no connection.
Dr Shabbir mentions the fallacy of  Argumentum ad populum

"In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument which is based on claiming a truth or affirming something is good because the majority thinks so."


Obviously this also refers to the meaning of the 'consensus of the majority'. 
Now here is a verse from the Quran, Surah 6:116,



Surah 6:116 If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of Allah. They follow only conjecture; they only guess. 
How I understand this is that if you feel that something is right simply because the majority says so then you may get into trouble. In other words the majority is not always right. There is no guarantee that the majority is right. There is no guarantee that something is right simply because the majority says so. 
We have to rely on evidence, proofs, logic, reasoning, the scientific method,  knowledge. We cannot simply rely on the opinion of the majority (or the minority).
But I have a question about the theory of Ijma or the consensus of the majority. 
I have another book on "The Concept of Ijma" written by the same Ahmad Hassan mentioned by Dr Shabbir Ally above. The book says that the concept of Ijma took almost 450 years to crystallize. That is a very long time.
But the question I would like to know is where, when and by who were these ijma or consensus achieved? 
Are all these ijma or consensus officially recorded somewhere? If so where are they recorded?
For example Dr Shabbir Ally mentions the ijma or the consensus 'of the scholars of Iraq'.
There are also statements like 'the ijma or consensus of the scholars of the Hanafi school' etc about some matter.
The question is exactly how many scholars were involved in deriving that ijma or consensus regarding that particular topic or subject? What were their names? Is it recorded anywhere? If they met where and when exactly did the scholars meet or sit down together to achieve that consensus? Is there a register or record of each and every of these ijma or consensus? I believe there are none because I have tried reading up and looking for examples of such records about any ijma. So far I have not found any. 

We only have 'the consensus of the scholars of Iraq', the 'consensus of the scholars of the Hanafi school', etc. 
Details? Not available.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.
By Syed Akbar Ali 

---