In a scholarly meeting, 38 of 40 participants agree on a view. The numerical majority alone does not establish technical ijma. The book’s definition is tied to the agreement of qualified juristic interpreters in an era; an ordinary vote is not a substitute.
Likewise, an authoritative scholar’s individual view may carry weight without constituting consensus. Identify who is included, whether the relevant jurists agreed, and which form of consensus is being claimed before assessing its evidentiary force.