A hypothetical argument states: “Every student may take the exam; therefore Ali certainly qualifies. The fee condition conflicts with the general permission and must be abrogated. A similar student entered elsewhere, so Ali must be admitted here too. Most attendees agree, so this is ijma.”
Five corrections:
1. Read general wording together with specifications.
2. Verify Ali’s actual payment and suspension status.
3. Do not call a condition abrogation without evidence.
4. Test whether the other center is governed by a relevant common cause and rule.
5. Do not equate a local majority with technical ijma.
A rigorous answer breaks a claim into premises, tests each with appropriate evidence, and concludes only as much as those premises establish.