Lessons from Saudi Arabia

[Zibago]

Lessons from Saudi Arabia

• Nadeem Qadir
• Published at 06:19 PM April 30, 2018
• Last updated at 04:29 AM May 01, 2018

https://www.dhakatribune.com/opinion/op-ed/2018/04/30/lessons-saudi-arabia/

Ushering in a new era? / BIGSTOCK
Perhaps the Saudi crown prince has the right idea
A changing Saudi Arabia is becoming inevitable under the leadership of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

It is now the time to not only further strengthen our ties with the desert kingdom, but also take lessons and highlight the religious liberalization that is giving a new meaning to conservatism.

I was delighted to read about the changes taking place in many areas of Saudi society with women leading the way.

That is the best news, as mothers — the symbol of women to me — can guide the nation towards the right path, as has been the case for Bangladesh with Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.

The Saudi authorities announced in September 2017 that the ban on women driving has been lifted, and they would be free to drive vehicles from June 2018.

The Royal decree said the decision would also boost the country’s economy, as more women would be encouraged to work.

That would also, I believe, change the mindset, in a male-dominated society, about women, as they would be able to see more of their at work.

It gives the country a more humane look, as it has been the only country in the world that had such a ban.

Protests against the ban on driving started in 1990, and it is a memorable victory for women, because the country is finally unchaining itself from the state’s male hegemony and religious conservatism.

Then came the call for all-gender stadiums. Now, women are allowed to watch football or any other games from the stands of stadiums like their male compatriots.

Saudi Arabia continued to see further change when a member of the Council of Senior Scholars said that women need not wear the ‘abaya’

A sea of change

Saudi Arabia continued to see further change, when Sheikh Abdullah al-Mutlaq, a member of the Council of Senior Scholars, said that women need not wear the “abaya,” or what we call a burqa.

“Muslim women should dress modestly, but this does not mean they need to wear religious clothing,” could very well be the best statement in a changing world, where religious conservatism has become an obstacle of progress towards a new era.

“More than 90% of pious Muslim women in the Muslim world do not wear abayas,” Sheikh Mutlaq was quoted as saying by the Saudi media recently.

The abaya is a loose-fitting, full-length robe, which women have been required to wear under the country’s “garment law.”

Although the statements made do not change the law immediately, observers say that “it is the first of its kind from a senior religious figure, and may be in line with the ongoing changes under the crown prince.”

In early 2017, activists won their first significant victory when King Salman issued an order saying that women “did not need permission from their male guardian for some activities, including entering university, taking a job, and undergoing surgery.”

Holding on to our roots

At a time when Saudi Arabia is moving towards liberalization from conservatism, particularly those linked to religion, we see a dismal picture in Bangladesh. We are moving backwards from our very progressive, liberal, and secular society.

Every day we are seeing more and more women wearing hijabs or burqas.

It seems odd to me that when this country was a part of Pakistan, we held on to our rich traditions. Having lived most of my life until 1970 in Pakistan, I can only remember such burqas in remote areas. Pakistani women rather copied our dressing style, and were mostly seen in saris like my mother.

Our women are beautiful, our sari is elegant, and our jewellery, extraordinarily unique. Why are we hesitant to show off all that Allah has given us? Why have we started denying our natural right to be ourselves?

Interestingly, gay relationships (and even marriages) have been ignored in recent days, signalling a lift on interfering in one’s private life.

Coming to the international front, Saudi Arabia and Israel have no formal diplomatic relations, but behind the scenes, improvements in their ties have reportedly accelerated in recent years.

The crown prince has said that the Jews have a “right” to a homeland. In an interview with an American magazine, the prince recently said: “I believe that people, anywhere, have a right to live in their peaceful nation … I believe the Palestinians and the Israelis have the right to have their own land.

“But we have to have a peace agreement to assure the stability for everyone and to have normal relations.”

This move — being more practical in relation with Israel — will bring economic benefits for the desert kingdom, as well as give it more power both regionally and internationally, as the move would bring the US and the Western world closer to Saudi Arabia.

Let us reap the benefits now and not wait for later.

The most important thing now is to confiscate the source of funds of fanatics and terrorist groups like Jamaat-e-Islami and mushrooming madrasas, and divert them to facilitate modern education to ensure the success of a Digital Bangladesh.

Let us get going now. Later might be too late.

Last, but not the least — a salute Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman.

Nadeem Qadir is a UN Dag Hammarskjold Fellow in journalism.

Hence proved a theocratic state has limited shelf life it cant work in the modern era

 

[Desert Fox]

Edit : How about mullahs raping boys in madrassas??

Those Mullahs got nothing on Lavrenti Beria when it comes to pedophilia. Looks like you're gonna have to denounce socialism now

 

[Zibago]

and now I am waiting for people to come and bash me and this article in the name of "Islam"
sad

Sanu shariyat dey pul tey bula key tey sona mahi liberal ho gaya

 

[Psychic]

Secondly, no, one cannot simply become a self proclaimed scholar or mufti. Although it is allowed for the individual Muslim to make decisions according to his/her best interests in a personal matter/circumstances when religious consultation is not feasible, but when the advice of great scholars and learned men is available you are not allowed to proclaim decisions as halal which contradict their collective rulings which they have come to agree on based on years of experience and wisdom through dedicating their lives to the study of every minute detail of Islamic holy scriptures and texts

We had such a "mujtahid" and "expert of Quran" here who made the following statements;
- Alcohol is not forbidden
- Hadith is not important. Hadith are a forgery by molvis.
- Covering head for woman is not compulsory.
- Blasphemy is 100pc acceptable in a Muslim country and we should be "tolerant".

And here's the catch, he like Jamahir is also a commie. He even had a red flag as his DP for quite some time.

Basically, these people think that the Muftis who spent their whole lives researching Quran and Hadith, who are fluent in Arabic, who are well versed with Tafseer and context are jahils and they are more credible than them since they have read the translation of a few verses and memorized a few ahadith.

 

[Desert Fox]

We had such a "mujtahid" and "expert of Quran" here who made the following statements;
- Alcohol is not forbidden
- Hadith is not important. Hadith are a forgery by molvis.
- Covering head for woman is not compulsory.
- Blasphemy is 100pc acceptable in a Muslim country and we should be "tolerant".

And here's the catch, he like Jamahir is also a commie. He even had a red flag as his DP for quite some time.

Basically, these people think that the Muftis who spent their whole lives researching Quran and Hadith, who are fluent in Arabic, who are well versed with Tafseer and context are jahils and they are more credible than them since they have read the translation of a few verses and memorized a few ahadith.

Just a bunch of idiots. The fact that these hypocrites haven't moved to North Korea yet proves that they are only talk and no walk.

 

[Psychic]

Really? Than why wasn't Stalin imprisoned?

Hahaha good one

 

[Zibago]

so am i supposed to grow this beard or na

Go for a soul patch

The Enlightened Moderation by Saudis has proved a theocratic state cant exist in a modern era for long
Rok saktey hi to rok lo

We had such a "mujtahid" and "expert of Quran" here who made the following statements;
- Alcohol is not forbidden
- Hadith is not important. Hadith are a forgery by molvis.
- Covering head for woman is not compulsory.
- Blasphemy is 100pc acceptable in a Muslim country and we should be "tolerant".

And here's the catch, he like Jamahir is also a commie. He even had a red flag as his DP for quite some time.

Basically, these people think that the Muftis who spent their whole lives researching Quran and Hadith, who are fluent in Arabic, who are well versed with Tafseer and context are jahils and they are more credible than them since they have read the translation of a few verses and memorized a few ahadith.

It being allowed in religion and state are two seperate things some muftis think bey namazis should be exiled and their businesses confiscated now does the state do that or should it do that?
No because religiousity or lack of it is a private issue sooner or later all Muslim countries will agree to that the only difference will be the exact time at which they do that

 

[Jf Thunder]

Sanu shariyat dey pul tey bula key tey sona mahi liberal ho gaya

what.........

Are you a mufti?

no

Interesting you mention that. So, my wife, whose a well educated career woman, she toggles between hijab on and off (never wore the burqah). She puts the hijab on because she says that it gives her a feeling of purity and confidence. But then, as soon as she feels that she starts feeling like good ol' mrs high and mighty mrs perfect muslimah who has the right to look down upon and judge other muslimahs who don't wear the hijab, SHE STOPS!

Just sharing her views, don't know what to make of it.

ok

All Muslims I have talked to is all for women empowerment and women's rights.

You are no better than those snobs who live in the west who are ignorant about the rights given to Muslim women from Islam.

Islam gave Muslim women many rights. While in Ancient Roman empire, Ancient Persia, Ancient India, Ancient China and the Ancient Far East, women were treated very badly and treated no better than prostitutes in some cases.

Burqa and Hijab is not the same thing.

all of those empires sucked
women got true rights during the time of the Prophet (PBUH) and the Khilafat E Rashida, specially the time of Hazrat Umar Farooq (R.A)

and after that during the Second Umayyad Caliphate of Spain

I agree with that. Okay this is near and dear to my heart so here's the deal...
Allah swt tells our Muslimahs to cover there chests with their head coverings.
Allah swt further tells us that some verses are clear and some are unclear.
Allah swt adds that those who are pious will say that both are from Allah while those who have evil in their hearts will concentrate and dwell upon the unclear verses.
Allah also tells us in the Quran that Allah has made what to do and what NOT to do very clear in the Quran.

So going BACK to the verse about covering the chest with head covering, we see that it is CLEAR that the chest MUST be covered. No ifs ands or buts about it. The vague part is the head covering BECAUSE two potentially different conclusions can be taken out of it:
1. The Muslims and the nonmuslim musrhik arabs of the time, be they male or female, covered there heads due to the harsh desert climate. Allah swt told the Muslim woman to cover her chest with her head covering THAT SHE WAS ALREADY WEARING (for obvious reasons).
2. That Allah swt is indirectly tellin the Muslim woman to cover her head as well as directly telling her to cover her chest.

Having said that, please recall what Allah swt says those who are pious accept both clear and unclear verses while those with evil in their hearts will constantly dwell upon the unclear. Since the part about covering the head is UNCLEAR, only those who have evil in their hearts would make an issue out of a woman NOT covering her head. While those who are pious would leave it up to the woman to decide whether she wants to cover her head or not BUT insist that the clear part of covering the chest INDEED be followed.

Any questions?

How did you manage to translate the word "Khimar" into a "head cover'?
it simply means "cover"
and because the women of Arabia had quite a lot of cloth along with the head cover, they chose to utilize that for covering their chests, no? So if they were using it our of their requirements or personal considerations, it does not make that part of Islam
nothing in the verse you quoted is unclear, it has clearly pointed out what to cover, and what not to cover.
Unclear verses are usually referred to those, in which the greatness of Allah is mentioned, for example, the start of Al Nur "Light upon Light"
It is unclear, but should be accepted another example is
"Alif Laam Meem"
that is another vague verse with no translation
similarly we have Ayat Ul Kursi etc

 

[GumNaam]

@Desert Fox

This is a silly post for a few reasons:

You are dismissing teachings and traditions which are based on centuries of wisdom grounrded in I slamic principles of the lives of some of the best people to walk on this Earth, you are dismissing all of this because you happen to cherry pick a bad example of some "Mullah" molesting children?

what you state has been crushed by none other than The Qur'an itself. The problem is that the jews and christians also had their share of muftis and molvis with the titles of rabbis and bishops and popes. They too had centuries of wisdom grounded in their own religious principles and examples of the lives of some of who they considered to be the best people to walk on this Earth. But Allah swt scolds these people of the book because, as per The Quran, they took their priests as their gods. You know this is a verse of The Qur'an, it is well known. so I don't really buy this age old ghisa pita argument, when there is nothing left to say, the extremist types always pull out the "best people on earth so you can't dispute them" card. Well I can dispute them. And I will dispute them. And I will dispute them on MERIT based on evidence. Bluntly put, if a simple old grandma can question someone like Hazrat Omar RA then I can dispute these scholars and imams and muftis whether they are alive today or are historical names. I can and I will question their work. I have nothing against either the sunni scholars nor the shia scholars in history. But there work, their edicts and their fatwas shall be scrutinized and the ones that should be disputed SHALL be disputed. But if you want to be one of those who take their priests as their god then knock yourself out, lemme know how that works out for ya in the hereafter, can you spell "shirk"?

Are you really that dense so as to confuse Islam and the wisdom behind it's teachings and traditions with the criminal behavior of some individuals?

Really? Wisdom? Have you read some of their wisdom? Have you read some of the so called ahadith that they base their "wisdom" on? Or are you so dense that you'll blindly accept anything they say with hands tied and head bowed down?

Do you also apply the same logic to other subjects and teachings?

"Whoops, Isaac Newton molested children, therefore theory of gravity is wrong and now gravity does not exist"

As I said above, everything shall be scrutinised based on evidence and MERIT. Your mixing Solids with liquids, there is No conversion between the toe. Gravity is science, regardless of how corrupt the child molesting presenter of logic is, 2+2 will always = 4. But am I gonna take lessons from a child molester on morality and I should and should not do? OH DA HECK NOO! So you mixing morality with sciences is a dead on arrival example as it is akin to mixing solid with liquid, the two are just not the same.


Secondly, no, one cannot simply become a self proclaimed scholar or mufti. Although it is allowed for the individual Muslim to make decisions according to his/her best interests in a personal matter/circumstances when religious consultation is not feasible, but when the advice of great scholars and learned men is available you are not allowed to proclaim decisions as halal which contradict their collective rulings which they have come to agree on based on years of experience and wisdom through dedicating their lives to the study of every minute detail of Islamic holy scriptures and texts.

So I'm gonna stop you right there and ask a few very prodding questions regarding the underlined. So who exactly decided to take on the authority to decide whether we are allowed or not allowed to use our own thinking or not? And no, PHULEEZ do not bring up the example of why we can't go against what doctors say okay?! No more mixing sciences with no moral matters, sick of listening to that example! The Holy Quran tells us to THINK and to use JUDGEMENT and to use our minds! Further more, It tells us that the majority is usually (not always) WRONG! So there goes your point about the "collective wisdom of scholars based on years of experience"! Do you know what these " years" of collective wisdom got us??? AN INVASION OF THE MONGOLS! Ji haan; your "learned" and "pious" were too busy researching and debating "if it would be halal to eat pig if it came to you in the form of a goat"! ! ! And we ALL know now far THAT got us with the Mongols now don't we?!?!?! THIS is what the " years of experience and wisdom" got us ... And who is the genius who said that us as individual "cannot procl aim decisions as halal which contradict their collective rulings which they have come to agree on based on years of experience and wisdom" ??? YES WE CAN!!! Oh yes we can PROVIDED it is based MERIT and EVIDENCE!

what.........


no


ok


all of those empires sucked
women got true rights during the time of the Prophet (PBUH) and the Khilafat E Rashida, specially the time of Hazrat Umar Farooq (R.A)

and after that during the Second Umayyad Caliphate of Spain


How did you manage to translate the word "Khimar" into a "head cover'?
it simply means "cover"
and because the women of Arabia had quite a lot of cloth along with the head cover, they chose to utilize that for covering their chests, no? So if they were using it our of their requirements or personal considerations, it does not make that part of Islam
nothing in the verse you quoted is unclear, it has clearly pointed out what to cover, and what not to cover.
Unclear verses are usually referred to those, in which the greatness of Allah is mentioned, for example, the start of Al Nur "Light upon Light"
It is unclear, but should be accepted another example is
"Alif Laam Meem"
that is another vague verse with no translation
similarly we have Ayat Ul Kursi etc

Dude, you are missing my point... which I think both of us agree on and is that Allah swt CLEARLY orders our women to cover their chest. The head part "khimaar" that I was talking about is not from my own dictionary, itis from the interpration of those Who say that the head must be covered so I was pointing the vagueness there. Apparently I did not do a good enough job, End of the day, it is fardh to cover the chest; THAT much is 100% clear and must be obeyed! Covering the head part or wearing the burqah is the lady's call and we can't force that and should NOT force that...

@Desert Fox @Nilgiri
Don't beat around the bush. Maybe USA is also run by muftis who have a thing for little girls, since the legal age for marriage is 14 years ! (in many states). Again you are an ignorant in the matters of faith as you pick and choose what you like instead of accepting the whole package. I don't have a thing for little girls, I am attracted towards mature women yet I am not the one doing cherry picking here.
And what you call sick is sick as per your standards. I started developing feelings for women(reached puberty) when I was 12 or 13. Girls mature earlier than boys. The age of marriage in Islam is not 16 or 18 or 40, it depends on the following:
1- Reaching age of puberty
2- Ready for intercourse
3- Consent
4- Law of the land
Now do yourself a favour and ask your elders what used to be the age of marriage in older times? People were married off at young ages and it was considered a norm. You might think that 12 is too young but 14 is O.K, but you have no right to judge people of other cultures by your moral yardstick.

Yeah a pretty good indication indeed
The age was never 5. It was 6 at time of Nikkah, it was 9 when she went with our Prophet SAW and according to some traditions it was 14 when she went with him(P.B.U.H). She had reached the age of puberty by the time she left her father(R.A)'s home. It was consensual and everybody was happy. The vast majority of the hadith are quoted by Ayesha R.A, whom the enemies of Islam say was a victim of .......

If you consider the molvi in the alley of your mohalla as a Mufti then may God have mercy on you. When Muftis do a wrong thing I criticize them. When they are telling something from the Quran, I don't reject it just because it came from a molvi.

I specifically mentioned UNDER AGED with the assumption that under age means before puberty. I never have and never will accept mentally the western meaning of underage where the age of 17 ,9 is considered under age but 18 i fine and dandy. And NO you do NOT get to defend these scholars as they ALL" agree" that an underage girl (or boy for that matter) can have EVEN a nikah! And that too, based SOOLLY on extremely weak and perhaps fabricated ahadith with ABSOLUTELY NO evidence from the Quran. The Holy Quran tells us that the girl MUST be a person of sound mind and judgement. No you show me a 5 year old or a b year old or a 9 year old who is of sound mind and feels that physical attraction? NO FOR THE LAST FREAKING TIME DO NOT USE THAT PATHETIC EXCUSE THAT IN THE ARAB WORLD THE DESERT WINDS MAKE GIRLGO to PUBERTY REALLY FAST AND BY THE AGE OF q WAIOALA ... SHE Is ALL WOMAN! I don't think so! FACE It! Most of these scholars are a bunch of chenviinistic SICKOS! And your argument about how that was some how the " norm" in the old days of our parents and grand parents doesn't ree lly hold any water either because if our fore parents were doing the right things then guess what ... THEY would NOT HAVE GOTTEN CONQUERED AND COLONIZED!

 

[Psychic]

It being allowed in religion and state are two seperate things some muftis think bey namazis should be exiled and their businesses confiscated now does the state do that or should it do that?
No because religiousity or lack of it is a private issue sooner or later all Muslim countries will agree to that the only difference will be the exact time at which they do that

Only a knowledgeable scholar with credibility and piousness is allowed to practice ijtihad. The basic teachings of Islam i.e halal and haram though can never be challenged by ijtihad,(pork, homosexuality, fornication, alcohol were haram and cannot be declared halal which that person did), only new problems can be dealt using ijtihad.
An ex-commie liberal drunkard who I was referring to in my post (A.Haider) has no authority to declare halal or haram which has been agreed upon by the Ummah through Ijma for centuries through scholastic debates and validated by evidence from Quran and Sunnah.
A Muslim state is responsible for the enforcement of certain laws as per the Quran and Sunnah and that cannot be changed in order to "fit into" the "modern world". These guiding principles are based on sound logic and are beneficial for the society as a whole. Allowing degeneracy to seep in in the name of "modernism" will do no good to a civilized society, the red line has to be drawn.
I am not defending the KSA of the past, it was the other extreme. But there has to be law and order as per the guidance of Islam if we want to remain a relatively healthy society. There are now many white people who are complaining about the declining white race and the increasing number of Muslims....why complain when you prefer to live with single boyfriends/girlfriends and prefer to not have babies? Once you allow one form of degeneracy in the name of tolerance, the whole society starts to rot.

Prostitution and drugs destroy families. It is wrong to say that it's free choice and that it harms no one else. The people living in their own mental utopia should consider a visit to the real world.
Marriages break, children are affected where a man visits a brothel or is on drugs. Many addicts sell off whatever they find in their homes in order to afford some more. They harm not only themselves but their family and perhaps the society as well who are innocent.

Just like I wouldn't allow my child to play with matches, a state has to stop its subjects from playing with fire for the fire will not only harm them but burn the entire house as it spreads.

 

[Jf Thunder]

Dude, you are missing my point... which I think both of us agree on and is that Allah swt CLEARLY orders our women to cover their chest. The head part "khimaar" that I was talking about is not from my own dictionary, itis from the interpration of those Who say that the head must be covered so I was pointing the vagueness there. Apparently I did not do a good enough job, End of the day, it is fardh to cover the chest; THAT much is 100% clear and must be obeyed! Covering the head part or wearing the burqah is the lady's call and we can't force that and should NOT force that...

agreed, its the lady's call
but it cannot be called a part of Islam

 

[Psychic]

I specifically mentioned UNDER AGED with the assumption that under age means before puberty. I never have and never will accept mentally the western meaning of underage where the age of 17 ,9 is considered under age but 18 i fine and dandy. And NO you do NOT get to defend these scholars as they ALL" agree" that an underage girl (or boy for that matter) can have EVEN a nikah! And that too, based SOOLLY on extremely weak and perhaps fabricated ahadith with ABSOLUTELY NO evidence from the Quran. The Holy Quran tells us that the girl MUST be a person of sound mind and judgement. No you show me a 5 year old or a b year old or a 9 year old who is of sound mind and feels that physical attraction? NO FOR THE LAST FREAKING TIME DO NOT USE THAT PATHETIC EXCUSE THAT IN THE ARAB WORLD THE DESERT WINDS MAKE GIRLGO to PUBERTY REALLY FAST AND BY THE AGE OF q WAIOALA ... SHE Is ALL WOMAN! I don't think so! FACE It! Most of these scholars are a bunch of chenviinistic SICKOS!

Maybe you have had a bad experience with a Mufti and nothing else.

Nikkah is one thing, rukhsati (going with the spouse and probably having intercourse) is another. It was practiced in the past and considered normal back in those days. Nikkah at young age, rukhsati when the girl becomes adult. It's like a promise that two families made that they'll marry off their children when they grow up.

I told you that I reached puberty at 12 or so. If you think that a younger girl cannot reach puberty, then I am sorry, I cannot help you.

I have never heard any Mufti saying that girls should go with their husbands before they start menstruating, you seriously should stop listening to the fake wannabe Muftis. I like it how an @sshole like Amjem Ch is considered a Mufti and many others who refute him and debunk his claims were not given any airtime.

Dude, you are missing my point... which I think both of us agree on and is that Allah swt CLEARLY orders our women to cover their chest. The head part "khimaar" that I was talking about is not from my own dictionary, itis from the interpration of those Who say that the head must be covered so I was pointing the vagueness there. Apparently I did not do a good enough job, End of the day, it is fardh to cover the chest; THAT much is 100% clear and must be obeyed! Covering the head part or wearing the burqah is the lady's call and we can't force that and should NOT force that...

Oh great!
The ijmah which this ummat reached after scholistic debates and evidence from Quran and Sunnah to back it up is faulty and a fatwa of a "gum naam" must be accepted!

 

[Jf Thunder]

Yeah a pretty good indication indeed
The age was never 5. It was 6 at time of Nikkah, it was 9 when she went with our Prophet SAW and according to some traditions it was 14 when she went with him(P.B.U.H). She had reached the age of puberty by the time she left her father(R.A)'s home. It was consensual and everybody was happy. The vast majority of the hadith are quoted by Ayesha R.A, whom the enemies of Islam say was a victim of .......

almost everyone has rejected the young age of Ayesha (R.A), and only a few people are hell bent on giving a bad name to Islam, I fail to understand how a 9 year old could recount so many Hadith

 

[Psychic]

This is a silly post for a few reasons:

You are dismissing teachings and traditions which are based on centuries of wisdom grounrded in I slamic principles of the lives of some of the best people to walk on this Earth, you are dismissing all of this because you happen to cherry pick a bad example of some "Mullah" molesting children?

what you state has been crushed by none other than The Qur'an itself. The problem is that the jews and christians also had their share of muftis and molvis with the titles of rabbis and bishops and popes. They too had centuries of wisdom grounded in their own religious principles and examples of the lives of some of who they considered to be the best people to walk on this Earth. But Allah swt scolds these people of the book because, as per The Quran, they took their priests as their gods. You know this is a verse of The Qur'an, it is well known. so I don't really buy this age old ghisa pita argument, when there is nothing left to say, the extremist types always pull out the "best people on earth so you can't dispute them" card. Well I can dispute them. And I will dispute them. And I will dispute them on MERIT based on evidence. Bluntly put, if a simple old grandma can question someone like Hazrat Omar RA then I can dispute these scholars and imams and muftis whether they are alive today or are historical names. I can and I will question their work. I have nothing against either the sunni scholars nor the shia scholars in history. But there work, their edicts and their fatwas shall be scrutinized and the ones that should be disputed SHALL be disputed. But if you want to be one of those who take their priests as their god then knock yourself out, lemme know how that works out for ya in the hereafter, can you spell "shirk"?

Are you really that dense so as to confuse Islam and the wisdom behind it's teachings and traditions with the criminal behavior of some individuals?

Really? Wisdom? Have you read some of their wisdom? Have you read some of the so called ahadith that they base their "wisdom" on? Or are you so dense that you'll blindly accept anything they say with hands tied and head bowed down?

Do you also apply the same logic to other subjects and teachings?

"Whoops, Isaac Newton molested children, therefore theory of gravity is wrong and now gravity does not exist"

As I said above, everything shall be scrutinised based on evidence and MERIT. Your mixing Solids with liquids, there is No conversion between the toe. Gravity is science, regardless of how corrupt the child molesting presenter of logic is, 2+2 will always = 4. But am I gonna take lessons from a child molester on morality and I should and should not do? OH DA HECK NOO! So you mixing morality with sciences is a dead on arrival example as it is akin to mixing solid with liquid, the two are just not the same.


Secondly, no, one cannot simply become a self proclaimed scholar or mufti. Although it is allowed for the individual Muslim to make decisions according to his/her best interests in a personal matter/circumstances when religious consultation is not feasible, but when the advice of great scholars and learned men is available you are not allowed to proclaim decisions as halal which contradict their collective rulings which they have come to agree on based on years of experience and wisdom through dedicating their lives to the study of every minute detail of Islamic holy scriptures and texts.

So I'm gonna stop you right there and ask a few very prodding questions regarding the underlined. So who exactly decided to take on the authority to decide whether we are allowed or not allowed to use our own thinking or not? And no, PHULEEZ do not bring up the example of why we can't go against what doctors say okay?! No more mixing sciences with no moral matters, sick of listening to that example! The Holy Quran tells us to THINK and to use JUDGEMENT and to use our minds! Further more, It tells us that the majority is usually (not always) WRONG! So there goes your point about the "collective wisdom of scholars based on years of experience"! Do you know what these " years" of collective wisdom got us??? AN INVASION OF THE MONGOLS! Ji haan; your "learned" and "pious" were too busy researching and debating "if it would be halal to eat pig if it came to you in the form of a goat"! ! ! And we ALL know now far THAT got us with the Mongols now don't we?!?!?! THIS is what the " years of experience and wisdom" got us ... And who is the genius who said that us as individual "cannot procl aim decisions as halal which contradict their collective rulings which they have come to agree on based on years of experience and wisdom" ??? YES WE CAN!!! Oh yes we can PROVIDED it is based MERIT and EVIDENCE!

Not going to read that wall of text;
I only accept something from a Mufti when it is based on Quran and Sunnah not on his or mine personal preferences. Hope it clears the cloud of misunderstanding.

 

[GumNaam]

@Psychic

Only a knowledgeable scholar with credibility and piousness is allowed to practice ijtihad.
And who decides the piety and credibility of these scholars? other scholars? Who decides theres? Back in the day, it was the king who would decide for his own political purposes that mufti or imam such and such as very pious and credible the royal command isthat everyone shall follow this guy but now who decides? Im almost tempted to findout the names of scholars Who were sentenced to death by the corrupt kings and sultans cuz those scholars must've rattled some very sensitive bones!

The basic teachings of Islam i.e halal and haram though can never be challenged by ijtihad,(pork, homosexuality, fornication, alcohol were haram and cannot be declared halal which that person did),

Agreed100%...

only new problems can be dealt using ijtihad.
An ex-commie liberal drunkard who I was referring to in my post (A.Haider) has no authority to declare halal or haram which has been agreed upon by the Ummah through Ijma for centuries through scholastic debates and validated by evidence from Quran and Sunnah.
A Muslim state is responsible for the enforcement of certain laws as per the Quran and Sunnah and that cannot be changed in order to "fit into" the "modern world". These guiding principles are based on sound logic and are beneficial for the society as a whole. Allowing degeneracy to seep in in the name of "modernism" will do no good to a civilized society, the red line has to be drawn.
I am not defending the KSA of the past, it was the other extreme. But there has to be law and order as per the guidance of Islam if we want to remain a relatively healthy society. There are now many white people who are complaining about the declining white race and the increasing number of Muslims....why complain when you prefer to live with single boyfriends/girlfriends and prefer to not have babies? Once you allow one form of degeneracy in the name of tolerance, the whole society starts to rot.

Here is the bottom line! ONLY and ONLY The Quran cannot be challenged! Everything else can be challenged and either confirmed or rejected based on mere it and evidence. And that includes ahadith and any other book by any scholar! This needs to happen over and over again and again WITH FULL AND EQUAL PARTICIPATION OF MUSLIM WOMEN! I cannot consider any ijmah as valid without the equal representation and opinions of learned sisters.