> Sunni Response The Modernist Reality of Odd Opinions

[al-boriqee]

I found two wonderful quotes that perfectly explain the modernist disputation in current times. I was blown away when I came across it

Imam Al-Baihaqi reported: “Isma’eel Al Qadi said: ‘One day I entered to Al Mu’tadid, one of the Abbasid Khaleefahs, and immediately he showed me a book to read. I found that the author had compiled in it, the strange sayings of every ‘Alim. So I told the Khaleefah that the author of this book is a heretic. The Khaleefah asked why this was so, and I told him that those sayings were not presented by the scholars as they are presented in this book. He who legalized the Mu’tah marriage did not legalize singing, while he who legalized one action would not legalize another action. Additionally, each ‘Alim has strange opinions, so if one would compile the pitfalls of all the Imams, and adopt them, then the Deen would be lost. The Khaleefah then ordered the book to be burned.”

Imam Al-Awza’i said: “He who traces the strange opinions of the scholars is out of Islam. You would find a scholar with a lot of knowledge and value, and also with a pitfall. So if a person was to collect the pitfalls of all the scholars and form a new Madhab, then what kind of ‘Ilm would you have?’”

these are two precious jewel of the Imaams on the mishape of heresy, particularly the heresy of legalizing everything they want to and prohibiting everything they find problematic that Allah allowed

I got the above materia from a nice site

Islamic Revival: Does Islam have a Ruling System?

However, the reason why Im posting the link is because our very own optimist posed a question on it

[salman]

Jazak Allah khayr for sharing this akhee - this should serve as slap on the faces of three kinds of people:

1 - Those who accuse us of blind taqleed of scholars by attacking us with straw man

2 - Those who say let us not be extreme like wahabis and take lenient opinions

3 - Who say let us change our deen by relaying on shadd and odd opinions

PS: akhee, who is Imaam Isma'eel al-Qadi? Was he a tabi or taba tabi?

[al-boriqee]

well, according to the text, it was during the time of the abassid caliphate with caliph Muta'adid, so he was definitely not a tabi or a atba

I remember coming across his name before, If I remember correctly he was a big time Imaam of the later forth century since al-Bayhaqee came right after

[Haqekka']

I'm not sure if this tread is the place...,but I need to know what means:
,,Sistem of presant-day (modern) Fiqh,,?

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Haqekka'

I'm not sure if this tread is the place...,but I need to know what means:
,,Sistem of presant-day (modern) Fiqh,,?

usually when you come across a person claiming "we need a new fiqh" or "a fiqh for our times" and "need for a modern fiqh", all of this usually is brought up by modernist or people affected by their heresy.

The problem that makes it worse is that in this subject, the people whom we discuss with need to be educated. If they don;t understand about how law works or if they have not went to law school, then it is virtually useless to discuss with them about the error of their way. That is what makes it more harder to deal with as a muslim.

Had modernist and the average people understood how law works, law is built primarily on legal theories, and the history of all law is understood that it is an entity that is BUILT UPON. In the world of academics, people of law BUILD upon what was already established and expand or narrow them depending on applicability. The endeavor to perform this requires the ability to make ijtihaad. The heresy of the modernist is that they claim that every single one of us HAS the ability to make ijtihaad.

A most straight forward refutation of that would be to let them know if they can just go to court and sit on the judges bench or even if they can get hiured by the state to do such work. The answer will definitely be no. And the reason for their denying such a person the right to become a judge just like that is the same reason we are explaining to people here, which is that you have to be QUALIFIED to perform ijtihaad.

This is a fundamental difference that forms a distinction between the average Muslims and the heretics called the progressives or modernists (reformist, revisionist, whatever name they are referred as). Under the
Islamic paradigm, everything has to be earned. If you want to be a fighter, you have to learn how to fight, if you want to be a scholar, you have to learn knowledge of a field, if you want to be a judge, you have to learn the discipline of law and its fundamentals along with its theories and concepts upon which fundamentals are based on thereby allowing you the ability to extract the law.

However with progressives, their laxity in religion causes them to view anyone by default of being a muslim as already ABLE enough to make ijtihaad on his own.

In order to translate this heresy into terms and realities we can understand, this thought is synonymous with having a group of fanatics in the western world to propagate that the lawyers, attorneys, and judges, and the entire legislative branch of government are to extreme or give improper analysis of law and principles, so rather we will propagate that anyone can judge in court (without going through the education) and anyone can be a lawyer and that it is extremism to think that we need to educate ourselves through the channels of learning the law in order to be able to judge for ourselves the correctness of an issue.

If anyone can grasp the preposterousness of this hypothetical situation I stated above, then this is the exact reality (meaning it is not hypothetical) that we face with modernist and progressives.

This is why when these heretics claim that they hold the "mantle" of reason with their usual slogans of "rationale" and "we use our reason", it only reveals to me how intellectually inept they are and how low they will go in order to practice religious malpractice into the religion of Islam.

anyways, I hope my answer answered your question
'

[Haqekka']

Yes,easy to understand examples.May Allah bless you!

Can you give me the names of most-popular reformist/modernist Faqeh?
Is Yusuf al Qaradwi one of them?