> Does the sun revolve around the earth?

[salman]

Originally Posted by Abdul-Fattah

Selam aleykum brother Salman

I didn't know wheter his view was widespread or not. I was just schocked to find that there are still people in this day and age who have this view, and felt compelled to provide a descent reply to it. I'm relieved to hear hardly any people hold this view.

wa'alaykum as-salam wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhi akhee

It is a new opinion because we don't find it in early tafsir of the scholars. And it was acknowledged as an odd view. I have seen only two kind of people using this opinion propagate and support their agenda: 1) the kufaar and 2) people of bida. It is not known among Muslims and neither propagated. Hence, I think it is better if we keep it that way because otherwise people make ugly comments about the scholars and the defenders become blind followers of the scholars etc. etc.

I have read that the reason for such conclusion by couple of scholars is because they were presented incorrect astronomical information: sun is fixed and earth revolves around the sun. Hence, due to this incorrect information, they decided to refute it and said the Qur'ran says the sun is moving. Reason for refutation was to warn people from such a belief which is not in accordance with Islam.

and Allah knows best

[Abdul-Fattah]

Selam aleykum

And who are your people of knowledge? Proof your claim. The shaykh is not propagating the fatwa, Adbul is.

To this I would like to point out, I merely said: "I think it would be wiser not to indulge". I didn't say haraam or halal. There's a difference between making a fatwa and giving naseeha, and there is different criteria on what is allowed and not within these two fields.
And Allah subhana wa t'ala knows best.

[Tema]

Wa alaykum salam

Brothers, as long as your aqeedah is purely Orthodox I do ask for forgivness. If you oppose to Athaar aqeedah by that by which you are not to differ on, you fall amongst 72 sects who will be in Hell.

To proceed:

Brother Abdul Fattah, I 100% agree with you that scholars are to be corrected, wether it is my dear Abdul Wahabb, Ibn Taymeyyah etc...

But you don't refute him with einsteins theory. Someone Allah says to be deaf, dumb and blind. Not only that:[وَمَثَلُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُواْ]


(And the example of those who disbelieve...) meaning, in their injustice, misguidance and ignorance, they are just like wandering animals, not understanding what they are told; if the shepherd heralds them or calls them to what benefits them, they would not understand what is actually being said to them, for they only hear unintelligible sounds. This is what is reported from Ibn `Abbas, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, `Ikrimah, `Ata', Al-Hasan, Qatadah, `Ata' Al-Khurasani and Ar-Rabi` bin Anas.


[صُمٌّ بُكْمٌ عُمْىٌ]

We do not follow scholars blindly and we do taqleed. You are not someone to correct Utaymeyyah no matter if your knowledge is a level of a scholar, you are not authorized to be one.

Brother Salman, your remarks about our hizb is basless. Check this out by someone you call a hizby:

Dear sister Imam Bin baaz (Rahimullah) could be right or wrong even he is a human , we Salafis don't stick to personalities but to Quran,Sunnah,Salafas-Saliheen.

I really do not care if the sun revolves oround earth or not. So I won't ask for another fatwa.

I have read that the reason for such conclusion by couple of scholars is because they were presented incorrect astronomical information: sun is fixed and earth revolves around the sun. Hence, due to this incorrect information, they decided to refute it and said the Qur'ran says the sun is moving. Reason for refutation was to warn people from such a belief which is not in accordance with Islam.

What is the intention of this? I understand that scholars who are to be boycotted such be mentioned by name to warn other Muslims. I would watch my claws when it comes to judgeing the Salaf.

[Abdul-Fattah]

Selam aleykum

Originally Posted by Unknown

Wa alaykum salam
Brothers, as long as your aqeedah is purely Orthodox I do ask for forgivness.

May Allah subhana wa ta'ala grant us forgiveness to whoever is right on this issue and whoever is wrong all the same.
Sister, you seem to classify views as either orthodox or not, however things are not that black-and-white. I mean, it's not like it's always crystal clear which of the different views is the "orthodox" one to begin with.

If you oppose to Athaar aqeedah by that by which you are not to differ on, you fall amongst 72 sects who will be in Hell.

Only Allah subahan wa ta'ala knows when a person belongs to hell or not, safe for those whom their were revelations.
- Every act is judged by it's intention
- There are many verses/hadeeth which speak of people of hell and heaven (ie, a person doing this will go to hell, a person doing that will go to heaven and so on).
However, nobody will be judged merely on a single act. A person can do both acts described in the hadeeth of hell, as well as acts described in the hadeeth of heaven. And Allah subhana wa ta'ala is the most just, and will not do anybody any wrong.
- How do you know that a person "belongs" to a sect merely for having one wrong belief?

But you don't refute him with einsteins theory.

1. I didn't refute him with Einstein's theory, relativity theory wasn't even a requirement for my refutation. I refuted him with direct observation of celestial bodies.
2. If the Islamic sources (qur'an hadeeth and so on) are unclear on a subect, there is nothing wrong with using common sense and even science. Again note that I did not make a Fatwa. I merely pointed out the flaws in someone elses fatwa, there's a difrence.

Someone Allah says to be deaf, dumb and blind. Not only that:

1. Allah subhana wa ta'ala did not say that Einstein was deaf dumb and blind. This verse doesn't mean that every single person who disbelievs is like this. For example, those that have never heard or read anything about Islam, are they deaf dumb and blind to? There are different classes of kafir. Like a disbeliever who was never properly explained what Islam is, or a person who rejects faith despite knowing it's the truth.
2. Einstein was not a muslim, but he wasn't an atheist either, he did believe in the existence of God.
3. Furthermore, this refers to the atheists "understanding of religious affairs". This is not to say that atheists are ignorant on every single subject.

We do not follow scholars blindly and we do taqleed.

1. I'm not sure, but isn't taqleed for fiqh?
2. While I agree that it's indeed impermissible for a layman to make his own fatwa, and thus he has no choice but to follow a scholar, that doesn't mean we cannot look at different scholars who have disagreements, and compare their respective viewpoints with each other.

You are not someone to correct Utaymeyyah no matter if your knowledge is a level of a scholar, you are not authorized to be one.

1. Again, I did not make any fatwa.
2. Is this process of needing authorizations to correct a scholar also from the sunnah? When Umar as-siddiq during his caliphate proposed to lower the dowr, he was corrected by an elder lady from the crowd. Did he then tell her that she had no authorisation to correct him? Or did he understand that what matters is the truth, and not who stands by what, and thus admitted his mistake?

[Tema]

Sister, you seem to classify views as either orthodox or not, however things are not that black-and-white. I mean, it's not like it's always crystal clear which of the different views is the "orthodox" one to begin with.

Brother, no matter how rude and harsh I am, you do not seem to understand. If you are trying to give daw'ah to me, I do not take my deen or anyone's understanding except by those I trust and believe to follow the literall form of Islam. It is obvious that you do not follow literall form of al -Islam!

Only Allah subahan wa ta'ala knows when a person belongs to hell or not, safe for those whom their were revelations.

If you mean those who didn't have the opportunity to hear about Islam, will not be punished. If they obey Allah on the judgement day, they won't burn in Hell. If not, they will. If I obey Allah, I will not burn in Hell. I don't know my future. Obeying Allah is accepting all from Him. What is by Allah? All that is in the Qur'aan and the Sunna. You reject any of it or give an interpretation opposing the literall hadeeth, you aren't a complete Muslim. Athaar aqeedah takes things as they are. On what is not clear, we don't interpreat, not sure if I'm correct here. So opposing to us, is opposing to clear Qur'aan and the Sunna. I do not mean the fatwa you have pasted.

Allah subhana wa ta'ala did not say that Einstein was deaf dumb and blind.

But the kuffar who reject the truth, He has.

If the Islamic sources (qur'an hadeeth and so on) are unclear on a subject, there is nothing wrong with using common sense and even science. Again note that I did not make a Fatwa. I merely pointed out the flaws in someone elses fatwa, there's a difrence.

That is you making your own conclusions...a fatwa...

Furthermore, this refers to the atheists "understanding of religious affairs". This is not to say that atheists are ignorant on every single subject

Anyone who rejects Islam, is to be hated and not befrended by US. I speak based on the fatwas I sought. Again, deaf dumb and blind they are. Worse than animals.

1. I'm not sure, but isn't taqleed for fiqh?
2. While I agree that it's indeed impermissible for a layman to make his own fatwa, and thus he has no choice but to follow a scholar, that doesn't mean we cannot look at different scholars who have disagreements, and compare their respective viewpoints with each other.

The 4 great imams agreed on 70% The 30% the senior scholars studied. We do taqleed on the stuff the senior scholars differed on. Now, choosing views from fatwas by these scholars, is not me making my own fatwa.

Is this process of needing authorizations to correct a scholar also from the sunnah?

Those with the knowledge of the Qur'aan and the Sunna can correct him. If you have knowledge about science by Allah I cannot correct you with the knowledge of human science. I don't care what humans see or don't, it is not backed up with Islamic evidence. When there is nothing from Islam prooving it, its innovation.

[Abdul-Fattah]

Selam aleykum

I seek refuge with Allah from your constant attacks and invitation to fitna.
Sister these attacks have gone on long enough. While I grant your right to express your views and be critical, If from here on you remain unable to adress me or others alike in a a respectfull manner, I will take action as moderator and ban you.

Originally Posted by Unknown

Brother, no matter how rude and harsh I am

Being rude or harsh doesn't give one's arguments any additional weight.

you do not seem to understand. If you are trying to give daw'ah to me,

Sister, I am merely defending myself.

In the past you have told me, that you are merely here with the intention to learn. Yet you have from the very beginning been picking on me, replying to my posts not with questions but with attacks. And you keep debatting with me, even though you say that you will not accept anything I say, even if it is logical, merely on the basis that I have no authority and you don't trust me.

So I con only conclude that either:
A) You have no knowledge on the correct methodology of learning and/or are acting contradictory to your motives
B) You have been dishonest about your intentions, and are trying to convert me to the "super salafis" under teh guise of being here to learn.
Either way, I suggest some sincere self-reflection before you continue this path.

I do not mean the fatwa you have pasted.
...
That is you making your own conclusions...a fatwa...

Not every conclusion or opinion that a person makes is a fatwa. A fatwa is a religious ruling or opinion on law. I did not make any ruling or such. I only pointed out some flaws, and voiced a concerned advice.

But the kuffar who reject the truth, He has.... Anyone who rejects Islam, is to be hated and not befriended by US. I speak based on the fatwas I sought. Again, deaf dumb and blind they are. Worse than animals.

How does one know what this or that person rejected? Do you know if he was explained Islam properly? In order to "reject" something you must first have it. Somebody who has never had a proper understanding thus doesn't necessaryly fall under this cathegory. Remember he lived in a time when Islam was not so widely spread in the west, nor discussed in the news/papers. And most information available in the west at his time was writen by (biased) Christians and Catholics.

The 4 great imams agreed on 70% The 30% the senior scholars studied. We do taqleed on the stuff the senior scholars differed on. Now, choosing views from fatwas by these scholars, is not me making my own fatwa.

But I am merely doing the same, all of the views which we have debated so far are all views which are held by other scholars, views which is disagreement upon. I haven't brought forth here any single Islamic ruling that I invented myself.

Those with the knowledge of the Qur'aan and the Sunna can correct him. If you have knowledge about science by Allah I cannot correct you with the knowledge of human science.

As I have mentioned before, the Islamic sources are not clear on this isue. That is to say when looking at teh Islamic evidence, one only gets at a neutral position (where both alternatives are still possible). So if at that point one interpretation contradicts direct observation and logic and science, whereas the other confirms it, it should be clear which of those two is teh accurate one.

I don't care what humans see or don't, it is not backed up with Islamic evidence. When there is nothing from Islam prooving it, its innovation.

The only innnovations which are bad, are innovations in religion. Meaning new rulings and so on. Scientific knowledge and advancement is not a bad thing

[al-boriqee]

there is one major problem that has scabuzled everyone and no one realized it.

every single one of these proofs

1) Allaah, the Most High says, that when Ibraaheem (`alayhi as-Salaam), disputed with the one who argued with him concerning his Lord:
"Verily, Allah brings the sun form the east; then bring it you from the west."
[Soorah al-Baqarah 2:258]

2) He also tells us that Ibraaheem (`alayhi as-Salaam) said:
"When he saw the sun rising up, he said: 'This is my lord. This is greater.' But when it set, he said: 'O my people! I am indeed free from all that you join as partners (in worship with Allaah)."
[Soorah al-An`aam 6:78]

So He described the settings as an attribute of the sun and not that the earth set upon it, for if it was the earth which revolved, He would have said: but when (the earth) set upon it.

3) Allaah the Most High says:
"And you might have seen, the sun, when it rose, declining to the right from their Cave, and when it set, turning away from them to the left."
[Soorah al-Kahf 18:17]

He has described the declining and turning away as descriptions of the sun, and that is a proof that the movement was from the sun. If it was a description of the earth, He would have said: Their Cave declined from it. Likewise, describing the sun as rising and setting proves that it is the sun which revolves, even though the indication of the may be less than the indication in His Words: "declining" and "turning away from them."

4) Allaah, the Most High says:
"And He it is Who has created the night and the day, and the sun, and the moon, each in an orbit floating."
[Soorah al-Anbiyaaa' 21:33]

Ibn `Abbaas (radhiallaahu `anhu) said: "They revolve in an orbit, like the turning of a mill. This was widely reported from him.

5) Allaah, the Most High says:
"He brings the night as a cover over the day, seeking it rapidly."
[Soorah al-Ara'af 7:54]

He described the night as seeking the day, and the seeker rushes and overtakes, and it is well known that the night and the day follow the sun.

6) Allaah, the Most High says:
"He has created the heavens and the earth with truth. He makes the night to go in the day and makes the day to go in the night. And He has subjected the sun and the moon. Each running (on a fixed course) for an appointed term. Verily, He is the All-Mighty, the Oft-Forgiving."
[Soorah az-Zumar 39:5]

and His Words:
"He makes the night to go in the day" that is, it turns around it, as a turban is wrapped around, which proves the revolving of the night and the day around the earth. If it were the earth which revolved around them, He would have said: He causes the earth to revolve around the night and day.

And in His words:
"the sun and the moon, each running (on a fixed course)." It is clear from what precedes it that it is a proof that the sun and the moon move in a perceptible orbit, because subjecting something which moves to its movement is more apparent than subjecting something stationary which does not move.

7) Allaah, the Most High say:
"By the sun and its brightness. By the moon as it follows it (the sun)."
[Soorah ash-Shams 91:1-2]

And the meaning of: "follows it" is that 'it comes after it' and this is a proof of their moving and revolving around the earth, for if it were the earth which revolved around them, the moon would not be following the sun; rather it would sometimes be following it and sometimes it would be followed by it, because the sun is higher than it. And deduction from this verse requires study and reflection.

8) Allaah, the Most High say:
"And the sun runs o*n its fixed course for a term {appointed}. That is the Decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing. And the moon, We have measured for it mansions {to traverse} till it returns like the old dried date stalk. It is not for the sun to overtake the moon, nor does the night outstrip the day. They all float, each in an orbit."
[Soorah Ya-Seen 36:38-40]

So, attributing the movement to the sun and describing it as a Decree from the Almighty, Most Wise proves that it is a real movement with a far-reaching Decree, since the consequence of it is the alternation of the night and day and the seasons.

The measure of the moon's mansions (i.e., stations) is a proof that it traverses them, for if it was the earth which revolves , the measuring of the mansions would be for the earth's movement around the moon and not for the moon's movement around it.

And negating the sun's ability to overtake the moon, and the night's ability to outstrip the day are evidence of the rushing movement on the part of the sun and the moon, and the night and the day.

9) The Prophet (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) said to Aboo Tharr (radhiallaahu `anhu), when the sun had just set: "Do you know where it goes?" He said, "Allaah and His Messenger knows best." He (sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam) said: "Verily, it goes (i.e., travels) and it prostrates beneath the Throne and seeks permission to rise, and permission is granted to it. Then (a time will come when) it will be about to prostrate itself but its prostration will not be accepted, and it will ask permission to go on its course but will not be permitted, but it will be ordered: Return from whence you came, and so it will rise in the West."
[Reported by al-Bukhaaree in the Book of the Beginning of Creation, in the Chapter: Description of the Sun and the Moon (#3199), and by Muslim in the Book of Faith, in the Chapter: Explanation of the Time when Faith will not be accepted (#159)].

So and it is extremely clear from his words: Return from whence you came that it revolves around the earth and through its revolving the sunrise and sunset occur.

10) It is clear from the many ahaadeeth which attribute rising, setting, and declining from its zenith to the sun, that it is the sun which does so and so and the earth.

are ALL mutashaabihaat in terms of its being "unclear". The interpretations that Ibn Uthaymeen brought forth are merely t'awilaat (interpretative deductions) from what knowledge he had, which in this case he had ilmu-shar'i, not astronomy.

And when I say they are mutashaabihaat, Im speaking of the "how" these occurences take place, and not about the fact of night and day.

1. "Verily, Allah brings the sun form the east; then bring it you from the west."
[Soorah al-Baqarah 2:258]

Ibraheem alaihi salam was refuting Nimrod by exposing his Ungodly powers. Ibraheem did not say that the Sun ORBITS the earth.

2. 2) He also tells us that Ibraaheem (`alayhi as-Salaam) said:
"When he saw the sun rising up, he said: 'This is my lord. This is greater.' But when it set, he said: 'O my people! I am indeed free from all that you join as partners (in worship with Allaah)."
[Soorah al-An`aam 6:78]

So He described the settings as an attribute of the sun and not that the earth set upon it, for if it was the earth which revolved, He would have said: but when (the earth) set upon it.

The ayaah itself is relating the perceptional experience from Ibraheem's standpoint, and not from the standpoint of the cosmos. The verse does not say that the sun ORBITS the earth.

3. Allaah the Most High says:
"And you might have seen, the sun, when it rose, declining to the right from their Cave, and when it set, turning away from them to the left."
[Soorah al-Kahf 18:17]

Again, the relative circumstance Allah is narrating is from the standpoint of the ahlul-kahf and not from the cosmic standpoint (which only makes sense since the hidaaya was for mankind and applicable to mankind and not for the cosmos and inapplicable for the cosmos)

there is nothing in the ayaah that states that the sun ORBITS the earth.

we can continue to disect these proofs, but the point has been stressed and it would be like beating a dead horse here.

The point is is that everything narrated in Islam doe not EXPLICITLY state the suns orbit of the earth, rather the terminological structure of the ayaat and hadeeth along with taking into consideration the circumstantial evidence if Allah's narrating the perceptional experience of the people He is narrating about and pushing aside the cosmic perspective, then it becomes easy to understand that the language employed in the scriptures narrate a general import that can be twisted in any direction, HENCE it is mutashaabih (unclear) and not muhkaam (clear).

As for Ibn Uthaymeen, our practice is a practice of a middle way as was exemplified by Salman. when we know an open irrefutable error, we treat it like that and move on. Adding to this, Ibn Uthaymeen was a theologian and a jurist, not an astronomer. This case is similar to Bin Baz who interpreted the general mutashaabih ayaah "We made the earth flat" as literally being flat and not global. Yet, no one knows that the Shaykh was blind.

thus, once we learn and take all of these issues into consideration, then we can understand that people who use this fatwa generally use it for a hidden agenda that they have in mind. People with academic honesty would not dare to use these as a means to substantiate a malfunction of Islamic thought. So people who use this sort of tactic are only bent on furnishing a stereo type and are not in it for some beneficial learning or discussion.

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Abdul-Fattah

Selam aleykum

walaykum salam

allow me to be the bridge between our sister unknown and yourself

Sister, you seem to classify views as either orthodox or not, however things are not that black-and-white. I mean, it's not like it's always crystal clear which of the different views is the "orthodox" one to begin with.

forgive her but allow me to help in bridging the gap. there are matters that are black and white and there are matters that are not. the matters that are black n white are those issues in where ijmaa has been made, explcitly affirmed and most of which is dealing with the basics of aqeedah and the basics of the manhaj of the Muslim. OUTside of this clear, everything else is less clear. It may be that some peoples level of what is clear and unclear may be different from others. Personally, I understand her but the marginal error that could be made was in viewing this matter as purely explicit, which it is not. However, it would be proper to understand how we approach those in authority over us, and it is most likely due to your wording that has caused others to have viewed your speech as one of disrespect or a type of disdain. Although I know you and your obvious or apparent intention on this thread, others may not.

- How do you know that a person "belongs" to a sect merely for having one wrong belief?

excuse her. this is the salafitalkism that permeates many people.

I was going to comment on the rest of your post, however, there is no need to, I understand your sentiments and you are correct. The main jist of her issue was in the flagrant manner of your speech in disecting Ibn Uthaymeen's fatwa (note: the level of flagrantness depends on the person. It was not flagrant in my view, but a bit off, an therefore I understand why others might cause or make an issue)

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by Unknown

Brother, no matter how rude and harsh I am, you do not seem to understand. If you are trying to give daw'ah to me, I do not take my deen or anyone's understanding except by those I trust and believe to follow the literall form of Islam. It is obvious that you do not follow literall form of al -Islam!

take my following words as a naseeha more than anything.

the brother was not trying to give dawah to you, he was merely informing you of certain realities that you yourself may not have experienced. If he has erred or he has a fault in understanding, the salafi is he who corrects them and with rifq as Allah says

"inallahi Rafeequn, wa yuhabu rifq"

The fact of the matter is, is that Allah is Gentle, and He loves gentleness. And He gives to gentleness (meaning He aids and bends the reality in favor to) what He does not give to one who is 'aunfal (rough)"

in essence ya ukhti, our general adaab is to stress patience and not to go off on average people. This sort of behavior we would reserve for known violators of the sunnah and the mubtadiah.

If you mean those who didn't have the opportunity to hear about Islam, will not be punished. If they obey Allah on the judgement day, they won't burn in Hell. If not, they will. If I obey Allah, I will not burn in Hell. I don't know my future. Obeying Allah is accepting all from Him. What is by Allah? All that is in the Qur'aan and the Sunna. You reject any of it or give an interpretation opposing the literall hadeeth, you aren't a complete Muslim.

sister. this is wrong and this is an erroneous manhaj that we need to retract ourselves from. Allow me to give you clear examples of how salafis from the past have behaved with people who errors and did not call them "incomplete muslims".

The fitnah between Maaalik ibn Anaas (Imaam Maalik) and Ibn Abi Dhibb. Maalik slightly erred with his doctrine of amal ahlul-madeenah, which is superb but had some fatal flaws in it. Ibn Abi Dhabb, the Imaam and Faqih and Haafidh said about Maalik

"If he does not refrain from his position, I fear he will leave Islam with it"

Ibn Abi Dhibb was making it known that this doctrine was kufr. Most of the fuqaha did not view it as kufr, infact it was acceptable, but it could not be made absolute.

we d not impugne Maalik for going on a tangent that is not in conformity with Qur'aan or Hadeeth

LIKEWISE, Imaam an-Nawawee has made clear mukhalafaat in the sifaat of Allah and has clearly articulated the innovators of the heretical sect of the Ash'aris. Do we destroy him on account of this.

the asl that pretty much most, if not all of the salafi ulema have articulated was that if a person's asl is salafi, and he has fallen into a heretical idea, then this error does not negate his salafiyyah and it surely does not make him an incomplete muslim.

More importantly. what is an incomplete muslim? I never came across a perfect Muslim. The only person I can think of who was a perfect Muslim is Abu Bakr as-Sadeeq radhiyallahu anhu.

Athaar aqeedah takes things as they are. On what is not clear, we don't interpreat, not sure if I'm correct here.

well, Im sure that your are incorrect.

the athari aqeedah is as you know based on the aathaar. the athari manhaj that takes things as they are is called alaa dhaahiran. SOMETIMES the dhaahir might be a literal reality, and sometimes it might be a metaphorical idea (meaning metaphorical within the western languages, non semetic).

So opposing to us, is opposing to clear Qur'aan and the Sunna. I do not mean the fatwa you have pasted.

But the kuffar who reject the truth, He has.

the brother is not rejecting that. He is merely highlighting to you that it is not applied on a specific individual until the affair of Islam becomes known to a person. That is because the hukm of Allah is hukm bil-wasf, and what you did was you applied it hukm al-ayn.

That is you making your own conclusions...a fatwa...

a conclusion is not a fatwa. A fatwa is the declaration of what is haraam or halaal on a legal matter. More importantly, abdul-fattah is correct, because the issue that he was talking about or applying his "conclusion" was on those matters that are tawfeeqiyyah. He was not applying it on aqeedah matters which is TAWQEEFIYYAH. there is a difference.

Anyone who rejects Islam, is to be hated and not befrended by US. I speak based on the fatwas I sought. Again, deaf dumb and blind they are. Worse than animals.

there is no disagreement here ya ukhti. there is a difference between utilizing a benefit from a rotton stinking kaafir VS befriending one. Abdul-Fattah may rightfully utilize him on something just as we utilize kaafirs in teaching us aerospace or chemistry, but that does not by default mean that they are befriended.

Those with the knowledge of the Qur'aan and the Sunna can correct him. If you have knowledge about science by Allah I cannot correct you with the knowledge of human science. I don't care what humans see or don't, it is not backed up with Islamic evidence. When there is nothing from Islam prooving it, its innovation.

It is bida if it opposes Islam. But there is nothing in this subject on this thread that is subject to be in opposition to Islam.

@Abdul-Fattah

Is this process of needing authorizations to correct a scholar also from the sunnah?

implicitly. there is an etiquette of doing things.