How trustable are Fatwas? And how many are based on Politics instead of Islam?

[Qeelbax]

This is from a fucked up subreddit so don’t mind it but this is true. How can we trust these kind of resources? Can’t trust stuff related to Saudi, can’t trust stuff related to Egypt even Somalia (Saudi influenced).

Even the infamous Ibn Baz banned driving and said it was haram.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

People have spoken a great deal in the al-Jazeerah newspaper about the issue of women driving cars. It is well known that it leads to evil consequences which are well known to those who promote it, such as being alone with a non-mahram woman, unveiling, reckless mixing with men, and committing haraam actions because of which these things were forbidden. Islam forbids the things that lead to haraam and regards them as being haraam too.

Right because wearing a Burka is a fixed practice and there should be no ifs or buts

 

[Qeelbax]

Why get rid of it once Saudi Arabia does? Do you truly follow your Salafi scholars or Saudi Arabia? They quoted ibn baz as proof. Ibn baz died long before they got rid of it and he was always against it.

now I’m 100% on the side that this ruling is insane and it means nothing to me but the inconsistencies are ridiculous. They need to write in bold that they are Saudi funded and operated and they don’t care for the scholars as much as they claim they do. This is literally the biggest Online Fatwa website.

Let me not make a comment on other Salafi clerics making fatwas saying if you allow mix settings then you are a kaffir.

 

[Omar del Sur]

well Islamqa is... I think his name is Munajidd.... anyways, that's just that guy.... I don't think any of the actual big Salafi scholars changed their view....

anyways.... I believe in Salafiyyah and I definitely pay a lot of consideration to scholars like Sheikh Ibn Baz, Sheikh Fawzan, Sheikh Uthaymeen, etc....



Sheikh Ruhayli mentions some of the major scholars here.


but what I like to do is this.... take a fatwa from Sheikh Fawzan, for example.... and then go find out what older, classical scholars said on the issue.... I remember I saw a fatwa from Sheikh Fawzan on an issue and I had heard that this view was wrong... so I wanted to check and see if Sheikh Fawzan's fatwa was right.... so I went and looked into it and it turned out his fatwa was the same as the ruling that was given by Imam Bukhari..... but honestly just go by major, trustworthy scholars.... it's bad to be reading the stuff on reddit... reddit will go and push things like lgbt and tell you lgbt is compatible with Islam.... that's bad enough but it's even worse if you are letting reddit influence your understanding of Islam.... if you don't trust fataawa then how are you going to trust that you are praying salaah correctly??? it could really undermine your din as a whole.... you have to find some good scholars and see what they say

 

[Omar del Sur]

Why get rid of it once Saudi Arabia does? Do you truly follow your Salafi scholars or Saudi Arabia? They quoted ibn baz as proof. Ibn baz died long before they got rid of it and he was always against it.

Sheikh Ibn Baz is a great scholar to learn from. One of the best of modern times. He is dead and there is no changing his fataawa to please anyone.

 

[Qeelbax]

Sheikh Ibn Baz is a great scholar to learn from. One of the best of modern times. He is dead and there is no changing his fataawa to please anyone.

I dont follow him and Inshallah never will, as I find Salafiyah to be extremism and a modern concept.

well Islamqa is... I think his name is Munajidd.... anyways, that's just that guy.... I don't think any of the actual big Salafi scholars changed their view....

anyways.... I believe in Salafiyyah and I definitely pay a lot of consideration to scholars like Sheikh Ibn Baz, Sheikh Fawzan, Sheikh Uthaymeen, etc....



Sheikh Ruhayli mentions some of the major scholars here.


but what I like to do is this.... take a fatwa from Sheikh Fawzan, for example.... and then go find out what older, classical scholars said on the issue.... I remember I saw a fatwa from Sheikh Fawzan on an issue and I had heard that this view was wrong... so I wanted to check and see if Sheikh Fawzan's fatwa was right.... so I went and looked into it and it turned out his fatwa was the same as the ruling that was given by Imam Bukhari..... but honestly just go by major, trustworthy scholars.... it's bad to be reading the stuff on reddit... reddit will go and push things like lgbt and tell you lgbt is compatible with Islam.... that's bad enough but it's even worse if you are letting reddit influence your understanding of Islam.... if you don't trust fataawa then how are you going to trust that you are praying salaah correctly??? it could really undermine your din as a whole.... you have to find some good scholars and see what they say

Tell me what’s so bad about women driving? I’m keeping my cool when I read their explanations. Man Allah swt made Islam easy and these guys make it a jail for women. Tell me what’s so haram about being in the drivers seat instead of the passengers seat?

 

[Omar del Sur]

I dont follow him and Inshallah never will, as I find Salafiyah to be extremism and a modern concept.

If you study Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah and a lot of the classical scholars, there's not really much of a difference. if you reject the Salafi scholars, you're going to end up with deviants. the whole concept of Salafiyyah is about following Islam according to the earliest generations. Salafiyyah predates Saudi Arabia. it isn't something modern. it is absolutely essential for people to follow the approach of the earliest generations. it's not about anything to do with Saudi. Saudi promoted Salafiyyah but Salafiyyah isn't some exclusive property of Saudi anymore than Sufism is some exclusive thing belonging to the Ottoman empire.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Tell me what’s so bad about women driving? I’m keeping my cool when I read their explanations. Man Allah swt made Islam easy and these guys make it a jail for women. Tell me what’s so haram about being in the drivers seat instead of the passengers seat?

Sheikh Albaani was one of the big Salafi scholars and he wasn't opposed to it. whatever anyone thinks of it... it's really sort of a side issue. it's not this fundamental thing that Salafiyyah is centered around. I know that Sheikh Ibn Baz and Sheikh Fawzan were against it and I take their word for it but I don't know a lot about the exact daleel for it. But Sheikh Albaani differed with them and... honestly, this is a modern issue. this isn't something where we can go back, check what the classical scholars said and then see. I take Sheikh Ibn Baz's and Sheikh Fawzan's word for it but I haven't really looked all that much into the issue. And ultimately, I see it really as a side issue. I don't think it's worth making a big thing about.

 

[Qeelbax]

If you study Sheikh Ibn Taymiyyah and a lot of the classical scholars, there's not really much of a difference. if you reject the Salafi scholars, you're going to end up with deviants. the whole concept of Salafiyyah is about following Islam according to the earliest generations. Salafiyyah predates Saudi Arabia. it isn't something modern. it is absolutely essential for people to follow the approach of the earliest generations. it's not about anything to do with Saudi. Saudi promoted Salafiyyah but Salafiyyah isn't some exclusive property of Saudi anymore than Sufism is some exclusive thing belonging to the Ottoman empire.

Deviants? I’m gonna lay off you today. Stop arrogating the Salaf to your specific group and claiming the rest of us are deviants.

I don’t follow ibn taymiyyah and most classical scholars are much different from most Salafiyyah ones.

I dont want this to be a back and forth with you, so let’s stop here.

Sheikh Albaani was one of the big Salafi scholars and he wasn't opposed to it. whatever anyone thinks of it... it's really sort of a side issue. it's not this fundamental thing that Salafiyyah is centered around. I know that Sheikh Ibn Baz and Sheikh Fawzan were against it and I take their word for it but I don't know a lot about the exact daleel for it. But Sheikh Albaani differed with them and... honestly, this is a modern issue. this isn't something where we can go back, check what the classical scholars said and then see. I take Sheikh Ibn Baz's and Sheikh Fawzan's word for it but I haven't really looked all that much into the issue. And ultimately, I see it really as a side issue. I don't think it's worth making a big thing about.

I completely disagree but I don’t want this to be a back and forth fight.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Deviants? I’m gonna lay off you today. Stop arrogating the Salaf to your specific group and claiming the rest of us are deviants.

I don’t follow ibn taymiyyah and most classical scholars are much different from most Salafiyyah ones.

I dont want this to be a back and forth with you, so let’s stop here.

but it's only fair that I can respond.

this concept of following the salaf as-salih... it doesn't mean "call yourself a Salafi" and follow this specific scholar.

it is a methodology. it is something that you literally have to follow and implement. it is one hundred percent literal. if Sheikh Fawzan and every scholar in the Arabian gulf start preaching something that contradicts the salaf as-salih- reject what they are calling for and follow the salaf as-salih instead.

as far as the women driving issue... this is a controversial topic that is a topic that didn't exist during the times of the classical scholars. but leaving these specifically modern issues aside- if you look at the fataawa of Sheikh Ibn Baz and them and you look at the fataawa of the classical scholars- you will see that the rulings are pretty much identical. following the salaf as-salih isn't just some empty slogan. it is meant one hundred percent literally. it isn't about following these particular scholars. follow them if what they say is consistent with the salaf as-salih. and if you research- what they are saying is consistent with the salaf as-salih. it goes back in an unbroken chain. this is why they are Salafi scholars. it isn't just some slogan or name.

and it isn't really necessary entirely to call yourself a Salafi. I avoid calling myself a Salafi. it's not about calling oneself a Salafi- it's about literally following that approach.

like I said, there was an issue, where I wasn't sure about a fatwa from Sheikh Fawzan- then I researched and I found out it was the exact same ruling given by Imam Bukhari. It isn't really necessary that the scholars call themselves Salafis but it's essential that they follow the methodology.

 

[Omar del Sur]

apparently Amazon is charging an insane amount for this book... maybe people can get it cheaper elsewhere.... but I really recommend this for people.... you can read what Imam Barbahari is saying and if you look at what the modern Salafi scholars are saying- you can see it's the exact same stuff... and it's only one example and one that's been translated into English... there are lots of other examples

 

[Qeelbax]

but it's only fair that I can respond.

this concept of following the salaf as-salih... it doesn't mean "call yourself a Salafi" and follow this specific scholar.

it is a methodology. it is something that you literally have to follow and implement. it is one hundred percent literal. if Sheikh Fawzan and every scholar in the Arabian gulf start preaching something that contradicts the salaf as-salih- reject what they are calling for and follow the salaf as-salih instead.

as far as the women driving issue... this is a controversial topic that is a topic that didn't exist during the times of the classical scholars. but leaving these specifically modern issues aside- if you look at the fataawa of Sheikh Ibn Baz and them and you look at the fataawa of the classical scholars- you will see that the rulings are pretty much identical. following the salaf as-salih isn't just some empty slogan. it is meant one hundred percent literally. it isn't about following these particular scholars. follow them if what they say is consistent with the salaf as-salih. and if you research- what they are saying is consistent with the salaf as-salih. it goes back in an unbroken chain. this is why they are Salafi scholars. it isn't just some slogan or name.

and it isn't really necessary entirely to call yourself a Salafi. I avoid calling myself a Salafi. it's not about calling oneself a Salafi- it's about literally following that approach.

like I said, there was an issue, where I wasn't sure about a fatwa from Sheikh Fawzan- then I researched and I found out it was the exact same ruling given by Imam Bukhari. It isn't really necessary that the scholars call themselves Salafis but it's essential that they follow the methodology.

Respectfully, I disagree with your answer and your views. May Allah swt bless you.

 

[Omar del Sur]

@Qeelbax I wish nothing but good for you and I hope there is no animosity between us even if we have different views.

I haven't read your response. I know how I am, I will want to respond if I read it. So without me having made any argument against your views, let us leave things here. I respect that you don't want to go back and forth and I don't want to go back and forth either. May Allah bless you. Ameen.

 

[xiin-finiin]

This is from a fucked up subreddit so don’t mind it but this is true. How can we trust these kind of resources? Can’t trust stuff related to Saudi, can’t trust stuff related to Egypt even Somalia (Saudi influenced).

Even the infamous Ibn Baz banned driving and said it was haram.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

People have spoken a great deal in the al-Jazeerah newspaper about the issue of women driving cars. It is well known that it leads to evil consequences which are well known to those who promote it, such as being alone with a non-mahram woman, unveiling, reckless mixing with men, and committing haraam actions because of which these things were forbidden. Islam forbids the things that lead to haraam and regards them as being haraam too.

View attachment 280511


Right because wearing a Burka is a fixed practice and there should be no ifs or buts
View attachment 280512

you can't really trust anyone anymore. That's why its soo important to learn the deen yourself. As for them being based on politics, i think its more so time than politics. For example, it has been argued that one of the reasons ibn.taymiyya took such strong positions was due to him witnessing the very traumatic event that was the sacking of baghdad/mongol invasion and just the tumultuous time he lived in. Also fatwas need not be universal rulings.

 

[Dualke]

@Hamzza is this true?

 

[Hamzza]

@Hamzza is this true?

It is true to some extent

But the decision to ban women from driving was an Islamic influence on politics. Sheikh Ibn Baz and co convinced the authorities to ban women from driving because they thought it was inappropriate, not the other way around.

 

[Omar del Sur]

It is true to some extent

But the decision to ban women from driving was an Islamic influence on politics. Sheikh Ibn Baz and co convinced the authorities to ban women from driving because they thought it was inappropriate, not the other way around.

this is a point that a lot of people miss and I don't mean specifically with this issue. in a broader and more general way, Sheikh Ibn Baz and the Saudi scholars would actively influence the Saudi state. it isn't like how people try to present it, that scholars like Sheikh Ibn Baz were just mindless puppets. Sheikh Ibn Baz and them would actively influence the state.

how many states were there where that was happening? I was reading a book on Central Asia. I remember reading about how the Soviets would prop up these modernist sellout types.... in order to undercut the actual scholars in that area. and they allowed some Soviet-supported modernist types to have some influence while the actual scholars there were brutally persecuted (I think they ended up crushing those poor scholars and then did the same to modernist sellouts once the scholars were out of the way). and then in Saudi the scholars were not only not persecuted but they were actually influencing the government.

 

[Hamzza]

this is a point that a lot of people miss and I don't mean specifically with this issue. in a broader and more general way, Sheikh Ibn Baz and the Saudi scholars would actively influence the Saudi state. it isn't like how people try to present it, that scholars like Sheikh Ibn Baz were just mindless puppets. Sheikh Ibn Baz and them would actively influence the state.

how many states were there where that was happening? I was reading a book on Central Asia. I remember reading about how the Soviets would prop up these modernist sellout types.... in order to undercut the actual scholars in that area. and they allowed some Soviet-supported modernist types to have some influence while the actual scholars there were brutally persecuted (I think they ended up crushing those poor scholars and then did the same to modernist sellouts once the scholars were out of the way). and then in Saudi the scholars were not only not persecuted but they were actually influencing the government.

Also, to be honest, the Saudi state used the influence of major scholars like Ibn Baz to give legitimacy to some of its more unpopular decisions like inviting US troops to the country.

 

[Omar del Sur]

Also, to be honest, the Saudi state used the influence of major scholars like Ibn Baz to give legitimacy to some of its more unpopular decisions like inviting US troops to the country.

I don't listen to Abu Khadeejah or spubs. I don't learn about Salafiyyah from them. I was taught about it at a Yemeni masjid way before I ever heard of spubs and them years later.

I am against Abu Khadeejah and spubs, I think there are serious problems with them and generally I stay away from them... but on that specific issue, there is a useful article from Abu Khadeejah where he talks about that.

Ibn Baaz Allowed The American Military Into Saudi Arabia? - Abu Khadeejah أبو خديجة

Seeking Help from Non-Muslim Nations in Battle During the first Gulf War with Iraq from 2nd August 1990 till 28th February 1991[1], many radical Jihādists condemned the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for [read on...]

abukhadeejah.com

the article shows some of the evidence for Sheikh Ibn Baz's fatwa. it is true that Osama Bin Laden and his terrorist organization as well as some other people made it this big issue.

But there does seem to be scholarly basis for Sheikh Ibn Baz's fatwa and there is no justification for anyone to claim that Sheikh Ibn Baz did not have sincere intention in giving the fatwa.

I am not saying you are making that claim against Sheikh Ibn Baz but it is a danger in bringing it up that it can expose people to shubuhat and I think it's better to protect people against shubuhat rather than to do things that can lead to them becoming confused.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be talked about but it has to be talked about in a way that isn't inviting shubuhat. It is Allah who knows Sheikh Ibn Baz's intention and there's no reason to cast aspersions on his intention. And are governments not allowed to defend their actions? There's nothing wrong with a government using a fatwa from a scholar to defend itself from criticism, especially when the issue is being used as propaganda to promote terrorism against the country.

 

[Aurelian]

This is from a fucked up subreddit so don’t mind it but this is true. How can we trust these kind of resources? Can’t trust stuff related to Saudi, can’t trust stuff related to Egypt even Somalia (Saudi influenced).

Even the infamous Ibn Baz banned driving and said it was haram.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

People have spoken a great deal in the al-Jazeerah newspaper about the issue of women driving cars. It is well known that it leads to evil consequences which are well known to those who promote it, such as being alone with a non-mahram woman, unveiling, reckless mixing with men, and committing haraam actions because of which these things were forbidden. Islam forbids the things that lead to haraam and regards them as being haraam too.

View attachment 280511


Right because wearing a Burka is a fixed practice and there should be no ifs or buts
View attachment 280512

They, and those before them, change their position if the ruler said so.

One of their silly explanations (I will give 2 of his) of why they banned women from driving was( as one sheikh explained)

1- because when woman drive on uneven route, or speed bumps, the car will shake up and down, and so the woman's body, and since her body shakes, her uterus shakes and that is not good.

2- woman body is weaker than man's body, and so when she sites on to drive, the sit and her weight forces her pelvis to compress on itself, which will harm her, and make it more difficult to give birth and increase the risk of maternal death.


As you see, they had silly explanations

 

[Aurelian]

Other explanations were:
She could escape, yes, women escaping was one of their arguments for why they banned women driving.