Bro has got a point.

Here is the link to the official website of the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.

The Above page in English

Is that translation an automatic computer type one? (i.e. not by a person?) It is utterly shocking...

[They translated Jinn as elves!! ]

^ Google...

Selam aleykum Amani
Thx for your detailed post. while I agree with the general message of the sermon, and while I acknowledge that it's more general and you didn't present it as a defense in favor of this police, I 'd like to still take the time point out that while at first glance this lecture might be antagonistic to my views, it could just as well be interpreted the other way.

I agree 100% and the best way to avoid this is to stick as close as possible to the sunnah of the prophet (peace be upon him) hence the first argument I presented in this thread is that police forces should only enforce rulings which the Prophet (peace be upon him) also enforced.

Which is why I stressed the need for proves in fatwa's.

I think it would be more prudent not to assume a single thing is the cause of strangeness in Islam. there could be many reasons why people alienated from Islam. Flagrant sins might be one of them, but there might be many others. For example, being overly severe in controling people might cause an aversion against Islam within the population and thus cause more damage then good.

Yes, I agree 100% We should try and always speak up to any wrong we see.

It's a fine line between helping someone and forcing someone.


again, it's a fine line between condemning acts and making acts juridically prosecutionable.

Is someone able to tell me the strength of these hadeeth? Also, if this is the default position, are there exceptions, or is this always valid?
The remainder of the text, while interesting and true, is irrelevant here.

Selam aleykum Malaikah
I could also say that you make it sound as if they have prove despite that you don't know whether or not they have it. I still hold it to be false until I find proof that shows otherwise.

No, I criticized the rulings, I didn't criticize them. after that people started to comment on my posts, and in my counter-comments I told them I disagree with believing these scholars by default. I understand how if you didn't read the whole tread that might have looked as "me criticizing the scholars" but if you'll look more carefully, you'd see that such is not the case.

Of course everyone is entitled to have their opinion; but just because you're a scholar doesn't mean you can present your opinions as though they are Islamic. Even itjihad has certain criteria and must have some ground.

Like I said, all my inquiries and searches so far have been in vain.

selam aleykum Brok3n and hi Nerd;
thx for the links, I 've searched the English translation but found no rulings.

Odd... shouldn't we go by the default, which is that scholars will usually give a fatwa using proof? Shouldn't we also assume good of our fellow Muslims, isn't that their right over us? Wouldn't we therefore assume they did have evidence for their claim (since that is to think good of them)?

Selam aleykum sister
I strongly disagree. In general yes, you have to assume the best of your fellow muslims. But like I said, I'm not questioning scholars, I'm questioning their rulings. There's also practical reasons to consider. According to your logic you'd have to accept every single ruling until you've had the chance to see if it's not well supported after all. This is what I meant with the hypocracy of some salafi who criticize other divisions for blindly following their scholars while in fact some salafi actually do the same. (not saying that you are one of them, just making an observation)

anyway, I think this thread is due for a lock?

^ Nice response bro... nuff respect *need to spread reps*

No, that isn't true at all. It is very common for conflicting opinions to exist in Islam while both of them have strong evidence for their claims. Does that mean they are both right? No. Therefore thinking good of them and assuming they have evidence is not the same as thinking their understanding or application of the evidence is ultimately correct.

For someone who isn't accusing me, or anyone else here, of being a salafi, I don't see the relevance of mentioning salafis in this discussion at all.

Simply assuming that a shaykh passed a ruling based on some knowledge that he has doesn't even come close to blind following at all! You don't have to follow an opinion to be able to admit that the shaykh has evidence for his claim.

Selam aleykum sister
So then you admit that I shouldn't accept it afterall "just to think nice of them"? Aren't you contradicting yourself here?

Doesn't this police force enforce what salafi scholars tell them to? Isn't this therefor relevant?

I disagree. Either the ruling is certain and has solid evidence, or the ruling has no evidence and is itjihad. Which is only based on indications. so an opinion never has evidence in the first place. If it would have evidence, then the evidence would "force" a Muslim to accept the ruling (since it's undeniable). So yes, you do have to follow a ruling if you accept that it has evidence.

No, I'm not. Read it again if you still don't get it.

No! It is totally irrelevant whether these scholars are salafi or not!

That's is false - evidence is not always solid. Evidence varies in strength or may be open to many interpretations. If it was as simplistic as you are proposing then there would essentially be no room for differences of opinion in Islam.

Allah subhana wa ta'ala knows best ^_^

As far as I know, the salafi take proof very serious and agree that you shouldn't accept rulings by authority of scholars, but only by proofs.
Hence the relevance.

Evidence that isn't solid isn't really evidence. You're playing with words. either a ruling has scriptural proof or it doesn't, there's no in between.

If it's weak, it's not evidence. If it relies on interpretations it's not evidence.

Exactly! thats' what I said several posts ago, there is no room for personal opinions in Islam.

Abdul Fattah. I'm interested in how much you know about usool al-fiqh?
I think you need to distinguish between personal opinions, and opinions based upon evidence. There could be a single verse, or hadeeth - and scholars could interpret that verse or hadeeth in several different ways. Does this make the evidence weak? No. But both opinions could be using strong evidence, by looking in to the linguistics, and other verses/hadeeths to provide explanations. I'm afraid it really isn't as simple as you propose it is.