Wane mutum ne ya fi zama barazana ga Al-Ummah? Mai "ci-gaban Musulunci" wanda a bayyane yake kira da a sake gyara Musulunci ta hanyar, a cikin wasu abubuwa, watsar da dukkan hadisai, saboda akwai labarai masu yawa na "nuna wariya ga mata" a cikin littattafan sahihai, da sauransu? Ko kuwa: "Malamin shaikh" wanda ya yi karatu a Al-Azhar ko wasu wurare, wanda ba shi da tasiri daga akidun zamani kamar su sakularism, liberalism, da feminism, amma maimakon ya kira a bayyane da a canza addinin gaba daya, sai ya koma ga yin amfani da ra'ayoyin "tsiraru" marasa tushe ba daidai ba, ya lalata ma'anar maqasid, ya ki amincewa da hadisai masu inganci bisa dalilai masu shakka, ya yi amfani da karkatar da ma'anar harshen Larabci ta hanyoyi masu yawa, ya lalata ma'anar `urf, ya rage darajar ilimin manyan malamai kamar Al-Ghazali, Ibn Taimiyya, da manyan imamai huɗu, Allah ya yi musu rahama, domin gabatar da ra'ayi "mai sassauci" da "na ilimi" wanda ya fi dacewa da zamani?

Which person poses more of a danger to the Ummah? The openly “progressive Muslim” calling for the reform of Islam by, among other things, throwing away all hadith, since there are so many “misogynistic” narrations in the sahih collections, etc.? Or: The “learned shaykh” who has studied at Al-Azhar or elsewhere who is no less under the influence of modern ideologies like secularism, liberalism, and feminism, but rather than openly calling for a complete overhaul of the deen, instead resorts to misapplying obscure “minority opinions,” bastardizing the concept of maqasid, disqualifying otherwise sound hadith on dubious grounds, employing highly creative Arabic etymological contortions, bastardizing the concept of `urf, downplaying the scholarly acumen of luminaries like Ghazali, Ibn Taymiyya, the four imams, etc., may Allah have mercy on them, in order to present a “nuanced” and “scholarly” opinion that is more relevant for modern times?