Shin wajibi ne a mayar da martani ga Musulmi masu sauye-sauye/ci gaba da ake kira masu kawo gyara? Ba wani dole ba ne. Idan ka yi kokarin shiga muhawara da su, aikin banza ne, domin ba su da usul. Ba su da ka'idoji bayyanannu, na zahiri, da suke amfani da su wajen samo dukkan ra'ayoyi masu ban mamaki da banbance-banbance da suke fitowa da su. Don haka idan ka yi kokarin rike su da wani abu, sai su koma da sauri zuwa wani abu daban, tattaunawar kuma ba ta kai ko'ina ba. Ina magana ne bisa kwarewa... Kwarewa mai yawa ta tafin hannu a goshi... Amma ba sai ka shiga tattaunawa da Musulmi masu sauye-sauye/ci gaba ba domin ka wargaza duk abin da suke tsayawa a kai gaba daya. Kana yin haka ne ta hanyar kai hari kan tushen akidarsu: tunanin 'yanci da zamani. Wannan shi ne abin da ya cancanci a kashe lokaci a kansa. Ka yi la'akari da wannan misali.

Is it necessary to provide a rebuttal to so-called reformist/ progressive Muslims? Not really. If you try to engage in debate with them, it is a fruitless exercise because they have no usul. They have no clear, explicit principles they use to derive all the strange, divergent opinions they come up with. So if you try to hold them to something, they quickly pivot to something else and the conversation goes nowhere. I speak from experience… A lot of face-palming experience… But you don’t need to engage reformist/progressive Muslims in order to completely debunk everything they stand for. You do this by attacking the root of their ideology: liberal, modernist thought. That is something worth spending your time on. Consider this example.

Masu gyara addini suna yawan yin babban magana game da hijabi da raba maza da mata gaba ɗaya, suna cewa yana da zalunci, na ubangida, da sauransu. Masu gyara da suka fi ƙwarewa za su zaɓi wasu sassa daga littattafan tarihi daban-daban, su kuma yi amfani da yawan “hujjoji bisa maƙasidi” don tabbatar da ra’ayinsu. Wasu mutane tabbas suna son shiga cikin aikin kai tsaye, su nuna duk kuskuren da suke yi wajen fassara nassoshi da kuma yadda suke lalata ma’anar maƙasidi, maslaha, da sauran ƙa’idodin fiqhu. Wannan aiki ne mai kyau da za a yaba. Amma abin takaici, masu gyara za su canja hujja su koma kan wani sabon jerin nassoshi da sabbin dalilai. Kamar yadda ake yaƙar Hydra na tatsuniya: ka yanke kai ɗaya, sai ka ga biyu sun tsiro a wurinsa.

Reformists make a big deal about hijab and gender separation in general and how it is oppressive, patriarchal, etc., etc. The more sophisticated reformists will cherry pick from different historical texts and trot out a generous helping of “maqasid-based reasoning” to make their case. Some people might certainly want to get their hands dirty and point out all the things they get wrong about the texts and their bastardization of maqasid, maslaha, and other fiqh principles. And this is an admirable endeavor in its own right. But unfortunately the reformists will just shift the argument and use another set of texts and another set of arguments. Like fighting a mythological Hydra: You cut off one head and two more grow in its place.

Hanya mafi inganci ita ce a soki Hydra a zuciya, ta hanyar sukar zato na zamani game da sutura, zalunci, ubangida, matsayin jinsi, da sauransu. Ta hanyar karyata wadannan ra'ayoyi, ana kwance wa masu neman gyara karfi. Kuma tunda mafi yawan wadannan masu neman gyara masu zurfin tunani ba su da yawa, sau da yawa ba su taba yin tunani a kan tushen akidarsu ba don ganin ko tana da inganci ko kuma za ta iya tsayawa ko da an dan bincika ta. Abin bakin ciki ne kwarai da gaske cewa mutane suna lalata imaninsu kuma suna neman canza addini bisa falsafa mara tushe irin wannan, wadanda kawai suke da muhimmanci saboda suna shahara a wannan lokaci, amma babu wani kyakkyawan darajar hankali ko ta dabi'a a cikinsu.

A more efficient route is to just stab the Hydra in the heart by critiquing the modernist assumptions about dress, oppression, patriarchy, gender roles, etc. By debunking these notions, you take the wind out of the reformist’s sails. And since the vast majority of these reformists are such shallow thinkers, they usually haven’t even reflected on the roots of their own ideology to see if they are sound or hold up to the least amount of scrutiny. It is quite sad actually that people destroy their iman and try to change the religion on the basis of such flimsy philosophies that are relevant only because they are trendy at this point in time, but otherwise have no redeeming intellectual or moral quality.