Ba'zan islohotchi musulmonlar yoki ma'lum islohotchi qarashlarni qo'llab-quvvatlaydigan musulmonlar o'z qarashlarini asoslash uchun kam uchraydigan, g'ayrioddiy klassik fikrni keltiradilar. Bu, albatta, "cherry picking" (tanlab olish) bo'lib, intellektual jihatdan halol emas. Biz ISIS kabi terror guruhlarining Islom matnlariga yondashuvini tanqid qilganimizda ham xuddi shu tanqidni bildiramiz. ISIS ham, bu islohotchilar ham post hoc asoslashni qilmoqdalar. Ular avvaldan erishmoqchi bo'lgan narsaga ega: siyosiy terrorni kuchaytirish yoki qandaydir liberal mafkurani ilgari surish, qanday bo'lmasin. Shundan so'ng ular Islom ilmining keng dengizini ko'zdan kechirib, o'z muayyan maqsadlarini qo'llab-quvvatlaydigan har qanday narsani izlaydilar.

Sometimes Muslim reformists or Muslims taking on certain reformist positions will cite a rare, unusual classical opinion to support their view. This is, of course, “cherry picking” and it is intellectually dishonest. This is the same critique we would make against terror groups like ISIS and their approach to Islamic texts. What both ISIS and these reformists are doing is post hoc justification. They already have something they want to accomplish, whether it is advancing political terror or advancing some liberal ideology, whatever the case may be. And then they scan the vast sea of Islamic scholarship for anything that might lend support to their particular agenda.

Ko'pincha, aytmoqchi, ularning klassik matnlarni o'qishi ham noto'g'ri bo'ladi yoki zarur kontekstdan ajratib olinadi, lekin bunga hozircha to'xtalmaylik. Biz bilamizki, amallar niyatlarga bog'liq, shuning uchun bu isloh qilish harakatlariga duch kelganimizda asosiy savol ham shu bo'lishi kerak. Ular: "Falon masala ulamolar orasida ma'lum bir fikr sifatida mavjud", deb da'vo qilishadi. Bu balki to'g'ri bo'lishi mumkin. Lekin bizning savolimiz quyidagicha bo'lishi kerak: biz nima uchun bu g'ayrioddiy fikrlarni keltirmoqdamiz? Bu yerdagi niyat nima? Maqsad ma'lum liberal mafkurani targ'ib qilishmi, o'z navbatida esa bu mafkura aqliy va axloqiy jihatdan shubhali bo'lsa-chi? Islom ilmini buzib ko'rsatish o'rniga, nega ozgina tanqidiy fikrlab, o'sha liberal qarashni o'zini so'roq qilmaslik kerak? Boshqacha aytganda, ixlos avvalo ko'pchilik fikrini e'tiborga olishni talab qiladi (garchi uni har doim qabul qilmasa yoki unga amal qilmasa ham), chunki ehtimollik nuqtai nazaridan ko'pchilik fikri haqiqatni ifodalashga ko'proq moyil. Ammo agar kishining asosiy maqsadi o'z qarashlarini oqlash bo'lsa, unda qanchalik kam uchraydigan yoki ozchilik tomonidan qo'llab-quvvatlanadigan bo'lmasin, har qanday fikr uning uchun yetarli bo'lib qoladi.

Most of the time, by the way, even their reading of the classical texts is wrong or ripped out of necessary context, but let’s put that aside. We know that actions are by intentions, so that should be the question when we are confronted by these reform efforts. They will claim, “Such-and-such is a known opinion within the tradition.” And that may be true. But our question should be: Why are we citing these unusual opinions? What is the intention here? To advance a certain point of liberal ideology, which itself is intellectually and morally questionable? Rather than bastardizing Islamic scholarship, why not exercise a little bit of critical thinking and question that liberal position? In other words, sincerity entails being concerned with the majority position first and foremost (even if one does not always accept or follow it), because probabilistically speaking, the majority position is more likely to represent the truth. But if one’s main concern is justifying one’s own views, any opinion no matter how rare or underrepresented is good enough.