The #wtfiqh series includes examples of faulty legal reason. If you find yourself inclining towards any of these things, please reconsider.
Q. It it valid to commission someone to do an act of disobedience?
A. No, as everyone is personally intended to avoid those acts. #wtfiqh
“I do not agree that x is harām since x is merely an individual choice.” #wtfiqh
“It’s OK to do ḥarām x, y, z since all good people go to Jennah.”
Doing these things contributes to Allah’s notion of good person? #wtfiqh
“Haram X is OK when I do it to seek Allah’s pleasure.”
Yet you tell everyone else that Islam rejects that ends justify means. #wtfiqh
“Only the close-minded say X is ḥarām!”
Open- & closed- are vanities; what matters is like-minded to Allah and His Messenger ﷺ. #wtfiqh
“Embrace diversity!”
Even when it’s something Allah & His Messenger ﷺ declared a monstrosity or a perversity? #wtfiqh
“See, this guy never smiles. Smile, bro, it’s a sunnah!”
And the sunnah re: public shaming & chomping on your brother’s flesh is…? #wtfiqh
“I reject #fiqh w/o proof…even then I reject it since man is fallible.”
Your opinion via translations removes this fallibility how? #wtfiqh
The Imāms were closer to sources & were masters of Arabic.
Your #fiqh via translation is closer, more pure & less fallible…how? #wtfiqh
“Opinions are fallible. I take directly from Allah & the Prophet ﷺ.”
After fallibly filtering the translator’s fallible opinions? #wtfiqh
“You see #fiqh imams as infallible!”
Fiqh as a product of ijtihād is necessarily fallible. Theirs is tested & found to be less so. #wtfiqh