If ultimately religious thought is an opinion or a point of view, seeing this thought as the main part of the raised issues and the resulting differences shows that this thought is trying to keep itself as the only option that is best suited for the community, both in this life and the one after.

There is the religious authority’s traditional position on such issues; women should not drive, and the hadiths in Kutub al-Sittah [six books containing collections of hadiths] must be accepted and believed in content and source. The Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice is an application to an Islamic rite that is on the verge of becoming — as some say — the sixth pillar of Islam. There are mistakes that some of those who belong to this committee must avoid, but this is a minor issue compared with the importance and necessity of the rite itself.

Such issues and differences over them are normal, especially in a community with growing concerns about what kind of future lies in store for it. However, these concerns must be taken into consideration and given the importance and legitimacy they deserve.

These matters, which may gain momentum with time, also include the position on those sayings [hadith] attributed to the Prophet Muhammad that are obviously strange and illogical. Abraham Matroudi may have been the latest to tackle this issue recently in his weekly articles in Al Riyadh newspaper, but it seemed to me that it did not receive many comments. However, what is important is that the comments were from the same religious point of view. In any case, this is also not a new issue. It goes back to the early stages of writing the Sunnah. Its re-emergence, however, is another indication of the potential components of the cultural movement that Saudi society is currently going through.

Once again, cultural, social and political matters have come to impose themselves on Saudi society, with topics for both discussion and disagreement. These matters include the return of the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice following the heinous car chase , which ended up in the tragic death of two young men. These matters also include the return of the female driving issue , which dates back to the 1970s, that is, 40 years ago.

On the other hand, this indicates that this thought increasingly feels that it is facing an unprecedented intellectual and social challenge. In this context, the question that arises is the following: If this is the position of those supporting “religious thought,” are those who disagree with them actually relying on a different systematic approach, and therefore have different postulates, or are they based on the very postulates of this thought, but believe that it is important to change what has become obsolete and correct aberrant readings and conclusions?

What is remarkable in the ongoing differences on those issues is that the standard adopted by at least the majority to decide whether to follow the first or second category is based on how close the category is to what is believed to be right in religion, and especially on the religious establishment’s position on an issue subject to disagreement.

In other words, how close or far does the new opinion or position toward an old issue stand from the requirements of religion and Islam? These requirements often mean a viewpoint, a fatwa or an interpretation of one or more of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad, or of a scholar or a group of religious scholars in this era or in previous Islamic eras.

Oddly enough, taking into consideration this opinion or fatwa means recognizing that those who issued the jurisprudence are entitled to do so and denying this right to subsequent generations, despite the fact that texts, just like facts, are not intrinsically explicit. There are, however, those who draw their meaning following a specific methodology and based on a given content in order to reach a particular target. Given that this process (analysis, interpretation and diligence in the elicitation) takes place in a specific time and place, it is naturally governed by the circumstances and facts of that time and place.

This is true because religion, with its many definitions and various aspects, is at the end of the day a part of human culture, not the other way around. In this context, it is important to pay attention to the significance of the hierarchy of the sources of legislation set by scholars (the Quran, followed by the Sunnah, the unanimity and then the opinion).

The Quran is at the top of this hierarchy, being — as [all Muslims] agree — the only sheer revelation. The Quran has been written by words and meaning as it was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad during his lifetime. The Quran is followed by the Sunnah, as it was not written down in words, but in meaning, and sometimes through a long series of narrators who conclude what they believe the prophet said regarding a particular issue. This process of writing took place at least a full century after the death of the prophet. Thus, human nature interfered, and consequently, human culture interfered with its own conditions, facts and constraints. In a bid to take precautions, the Science of Jar’h and Ta’adil (Criticism and Praise) emerged. The Sunnah, in turn, is followed by the last two sources (the unanimity and the opinion), which together are purely part of human culture. What does that mean?

It means that religion is a static text in the Quran in the first place and the Sunnah in the second place, and the religious thought deriving from religion is part of the culture, not the opposite. It should be noted that the Quran (pure revelation) cannot be understood, interpreted or have its provisions and implications explained except through generally accepted tools in the culture of the community. Chief among these tools is the language, including its vocabulary and terminology. The Quran was revealed in Arabic, the language of the people of Mecca and the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century. Therefore, the religious thought derived from the Quran and the Sunnah is mere human judgment subject to the terms of the human culture of a particular community in a particular stage. It is also subject to the requirements and limitations of this culture, and any other claim contradicts the nature of the matter.

If so, religious thought, with all its sciences, branches and postulates, is an approach that regulates life, people, the community, their issues and needs. It is an approach that has a long history and a rich heritage. For some, it is even as sacred as the Quranic text itself. Still, it is definitely not the only approach, especially at this point in time.

Moreover, it is not the wisest approach to address issues related to society, history, politics and the economy. For example, there is the philosophical approach that came as a result of the historical development of the human thought after the religious approach. However, religious thought, and the Sunni thought in particular, rejects philosophy based on the fact that it contradicts religion. There is also the scientific approach in its modern sense, on which the religious establishment has a confused position; religion is suspicious of the secular starting points of science, and it refuses its methodological strictness. At the same time, however, it claims adopting the approach of this science and considers that Islam took the lead even before the modern era. There is an assumption that religion itself is a science and that it is based on a scientific methodology! Is it the case?