Reddit reply in r/MuslimAcademics: ibn ashur wrote in his tafsir on verse 2431 that — February 4, 2026 | Ali Shukri Amin

For point #3 you ask if it's a mistake. Typically when a scholar mentions "qīla" without citing a source, they intend to indicate that it is a fringe opinion held by unreliable people not worth mentioning. Ibn Ashur's tafsir is encyclopedic & he attempts to provide an exhaustive analysis of nearly every issue of tafsir. The fact that he mentions hair in one word tells you he thinks this is a settled issue and is giving only the most miniscule reference to this shādh view.

If we are truly free to select whatever views have been espoused in the past without respect for "tradition" in fiqh, why is it always the views that make us more aligned with modern secular lifestyle? There are many shadh views on a variety of topics.

For example, ibn Abbas held that mut'ah was not fully abrogated. Why can't I engage in several mut'ah marriages with several Muslim sisters? Because we would find it morally reprehensible? Yet I can provide evidence for it.

Or the shādh view of Ahmad & ibn Hazm with respect to seeing a woman I intend to marry nude prior to marriage. Why can't I combine that with the view a marriage contract is not required & mahr can be as little as we agree? Let's add the Hanafi view that she needs no male wali. So long as two witnesses witness our agreement, I can give her a few coins, and this is essentially halal prostitution.

There is an exhaustive form of internal review, critique, & improvement in Islamic jurisprudence. It's called the madhahib. If we discard them entirely and begin seeking out obscure views, then anyone can claim whatever they want.

It's the equivalent of people rejecting medical advice from reputable universities because they researched on youtube.