Within the framework of this confusion, whenever the issue of heritage is raised, we find people - in general - about it in two groups: a group with heritage, and a group against it, and within each group people are divided on fronts that sometimes converge and diverge often, and perhaps the partisanship on the side of one of these two groups is a partisanship against the other. If there is an emerging third group that does not enjoy the breadth and spread of the previous two groups, its owners distance themselves from fanaticism with or against heritage, and stress the need to subject our heritage to screening and scrutiny in order to invest its positives in achieving our desired renaissance. Accordingly, we can identify the most prominent positions that reflect our current dealings with the Islamic heritage, either by returning to the heritage and being satisfied with it; Those who hold this position see that the way to overcome our weakness and achieve our civilized revival is to return to our heritage, and “adherence to the literalism of the words, actions, behaviors and customs that the predecessors used to adhere to and practice without adding to them, nor decreasing them, nor changing them” because any violation of what the predecessors left us will inevitably be achieved. of the nation's character and distort its identity.