Faisal Hassan Telegram Posts

The reality about students, graduates, and learning institutes

Whenever I tell students to take responsibility for their learning, some may assume I have no criticisms of their learning institutes... So let me address this and say something about institutes and students that everyone needs to hear.

As a student, the shortcomings of your institute are not in your control. You're not in a position of authority to enforce any change, and trying to do so just gives you a bad look.

Any concerns you do have should be acknowledged, and addressed after you graduate... at a time you do have some influence and don't appear like a rebel undermining the institute.

The reality, however, is that even with the shortcomings of an institute, students still have the ability to excel in their studies. And it only takes one student in your institute to demonstrate this.

If one student from your institute can excel, then you have no excuse as it demonstrates it is possible.

The problem is that most students are lazy.

In most Islamic institutes, the students that graduate and actually have a passion for what they study probably make up 10% (and I'm being generous with the figure).

And this really is no different to a university setting:

In a university class of, say, fifty students, there are some who pass with a 50% grade across all their assignments; others 60%; others 70% or even 80% or 90%.

Not all students in the same class are at the same level, even if they all "graduate" from the same institute.

Some have a passion for what they study, and others simply don't. Some are lazy, and others are hardworking.

Some won't even pick up a book again after they graduate.

Now you tell me. Does that sound like a student, let alone an aspiring scholar??

No, it clear doesn't. Most graduates of Islamic institutes are not aspiring scholars, and anyone in an active state of learning will tell you the same.

Does that mean they wasted their time in the institute? Absolutely not.

Nobody who spent time studying Islamic knowledge has wasted their time. They've rather spent their time well, gained clarity on issues, and are more knowledgeable than the state they started in. May Allah reward them.

But there's a difference between learning and aspiring to be a scholar. Merely graduating from an institute alone doesn't make you a scholar, especially if you have no passion for what you're studying and never continue to seek knowledge thereafter.

And a title you receive doesn't change that.

I say this all from a place of both love and transparency.

But I sincerely believe that if students just studied properly and recognised they're the only ones who can control their learning, they'll be smashing it and take their learning more seriously. ❤️🙏

As a student, if you have a choice between blaming your institute or yourself, blame yourself.

Exceptional students are exceptional irrespective of their environment and circumstance. They simply put in the graft and get the job done.

- They don't need to look to others for motivation.

- They don't need to be forced to pick up a book and read independently.

By blaming yourself for your learning, you assign all responsibility to yourself. Your learning is now in your hands.

And if you really view your learning that way, you'll strive to do your best regardless of the shortcomings of others or even your institute. You can't scapegoat anyone. It's all you, my man! 💪

One of the ways to properly conceptualise God is through His Divine names.

As we find in the report of Abu Hurayrah: the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "God has ninety-nine names; one short of one hundred. Whoever encompasses them shall enter Paradise." (Bukhari and Muslim)

What is interesting here is that there exists no authentic report from the Prophet (peace be upon him) listing what those ninety-nine names of God are - (which also explains why classical scholars differ on some of them). *

In other words, the goal in the prophetic hadith is to search for the ninety-nine names. Look for the ninety nine in the Quran and in how the Prophet (peace be upon him) described God in various reports, and you will find them.

This search is part of 'encompassing' the names.

'Encompassing' is not simply memorising them, but to truly understand and internalise the meanings. It is to recognise them and link them back to God in every single event in the universe.

Someone who is able to do that... Well, you can expect him to be a man of God who he is deserving of his station in Paradise. This man has a God-centered outlook on life, and that is a goal to which we all aspire. 🙏

__
* The popular list of ninety-night names is actually taken from a report in which the names are inserted by one of the narrators (i.e. idraj), and not from the Prophet (peace be upon him). It is based on the narrator's assessment for which he is rewarded, though classical scholars differ on some of the names listed.

What is the actual point of identifying purposes in Divine Law?

There are at least eight benefits in identifying purposes behind legislation.

Here, I present a summary from the scholar Sh. Ayman Saleh:

(1) It encourages the believer to practice what they are instructed -

either as a direct result of actually understanding the legislative purpose, or identifying the benefit it will have on them in this life and the next.

Humans are naturally inclined to practice what they understand (even though this is not a condition for following God's instructions as He is in a position of authority and is the absolute King).

(2) It allows the believer to implement the instruction exactly as it is intended.

E.g. the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibited two people from speaking privately in a group of three. The reason for prohibition is not only to prevent the third from feeling left out, but to also prevent the suspicion that they are speaking ill of him, and to observe general etiquette.

Accordingly, this prohibition can also be extended to two people speaking in a language the third does not understand, as this carries the same consequence.

(3) Identifying the purpose leads to greater reward.

This increased reward can come from both (i) the acquisition of knowledge, and also (ii) seeking the intended purpose when performing the action, rather than just the action itself.
___

While the three benefits above apply to all believers, the following five are more relevant to the jurist:

(4) Knowing when to extend or restrict a ruling to other cases.

E.g. wine is prohibited due to intoxication, and this prohibition is extended to all intoxicating substances as they all share the quality of intoxication. On the other hand, if wine turns to vinegar, the quality of intoxication no longer exists and therefore does not share the same ruling.

(5) Revoking the ruling when the legal cause ceases to exist.

E.g. sewage water is impure and filthy, but once it is recycled (and returns to its original state), it becomes pure as the qualities of impurity are removed.

(6) Determining the exact meaning of a text - as legal causes and purposes can influence textual interpretation.

E.g. 'illness' is a concession allowing one to not fast in Ramadan. The reason for this concession is the difficulty this imposes on the fast, and therefore the 'illness', while unqualified in the text, refers to that which actually affects the fast in some way.

(7) Understanding the priority and hierarchy of laws.

This can be a result of how consistent the legal cause is found in law, and whether the ruling is intended intrinsically or serves another purpose (which is relevant when assessing the lesser of two harms, and determining the greater of two benefits).

(8) Understanding and appreciating both the overarching and particular goals (maqasid) of law.

This is relevant to understanding the broad philosophy of law, and is also applicable to non-textual issues (and what is known as Maslahah Mursalah).
_

While there is much more to say on each point (something I expanded on in my Usul course), I believe the above should suffice in highlighting the importance of legislative purposes (what jurists call 'ta'lil').

And of course, Allah knows best.

Does Divine Law actually serve purpose and wisdom?

If we take a step back, we see that this is indeed a very strange question.

To explain:

Any law (including human law) is expected to serve purpose and wisdom. Even humans are not expected to give instructions randomly.

Parents instruct kids to do things all the time, and there is an assumed underlying purpose and wisdom in that instruction.

Likewise protocols in universities, businesses, and even the highway code. There is an assumed purpose behind such instructions and legislations.

Now if this is assumed in human law, then how is it not assumed in Divine Law?

In Divine Law, not only is this assumption of purpose all the more expected, but it is also an extension of God being the Most Wise (al-Hakim), and that His wisdom is naturally reflected in His instructions and laws (just like it is reflected in His creation of the universe).

We see God Himself highlight His purpose behind both actions and legislations again and again in the Quran, in countless verses (something classical scholars also make note of).

When we read prophetic instructions, very often, the underlying purpose is quite clear (even when it is not stated explicitly).

Take these examples:
1) The Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibited a judge from ruling in a state of anger - this instruction is not random; rather, the purpose is to prevent the judge from clouded reasoning and error in his conclusion.
2) Encouraging washing hands before placing them in a utensil when awaking - this is due to the possibility of any filth or dirt reaching the hands while asleep, and the subsequent doubt as a result.
3) Encouraging eating before performing the prayer when hungry - this is clearly to prevent lack of concentration and mindfulness in the prayer.
4) Discouraging approaching the mosque after eating onion or garlic - this is clearly due to the unpleasant smell and inconvenience to others.
5) Prohibiting sending a marriage proposal over the proposal of someone else - this is clearly to prevent any possible dispute between the two parties.

These are not random legislations, and I am also sure that the wisdom and purpose behind these laws can be appreciated and identified even by the non-specialist.

And because this idea is so consistent throughout the Quran and Hadith, we also find several scholars appealing to consensus that Divine Law serves purpose and wisdom.

So does Divine Law serve purpose and function?

Absolutely! There is no doubt about it.

Using exclusive language doesn't make your argument any better.

I know a very intelligent chap who hasn't studied Fiqh formally, but whenever I explain concepts of law to him, he's very very clued on.

Very often, he's able to articulate concepts and even offer a sound and valid interpretation of a text before I've even explained it, and in ways better than many students who've actually studied law.

I most certainly know that if this man committed himself to law (or any field for that matter), he'd be a very very capable jurist. An absolute unit! (God bless him!)

However, I also know that because he hasn't studied Fiqh formally, I can quite easily complicate concepts to him by using technical jargon he doesn't understand.

It's not because he's stupid (he's clearly not), but simply because he hasn't studied the concepts formally to acquire the technical language.

So what's my point?

My point is that just because someone is using words you don't understand, it doesn't mean their argument is actually sound. Don't be duped.

It's actually very easy to coat a bad argument with fancy terms, and anyone who's studied any science knows this.

So if someone's throwing around words like "sarih/dhahir" or even a random Arabic word like "na'am", please know that that really doesn't mean anything.

These words have direct equivalents in English, and if the person knows that, they'd respect you enough to keep you in the conversation.

As I teach the topic of scholarly consensus (ijma') today, I can't help but remember the legendary quote of the classical Hanafi scholar Mughultay (d. 762):

وقد أجمع العلماء: أنّ الحبّ ليس بمستنكر في التنزيل ولا بمحظور في الشرع.

"Scholars unanimously agree that love is not reprehensible in revelation nor prohibited in law." 😄

The obvious question that arises here is: how exactly do you verify such a claim of consensus to know if it is indeed true? That's what I'm interested in!

But since Mughultay has shared this interesting claim on love, let me quote another statement from the famous Muhammad ibn Sirin (d. 110):
كانوا يعشقون من غير ريبة.

"They (i.e. the people from the first century) would fall in love without suspicion (i.e. unlawful activity)." (Abu Nu'aym's Hilyah al-Awliya')

Now while several classical scholars held that emotions beyond one's control are not inherently sinful (as God tells us He does not obligate anything on anyone beyond their capacity - Q. 2:286),

I'm sympathetic to those philosophers who consider love an illness, preoccupying the mind in a way only befitting a poet! So to those afflicted: get well soon! 😂

While I'm on this topic, I feel it's worth mentioning the believer's code of conduct with respect to games:

(i) Don't be a sore loser. It's fine to be competitive, but a sore loser isn't commendable. If you lose, take it on the chin and don't allow your behaviour to spoil other people's mood.

(ii) Don't cheat. Deception and selfishness are not admirable traits.

(iii) Particularly for those online, don't be a troll. There's a human on the other side of the screen; give the guy a break.

And in the case when you're the one getting trolled (as this can be a toxic space), two Quranic verses come to mind indicating principles of justice and excellence.

1) "The recompense of evil (and wrongdoing) is an evil the like of it; but whoever pardons and makes amends, his reward is with God. God does not like those who are unjust." (42:40)

2) "Good and evil are not equal. Repel [evildoing] with that which is better. Then, see! The one whom between you and him is enmity will become like an intimate friend." (41:34)

The contemporary scholar of Fiqh and Hadith Sh. Abdullah al-Judai argues that the prohibition of the game 'backgammon' is actually due to the gambling with which it is coupled, and not the mere act of playing the game itself.

Elsewhere, I've heard Sh. Judai extend this reasoning to all types of games. In other words, the prohibition comes from external reasons like gambling and inappropriate behaviour, and that in the absence of such reasons, games are either discouraged or permitted.

Admittedly, this is a matter of disagreement among scholars classically.

The phenomenon of hadith narrators paraphrasing (الرواية بالمعنى) and partially transmitting (الاختصار) events has major implications on Fiqh.

This is why in order to properly understand the relationship between Fiqh and Hadith requires not only a discussion on hadith authenticity, but also the exact nature of hadith transmission, and seeing hadiths as data points that actually fit into a much larger context and framework of revelation.

This was a topic of last week's Usul al-Fiqh lesson, and, as you can see above, I shared an important quote on this by the famous hadith scholar Ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311).