“We’re seeing reversal of the spheres of the spiritual & sensual. The spirit is vast & free, soaring. The sensual is bound & restricted…”
Now, vastness is attributed to the sensual while restriction is attributed to the spiritual, of detriment to both faith & fitra…
“Why has digital entertainment seduced the world? Why have some of the most sublime meanings taken the lewdest of forms? Might it be because the human instinct to find meaning - one that can only be fulfilled through the Divine - grows evermore distant, a figment of imagination?
May Allah’s infinite peace & blessings be upon Rasūlullāh, his pure progeny & folk, along with his gleaming companions, illuminated inheritors and all his loyal followers until the Last Day.
To avert confusion on this matter (as evidenced by #dm inquiries), the intent of this thread is to clarify the definition of a scholar (in contradistinction to others), as well as the adab necessary toward them and from them. Simplified. Summarized.
1 An Islamic scholar has
a. mastered & practiced the knowledge & deeds obligatory on a Muslim
b. upheld the limits of the sacred law & tenants of tasawwuf
c. teaching competence in all Islamic disciplines
d. made an advanced contribution in the area of their disciplinary focus.
2 The following aren’t sufficient qualifications to be an Islamic scholar
a. a madrasa certificate, university degree, or ijāza
b. fard ‘ayn studies appended to a higher secular degree
c. an advanced contribution in an Islamic discipline without the other requisite conditions
You might agree, though, that interdisciplinary skill isn’t achieved through mere dual-degrees? That’s why I devised #metafiqh
Time, money, and intellectual freedom are constraints, but - more importantly - sound methodology that preserves tradition without impeding growth.
As for those who feel the need to denigrate others to elevate themselves, I think we all know the answer to that. If a trait isn’t befitting for ‘normal’ people, it is a stronger aversion in a (so-called) scholar.
Istikhāra says to withhold direct reference. Alhamdulillāh for whatever He decrees.
However I will give a general principle that is *so critical* when evaluating some of these ludicrous posts…
Also, yes. There is a typo معكم
Allah - Mighty and Majestic, Exalted and Glorified - says,
“If anyone desires a harvest in the life to come, We shall increase it for him; if anyone desires a harvest in this world, We shall give him a share of it, but in the Hereafter he will have no share.” [42:20]
The verse means that whoever seeks ākhira will attain it. Whoever seeks dunya, will lose the ākhira and still not attain more wealth than what was originally divinely-apportioned. There are numerous verses of Quran and reports from the Sunna upon the same purport. Definitive.
May Allah’s infinite peace & blessings be upon Rasūlullāh, his pure progeny & folk, along with his gleaming companions, illuminated inheritors and all his loyal followers until the Last Day.
الحمد لله ربّ العالمين
The heights of sūfic attainment aren’t reached through theory. If one attempts to delve into theory without practice, it won’t augment, but rather strangle their progress. Tasawwuf is 100% about practice. Its theory is of the magnificent fruits of that persistent, deep devotion.
I’ve witnessed on MT, statements from claimants to knowledge (supposedly classically trained) that are the peak of ignorance & falsehood. I’m withholding my anger very strongly, pending istikhāra. However, I send a stern warning. If this does not persist,
1 In surveying Hanafī fiqh books, one finds that jurists were aware of changes in custom, even rapid ones. See two (of many) examples in which Imām Marghīnānī cites “variance of time period” as direct cause for the switching of custom-based rulings.
2 This, in itself, isn’t new. What I found to be interesting, though, is that – on many occasions – this turn over occurred within the lifetimes of the three Imāms themselves. In a span of < 30 years, customs changed and the Imāms rapidly adjusted their rulings accordingly.
3 Considering the current state of ijtihādī stagnation, this level of juristic agility among the Imāms teaches us lessons.
The Imāms
a. weren’t distant from real life
b. exhibited juristic agility in the face of changing trends
c. their fiqh wasn’t rigid, but evolving