Roots Of Knowledge ROK 😊

Not everyone should be put on a pedestal Here’s another discussion from Mirror Thinking by Fiona Murden that I found really useful and wanted to share with you guys. The problem with putting a role model on a pedestal is that the standard for right and wrong shifts once they are in the limelight. It stops being about universal rules and becomes tailored to that specific person, especially when all they ever hear is praise. This is a trap any human being can fall into. Our brains simply aren't wired to sustain continuous power or fame without disconnecting us from normal societal checks and balances. Even if someone starts out with the best intentions, power can literally cause acquired personality disorders. Fiona Murden calls it "Hubris [Arrogance] Syndrome". She mentions a study done by Lord David Owen and Jonathan Davidson that found that out of 18 US presidents, 7 had traits of this disorder, with George W. Bush having full-blown 'hubris syndrome'. In the UK, out of 26 prime ministers, David Lloyd George, Neville Chamberlain, Margaret Thatcher, and Tony Blair all developed the actual syndrome. Now imagine such studies were done on contemporary Muslim leaders, scholars & influencers. How much of a difference would there be? Whether someone is a Maulana, a Shaykh, or just an overnight social media sensation, absolutely no one is immune to the sickness of being put on a pedestal. There has to be a proactive effort to suppress this from overtaking a person's life and thus taking them away from Allah. She asks an interesting question why is there such a rapid increase in arrogance in today's leaders as compared to the past? Classically, tribes were small, leaders rarely experienced hubris, the natural checks in society kept them grounded and deeply connected to the community. But the modern era has stripped away those constraints. Today, online influencers can gain massive popularity overnight without feeling any real human connection to their audience. The result? An abuse of power, and a total inability to handle feedback are classic signs of someone suffering from hubris. Islam has always warned us about the dangers of public praise and holding high positions. Being brutally self-critical and ensuring others kept him in check was the well-known habit of Sayyidna Umar (r.a.). May Allah protect us and give us true insight into ourselves.

How Mirror thinking shapes our perception of others Today, while reading Mirror Thinking by Fiona Murden, I came across a really interesting point about how our brains handle empathy. The book explains that people actually feel less empathy for someone if that person supports a rival sports team. It turns out the brain is literally wired to switch off empathy for perceived rivals. Sadly, you see this exact same thing happening in a lot of Muslim groups and organisations. As soon as someone buys into a specific group mentality, they lose the ability to feel the same empathy for outsiders as they would for members of their own circle. In fact, the book even mentions that watching a rival group suffer can actually activate the reward centers in the brain. The only way to beat this is if a person consciously steps outside of that mindset, questions their own automatic reactions, and intentionally rises above that tribal group mentality. It made me think about one of the most beautiful aspects of the Prophet, peace be upon him, his incredible ability to show deep empathy even to those who actively harmed him. There are so many narrations where his sublime character completely broke through people's defences. When people witness that kind of empathy, it is unforgettable. It completely mirrors into their own lives and shapes the way they make decisions from that moment on. Let me know if you want me to share a few more interesting points from the book related to leadership.

Islam's Built-In Leadership From all the things I have been reading about leadership, I have come to realise something: If you switched the word "Islam" for "divinely guided leadership", you would not be far from the truth. Leadership is literally built right into our daily rituals and the way our communities function. Take prayer, for example. Five times a day, someone is chosen from among the ranks to lead. The followers fall into perfect alignment and follow along from start to finish. But it's not blind obedience. If the Imam makes a mistake, the community is actually required to call it out and correct him. Because we repeat this every single day, the core ideas of leadership and accountability are naturally woven right into the fabric of our lives. Look at Zakat, too. It’s not just a case of someone feeling pity for the less fortunate, reaching into their pocket, and tossing some cash. It’s actually a highly sophisticated system designed to map out exactly who is in need and who has the means to give. It sets strict guidelines for when, how much & who receives what. This pushes the responsibility upon the individuals in authority to stand up, to take the lead, to make sure everything is handed out equally and transparently. These are just two common, everyday practices that millions of us do without ever really stopping to realise the deep leadership wisdom behind them. But there is a flip side to this. Because people are used to following, it can easily make the public feel like they owe absolute devotion to their leaders or religious scholars. Respecting them is fine, but it turns toxic the second these mentors and scholars are put on a pedestal to the point where they expect and enjoy being idolised. The second honest leadership stops being about serving the people and turns into leader worship, we reduce Islam to empty rituals, just like any other faith out there. We strip it of its practical purpose, which is supposed to be the actual betterment of mankind.

When leaders succumb to the crowd One of the books I’m currently reading is 'Depth Leadership' by Helene Smit, which looks at the deep psychological side of leadership. There’s this really interesting section where she talks about how a group can unconsciously project their own backgrounds, traumas, and baggage onto their leader without the leader even realizing it. If you aren't careful, you end up compromising your own values and boundaries just to cater to the collective psyche of the crowd. This is seen when influencers drop their values once they succumb to the "stay-relevant" phase of their online/media career. It honestly made me reflect on just how incredibly strong the Prophets of Allah were, and how unshakable they remained in their conviction. Think about our Prophet ﷺ maintaining absolute consistency for 23 years, despite 13 years of brutal persecution, isolation, and trauma in Makkah. Yet, despite his immense strength, Allah still reminded him: "And if We had not given you a firm footing, you would have almost inclined toward them a little." (Quran 17:74) The Quran was his anchor, the ultimate rope of Allah that made him the greatest leader to ever exist. Whether he was at home with his family, in the masjid, conducting trade, or acting as the head of state, his leadership style will always be miles ahead of anything modern psychology tries to teach us. When you look at history, even the most rigid Muslim leaders usually softened their stance once they actually took office. For some, the reality of governance completely shifted them to the opposite side of the spectrum. On paper, it’s easy for anyone to imagine themselves as the perfect, ideal leader and sit back picking faults in those who are actually trying to lead. But reality hits different. I've come to realise that the Ummah today desperately needs to understand the weight and seriousness of two things: marriage (with everything it entails) and honest leadership. Because we lack both, the Ummah is crumbling from the inside out, both within the walls of our own homes and in our houses of governance. #propheticleadershipblueprint

Not every scholar is a leader, just as not every leader is a scholar. Leadership isn't a free it’s a specific skillset forged over years of trial and error. Unless a scholar has spent significant time in the amongst the community, actually dealing with people’s messy, real-world problems, they shouldn't be the "go-to" for life’s big crises. There is this common misconception that the moment someone graduates from a Madrasah or an Islamic institute, they suddenly possess a fountain of golden advice. That’s just not the reality. Don’t get me wrong, if you need to know the technicalities of prayer, Zakat, Hajj, or the ethics of trade, that is strictly the domain of trained scholars. But I remember when I first graduated; people would come to me for advice on marriage, divorce, career moves, or even depression. Honestly? I didn't have the answers. I’d just parrot things I’d heard from my teachers, but I realise now that wasn't the best move. When it comes to helping people through life, experience is the most vital ingredient. You need that lived wisdom alongside Islamic knowledge. I think the reason the public treats scholars like a "fourth emergency service" is because of the heavy titles we use, Molana, Mufti, Shaykh, Apa, or Shaykha. We put people on pedestals. Yet, one of the truest marks of a great leader is the ability to admit their own limitations. Even our Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) would constantly remind his companions of his humanity. When a man approached him, trembling with nerves and awe, he said: "Take it easy on yourself, for I am not a king. I am merely the son of a woman from the Quraysh who used to eat dried meat." My advice to the public is this: if you’re looking for help with a specific problem, find a scholar who has hands-on experience in that specific field. If you can’t find one, you’re honestly better off speaking to a wise elder in your family who has lived through it. And to my fellow graduates: please, don't feel like you have to solve everyone’s problems or have an answer for every DM. Being a listening ear is one thing, but giving "half-baked" solutions is dishonest. We need to get comfortable saying, "I don't know." Many of the greatest scholars of our past were never too proud to apologise and admit they didn't have the answer.

Take the direction of the Qibla, for example. It’s such a standard part of our daily Salah, but it required Muslims to master how to find an exact direction across huge distances. This was a primary driver for Muslims to explore the movements of the stars, the sun, and the moon. This curiosity became the foundation for Muslim achievements in astronomy, mathematics, and the laws of nature, leading to the development of timekeeping devices, sea navigation, and countless other advancements. I don’t intend to list every single inspiration here, that would be a very hard task, but if anyone is interested in exploring this further, I highly recommend the book 'Islam Between East and West' by Alija Izetbegović. When you really look at the influence the Prophet (peace be upon him) has had over the centuries, it is impossible not to marvel at the sheer impact he continues to have on the hearts of Muslims today.

Ranking Influence: Why Hart Put the Prophet ﷺ at No. 1 I’m currently going through Michael Hart’s 'The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History'. What initially drew me to this book is that Hart ranked the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as the single most influential figure in human history, placing him above Jesus Christ, all other biblical prophets (peace be upon them all), and every major historical leader. He also notably includes Umar bin al-Khattab (r.a.) at the number 52 spot. I’d often heard this book mentioned in articles regarding Western perceptions of the Prophet (peace be upon him), but I never actually got around to reading it until now. Since I’m currently preparing a course on leadership, my interest in why certain individuals leave such a massive footprint on society pushed me to finally add this to my list. There is no doubt that the legacy of a noble person who has captivated the hearts and shaped the lives of billions over 1,500 years is something worth studying deeply. Hart’s core reasoning is that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had a far greater personal influence on the actual formulation of Islam than Jesus had on Christianity. He points out that unlike Jesus, who held no political office and whose influence was purely spiritual, the Prophet (peace be upon him) was uniquely successful as both a 'political' and a religious leader. He writes: "Muhammad has been ranked higher than Jesus. There are two principal reasons for that decision. First, Muhammad played a far more important role in the development of Islam than Jesus did in the development of Christianity. Although Jesus was responsible for the main ethical and moral precepts of Christianity (insofar as these differed from Judaism), it was St. Paul who was the main developer of Christian theology, its principal proselytizer, and the author of a large portion of the New Testament. Muhammad, however, was responsible for both the theology of Islam and its main ethical and moral principles. In addition, he played the key role in proselytizing the new faith, and in establishing the religious practices of Islam. Moreover, he is the author of the Moslem holy scriptures, the Koran, a collection of Muhammad’s statements that he believed had been divinely inspired. Most of these utterances were copied more or less faithfully during Muhammad’s lifetime and were collected together in authoritative form not long after his death. The Koran, therefore, closely represents Muhammad’s ideas and teachings and, to a considerable extent, his exact words. No such detailed compilation of the teachings of Christ has survived. Since the Koran is at least as important to Moslems as the Bible is to Christians, the influence of Muhammad through the medium of the Koran has been enormous. It is probable that the relative influence of Muhammad on Islam has been larger than the combined influence of Jesus Christ and St. Paul on Christianity." [The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History - p. 9] While Hart attributes the authorship of the Quran to the Prophet (peace be upon him) whereas we believe it is the direct Word of Allah revealed to him it is still fascinating to see how the Quranic teachings inspired such vast developments in Muslim history. I’m not just talking about cultural contributions like coffee or loanwords in the English language, but rather the intellectual curiosity Muslims developed because of the core tenets of the faith.

Some Thoughts on Prophetic vs. Corporate Leadership For me, reading about leadership has been tremendously fulfilling in many ways. I am not an expert in this field, but like many others out there I have always tried to link the dots between leadership from the Islamic texts and leadership in the current world. Most of us grew up only seeing leadership through a political or corporate lens. And even then, we usually only see the public performance, we don't really get to see how those models are actually supposed to work behind the scenes. When you look at the Prophetic model of leadership, on the other hand, it’s a completely different world. Here are four big ways it stands apart from the typical corporate "boss" model: 1. Integrity in public and private In the corporate world, ethics are often compartmentalised. As long as the CEO is hitting the numbers, people tend to ignore their private life. Prophetic leadership doesn't work like that. It demands a total alignment between your public face and your private reality. No compromises. 2. Where the "Intelligence" comes from Modern business is obsessed with IQ (logic) to make money, and maybe a bit of EQ (emotional intelligence) to keep the staff happy. But Prophetic leadership is built on Spiritual Intelligence. Without that spiritual bedrock, leadership just becomes a mechanical "tick-box" exercise, honestly, something an AI could do. 3. What power is actually for The corporate model is often pretty self-serving. The person at the top gets the perks, the bonuses, and the elite status. It feels like the team exists to serve the leader. The Prophetic model turns that whole hierarchy upside down. You aren't the 'boss', you're a servant. It’s about taking the heaviest burden onto your own shoulders and looking out for everyone else while you stay completely in the background. 4. Doing things right vs. Doing the right thing A corporation will keep a leader as long as they’re efficient, like a well-oiled machine or an algorithm. But a Prophetic leader always prioritizes justice over efficiency. It’s not just about "doing things right" to get a result; it’s about making sure the goals of the business stay subservient to divinely inspired morals. At the end of the day, a purely "worldly" leader is basically just a glorified, intelligent biological machine, just trying to get more efficient to get a bigger yield. In contrast, Prophetic leadership is about having a heart full of humanity and the shoulders to carry the burden of doing what’s right. Let me know if there is anything interesting that you've come across on the topic InshAllah, I’ll be talking more about this and some other deep dives in my upcoming course on 'Prophetic Leadership' Unlock the Prophetic DNA of Leadership Do you feel the potential for leadership within you but struggle to bridge the gap to becoming a truly "Guiding Leader"? Leadership is more than just a corporate buzzword or a business competency-it is a spiritual obligation. Join us for a powerful one-day intensive as we deconstruct the "Blueprint" of the greatest leader to ever walk the earth: the Prophet Muhammad Date: Saturday 13th June Time: 10am - 3pm Venue: As-Suffa Institute, 156 High St, B6 4UX Open to: Brothers and Sisters Fee: £15 (without meal) | £20 (with meal included) Seats are limited. Give your leadership potential the Prophetic foundation it deserves.

*اسلامی علوم حاصل کرنے سے پہلے عربی میں مہارت کیوں ضروری ہے؟* اس سوال کا جواب سمجھنے کے لیے پہلے یہ طے کرنا ضروری ہے کہ ہمارا اصل مقصد کیا ہے۔ ہمارا مقصد محض اسلام کے بارے میں معلومات اکٹھا کرنا نہیں، ہمارا مقصد قرآن اور سنت کو ان کے اصل سرچشمے سے سمجھنا ہے۔ اور یہ تبھی ممکن ہے جب انسان عربی زبان پر اس گہرائی سے عبور حاصل کرے جس طرح قرآن کے نزول کے زمانے میں اسے سمجھا جاتا تھا۔ بات سیدھی سی ہے: جس کی عربی کمزور ہوگی، اس کے دین کی پوری سمجھ بھی کمزور رہے گی۔ جب آپ ترجمے پر انحصار کرتے ہیں تو آپ متن کو مترجم کی نظر سے دیکھ رہے ہوتے ہیں، اور اسی بات کو سمجھتے ہیں جو اس نے اپنے فہم اور الفاظ کے ذریعے پیش کی ہوتی ہے۔ نیت کتنی ہی اچھی ہو اور سوالات کتنے ہی درست ہوں، زبان نہ آنے کی صورت میں آپ اور حقیقت کے درمیان ایک دیوار ہمیشہ کھڑی رہتی ہے۔ آپ جو پڑھ رہے ہیں وہ واقعی اصل متن کا صحیح مفہوم ہے یا نہیں، اس کی تصدیق کا آپ کے پاس کوئی راستہ نہیں ہوتا۔ آج یہی مسئلہ ان لوگوں کے ساتھ بھی ہے جو دین سیکھنے کے لیے AI کا استعمال کرتے ہیں۔ انہیں جوابات تو مل جاتے ہیں، لیکن وہ یہ نہیں جان سکتے کہ وہ درست ہیں یا محض الگورتھم کی خود ساختہ غلطی۔ دین کے معاملے میں AI یا گوگل پر انحصار کرنا بالکل ایسا ہی ہے جیسے کوئی سنگین بیماری میں انٹرنیٹ سے علاج ڈھونڈنے لگے۔ اس سے وہ ڈاکٹر نہیں بن جاتا، بس سرچ کرنا سیکھ لیتا ہے۔ اور یہ بھی نہ بھولیں کہ یہ سسٹم انسانوں کے بنائے ہوئے ہیں، اور ہر انسان کے اپنے تعصبات ہوتے ہیں۔ عام لوگوں کی نظر میں، جو شخص ترجموں اور AI سے سیکھ کر باتیں کرتا ہو ماہر نظر آ سکتا ہے، لیکن حقیقت میں اس کے پاس خود سے تحقیق کرنے اور بات کی صحت پرکھنے کی صلاحیت نہیں ہوتی۔ اور یہی بنیادی چیز ہے۔ قرآن و سنت کا علم ہمیشہ ایک مضبوط سلسلے کے ذریعے منتقل ہوتا آیا ہے، ایسے مخلص اور دیانتدار مردوں اور عورتوں کے ذریعے جنہوں نے اپنی زندگیاں دین کو تحریف سے بچانے کے لیے وقف کر دیں۔ اس پورے سلسلے میں عربی زبان ہی وہ لنگر ہے جو سب کو ایک جگہ باندھے رکھتا ہے۔ پھر چاہے کوئی مفسر ہو، محدث ہو یا فقیہ، سب کو عربی زبان ہی کے معیار پر پرکھا جاتا ہے۔ یہی وہ ذریعہ ہے جو ہمیں یہ صلاحیت دیتا ہے کہ اگر کوئی علمی غلطی کرے تو ہم اس کی تصحیح کر سکیں۔ تاریخ گواہ ہے کہ کوئی بھی حقیقی عالم ایسا نہیں گزرا جو پہلے عربی علوم میں مہارت نہ رکھتا ہو۔ آخر میں، جو شخص کسی موضوع پر صرف انگریزی یا اردو میں پڑھتا ہے وہ بظاہر اچھی گفتگو کر سکتا ہے، لیکن حقیقت میں وہ دوسروں کی باتیں ہی دہرا رہا ہوتا ہے۔ اصل اور گہرے سوالوں کے جوابات صرف وہی دے سکتا ہے جس نے عربی زبان کے ذریعے ان علوم کی گہرائیوں میں اتر کر انہیں حاصل کیا ہو۔ 🖋️*تحریر از: مفتی لياقت زمان صاحب* (برطانیہ) (فاضل جامعہ العلوم الاسلامیہ بنوری ٹاون) 📝اردو ترجمہ از: *مجلس طالبات علم پاکستان*

Why Vision is the Missing Link in Our Organisations I’ve been diving back into Nabeel al-Azami’s book, 'Muhammad (s): 11 Leadership Qualities That Changed the World,' and a few things really jumped out at me. Out of all eleven qualities he breaks down, the one I think we’re starving for in our organizations today whether it’s mosque committees, charities, or schools, is Vision. There’s a famous idea that if you don’t know which way you’re headed, you’re not actually "moving". A lot of us mistake busywork or constant change for actual progress, but without a clear direction, we’re mostly just walking in circles or, even worse, wandering blindly. A visionary leader is the one who ensures everyone is doing the 'right' thing, not just any thing. But for that to work, the leader’s own vision has to be solid from the start. Nabeel lists five "tick boxes" for a proper visioning process, and the order really matters here: 1. Self-Assessment: Where are we right now? 2. Trends Analysis: Where are we actually going? 3. Vision Statement: Where exactly do we want to be? 4. Mission & Action Plan: How do we actually get there? 5. Implement & Monitor: Are we actually making it? I’m going to go much deeper into these during the course, but it’s worth noting that anyone who studies the Quran and the Seerah can see this wasn't just "luck." There was a distinct, systematic approach to how the Prophet ﷺ established the Deen. From the gradual way laws were introduced to the calculated strategies behind the Hijrah or the bond of brotherhood (Mu'akhah), nothing was "off the cuff." It wasn't just random people doing random tasks. When a leader has a clear vision and, this is the key, manages to get their team to believe in that same vision, progress is inevitable. Without it? You’re basically on a ship where the crew is working hard, but the boat isn't getting any closer to the shore.

Some insights from the book With the Heart in Mind I’ve almost finished Mikaeel Ahmed Smith’s ‘With the Heart in Mind’ and honestly, it’s been such a very good read. If you’re trying to wrap your head around how the early Muslims understood the mind and how that shaped their worldview, this is definitely a must-have on the shelf. Huge thanks to everyone who recommended it, I’ll definitely be referencing some of these concepts in the upcoming Prophetic Leadership course, inshAllah. I wanted to share a quick breakdown of al-Muhasibi’s three levels of intellect, as they’re super relevant to how we process the world today: 1. The Innate Intellect (Gharizah) This foundational level is a natural quality or "implanted light" given directly by Allah, and it forms the basis of human accountability. It provides the essential capacity to conceptualise and differentiate between things. According to Muhasibi, this innate level has three exclusive functions: speech (constructing intelligible and logical arguments), deduction (extracting meanings from sensory information), and choice (making decisions based on gathered knowledge). 2. Understanding (Fahm) The second level refers to the correct comprehension of things exactly as they truly are. It involves grasping the meanings of everything a person perceives through their senses. Muhasibi notes that this cognitive ability to comprehend meanings is shared equally by all people, regardless of whether they are spiritually guided to the right path or not. 3. Divine Insight (Basirah) The highest level is a spiritual intuition regarding the true value of actions, specifically distinguishing what will be beneficial or harmful in the hereafter. This profound insight grows or diminishes in proportion to a person's reverence for Allah and their recognition of His blessings. Muhasibi emphasises that the first two levels are critical for developing this third level, as true intelligence is ultimately determined by whether a person's actions and behaviour align with the logical conclusions of their faith I love how intrigued our early scholars were with the 'intellect'. No doubt, the way the Quran constantly pushes us to 'think' and 'reflect' is what drove Muslims to lead the way in this research. Sadly, this has not been the case with many modern-day institutes. It’s also why the traditional "foundational" sciences [aka Uloom aalah], like Nahw (grammar), Balagha (rhetoric), and Mantiq (logic), are so heavy on sharpening the mind before you even get into the deep theology. If you found this interesting, let me know and I’ll share more insights as I come across them, inshAllah.

Leadership & the Female Ant Whilst preparing for a course on Prophetic leadership, I re-read the narrative of the Ant in the Quran and this time I viewed it through a whole different lens. Amazing how the Quranic verses show new levels of depth when your life situations change. To me, that’s the ultimate proof of its universal nature. Whether you’re a researcher, a parent, or a leader, the text meets you where you are. The core message remains untouched, but the specific insights can become incredibly intense depending on what you’re going through. Take the moment where Prophet Sulaiman a.s. is travelling with his army and they approach a valley of ants. Then one ant senses the danger and screams out: O ants, enter your houses lest you be crushed by Sulaiman and his troops while they perceive not. Looking at this from a leadership perspective, that tiny ant displays some massive traits. 1. It shows a high level of situational awareness and insight about immediate hazards. 2. There's a true compassion there too, to stop and warn the people rather than just running to safety. 3. The message is communicated very clearly, 4. It gives them an immediate crisis plan, informing them exactly where to go. 5. Specifying 'Your Houses", which shows a level of organisation to avoid causing harm to one another in the panic. But perhaps the most profound leadership trait is the diplomacy involved. The ant tries to identify a possible excuse for the actions of others before jumping to conclusions by saying "while they perceive not" which John Adair refers to as emotional intelligence of a leader. On the flip side, you have Sulaiman a.s. As a King and Prophet, he didn't just understand the ant; he recognised the weight of his own power and how easily it could crush the vulnerable if he wasn't careful. What’s even more interesting is the phrasing: Qaalat Namlah. This literally translates as "a female ant said". Historically, linguists went back and forth on this. Some argued the feminine ending was just a grammatical marker for a single ant, not necessarily a gender designation. There’s even a famous, though debated, report of Imam Abu Hanifa holding the view that it was indeed a female during a debate with the scholar Qatada. Back then, the debate might have seemed like a linguistic niche without much practical fruit. But fast forward to modern zoology, and the science is incredible. We now know that ant colonies are matriarchal. The soldiers and foragers, the ones actually out there observing the environment and directing the colony, are almost always female. To add to that, there’s a really subtle parallel here between the kingdom of the ants and the kingdom of Sheba. In both cases, you have female leadership stepping in to protect their people. Both the ant and the Queen had the foresight to recognise the sheer scale of the power Sulaiman a.s. held, and they both moved strategically to make sure their communities didn't get caught in the crossfire.

Why "Irrelevant" Fiqh Chapters Actually Matter I once heard someone argue that Islamic institutions should purge "irrelevant" chapters from their fiqh curriculum, specifically, the sections on rulings regarding wells or ancient water sources. When I first heard this, I immediately got where he was coming from. It’s an easy conclusion to reach if you view fiqh simply as a checklist of rules for modern daily life. From that perspective, a teacher might assume that chapters on wells, hunting, or reviving dead land have no place in the world today. For a beginner student with no intention of going deeper, that might be fine. However, if a student actually wants to progress to advanced texts like al-Hidayah, they have to study every single chapter, regardless of whether it’s "practical" right now. The reason is simple: advanced fiqh isn't just about learning rules; it’s about becoming familiar with the jurists' thought processes and gaining deep *tafaqquh* (legal insight). Look, the reality is that Fiqh is a web where everything touches everything else. You don't get to see the actual 'engine' of the Madhhab, how the jurists are consistently pulling rulings from a set of core principles, unless you see those principles tested across different scenarios. The logic in one chapter is often the secret key to the next. If you’ve actually struggled through a text like al-Hidayah, you’ve seen it: the author will suddenly drop an analogy from a totally seemingly 'irrelevant' chapter to solve a complex modern problem. On the surface, they look worlds apart, but the underlying legal DNA is identical. Unfortunately, this slow dilution of fiqh books and the "purging" of various masail (legal issues) is having a visible effect on graduates today. Instead of being able to resort to the texts they’ve studied to find an answer, it’s becoming easier for them to just search for online discussions or debates. If you’re a graduate and you feel like this is happening to you, there is hope. You can go back to your books from the very beginning. Re-read them, but this time, do it with more curiosity and a sense of purpose. In my opinion, a truly great fiqh class is one where the teacher is a seasoned expert, the student is diligent, and both are genuinely passionate about the depth of the discussion.

Why do we spend so much time on Arabic before studying the Islamic sciences? To get why this is so important, you have to look at what the goal actually is. We aren't just trying to "know things" about Islam; we’re trying to understand the Quran and the Sunnah at the source. But here’s the catch: that’s only possible if you’ve actually mastered the language the way it was understood when the Quran was first revealed. If your Arabic is shaky, your entire understanding of the religion is going to be shaky. It’s that simple. When you rely on a translation, you’re basically at the mercy of the translator. You’re seeing the text through their lens, their vocabulary, and their limitations. You might have the best intentions and ask all the right questions, but without the language, there’s always going to be a wall between you and the truth. You have no way to step back and verify if what you’re reading is actually what the text says. It’s the same problem we see today with people using AI to learn about Islam. They get an answer, but they have zero way to check if that answer is actually correct or just a "hallucination" by the algorithm. Relying on AI or Google for your theology is like trying to self-diagnose a serious medical condition online; it doesn't make you a doctor, it just makes you someone who knows how to type into a search bar. Plus, you’re ignoring the fact that these algorithms are controlled by people with their own biases. To the average person, someone who quotes translations and AI might sound like an expert, but they’re missing the most critical piece: the ability to verify. Studying the Quran and Sunnah has always been about a chain of people, upright men and women who dedicated their lives to making sure the Deen didn't get distorted. Arabic is the "anchor" for all of them. Whether it’s a scholar of Tafsir, Hadith, or Fiqh, the Arabic language is the standard they are all held to. It’s the one science that allows us to correct an author if they stumble. Historically speaking, you won't find a single real scholar who wasn't a master of the Arabic sciences first. At the end of the day, someone who’s read every English article on a topic might be able to give a remarkable speech about it, but they’re still just repeating what others have said. Only the person who has mastered the science through the Arabic language can really sit down and answer the deep, "why" questions that actually matter.

Understanding Divergence in Hanafi Fatwas It's a common point of confusion: if two Muftis are both "Hanafi," why do they sometimes give completely different answers? The reality is that a Fatwa isn't a monolith; it’s an adaptive legal verdict that depends heavily on the source material and the specific context of the person asking the question. The Fixed Core: Zahir al-Riwayah & relied upon the positions of the Mashaikh. Some issues are "settled law". These are matters found in the core works of the school's founders (Imam Abu Hanifa and his students). In these cases, you’ll find near-unanimous agreement among Muftis. Take Wudu, for example. If someone accidentally falls into a pool, climbs out, and wipes their head, is their Wudu valid for Zuhr? Because the Hanafi school doesn’t view a formal intention (niyyah) as a strict requirement for the validity of Wudu itself, every Mufti will give you the same answer: Yes, you’re good to go. This is the "relied-upon position" (Mufta bihi), and there's no real room for debate here. The confusion usually starts when we hit "new" territory issues, where the early founders didn't leave a direct script. This is where a Mufti has to bridge the gap between classical principles of the school and modern reality. 1. The Length of the Beard. This is a classic example of differing methodologies. > Some Muftis look directly at Hadith like the command to "lengthen the beard and trim the mustache" and derive a ruling based on the literal text that the beard must reach a certain length before being allowed to trim it. > Others look at these narrations through the lens of established Hanafi principles regarding body hair or general legal maxims, reaching a ruling that the aim of the beard is to have facial hair on the jaws. Both sides stay within the school's framework, but their starting points differ. One prioritizes the literal wording of the Hadith, while the other prioritizes the "legal spirit" and context. This leads to back-and-forth academic rebuttals, which is actually a healthy sign of a living legal tradition. 2. The "Prawn" Debate Then you have issues of biology and linguistics, like whether prawns are halal. The early scholars in Kufa or Baghdad didn't really deal with prawns; it wasn't a staple of their environment. Later Muftis had to decide: Is a prawn a "fish" (Samak)? > Some looked at general prohibitions on sea life, > while others consulted linguists who argued that Arabs traditionally categorized prawns as fish. Because the "Founding scholars" didn't discuss it, both views end up coexisting within the school. The "Spectrum" Solution For the average person, this can feel like the goalposts are constantly moving. A helpful way to look at it is through a 1–10 spectrum: > Level 10: Explicitly mentioned by Imam Abu Hanifa and his students or early Hanafis (e.g., Wudu). This would be categorical and agreed upon. > Level 1: A modern deduction based on linguistic or local context (e.g., Prawns or modern finance). The lower the number, the more a Mufti relies on their own research (Ijtihad) due to a lack of information about it in the core works. What Should You Do? Ultimately, if you aren't an expert, you aren't expected to navigate the "1 through 10" yourself. Your responsibility is simple but weighty: Follow the expert you trust the most. Religion isn't about "Mufti shopping" for the easiest answer; it’s about finding a scholar whose knowledge and integrity you rely on and sticking with their guidance.

Thinking in Fiqh When a student spends most of their time studying fiqh through translations, they end up in a bit of a trap. They might be able to quote you any ruling in the book, but they struggle to actually strip away the words and see the "logic" behind it, the beautiful way everything in fiqh connects. You have to realise that the statements of the Fuqaha aren't just general advice; they are incredibly precise, crafted for very specific scenarios. If you haven't been trained to see that, you'll probably take a text at face value and try to apply it literally to any situation that looks similar. This issue becomes even clearer when they read fatwas on various websites. It’s challenging for them to see beyond the ink or pixels in this case. They might not realise that a fatwa is often tailored to specific points in a question or influenced by the unique circumstances of the questioner. On the other hand, a trained student reads between the lines. They can appreciate the multiple layers, the context, and the sheer depth of thought the author poured into the text. There is a massive difference between simply reading or translating a text and attaining Tafaqquh, a deep, intuitive understanding. You could call it "thinking in Fiqh." This is exactly why some students, and even graduates, freeze up when they’re asked a real-world question. If you haven't learned to "think in Fiqh," it’s nearly impossible to make sense of the nuanced positions held by senior experts. If you’re a graduate looking to develop this "Fiqh mindset," here is my advice: > Go back to everything you’ve studied and try to explain it to someone else. Teaching forces you to master the material yourself. When your student asks a tough question or misunderstands a point, don’t ignore it, write it down and take it to a senior scholar for clarification. > Try to study directly under an expert or, at the very least, watch their detailed lectures and videos. Pay attention not just to *what* they say, but *how* they arrive at their conclusions. Doing this will jumpstart the "Fiqh engine" in your mind, moving you from a passive reader to an inquisitive and insightful thinker InshAllah.