Tag: logic

  • Useless Consultants

    Nothing is more frustrating than having to watch obscenely paid consultants talk absolute bullshit, watch the ignorant groupies gather around them trying to figure out the problem that was just created by said consultants in their efforts to articulate a solution, and then having to step in to restore sanity to the context of the discussion and to salvage what little value remains in the workshop while being paid a market related salary for a job description that is only a tenth of your scope of accountability.

    But, as is clearly evident on Tumblr and in real life, the laziness of those with authority and cheque books will always result in titles being respected, if not revered, more than real world wisdom because appreciating real world wisdom requires the establishment of an informed opinion on a subject. And then to add insult to injury, having to sit quietly trying to justify why logic is logical, and having to over exert yourself to get the illogical to be convinced that 1+1=2 not just because you say so, but simply because it does.

    The demise of this world will result from the intellectual laziness that is excessively camouflaged by the brain numbing acquisition of useless information through academic pursuits disguised as models against which free thinkers are supposedly developed.

  • Quote

  • Sheikh Google

    Many take a condescending tone when referring to ‘Sheikh Google’ but from what I can tell, Sheikh Google is exposing more disbelievers to Islam, and facilitating more reversions than any real life sheikh I’ve heard of. The risk of misinformation is no different than the potential of interested parties innocently contacting misguided scholars or imams in their search for Islamic knowledge. But again, it’s more a clever twist of words that makes it an attractive phrase rather than its genuine appeal to intellect and wisdom.

    Yet another example of the ‘scholars’ or students of knowledge misconstruing the medium for the content that is available through it. Also a really good example of extremism by dismissing an entire channel for education simply because some abuse it. That’s like saying that knives should be made haraam because some people kill and injure and rob others with it. 

    An absence of logic in the pursuit of scholarly titles is in fact a major disservice to the Ummah rather than a fulfilment of a calling to Allah’s path. 

  • tick-tock-turnip:

  • You could double the number of synaptic connections in a very simple neurocircuit as a result of experience and learning. The reason for that was that long-term memory alters the expression of genes in nerve cells, which is the cause of the growth of new synaptic connections. When you see that at the cellular level, you realize that the brain can change because of experience. It gives you a different feeling about how nature and nurture interact. They are not separate processes.

    Eric R. Kandel, Nobel Prize-winning neuroscientist.

    A Quest to Understand How Memory Works.

    (via storyseldomtold)

    The fact that the brain changes because of experience, as I’ve mentioned in several of my previous posts on the subject, to me, confirms that our study of chemical imbalances to prove the prevalence of psychological disorders is focusing on the symptoms rather than the root cause. But it’s easier to be a victim to chemicals than a master of your thoughts. 

  • Madhabs…why?

    honeststrangers:

    “Rasulullah (sal Allahu alaihi wa sallam) said: “Make things easy! And do not make them complicated! Be cheerful! And do not be repulsive.””

    —

    Bukhari (via oneislam)

    This hadith echoes the thoughts in my head right now. Whenever I find myself delayed in the performance of my dhuhr salaah, I have to fight the tendency to want to debate (in my head) whether I should refer to the Shaf’i or Hanafi madhab to determine whether or not it is still permissible for me to perform dhuhr. 

    I’ve chosen to follow the Shaf’i view on this. My reason being that I cannot see how it would be possible for two Muslims (a Shaf’i and a Hanafi) to be standing side by side, with one performing Dhuhr and the other performing Asr at exactly the same time, and have both of their salaah accepted as having been read within the prescribed window for that prayer. It’s illogical!

    Islam always makes sense to me. Logical sense. This situation defies logic. So for this reason (amongst others) I find it impossible to respect these differences between the madhabs. If the Shaf’i followers believe that they are acting within the bounds of the Sunnah, and the Hanafi followers also believe that they’re acting within these same bounds, then is it not possible that in fact a combination of the two madhabs are in fact within the bounds of the Sunnah anyway? 

    The more I try to rationalise this, the more entangled I feel! But I refuse to apply a label to myself in the process other than being a Mu’min (a Believer!) and nothing else. Unless something was specifically forbidden, I will make it as easy as possible for me to practise my deen. This world is insane enough as it is, let alone the enormous trials that are placed on anyone that resists hedonism or liberalism. Anyone trying to live a decent, respectable, and modest life, regardless of religious persuasion, is fighting against the massive currents of corruption, immodesty, and vulgarity. Add to this the ridiculous burdens placed on top of Muslims to try to determine which one of the madhabs we’re supposed to follow and the numerous debates and arguments and inconsistencies that go with that, and it’s not difficult to understand why the youth are so rebellious these days. 

    We’ve created a legacy of Islam that is prone to ridicule, and we fool ourselves by arrogantly believing that we’re standing out because we’re the strangers that Rasulullah (SAW) referred to. I doubt that we are. I think that the moment we align with a group that considers itself to be of those strangers, we cease to be strangers and therefore cannot ever be certain of our status. Yet we persist in our divisions, and our sects and our folly with words and interpretations and man-endowed titles of scholarly supremacy! 

    Just the thought of it all is horribly disheartening. 

  • On Choosing A Sect

    These thoughts have plagued me for a long time now, and reading through some posts this morning further cemented my views on whether or not I should choose a specific madhab. 

    I’ve traditionally been raised as part of the Hanafi madhab, but have had significant exposure to the Shafi madhab as well. And given the few contradictions of practices between the two that I have personally experienced, it always left me wondering why should there be two or more different schools of thought to begin with? 

    Perhaps I’m over-simplifying a complex issue, but I would be more inclined to believe that most over-complicate a simple issue. For me it’s quite simple. Unless the action or practice was specifically forbidden, it is allowed. Even the Prophet (SAW) was not allowed to make something haraam that Allah had declared halaal. So how can anyone else come along and profess to know better?

    I once entered a prayer facility where there was a man from the Shafi madhab preparing to pray his Asr salaah, whilst a man from the Hanafi madhab was preparing to pray his Dhuhr salaah. Within the context of their specific schools of thought, they were both right, but surely logic dictates that only one of them could be correct? I could never receive a satisfactory answer to this dilemma, except for a feeble attempt from one Aalim stating that the madhab of the chosen Imam for that salaah between the two of them would prevail. That would mean that the Hanafi follower would potentially miss his Dhuhr salaah if the Shafi follower was Imam?

    It simply doesn’t make sense to me, and I’ve always found Islam to be extremely sensible. Therefore I can only conclude that the intent of the scholars was entirely misconstrued because of excessive interpretations and implementations of their teachings resulting in the mess we have today. The dogmatic application of the schools of thought have done nothing but driven a wedge between communities based on a scholar’s interpretation of the Sunnah.

    For this reason, I have chosen to follow the least restrictive guidelines in any given situation since at no point did anyone prove that either of the madhabs are incorrect. Which to me implies that it was all about context. And because we don’t seem to understand context and principles more often than not, we end up applying rulings out of context and then insist that it’s beyond reproach because the scholars said so. I refuse to limit the scope of my Imaan or my application of the Sunnah to the views of a single scholar, or to fit in with a specific community. 

    Islam is clear about Halaal and Haraam. The rest is open to debate and conjecture and is often defended based on egos and obstinacy. That is the doubtful parts that I will avoid as best as I can. Insha-Allah. 

  • If we would like to know if a religion is true or false, we should not depend on our emotions, feelings, or traditions. Rather, we should depend on our reason and intellect.

    From the book “A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam (via anjodepernastortas)

    This sums up the logic that I try to apply to everything spiritual and religious. Those that claim that Islamic customs or laws are not always supposed to be logical because of its mystical inferences are missing the point. Just because we don’t understand or appreciate the logic behind something now, doesn’t mean that that logic doesn’t exist. It just means that we have more to learn before it becomes clearer to us.