I realize my style can come across as "intense" & might also seem needlessly confrontational. I have also had a few fellow academics convey to me the idea that I shouldn't go "dumpster diving" & debate "nobodies." Instead, I should limit discourse to the academic community. 1/
Whereas I understand where this is all coming from, I have a different & non-conformist take. I believe academic "snobbery"--& staying locked in the ivory tower--leads to a gaping hole that is filled by demagogues & extremists, who are able to push their propaganda unopposed. 2/
In Islamic studies, I take as my inspiration scholars such as Prof. @jricole (the OG) & Prof. @JonathanACBrown... & confess my fascination with Prof. @rezaaslan's early work & debates. Ultimately, I wish to combine scholarship with public-facing work. 3/
I am, on that note, being considered for a think tank-ish position that I hope to secure... This would allow me to have one foot in the academy & another in the think tank space. I also want to fix my gaze on "lower" outlets: social media, forums, YouTube, etc... 4/
That is to say, I *want* to "dumpster dive," so that I can start to clean up the mess. When it comes to Islam & public discourse, it's mostly dominated by the crudest voices. I think cleaning this up is a collective obligation (farḍ al-kifāya) for the academic community. 5/
If a small group does it, then the rest are absolved of their responsibility. But, for the last couple of decades, most academics have disdained these media outlets & allowed the demagogues to run amock. That's a travesty: we have the skills & knowledge to counter them. 6/
On the other hand, I also think many academics *don't* have the temperament, debate skills, or even ability to counter certain arguments that are commonly bandied about. This gives the impression to these demagogues that they are correct & right... 7/
...& that they are simply saying what academics are prevented from saying due to "political correctness." I hope to show that this is not true & that their ideas are, indeed, weak & spurious. 8/
One of my professors just chided me, "So what's the latest Twitter jihād?" More than one told me that it's a waste of time since no academic debates are resolved on Twitter. Yet, I actually think public opinion is probably more important, at least in some ways, than scholars. 9/
I get it that one Twitter jihād after another can get old to some people. But, that's why I entered the game, so expect more to come.
Ultimately, I must say that the unfollow, mute, & soft blocks exist on Twitter for a reason. Don't worry--I won't get offended! 10/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr. Javad T Hashmi

Dr. Javad T Hashmi Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @DrJavadTHashmi

8 May
The fear--that life without God is meaningless--has long been recognized by theistic & atheistic philosophers alike & it seems unthinking to simply dismiss it in such an offhanded way. The human need to find meaning beyond ourselves is exactly the timeless allure of religion. 1/
That atheism can & does lead to nihilism is not seriously in dispute, the only question being if that state can be overcome or not. You may believe that it can be, but we have powerful reasons for our skepticism, which you do not seem to have duly pondered. 2/
On the purely atheistic worldview, humans are the result of mere happenstance, the chance byproduct of a random & mindless process, nothing more than molecules colliding--mere matter in motion. We are a tiny speck on a distant planet in a vast universe, hurtling in space... 3/
Read 20 tweets
7 May
So, get this: a nurse just complained to me about "a Muslim family" that recently lost a loved one in our ER... & she was implying how inconsiderate it was that an "army" of family was in the room, with even more coming as time progressed... 1/
She then complained about how they stayed with the body for the entire day until the deceased was taken to the funeral home, as if this is some peculiar "Islamic custom." Of course, this differs from what I witness day in & day out: Elderly patients who live & die alone... 2/
...living far away from family or loved ones. Sometimes nobody even knows the patient has died before they are brought to the ER. When family are notified, the nonchalance of their response never ceases to amaze me, or the "well, they are in a better place now," despite... 3/
Read 7 tweets
6 May
The so-called "sword verse" (Q 9:5) is often invoked to claim that the Qur'an repudiated all treaties with non-Muslims & thereafter advocated perpetual holy war against unbelievers. The cut-&-paste job needed to claim this is absurd. 1/
This passage itself actually reinforces the idea of equal retaliation (qiṣāṣ) as the pivot of Qur'anic just war; the violation of a treaty by one side legitimizes a counter-violation & a throwing off of the treaty due to the aggression & transgression by the violating side. 2/
@Budrus_Dhuliman cites 9:1 & 9:7 to make his claim. Yet, the passage says,
"[9:1] A repudiation from God and His Messenger to those idolaters with whom you made a treaty... [9:4] EXCEPT for those idolaters with who you have made a treaty and who thereafter commit no breach... 3/
Read 9 tweets
6 May
It is sad that some Christians seek to use such hateful polemical arguments against Muslims. As Philip Jenkins writes, "In terms of ordering violence and bloodshed... it’s easy to see the mote in somebody else’s eye while missing the beam in your own. In fact... 1/
"...the Bible has its own bloody and violent passages... The Bible overflows with 'texts of terror,' to borrow a
phrase coined by American theologian Phyllis Trible, and
biblical violence is often marked by indiscriminate savagery..." 2/
"If the Qur’an urges believers to fight, as it undoubtedly does, it also commands that enemies be shown mercy if they surrender. Some frightful portions of the Bible by contrast, order the total extermination of enemies, of whole families & races—of men, women, & children." 3/
Read 12 tweets
6 May
Wow, this went viral. I'm sorry but I am going to have to take a dissenting view here. I think the professor--& I think I know who it is--is correct & he might simply be guiding you to another department, i.e. faculty of theology vs oriental studies.
I do agree that Muslims face undue criticism & suspicion when they *do* use a secular approach, but that's a different complaint than this one here. Just my two cents. 2/
And I say this as someone who himself would thrive in a faculty of theology/divinity more so than a pure Oriental Studies or NELC department. 3/
Read 5 tweets
5 May
Jihād as taught by Al-Azhar University
(Official lecture notes from التشریع الإسلامي والقضایا المعاصرة, Spring 2018):

1. We do not believe that legitimate jihād exists today except for defensive jihād.
ولا نعتقد أن الجهاد المشروع قائم الآن سوى جهاد الدفاع عن النفس .
2. As for offensive jihād, there is no place for it in our day & age.
أما جهاد الطلب ففي عصرنا لا مكان له.
3. This is because it is possible to preach by modern [peaceful] means... so, there is no need for it [offensive jihād]...
لأن إمكانیة تبلیغ الدعوة بالوسائل الحدیثة متاحة... فلا داعي له
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(