Abstract:
This paper seeks to lay out a case for the importance of producing and drawing on a number of cultural products – all the way from documentaries and blogs to novels and plays – in order to widen, strengthen and make da’wah more influential. However, the paper seeks to go beyond such simple and, it is hoped, appreciable efforts to analyse more deeply the nature of cultural products in relation to social reality and their impact on individual subjectivities. The paper argues that if we see cultural production in sociological terms we will soon see the centrality of cultural products to safeguarding and better embedding Muslims in identities more in keeping with their Islam. It suggests doing this in part by creating an Islamicate culture for Britain through cultural production, which can aid Muslims to live in this country more comfortably without compromising their faith. Overall the paper is animated by a spirit of seeking to assess the role cultural production can have in making positive social changes for Muslims living as a minority in Britain.
| File | Description | File size |
|---|---|---|
 diversifying_muslim_cultural_production.pdf |
709 Kb |
8 Comments
Misquoted
To YRG I didn’t say that at all. Read my comment again. I do not support your views on this matter in the slightest.
Misquoted
To YRG I didn’t say that at all. Read my comment again. I do not support your views on this matter in the slightest.
To YRG
How did you work out his intentions that he was writing merely to appear ‘more academic’? You do know that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that we have been commanded not to check and search the hearts of men.
Br Syed is writing in his capacity and from his background. His studies relate to academic subjects and so undoubtedly this will be reflected in his writings. Perhaps he isn’t as well-versed in traditional Islamic sciences as he is in his academic subjects (though that is an assumption) but this is not something so heinous. How many of us know maths more than we know Quran?
If he has written something haram and unislamic then perhaps you can jump on his back and criticise him. Even them, with the adab of a Muslim, it would be recommended to do so with gentleness with the ‘well-wishing’ that is the definition of naseeha.
But if he hasn’t written anything unislamic or haram, then why should you be upset with him and display contempt when Allah is not angry with it (because Allah is angry with those things that are haram and unislamic)? And ‘It is evil enough that one of you should hold your fellow brother in contempt’. Shouldn’t we love those things that Allah loves and dislike things that Allah dislikes? Let’s be proportionate in our criticisms, as Ibn Taymiyah said, a person is loved according to the good he has and disliked according to the evil he has.
To YRG
How did you work out his intentions that he was writing merely to appear ‘more academic’? You do know that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that we have been commanded not to check and search the hearts of men.
Br Syed is writing in his capacity and from his background. His studies relate to academic subjects and so undoubtedly this will be reflected in his writings. Perhaps he isn’t as well-versed in traditional Islamic sciences as he is in his academic subjects (though that is an assumption) but this is not something so heinous. How many of us know maths more than we know Quran?
If he has written something haram and unislamic then perhaps you can jump on his back and criticise him. Even them, with the adab of a Muslim, it would be recommended to do so with gentleness with the ‘well-wishing’ that is the definition of naseeha.
But if he hasn’t written anything unislamic or haram, then why should you be upset with him and display contempt when Allah is not angry with it (because Allah is angry with those things that are haram and unislamic)? And ‘It is evil enough that one of you should hold your fellow brother in contempt’. Shouldn’t we love those things that Allah loves and dislike things that Allah dislikes? Let’s be proportionate in our criticisms, as Ibn Taymiyah said, a person is loved according to the good he has and disliked according to the evil he has.
Totally agree
I totally agree with you just thinking. Syed does over do it with Western theory and like others have pointed out this is just to make himself appear more academic… but we don’t need academics (as Ukht suggested in some of his/her comments on Mimbar-rising) we need Muslims to learn their own history and be proud of it. Syed suffers from an inferiority complex that makes him run toward Western theory because he thinks by using this he makes himself look ‘clever’ – typical modernist flwaw!
Totally agree
I totally agree with you just thinking. Syed does over do it with Western theory and like others have pointed out this is just to make himself appear more academic… but we don’t need academics (as Ukht suggested in some of his/her comments on Mimbar-rising) we need Muslims to learn their own history and be proud of it. Syed suffers from an inferiority complex that makes him run toward Western theory because he thinks by using this he makes himself look ‘clever’ – typical modernist flwaw!
Too much Western theory?
This is a long paper – your stamina has to be admired. I have read this and found it infintely interesting, but I am puzzeled by one thing and wonder what others think of my point too. You speak about the subject/object dialectic and the way in which human beings are narratively constructed. No where though do you speak about the human being as a spiritual being. By leaving this out are you not in danger of submitting to a secular view of the human being and could this not be an argument for your over doing it with Western theory? Any one else agree with me?
Too much Western theory?
This is a long paper – your stamina has to be admired. I have read this and found it infintely interesting, but I am puzzeled by one thing and wonder what others think of my point too. You speak about the subject/object dialectic and the way in which human beings are narratively constructed. No where though do you speak about the human being as a spiritual being. By leaving this out are you not in danger of submitting to a secular view of the human being and could this not be an argument for your over doing it with Western theory? Any one else agree with me?