/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17827012]

Looking for a series covering history of Islam from beginning to today, I tried Venture of Islam but I found it obnoxious in its weird moralizing ecumenicism. I'm reading at the Oxford history but it's only one volume and the Cambridge is multi volume but it's an absolute slog, like reading a government report. I couldn't find anything on history in the /lit/ pastebin for Islam
https://pastebin.com/CKbsaqE0

The lectures at the beginning have some series on the Rashidun but it's pretty limited. Should I just start with Ibn Kathir? I heard his use of relating all the chains in history makers it a bit awkward and he obviously doesn't go to modern times. I don't know if there are any good podcasts or other series on history but I'd also be open to that

[Anonymous No.17827069]

[Anonymous No.17827095]

>>17827069
>one volume
>revisionist school
>New York Times best seller

Three strikes

[Anonymous No.17827202]

>>17827069
Cringe

[Anonymous No.17827510]

>>17827012
https://pastebin.com/CKbsaqE0
check out the audio series

[Anonymous No.17827532]

>>17827012
A History of Islamic Societies

[Anonymous No.17827787]

>>17827510
Did you read my OP?

>>17827532
Thanks, this looks pretty solid

[Anonymous No.17827802]

>>17827787
No

[Anonymous No.17827935]

>>17827802
I already mentioned that exact pastebin and the audio series and said I want something that continues where it left off

[Anonymous No.17827982]

>>17827935
You're welcome

[Anonymous No.17828009]

>>17827982
Did you put it together?

[Anonymous No.17829171]

Bump

[Anonymous No.17829395]

>>17827012
Is religious poetry beautiful? I feel like it would be

[Anonymous No.17829794]

>>17827012
Islam: A Short History by Karen Armstrong was very good, it contains a lot more insight than one would expect given its short length (off of memory I’d say around 250 pages?)
There’s also Turning Points in Middle Eastern History, by The Great Courses, but that’s an audiobook/lecture series, so depends if you’re up for that format.

[Anonymous No.17830244]

>>17827012
Caspian Report's video series on the early history is pretty decent.

[Anonymous No.17830656]

>>17829395
Yes definitely

>>17829794
I was hoping for something broader that covers Islam in Africa and Eastern Asia as well

>>17830244
Are they academic or more pop?

[Anonymous No.17830684]

>>17830656
>I was hoping for something broader that covers Islam in Africa and Eastern Asia as well
Islam: A Short History is more of that. I don’t think I remember it touching on the Southeast Asian/Oceanic Islamic countries like the Phillipines or Bangladesh, but it definitely covers the theological and cultural developments of the Islamic world from Morocco to India.

[Anonymous No.17830704]

>>17827012
Start with the Greeks.

[Anonymous No.17830728]

>>17827012
>weird moralizing ecumenicism
???

[Anonymous No.17830982]

>>17830656
>Are they academic or more pop?

they're pretty damn academic. the guy puts real effort into his vids, and each one is a mini documentary, pretty crack if u ask me

[Anonymous No.17831045]

>>17830684
Interesting take, I was doubting if I should procure the book, since I already have the vision of Islam that I'm about to begin reading, but now i think i should also get this book

[Anonymous No.17831072]

>>17831045
Vision of Islam isn't even written by a Muslim and contains theology that 99% of Muslims would reject

[Anonymous No.17831104]

Why not just watch this video, anon?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qx1IkH5pNH0

[Anonymous No.17831115]

>>17831104
>watch this basedfaced Christian
No thank you

[Anonymous No.17831151]

>>17831115
scared he might show you something you don't want to know? He only quotes the quran and the hadiths

[Anonymous No.17831197]

>>17831151
His position is incoherent.

>he was a self-interested man and a fraud
>AND he didn't exist

[Anonymous No.17831237]

>>17831104

[Anonymous No.17831255]

rageh omaar's prophet muhammad is one of the better historical, Islamic docs on YouTube.
I tend to give pro yootoobers a wide berth as they often lack credibility. The "virtual friend experience" aspect is disturbing too.

[Anonymous No.17831418]

>>17831045
It’s probably worth reading both, there will inevitably be different viewpoints on the subject. What I liked most about A Short History was that it made a convincing explanation for the current unrests in the Muslim World right now, like why so many Muslim countries are violent fundamentalist dictatorships at the expense of a religious history that leaned far more into the spiritual, expresive side of faith. And although colonialism is a big part of that explanation, it was only the final blow, and these shifts have been happening over the course of many centuries.

[Anonymous No.17831700]

>>17831418
They're violent dictatorships but hardly fundamentalist

[Anonymous No.17831702]

>>17831072
>contains theology that 99% of Muslims would reject
Such as? I genuinely am curious to know as I have the book and am going to start reading it soon

[Anonymous No.17831715]

>>17831418
>And although colonialism is a big part of that explanation, it was only the final blow, and these shifts have been happening over the course of many centuries.
Interesting. What were the changes that actually enabled it to happen?

[Anonymous No.17831790]

>>17831702
For example this idea is presenting as fundamental to Islamic theology
https://www.britannica.com/topic/tashbih

It also grossly misrepresents certain religious concepts like jihad (saying it is the Arabic word for any war and not necessarily good when in fact the word is harb, jihad is now almost exclusively a religious term even in a not warfare context). And that Arab warfare was nothing like modern warfare (actually concepts like catapults on settlements, fire, collateral damage, civilians, all existed as important ideas in Islamic rules of war and are very analogous with modern circumstances in some respects, also in that time raiding other tribes for slaves was common so his rosy picture that tribal warfare was just about ensuring equality by redistribution of wealth is very strange).

Overall I loved the book, it is very interesting, but the perspective of the author is a very, very idiosyncratic interpretation among some Sufis, not by any means most Sufis, let alone most Muslims

[Anonymous No.17831820]

>>17831790
Oh added to this he regularly cites Hadiths that have no chain, meaning they are taken to be apocryphal or, to use the Islamic term, "fabricated"

[Anonymous No.17832182]

>>17830982
So John Green but not cringe?

[Anonymous No.17833035]

>>17831715
Read the book lol.
Mongol invasions were a big part because it was the first time the Islamic states succumbed militarily to an outside invading force, which influenced the way they implemented governments and the military from then on. It was also the end of Baghdad as a single power structure for the entire Muslim world, both culturally and politically. The Muslim states had already begun to drift apart in many ways, but the fall of Baghdad was the big tipping point which really fragmented the Muslim world into very distinct sociopolitical entities.
>>17831700
Arguably yes, and I agree with what you mean, but they consider themselves fundamentalist. How close they are to capturing the essence of Islam’s true fundamentals is besides the point, unfortunately. Fundamentalism is a reactionary movement in response to an undesirable state of the world which people believe can be remedied by returning to a lost “correct” way of organizing society, specifically by strict adherance to certain laws and practices.
Not even Saudi Arabia, Iran, ISIL, or the Taliban agree about what Sharia Law entails, but they are all still organized as fundamentalist Islamic polities, pushing back against outsider influences.

[Anonymous No.17833060]

>>17833035
None of them regard themselves as fundamentalist, the House of Saud days the idea women can't be in the workplace or politics is a "Muslim Brotherhood" extremist idea (and the Muslim Brotherhood is actually very progressive for Islamists)

[Anonymous No.17833074]

>>17833035
Also fundamentalist states arose before the Mongols, see the Almohad Caliphate or the Rashidun

[Anonymous No.17833087]

Look at the people in this thread taking a joke of a religion seriously. Is there anything more pathetic than white Westerners pretending like they need to seriously study the ravings of an illiterate 6th century Arabian caravan robber whose "revelations" were obviously self-serving, giving him more wives than others?

It's just pathetic.

Here's something Western white Muslim wannabes will never do: read the actual Bukharhi Hadith, which is full of idiotic absurdities

[Anonymous No.17833163]

>>17833087
I am a convert and I read a lot of Bukhari for fiqh and practice, generally not just from cover to cover of course as I don't need to read ten Hadiths on how to wash dog spit or something but they're invaluable Hadiths

[Anonymous No.17833191]

>>17833163
Also a convert here, but hadiths seem absurd. Is it just me or is it not borderline shirk and idolizing Muhammad(pbuh), putting a mere human first and foremost in your life and mind?

[Anonymous No.17833205]

>>17833191
He said do not love him to excess as Christians did with Christ. Some Muslims do that, like Barelvis. However taking him as your example and imitating and deferring to his judgement and loving him more than anything else in creation is not overly much.

[Anonymous No.17833268]

>>17833205
We should take the guy who raped a nine 9 year when he was 54 as our example?

[Anonymous No.17833365]

>>17833268
How was it rape except by contemporary, neurotic standards (which give extraordinary latitude to the definition)?

[Anonymous No.17833381]

>>17833365
See, this is the dilemma that Muslims have. You can only choose one of the following:

1) Muhammad was a rapist who raped a 9 year old -- A NINE YEAR OLD -- when he was 54 and already had multiple wives

or

2) A nine year old can consent to sex with a 54 year old

Now you know why Islam is such a joke to the modern world.

[Anonymous No.17833408]

>>17833381
I don't get what your point is, the modern world sexualizes nine year olds and gay them do exotic dances at gay bars.

[Anonymous No.17833434]

>>17833408
You honestly can't follow the argument of the last post? That's honestly too difficult of an argument for you to comprehend?

[Anonymous No.17833520]

>>17833434
I mean, the last post is demanding I accept the contempory morality which says it's a crime and I don't accept that and in fact consider it hypocritical

[Anonymous No.17833785]

>>17833381
>she was heckin 9 years old!!!11 she cant consent!! muh biology says so!!

modern "morality" is one of two, either a person holds the opinion that anyone cannot have intercourse with anyone under 18 (which is bizzare), or a person holds the opinion that any and all can do anything to anyone as long as they consent. and often times, the line is blurred between the two, and many hold both opinions at the same time and switch between them whenever necessary. either way, it is foolish to hold modern opinion to such high regard. often times, modern people look at the past, something they can't comprehend, and say they are better, when in fact, they are not.

[Anonymous No.17835326]

Bump