Scan barcode
A review by vivacissimx
With the Heart in Mind: The Moral & Emotional Intelligence of the Prophet by Mikaeel Ahmed Smith
emotional
informative
reflective
fast-paced
2.5
Star reviews are fiddly things and in this case the low rating is worth explaining. It's not that this book isn't a wealth of information or that I found none of it useful, because both of those are untrue. I do agree with the reviews which call this book 'meandering' (not always a fatal flaw- in this case I would class it more as 'slightly confusing' than anything else). This work isn't wildly incohesive but it would benefit from a stronger through-line. At times this is less of an examination of the Prophet Muhammad (saw), and more of an attempt to (re)define the masculinity of the American Muslim Man. We can even say that this entire book is geared to an audience of the straight Muslim man. Nonetheless, I was able to take away quite a bit from the more Seerah-focused portions, particularly the first half.
The reason for the rating: the first red flag which immediately jumped out to me was the section where the author described instances of marital r*pe & abuse (the latter word is used, the former only alluded to). The text goes on to discuss empathy. Of course we know very well that r*pe is about power. 'Power' is not a word the author is shy to use, it longforms discussions of ayaat from the Quran regarding that very concept, but in this case the P-word would have required bringing up the underlying power structure- say it with me, patriarchy- which maybe was not what the author desired to get into. No maybe about it, really, because a discussion of patriarchy would have explicitly clashed with the book's two-page conclusion. In it, the author speaks to the deterioration of the family & points to the increased use of daycares and nursing homes as solid proof of concept. The expansion of both is more accurately described a direct result of women entering the workforce, which did not collapse The FamilyTM so much as it collapsed the specific economic structure which relied on an unpaid laborer maintaining the household tasks to function (whereas most working class households nowadays require two incomes to stay afloat). The patriarchal mode by which said unpaid labor was procured (marriage between an advantaged husband and a reliant wife) is ignored in this book because, again, an attempt is being made to define Muslim masculinity. So the vulnerability of women in the family home in question is not so relevant to that thesis, except as it calls upon already-empowered husbands to increase themselves in empathy & emotional intelligence.
And all that is probably why Hannah Arendt's (Hegelian) work isn't cited though her ideas are present, and why there is a delightful though inappropriate Dostoevsky reference used ("If there is no God, everything is permitted" is the philosophy of Ivan Karamazov from The Brothers Karamazov, and it's one the text always treats as ridiculous, because Dostoevsky was actively arguing for a return to Orthodox Christianity in that book even while attempting to grapple with the newly emerging masculinity/national character of a late 1800's Russia).
There's more I could say but that's really my main point in reviewing this work- again, I took quite a bit of beneficial information with it so I do want to maintain that.
The reason for the rating: the first red flag which immediately jumped out to me was the section where the author described instances of marital r*pe & abuse (the latter word is used, the former only alluded to). The text goes on to discuss empathy. Of course we know very well that r*pe is about power. 'Power' is not a word the author is shy to use, it longforms discussions of ayaat from the Quran regarding that very concept, but in this case the P-word would have required bringing up the underlying power structure- say it with me, patriarchy- which maybe was not what the author desired to get into. No maybe about it, really, because a discussion of patriarchy would have explicitly clashed with the book's two-page conclusion. In it, the author speaks to the deterioration of the family & points to the increased use of daycares and nursing homes as solid proof of concept. The expansion of both is more accurately described a direct result of women entering the workforce, which did not collapse The FamilyTM so much as it collapsed the specific economic structure which relied on an unpaid laborer maintaining the household tasks to function (whereas most working class households nowadays require two incomes to stay afloat). The patriarchal mode by which said unpaid labor was procured (marriage between an advantaged husband and a reliant wife) is ignored in this book because, again, an attempt is being made to define Muslim masculinity. So the vulnerability of women in the family home in question is not so relevant to that thesis, except as it calls upon already-empowered husbands to increase themselves in empathy & emotional intelligence.
And all that is probably why Hannah Arendt's (Hegelian) work isn't cited though her ideas are present, and why there is a delightful though inappropriate Dostoevsky reference used ("If there is no God, everything is permitted" is the philosophy of Ivan Karamazov from The Brothers Karamazov, and it's one the text always treats as ridiculous, because Dostoevsky was actively arguing for a return to Orthodox Christianity in that book even while attempting to grapple with the newly emerging masculinity/national character of a late 1800's Russia).
There's more I could say but that's really my main point in reviewing this work- again, I took quite a bit of beneficial information with it so I do want to maintain that.