-vive2ladifference

Rory chose Yale over Harvard in Gilmore Girls, so it has that going for it.

Islamic studies, anyone? My main interests are in the Indo-Persian tradition, Shi'ism, mysticism and the intersections between the three in history.

As someone finishing up an MTS right now, and planning on studying American Religious History at the PhD level, I wanted to throw my two cents in about the worth of an MTS versus a focused MA, or say, the MARc at Yale.  
 
As has been stated above, the MTS is a broad degree.  It is the generalist, entry level masters degree for the study of religion. It is a foundational degree for the further academic study of religion.  You can get into an MTS program with a B.S. in Biology, because the MTS is meant for students who don't necessarily have a BA in Religious Studies or Christian Minister or Bible or Theology.  
 
At the same time, I would argue that this type of degree can be very useful for someone who does have a bachelors degree in religion.  The undergraduate religion degree is just that, undergraduate.  Undergrad religion degrees are typically broad, but they don't typically attend to the subject matter with the same type of rigor as the MTS, nor do they often promote the same type of critical thinking skills that a top tier MTS program does.  

Furthermore, there is something to be said about having a good foundation in all areas of the academic study of religion if you plan on attaining the PhD in Religion in some specific field.  For example, the historian of religion will have a much better grasp of what is going on historically if they have a good grasp of theology, and even better, if they have actually done theology themselves in an academic program.  Likewise, a sociologist studying religious groups will have a better grasp of what is going on in a Christian group if they understand the bible, and if they've undertaken their own study of the bible at some point in their training.  The MA, on the other hand, being all history or all theology or all biblical studies, etc., just doesn't prepare you broadly like the MTS can.  That is why, more and more, the standard in many schools is multiple M* degrees before moving on to the PhD.  There is just too damn much to learn about religion to get it all done in one degree, even if it happens to be a three year MDiv, for example. 

As far as class sizes and Vandy, the MDiv required courses (Hebrew Bible, New Testament, Formation of Christian Traditions, Reformation, American Religious History) can be quite large.  As soon as you step out of those five classes, however, you walk into seminar courses with 4-12 people in them.  
 
Finally, I think there is something to be said about theologically conservative folks studying at a "liberal" place like Vanderbilt.  Many, if not most of the students at Vanderbilt are more conservative than their professors.  But what you get at Vanderbilt, that you won't get at a Fuller or a Dallas, is FULL academic freedom.  When you take a class on the Hebrew Bible at a "liberal" Div school, you won't have the professor pulling punches about whether or not all of the historical and archeological evidence supports the claim that the Hebrews were slaves in Egypt (hint: pretty much no evidence whatsoever, and plenty of evidence to the contrary).  Likewise, you won't have professors pulling punches when dealing with errors of geography, history, science, logic, theology, etc. in the New Testament text.  People are free to actually look at the evidence and make their own decisions and not be branded a heretic for following where it leads.  That, too me, seems much more Christian than the approach of some of the avowedly conservative Christian seminaries, IMHO. 

Really? Do you have stats for that?

I'm going to have to disagree. Tasfir (Qur'anic exegesis) was literally, the first field of Islamic Studies. The corpus of literature on the Qur'an is voluminous and perhaps only second to fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). Tafsir is also not a field one can just enter - advanced knowledge of classical Arabic, the Torah as well as the hadith corpus is also necessary. This field is also very popular among Islamic Studies students coming from the Middle East, who have had a lot of prior exposure to these topics, thus making it more competitive. However, if you want to do original exegesis of the Qur'an, hermeneutical approaches using Queer and Feminist theory are hugely under developed areas where there is a lot of interest but not enough serious scholars. Of course, that area is also very contentious so you would really have to be committed to that approach and unphased by extreme criticism (e.g. just look at what Amina Wudud has gone through).

Just wanted to say that a lot of your interests don't even fall within the realm of IR, these are all pretty much comparative politics or could fall within history if you take a more qualitative and longitudinal approach to them:
 
Minorities in the Middle East (women, Kurds, gays, Jews, Turks, Shia Muslims, Yazidis, etc.) Development & evolution of gender, religion, culture, and nationalism Kurdish independence movements, nation-state debates regarding Iraq

Thanks for your thoughts, everyone.
 
Victorydance - This is where my issue comes into play: should I become a Political Scientist or a Historian? I do not know *pulls hair out*
 
OneLove21 - Do you know anything about the importance of studying abroad for admissions? Being a gay white American Zionist, visiting most of the Middle East has not been a safe option for me, so I will have studied abroad in Israel and France, but not any places like Jordan or Morocco. I just really do not want to be penalized for not traveling to places where the people want to kill me...

Tachiyaku - I think you should not be studying any of the liberal arts if you are going to allow political correctness to affect your conclusions.
 
I did not say that all Jews or Arabs can be recognized on sight. Of course not. However, many obviously can be. I reject your notion that I have "disdain" for people just because I point out facts. Most of the time you can tell a person has African ancestry is black because of their skin tone. Most of the time you can tell a guy is gay by how they dress. Of course, there are many exceptions but exceptions do not mean the general rule of thumb is cast out.
 
Nevertheless, none of what you said actually rebukes any of what I said. Furthermore, it has nothing to do with my original post. If you are going to comment here, I am going to expect you to do one of two things:
post something that attempts to somehow answer my original post OR post something that attempts to somehow respond to one of the claims I make in the succeeding posts  
If you do neither of those things, your post in no way adds to any discussion and I will be left with no choice but to mark down your comment and report it as spam. Thank you and have a nice day.

I'm going to have to disagree. Tasfir (Qur'anic exegesis) was literally, the first field of Islamic Studies. The corpus of literature on the Qur'an is voluminous and perhaps only second to fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence). Tafsir is also not a field one can just enter - advanced knowledge of classical Arabic, the Torah as well as the hadith corpus is also necessary. This field is also very popular among Islamic Studies students coming from the Middle East, who have had a lot of prior exposure to these topics, thus making it more competitive. However, if you want to do original exegesis of the Qur'an, hermeneutical approaches using Queer and Feminist theory are hugely under developed areas where there is a lot of interest but not enough serious scholars. Of course, that area is also very contentious so you would really have to be committed to that approach and unphased by extreme criticism (e.g. just look at what Amina Wudud has gone through).

Asking "big questions" is certainly both appealing and very daunting. A great piece of advice given to me by a professor was to research something very specific, which can speak to broader questions. That is to say, you don't necessarily have to directly answer the big question, but approach it through a different lens, a unique perspective or through the idiosyncracies of a particular historical event or individual. Read the general literature and let your interests and own reflections direct you. Precising your exact method or course of study is something that will be developed during your doctorate. 

Really? Do you have stats for that?

Bluenebraska - Thanks for your opinions. I am not changing my mind about Jordan or Morocco. After all, Morocco was just internationally shamed for arresting a gay man and Jordan regularly arrests gay men too. There is no such thing as a progressive Islamic country, only Islamic countries which are less regressive (especially Turkey and - if they ever gain freedom - Kurdistan).
 
And I am very well aware of Said. I don't think one can read anything about the Middle East and not be aware of the Lewis vs. Said debates. Needless to say, I think Said is a complete disgrace to Western academia and is a complete joke.
 
And just for the record: I have visited the West Bank and will be living/ studying abroad in Jerusalem soon, where I will spend some time visiting Amman, Nazareth, and Ramallah. I do not mind visiting these Islamic countries, my only problem is with living there. As for languages, I am studying English, French, Arabic, and Hebrew.
 
As a gay white American Zionist, I should not be expected to change my lifestyle to visit countries that the West funds with foreign aid. After all, these Muslims do not take off their headscarves or start eating pork when they move to France or the United States. If a particular country is so intolerant of someone for being gay or Jewish, for instance, that particular country should not seriously expect the respect of those people they are demonizing and literally killing. (And btw, if you think gay people cannot be recognized on sight like whites, Jews, or Arabs... have you met many gay men? We sure do stick out - almost as much as lesbians.)

KevinYoungX - I think you should perhaps revise your opinion of places like Jordan and Morocco. Having studied for quite awhile in Jordan, I have a number of friends who are also white American Zionists (and anti-Zionists) who have had no problem living in Jordan. You would, perhaps, be amazed at the safety of Jordan and Morocco. Additionally, you may or may not be aware that Israelis are fully able to travel to Morocco and many do; Morocco never renounced the citizenship of its Jewish population that left for Israel in the 50s-70s. Morocco also has an embassy in Tel Aviv. 
 
As for being gay, yes, this is a problem in much of the Middle East, but it isn't as though someone can look at you and tell that you are either a) gay or a Zionist. You shouldn't have any problems.
 
I would say that, unless your interests are solely in Israeli and Palestinian society (which it sounds like they're not), then you should invest some time in studying abroad in the Arab Middle East. Kurdistan is out of the question, naturally, and unfortunately places like Syria that were popular in years past are now generally off the list. Yet Morocco, Lebanon, Tunisia, Jordan, the Gulf and even Egypt are not out of the question. This would also likely help you expand your list of inspirations, which seem to consist of many Orientalist scholars not well thought of in the Middle East studies academy. Read some Said, for instance. You also definitely need to have a strong foundation of Arabic for jobs inside the academy and out in the policy world, if your focus is on the Arab Middle East and not just the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"these muslims" huh? If you think Jews and Arabs are recognizable on sight then maybe you ought to study computer science or some other discipline where you don't have to talk about actual people - especially those you clearly have such disdain for.

Ratings/prestige are important to a point and all those programs are well-known and prestigious. I think that you should go wherever will give you the best training in your subject of interest---whomever is the strongest in ethics and where there are faculty/resources that can best inform your interests. Focus on getting those strong letters of recommendation from those in your field and network! 
 
A lot of the PhD process is not quantitative: someone can have the right grades, the right GRE, and go to the right schools and not get in anywhere. It's about your proposed research; and given your interests, does the PhD program you're potentially applying to have the faculty to advise you and if so, do they find your research interesting/promising? Start thinking like that and I think you'll be fine wherever you go.  

Almost never a good idea to email a POI this early - they have your application, and they know who you are. They aren't going to speed up the process on your account, and you run the risk of putting yourself in a bad light, seeming pushy. 
 
If it were early April, then sure. But its not even February, so my very best advice is: stop checking GradCafe. It will make you stress more than is necessary.

Asking "big questions" is certainly both appealing and very daunting. A great piece of advice given to me by a professor was to research something very specific, which can speak to broader questions. That is to say, you don't necessarily have to directly answer the big question, but approach it through a different lens, a unique perspective or through the idiosyncracies of a particular historical event or individual. Read the general literature and let your interests and own reflections direct you. Precising your exact method or course of study is something that will be developed during your doctorate. 

Presumably if 104 is the minimum, it's the minimum - that's what is implied with such a term.
 
As far as percentages - are you applying PhD or M*? If PhD, it's about 10% overall but varies across field. MDiv is about 40% (For MDiv, about 75 apply and 30-35 are accepted but packages are structured in such a way that they try to aim for only 12-15 accepting their offer).
 
For your SOP - If PhD, if your personal background ties into your research interests, go for it but go for it carefully. If MDiv, it's more acceptable but still not a green-light for an autobiography.
 
Research interests - PhD students are generally required to develop proficiency in at least one minor/subfield so if you already have an idea of what that might be, go for it. If MDiv - it's more or less icing on the cake. In both cases, the expectation is that you'll grow while in the program so some things will change.

This strikes me as a bit sad and misguided. But we have different ideas of what the function of higher education is, so there's that. 
 
If you are an inerrantist, then, as it was said above, you will not have a good time. Though it's also important to ask what do you consider a top program? I'm also curious: What makes you want to even study at a 'top' school with such views? If you mean the 'usual suspects', you will very likely be surrounded by opposing views, both from your peers and your professors. So, if not to either change or because you love to torture yourself, why go in the first place? And what do you want to do when you're done? If you want to teach at an inerrantist school, you could just as easily stay in the sphere you are already in and 'challenge' yourself in ways that already support your ideology. 

being at harvard, i can say there is a fair handful of M students with 'unrelated' bach. degrees. take a look at hds courses and how they (into 2017) match your interest and keep in mind you can cross enroll to greater harvard community (gsas, etc)
sop should show passion. what you can bring to the table. i see many specific and many broadly interested mts students here. you have a shot , feel free to pm me

Your background is not unrelated. In fact I think you will find you have a much stronger background than many of your fellow students wherever you end up. The fact that you have begun Arabic is a huge plus and one that will very likely help you secure a spot at both schools (generally speaking Islamic Studies tracks are the least applied to in such programs, making admissions a bit lighter). If there is anyone of interest there, you might throw YDS in the mix, only because they traditionally offer good funding. Chicago, as you likely know, is fairly stingy with giving out full rides (most get 50%, I think).
Concerning the SOP, I would be more specific than "Sufism," but not so focused as to pit yourself as only interested in one particular topic. You can be specific, but just make sure you pull back a bit and, best of all, why X program will help you develop aforesaid interests.