一本介紹Rashid Rida思想與對基督教觀點的書。
Despite growing academic interest in the field of modern Islamic thought, many works of the most prominent Muslim thinkers of the nineteenth and twentieth century have still not been made available in European languages. Nor have scholars generally been concerned with detailed analyses of the actual contents of these works. Thus, while quite a lot has been done on the social and political context of modern Islamic thought, many of the ideas in fact propounded by modern Muslim intellectuals have so far been examined only in fairly superficial fashion. Simon Wood's new book, Christian Criticisms, Islamic Proofs addresses these shortcomings of the field by providing a translation, as well as a detailed analysis of a long neglected work of one of the most prominent Muslim thinkers of the early twentieth century.
Based on Wood's 2004 Ph.D. dissertation at Temple University, under the supervision of Mahmoud Ayoub, Christian Criticisms, Islamic Proofs is a translation and analysis of a collection of sixteen essays by Rashīd Riḍā, in defense of Islam against Christian missionary and secularist criticisms. Originally published individually (between 1901 and 1903) in Riḍā's Majallat al-Manār, the essays were written in response to several publications, including, first and foremost, Niqūlā Ghibrīl's Abḥāth al-mujtahidīn, as well as a number of articles from the Protestant missionary magazines Bashāʾir al-salām and Rāyat Ṣahyūn. The last three essays were in reaction to a series of articles published in Faraḥ Anṭūn's secularist-humanist journal al-Jāmiʿa. In 1905 Riḍā decided to collect the sixteen essays and publish them in a separate book, titled Shubuhāt al-naṣārā wa ḥujjaj al-islām (second and third editions of which appeared after Riḍā's death, in 1947 and 1956 respectively). Although primarily intended to address specific criticisms of Islam made in these missionary and secularist works, the essays allowed Riḍā to embark upon wider discussions of the nature of religion, revelation and scripture, the relationship between Islam and other religions, as well as the significance of religious and political authority in both Islam and Christianity.
In his introduction Riḍā explains that he does not so much fear that attacks on Islam will cause Muslims to convert to Christianity.Rather he fears that they will cause Muslims to doubt religion altogether (p. 69). It is for this reason he felt the duty to reply to statements such as that Islam is essentially inferior to Christianity, that it is a fundamentally irrational religion, that the Qurʾān is inconsistent and confused, that Muslims do not follow the Qurʾānic injunction of believing in the Torah and Gospel, that Islam will only be able to challenge the West if Muslims separate religious from political authority, and so on. Riḍā responds to each individual point of criticism at length, at times quite originally and unapologetically, at other times less so.
One of the first things that strike the reader is, of course, Riḍā's uneven juxtaposition of ‘the spurious arguments of the Christians’ against ‘the proofs of Islam’ in the title. Riḍā explains that he deliberately did not choose to compare the two religions, nor the two communities, but rather the arguments put forth by some Christians (who do not necessarily represent the essence of Christianity), with what he regards as the ideal of Islam (which, in its turn, was not necessarily represented by many of Riḍā's fellow Muslims). Riḍā's word-play on shubuhāt is also noteworthy, i.e. ‘spurious arguments’ that induce ‘doubts’ in Muslim minds (cf. P. 31f.).
Riḍā compares the scriptures of Judaism, Christianity and Islam respectively, meticulously laying out the traditional Muslim case for the corruption of the Torah and the Gospels. He also explains the development of the three religions in terms of a human-being's life-cycle, representing the stages of childhood, adolescence and adulthood respectively.
Moreover, he compares Christianity and Islam in terms of what he sets out as the three goals of religion, namely (i) ‘the confirmation of the beliefs through which reason may be perfected’, (ii) ‘the cultivation of the morals that perfect the souls’, and (iii) ‘the perfection of acts upon which welfare and benefit depend and that perfect the body’ (p. 87). Riḍā emphasizes the essential irrationality of Christian doctrine, as well as its ‘exaggeration’ in terms of moral teachings. According to Riḍā, precepts such as ‘love your enemies’ and ‘pray for those who persecute you’ are not only humiliating, but ask of humans something that they are essentially incapable of. In contrast to Christianity's irrationality Riḍā stresses Islam as the ‘religion of reason’. He also elaborates at length on the indivisibility of the religious and political spheres in Islam, arguing that ‘civil authority in Islam derives from the religion, or that civil authority is religious authority’ (p. 199). A separation of the two, as in the case of Christian Europe, would lead to a further weakening of Islam.
Apart from providing a translation of the text of the sixteen essays, Wood also offers his readers a thoughtful examination of some of the most pertinent issues emerging from what Riḍā has to say. He focuses in particular on the question of Muslim–Christian relations, as well as the various ways in which Muslim thinkers have engaged ‘modernity’(although Wood never actually defines the term).
Ch. 1 provides a summary outline of both classical and modern Muslim discourses on Christianity. This is followed by a discussion of the specific historical context in which Riḍā's work has to be understood in Ch. 2. Ch. 3 is devoted to a more in-depth analysis of Riḍā's view of Christianity in the Shubuhāt (with a particularly interesting discussion of the concept of dīn al-fiṭra), while Ch. 4 confronts the question of whether or not one can rightfully label Riḍā a ‘fundamentalist’.
Wood nicely deconstructs the concept of ‘fundamentalism’ and argues that Riḍā should much rather be characterized as a ‘modernist’. However, in his discussion of ‘fundamentalism’ Wood does not address an important point. It is the case that those usually described as ‘fundamentalist’ generally hold that Islam should take a key place in the political arena. That is to say, much of what used to be labelled ‘fundamentalist’ in fact falls under the category of what is now more often called ‘political Islam’ or ‘Islamism’. Riḍā certainly believed that Islam required to be expressed in political terms, and it is in this regard that he took ʿAbduh's thought in a much more political direction.
The problem we are faced with when discussing much of modern Islamic thought is one of both taxonomy and semantics, it seems. There is still no agreement on the definition of categories such as ‘salafī’, ‘modernist’, ‘Islamist’ and the like, nor is there agreement on which thinkers should be placed in what category. Wood rightly points to a ‘degree of confusion’ (p. 21), and his examination could certainly serve as a much-needed basis for renewed discussion of the matter.
Wood's translation is first-rate. However, choosing ‘fidelity rather than domestication’ (p. 66) has on occasion resulted in overly literal renditions of the original, which can give the text a somewhat cumbersome feel. In addition, some passages that are easily understood by Islamic studies specialists or those with knowledge of Arabic, might prove difficult for the lay reader. These could have called for more annotation in the footnotes, which are otherwise excellent, as is Wood's bibliography.
Overall, Christian Critisims, Islamic Proofs is an invaluable addition to the study of modern Islamic thought. It should be recommended to anyone who wants to learn more about what a key figure of early twentieth century Muslim reform thought of Christianity, Christian–Muslim relations, and the place of religion in the political sphere.
http://jis.oxfordjournals.org/content/20/1/100.full
.jpg)
没有评论:
发表评论