Cultivating Feminist Hermeneutics As The Interpretation Of Al-Qur'an: A Comparative Study Between Asghar Ali Engineer And Muhammad Al-Ghazali

Haidar Masyhur Fadhil
{"title":"Cultivating Feminist Hermeneutics As The Interpretation Of Al-Qur'an: A Comparative Study Between Asghar Ali Engineer And Muhammad Al-Ghazali","authors":"Haidar Masyhur Fadhil","doi":"10.18592/jiiu.v22i1.10587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the ideas and thoughts of Asghar Ali Engineer and Muhammad al-Ghazali, especially regarding the reconstruction of their tafsir methodology related to gender verses and the application and theoretical implications of the method they built. As fighters for liberation theology and fighters for women's rights, both figures try to defend women by interpreting al-Qur’an based on gender equality and trying to criticize the interpretation of classical scholars who are atomistic. This article is a comparative study based on the works of Asghar Ali Engineer and Muhammad al-Ghazali. At the same time, the approach taken is using descriptive-analytical. In this study, at least I found that Asghar Ali Engineer uses three essential methods: historical, sociological-anthropological, and philosophical. On the other hand, al-Ghazali uses a more traditionalist-progressive approach: Reading text and reality, contextualizing the meaning of the text further, and separating dynamic verses from static verses. Furthermore, applying feminist hermeneutics to the verses of al-Qur’an carried out by the two figures strongly opposes discrimination and injustice against women.","PeriodicalId":32673,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Ushuluddin","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Ushuluddin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18592/jiiu.v22i1.10587","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines the ideas and thoughts of Asghar Ali Engineer and Muhammad al-Ghazali, especially regarding the reconstruction of their tafsir methodology related to gender verses and the application and theoretical implications of the method they built. As fighters for liberation theology and fighters for women's rights, both figures try to defend women by interpreting al-Qur’an based on gender equality and trying to criticize the interpretation of classical scholars who are atomistic. This article is a comparative study based on the works of Asghar Ali Engineer and Muhammad al-Ghazali. At the same time, the approach taken is using descriptive-analytical. In this study, at least I found that Asghar Ali Engineer uses three essential methods: historical, sociological-anthropological, and philosophical. On the other hand, al-Ghazali uses a more traditionalist-progressive approach: Reading text and reality, contextualizing the meaning of the text further, and separating dynamic verses from static verses. Furthermore, applying feminist hermeneutics to the verses of al-Qur’an carried out by the two figures strongly opposes discrimination and injustice against women.
培养女性主义解释学对《古兰经》的解释——阿斯哈尔·阿里·Engineer与穆罕默德·阿扎里的比较研究
本文考察了阿斯加尔·阿里·安吉格尔和穆罕默德·艾尔·加扎利的观点和思想,特别是关于他们关于性别诗歌的工作方法的重建以及他们所建立的方法的应用和理论意义。作为解放神学的斗士和女权的斗士,两位人物都试图通过基于性别平等的解读《古兰经》来捍卫女性,并试图批评古典学者的原子论解读。本文以阿斯哈尔·阿里·工程师和穆罕默德·阿扎里的作品为基础进行比较研究。同时,所采取的方法是使用描述性分析。在这项研究中,至少我发现Asghar Ali Engineer使用了三种基本方法:历史、社会学-人类学和哲学。另一方面,al-Ghazali使用了一种更传统的进步方法:阅读文本和现实,进一步将文本的意义置于语境中,并将动态经文与静态经文分开。此外,将女性主义解释学应用于两位人物所进行的《古兰经》经文,强烈反对对妇女的歧视和不公正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信