Between Preaching and Judging: the Muslim Brotherhood and the Predicament of takfīr (1960s–1980s)

IF 0.3 2区 哲学 0 RELIGION
S. Elsässer
{"title":"Between Preaching and Judging: the Muslim Brotherhood and the Predicament of takfīr (1960s–1980s)","authors":"S. Elsässer","doi":"10.1163/15685195-bja10044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nBoth as a slogan and a book, “Preachers, not Judges” has long dominated academic narratives about the Muslim Brotherhood’s turn towards ‘moderation’ in the 1970s and 1980s. However, upon examination, several commonplace assumptions about “Preachers, not Judges” do not hold. Firstly, the Muslim Brotherhood never renounced takfīr as a basic doctrine. It only debated different ways of implementing this doctrine in practice. Secondly, “Preachers, not Judges” was much less clear and authoritative as a doctrinal statement than often assumed. It is better understood as a tactical manoeuvre aimed at avoiding splits within the movement. Based primarily on a new and comprehensive survey of contemporary sources from the 1970s, this article will propose a revised understanding of Muslim Brotherhood discourse on preaching, judging, and the doctrine of takfīr that remains relevant until the present day.","PeriodicalId":55965,"journal":{"name":"Islamic Law and Society","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Islamic Law and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685195-bja10044","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Both as a slogan and a book, “Preachers, not Judges” has long dominated academic narratives about the Muslim Brotherhood’s turn towards ‘moderation’ in the 1970s and 1980s. However, upon examination, several commonplace assumptions about “Preachers, not Judges” do not hold. Firstly, the Muslim Brotherhood never renounced takfīr as a basic doctrine. It only debated different ways of implementing this doctrine in practice. Secondly, “Preachers, not Judges” was much less clear and authoritative as a doctrinal statement than often assumed. It is better understood as a tactical manoeuvre aimed at avoiding splits within the movement. Based primarily on a new and comprehensive survey of contemporary sources from the 1970s, this article will propose a revised understanding of Muslim Brotherhood discourse on preaching, judging, and the doctrine of takfīr that remains relevant until the present day.
在传教与审判之间:穆斯林兄弟会与塔克法尔的困境(20世纪60年代至80年代)
“传教士,而不是法官”作为口号和一本书,长期以来一直主导着关于穆斯林兄弟会在20世纪70年代和80年代转向“温和”的学术叙述。然而,经过审查,关于“传道者,而不是法官”的几个常见假设并不成立。首先,穆斯林兄弟会从未放弃伊斯兰教这一基本教义。它只是讨论了在实践中实施这一原则的不同方式。第二,“传道者,而不是法官”作为一种教义陈述,远不如人们通常认为的那样清晰和权威。更好的理解是,这是一种旨在避免运动内部分裂的战术操作。本文主要基于对20世纪70年代以来当代资料的一项新的全面调查,将提出对穆斯林兄弟会关于讲道、审判和takf教义的话语的修订理解,这些话语直到今天仍然具有相关性。
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
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: Islamic Law and Society provides a forum for research in the field of classical and modern Islamic law, in Muslim and non-Muslim countries. Celebrating its sixteenth birthday in 2009, Islamic Law and Society has established itself as an invaluable resource for the subject both in the private collections of scholars and practitioners as well as in the major research libraries of the world. Islamic Law and Society encourages discussion on all branches of Islamic law, with a view to promoting an understanding of Islamic law, in both theory and practice, from its emergence until modern times and from juridical, historical and social-scientific perspectives. Islamic Law and Society offers you an easy way to stay on top of your discipline.
×
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