Phallogocentrism, Global Entanglements and Comparison in the Study of Religion

IF 0.3 0 RELIGION
G. Maltese
{"title":"Phallogocentrism, Global Entanglements and Comparison in the Study of Religion","authors":"G. Maltese","doi":"10.30965/23642807-bja10081","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nAlong with the critique of generic terms, such as religion or mysticism, regarded as Western-centric, comparison in religious studies has been faulted for reinforcing Western dominance over the rest of the world. Global Religious History claims to constructively address these charges by focusing on global entanglements. On closer inspection, however, if the latter are theorized at all, an astounding exclusion comes to the fore: the omission of gender as category of knowledge. Engaging this phallogocentrism in Global Religious History, this article calls for a conceptualization of global entanglements that takes this omission seriously. As a case study, I use a tract published serially in a Singapore-based Islamic missionary journal (1938–1941), to argue that a revised conceptualization of global entanglements can help to uncover the contributions of non-hegemonic subjects to contemporary discourses on religion, mysticism, Islam, and Sufism, as well as to the comparative study of religion.","PeriodicalId":53191,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Journal for Religion and Transformation in Contemporary Society","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interdisciplinary Journal for Religion and Transformation in Contemporary Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30965/23642807-bja10081","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Along with the critique of generic terms, such as religion or mysticism, regarded as Western-centric, comparison in religious studies has been faulted for reinforcing Western dominance over the rest of the world. Global Religious History claims to constructively address these charges by focusing on global entanglements. On closer inspection, however, if the latter are theorized at all, an astounding exclusion comes to the fore: the omission of gender as category of knowledge. Engaging this phallogocentrism in Global Religious History, this article calls for a conceptualization of global entanglements that takes this omission seriously. As a case study, I use a tract published serially in a Singapore-based Islamic missionary journal (1938–1941), to argue that a revised conceptualization of global entanglements can help to uncover the contributions of non-hegemonic subjects to contemporary discourses on religion, mysticism, Islam, and Sufism, as well as to the comparative study of religion.
宗教研究中的生殖器中心主义、全球纠葛与比较
随着对通用术语(如宗教或神秘主义)的批判,被视为以西方为中心,宗教研究中的比较被指责为加强了西方对世界其他地区的主导地位。《全球宗教史》声称通过关注全球的纠葛,建设性地解决了这些指控。然而,如果对后者进行更仔细的考察,就会发现一个令人震惊的排除:性别作为知识范畴的遗漏。这篇文章在全球宗教史中探讨了这种生殖器中心主义,呼吁对全球纠缠进行概念化,认真对待这种遗漏。作为一个案例研究,我使用了一份新加坡伊斯兰教传教士杂志(1938-1941)连续发表的小册子,来论证全球纠缠的修订概念化可以帮助揭示非霸权主体对当代宗教、神秘主义、伊斯兰教和苏菲主义话语的贡献,以及对宗教比较研究的贡献。
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
0.00%
发文量
16
×
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