JOURNAL OF RELIGION最新文献_第4页

:Thou Art the Man: The Masculinity of David in the Christian and Jewish Middle Ages ：你就是那个人：大卫在基督教和犹太中世纪的男子气概

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI: 10.1086/723707

J. Murray

引用次数: 2

:On Not Dying: Secular Immortality in the Age of Technoscience ：论不死：技术科学时代的世俗不朽

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI: 10.1086/723709

Sara-Jo Swiatek

引用次数: 6

:Thinking Nature and the Nature of Thinking: From Eriugena to Emerson ：思维的本质与思维的本质——从埃留格纳到爱默生

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI: 10.1086/723775

Thomas A. Carlson

引用次数: 0

:Coping with Defeat: Sunni Islam, Roman Catholicism, and the Modern State 《面对失败:逊尼派伊斯兰教、罗马天主教和现代国家》

3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI: 10.1086/723713

Iza Hussin

引用次数: 0

:Blood Theology: Seeing Red in Body- and God-Talk 血神学:在身体和神的话语中看到红色

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-04-01 DOI: 10.1086/723712

C. Bynum

引用次数: 2

Profound Meanings and Dubious Buddhas: Reading the Tantric Polemics of Early Fifteenth-Century Tibet 深刻的意义和可疑的佛像:阅读十五世纪早期西藏的密宗论战

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1086/722581

R. Dachille

{"title":"Profound Meanings and Dubious Buddhas: Reading the Tantric Polemics of Early Fifteenth-Century Tibet","authors":"R. Dachille","doi":"10.1086/722581","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722581","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers what it means to take Buddhist authors “seriously” by critically investigating the choices available to Buddhologists interpreting tantric polemics. This genre fuses conventions of philosophical debate and of tantric commentary, presenting a rich array of issues of interpretation and practice, along with broader philosophical questions. In Tibet, it is common for centuries to pass before a reply to a critique is issued, often raising one simple question for scholars: Why now? Scholars of tantric polemics therefore negotiate between choices to abstract or to contextualize these arguments, as well as between interpretive dispositions of good faith and the hermeneutics of suspicion. The Sakyapa monk Ngor chen Kun dga’ bzang po composed a text and commentary on Overcoming Objections to the Three Tantras in 1406 in response to a charge that threatened the foundations of his tradition’s approach to both sutra and tantra. The problematic claim is that the Hevajra Tantra embraces the philosophy of Cittamātra. The article evaluates the undesirable consequences that would result if his opponent’s claims were valid, with particular attention to Ngor chen’s use of contradiction, absurdity, and the tendency to “get personal.” I explore the role of one opponent, Red mda ba’ (Gzhon nu blo gros), and the challenges he poses: the cross-contamination of lineages and inconsistency in interpretive stance. Through this analysis of Ngor chen’s approach in Overcoming Objections to the Three Tantras, I demonstrate how tantric polemical texts demand tempering “pure philosophical questions” with concerns with human and institutional relationships, ritual, and exegesis.","PeriodicalId":45199,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45562949","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Polemical Paths: Tsongkhapa and Taktsang on Yogic Perception 论战之路:宗喀巴与扎克曾的瑜伽觉知

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1086/722542

J. Forman

{"title":"Polemical Paths: Tsongkhapa and Taktsang on Yogic Perception","authors":"J. Forman","doi":"10.1086/722542","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722542","url":null,"abstract":"Tibetan Buddhist polemics are often perceived as a type of hairsplitting or logic chopping, where defeating one’s opponent is more highly prized than arriving at truth. This assumes that Tibetan polemicists are obsessed with inconsequential minutiae and invested in nitpicking, trite attempts at self-aggrandizement. This article seeks to undermine the notion of Tibetan polemics as mere quibbling, arguing that what appears to be competitive carping in fact involves high stakes. Each Tibetan Buddhist philosophical system is constituted by tightly imbricated tenets, which not only are deeply interconnected with each other but individually comprise a microcosm of that system’s broader philosophical view. Inconsistencies between two systems’ seemingly subsidiary tenets thus demarcate proxy battles indicating larger conflicts over each system’s total cogency. To explore this point, I investigate one “polemic” initiated by Taktsang Lotsāwa (1405–77) against the Gelug school concerning yogic perception and where it occurs along the adherent’s spiritual progression. Although this point seems trivial at first blush, a deeper analysis reveals that it is central to Taktsang’s entire philosophy. Taktsang is invoking a wider philosophical framework in which reality transcends appearances. Impermanence entails appearances, and so cannot be an object of yogic perception, which necessarily perceives reality. Tsongkhapa, on the other hand, argues that reality remains accessible to appearances, and so yogic perception can realize impermanence. In this small debate, much larger stakes become clear—the very connection between appearances and reality, a cornerstone issue of both ontology and epistemology.","PeriodicalId":45199,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47804436","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Response: Polemics? Who Cares!? 响应:争论?谁在乎?

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1086/722596

Constance Kassor

{"title":"Response: Polemics? Who Cares!?","authors":"Constance Kassor","doi":"10.1086/722596","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722596","url":null,"abstract":"This is a reflective response to the articles in this special issue, “Tibetan Polemics as Genre.” It argues that just as we might use polemics as way to think through Tibetan texts, we can use these texts as a way to think through the scholar’s use of polemics. The response illustrates that by paying close attention to a debate between Go rams pa (1429–89) and Tsong kha pa (1357–1419), the scholar gains a greater sensitivity to perspective, both to the multiple perspectives Tibetan authors are seeking to address and that they themselves inhabit and to the scholar’s own perspective and the decision to approach a work as polemical. This call for perspectivalism reveals that the question of whether a work is polemical is ill-formed and flat-footed. Rather, the genre of polemics is simply one hermeneutic tool that allows for a particular type of interpretation. It would be foolish to assume the utility of this lens affords some ultimate claim about the text itself or that no other interpretation is necessary. Polemics denotes a useful tool but never the be-all and end-all of the text as a whole. These concluding thoughts offer helpful advice for how to nuance the study of polemics successfully without having to jettison the category.","PeriodicalId":45199,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41996874","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Enough with Polemics! Against Polemical Reductionism Polemics够了！反对波兰还原主义

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1086/722752

Pierre Harter

{"title":"Enough with Polemics! Against Polemical Reductionism","authors":"Pierre Harter","doi":"10.1086/722752","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1086/722752","url":null,"abstract":"This article engages in a critical reflection on the concept of polemics, questioning its dominance as an interpretative category in the fields of Buddhist, Tibetan, and religious studies more broadly. It argues that we ought to rehabilitate the concept of argument or debate as a central presupposition of the philosophical approach and that interpretations are impeded by reducing all critical engagement of others’ ideas and texts to polemical intents. The article proceeds with a theoretical part intended to motivate a distinction between polemics and debate or an antagonistic and an agonistic practice of engagement with others, and a practical application of the distinction. The theoretical development proposes both a conceptual distinction between these two practices, illustrated historically by different texts from Western and South Asian literatures, and a genealogical interpretation of the polemical reductionism that relates a certain social science approach to the treatment of truth and power as found in the works of Michel Foucault. The next part takes the specific example of the debate between two Tibetan authors, Mi pham (1846–1912) and Brag dkar sprul sku (1866–1928), to show the interpretative gain made by maintaining this distinction. In conclusion, the article offers a further argument for maintaining this distinction from the disciplinary point of view according to which the overuse of the category of polemics has potentially reduced the philosophical appeal of Buddhist and Tibetan texts to a wider audience of philosophers.","PeriodicalId":45199,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF RELIGION","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43715450","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

What Time Is Right View? Monks, Revolutionaries, and Straw Men at the End of History 什么时候是正见?历史终结中的僧侣、革命者和稻草人

IF 0.3 3区哲学

JOURNAL OF RELIGION Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI: 10.1086/722621

M. King

引用次数: 0