新教佛教与“影响”:一个概念的时间性

A. Abeysekara
{"title":"新教佛教与“影响”:一个概念的时间性","authors":"A. Abeysekara","doi":"10.1215/10418385-7522565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Critiques of the concept of \"Protestant Buddhism\" claim to tell a different story about the relation between religion and modernity (\"Protestantism\") in South Asia. They seek to reconstruct the temporal relation between the past and the present, contesting postcolonial conceptions of history, time, and religious practice. This story of temporality is staked on the question of \"influence,\" which has a genealogy that includes not just colonial, missionary, liberal politics but also contemporary legal-political questions about foreign influence on democracy and sovereignty. This article argues that preoccupation with influence inscribes an a priori ontology that already separates the past from the present. This makes it difficult to understand the relation between temporality and a form of life in a discursive tradition, as the question of influence grounds the ostensive plurality of religions in some preexisting ontological difference. Once religion as such is understood as an object of influence, the temporality of the form, which is encountered within power—that is, the formations of particular sensibilities and dispositions within the coherence of a tradition—is rendered marginal if not irrelevant to the embodied life of religion. The article calls for renewed attention to the temporality of sensibilities to think about the temporality of a form of life within the limits of a tradition.","PeriodicalId":232457,"journal":{"name":"Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Protestant Buddhism and \\\"Influence\\\": The Temporality of a Concept\",\"authors\":\"A. Abeysekara\",\"doi\":\"10.1215/10418385-7522565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract:Critiques of the concept of \\\"Protestant Buddhism\\\" claim to tell a different story about the relation between religion and modernity (\\\"Protestantism\\\") in South Asia. They seek to reconstruct the temporal relation between the past and the present, contesting postcolonial conceptions of history, time, and religious practice. This story of temporality is staked on the question of \\\"influence,\\\" which has a genealogy that includes not just colonial, missionary, liberal politics but also contemporary legal-political questions about foreign influence on democracy and sovereignty. This article argues that preoccupation with influence inscribes an a priori ontology that already separates the past from the present. This makes it difficult to understand the relation between temporality and a form of life in a discursive tradition, as the question of influence grounds the ostensive plurality of religions in some preexisting ontological difference. Once religion as such is understood as an object of influence, the temporality of the form, which is encountered within power—that is, the formations of particular sensibilities and dispositions within the coherence of a tradition—is rendered marginal if not irrelevant to the embodied life of religion. The article calls for renewed attention to the temporality of sensibilities to think about the temporality of a form of life within the limits of a tradition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":232457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1215/10418385-7522565\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qui Parle: Critical Humanities and Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/10418385-7522565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

摘要:对“新教佛教”概念的批评,声称讲述了南亚宗教与现代性(“新教”)之间关系的不同故事。他们试图重建过去和现在之间的时间关系,挑战后殖民时期的历史、时间和宗教实践概念。这个关于时间性的故事是建立在“影响”的问题上的,这个问题的谱系不仅包括殖民、传教士、自由政治,还包括当代关于外国对民主和主权的影响的法律政治问题。本文认为,对影响的关注体现了一种先验的本体论,这种本体论已经将过去与现在分开了。这使得我们很难理解在话语传统中,时间性和一种生活形式之间的关系,因为影响的问题将宗教的显性多元性建立在一些预先存在的本体论差异之上。一旦宗教被理解为一个受影响的对象,在权力中遇到的形式的暂时性——也就是说,在传统的连贯性中形成的特殊情感和性格——即使不是与宗教的具体化生活无关,也会被边缘化。这篇文章呼吁重新关注情感的暂时性,在传统的限制下思考一种生活形式的暂时性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Protestant Buddhism and "Influence": The Temporality of a Concept
Abstract:Critiques of the concept of "Protestant Buddhism" claim to tell a different story about the relation between religion and modernity ("Protestantism") in South Asia. They seek to reconstruct the temporal relation between the past and the present, contesting postcolonial conceptions of history, time, and religious practice. This story of temporality is staked on the question of "influence," which has a genealogy that includes not just colonial, missionary, liberal politics but also contemporary legal-political questions about foreign influence on democracy and sovereignty. This article argues that preoccupation with influence inscribes an a priori ontology that already separates the past from the present. This makes it difficult to understand the relation between temporality and a form of life in a discursive tradition, as the question of influence grounds the ostensive plurality of religions in some preexisting ontological difference. Once religion as such is understood as an object of influence, the temporality of the form, which is encountered within power—that is, the formations of particular sensibilities and dispositions within the coherence of a tradition—is rendered marginal if not irrelevant to the embodied life of religion. The article calls for renewed attention to the temporality of sensibilities to think about the temporality of a form of life within the limits of a tradition.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Dispossession and Totality Beyond Desire An Afropessimist, Antidisciplinary Rejoinder to History, Its Human, and Its Anti-Blackness Deconstruction and Anastasis Nancy's Prophetic Voice
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1