*Interview with Talal Asad by Saba Mahmood*
*

http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHR/5-1/text/asad.html
*
*In examining world traditions, theorists of religion have often contrasted
deistic religiosity with a "traditional" sensibility that emphasizes, for
example, correct bodily practices, literal understandings of texts, etc.
Deism, on the other hand, is associated with an abstract understanding of
the idea of divinity, sacred texts, and general principles of a religious
doctrine. Evolutionary models of religious theory associate deism with a
post-Enlightenment conception of religion, of which Post-Reformation
Christianity is considered paradigmatic, and Islam, Hinduism, and certain
forms of Judaism are associated with a literalist understanding of religion.
[4] <http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHR/5-1/text/asad.html#note4> Even if we
reject an evolutionary model of religious development in history, there are
obvious differences in the focus on correct bodily practices in some of
these religious traditions. Given your emphasis on historicizing the concept
of religion, and on the inimical relationship between religious discourse
and bodily practices (particularly in medieval Christianity), what do you
suggest are some ways to engage with this characterization of religious
traditions as deist and/or literalist?*

I think this is a false opposition, because abstract principles and ideas
are also integral to various Islamic, Judaic, and pre-Reformation Christian
traditions. Abstract ideas are relevant not only for theology, they are
important also for programs aiming to teach embodied practices. I talk about
these programs in *Genealogies of Religion.* In this sense abstract ideas
are not opposed to embodied practices. This point applies to the way
Christian virtues are developed in the monastic context, and it applies
equally to the way *nasiha* constitutes an embodied practice, as I try to
show in my book. The point is that, in contemporary Protestant Christianity
(and other religions now modeled on it), it is more important to have the
right *belief* than to carry out specific prescribed practices. It is not
that belief in every sense of the word was irrelevant in the Christian past,
or irrelevant to Islamic tradition. It is that belief has now become a
purely inner, private state of mind, a particular state of mind detached
from everyday practices. But although it is in this sense "internal," belief
has also become the object of systematic discourse, such that the system of
statements about belief is now held to constitute the essence of "religion,"
a construction that makes it possible to compare and evaluate different
"religions." These systematic statements, these texts, are now the real
public form of "religion."

So I think the contrast one should make is between the development of
prescribed moral-religious capabilities, which involve the cultivation of
certain bodily attitudes (including emotions), the disciplined cultivation
of habits, aspirations, desires, on one hand, and on the other hand, a more
abstracted set of belief-statements, "texts" that contain meanings and
define the core of the religion.

*Now, insofar as certain modern forms of religiosity have been identified
with sets of abstracted belief-statements which have barely anything to do
with people's actual lives, you get the curious phenomenon of Christians,
non- Christians, and atheists allegedly believing in or rejecting religion,
but living the same kind of life*. Now, if this is the case, then clearly it
is different from embodied practices of various kinds. I think the important
contrast to bear in mind is the difference between this kind of
intellectualized abstracted system of doctrines that has no direct bearing
on or relationship to forms of embodied practices, and lives that are
organized around gradually learning and perfecting correct moral and
religious practices. *The former kind of religiosity is much more a feature
of modern religion in Europe and, indeed, a part of what religion is defined
to be: a set of belief-statements that makes it possible to compare one
religion to another and to judge the validity--even the sense--of such
abstract statements. This state of affairs is radically opposed to one in
which correct practice is essential to the development of religious virtues
and is itself an essential religious virtue. After all, while you can talk
about certain belief- statements as being credible or non-credible, true or
false, rational or irrational, you can't really talk like that about
embodied practices. Practices aren't statements.* As Austin pointed out in *How
to Do Things with Words,* they are performatives and not constatives. We do
not say of performatives that they are believable or unbelievable. We
inquire, instead, as to whether they are well done or badly done;
effectively done or ineffectively done. So different kinds of questions
arise in these two contexts. That is the opposition one has to bear in mind,
and that is partly what my two chapters on monastic discipline are
about.[5]<http://www.stanford.edu/group/SHR/5-1/text/asad.html#note5>
In Islam, this is what matters, and if Muslims simply argue about whether or
not a particular doctrine is "true Islam," and if the answer to that
question makes no difference to how they learn to live, how they develop
distinctive Islamic virtues, then it makes no difference whether that
doctrine is the same as Christianity or not, because the way in which they *
live* is the same, or pretty much the same. That is the point one has to
bear in mind. The crucial question, it seems to me, is this: Are there
practical rules and principles aimed at developing a distinctive set of
virtues (articulated by *din *[religion]) which relate to how one structures
one's life? That is what I mean by embodied practices.


4. See, e.g., Robert Bellah, *Beyond Belief *(New York: Harper, 1970).

5. Asad, *Genealogies *83-170.


On 3/10/09, Afthab Ellath <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Sreenivas,
>
> Attached introductory chapter from the book *The Aryan Jesus: Christian
> Theologians and the Bible in Nazi Germany,* will be an interesting read to
> understand the "tolerance" of Europian modernity... The religious minorities
> and immigrants are treated in 21st centuray europe, is revealing this
> "tolerance"
>
> Regards
> Afthab
>
>
> On 3/8/09, sreenivas v.p <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>   Hi Afthab,
>>
>> My statement has nothing to do with terrorism or any contemporary
>> phenomenon . In fact I do
>> not think that terrorism has something to do with Islam. And speaking
>> about religion , I do not see a religionless future. The quest for
>> meaning is fundamental to being human. The question, then, is not whether
>> religion is fading, but instead how religion can be more pragmatic and
>> scientific to support life in this planet . The future of religion rests in
>> the above reason . Looking at this perspective , I see hope in
>> only christianity. Other religions including Hinduism and Islam will fade
>> away mainly because people have start recognizing its dogmaitc charactor .
>> Science developed in western countries mainly because of this fact that
>> christianity has become less dogmaitc in charector compared to the times of
>> Galilio . I do not think there is any truth
>> in Damodar's statement that Islam has been secular to scientifc inquiries
>> .
>> On the other hand Islam and Hinuism  has ignored  the developments in
>> science by perpetuting false ideologies.  Later they realized that the
>> existence of their false ideologies require the help of science . This could
>> be one reason why they started claiming that religion has already revealed
>>  what science proved later .
>> Let us not look at what the actions of church was . But christianity with
>> its less dogmatic charactor and liberal values played a major  influence on
>> its people.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --- On *Sat, 7/3/09, Afthab Ellath <[email protected]>* wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Afthab Ellath <[email protected]>
>> Subject: [GreenYouth] Re: March -8
>> To: [email protected]
>> Date: Saturday, 7 March, 2009, 10:06 AM
>>
>>  Sreenivas,
>>
>> Is it the violence that is now associated with Islam and the rise of
>> communalism in India that compelled you to make such a naive statement?
>>
>> But a slight historical inquiry will help you to find that there is a
>> close relationship between the present day political violence and political
>> modernity.  The suicide bomber identified as an irrational attempt to
>> reverse the free-thought and the liberal values is of course is easy and
>> self-serving.. But it has nothing to do with the political reality of the
>> contemporary world... The senseless violence of the suicide bombing is
>> closely related with the violence of modernity rather than Islam...
>>
>> Regards
>> Afthab Ellath
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 6:59 AM, damodar prasad 
>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Western culture is far superior to that of Asia mainly because of the
>>> fact that a liberal form of christianity is  far superior to Hinduism and
>>> Islam .
>>>
>>> For defending globalization, sreenivas , do you think we need to go to
>>> other extreme.
>>>
>>> If you go by historical instances, compared to other religions, it is
>>> Xian-Papal authority which has persecuted thinkers, scientists, stalled
>>> independent inquiries, endorsed colonial-civilizational expansions. Islam,
>>> in this sense, has been secular in its "approach" towards scientific
>>> inquiries. Hinduism as Brahmnism  limited the with democratization of
>>> knowldedge while permitting inquiries within caste order. Thirdly, the
>>> inter-civilizational network and exchange of things material and immaterial
>>> were in place since time immemorial and the idea of "western" is a recent
>>> "western" invention.
>>>   8:08 AM, sreenivas v.p 
>>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Globalization has many positive effects . One of them is that
>>>> Indians now got to know about the western culture and start recognizing
>>>> their individuality . As Hindutva elements say , globalization is 
>>>> destroying
>>>> our culture . But we should be happy that  what is being destroyed is a
>>>> stupid culture . Western culture is far superior to that of Asia mainly
>>>> because of the fact that a liberal form of christianity is  far superior
>>>> to Hinduism and Islam .
>>>> Christianity has become less persecuting , manily due to the work of
>>>> freethinkers who have made dogmatists rather less dogmatic . In some forms
>>>> of liberal christianity , the element of dogma is reduced to a minimum .
>>>> And the western culture has become more sophisticated and pragmatic because
>>>> of this influence .
>>>> sreenivas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- On *Thu, 5/3/09, Venugopalan K M 
>>>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>
>>>> >* wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Venugopalan K M 
>>>> <[email protected]<http://in.mc87.mail.yahoo.com/mc/[email protected]>
>>>> >
>>>> Subject: [GreenYouth] March -8
>>>> To:
>>>> Date: Thursday, 5 March, 2009, 5:17 PM
>>>>
>>>>   Agolavalkaranam in the context of women's rights, just means
>>>> onslaught
>>>> on this beloved country's great Culture!
>>>> Like women daring to visit pubs, daring to defy the dress codes,
>>>> daring to shatter the  values of family and bringing shame to the
>>>> country and the countryMen, so on and so forth.
>>>> While Muthaliks and Modys are there in Karnataka and Gujrat at large
>>>> to fight these evils,  who will fight here?
>>>> Going by the press reports, we find the  local police to the leftist-
>>>> rightist  women/youth/students  organizations to the neighborhood
>>>> fraternity vigilance volunteers arrayed in the great task of defending
>>>> culture. Part of the task of (people) getting opinionated against w
>>>> omen's assertions,  is of course  left to the Fourth Estate together
>>>> with the Samskarika Nayakans and Nayikas of Kerala through rhetoric s
>>>> and imagery  of  globalization destroying  Culture.... especially by
>>>>  w omen shedding their  sense of guilt and shame,  daring to express
>>>> their sexuality in first person, unmindful of the Culture and
>>>> Tradition!
>>>> We find in one report after other ,youths being rounded up by the
>>>> police for no cognizable crime.
>>>> An item appeared in Malayala Manorama daily on the other day. It was a
>>>> report under a sensational caption, about  an incident at Kollam
>>>> railway station. Lacking in many details,esp of the legality of the
>>>> police/railway court's action, the report would mean that two people
>>>> of different sex, unconnected either through  marriage or through
>>>> blood relation, sitting together and talking is an act punishable with
>>>> instant arrest and fine!
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>> Cricket on your mind? Visit the ultimate cricket website. Enter now!
>>>>
>>>> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_cricket_1/*http://beta.cricket.yahoo.com>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> Add more friends to your messenger and enjoy! Invite them now.
>> >>
>>
>> <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_messenger_6/*http://messenger.yahoo.com/invite/>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Afthab Ellath
>



-- 
Regards

Afthab Ellath

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Green Youth Movement" group.
 To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
 For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to