Religious Rituals as Civil hexis
The Case of Modernist Interpretations of Islamic Rituals among Iranian Pre-revolutionary Intellectuals
In: Method & Theory in the Study of ReligionSearch for other papers by Fatima Tofighi in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
In their attempt to question the assumption that rituals are merely symbolic, Talal Asad and Saba Mahmood tried to show that rituals have functioned as instruments. In Asad’s study of medieval Christianity and Mahmood’s work on mosque women, rituals function to make selves. These instrumentalist readings stand outside the usual modernist representational readings. For these anthropologists, the distinction between representational and instrumental understandings of rituals seems to be very clear. Nationalist modernist readings of Islamic rituals seem to confirm the representational logic, which apparently falls entirely outside the instrumental framework. In this paper, I intend to disturb this clear-cut distinction, and demonstrate that in many occasions the instrumental understanding is preceded by a representational interpretation, while the representational may, in turn, help create a civil subject. My evidences come from the Iranian Islamic literature in 1960s and 70s, viz. Mortaza Motahhari, Ali Shariʾati, Mehdi Barzargan, and the authors of Maktab-e Islam monthly. Although some of these intellectuals emphasized the instrumental nature of rituals in making the pious subject, others proposed different rationalizations—medical benefit, collective solidarity and order, and existential meaning. For these thinkers or their audience, there was no clear distinction between these justifications. It is true that many of them had a representational logic; but they contributed to making a proper civil subject. Hence, the instrumental-representational binary cannot always be maintained. Asad’s and Mahmood’s critiques of anthropological readings of rituals have yet to be qualified to take into account the prior interpretations and theological context of religious rituals, to highlight the conflation of the representational and instrumental frameworks in many modern rituals, and to note that deciding on the instrumentality of a particular ritual is not only significant when it is about constructing the interior of the private self, but may be involved in building larger communities.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Abrahamian, Ervand (1982). Iran between Two Revolutions. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
-
Agrama, Hossein Ali (2012). Questioning Secularism: Islam, Sovereignty and the Rule of Law in Modern Egypt. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
-
Akhavi, Shahrough (1980). Religion and Politics in Contemporary Iran. New York: SUNY.
-
Arjomand, Said Amir (1988). The Turban for the Crown. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Asad, Talal (1993). Genealogies of Religion: Discipline and Reasons of Power in Christianity and Islam. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
-
Bahonar, Mohammad-Javad (1960). “Kongereye azim-e eslami.” Maktab-e Eslam 2(5): 49-53.
-
Balslev, Sivan (2014). “Dressed for Success: Hegemonic Masculinity, Elite Men and Westernization in Iran, c. 1900-40.” Iran Namag 26(3): 545-564.
-
Bazargan, Mehdi (2000). Majmuʾe asar. Tehran: Sherkat-e Sahami-e Enteshar.
-
Bell, Catherine (1992). Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
-
Bourdieu, Pierre (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Translated by Richard Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Chehabi, Houchang (1990). Iranian Politics and Religious Modernism: The Liberation Movement of Iran Under the Shah and Khomeini. London: I. B. Tauris.
-
Dabashi, Hamid (1998). Theology of Discontent: The Ideological Foundation of the Islamic Revolution in Iran. New York: New York University Press.
-
Foucault, Michel (2005). Hermeneutics of the Subject. Translated by Graham Burchell. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
-
Hindi, Ahmad Khan (1959). Tafsir al-Qurʾan wa huwa al-huda wa al-furqan. Tehran: Sobh emruz.
-
Hirsckind, Charles (2001). “Civic Virtue and Religious Reason: An Islamic Counterpublic,” Cultural Anthropology 16(1), pp. 3-34.
-
Hirsckind, Charles (2011). “Is There a Secular Body?” Cultural Anthropology 2(4): 633-647.
-
Humphrey, Caroline and James Laidlaw (1994). The Archetypal Actions of Ritual. Oxford: Clarendon.
-
Keddie, Nikki R. (1981). Roots of the Revolution: An Interpretive History of Modern Iran. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
-
Köpping, Klaus-Peter (2000). “Transformationen durch performative Verkörperung in japanischen Ritualen,” in Im Rausch des Rituals: Gestaltung and Trasformation der Wirklichkeit in körperlicher Performanz, ed. Klaus-Peter Köpping and Ursula Rao, Hamburg: LIT.
-
Mahmood, Saba (2001a). “Rehearsed Spontaneity and the Conventionality of Ritual: Disciplines of Salat.” American Ethnologist 28(4): 827-853.
-
Mahmood, Saba (2001b). “Feminist Theory, Embodiment, and the Docile Agent: Some Reflections on the Egyptian Islamic Revival.” Cultural Anthropology 16(2): 202-236.
-
Mahmood, Saba (2005). Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
-
Motahhari, Mortaza (2001). Majmuʾeh asar. Qom: Sadra.
-
Rida, Mohmmad Rashid (n.d.). Tafsir al-Qurʾan al-karim. Beirut: Dar al-Maʾrifah.
-
Sazman-e Mojahedeen-e Khalq (1979). Tahlil-e amuzeshi-e bayaniye-ye oportunist-haye chapnema.
-
Schayegh, Cyrus (2009). Who Is Knowledgeable Is Strong: Science, Class, and the Formation of Modern Iranian Society, 1900-1950. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
-
Shariʾati, Ali (1961). Hajj. Tehran: Daftar-e nashr-e farhang-e eslami.
-
Shariʾati, Ali (1981). Majmuʾeh asar. Tehran: entesharat sabz.
-
Shariʾati, Mohammad-Taqi (1974). Tafsīr-e novin. Tehran: dafter-e nashr-e farhang-e eslami.
-
Staal, Frits (1979). “The Meaninglessness of Ritual.” Numen 26: 2-22.
-
Starrett, Gregory (1995). “The Hexis of Interpretation: Islam and the Body in the Egyptian Popular School.” American Ethnologist 22(4): 953-969.
-
Tabataʾi, Mohammadhossein (1958). “Aya eslam be ehtiyajat-e vaqeʾi-e har asri pasokh midahad?” Maktab-e Eslam 2(5), pp. 6-13.
-
Tavakkoli-Targhi, Mohammad (2015). “From Jinns to Germs: A Genealogy of Pasteurian Islam.” Iran Namag 30(3): iv-xix.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 660 | 161 | 9 |
| Full Text Views | 72 | 2 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 120 | 4 | 0 |
Religious Rituals as Civil hexis
The Case of Modernist Interpretations of Islamic Rituals among Iranian Pre-revolutionary Intellectuals
In: Method & Theory in the Study of ReligionSearch for other papers by Fatima Tofighi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
In their attempt to question the assumption that rituals are merely symbolic, Talal Asad and Saba Mahmood tried to show that rituals have functioned as instruments. In Asad’s study of medieval Christianity and Mahmood’s work on mosque women, rituals function to make selves. These instrumentalist readings stand outside the usual modernist representational readings. For these anthropologists, the distinction between representational and instrumental understandings of rituals seems to be very clear. Nationalist modernist readings of Islamic rituals seem to confirm the representational logic, which apparently falls entirely outside the instrumental framework. In this paper, I intend to disturb this clear-cut distinction, and demonstrate that in many occasions the instrumental understanding is preceded by a representational interpretation, while the representational may, in turn, help create a civil subject. My evidences come from the Iranian Islamic literature in 1960s and 70s, viz. Mortaza Motahhari, Ali Shariʾati, Mehdi Barzargan, and the authors of Maktab-e Islam monthly. Although some of these intellectuals emphasized the instrumental nature of rituals in making the pious subject, others proposed different rationalizations—medical benefit, collective solidarity and order, and existential meaning. For these thinkers or their audience, there was no clear distinction between these justifications. It is true that many of them had a representational logic; but they contributed to making a proper civil subject. Hence, the instrumental-representational binary cannot always be maintained. Asad’s and Mahmood’s critiques of anthropological readings of rituals have yet to be qualified to take into account the prior interpretations and theological context of religious rituals, to highlight the conflation of the representational and instrumental frameworks in many modern rituals, and to note that deciding on the instrumentality of a particular ritual is not only significant when it is about constructing the interior of the private self, but may be involved in building larger communities.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 660 | 161 | 9 |
| Full Text Views | 72 | 2 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 120 | 4 | 0 |
