Sharh: 31 -jild - Din

Sharh: 31 -jild - Din


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

"Unutilgan Xushxabar", biz hozir qabul qilayotgan kanonning yaratilishi, Isoning hayoti, o'limi va ta'limotlari haqidagi ko'plab muhim, ma'lumotli va yorituvchi yozuvlarni qanday chiqarib tashlaganini ko'rsatadi. Bu erda asl yunon, lotin, ibroniy, slavyan va kopt tillaridan yangi tarjima qilingan va ularning kelib chiqishi va aloqadorligi haqida aniq va qisqa tushuntirishlar berilgan matnlar. Ular birgalikda Yangi Ahdning qo'shimchasini tuzadilar, bu esa rekord o'rnatadi. Materiallar parcha va parchalarda saqlanib qolgan, ularning ba'zilari faqat hozirgi zamonda topilgan (Tomas Xushxabari 1945 yilda topilgan), boshqalari esa erta nasroniylarning yozuvlari orqali. Ko'pchilik e'tiroz bildiradi: Ibroniylarning Xushxabari tirilish haqida muqobil hisobni taqdim etadi; Aleksandriya Klementi Markning yashirin xushxabarini yozadi va undan iqtibos keltiradi; Celsusning ta'kidlashicha, Maryam Panthera bilan zinokor munosabatda bo'lgan va natijada Iso bo'lgan - bularning barchasi katta qiziqish uyg'otadi. Tarixiy Iso bilan bog'liq bo'lgan oldingi davrdan kelib chiqadigan hech qanday natija matni qoldirilmagan. Ular uning hayoti va ta'limotiga oxirgi, kutilmagan oyna ochadilar.


Inqilobiy din: shia islomi va Eron inqilobi

1979 yildagi Eron inqilobi Shohni ag'darish uchun Eron jamiyatidagi turli manfaatlar va siyosiy guruhlarning ommaviy harakatini ko'rdi. Bu oxir -oqibat 1979 yil aprelda Eron Islom Respublikasi va dekabr oyida yangi konstitutsiya yaratilishiga olib keladi. Biroq, Shohni taxtdan ag'darish harakati va Eronda yangi siyosiy tizimni qurishga undovchi harakat ikki alohida harakatni tashkil etdi. Mug'adam (2002: 1137) ta'kidlaganidek, "Eronda ikkita inqilob bor edi ... populistik inqilob ... va islom inqilobi". Bu inshoda men "populistik inqilob" ga va uni islomiy deb atash mumkinligiga e'tibor qarataman. Birinchi inqilobga bo'lgan e'tibor muhim, chunki uning tabiati bahsli (Kurzman, 1995 Sohrabi, 2018). Aksincha, ikkinchi inqilob, shubhasiz, islomiy edi: Islom respublikasini tuzish bo'yicha muvaffaqiyatli referendum, islomiy konstitutsiyani yaratish va Eron oliy rahnamosi sifatida oyatulloh Xomeyniyni tasdiqlash bu fikrni qo'llab -quvvatlaydi. Shunday qilib, mening inshomiz "populistik inqilob" ni qanchalik islomiy deb atashimiz mumkinligini ko'rib chiqadi. Bu yorliqdan foydalanish maqsadga muvofiq deb bahslashiladi, chunki inqilob Shia islomining bayoni va tashkiliy tuzilmasidan foydalanib, Shohni ag'darishga qodir kuchli ommaviy harakatni yaratdi (Nasr, 2007 Richard, 1995 Roy, 1994). Biroq, o'zgarish iqlimini ta'minlaydigan ijtimoiy -iqtisodiy sharoitlar va mavjud siyosiy harakatlar dunyoviy xarakterga ega edi (Ahmineh va Eisenstadt, 2007 Kamrava, 1990 Avraamian, 1982). Shuning uchun 1979 yildagi Eron inqilobini islomiy deb atash o'rinli, lekin biz uning dunyoviy talablardan kelib chiqqanligini tan olishimiz kerak. Bu insho Eronning norozilik tarixini o'rganish, 1979 yilgi inqilobning iqtisodiy va siyosiy kontekstini ko'rib chiqish va Ali Shariati harakatlari va g'oyalarining inqilobdagi rolini baholash orqali yuqoridagi dalilni namoyish etadi. Yakuniy bo'limda inqilobda shia islomining rolini, Karbalaning ramziy kuchiga e'tibor qaratiladi (Fischer, 2003).

Eron XX asr: inqilob va islohotlar

Eron inqilobi qanchalik islomiy ekanini ko'rsatish uchun 1979 yilgi inqilobni Eronning uzoq norozilik tarixiga kiritish kerak. Bu bo'lim Eron inqilobining islomiy ekanligini ko'rsatadi, chunki inqilobni qo'llab -quvvatlashda shia ruhoniylari o'ynagan. Bundan farqli o'laroq, oldingi qo'zg'olonlar muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchradi, chunki ruhoniylar o'zgarish chaqiriqlariga qarshi chiqishdi yoki bunday vaziyatlarda betaraf qolishdi. Eron tarixini tashkil topganidan to hozirgi kungacha o'rganib chiqish juda og'ir vazifa bo'lar edi, Axworthy (2013: xix, meniki) "Eron tarixini butun insoniyat tarixining mikrokosmosi sifatida ko'rish mumkin: imperiyalar" , bosqinlar, inqiloblar'. Shunday qilib, men Eronning inqilobiy tarixiga to'xtalib o'taman va 1979 yilgi inqilobdan oldingi noroziliklarni islomiy deb hisoblash mumkinmi va bu bizga 1979 yildagi voqealar haqida nima deyilganini tekshirib ko'raman.

Eronning konstitutsiyaviy inqilobi 1905-1911 yillar oralig'ida bo'lib o'tdi, odamlar ommaviy harakat bilan davlatni iqtisodiy modernizatsiya bilan bir qatorda davlat tomonidan o'zboshimchalik bilan boshqarishni to'xtatishni talab qilishdi. Bu bizga 1979 yil inqilobiga o'xshash siyosiy va iqtisodiy maqsadlarni ko'zlagan tarixiy parallellikni beradi (Katouzian, 2011: 764). Konstitutsiyaviy inqilob, shuningdek, "ulamoni birinchi marta Eron boshqaruv elitasining bir qismi sifatida rasman tan oldi" (Moozami, 2011: 73). Aynan mana shu voqealar ketma -ketligi ulamoni (diniy ruhoniylarni) davlat apparati ichida hokimiyat mavqeiga qo'yadi, bu ulamaning 1979 yilgi inqilobda qanday rol o'ynashi muhim rol o'ynaydi. Ibrohimyan (1979) konstitutsiyaviy inqilob sabablarini sinchkovlik bilan tahlil qilib, o'sha paytdagi Eronning og'ir iqtisodiy sharoitlari va Qajarlar oilasining despotik shaxslariga qarshi birlashgan harakatning ahamiyatini bayon qiladi. Shunga qaramay, iqtisodiy inqiroz va muvaffaqiyatsiz, avtokratik liderning kombinatsiyasi biz 1905 va 1979 yillardagi inqiloblarda ham kuzatilishi mumkin. Konstitutsiyaviy inqilob "shialar merosidan kelib chiqqan ijtimoiy adolat va hissiy ramzlarning an'anaviy kontseptsiyalari va ayniqsa Husayn va uning oilasi shahid bo'lishidan" kelib chiqib, davlatga qarshi kurashish uchun birlashgan harakatni birlashtirgani ham bir xil ahamiyatga ega. (o'sha erda: 413). Bu inshoning oxirgi qismida ko'rsatilgandek, bu ramzlar 1979 yilgi inqilobda ham muhim rol o'ynagan. Ko'p jihatdan, 1905 yildagi inqilob 1979 yildagi inqilobni aks ettirdi va tasvirlab berdi: ikkala inqilob ham iqtisodiy va siyosiy inqirozga asoslangan edi va ikkala inqilobiy harakat ham hokimiyatga qarshi chiqish uchun shia islom ramzlaridan foydalangan. Bu ikki omil 1979 yilgi inqilobni tushunishda hal qiluvchi ahamiyatga ega, chunki ular inqilobning islomdan emas, balki islom orqali ifoda etilganidan dalolat beradi. Shunday qilib, ikkala inqilobni ham islomiy deb hisoblash mumkin.

1905-11 yillardagi xalq inqilobidan farqli o'laroq, muhim siyosiy va iqtisodiy o'zgarishlarni talab qiladigan xalq inqilobining oldini olish maqsadida, 1963-78 yillardagi Shohning "Oq inqilobi" yuklatilgan. Haqiqatan ham, Ansoriy (2001: 2) Oq inqilobni "yuqoridan qonsiz inqilob ... ko'pchilik qonli inqilob xavfini pastdan kutgan va oldini olgan" deb ta'riflaydi. Shohning islohotlarga bo'lgan urinishlari o'sib borayotgan o'rta sinfni yaratishda muvaffaqiyat qozondi, ammo ulamoni er egalarini nishonga olib, ulamoni begonalashtirdi. Shia islomi noroziligining yagona xavfsiz shaklini ta'minlagan davlatda, Shohning noroziligiga qarshi bosqini tufayli, 1979 yilgi inqilob ulamolar tomonidan qanchalik osonlashtirilganini ko'rib chiqishda hal qiluvchi ahamiyatga ega bo'ladi (Kamali, 1997: 179). . Bundan tashqari, Shoh islomning ramzlari va tiliga tayanolmagani uchun o'z islohotlarini qo'llab -quvvatlay olmadi. Ansoriy (2001: 2) aytganidek, "Oq inqilob haqidagi xabar" uning ko'pchilik uyushmalariga notanish belgilar va qadriyatlardan qurilgan ". 1963-78 yillardagi Oq inqilob 1979 yildagi voqealarga urug 'sepdi. Shohning islohotlarga bo'lgan urinishlari 1979 yilgi inqilobga qarshi bo'lgan: demokratik bo'lmagan dunyoviy g'arblashtirishni ifodalaydi. Eng muhimi, Oq inqilob ulamalarni institutsional kuchini yo'qotmasdan nishonga oldi (Moazami, 2011). Bu harakat Shohni ulamo va ulamalarga qarshi xalq tarafida qattiq turib oldi. Oq inqilobga qarshilik sifatida ta'riflangan 1979 yildagi inqilob o'z xabarida ham, uni boshqarishga kelgan aktyorlarda ham islomiy edi.

Eron inqilobining iqtisodiy va siyosiy kontekstlari

Bu inshoning birinchi bo'limi 1979 yildagi inqilobda, ayniqsa 1963 yildagi muvaffaqiyatsiz oq inqilobga qaraganda, diniy qo'llab -quvvatlash muhimligini ko'rsatdi. Biroq, bu bo'lim 1979 yildagi inqilob dastlab islom inqilobi emasligini ko'rsatadi. Eron xalqini qo'zg'olonga undagan iqtisodiy va siyosiy omillarni, shuningdek inqilob muvaffaqiyatini ta'minlashda ta'sirli rol o'ynagan ko'plab dunyoviy guruhlarni alohida qayd etish lozim. Bu 1979 yildagi inqilobning mohiyatini tushunishda hal qiluvchi ahamiyatga ega va nima uchun uni faqat islom inqilobi sifatida oddiylashtirish mumkin emas. Garchi 1979 yildagi voqealar islom inqilobiga aylangan bo'lsa -da, ular dastlab dunyoviy guruhlar vakili sifatida iqtisodiy va siyosiy o'zgarishlarga e'tibor qaratdilar.

1979 yildagi Eron inqilobi Shohning 1963 yildagi muvaffaqiyatsiz oq inqilobi natijasida yuz berdi. Oq inqilob mamlakatda katta iqtisodiy noaniqliklarni keltirib chiqardi, shu bilan birga, Shohning siyosiy noroziligini yo'q qilish uchun SAVAKdan foydalanishi Eron xalqini tark etdi. ovozsiz. Darhaqiqat, Amine va Eisenstadt (2007: 131), "Oq inqilob" Eron jamiyatining hech bir qismini qoniqtirmadi va buning o'rniga aholining ko'p qismini g'azablantirdi, deb ta'kidlaydi. Bu tushuncha 1963 yildagi noroziliklar tomonidan ham qo'llab -quvvatlanadi, bu Xomeynining ismini mashhur qildi va Shoh islohotlaridan erta noroziligini ko'rsatdi (Buchan, 2013). Bundan tashqari, 1975 yilda yana norozilik namoyishlari bo'lib o'tdi, ammo bu muvaffaqiyatsiz bo'lsa ham, Shohni avtoritar tendentsiyalarini harakatda ko'rsatishga majbur qildi (Parsa, 2011: 54). Bu namoyishlar uch yil o'tib, Eron inqilobini qo'zg'atgan noroziliklarda aks ettirilgan (Kurzman, 2003: 293). 1963 va 1975 yillardagi norozilik namoyishlari diniy va dunyoviy aktyorlardan tashkil topgan va shunday deb tan olingan. 1979 yildagi inqilob ham turli guruhlardan tashkil topgan, ammo "islomiy" deb hisoblanadi. Keyingi bo'limda nima uchun bunday bo'lganligi ko'rib chiqiladi.

1979 yildagi Eron inqilobi oyatulloh Xomeyni obrazi bilan uzviy bog'liqdir. Shunga qaramay, "inqilobni demokratiya va siyosiy erkinliklar, ijtimoiy adolat va mustaqillik maqsadlari bilan dunyoviy progressiv kuchlar boshladilar" (Rahnema, 2011: 43). Demak, Eron inqilobi qanday qilib islom inqilobi deb atala boshlaganini o'ylab ko'rish kerak. Bu qisman, chunki ba'zi olimlar Shohning olib tashlanishi va Eron Islom Respublikasining tashkil etilishi o'rtasidagi farqni farqlay olmaydilar, chunki Mo'g'om (2002: 1137) ularni "populistik" va "islomiy" inqiloblar deb belgilaydi. Xuddi shu olimlar, shuningdek, Eron inqilobini Eron-Iroq urushi paytida Eronning islomiylashuvi bilan bog'lashga moyildirlar (Moazami, 2009: 61). Shunga qaramay, 1979 yilgi inqilobni islomiy deb qabul qilish faqat tanlangan tarixshunoslikning aybi emas. Aksincha, inqilob boshlanishidan oldin Eron chap qanotining etakchi arbobining o'limi va inqilob paytida chaplarning bo'linishi, chapning Xomeyniyning soyasida qolganligini anglatardi. Eron inqilobida dunyoviy kuchlarning rolini ko'rsatish uchun, birinchi navbatda, Eron chap fraktsiyasi, ikkinchidan, Ali Shariyatiyning o'rni va merosini ko'rib chiqish juda muhimdir.

Eron chapining mag'lubiyati: fraktsionizm va qatag'on

1970 -yillarning oxirida Eron chaplari har qanday potentsial inqilob maqsadlari bo'yicha bo'linishdi. Kronin (2000: 236) yozganidek, "ba'zilar uchun, toda va fadaiyanlarning ko'pchiligi uchun, yangi rejimning anti-imperializmi ... chapdagi boshqa elementlar uchun, masalan, fadaiyan ozligi va paykar uchun juda muhim edi. iqtisodiy o'zgarishlarning yo'qligi hal qiluvchi ahamiyatga ega edi ". Greason (2005), bunday mazhabiy bo'linishlar Eron konteksti bilan chegaralanmagan, balki xalqaro chap uchun umumiy bo'lgan, deb ta'kidlaydi. Shunga qaramay, bu bo'linishlarning oldini olish mumkin edi. Eron inqilobidan oldin va uning davrida chaplarning tarqoqligi Shohning o'z tashkilotlarini tazyiq qilishi bilan yanada kuchayib ketdi. Shahidian (1994: 226) vaziyatni tasvirlab berganidek, "chaplar zaiflashgan holatda yaqinlashib kelayotgan inqilobga duch kelishdi: uning rahbarlarining ko'pchiligi o'ldirilgan ... oddiy va tajribasiz". Rahbarlikning yo'qligi qisman Ali Shariyatiyning o'limi bilan bog'liq bo'lib, u keyingi bo'limda muhokama qilinadi. Shunga qaramay, bu nufuzli shaxsning rolini ko'rib chiqishdan oldin, Shohning keng tarqalgan, repressiv choralarini baholash kerak.

"Oq inqilob" deb nomlanuvchi iqtisodiy islohotlar tezda amalga oshirilgandan so'ng, ishchilar va kasaba uyushmalari ish tashlashlar va noroziliklar orqali Shohga qarshi ekanliklarini bildirdilar. Rasler (1996: 146) yozishicha, "[1978 yildagi] ish tashlashlar va namoyishlar to'lqinlariga javoban, Shoh ... harbiy hukumat o'rnatgan". Shuni ta'kidlash kerakki, bu Shohning chapga zarar etkazgan birinchi repressiv chorasi emas edi. Mazaheri (2006: 404) "siyosiy jihatdan davlat ikki partiyali tizimda ishlagan bo'lsa ... 1975 yil mart oyida Shoh ikkalasini tugatdi va o'zining fashistik uslubini yashirish uchun" qonuniy "va" 8221 "siyosiy partiyalarini tuzdi. qoida ". Shunday qilib, Eron chaplari na parlamentda, na ko'chada muvaffaqiyat qozonishdi. Shunga qaramay, qatag'onlar faqat chaplar emas edi. Aytish mumkinki, 1979 yildagi inqilob uchun eronlik o'rta sinf savdogarlari yoki "bozorchilar" ning qatag'on qilinishi muhimroq bo'lgan. Bozor siyosiy kuchining oldingi misollariga qaramay, 1890 -yillar tamaki qo'zg'olonlarida ko'rsatilgandek, Shoh savdogarlar sinfida narx nazoratini o'rnatishga harakat qildi. Bundan tashqari, barcha bozorchilar Shohning siyosiy partiyasiga xayriya qilishga majbur bo'lishdi (Bashiriya, 2011). Shunday qilib, Shoh nafaqat siyosiy chapni qatag'on qildi, balki o'rta sinflar repressiyasini ham ta'qib qildi. Bu inqilob uchun vosita sifatida faqat diniy muassasani qoldirdi. Shuning uchun, Eron inqilobi "islomiy" bo'lishi mumkin, lekin 1979 yildagi dunyoviy talablar islomiy atamalarga tarjima qilinganligi uchungina. Bu davrda keng tarqalgan repressiyalar bilan bir qatorda, agar diniy bo'lmagan guruhlar inqilobga nima uchun rahbarlik qila olmaganini tushunadigan bo'lsak, Ali Shariyatiyning maqsadli qatag'onlari ham muhim ahamiyatga ega.

Yo'qotilgan lider? Ali Shariyatiyning roli

Bu inshoda ilgari ta'kidlanganidek, Eron inqilobini xalq idroki Ayatolloh Xomeyni boshchiligidagi diniy avangarddir. Shunga qaramay, Nasr (2007) va Keddi (1982) kabi olimlarning ta'kidlashicha, Eron inqilobining paydo bo'lishi Xomeyniy rahnamoligida emas, balki Ali Shariyatiyning g'oyalarida bo'lgan. Qamoqqa olinishi va keyinchalik Shariyatiyning o'limi eronliklarni kuchli rahbardan mahrum qildi va uning g'oyalariga amal qilgan inqilob amalga oshmadi. Bu bo'limda Shariati o'limining chap tarafdagi ta'siri, shuningdek, Shariati g'oyalari Eron inqilobining sinkretik mafkurasini qanday qamrab olganligi ko'rsatiladi.

Garchi Abedi (1986: 229) kabi olimlar Shariatini Eron inqilobining "me'mori" deb atagan bo'lsalar -da, balki Shomiyatni Xomeyni bilan birga inqilobning "ikki intellektual ustunidan" biri sifatida joylashtirish to'g'ri bo'ladi (Mahdavi, 2014: 25). . Darhaqiqat, Xomeyni 1979 yilgi inqilobni muvaffaqiyatli boshqarganini e'tibordan chetda qoldirmasligimiz kerak. Shunga qaramay, Shariatining o'limi chapni etakchisiz qoldirganini ko'rib chiqish kerak. 1978 yilda, Shariati vafotidan bir yil o'tgach, "ishchilar harakati ... ish tashlashlar uyushtirishdi, kichik iqtisodiy talablar uchun sekinlashdi, asta -sekin siyosiy bo'la boshladi. aniq rahbarlik yo'q va islomiy harakatga bo'ysunib qoldi "(Mather va Mather, 2002: 181, diqqat meniki). Chaplar hali ham faol kuch edi, lekin etakchilik vakuumiga duch kelishdi. Qisman, bu Shoh tomonidan dunyoviy, chap harakatlarning keng miqyosda bostirilishi bilan bog'liq. Bu, shuningdek, 1957 yildan beri tez -tez qamoqqa olingan va o'lguniga qadar surgunga majbur bo'lgan Shariyatiyning maqsadli qatag'onlari bilan bog'liq (Abedi, 1986). Shunisi e'tiborga loyiqki, Xomeyni ham surgunga majbur qilingan, lekin masjidlar va ulamolar chap tarafdagidek qatag'on qilinmaganligi sababli, Xomeyniyning qaytishi oson edi (Corboz, 2015: 224). Shariatining o'limi nafaqat eronliklarni xarizmatik etakchisiz qoldirdi, balki shariyatiyning yo'qolishi, shuningdek, Eronning turli fraktsiyalari strategik harakatlar o'rniga mavhum nazariyalarga berilib ketishlarini anglatardi. Mather va Mather (2002: 187) vaziyatni ta'riflaganidek: "Marksizmga diniy yondashuv mavhum tushunchalar va Rossiya inqilobi atrofidagi munozaralarga berilib ketish, ishchilar sinfining mustaqil harakatlariga hurmatsizlik, avangard xayoliga olib keldi. hamma boshqalardan ko'ra ko'proq biladi, hamma simptomatik [chapdan] edi ”. Shunday qilib, Shariatiyning yo'qolishi nafaqat qatag'on qilingan Eron chapining tashkiliy muammolarini yanada kuchaytirdi, balki Shariati g'oyalaridagi farqlar inqilobiy lahzada chapni ahamiyatsiz qilib qo'ydi. Bu shuni anglatadiki, inqilobning sabablari diniy omillardan kelib chiqmagan bo'lsa -da, Xomeyni diniy harakati ularni 1979 yildagi voqealarni monopollashtirishdan to'xtatish uchun na samarali, na jozibali qarshilikka ega emas edi. Shariati o'limining Eron chap tomoniga salbiy ta'sirini ko'rsatdi. Shariati mafkurasini va uning 1979 yilgi inqilob bilan aloqasini o'rganish juda muhim. Bu inshoning oxirgi qismining mavzusi bo'ladigan shia islomining inqilobiy salohiyatini to'liq anglashimiz kerakligini tushunish juda muhimdir.

Ali Shariyatiyning fikri "islomning radikal ... demokratik va ilg'or versiyasi" deb ta'riflangan (Keddi, 1982: 290). Shariati falsafasining o'ziga xos islomiy tabiatiga qaramay, u "nafaqat monarxlar va podshohlar, balki Eron ulamolari ham xalq ustidan hukmronlik qilib, unga qarshi" (Pashaog'lu, 2013: 112) qarshi chiqdi. Shunday qilib, Shariati siyosiy faol musulmon edi, lekin islomchi emas edi. Aksincha, Ali Shariati Saffariy (2017: 289) "Shii ozodlik ilohiyoti" deb belgilagan narsalarning asosiy namoyandasi edi. Ko'p yillar oldin Muhammad Naxshab bu talqin uchun bahs qilganidek, Ali Shariati shia islomini birinchi bo'lib talqin qilmagan. 60-yillarning oxiri va 70-yillarning boshlarida siyosiy tartibsizliklar boshlanganligi sababli, Shariati bu an'ananing eng ko'zga ko'ringan vakili edi. Eron chap tomonidagi taniqli etakchi ham, mazlumlar tarafida bo'lgan ilohiyotchi ham bo'lgani uchun, Shariati g'oyalari xavfli deb hisoblangan, shuning uchun Ali Shariyatiy qamoqqa tashlangan va surgun qilingan. Shariati merosi 1979 yildagi voqealarda yaqqol ko'rinib turardi. Inqilob paytida nafaqat Shariyatiyning rasmlari, balki uning g'oyalari ham inqilobni kuchaytirdi: "uning mashhur asarlari va nutqlari ... davom etadigan idealist yosh avlodni ruhlantirdi. Xomeyni ortida miting »(G'olizadə va Xuk, 2012: 177). Shunday qilib, 1979 yildagi Eron inqilobi Shariyatiyning ozodlik ilohiyotidan ilhomlanib, o'zi islomdagi fikr maktabi edi. Shariati mafkurasi inqilobning iqtisodiy va siyosiy kontekstini ham, bu muammolarning islomiy echimini ham aks ettiradi. Biroq, Shariati falsafasini Xomeyni inqilobdan keyin amalga oshirmagan. Bu bo'lim 1979 yilgi inqilobni islom deb belgilash to'g'ri ekanligini ko'rsatdi, chunki islomni inqilobiy tarzda talqin qilish mumkin. Mening inshoimning oxirgi qismi islomni nafaqat inqilobiy deb talqin qilinganini, balki islomning Eron jamiyatidagi ajralmas roli bu inqilobiy o'zgarishlarning yagona real yo'li ekanligini anglatishini ko'rsatib beradi.

Shia Islom: inqilob kanalimi?

70 -yillarning boshlarida norozilik va g'azabning boshqa yo'llari bostirilgani bois, shia islomining masjidlari va ularni boshqargan ruhoniylar Shohdan norozi bo'lgan har qanday Eron fuqarosi uchun yagona forum bo'lgan. Richard (1995: 80) vaziyatni shunday ta'riflaydi: "ulamolar masjiddan inqilobiy qo'mitalar shtabi, eng zarur buyumlarni tarqatish markazi va xalqni safarbar qilish markazi sifatida foydalanganlar". Tashkiliy tuzilma va kuch jihatidan Eron ulamosi hal qiluvchi rol o'ynadi. Mening inshomning bu bo'limi ulamolarning rolini to'liq ochib beradi, inqilobni o'rganishda resurs-safarbarlik yondashuvidan foydalangan holda, shuningdek, shia Islomning ramziy kuchini hisobga olgan holda. 1979 yilgi inqilobda ulamoning roli haqidagi munozara Eron inqilobi qanday islomiy bo'lganligi haqidagi savolga javob berish uchun juda muhim. Ko'rinib turibdiki, aholining talablari islom bilan chambarchas bog'liq emas, balki islom bu talablarni aytishga ruxsat bergan va shu tariqa inqilobning asosiy omiliga aylangan.

70 -yillardagi Eron chap va o'rta sinf bozorchilarining qatag'onlaridan farqli o'laroq, Shia ulemalari Shohning repressiv choralariga umuman ta'sir qilmagan. Shunday qilib, Fischer (2003: 185) ta'kidlaganidek, "inqilobning islomiy shaklini yaratgan narsa islomiy tiklanish emas, balki boshqa siyosiy nutq turlarini bostirish edi". Bu qatag'ondan qochish "ulamoning to'rt sohada katta resurslarga ega ekanligini anglatardi: mafkura, ishchi kuchi, tashkilot va etakchilik" (Moshiri, 1991: 118). Darhaqiqat, Moshiri (o'sha erda) inqiloblarga asosiy resurslarni safarbar qilish usuli, eng ko'p resurslarga ega bo'lgan tashkilot yoki guruh muqarrar ravishda inqilobga rahbarlik qilishini ko'rsatadi, deb ta'kidlaydi. Seeberg (2014: 492) bu fikrni takrorlaydi, lekin harbiy aralashuvning yo'qligi ulamalarga inqilobni qo'llab-quvvatlashga imkon berganligini ham ta'kidlaydi. Foran (1992: 14), harbiy repressiyalarning yo'qligini, Shohning "inson huquqlariga yo'naltirilgan tashqi siyosat" ni ilgari surgan Karter ma'muriyati bilan yaqin ittifoqi bilan bog'laydi. Qatag'onning bu bo'shashishi dunyoviy, chap harakatlar uchun juda kech edi, lekin ulamalarga inqilobni hech qanday keskin qarama -qarshiliksiz boshqarishga imkon berdi. Ulamalar foydalangan institutsional himoya ham, ulkan manbalar ham ulamaning nima uchun inqilobni boshqarishi mumkinligini tushuntiradi. Shunga qaramay, biz nima uchun ular inqilobni boshqarishni xohlaganlarini ham ko'rib chiqishimiz kerak.

Oldingi inqirozlarda, masalan, 1953 yilda demokratik yo'l bilan saylangan Mossadegga qarshi to'ntarish kabi, ulamolar mashhur fikr emas, balki hokimiyat (bu holatda AQSh) tarafini olgan edi (Amjad, 1989: 43). Shuning uchun biz ulamaning nima uchun 1979 yilda inqilobchilar tarafida bo'lganini ko'rib chiqishimiz kerak. Berberog'lu (2001: 306), ulamoning Shohning iqtisodiy islohotlari boylikni diniy tashkilotdan uzoqda qayta taqsimlaganligi sababli, Eron inqilobiga qo'shilganini va oxir -oqibat uni boshqarganini ta'kidlaydi. Bu dalil shuni ko'rsatadiki, 1979 yilgi inqilobni qo'zg'atuvchi omillar islomiy emas, balki tubdan iqtisodiy edi, hatto inqilobni "islomiy kurash" sifatida ko'rsatmoqchi bo'lgan ulamolar uchun ham (G'olizadə va Xuk, 2012: 177). Biroq, ulamoning roli faqat iqtisodiy tashvishlardan kelib chiqqan, deb aytish oddiy va shia islomining inqilobiy salohiyatini inobatga olmaydi. Ulamo inqilobning etakchilariga aylandi, chunki ular nisbatan repressiv Shohga tegmagan va keng tarqalgan o'zgarishlarni amalga oshirish uchun qulay tashkiliy tuzilishga ega bo'lgan. Biroq, ulamolar inqilobni tanlaganidek, ular ham inqilobni islom tarixi va e'tiqodining bajarilishi sifatida ko'rsatdilar (Roy, 1994: 168). Ulamo inqilobiy harakatni emas, balki inqilobiy harakatni boshqarganiga qaramay, Eron ruhoniylari bo'linib ketgan inqilobiy fraktsiyalarni milliy shia islom dini orqali birlashtira oldilar. Keyingi bo'lim ulamolar tomonidan 1979 yilgi inqilobni islomiy qilib ko'rsatish uchun diniy holatlar va tasvirlardan qanday foydalanilganligini ko'rsatadi.

Inqilobiy islom va "Karbala paradigmasi"

Hozircha bu insho Eron inqilobiga ulamolar bilan bog'liq bo'lmagan iqtisodiy va siyosiy omillar sabab bo'lganini ko'rsatdi, lekin ulamoning tashkiliy kuchi ularga o'z inqilobini o'ziga xos qilishiga imkon berdi. Bu, shuningdek, chap tarafdagi repressiyalar va Ayatulloh Xomeyni bilan birga inqilobning bo'lajak etakchisi bo'lgan Ali Shariyatiyning yo'qolishi bilan bog'liq edi. Ammo ulema inqilobni boshqarishga faqat tashkilotchilik qudrati tufayli kelgani yo'q, shia islomining ramziyligi ulamalarga dunyoviy kelib chiqishiga qaramay, inqilobni haqiqatdan ham "islomiy" qilishga imkon berdi. Inshoning yakuniy qismida shia islomining inqilobiy simvolizmi taqdim etiladi va baholanadi, "Karbala paradigmasi" ga e'tibor qaratiladi - shia islomi inqilobiy kurash natijasida paydo bo'lgan va shu vaqtdan beri bu mavzuga alohida e'tibor qaratiladi. : xvii).

70 -yillar davomida Eronda kamdan -kam uchraydigan noroziliklar keng tarqalgan bo'lsa -da, inqilobiy harakatlarning tuzilishi va uyushmasi yo'q edi. Ulamo inqilobning tuzilishini ta'minladi, chunki u namoyishchilar o'ldirilganidan qirq kun o'tib norozilik namoyishlari o'tkazdi. Bu 1978 yil 7 -yanvarda boshlandi, keyin 18 fevral, 29 -mart, 10 -may va yana shunga o'xshash noroziliklar davom etdi, chunki bunday namoyishlar harakatni davom ettirish uchun etarli kuchga ega bo'lmaguncha. Bu harakatlar ma'lum bir tuzilishga amal qilgan, chunki qirq kun dafn marosimidan keyin an'anaviy motam davomiyligi bo'lgan (Kurzman, 2004: 55). Inqilob shahid Husayn Aliga bag'ishlangan Ashurani xotirlash uchun yanada kuchaytirildi (Husayn, 2005). Shoh shunday qarshilikka duch kelib, bir oy o'tgach, 1979 yil yanvar oyida Eronni tark etdi. Xomeyni ko'p o'tmay, fevral oyining boshida Eronga qaytdi.

Inqilob xronologiyasidan ko'rinib turibdiki, ulamolar tartibsiz noroziliklarga tuzilma berib, inqilobiy ishtiyoq o'chmasligini, balki islom taqvimining ma'lum kunlarida to'planishini ta'minladilar. Shunga qaramay, ulamolar islom taqvimini o'z ehtiyojlariga moslashtirishi shart emas edi, chunki shia islomining urf -odatlari va ramziy ma'nosi inqilobga tayyor. Dabashi (2011: 314) yozganidek, "shialarning isyonkor ramziyligining ulkan arsenali zo'ravonlikka qarshi inqilob xizmatida safarbar qilingan". 1979 yildagi inqilobda islomiy, xususan, shia simvolizmidan foydalanish, inqilob qanday qilib islomga aylanmaganligini ko'rsatadi. Bunday ramzlar Karbalo paradigmasini tashkil qiladi, biz hozir e'tiborimizni unga qaratamiz.

Karbalo paradigmasi, Husayn Ali - uchinchi imom - Karbalo jangida shahid bo'lishi bilan bog'liq bir qator ramz va marosimlarni nazarda tutadi. Nasr (2007: 43) Karbalaning shia musulmonlari uchun ahamiyatini aniq tasvirlab beradi: "Karbala - azob -uqubat va tasalli timsoli, lekin ... noqonuniy hokimiyatga qarshi kurashishga tayyorlik". Shunday qilib, 1978 yildagi namoyishchilarning motam tutishi nafaqat qayg'u, balki qo'zg'olonga sabab bo'ldi. Karbaloning bu ikkiyuzlamachiligi, dastlabki voqeaning mazmunidan kelib chiqadi, "tarixiy manbalarda hamma bir fikrga keladi ... Muhammad payg'ambarning nabirasi Husayn, otasi tomonidan xalifalikning vorisi etib tayinlangan Yazidga bay'at berishdan bosh tortdi. (Husayn, 2005: 19). Husaynning hukmronlik davri misli ko'rilmagan tabiati tufayli merosxo'rligi bahsli bo'lgan Yazidni tan olishdan bosh tortishi ulamoning Shohni Eron hukmdori sifatida tan olmasligidan dalolat beradi. Shunday qilib, ulamolar inqilobni kuchaytirish uchun Husaynning shahidligi xotirlanadigan Ashura voqeasidan foydalandilar. Fisher (2003: 213) ta'kidlaganidek, "Karbaloni faol talqin qilishning eng yorqin tasviri an'anaviy motam marosimlarining to'xtatilishi edi. [Ular uchun] siyosiy yurishlar almashtirildi". Tarixiy qarshilik namunalariga asoslangan taqvim bilan qo'zg'olon mavzusining birlashishi ulamolarga Eron aholisiga diniy tilda inqilobiy xabarni etkazish imkonini berdi. Skocpol (1982: 275): "Shi islomi Eron inqilobini amalga oshirish uchun ham tashkiliy, ham madaniy jihatdan hal qiluvchi ahamiyatga ega edi ... Eron hayotining" an'anaviy "va" 8221 qismi ... "ni shakllantirish uchun muhim siyosiy manbalarni taqdim etdi. juda zamonaviy ko'rinishga ega bo'lgan inqilobiy harakat ”. Shunday qilib, ommaviy harakatni birlashtirish va Shohni taxtdan ag'darish uchun Karbala paradigmasining ishga solinishi, 1979 yildagi inqilobni islomiy deb atash uchun kuchli dalillarni beradi, garchi uning dastlabki talablari diniy emas, siyosiy va iqtisodiy edi.

Bu insho 1979 yildagi Eron inqilobini munosib tarzda islomiy deb atash mumkinligini ko'rsatdi. Garchi inqilobni boshlagan talablar va tartibsizliklar siyosiy va iqtisodiy bo'lsa-da, Eron ulamosi o'z mavqeidan foydalanib, inqilobni qo'llab-quvvatladi va siyosiy va iqtisodiy talablarni diniy ramziylikka aylantirdi. Oxirgi inqilob rahbariyati ulamalarning institutsional kuchi va boshqa tashkilotlar duch kelgan repressiya tufayli islomiy edi. Ali Shariyatiyning misoli, nima uchun chaplar muvaffaqiyatsizlikka uchraganini, agar qattiq qatag'on qilinmaganida, chap tomon qanday muvaffaqiyat qozonishi mumkinligini ko'rsatadi. Shariati yo'qolishi va chapning muvaffaqiyatsizligi bilan, Eron ulamosi inqilobiy o'zgarishni xohlaydigan aholi uchun yagona variant edi. Ulamaning tashkiliy kuchi shia islomining isyonkor ramziyligi bilan birlashganda, xususan Karbalo paradigmasidan foydalanish dastlab dunyoviy inqilobning islomiy tabiatini ta'minladi.

Bibliografiya

Abedi, M. 1986 yil. "Ali Shariati: 1979 yildagi Islom inqilobining me'mori". Eronshunoslik. 19-jild, No 3. 229-234-betlar.

Ibrohim, E. 1979. "Eronda konstitutsiyaviy inqilobning sabablari". Xalqaro Yaqin Sharq tadqiqotlari jurnali. 10-jild, 1-son. 381-414-betlar.

Ibrohim, E. 1982 yil. Eron ikki inqilob o'rtasida. Princeton universiteti matbuoti: Princeton, N. J.

Ahmine, M. va Eisenstadt, S. 2007 yil. "Eron inqilobi: Eron inqilobining ko'p kontekstlari". Global rivojlanish va texnologiya istiqbollari. 6-jild, 1-son. 129-157-betlar.

Amjad, M. 1989 yil. “Eronda shiaizm va inqilob ". Davlat va cherkov jurnali. 31-jild, 1-son. 35-53-betlar.

Ansoriy, A. M. 2001 yil. "Oq inqilob afsonasi: Muhammad Rizo Shoh," Zamonaviylashtirish "va" Quvvat konsolidatsiyasi ". Yaqin Sharq tadqiqotlari. 37-jild, 3-son, 1-24-betlar.

Axworthy, M. 2013 yil. Inqilobiy Eron: Islom Respublikasi tarixi. Oksford universiteti matbuoti: Oksford.

Bashiriya, H. 2011. Eronda davlat va inqilob, 1962-1982. Marshrut: London.

Berberog'lu, B. 2001 yil. "Din va diniy harakatlarning sinfiy tabiati: 1979 yildagi Eron inqilobining tanqidiy tahlili". Insoniyat va jamiyat. 25-jild, No 3. 299-313-betlar.

Buchan, J. 2013 yil. “The Iranian Revolution of 1979”. Asian Affairs. Volume 44, Issue 3. pp. 418-426.

Corboz, E. 2015. “Khomeini in Najaf: The Religious and Political Leadership of an Exiled Ayatollah”. Die Welt des Islams. Volume 55, Issue 2. pp. 221-248.

Cronin, S. 2000. “The Left in Iran: Illusion and Disillusion” (Review Article). Middle Eastern Studies. Volume 36, No. 3. pp. 231-243.

Dabashi, H. 2011. Shi’ism: A Religion of Protest. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

Fischer, M. J. 2003. Iran: From Religious Dispute to Revolution. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

Foran, J. 1992. “A Theory of Third World Social Revolutions: Iran, Nicaragua, and El Salvador Compared”. Critical Sociology. Volume 19, Issue 2. pp. 3-27.

Gholizadeh, S. and Hook, D. W. 2012. “The Discursive Construction of the 1978-1979 Iranian Revolution in the Speeches of Ayatollah Khomenei”. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology. Volume 22, No. 1. pp. 174-186.

Greason, D. 2005. “Embracing Death: The Western Left and the Iranian Revolution, 1978-83”. Iqtisodiyot va jamiyat. Volume 34, Issue 1. pp. 105-140.

Hussain, A. J. 2005. “The Mourning of History and the History of Mourning: The Evolution of Ritual Commemoration of the Battle of Karbala”. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Volume 25, No. 1. pp. 78-88

Kamali, M. 1997. “The Modern Revolutions of Iran: Civil Society and State in the Modernization Process”. Citizenship Studies. Volume 1, Issue 2. pp. 173-198.

Kamrava, M. 1990. Revolution in Iran: The Roots of Turmoil. Routledge: London.

Katouzian, H. 2011. “The Revolution for Law: A Chronographic Analysis of the Constitutional Revolution of Iran”. Middle Eastern Studies. Volume 47, Issue 5. pp. 757-777.

Keddie, N. R. 1982. “Comments on Skocpol”. Theory and Society. Volume 11, No. 3. pp. 285-292.

Kurzman, C. 1995. “Historiography of the Iranian Revolutionary Movement, 1977-79”. Iranian Studies. Volume 28, No. 1. pp. 25-38.

Kurzman, C. 2003. “The Qum Protests and the Coming of the Iranian Revolution, 1975 and 1978”. Social Science History. Volume 27, No. 3. pp. 287-325.

Kurzman, C. 2004. The Unthinkable Revolution in Iran. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.

Mahdavi, M. 2014. “One Bed and Two Dreams? Contentious Public Religion in the Discourses of Ayatollah Khomeini and Ali Shariati”. Studies in Religion. Volume 43, Issue 1. pp. 25-52.

Mather, D. and Mather, Y. 2002. “The Islamic Republic and the Iranian Left”. Critique: Journal of Socialist Theory. Volume 30, Issue 1. pp. 179-191.

Mazaheri, N. 2006. “State Repression in the Iranian Bazaar, 1975-1977: The Anti-Profiteering Campaign and an Impending Revolution”. Iranian Studies. Volume 39, No. 3. pp. 401-414.

Moazami, B. 2009. “The Islamization of the Social Movements and the Revolution, 1963-1979”. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Volume 29, No. 1. pp. 47-62.

Moazami, B. 2011. “Rethinking the Role of Religion in Iran’s History and Politics, 1796–2009”. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Volume 31, Number 1. pp. 69-75

Moghadam, V. 2002. “Islamic Feminism and Its Discontents: Toward a Resolution of the Debate”. Belgilar. Volume 27, No. 4. pp. 1135-1171.

Moshiri, F. 1991. “Iran: Islamic Revolution Against Westernization” in (eds): Goldstone, J. A., Gurr, T. R. and Moshiri, F. Revolutions of the Late Twentieth Century. Westview Press: Boulder, CO. pp. 116-135.

Nasr, V. 2007. The Shia Revival. W. W. Norton: New York.

Parsa, M. 2011. “Ideology and Political Action in the Iranian Revolution”. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Volume 31, No. 1. pp. 53-68.

Paşaoğlu, M. T. 2013. “Nationalist Hegemony Over Islamist Dreams in Iran and Pakistan: Who Were Shariati and Maududi?”. Asian Politics and Policy. Volume 5, No. 1. pp. 107-124.

Rahnema, S. 2011. “Retreat and Return of the Secular in Iran”. Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Volume 31, No. 1. pp. 34-45.

Rasler, K. 1996. “Concessions, Repression and Political Protest in the Iranian Revolution”. American Sociological Review. Volume 61, Issue 1. pp. 132-152.

Richard, Y. 1995. Shi’ite Islam: Polity, Ideology, and Creed. Blackwell: Oxford.

Roy, O. 1994. The Failure of Political Islam. I. B. Tauris: London.

Saffari, S. 2017. “Two Pro-Mostazafin Discourses in the 1979 Iranian Revolution”. Contemporary Islam. Volume 11, Issue 3. pp. 287-301.

Seeberg, P. 2014. “The Iranian Revolution, 1977–79: Interaction and Transformation”. Britaniya Yaqin Sharq tadqiqotlari jurnali. Volume 41, Issue 4. pp. 483-497.

Skocpol, T. 1982. “Rentier State and Shi’a Islam in the Iranian Revolution”. Theory and Society. Volume 11, No. 3. pp. 265-283.

Sohrabi, N. 2018. “The “Problem Space” of the Historiography of the 1979 Iranian Revolution”. History Compass. Volume 16, Issue 11. pp. 1-10.

Written by: Nathan Olsen
Written at: University of Leeds
Written for: Dr Lars Berger
Date written: May 2019


Mustaqil

The Independent was an American magazine of religion, politics, and literature published in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. It was published weekly in New York for most of its lifespan, though in its later years it shifted to fortnightly, and moved to Boston. (There is a Wikipedia article about this serial.)

Publication History

The Independent began in 1848 as a Congregationalist journal, but later broadened its focus. It absorbed The Chautauquan in 1914, and Harper's Weekly in 1916. It absorbed the Weekly Review in 1921, and for a few months in 1921 and 1922 was known as The Independent and the Weekly Review. No issue or contribution copyright renewals were found for this serial. (More details) It ran until 1928, when it was absorbed by The Outlook.

Persistent Archives of Complete Issues

  • 1860: The Internet Archive has volume 12, number 623, dated November 8, 1860.
  • 1878: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 30, covering January-June 1878.
  • 1879: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 31, covering January-June 1878.
  • 1882: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 34, covering January-June 1882.
  • 1882: HathiTrust has the second half of volume 34, covering July-December 1882.
  • 1884: HathiTrust has the second half of volume 36, covering July-December 1884.
  • 1887: HathiTrust has the second half of volume 39, covering July-December 1887.
  • 1889: HathiTrust has the second half of volume 41, covering July-December 1889.
  • 1890: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 42, covering January-June 1890.
  • 1895: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 47, covering January-June 1895.
  • 1895: HathiTrust has the second half of volume 47, covering July-December 1895.
  • 1896: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 48, covering January-June 1896.
  • 1898: HathiTrust has the first half of volume 50, covering January-June 1898.
  • 1898-1923: HathiTrust has the second half of volume 50, and volumes 51-107 and 109-110.
  • 1911: The Internet Archive has volume 70, covering January-June 1911.
  • 1911: The Internet Archive has volume 71, covering July-December 1911.
  • 1912: The Internet Archive has volume 72, covering January-June 1912.
  • 1912: The Internet Archive has volume 73, covering July-December 1912.
  • 1913: The Internet Archive has volume 74, covering January-June 1913.
  • 1913: The Internet Archive has volume 75, covering July-September 1913.
  • 1913: The Internet Archive has volume 76, covering October-December 1913.
  • 1914: The Internet Archive has volume 77, covering January-March 1914.
  • 1914: The Internet Archive has volume 78, covering April-June 1914.
  • 1914: The Internet Archive has volumes 79 and 80, covering July-December 1914.
  • 1915: The Internet Archive has volumes 81 and 82, covering January-June 1915.
  • 1915: The Internet Archive has volumes 83 and 84, covering July-December 1915.
  • 1916: The Internet Archive has volumes 85 and 86, covering January-June 1916.
  • 1916: The Internet Archive has volumes 87 and 88, covering July-December 1916.
  • 1917: The Internet Archive has volumes 89 and 90, covering January-June 1917.
  • 1917: The Internet Archive has volumes 91 and 92, covering July-December 1917.
  • 1918: The Internet Archive has volumes 93 and 94, covering January-June 1918.
  • 1918: The Internet Archive has volumes 95 and 96, covering July-December 1918.
  • 1919: The Internet Archive has volumes 97 and 98, covering January-June 1919.
  • 1919: The Internet Archive has volumes 99 and 100, covering July-December 1919.
  • 1920: The Internet Archive has volumes 101 and 102, covering January-June 1920.
  • 1920: The Internet Archive has volumes 103 and 104, covering July-December 1920.
  • 1921: The Internet Archive has volumes 105 and 106, covering January-September 1921.
  • 1921: The Internet Archive has volume 107, covering October-December 1921.
  • 1922: The Internet Archive has volume 108, covering January-June 1922.
  • 1922: The Internet Archive has volume 109, covering July-December 1922.
  • 1922: HathiTrust has volume 109, covering July-December 1922.
  • 1923: HathiTrust has volume 110, covering January-June 1923.
  • 1923: HathiTrust has volume 111, covering July-December 1923.
  • 1924: HathiTrust has volumes 112 and 113.
  • 1925: HathiTrust has volume 115, covering July-December 1925.

Tegishli manbalar

  • We also list issues of The Chautauquan, which this magazine absorbed in 1914.
  • We also list issues of Harper's Weekly, which this magazine absorbed in 1916.
  • We also list some issues of The Outlook, which absorbed this periodical.

This is a record of a major serial archive. This page is maintained for The Online Books Page. (See our criteria for listing serial archives.) This page has no affiliation with the serial or its publisher.


The future size of religiously affiliated and unaffiliated populations

Fon: People who are religiously unaffiliated (including self-identifying atheists and agnostics, as well as those who say their religion is "nothing in particular") made up 16ǐ% of the world's population in 2010. Unaffiliated populations have been growing in North America and Europe, leading some to expect that this group will grow as a share of the world's population. However, such forecasts overlook the impact of demographic factors, such as fertility and the large, aging unaffiliated population in Asia.

Objective: We project the future size of religiously affiliated and unaffiliated populations around the world.

Methods: We use multistate cohort-component methods to project the size of religiously affiliated and unaffiliated populations. Projection inputs such as religious composition, differential fertility, and age structure data, as well as religious switching patterns, are based on the best available census and survey data for each country. This research is based on an analysis of more than 2,500 data sources.

Natijalar: Taking demographic factors into account, we project that the unaffiliated will make up 13ǎ% of the world’s population in 2050. The median age of religiously affiliated women is six years younger than unaffiliated women. The 2010-15 Total Fertility Rate for those with a religious affiliation is 2ሳ children per woman, nearly a full child higher than the rate for the unaffiliated Ƒሹ children per woman).

Xulosa: The religiously unaffiliated are projected to decline as a share of the world's population in the decades ahead because their net growth through religious switching will be more than offset by higher childbearing among the younger affiliated population.


The Letters of TS Eliot: Volume 5, 1930-1931, edited by Valerie Eliot and John Haffenden – review

I n a letter of 9 August 1930, TS Eliot dissociates himself from modern poets. He alone is exploring the “intenser” feelings “in terms of the divine goal”. Among the telling letters he wrote from the age of 41 to 43 are those explaining that his model for his long poem Ash Wednesday (1930) had been Dante’s initiation into the “new life”, La Vita Nuova. Its aim was “the discipline of the emotions”.

The correspondence in this new volume follow Eliot’s great Dante essay of 1929. Two outstanding letters open up Eliot’s commitment to the psychic journey through an inferno and purgatory, and his reach toward expressing the inexpressible in future poems.

In the midst of business communications relating to Eliot’s journal the Criterion, accounts of his high-toned engagements with European intellectuals such as Ernst Robert Curtius in Germany, as well as factual reports to his mother- and brother-in-law about shares it is extraordinary to come upon an unguarded Eliot opening up to Paul Elmer More, a fellow American and Anglican, about how he went “in daily terror of eternity”. To More, he is not the “enigma” (as one correspondent complains), not the Pope of Russell Square (his address at Faber & Faber, where Eliot was a director) on the subject of pain, Eliot bares his soul. “I am shocked by your assertion that God did not make Hell,” he writes on 2 June 1930. “Is your God Santa Claus?”

Religion had brought Eliot “the perception of something above morals, and therefore extremely terrifying … more terrifying than ordinary pain and misery the very dark night and the desert.” Given his dismissal of the Unreal City of The Waste Land, it is telling that he finds the maker of hell to be real – “more real”, he insists, “than sweetness and light and culture”.

The other revealing letter, on 28 March 1931, is a response to Stephen Spender who had been listening to Beethoven. Eliot replies:

I have the A minor quartet on the gramophone, and find it quite inexhaustible to study. There is a sort of heavenly or at least more than human gaity [sic] about some of his later things which one imagines might come to oneself as the fruit of reconciliation and relief after immense suffering I should like to get something of that into verse once before I die.

It is like a wave rising far out, as Eliot’s masterpiece Four Quartets heaves into sight on his horizon.

Eliot’s social letters are reserved about the ills of his first wife, Vivienne, though some correspondents would have known how strained the marriage was. The Waste Land manuscript includes quatrains about a “Poe-bride” and the horror of a man who finds himself joined to a draining mate who will leave him lifeless – doomed like Roderick in “The Fall of the House of Usher”. Vivienne acted out this nightmare and upstaged it with the domestic English narrative of her letters to others, included in this volume. She confides to a sympathetic Mary Hutchinson and also to Lady Ottoline Morrell how stressful she found it to live with “Tom”, whose moodiness got her down when they were alone.

Vivienne’s letters in earlier volumes, as well as her satirical sketches in the Criterion, highlight the way in which she views foreigners such as her husband, and she explains how her Englishness justifies her jumpy conduct. A power struggle was taking place, exposed in Vivienne’s letters, and in Eliot’s which are overlaid by concern for a wife in poor health.

The creeping shadow of this volume is the oncoming termination of the Eliots’ union after 16 years. His letters still speak the marital language of “we” and “us”. Eliot notes that he must settle Vivienne, already in bed, for the night – his fatherly concern would make it hard for her to believe he had really left her, when he came to do so. Vivienne, for her part, plans a reading of his poems at their home, 68 Clarence Gate Gardens, with the added attraction of dinner. Sadly, the letters show that whenever she exerted herself in the role of poet’s helpmeet, it turned out badly, with Vivienne more ready to acknowledge social disaster than her husband, who tried to sustain the marriage.

Or did he? Part of his new life was a vow of celibacy in 1928 – an act of detachment from his marriage. This volume takes Eliot to the brink of leaving Vivienne when, at the end of 1931, he accepted a visiting professorship at Harvard for 1932-33.

What else is not present in the letters at this point in Eliot’s life? Waiting in the wings was a Bostonian, Emily Hale, a teacher of speech and drama, who had been his first love. Hale, still single, came to England for consecutive summers from 1927 to 1930. Eliot wrote to her at Burford in the Cotswolds in September 1930 and again on 6 October. Though this preliminary phase of their correspondence is not sequestered along with the thousand or so letters that Eliot later wrote to her, it does not appear in this volume. Eliot does mention seeing Hale in a letter to his Boston cousin, Eleanor Hinkley, who had introduced him to Hale in 1912. And a letter in 1931 to another of her friends, Willard Thorp of Princeton, mentions a discussion with Hale.

The dates of Eliot’s early letters to Hale are vital to the record of his imagination as he shaped a role for this woman in the poetry of the new life: the revitalising figure of the “Lady” in Ash Wednesday, and the emotional quickening of reunion, couched in the seascape of New England, at the end of a journey in “Marina” (1930). Their relationship appears to have quickened further in the course of 1931 when Eliot wrote Hale 92 letters, which will, however, be withheld until 2020.

There is a counter to purified love in a letter dated 20 January 1930 in which the PS revived Eliot’s sex-mad character, King Bolo. Eliot began circulating a smutty verse romp when he was a student at Harvard, and it continued to divert this grave-faced convert, who was prone to urge a Puritan rigour on the mild Anglican church he had chosen to join. The alternation of public rectitude and private licence seems straight out of a tale by Hawthorne, a Dimmesdale figure in an allegory about sin.

Conceivably, he was testing the morality of the letter’s recipient, a Criterion board-member called Bonamy Dobrée. How far can the games at King Bolo’s court – Musical Arse, Blind Man’s Bum, Piss in the Ring, and Postman’s Cock – bring a gentleman of letters to debase himself?

Eliot saw about him a “vulgarity” deeper than the American variety, so he informs his brother in the US. In all the volumes published so far, the letters to Henry Eliot stand out for asides that reveal the expatriate behind Eliot’s Anglicised facade. Concealed behind his London uniform of bowler hat and rolled umbrella, he exercised a patient, curious eye, detecting clues to character with an outsider’s power of judgment. That power, enhanced by his position at Faber and the status of the Criterion, reached full strength in the editorial rulings that pervade this volume of the letters.

“CRY what shall I cry?” he quotes from Isaiah in his poem, “Difficulties of a Statesman” (1931). Here is a prophet in the making, to whom all flesh is grass.

Lyndall Gordon’s The Imperfect Life of TS Eliot is published by Virago.


Help us move people beyond their good intentions. Help us share a vision of the material poor as full of creative capacity, dignity, and potential. Only then will we see true, human flourishing in the poorest corners of the earth.

PovertyCure, being an initiative of the Acton Institute, seeks to connect good intentions with sounds economics. So often the efforts of well-meaning people and organizations to address poverty do more harm than good. Our goal is to equip these same people and organizations with resources that promote satisfying and fruitful work, within the context of a free and virtuous society, as the best, and most sustainable, pathway out of poverty.

Your donations will help us reach additional schools, churches, nonprofits, and other organizations with this message. Through screenings of the PovertyCure Video Series, simple training sessions with organizations, and conferences with influential nonprofit leaders, we hope more and more people will move away from aid and embrace enterprise in their fight against material poverty.


ScholarlyCommons

John Efron's new book pursues two scholarly trajectories simultaneously. On the one hand, it offers a history of Jewish physicians and medical practice in Germany from the Middle Ages until the Holocaust period. On the other hand, it examines the uses of medicine and medical discourse to bolster or undermine political, racial, and national agendas, both Jewish and antisemitic, in the modern era. Although Efron seeks to link these two subjects as one, they do not mesh as organically as he intends. Moreover, while the second trajectory is generally well-conceived and well-argued, making a genuine contribution to modern Jewish cultural history, the first is more sketchy and uneven, and is clearly less accomplished.

Copyright/Permission Statement

Barcha huquqlar himoyalangan. Except for brief quotations used for purposes of scholarly citation, none of this work may be reproduced in any form by any means without written permission from the publisher. For information address the University of Pennsylvania Press, 3905 Spruce Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104-4112.


God and Atheism

The reason for the apparent discrepancy between Scotus ' solution to the
problem of man's knowledge ning Xudo and his . by revelation , in the Theoremata
he attempts to reach Xudo purely as a philosopher , i.e. , by the light of tabiiy
reason alone . . 59 See Charles Balić , “ The Life and Works of John Duns
Scotus , " pp .

  • Muallif: Bernardino M. Bonansea
  • Publisher:
  • ISBN: UOM:39015002694647
  • Turkum: Xudo
  • Page: 378
  • View: 929

"Don't Tread on Me": Customers' Religious Objections to Mandated Use of Face Masks in the Era of COVID-19

Untold millions have lost jobs, and vast numbers of businesses have been forced to close in an attempt to slow the spread of the coronavirus. COVID-19, as of September 2, 2020, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has killed or contributed to the deaths of at least 170,000 Americans. Congress, a few months ago, threw employers a curveball in the form of the "Families First Coronavirus Response Act" (the "FFCRA") that, for the first time, created a nationwide paid-leave law. States have issued their own laws and executive orders, as has, for example, North Carolina, the most recent of which, Executive Order 163, was issued on September 1, 2020. An article about that can be found here.

All business owners must consider what they must do to protect the health and safety of their employees and customers in ways that most employers never pondered before. "CDC guidelines" have become more prominent than ever, and face masks, previously used primarily in clinical and industrial settings, have become de rigueur if not legally required.

But some people object to wearing face masks and don't want their employer or the businesses that they patronize to tell them that they have to do so when on the businesses' premises. Some of those who have objected to the requirement have done so on religious grounds. One group, for example, ironically named "The Healthy American", based in California, is selling a "RELIGIOUS EXEMPTION INFORMATION CARD" for a "donation" of $12, that "can be used in every state in the USA" (the "Religious Exemption Card"). The Religious Exemption Card, 4 x 3 inches in size and provided with a "plastic sleeve and neck lanyard", reads exactly (in substance and form) as follows:

The bearer of this card is LEGALLY EXEMPT from wearing any face coverings or being subjected to temperature taking or viral testing, as protected by U.S. Federal Law Title 2 of the Civil Rights Act, §§ 201 (a) According to state and federal civil rights law, this individual has FREE and EQUAL access to all facilities in your business establishment, regardless of store policies. Refusal of service may place you at risk of being prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Your recognition and protection of these religious and civil rights is appreciated.

The Religious Exemption Card purports to be signed by a "Pastoral Representative" and bears a gold seal with a cross. The seller's website claims that the "bearer of this card is exempt from wearing masks or cloth face coverings" (and for that matter from "having temperature taken, viral testing and vaccinations") that "[y]our right to shop mask-free is protected by state and federal civil law, which defends your religious freedom" and that the "card clearly states the applicable laws, and penalty for violating the laws." But the seller, wisely unsure of itself, cautions that "[t]his card … does not guarantee your entry into any particular business establishment."

That's good because the Religious Exemption Card does nothing of the kind.

The card refers to "Federal Law Title 2 of the Civil Rights Act", presumably meaning Title II of the Civil Rights of Act of 1964 (the "Act"), which prohibits "discrimination or segregation in [specified] places of public accommodation" based, in part, on "religion". (It also refers to unspecified "state … civil rights law". North Carolina law doesn't "exempt" customers from having to wear masks in public facilities based on "religion" (although the governor's latest Executive Order does so on numerous other grounds). The relevant laws of other states, if any, are beyond the scope of this article.)

Employers have had to deal with the threat of potential "religious discrimination" claims by applicants and employees for decades. Title VII of the Act requires ish beruvchilar who are covered by that title of the Act (generally speaking, those that employ 15 or more employees) to "reasonably accommodate" – in the employment context – an applicant's or employee's sincerely held religious belief, unless doing so would cause an "undue hardship on the conduct of the employer's business". Such an accommodation might take the form of letting an employee whose traditional Sabbath is on Saturday have that day off and work instead on Sunday, or waiving a dress code prohibiting employees from wearing headwear and permitting an employee who wears a turban for sincerely held religious reasons to wear it at work. Such employment-based obligations are nothing new.

But do the obligations imposed on ish beruvchilar by Title VII mean that xaridorlar of businesses, based on Title II, have the "right to shop mask-free" based on customers' so-called "religious freedom" or that owners of businesses who refuse service to the mask-less face the "risk of being prosecuted?" The answer, thank … goodness, is NO.

The law invoked by the Religious Exemption Card, Title II of the Act, provides in part as follows:

2000a. Prohibition against discrimination or segregation in places of public accommodation

"(a) Equal access

All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

Notably, it applies only to defined "place[s] of public accommodation". They include, for example:

Inns, hotels, motels, and other establishments that provide "lodging to transient guests"

Restaurants, cafeterias, lunchrooms, lunch counters, soda fountains, and "other facility[ies] principally engaged in selling food for consumption on the premises" and

Movie theaters, concert halls, sports arenas, stadiums and "other place[s] of exhibition or entertainment".

Customers who have suffered intentional "discrimination or segregation on the ground of … religion" in a "place of public accommodation" (for example, by the posting of a bigoted sign reading "No Sikhs allowed") can sue an offending business, but not for money-damages: they may sue only for prospective injunctive relief, and may get an award of "a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs" in the discretion of the court.

But can they lawfully sue a business for alleged violation of the Act, whose only offense is refusing to accommodate a customer's religious demand that he or she be allowed to "shop mask-free"? The answer, again, is NO. Title II of the Act, no matter what you may hear elsewhere, does emas require "place[s] of public accommodation" to accommodate the religious beliefs of its patrons by waiving a rule that it imposes on others so long as the rule is applied to all customers without regard to their "religion" (or, for that matter, their race, color, or national origin), such as a rule prohibiting entry on the premises unless you are wearing a face mask".

This, too, is not new. As plainly put by a federal district court in Idaho 25 years ago:

In the three decades since Title II was enacted, Congress and the supervising federal agencies have never added language to Title II to extend Title VII's employee protections to customers or patrons. In the Court's view, this is persuasive evidence of a congressional intent not to require Title II public facilities to reasonably accommodate the religious beliefs of patrons.

The court noted the "complete absence of any court decision in the past thirty years applying the reasonable accommodation requirements of Title VII to Title II". That absence has continued to this day.

The bottom line for those who operate businesses that are covered by Title II of the Act and their customers: A Title II claim of "religious" discrimination cannot be asserted based only on the imposition of a rule requiring customers to wear specified attire, such as face masks, that denies service to those who refuse to wear them, agar bo'lmasa there is reason to believe that the operator of the business, by imposing the rule, intended to discriminate against customers based on religion. Mere faith in that perception, devoid of evidence of intentional discrimination, won't cut it. Neither will reliance on a $12 "Religious Exemption Card."

Customers inclined to buy such a card would make better use of their money by spending it on a mask.


Xulosa

The Framers derived an independent government out of Enlightenment thinking against the grievances caused by Great Britain. Our Founders paid little heed to political beliefs about Christianity. The 1st Amendment stands as the bulkhead against an establishment of religion and at the same time insures the free expression of any belief. The Treaty of Tripoli, an instrument of the Constitution, clearly stated our non-Christian foundation. We inherited common law from Great Britain which derived from pre-Christian Saxons rather than from Biblical scripture.

Today we have powerful Christian organizations who work to spread historical myths about early America and attempt to bring a Christian theocracy to the government. If this ever happens, then indeed, we will have ignored the lessons from history. Fortunately, most liberal Christians today agree with the principles of separation of church and State, just as they did in early America.

"They all attributed the peaceful dominion of religion in their country mainly to the separation of church and state. I do not hesitate to affirm that during my stay in America I did not meet a single individual, of the clergy or the laity, who was not of the same opinion on this point"

-Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1835

Bibliografiya

Borden, Morton, "Jews, Turks, and Infidels," The University of North Carolina Press, 1984

Boston, Robert, "Why the Religious Right is Wrong About Separation of Church & State, "Prometheus Books, 1993

Boston, F. Andrews, et al, "The Writings of George Washington," (12 Vols.), Charleston, S.C., 1833-37

Fitzpatrick, John C., ed., "The Diaries of George Washington, 1748-1799," Houghton Mifflin Company: Published for the Mount Vernon Ladies Association of the Union, 1925

Gay, Kathlyn, "Church and State,"The Millbrook Press," 1992

Handy, Robert, T., "A History of the Churches in U.S. and Canada," New York: Oxford University Press, 1977

Hayes, Judith, "All those Christian Presidents," [The American Rationalist, March/April 1997]

Kock, Adrienne, ed., "The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society," New York: George Braziller, 1965

Mapp, Jr, Alf J., "Thomas Jefferson," Madison Books, 1987

Middlekauff, Robert, "The Glorious Cause," Oxford University Press, 1982

Miller, Hunter, ed., "Treaties and other International Acts of the United States of America," Vol. 2, Documents 1-40: 1776-1818, United States Government Printing Office, Washington: 1931

Peterson, Merrill D., "Thomas Jefferson Writings," The Library of America, 1984

Remsburg, John E., "Six Historic Americans," The Truth Seeker Company, New York

Robinson, John J., "Born in Blood," M. Evans & Company, New York, 1989

Roche, O.I.A., ed, "The Jefferson Bible: with the Annotated Commentaries on Religion of Thomas Jefferson," Clarkson N. Potter, Inc., 1964

Seldes, George, ed., "The Great Quotations," Pocket Books, New York, 1967

Sweet, William W., "Revivalism in America, its origin, growth and decline," C. Scribner's Sons, New York, 1944

Woodress, James, "A Yankee's Odyssey, the Life of Joel Barlow," J. P. Lippincott Co., 1958

Encyclopedia sources:

Common law: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 6, "William Benton, Publisher, 1969

Declaration of Independence: MicroSoft Encarta 1996 Encyclopedia, MicroSoft Corp., Funk & Wagnalls Corporation.

In God We Trust: MicroSoft Encarta 1996 Encyclopedia, MicroSoft Corp., Funk & Wagnalls Corporation.

Pledge of Allegiance: Academic American Encyclopedia, Vol. 15, Grolier Incorporated, Danbury, Conn., 1988

Special thanks to Ed Buckner, Robert Boston, Selena Brewington and Lion G. Miles, for help in providing me with source materials.


Videoni tomosha qiling: 31-dars: Sajdada aytilishi sunnat bolgan zikrlar. Ustoz Yusuf Davron


Izohlar:

  1. Ayo

    Albatta. Yuqoridagilarning barchasiga qo'shilaman. Biz ushbu mavzu bo'yicha aloqa qilishimiz mumkin.

  2. Vobar

    Afsuski, endi ifoda eta olmayman - bo'sh vaqt yo'q. Men ozod bo'laman - bu savolga o'z fikrimni bildiraman.

  3. Kamlyn

    bu ijobiy) faqat sinf)

  4. Tier

    Men sizning fikringizni to'liq baham ko'raman. In it something is and it is good idea. Men sizni qo'llab-quvvatlayman.

  5. Ambros

    Siz to'g'ri emasligingizni aytishingizni xohlayman.



Xabar yozing