龔鵬程對(duì)話海外學(xué)者第六十一期：在后現(xiàn)代情境中，被技術(shù)統(tǒng)治的人類社會(huì)，只有強(qiáng)化交談、重建溝通倫理，才能獲得文化新生的力量。這不是誰的理論，而是每個(gè)人都應(yīng)實(shí)踐的活動(dòng)。龔鵬程先生遊走世界，并曾主持過“世界漢學(xué)研究中心”。我們會(huì)陸續(xù)推出“龔鵬程對(duì)話海外學(xué)者”系列文章，請(qǐng)他對(duì)話一些學(xué)界有意義的靈魂。范圍不局限于漢學(xué)，會(huì)涉及多種學(xué)科。以期深山長(zhǎng)谷之水，四面而出。

瑪麗亞·H·A·雅斯科教授（Professor Maria H.A. Jaschok）

牛津大學(xué)國(guó)際性別研究中心主任。

龔鵬程教授：您好。請(qǐng)問對(duì)女性主義在美國(guó)激化發(fā)展的酷兒（Queer）理論及其政治社會(huì)實(shí)踐，您有何看法？

瑪麗亞·H·A·雅斯科教授：龔教授，您好。學(xué)術(shù)研究告訴我們，酷兒理論并不是一個(gè)同質(zhì)化或系統(tǒng)化的學(xué)派，而是各種研究的混合體，它們專注于對(duì)異性戀的批判，即那些支持異性戀作為統(tǒng)一、自然和包羅萬象的原始性活動(dòng)的機(jī)構(gòu)、結(jié)構(gòu)、關(guān)系和行為。

在90年代酷兒理論的早期，學(xué)者和哲學(xué)家們?cè)谖谋痉治龊蛯?duì)視覺文化和政治的解釋方面有一個(gè)共同的基礎(chǔ)，而且大多數(shù)人的出發(fā)點(diǎn)是女性研究、女權(quán)主義理論和女同性戀研究。

雖然酷兒理論、女同性戀研究之間的關(guān)系和互動(dòng)已經(jīng)變得緊張，相互支持有時(shí)會(huì)讓位于對(duì)學(xué)科身份劃分的指責(zé)，對(duì)性別研究忽視酷兒觀點(diǎn)的攻擊，以及目前對(duì)變性理論化與酷兒研究分界的指責(zé)，但是它們?nèi)匀挥泄餐难芯款I(lǐng)域，即對(duì)LGBTQI+社區(qū)的研究。這是同性戀研究的遺產(chǎn)。

一個(gè)深刻的例子說明了：在不斷變幻中的持續(xù)動(dòng)態(tài)，這就是性研究的全景，可以從西方國(guó)家20世紀(jì)70年代婦女運(yùn)動(dòng)中的女同性戀的早期歷史中看到。

在早期，女同性戀只極少數(shù)人群見到，甚至被邊緣化；后來的發(fā)展使女同性戀成為女權(quán)主義批判異性戀的基石，成為理解支撐和塑造主流（異性戀）規(guī)范和實(shí)踐的規(guī)范和機(jī)構(gòu)的構(gòu)建性質(zhì)的出發(fā)點(diǎn)。

在這方面，有必要指出，命名的政治，本質(zhì)上是一種身份的政治，已經(jīng)導(dǎo)致西方年輕一代的女同性戀者更傾向于用 "queer"而不是 "lesbian"作為她們性行為的標(biāo)志。其內(nèi)涵是一種更廣泛的政治化身份，與主流規(guī)范和價(jià)值觀的 "同性戀 "不一致，也更容易接受。

酷兒方法論已經(jīng)超越了性活動(dòng)的范疇，意味著研究者對(duì)所考慮的主題的 "酷兒"觀點(diǎn)。

在這方面，位于學(xué)術(shù)界的酷兒理論受到了批評(píng)，因?yàn)樗鲆暳诵袆?dòng)主義和社會(huì)運(yùn)動(dòng)，而認(rèn)同了后現(xiàn)代哲學(xué)、精神分析、后結(jié)構(gòu)主義和文化研究。

批評(píng)者認(rèn)為，如今的"酷兒"一詞越來越多地作為一個(gè)主流術(shù)語，而不是作為其起源的激進(jìn)批評(píng)。如果這個(gè)過程繼續(xù)下去，就像性別理論一樣，這可能會(huì)大大削弱其批評(píng)內(nèi)容和社會(huì)影響。

Scholarship tells us that queer theory is not a homogeneous or systematic school of thought, but a mixture of studies that focus critically on heteronormativity, i.e., those institutions, structures, relations, and acts that support heterosexuality as a uniform, natural and all-embracing primordial sexuality. In the early days of queer theory, in the 1990s, scholars and philosophers had a common base in textual analysis and interpretation of visual culture and politics, and most had their starting point in women’s studies, feminist theory and lesbian and gay studies. Whilst relations and interactions among queer theory, lesbian and gay studies have become tense, with mutual support at times giving way to accusations over demarcations of disciplinary identity, to attacks on gender studies for neglect of queer perspectives and more currently over lines of separation of transsexual theorizing from queer studies, there have however continued to be common areas of research, the study of the LGBTQI+ communities. This is a legacy from lesbian and gay studies.

An insightful illustration of the continued dynamics in the shifting mosaic that is the landscape of study of sexuality might be seen in the early history of lesbianism within the 1970s women’s movement in western countries. In its early days marginal and even marginalized, subsequent developments have made lesbian sexuality a cornerstone of feminist critiques of heteronormativity, a starting point for understanding the constructed nature of norms and institutions that undergird and mould mainstream (heterosexual) norms and practices.

In this connection, it is constructive to note that the politics of naming, essentially a politics of identity, has led to younger generations of lesbians in the west to prefer ‘queer’ as a marker of their sexuality rather than ‘lesbian’. The connotation being that of a wider politicized identity at odds and more comfortable with the ‘queering’ of mainstream norms and values.

Queer methodology has expanded beyond the domain of sexuality to connote a ‘queer’ perspective on the subject matter the researcher is considering. In this connection, queer theory, as situated in academe, has come under criticism for ignoring activism and social movements, instead identifying with postmodern philosophies, psychoanalysis, poststructuralism, and cultural studies. The term ‘queer’ these days, so critics hold, serves increasingly as a mainstream term and not as the radical critique of its origin. If this process continues, very much like gender theory, this could greatly diminish its critical content and social impact.

龔鵬程教授：您能描述一下“女性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的伊斯蘭”嗎？

瑪麗亞·H·A·雅斯科教授：正是在對(duì)清真寺的認(rèn)同中，作為他們社區(qū)獨(dú)特性和其他性的存在理由，伊斯蘭信仰和穆斯林傳統(tǒng)的連續(xù)性被制造出來，并被重新制造。用學(xué)者Kim Knott的話說，"......人們通過他們的想象力、記憶、行動(dòng)和語言來構(gòu)建這樣的場(chǎng)所或環(huán)境"——同時(shí)，他們周圍不斷變化的世界以父權(quán)制的反對(duì)和國(guó)家產(chǎn)生的世俗發(fā)展思想的全部重量壓在他們身上。

我們研究了回族穆斯林婦女在有組織的伊斯蘭教中的歷史存在，也考察了她們作為中國(guó)中部不同地方信仰傳統(tǒng)的女性成員身份。我們認(rèn)為，這些由女性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的宗教組織能夠利用她們的歷史社會(huì)空間，從而擴(kuò)大宗教實(shí)踐對(duì)現(xiàn)代中國(guó)社會(huì)的要求的解放潛力。

婦女自己的禮拜和教育場(chǎng)所的存在，對(duì)穆斯林婦女來說是非常重要的，她們對(duì)自己幾百年來的傳統(tǒng)感到自豪，從而產(chǎn)生了尊嚴(yán)，而且由于有了合法占有的社會(huì)空間，她們有了法律和見證的權(quán)利感。

這一點(diǎn)在相對(duì)自由的國(guó)家政策時(shí)期變得很明顯，當(dāng)時(shí)出現(xiàn)了女性的聲音，這些聲音在中國(guó)社會(huì)發(fā)展的性質(zhì)和未來的世俗主流話語中加入了以前未曾聽到的宗教信徒的觀點(diǎn)。

我和來自中國(guó)中部回族穆斯林家庭的社會(huì)學(xué)家水鏡君一起，從1994年開始對(duì)中國(guó)伊斯蘭教女性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的機(jī)構(gòu)的起源和演變進(jìn)行了研究：在一個(gè)缺乏書面資料的學(xué)術(shù)領(lǐng)域，使用民族志研究和口述歷史來進(jìn)行研究。

我們發(fā)現(xiàn)女性信徒在歷史上對(duì)伊斯蘭教父權(quán)制的挑戰(zhàn)，這種挑戰(zhàn)已經(jīng)制度化，成為補(bǔ)充性的，但有時(shí)也是挑戰(zhàn)性的實(shí)踐和傳統(tǒng)。

我們沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)對(duì)主流神學(xué)辯論的干預(yù)，也沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)"雙重解讀"，即伊斯蘭教世界其他地方所注意到的范式轉(zhuǎn)變。用Ursula King的話說，女性主義對(duì)世界宗教研究和實(shí)踐的影響帶來了 "基礎(chǔ)性的動(dòng)搖，對(duì)我們的知識(shí)和學(xué)術(shù)前景的徹底重塑，以及與宗教有關(guān)的知識(shí)體系的重新定位"。

然而，在中國(guó)的背景下，到目前為止，在對(duì)經(jīng)典文本的解釋中，或在關(guān)于伊斯蘭教的主流或邊緣話語中，幾乎找不到女性的印記。幸而，我們?cè)诘胤缴习l(fā)現(xiàn)了重要的證據(jù)，表明女性宗教領(lǐng)袖和普通信徒是如何通過閱讀、布道、集會(huì)、場(chǎng)所、活動(dòng)和儀式來表達(dá)生存的愿望，并對(duì)不斷變化的社會(huì)需求做出反應(yīng)，以造福于她們的家庭和社區(qū)。

比較中國(guó)不同穆斯林社區(qū)的婦女生活，也就是比較那些擁有女性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的宗教組織傳統(tǒng)的社區(qū)和那些傳統(tǒng)不為人知，或在1978年后宗教場(chǎng)所重新開放時(shí)沒有恢復(fù)的社區(qū)，可以得到一個(gè)重要的啟示：在清真女寺幸存下來并繼續(xù)發(fā)展的地方，在面臨來自伊斯蘭教內(nèi)部、快速現(xiàn)代化和中央集權(quán)的中國(guó)以及與阿拉伯穆斯林國(guó)家重新聯(lián)系的挑戰(zhàn)時(shí)，它們是婦女的重要資源。

當(dāng)這些女性被認(rèn)同于一個(gè)在社會(huì)上有公認(rèn)地位的機(jī)構(gòu)，而且是合法注冊(cè)的機(jī)構(gòu)時(shí)，她們挑戰(zhàn)歧視性做法的能力就會(huì)更強(qiáng)。通過占領(lǐng)像清真女寺這樣的社會(huì)空間，投入歷史、傳統(tǒng)和具有表現(xiàn)力的文化和教育遺產(chǎn)，通過這樣的空間資源，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層可以調(diào)集政治和社會(huì)資本，以及黨/國(guó)家的支持，使她們?cè)诒匾獣r(shí)能夠抵御對(duì)其獨(dú)特機(jī)構(gòu)和婦女行使領(lǐng)導(dǎo)權(quán)的合法性的攻擊。

對(duì)穆斯林女性來說，全球化也帶來了來自阿拉伯-穆斯林世界的影響——通過對(duì)清真寺學(xué)校的資助，通過有學(xué)識(shí)的教師的訪問，通過朝圣和旅游，盡管程度比清真男寺要小。

這種影響在地方上如何發(fā)揮作用？更廣泛地說，婦女在與國(guó)家當(dāng)局或男性同行討價(jià)還價(jià)時(shí)能獲得多大的力量，這取決于特定的清真女寺的地緣政治和物質(zhì)條件，但重要的是，取決于清真寺的女阿訇的能力，以及她不僅能帶來令人信服的宗教學(xué)識(shí)，還能帶來相當(dāng)?shù)恼魏蜕鐣?huì)關(guān)系技能。

中國(guó)穆斯林組織傳統(tǒng)、儀式實(shí)踐和政治地位的多樣性反映在不同的地緣政治格局和與中央政府的關(guān)系，以及與精神家園和中東朝圣地的不同程度的重新聯(lián)系（在20世紀(jì)80年代邊境開放后）。正是在這種情況下，"穆斯林女性"作為伊斯蘭教、種族和政治分界的 "邊界主體"，發(fā)揮著集體身份載體的有力作用。

It is here, in the identification with the mosque as defining raison d’être of their communal distinctiveness, and otherness, that continuities of Islamic faith and Muslim traditions are made, and remade. In the words of the scholar Kim Knott, ‘… people construct such sites or environments through their imaginations, memories, actions, and speech’ – as simultaneously the changing world around them presses on them with the full weight of patriarchal disapproval and state engendered secular development ideology. In our study of the historical presence of Hui Muslim women in organized Islam and of women as members of diverse local faith traditions in central China, we (that is, Jaschok and Shui, 2000) argue that these female-led religious organizations were able to use their historical social space to capitalize on, and thus widen, the emancipatory potential of religious practices for requirements of modern Chinese society.

The presence of women’s own places of worship and education makes all the difference to Muslim women whose pride in their centuries-old tradition engenders dignity and, because of a legitimately occupied social space, a sense of legal and testimonial rights. This became evident during the years of relatively liberal state policies, when female voices emerged which were adding to secular mainstream discourses over the nature and future of societal developments in China previously unheard perspectives of religious believers.

Together with the sociologist Shui Jingjun, who comes from a Hui Muslim family in central China, I have since 1994 conducted research into the genesis and evolution of Islamic female-led institutions in China, using ethnographic research and oral history in an area of scholarship where written sources are scarce. We discovered the historical challenge to Islamic patriarchy by female believers which has become institutionalized into complementary, but sometimes also challenging, practises and traditions. We did not uncover interventions in mainstream theological debates, nor the ‘double readings’ involving the sort of paradigm shifts that has been noted elsewhere in Islamic circles where, to quote Ursula King, the impact of feminism on the study of, and practices in, world religions, has brought about the ‘shaking of foundations, a radical remapping of our intellectual and academic landscape, and a repositioning of bodies of knowledge that relate to religion.’ In the Chinese context, however, so far little trace of women’s imprint may be found in interpretations of canonical texts, or in mainstream or marginal discourses on Islam. However, we uncovered at the local level significant evidence of how women religious leaders and ordinary believers have en-gendered readings, sermons, assemblies, places, events, and rituals to express existential aspirations and to respond to changing social needs, for the benefit of their families and communities.

Comparison of women’s lives in the diverse Muslim communities in China, that is, comparison of communities boasting of a tradition of female-led religious organizations with those where this tradition is unknown or was not revived when religious sites re-opened after 1978, allow for an important insight. Where women’s mosques have survived and continue to grow, they constitute an important resource for women at times of challenges from within Islam, from a rapidly modernizing, and centralizing Chinese state and from reconnected links with Arab-Muslim countries. Women’s capacity to challenge discriminatory practices proves itself to be stronger when these women are identified with an institution, moreover legally registered, which has a recognized place in society. Through occupation of a social space such as the women’s mosque, invested with history, tradition, and expressive cultural and educational legacies, through such spatial resource, leaderships may marshal political and social capital, as well as the support of the Party/State, enabling them to withstand, if necessary, attacks on their unique institution and on the legitimacy of women to exercise leadership. Globalization for Muslim women has entailed also, if to a lesser extent than has been the case for men’s mosques, influences from the Arab-Muslim world – through help with funding of mosque schools, through the visits of learned teachers, through pilgrimages and tourism. How this influence plays itself at local level, more generally, how much strength women can garner to bargain with state authorities or their male counterparts, depends on the geo-political and material conditions of a given women’s mosque but also, importantly, on the calibre of the mosque’s presiding female ahong and her ability to bring to representation not only convincing religious erudition but also considerable political and social networking skills.

The diversity of Chinese Muslim organizational traditions, ritual practices and political standing is reflected in varied geo-political constellations and relations with the central state as well as different degrees of reconnections (following the opening of borders during the 1980s) with the spiritual homeland and its sacred sites of pilgrimage in the Middle East. It is in this context that ‘the Muslim woman’, a ‘boundary subject’ of Islamic, ethnic, and political demarcations, performs a potent role as carrier of collective identity.

龔鵬程教授：能不能介紹中國(guó)中部地區(qū)女性宗教成員對(duì)當(dāng)?shù)毓裆矸莺凸裆鐣?huì)的影響問題？

瑪麗亞·H·A·雅斯科教授：在中國(guó)的中原地區(qū)，婦女清真寺作為她們?cè)谥袊?guó)社會(huì)中的歷史地位的可見的、多方面的象征，在記錄婦女的集體的、積極的能力方面形成了一條重要的線索。這些能力不僅對(duì)她們自己，也對(duì)她們周圍的社會(huì)產(chǎn)生了影響，而且為獨(dú)特的性別化的過去和充滿希望的未來提供了聲音。

正是在這個(gè)地區(qū)，婦女清真寺的傳統(tǒng)起源于300多年前，激勵(lì)著當(dāng)代穆斯林婦女和她們的宗教領(lǐng)袖重新/發(fā)現(xiàn)、記錄并找到保護(hù)其獨(dú)特遺產(chǎn)和文化傳統(tǒng)的方法。

基于清真寺的教育機(jī)會(huì)使文盲婦女能夠按照規(guī)定的祈禱和儀式進(jìn)行禮拜，將《古蘭經(jīng)》和圣訓(xùn)中的命令應(yīng)用于穆斯林的道德和行為，并為在非穆斯林國(guó)家作為穆斯林生活找到重要的心理和情感支持。

對(duì)婦女來說，禮拜和祈禱的儀式是在（女性）家務(wù)和宗教職責(zé)之間的日常緊張關(guān)系中進(jìn)行的，這就構(gòu)成了清真女寺存在的意義背景，它由一位女性阿訇領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，能夠維持婦女在思考后世時(shí)對(duì)其靈魂的拯救的希望。

婦女清真寺提供的安全感、保障和精神以及社會(huì)支持，對(duì)婦女與當(dāng)?shù)厣鐓^(qū)以及與更廣泛的世界的互動(dòng)產(chǎn)生了不同的重要影響。在一個(gè)以性別隔離為主的社會(huì)中，明末清初博學(xué)的女教師，后來在中國(guó)中部的回族穆斯林社區(qū)也被稱為女阿訇，在有限的婦女世界和救贖的前景之間發(fā)揮著中介作用。在女性宗教機(jī)構(gòu)300多年的歷史中，通過教學(xué)、咨詢、指導(dǎo)以及代表普通穆斯林婦女進(jìn)行更直接的干預(yù)。可以說這些女阿訇對(duì)公共空間進(jìn)行了重大的入侵，使穆斯林的女兒、妻子和母親在這些地方變得"安全"，以擴(kuò)大獲得教育和文化以及宗教資源的機(jī)會(huì)。

許多最有能力和最受尊敬的清真女寺領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人在為感恩的教眾服務(wù)時(shí)，已經(jīng)實(shí)現(xiàn)了職責(zé)的多樣化，可以說是為教眾以外的女孩和婦女的各種需求服務(wù)。

這些服務(wù)包括為有需要的家庭提供慈善，為農(nóng)村地區(qū)教育條件差的婦女和女孩（也經(jīng)常為非穆斯林女孩）提供教育，最近還為失業(yè)或需要額外技能的婦女提供職業(yè)課程。有鑒于此，宗教可以被視為活動(dòng)和機(jī)構(gòu)的來源，它注入并促進(jìn)了與現(xiàn)代化社會(huì)密切相關(guān)的發(fā)展和進(jìn)步的概念。

過去幾年，清真女寺的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人毫不猶豫地批評(píng)了他們認(rèn)為伊斯蘭生活的純潔性被越來越多的商業(yè)化以及對(duì)地位和收入的重視超過了宗教原則所污染的情況。在中國(guó)中部的穆斯林社區(qū)中，一些最獨(dú)立的女阿訇已經(jīng)成為運(yùn)動(dòng)的先鋒，她們呼吁更干凈、更精神的生活。

因此，可以說，女性正在以身作則。這得益于將民主管理委員會(huì)有效地納入清真女寺文化（自1957年開始實(shí)施），以及堅(jiān)持透明的選拔程序和社區(qū)內(nèi)部對(duì)候選人能力的全面協(xié)商。被任命的女阿訇只有在表現(xiàn)令人滿意的情況下才能續(xù)簽合同。

中國(guó)國(guó)家對(duì)其宗教少數(shù)群體的政策和更廣泛的性別制度，正在塑造穆斯林婦女的機(jī)會(huì)，使她們能夠商討出更多有抱負(fù)的角色組合。觀念的改變和對(duì)她們?cè)诋?dāng)?shù)毓采钪兴l(fā)聲音的日益承認(rèn)，雖然受到更廣泛力量的影響，但同時(shí)也受到與她們自己的本土傳統(tǒng)的重新聯(lián)系的滋養(yǎng)，以及對(duì)她們作為穆斯林和中國(guó)婦女身份的獨(dú)特成就的日益自豪。

It is in the central plains of China that the enduring presence of women’s mosques as visible, multi-facetted symbols of their historical place in Chinese society, forms an important thread in documenting women’s collective, agential capacities. These are capacities which make a difference not only to themselves but also to society around them, giving moreover voice to a uniquely gendered past and possibility of a hopeful future.

It is in this region that the tradition of women’s mosques had its origins over 300 years ago, motivating contemporary Muslim women and their religious leaders to re/discover, record, and find ways to preserve their unique heritage and cultural tradition. Opportunities for mosque-based education enabled illiterate women to worship in line with prescribed prayers and rites, to apply commands from the Qur’an and from Hadiths to Muslim morality and conduct, and to find important psychological and emotional support for living as a Muslim in non-Muslim nation. For women, rites of worship and prayer are performed in daily tensions between (female) domestic and religious duties, and this forms the context for the significance of the presence of a women’s mosque, led by a woman ahong, able to sustains women’s hope for salvation of their soul as they ponder Afterlife.

The sense of safety, security and spiritual as well as social support women’s mosques provided have had varied and important consequences for women’s interaction with the local community but also with the wider world. In a predominantly gender-segregated society, the learned women teachers of the late Ming/early Qing dynastic eras, subsequently known in central China’s Hui Muslim communities also as ahong, functioned as mediators between the limited world of women and prospects of salvation. During a more than 300-year long history of female religious institutions, through teaching, counselling, guidance, and more direct intervention on behalf of ordinary Muslim women, it can be argued that these ahong came to make significant incursions into public space, making these ‘safe’ for Muslim daughters, wives, and mothers to widen access to educational and cultural as well as religious resources.

Many of the most capable and respected women’s mosque leaders have come to diversify duties and responsibilities in the service of a grateful congregation, arguably serving varied needs of girls and women often beyond their congregation. Such services can include delivering charity for families in need, providing education to women and girls (and not infrequently to non-Muslim girls) in rural areas where schooling is poor and, in recent times, vocational courses are offered to women unemployed or in need of additional skills. In this light, religion could be seen as a source of activity and agency which infuses and facilitates notions of development and progress of close relevance to a modernizing society.

Women’s mosque leaders have these last years not hesitated to critique what they regard as contamination of the purity of Islamic life by increased commercialisation and regard to status and income over more religious principles. Some of the most independent voices among female ahong in central China’s Muslim communities have made themselves the vanguard of a movement calling for cleaner, and more spiritual, life. Arguably therefore, women are seeking to lead by example. This has been helped by means of effective incorporation into women’s mosque culture of democratic management committees (in place since 1957) and insistence on transparent selection procedures and thorough intra-community consultations over the calibre of candidates. Contracts are renewable for appointed ahong only after satisfactory performance.

Chinese state policies towards its religious minorities and the wider gender regime are shaping Muslim women’s opportunities for negotiating an expanded repertoire of aspirational roles. Changing conceptions and growing realizations of the strength of their voices in local public life, whilst influenced by wider forces, are at the same time nourished by reconnection with their own indigenous traditions, and a growing pride in the uniqueness of their achievements as women in both their Muslim and Chinese identities.

龔鵬程教授：在亞洲印度教或佛教背景下，從書寫或聽覺研究婦女史，可以有什么進(jìn)展嗎？

瑪麗亞·H·A·雅斯科教授：在以全球南方和后殖民研究為基礎(chǔ)的女權(quán)主義勢(shì)頭的推動(dòng)下，在被Rosi Braidotti稱為 "后世俗 "女權(quán)主義階段的時(shí)代，新的宗教女權(quán)主義流派對(duì)婦女的宗教經(jīng)驗(yàn)的多樣性給予了越來越多的批判性關(guān)注，作為多樣化的嵌入式女權(quán)主義的替代形式。

越來越多有影響力的學(xué)者在寫宗教機(jī)構(gòu)的性別性質(zhì)時(shí)，利用了性別與宗教跨文化研究學(xué)者Ursula King在其1995年的出版物中所說的"消極批評(píng) "和 "積極批評(píng) "的方法來研究宗教。她對(duì)國(guó)家政權(quán)、民族和宗教政策以及地方突發(fā)事件交織在一起的宗教傳統(tǒng)的文字和實(shí)踐的研究影響了后來幾代女權(quán)主義學(xué)者的解釋。

她指出，需要繼續(xù)關(guān)注和批判作為宗教任務(wù)的父權(quán)制在全球的復(fù)蘇，同時(shí)對(duì)聲稱宗教是一種解放力量的婦女的力量給予應(yīng)有的承認(rèn)。合謀的世俗/宗教父權(quán)制與女性自信的、通常是直接的異議機(jī)構(gòu)之間的緊張關(guān)系，也構(gòu)成了我自己關(guān)于20世紀(jì)90年代以來歷史上和當(dāng)代中國(guó)社會(huì)中女性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的宗教組織的寫作的主線，是亞洲學(xué)術(shù)界新興的后世俗女權(quán)主義的例證。

宗教研究的第一次 "性別轉(zhuǎn)向 "是在20世紀(jì)90年代，將批判性的性別理論更廣泛地應(yīng)用于宗教的傳統(tǒng)和研究中，標(biāo)志著宗教研究的 "范式轉(zhuǎn)變"。

然而，在一本描述性別與宗教領(lǐng)域新興學(xué)術(shù)的開創(chuàng)性書籍中，其編輯Ursula King警告說，持久的"宗教盲 "偏見仍然彌漫在許多女性主義思想中。

不過，我們注意到，從后宗教到后世俗的女權(quán)主義學(xué)術(shù)研究，有一條清晰的軌跡，盡管是不均衡的。

在全球南方后殖民研究中的女權(quán)主義聲音的推動(dòng)下，呼吁采取更全面的方法來接受婦女的生活經(jīng)驗(yàn)和選擇，在后世俗女權(quán)主義階段的宗教女權(quán)主義新流派開始密切關(guān)注宗教婦女生活的多樣性。他們?cè)儐柸绾螌D女的經(jīng)驗(yàn)、價(jià)值、選擇和實(shí)踐理解為經(jīng)過不同談判的自我建構(gòu)的權(quán)利。

這些聲音認(rèn)為，只有尊重當(dāng)?shù)氐奈幕攸c(diǎn)，承認(rèn)本土知識(shí)的重要意義，研究結(jié)果才能實(shí)現(xiàn)有效和有意義的發(fā)展。

此外，"性別批判的轉(zhuǎn)向 "催生了一個(gè)新的跨學(xué)科/多學(xué)科研究領(lǐng)域，但也引發(fā)了對(duì)性別研究和宗教研究中主流學(xué)術(shù)文獻(xiàn)的批判性重讀。說明這一發(fā)展的，是越來越多的學(xué)術(shù)會(huì)議、期刊特刊、一般出版物、學(xué)生項(xiàng)目和學(xué)術(shù)參考書，它們帶來了性別和宗教研究的豐富收獲。

與國(guó)際婦女/性別研究學(xué)者討論中提到的對(duì) "宗教女性主義 "概念的抵制一樣，中國(guó)婦女和性別研究領(lǐng)域的學(xué)者在談到宗教在社會(huì)中的作用及其對(duì)婦女解放之路的影響時(shí)，也表現(xiàn)出同樣的、最深刻的矛盾心理。然而，批判性的理論和方法論工作的發(fā)展需要更廣泛地參與到國(guó)際話語中，并進(jìn)入到探究知識(shí)生產(chǎn)、性別變化和國(guó)家性別政治之間的聯(lián)系以及它們對(duì)跨國(guó)女權(quán)運(yùn)動(dòng)的影響的對(duì)話中。

我們對(duì)婦女生活和女性領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的伊斯蘭的研究，在很大程度上是關(guān)于宗教原教旨主義的新興話語的一部分，即關(guān)于本土化的伊斯蘭習(xí)俗及其與女權(quán)主義性別政治的不同和對(duì)比關(guān)系。

可以說，以前在伊斯蘭教和不同的穆斯林文化背景下，關(guān)于婦女機(jī)構(gòu)、平等和賦權(quán)的辯論之所以如此困難，不僅與宗教日益工具化的外部環(huán)境有關(guān)，而且與女權(quán)主義在歷史上對(duì)宗教的敵意排斥有關(guān)，認(rèn)為它不利于婦女的進(jìn)步。

當(dāng)我們?cè)?0世紀(jì)90年代進(jìn)行實(shí)地調(diào)查時(shí)，情況就是如此，直到今天也是如此——即使在理解婦女協(xié)商和主張選擇的一系列嵌入式機(jī)構(gòu)方面取得了進(jìn)展。

女性主義/性別研究和新的宗教機(jī)構(gòu)概念之間的關(guān)系仍然是一種非常令人困惑的關(guān)系。然而，對(duì)于國(guó)際女權(quán)主義學(xué)者來說，這也是一種持久的魅力，因?yàn)樗麄兠媾R著機(jī)構(gòu)、性別、賦權(quán)和信仰等不同交叉點(diǎn)的難題。

Carried by the momentum of feminism anchored in the Global South and postcolonial studies, new schools of religious feminisms in an era characterized by Rosi Braidotti (2008) as a ‘postsecular’ feminist phase are paying ever more critical attention to the diversity of women’s religious experiences as alternative forms of diversely embedded feminisms. A growing number of influential scholars writing on the gendered nature of religious institutions are utilizing what Ursula King, the scholar of cross-cultural studies of gender and religion, in her publication of 1995, characterizes as ‘negative-critical’ and ‘positive-critical’ approaches in the study of religion. Her study of words and practices of religious traditions in the intersections of state regime, ethnic and religious policies and local contingencies influenced interpretations of subsequent generations of feminist scholars. King points to the need for continued attention to, and critique of, the global resurgence of patriarchy as a religious mandate whilst giving due recognition to the power of women who claim religion as a liberating force. The tension between a complicit secular/religious patriarchy and female assertive, often outright dissenting agency forms the main thread also in my own writing on female-led religious organizations in historical and contemporary Chinese society since the 1990s, an illustration of emerging postsecular feminism in Asian-based scholarship.

The first ‘gender turn’ in the study of religion came during the 1990s with a more wide-ranging application of critical gender theory to the traditions and study of religion, signalling no less than a ‘paradigm shift’ in religious studies. Still, in a seminal volume, profiling a burgeoning scholarship in the field of gender and religion, its editor Ursula King (2005) warned of the enduring ‘religion-blind’ prejudice that still permeates so much of feminist thought.

Yet we note a discernible, if unevenly drawn, trajectory from post-religious to post-secular feminist scholarship. Carried by the momentum of feminist voices in postcolonial studies from the global south, calling for more holistic approaches receptive to women’s life experiences and choices, new schools of religious feminisms in the post-secular feminist phase began to pay close scholarly attention to the diversity of religious women’s lives. They asked how women’s experiences, values, choices, and practices could be understood as diversely negotiated rights of self-constitution. It is only by respecting cultural specificities of local contexts, and by acknowledging the vital significance of indigenous knowledge, these voices maintain, that research findings make for effective and meaningful development.

Moreover, the ‘gender-critical turn’ spawned a new field of inter/multi-disciplinary studies but also engendered critical re-readings of mainstream canons of scholarly literature, both in gender studies and in the study of religion. Illustrative of this development are the ever-growing number of academic conferences, special journal issues, general publications, student projects and academic reference works that bring to the fore a rich harvest of gender and religion studies.

Not unlike the resistance to the very notion of ‘religious feminism’ noted in discussions of international women/gender studies scholars, Chinese scholars in the field of women’s and gender studies express an equal and most profound ambivalence when it comes to the role of religion in society and its impact on women’s pathway to liberation. However, development of critical theoretical and methodological work needs to engage more widely in international discourse and to enter in conversations that probe linkages between knowledge production, gender change, and national gender politics as well as their impact on transnational feminist movements.

Our study of women’s lives and female-led Islamic organizations has been very much part of an emerging discourse on religious fundamentalism, i.e., on indigenized Islamic practices and their varied and contrastive relationship with feminist gender politics. Arguably, what had previously made the debates over women’s agency, equality, and empowerment in a context of Islam and diverse Muslim cultures so difficult related not only to an external environment of an increased instrumentalization of religion, but also to feminism’s historically hostile rejection of religion as detrimental to women’s progress. This was so when we conducted fieldwork in the 1990s, and it remains to this day – even given the developments made in understanding the spectrum of embedded agencies by which women negotiate and assert choices. The relationship between feminist/gender studies and newer concepts of religious agency remains a relationship of great perplexity. Yet it is of abiding fascination for international feminist scholars challenged by the conundrum over diverse intersections of agency, gender, empowerment, and faith.

龔鵬程，1956年生于臺(tái)北，臺(tái)灣師范大學(xué)博士，當(dāng)代著名學(xué)者和思想家。著作已出版一百五十多本。

辦有大學(xué)、出版社、雜志社、書院等，并規(guī)劃城市建設(shè)、主題園區(qū)等多處。講學(xué)于世界各地。并在北京、上海、杭州、臺(tái)北、巴黎、日本、澳門等地舉辦過書法展?，F(xiàn)為中國(guó)孔子博物館名譽(yù)館長(zhǎng)、美國(guó)龔鵬程基金會(huì)主席。