2015年，我受邀在当地的一座清真寺参加一场关于父权制与女权主义的辩论。活动日期确定并在社交媒体上公布后约一个月，该活动被突然取消，而具体原因从未向我说明。

In 2015, I was asked to participate in a debate on patriarchy and feminism at a local masjid. A month or so after the date was set and announced on social media, the event was abruptly canceled for reasons that were never made clear to me.

老实说:这已经不是第一次发生这样的事,我相信以后也不会是最后一次。我不打算去猜测这间清真寺为何取消这场特定的活动。我甚至不知道是谁取消了活动,也不清楚他/她/他们为什么这样做。

I’ll be honest: This was not the first time that something like this had happened and I’m sure it won’t be the last. I am not going to speculate as to why this particular masjid canceled this particular event. I don’t even know who was responsible for canceling the event or exactly why he/she/ they did so.

我在准备辩论时，写了一些简短的笔记，概述我立场的基本主旨（如下）。显然，有些人会觉得这一立场深感冒犯——冒犯到足以遭到审查。但我认为，现在是提出这些重要问题的时候了，尽管出于种种原因，它们被视为政治不正确。我认为，我们应当能够以尊重和学术的方式辩论观点，尤其是那些对穆斯林社群和穆斯林思想有重大影响、并引发诸多疑惑之源的观点。

In preparing for the debate, I put together some brief notes on the basic thrust of my position (below). Obviously, it is a position some find deeply offensive — offensive enough to censor. But I think it is high time we ask these important questions even though, for whatever reason, they are considered politically incorrect. I think we should be able to debate ideas in a respectful and academic fashion, especially ideas that have such a major influence on the Muslim community and the Muslim mind and are the source of much doubt.

不幸的是，总有一些人不愿看到这样的对话发生，并会压制任何试图展开这种对话的人。

Unfortunately, there are those who do not want to see such a conversation happen and will shut down anyone who tries to have it.

无论如何，我原本打算用大量论据和证据来为我的立场辩护，这些论据和证据既来自历史和哲学材料，也来自女性主义者自己的著作。我还准备了一些论点，为那些多年来遭到穆斯林女性主义者猛烈抨击的古典学者辩护。

In any case, what I had planned to do was defend my position using a wide range of arguments and evidence from historical and philosophical material as well as the work of feminists themselves. I also had arguments lined up in defense of classical scholars that Muslim feminists have viciously attacked over the years.

有一种观点自第二波女性主义兴起以来影响力日益扩大：在每个社会中，除了不同社会经济阶层、种族、部落归属等之间的权力关系之外，最主要的权力关系之一是两性之间的权力关系。正如不同政治派别和阶层在每个社会中争夺权力一样，两性也在争夺权力，即男性与女性相争。所有社会都存在这方面的权力差异，而且普遍而言，男性支配女性的情况一直存在，这就是父权制。在我们这个时代，这种支配未必是公开的，即男性未必有意识地支配女性，尽管在某些情况下确实如此。更确切地说，我们继承了一个父权制体系，其僵化的权力结构仍在压迫女性。女性主义者认为，与这些父权结构作斗争是我们的道德责任。 所有这些在伊斯兰历史上同样适用，而且尤为明显。在这一点上，女性主义者之间存在一些分歧。女性主义的默认立场，以其主要学者为代表，认为一切宗教本质上都是父权的，因此对女性具有压迫性。穆斯林女性主义者对此提出异议，相反地主张：真主并非父权的，也不希望让女性从属于男性。相反，真主启示的宗教伊斯兰教是完全平等的，只是男性对该宗教的父权式解读，才产生了压迫穆斯林女性的规则和习俗。由此出发，不同的穆斯林女性主义者在不同的地方划定界限。例如，一夫多妻的规定属于真正的伊斯兰教，还是父权制的后来附加物？有人说是，有人说不是。关于女性的某些圣训是真实的伊斯兰教，还是父权制的捏造？古典学者关于女性的某些论述，是否呈现了对真正伊斯兰教的诚实而有效的理解，还是仅仅是父权偏见在影响他们的观点？ 有一百多个“有争议”的例子，从当代普通非穆斯林女权主义者的角度看，伊斯兰教压迫女性，或者至少剥夺了女性的权利。不同的穆斯林女权主义者在反驳这一观点、捍卫真正的伊斯兰教是平等主义的论点时，会采取不同的策略。

There is a common perspective that has grown increasingly more influential since the dawn of Second Wave feminism that one of the primary power dynamics within every society — in addition to the dynamics between different socio-economic classes, races, tribal affiliations, etc. — is the power dynamics between the genders. Just like different political factions and classes are vying for power in every society, so are the genders, men against women. All societies experience a power differential in this regard, and universally it has been the case that men dominate women — this is patriarchy. In our times, this domination is not necessarily overt such that men are consciously dominating women, though in some instances, that may be true as well. Rather, we have inherited a patriarchal system with ossified power structures that continue to subjugate women. It is our moral duty, argue feminists, to fight against these patriarchal structures. All of this applies in spades to Islamic history. Here feminists will have some disagreements. The default feminist position as represented by their leading scholars is that all religion is inherently patriarchal and therefore oppressive to women. Muslim feminists take issue with this and claim, to the contrary, that God is not patriarchal and does not desire to subjugate women to men. Rather, God’s revealed religion, Islam, is fully egalitarian and it is only a patriarchal reading of that religion by men which gives us rules and customs that oppress Muslim women. From this point, different Muslim feminists draw the line in different places. Are the rules of polygyny, say, part of true Islam or are they patriarchal accretions? Some say yes, some say no. Are certain hadith on women true Islam or just patriarchal fabrications? Are certain classical scholars opining on women presenting an honest, valid understanding of true Islam, or is it just a patriarchal bias coloring their views? There are over a hundred “controversial” examples of where, from the perspective of your average modern non-Muslim feminist, Islam oppresses, or at least disenfranchises women. And different Muslim feminists will take different strategies in countering that perspective in defending the notion that true Islam is egalitarian.

我的观点是，整个女权主义事业，无论是世俗的还是穆斯林的，都是误入歧途的。事实上，关于基于性别的社会冲突这一整体概念，存在重大的概念性和证据性问题。认为男性构建并维持了一种普遍的结构，即父权制，以系统性地利用女性，并把男性的利益置于女性的利益之上，这一说法既得不到历史事实的支持，也经不起理论上的审视。是的，从男性在历史上每个社会中都享有权威的意义上说，父权制是存在的。但那种权威是为了所有人的福祉，而不仅仅是以牺牲女性为代价来谋取男性的利益。

My view is that the entire feminist project, whether of the secular or Muslim variety, is misguided. In reality, there are major conceptual and evidential problems with the entire notion of societal conflict based on gender. The idea that men have constructed and maintained a universal structure, namely patriarchy, to systematically take advantage of women and prioritize men’s interests over women’s is not substantiated by historical facts or theoretical scrutiny. Yes, patriarchy exists in the sense that men have had authority in every society of history. But that authority was for the benefit of all, not merely the benefit of men at the expense of women.

作为这场对话的利害所在，以下是我脑海中浮现的几个主要问题。第一，如果认为一千四百年来的穆斯林学术传统在很大程度上浸润于父权压迫之中，并且在某种程度上受其引导，那么这在神学上意味着什么？第二，如果主张过去与现在的每一个社会都受到父权制的困扰，那么这在本体论上意味着什么？也就是说，这对人性意味着什么，进而对创造了这种人性和这段人类历史的真主本身意味着什么？第三，父权制是否足以准确解释穆斯林社会在性别关系、家庭暴力等方面所面临的问题？（我并不否认这些问题确实存在。）

As far as what is at stake in this conversation, these are some of the main questions that come to my mind. What are the theological implications of understanding 1400 years of the Muslim scholarly tradition as being by and large immersed in and, to at least some extent, guided by patriarchal oppression? What are the ontological implications of claiming that every society past and present suffered from patriarchy, i.e., what does this mean for human nature and, by extension, God Himself, who created that human nature and that human history? Is patriarchy an adequate or accurate explanation of the problems Muslim societies face with regard to gender relations, domestic abuse, etc. (i.e., problems that I do not deny exist)?

正如这些问题所暗示的那样，将父权制视为男性压迫女性的普遍体系，对穆斯林的思想有极大的损害。原因在于，这种观念实际上把所有宗教和宗教权威都视为父权制的工具，这意味着宗教，无论是整体还是其中大部分，都成了为男性利益而压迫女性的手段。

As these questions are meant to imply, the idea of patriarchy as a universal system of male oppression against women is extremely damaging to the Muslim mind. This is because the idea effectively renders all of religion and religious authority as an arm of patriarchy, which means that religion, either in its entirety or in large part, is a tool to oppress women for the benefit of men.

难道还需要惊讶吗？那么，穆斯林女权主义者接受并拥护日益激进和偏离正道的观点，而且其中许多人最终背教，又有什么可奇怪的呢？

Is it any surprise, then, that Muslim feminists accept and espouse increasingly radical and deviant views and many of them ultimately apostatize?

当然，令人沮丧的是，即便是那些虔诚的穆斯林女性，也接受了女权主义的基本前提，包括认为压迫性的父权制贯穿整个历史、无处不在这一观点。

Certainly, it is depressing to see even otherwise religiously devout Muslim women accepting the basic premises of feminism, including the idea of universal oppressive patriarchy extending throughout history.

在现实中，女权主义的所有分支和各种流派都与伊斯兰教相悖。穆斯林女权主义者可能不同意这一点，但这并不改变这一事实。这可以用一个简单的论证来证明：

In reality, all branches and varieties of feminism are anathema to Islam. Muslim feminists might disagree with this, but it does not change the fact. This is proven by a simple argument:

1. 若不接受"父权制论题"，就不可能真正认同女权主义。所谓父权制论题，是指存在一种由男性维系、旨在压迫和奴役女性的社会结构，并且这种结构自文明诞生之初便已存在。

1. One cannot be committed to feminism without accepting the Patriarchal Thesis, i.e., the thesis that there exists a social structure perpetuated by men designed to subjugate and oppress women that has existed since the dawn of civilization.

2. 父权论题与伊斯兰教是格格不入的。

2. The Patriarchal Thesis is anathema to Islam.

3. 因此，女权主义与伊斯兰教是相悖的。

3. Therefore, Feminism is anathema to Islam.

这句话是用户的待翻译文本，我只做翻译： 为什么父权论题（PT）在伊斯兰教看来如此有害？

Why is the Patriarchal Thesis (PT) so noxious as far as Islam is concerned?

首先，PT（性别理论）破坏了先知身份（nubuwwa）这一概念本身。所有向人类传达教义、站在族人面前召唤归向伊斯兰的先知（anbiya）都是男性。难道这些先知都是用来统治女性的父权结构的一部分吗？

First of all, PT undermines the very notion of nubuwwa. All anbiya who preached to humanity and stood in front of their people to call to Islam were men. Were all these anbiya part of the patriarchal structure used to dominate women?

PT也削弱了学术传统。我们传统中的绝大多数乌拉玛都是男性，其中最具影响力、著述最丰富的也都是男性。而他们所有人，毫无例外，都持有大量现代女权主义者视为最恶劣的有毒男性气质、厌女主义胡言乱语的观点。这些男性是否都是用来压迫女性的父权制度的一部分？

PT also undermines the scholarly tradition. The vast majority of ulama in our tradition were men, and the most influential and prolific of them were men. And all of them, literally all of them, espoused a plethora of views that modern feminists consider toxic masculine misogynist drivel of the worst kind. Were all these men part of the patriarchal system used to oppress women?

这是一段需要翻译的英文文本，但内容本身是一个问题，而非需要翻译的伊斯兰书籍段落。根据我的职责，我只提供译文。以下是翻译： PT破坏了伊斯兰神学本身。如果父权制如此根深蒂固，是一种毁灭性的力量，给人类带来如此多的痛苦和苦难，那么《古兰经》为何不谈论它？先知صلى الله عليه وسلم为何没有提及它？如果《古兰经》和《圣训》对这种系统性压迫只字不提，它们还能被视为完整的指引吗？女权主义者坚持认为，父权制是人类历史上最邪恶的力量之一，然而阿拉伯语中甚至没有一个词来指代它。没有一节经文或一段圣训专门拉响警钟，警告人类这种可怕的压迫。这是为什么？

PT undermines Islamic theology itself. If the patriarchy is this entrenched, destructive force plaguing humanity and inflicting so much pain and suffering, why doesn’t the Quran address it? Why didn’t the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم address it? Can the Quran and Sunnah be considered complete guidance when they do not call out this systematic oppression? Feminists maintain that patriarchy is among the greatest forces of evil in all human history, yet there is not even a word for it in Arabic. Not a single verse or hadith dedicated to sounding the alarm bells, warning humanity of this terrible oppression. Why?

这些是女权主义者就伊斯兰教所作的逻辑推论，因此穆斯林女权主义者会经历一个又一个的幻灭阶段，许多人最终离开了伊斯兰教。她们首先将我们传统中的学者推出来受批评，认为他们持有“邪恶”的父权制女性观；接着发展到攻击先知，还记得自称“穆斯林改革派”的阿米娜·沃杜德（Amina Wadud）侮辱易卜拉欣先知的事吗？再往后，就开始批判《古兰经》。她们会问：为什么安拉用阳性代词指称自己？为什么安拉先创造了男人亚当？为什么安拉降示了第4章第34节？诸如此类。

These are the logical entailments feminists make with respect to Islam and that is why Muslim feminists go through phases of disillusion with Islam and many end up leaving. They start by throwing the scholars of our tradition under the bus for having “evil” patriarchal views of women. Then they graduate to attacking the prophets (remember “Muslim reformist” Amina Wadud insulting Prophet Ibrahim?). Then they graduate to criticizing the Quran. Why did Allah use masculine pronouns to refer to Himself? Why did Allah create Adam, a man, first? Why did Allah reveal verse 4:34? etc.

这正是“父权论题”所造成的内在神学张力。它使许多穆斯林女性主义者采取越来越偏离的观点，甚至背教。因此，那些想要主张女权主义与伊斯兰教相容的人，必须正面回应上述的1-2-3论证。你们的选择有限。我来把它说得简单明了：

This is the inherent theological tension created by the Patriarchal Thesis. And it leads many Muslim feminists to adopt increasingly deviant views and even apostatize. So those who want to claim that Feminism and Islam are compatible, confront the 1-2-3 argument above. You have limited options. I’ll make it easy and lay it out:

1. 人们可以主张，一个人即使是女权主义者，也可以不接受父权制（PT）的观点，即自古以来无处不在的父权制压迫女性的观点。

1. You can either argue that one can be a feminist and not accept PT, i.e., the idea of ever-present patriarchy subjugating women since time immemorial.

2. 或者你也可以主张，进化论（PT）并不会损害伊斯兰教。

2. Or you can argue that PT does not undermine Islam.

哪一个是？

Which one is it?.

那些乐于抛弃以男性为主的学术传统的人（"改革派"、"进步派"之类，以及"古兰主义者"等），会选择第二个选项。但正常的、具有正确信仰（aqida）的穆斯林明白，若没有以男性为主的学术传统，《古兰经》就不会传到我们手中，圣训也不会传到我们手中，伊斯兰也无法得到保存，等等。如果你把乌拉玛排除在外，你就是把伊斯兰排除在外。学者是先知的继承人。任何人若想主张学者在全球范围内存在系统性偏见，并对女性不公，便是在损害乌拉玛的道德声誉，从而也就是在损害伊斯兰本身。

Those who are fine with throwing the male-dominated scholarly tradition under the bus (the “reform,” “progressive” type as well as “Quranists,” et al.) will take Option 2. But normal Muslims with correct aqida recognize that without the male-dominated scholarly tradition, the Quran would not have reached us, the Sunnah would not have reached us, Islam would not have been preserved, etc. If you throw the ulama out, you throw Islam out. The scholars are the inheritors of the prophets. Anyone who wants to claim that the scholars were systematically biased on a global scale and unjust against women is undermining the morality of the ulama and is therefore undermining Islam itself.

在任何情况下，我都坚持认为这是一个合乎逻辑的判断。持不同意见者可以提出合乎逻辑的反驳。请不要再诉诸情感、人身攻击式的抱怨，或是那种自命救世主般的夸张表演。

In any case, I maintain that this is a logical assessment. Those who disagree are free to provide logical rebuttals. Spare me the emotional appeals, ad hominem whining, and white knight histrionics.

注意：我提供一些区分说明。当然，父权制确实存在。伊斯兰教是一种父权制宗教。根据伊斯兰教法，血统是父系的，社会和家庭结构的权威通过家长及其他男性人物传递。但女权主义意义上的父权制有所不同，它将恶意归于这些结构。女权主义的论点是，这些父权制机构是由男性出于邪恶的意图而设计的，旨在为了男性的利益而挫败女性的利益。换言之，一群邪恶的男性阴谋集团时刻密谋，处处破坏可怜、无辜、天真的女性，而勇敢的女权主义者直到最近几十年才发现这一卑劣的阴谋，并正为废除它而奋力抗争。是的，这听起来很荒谬，因为它本来就很荒谬。

NB: Let me provide some disambiguation. Of course, the patriarchy does exist. Islam is a patriarchal religion. According to Islamic Law, lineage is patrilineal and social and family structures have authority flowing through the patriarch and other males figures. But patriarchy in the feminist sense is different in that it ascribes maliciousness to these structures. The feminist claim is that these patriarchal institutions are designed by men with the evil intention to frustrate the interests of women for the benefit of men. In other words, an evil cabal of men are perpetually conspiring to sabotage poor, innocent, naive women at every turn and the brave feminists have discovered this dastardly plot only in the past few decades and are fighting the good fight to abolish it. Yeah, it sounds crazy because it is.

在这个“父权制论题”深深迷惑下一代穆斯林之前，穆斯林学者和伊玛目必须尽快驳斥它，这一点已经变得至关重要。驳斥的方法有很多。首先，应当承认：确实有男人虐待女人，也有包括一些宗教机构在内的更大的机构苛待女性、侵夺她们的权利。这一点不能回避——家庭暴力（身体上和情感上的）、把女性当作垃圾对待、阻止女性在家庭和更广泛的社群中发挥任何影响力、对性侵害视而不见，等等。这些问题都需要在世界上所有社会中加以解决。但是，这些问题是否源于一个庞大而无法逃脱的体系，即男人共同努力使女人持续处于从属地位？还是说，这些问题产生于某些恰好是男人（或女人）的、残暴、自私、无知而邪恶的人？

It has become absolutely critical for Muslim intellectuals and imams to debunk this Patriarchy Thesis before another generation of Muslims falls under the spell. There are many ways to do this. First of all, one should acknowledge that, yes, there are men who abuse women and there are larger institutions, including some religious institutions, that mistreat women and usurp their rights. This cannot be ignored—domestic abuse (physical and emotional), treating women like garbage, preventing women from having any influence on their household and their larger communities, overlooking sexual abuse, etc. These are all problems that need to be addressed in all societies of the world. But do these problems stem from a large, inescapable system of men working to keep women subjugated? Or are these problems that arise due to certain abusive, selfish, ignorant, evil people that happen to be men (or even women)