Din Kavramının Kolonyal Bir Kategori Olarak İnşası: Konfüçyanizm Üzerinden Teorik Bir Analiz

Öz

Dekolonyal çalışmalar, kolonyalizmin yalnızca askerî ve siyasal bir tahakküm biçimi olmadığını, bilgi üretim araçları üzerinden Batı dışı toplumlarda varlığını sürdürdüğünü ortaya koymuştur. Batı’nın kendi tarihsel tecrübesinin ürünü olan kavramların Batı dışı toplumlara dayatılması bu epistemik tahakkümün bir başka veçhesini teşkil etmektedir. Bu çalışmada Avrupa’nın tarihsel tecrübesi içerisinde şekillenen din kavramı ele alınmakta ve dekolonyal bir perspektifle incelenmektedir. 19. yüzyıldan itibaren analitik ve kültür-nötr bir kategori olarak sunulan din kavramının, Batı dışı toplumlara uygulanırken örtük bir sekülerizm anlayışını da beraberinde getirdiği, böylece yerel geleneklerin kamusal rollerini yeniden düzenleyerek epistemik bir kolonyalite ürettiği ileri sürülmektedir. Bu iddia, Konfüçyanizm’in din ile felsefe arasında sıkıştırılarak kamusal rolünden tasfiye edilmesi ve seküler alanın inşası süreci üzerinden somutlaştırılmaktadır. Makalede, sosyal bilimlerde kullanılan din kavramının bilimsel ve nesnel bir kategori olmadığı, seküler düşüncenin inşasına zemin hazırlayan kolonyal bir epistemoloji ürettiği savunulmaktadır. Konfüçyanizm örneği üzerinden modern bilginin kavramsal araçlarının, Batı dışı toplumlarda nasıl dönüştürücü sonuçlar ürettiğini görünür kılınmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dekolonyalizm
• Din
• Sekülerizm
• Çin
• Konfüçyanizm

The Construction of the Concept of Religion as a Colonial Epistemic Category: A Theoretical Analysis through Confucianism

Öz

Decolonial scholarship has shown that colonialism is not merely a form of military and political domination, but also an epistemic structure sustained through concepts and regimes of knowledge production. Debates on coloniality demonstrate that the West legitimized its authority to classify and transform non-Western societies by presenting concepts rooted in its own historical experience as universal categories. In this context, this study examines the modern and Western notion of religion as a colonial category of knowledge that operates in conjunction with the ideals of secularization and rationalization. Before colonial modernity, religion operated within specific European ritual and theological contexts rather than as a universal category. From the Reformation and Enlightenment onward, it was increasingly reconfigured as a discrete sphere of belief set apart from political, legal, scientific, and educational domains. With this differentiation, the secular sphere was transferred to the domain of rationality, and religion and secularity were constructed within the same historical process. In the nineteenth century, with the emergence of the academic study of religion, the concept of religion was universalized as a culture-neutral analytical category structured around theocentric assumptions. Societies were positioned within an evolutionary hierarchy according to the degree of abstraction in their conceptions of the divine. This process also entailed the search for equivalents of the concept of religion in non-Western societies. While local traditions were reduced to theology, they were simultaneously removed from their public roles. The study examines how this conceptual framework generated a structural tension in the case of Confucianism. As a normative tradition integrating politics, ethics, and cosmology without a strict sacred–secular divide, Confucianism did not fit easily into the modern category of religion. It was either reinterpreted as a religion due to its ritual practices or reduced to philosophy on the grounds that it lacked a theocentric structure. Within the discourse of modernization, the view that Confucianism should be excluded from politics, law, and education gained influence. While figures such as Kang Youwei sought to preserve it by formulating it as a “state religion,” representatives of the New Culture Movement attempted to diminish its normative authority by redefining it as philosophy. Despite their differences, both approaches operated within the boundaries of secular epistemology. This reclassification weakened Confucianism’s public and institutional functions, and the abolition of the imperial examination system in 1905 marked the institutional dismantling of its normative role within the state. The repositioning of Confucianism within the categories of religion or philosophy was directly linked to the modern concept of religion functioning as a universal measure. The authority to define what counts as “religion” simultaneously delineates the boundaries of legitimate knowledge. In this sense, the concept of religion functioned not as a neutral descriptive category but as a colonial epistemic instrument that reclassified non-Western societies by detaching them from their own normative totalities. This study problematizes the universalist claims of the modern concept of religion and demonstrates how this category has operated as a transformative tool within colonial modernity.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Decolonialism
• Religion
• Secularism
• China
• Confucianism

Kaynakça

1. App, Urs. The Birth of Orientalism (Encounters with Asia). Philadelphia-Oxford: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010.
2. Asad, Talal. “Antropolojik Bir Kategori Olarak Dinin İnşası”. çev. A. Tekin. Milel ve Nihal 4/2 (2007), 103-137.
3. Asad, Talal. Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity. California: Stanford University Press, 2003.
4. Asad, Talal. Genealogies of Religion: Discipline and Reasons of Power in Christianity and Islam. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1993.
5. Balagangadhara, S. N. “The Heathen in His Blindness ...”: Asia, the West, and the Dynamic of Religion. Daryaganj, New Delhi: E. J. Brill, 1994.
6. Chan, Wing-Tsit. A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1963.
7. Chen, Duxiu. “Zài lùn Kǒngjiào wèntí” (再论孔教问题 / Konfüçyanizm Meselesinin Yeniden Tartışılması)”. Xin Qingnian (新青年 / New Youth). Erişim 04 Şubat 2026. https://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hans/%E5%86%8D%E8%AB%96%E5%AD%94%E6%95%99%E5%95%8F%E9%A1%8C
8. Chen, Yong. A Hermeneutic Reading of the Controversy on Confucian Religiosity and Its Significance to the Understanding of Chinese Tradition and Modernity. Tennessee: Vanderbilt University, Doktora Tezi, 2005.

9. Chidester, David. Empire of Religion: Imperialism and Comparative Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014.
10. Creel, Herlee G. Chinese Thought from Confucius to Mao Tse-tung. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953.
11. Cusanus, Nicolas. “Nicolasus Cusanus, Gizlenen Tanrı Üzerine”. çev. Arif Yıldız. Felsefe Arkivi 33 (2008), 87-100.
12. Çifci, Esra. 16. ve 18. Yüzyıllarda Konfüçyanizm’in Dini Mahiyeti Tartışmaları. Marmara Üniversitesi, Doktora Tezi, 2024.
13. Dubuisson, Daniel. The Western Construction of Religion: Myths, Knowledge, and Ideology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.
14. Durkheim, Emile. The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. New York: Collier Books, 1961.
15. Elman, Benjamin A. “The Civil Examination System in Late Imperial China, 1400-1900” 8/1 (2013), 32-50.
16. Feil, Erns - Despland, Michel. “From the Classical Religio to the Modem Religion: Elements of a Transformation Between 1550 and 1650”. Religion in History: The Word, the Idea, the Reality: / La religion dans l’histoire: le mot, l’idée, la réalité. Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1992.
17. Ficino, Marsilio. Marsilio Ficino, On the Christian Religion. çev. Susan R. Clark. Medieval & Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1985.
18. Fingarette, Herbert. Confucius: The Secular as Sacred. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1998.
19. Fitzgerald, Timothy. The Ideology of Religious Studies. Oxford University Press, 1999.
20. Foucault, Michel. Cinselliğin Tarihi. çev. Hülya Tufan. Afa Yayınları, 1993.
21. Fung, Yu-Lan. Çin Felsefesi Tarihi. çev. Fuat Aydın. İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi, 2019.
22. Giles, Herbert A. Confucianism and Its Rivals. London: Williams and Norgate, 1915.
23. Goossaert, Vincent. “The Social Organization of Religious Communities in The Twentieth Century”. Chinese Religious Life. ed. David A. Palmer vd. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.
24. Haar, Barend J. Ter. “From Field to Text in the Study of Chinese Religion”. Religion and Orientalism in Asian Studies. ed. Kiri Paramore. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2016.
25. Hankins, James. “Marsilio Ficino and the Religion of the Philosophers”. Rinascimento 48, 2008.
26. Hao, Chang. Chinese Intellectuals in Crisis: Search for Order and Meaning (1890–1911). Berkeley: University of California Press, 1987.
27. Harrison, Peter. “Religion” and The Religions in The English Enlightenment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
28. Hon, Choi Ivan. Chinese Intellectual’s Reconstruction of Confucianism in the Late 19th and early 20th Century China. London: SOAS University of London, Doktora Tezi, 2005.
29. Hu, Shih. The Development of The Logical Method in Ancient China. Shanghai Oriental Book Co, 1922.
30. Jones, W. R. “The Image of The Barbarian in Medieval Europe”. Comparative Studies in Society and History 13/4 (1971), 376-407.
31. Josephson, Jason Ananda. The Invention of Religion in Japan. Chicago-London: The University of Chicago Press, 2012.
32. Kant, Immanuel. Political Writings. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
33. King, Richard. Orientalism and Religion: Postcolonial Theory, India and “The Mystic East”. London New York: Routledge, Reprinted., 2009.
34. Kwok, Danny W. Y. Scientism in Chinese Thought: 1900–1950. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1932.
35. Lagerwey, John. China: A Religious State. 2010: Hong Kong University Press, 2010.
36. Legge, James. The Religions of China: Confucianism and Taoism Described and Compared with Christianity. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1880.
37. Masuzawa, Tomoko. The Invention of World Religions, Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 2005.
38. Meierding, Loren. “The Consensus Gentium Argument”. Faith and Philosophy: Journal of The Society of Christian Philosophers 3/15 (1998), 271-297.
39. Mignolo, Walter D. The Darker Side of Western Modernity: Global Futures, Decolonial Options. Durham: Duke University Press, 2011.
40. Mignolo, Walter D. Yerel Tarihler/Küresel Tasarımlar: Sömürgecilik, Madun Bilgiler ve Sınırda Düşünmek. çev. Emre Can Ercan. İstanbul: İnsan Yayınları, 2023.
41. Mou, Zongsan. Nineteen Lectures on Chinese Philosophy. çev. Esther C. Su. Taipei: Student Book Co., 1983.
42. Müller, Max F. Introduction to the Science of Religion. London: Longmans Green, 1893.
43. Müller, Max F. Sacred Books of The East. London: Routledge, 2007.
44. Na, Chen. “Why is Confucianism Not a Religion? The Impact of Orientalism”. Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 51/1 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12241
45. Nongbri, Brent. Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept. London: Yale University Press, 2013.
46. Osterhammel, Jürgen. Colonialism: A Theoretical Overview. çev. Shelley L. Frisch. Princeton (N.J.): M. Wiener, 2005.
47. Popkin, Richard. “The Religious Background of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy”. The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Philosophy. ed. Daniel I. Garber. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
48. Quijano, Aníbal. “Coloniality and Modernity/Rationality”. Cultural Studies 21/2 (2007), 168-178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353
49. Quijano, Anibal - Ennis, Michael. “Coloniality of Power, Eurocentrism, and Latin America”. Nepantla: Views from South 1/3 (2000), 533-580.
50. Rubies, Joan Pau. “The Concept of Cultural Dialogue and The Jesuit Method of Accommodation: Between Idolatry and Civilization”. Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu 74/1447 (2005), 237-280.
51. Said, Edward W. Şarkiyatçılık: Batı’nın Şark Anlayışları. çev. Berna Yıldırım. İstanbul: Metis Yayınları, 2016.
52. Sarma, Deepak. “Postcolonial Religion: Religion and Its Study after Colonialism”. The Macmillan Interdisciplinary Handbooks Religion. ed. Jeffrey Kripal. 195-212. Macmillan Reference, 2016.
53. Schwartz, Benjamin A. In Search of Wealth and Power: Yen Fu and the West. Cambridge: Harward University Press, 1964.
54. Smith, Wilfred C. The Meaning and End of Religion. New York: The Macmillian Company, 1963.
55. Stroumsa, Guy G. A New Science: The Discovery of Religion in the Age of Reason. Cambridge: Harward University Press, 2010.
56. Sun, Anna. Confucions Over Confucainsim: Controversies Over the Religious Nature of Confucianism, 1870-2007. Princeton University, Doktora Tezi, 2008.
57. Swain, Tony. Confucianism in China: An Introduction. London, England: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474242479
58. Taylorian, Brandon R. “The Legacy of Colonialism in the Recognition of Religions”, 256-292.
59. Tillich, Paul. Theology of Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1959.
60. Valkenberg, Pim - Ian, Christopher. Una Religio in Rituum Varietate: Religious Pluralism, the Qurʾan, and Nicholas of Cusaed. Boston: Brill, 2014.
61. Yao, Xinzong. An Introduction to Confucianism. Cambridge University Press, 2000.
62. https://www.globaleast.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Document_no._19_1982.pdf. “Document 19”, ts. Erişim 04 Şubat 2026