Abstract

At the opening of the first volume of his Deconstruction of Christianity, Nancy argues that “The much discussed ‘return of the religious,’ which denotes a real phenomenon, deserves no more attention than any other ‘return’” (1). This statement may seem paradoxical in light of Nancy’s extensive study of the logic of the return – including, of the divine – in texts such as “Of Divine Places,” Noli me tangere, Dis-Enclosure and Adoration. Nancy does pay considerable attention to something that, according to him, deserves none. In this paper, I examine Nancy’s critique of the “return of religion” in detail and argue that it would be a mistake to assume that Nancy’s understanding of the logic of the “return” is limited to the – largely uninteresting and even dangerous, indeed – return of the Same, just as it is a mistake to assume that the phenomenon known as the “return of religion” merely consists of the dialectical resurgence of a past religious fervour, a step backwards in history. According to Nancy, religion today returns in a way that radically breaks with the logic of the return of the Same and testifies to an eternal return of difference which, paraphrasing Nancy, opens religion to the limitlessness that constitutes its truth. It does, therefore, deserve our attention, yet only insofar as, paraphrasing Nancy, it opens religion to the limitlessness that constitutes its truth (Dis-Enclosure 1), thereby providing us with new resources to think religion in the singular-plural today.

摘要

在他的《基督教解构》第一卷的开头，南希认为“被广泛讨论的‘宗教的回归’表示一种真实的现象，不比任何其他‘回归’更值得关注”(1)。鉴于南希对回归逻辑的广泛研究——包括神圣的——在诸如“神圣之地”、Noli me tangere、Dis-Enclosure和Adoration 之类的文本中，这种说法似乎是自相矛盾的. 南希确实非常关注一些在他看来不值得的东西。在这篇论文中，我详细研究了南希对“宗教回归”的批评，并认为假设南希对“回归”逻辑的理解仅限于——基本上是无趣的，甚至是危险的，确实是错误的。 – 回归原点，正如认为被称为“宗教回归”的现象仅仅是过去宗教狂热的辩证复苏、历史倒退的说法是错误的。根据南希的说法，今天的宗教以一种彻底打破同一回归逻辑的方式回归，并证明差异的永恒回归，用南希的话来说，它向构成其真理的无限敞开了宗教。因此，它确实值得我们关注，Dis-Enclosure 1），从而为我们提供了新的资源，可以在今天以单复数形式思考宗教。