The Idea
The idea is that orthodoxy did not take shape merely with the appearance of texts, but through a process of their official closure, that is, the fixing of a particular reading and the exclusion of other readings. In this sense, orthodoxy does not mean simply fidelity to the text, but turning it into a single authorized form presented as final. This results in excluding the plurality that existed at the beginning or that could have existed within the religious field.
Concise Formulation
Orthodoxy was formed through the official closure of texts
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim is placed at the heart of the book’s argument because it explains how the text turns from an open field of meaning into a reference governed by selection and sorting. Rather than viewing tradition as a direct extension of revelation, the text shows that there is a historical moment when the door is closed to other possibilities. Hence the importance of this idea in deconstructing the image of permanence.
Why It Matters
This idea is important because it shows that what is called consensus is not always the result of inner clarity, but may be the outcome of deletion and forgetting. It also helps us understand Arkoun as a reader who is concerned with what has been excluded as much as with what remains. In this way, the history of religious thought becomes a history of selection, not merely a faithful preservation of what once existed.
Reading Questions
- What does it mean to officially close texts in the history of religion?
- How does our understanding of tradition change when we see it as the result of selection rather than completion?
Documentation Degree
High: the claim appears in a clear location in the book’s material.