Formulation of the Claim
Arkoun rejects confining the understanding of the religious text to traditional and dogmatic exegeses, whether exoteric or esoteric.
Explanation
In Arkoun’s thought, returning to inherited commentaries as the sole reference for the meaning of the text is not sufficient, because such confinement turns interpretation into closed boundaries and prevents questioning what tradition has established. The rejection here is therefore connected to a broader stance of critiquing epistemic closure, not merely to preferring one reading over another.
This also means that the text is not reduced to a single layer of interpretation; rather, it is considered within the history of its reception and the multiplicity of its readings. The issue is not the abolition of tradition, but rather not treating it as the end of questioning or the final arbiter of meaning.
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This atom belongs to the argument in which Arkoun seeks to free reading from the authority of ready-made exegesis and to open the way for a broader examination of the structure of religious discourse and how it was historically formed. It is close to the atoms that criticize dogmatism and call for moving beyond the divisions that confine understanding between the exoteric and the esoteric.
Limits of the Claim
This rejection does not mean invalidating the whole of tradition or calling for a rupture with it, nor does it mean adopting a single closed alternative interpretation. What is intended is to strip traditional exegeses of exclusive privilege when they are presented as alone sufficient.