Prophetic orientation is a prominent aspect of

Studying Religion

What is essential (in the practices and beliefs) for a tradition to be called a religion? Illustrate your points by referring to the commonalities of at least 2 different religions. Include specific examples from the various religious traditions described in the Week 1 readings, such as a belief in one God or many gods and goddesses, the removal of one’s shoes before entering a place of worship, bathing and baptism as methods of spiritual purification, or refusing to eat certain types of meat. You may also include examples from your own religious tradition or another religious tradition with which you are familiar.
What place does religion have in making ethical decisions? Include specific examples of situations involving ethics faced by members of a religion today. Reflect on your own spiritual beliefs, how have your ethics been influenced personally or professionally? If you hold no spiritual beliefs, consider how individuals you may know or work with are faced with ethical decisions that are influenced by their beliefs.
Consider what you know about religion today. What are some modern issues that may be affecting religious traditions? How are these religions handling these issues?

You have been staying in San Diego for the past five months. The city is fun, but much different than you had expected. Before you came, you had thought that the city would be a fairly quiet seaside town with a historical center. You quickly found the historical center—old Spanish-style buildings, pink oleander, and red bougainvillea—but you still haven’t found the quiet. Once a provincial naval port, the city of San Diego is now large, modern, and crisscrossed with freeways and wide roads. The hum of traffic can even be heard in the hillsides. A friend told you of Joshua Tree National Park and its wonderful vegetation. It is not too long a drive, and you consider taking a trip. You and your friend plan your trip, expecting to camp for two nights during a week in autumn. Together you drive north. You have lots of bottled water, sunscreen, a hat, and a long-sleeved shirt for protection from the bright sun. You drive through the Anza-Borrego area and then to the Salton Sea. Finally you arrive at Joshua Tree National Park and get a camping permit. The Joshua trees look like vegetation from another world, and the massive boulders are unbelievable. After setting up camp and eating supper, you enjoy the sunset. The dusk comes on gently, and before you are aware of it, the stars start to appear. You put on your hooded jacket and walk out into a world transformed by twilight. What strikes you first is the crispness of the air. You walk farther, beyond the clearing, and suddenly you are on a path near large boulders. As a strong breeze rises, the wind makes an eerie, whispering sound. Moving on, you find yourself walking along a slight ridge. To your right, you see the evening star against the blue-black sky. To your left, the sky still holds some daylight. You sit down on a flat rock, pull up your hood, and watch the silhouettes of rocks and trees disappear as darkness spreads its thickening veil.

It’s difficult to pull yourself away. All around you stars begin to pop out, and soon they are blooming thick as wildflowers. Overhead, the mass of stars resembles a river—it must be the Milky Way. You get up and slowly turn full circle to take it all in. You had almost forgotten about stars. You don’t see them much back home, let alone think of them. Where you have lived, stars appear in movies. Here, though, stars are mysterious points of light. You remember what you once learned: stars are so distant that their light can take millions of years to reach earth. You realize that some of the stars you see may no longer exist. Only their light remains. At last you begin to walk back. A cluster of clouds emerges on the horizon, lit from behind by the rising moon. You see your campground in the distance. From here it looks so small. The stars seem like the permanent, real world, while the few tents appear little and temporary—more like a question mark in the great book of the universe. Questions flood your mind. Who are we human beings? Do we make any difference to the universe? Are we part of any cosmic plan? Is there any point to the universe at all? What is it all about? WHAT IS RELIGION? Starry Night over the Rhône depicts a sky full of luminous stars. Painted near the end of its creator’s life, the work summarizes the vision of Vincent van Gogh (1853–1890). Van Gogh was an intensely religious man who had planned to be an ordained minister in the Dutch Reformed Church, as was his father. But he struggled with his studies and had a falling-out with Church authorities. For a time, he lived Page 5as a lay preacher, working with poor miners in Belgium. When he was 27, his brother Theo, an art dealer, encouraged him to take up painting.

Despite this new career in painting, van Gogh continued to think of himself as a minister. If he could not preach in words, he would preach in pictures. His subjects were the simple things of life: trees, sunflowers, a wicker chair, a bridge, his postman, a farmer sowing seeds, peasants eating a meal, workers bringing in the harvest. His paintings express a quiet awe before the wonder that he sensed in everyday objects and ordinary people. It was his special sense of the sacredness he saw all around him that he wanted to share. Almost as a reminder, in Starry Night over the Rhône, van Gogh placed the town below the night sky, but with his attention upward to the stars. The heavenly realm illuminates van Gogh’s vision of the sacred character of the entire world. Key Characteristics of Religion When people begin their study of religions, they bring ideas from the religion in which they were raised or from the predominant religion of their society. They may assume, for example, that every religion has a sacred book or that it worships a divine being or that it has a set of commandments. Indeed, many religions do share all these characteristics, but some do not. Shinto, for example, does not have a set of commandments, nor does it preach a moral code; Zen Buddhism does not worship a divine being; and many tribal religions have no written sacred scripture. Nevertheless, we call them all religions. What, then—if not a common set of elements—must be present for something to be called a religion?Page 6An obvious starting point for many scholars is to examine linguistic clues: What are the linguistic roots of the term religion? Intriguingly, the word’s Latin roots are re-, meaning “again,” and lig-, meaning “join” or “connect” (as in the word ligament).1 Thus the common translation of religion is “to join again,” “to reconnect.” If this derivation is correct, then the word religion suggests the joining of our natural, human world to the sacred world. In classical Latin, the term religio meant awe for the gods and concern for proper ritual.2 We must recognize, though, that the term religion arose in Western culture and may not be entirely appropriate when applied across cultures. Spiritual path, for example, might be a more fitting designation to refer to other religious systems. We will keep these things in mind when we use the long-established term religion.

People have constantly tried to define religion, and there are thus many notable attempts. These definitions may emphasize a sense of dependence on a higher power, awareness of the passing nature of life, the use of symbolism and ritual, the structuring of time, or the acceptance of moral rules. Yet reading these definitions makes one aware of their limitations. The definitions often seem inadequate and time-bound, the product of a particular culture or period or discipline. Perhaps, for the time being, it is better simply to be open to many possible definitions, without as yet embracing any single one. After studying the major world religions, we will undoubtedly come closer to our own definition of religion. The problem of how to define religion continues to plague scholars, who love definition. A definition may apply well to some religions, but not to others. A definition may apply to religions of the past, but may not be suitable for a religion of the future. Traditional dictionary definitions of religion read something like this: a system of belief that involves worship of a God or gods, prayer, ritual, and a moral code. Yet there are so many exceptions to that definition that it is neither comprehensive nor accurate. So instead of saying that a religion must have certain characteristics, it is more useful to list a series of characteristics that are found in what are commonly accepted as religions. Scholars note that what we ordinarily call religions manifest to some degree the following eight elements:4Belief system Several beliefs fit together into a fairly complete and systematic interpretation of the universe and the human being’s place in it; this is also called a worldview. Community The belief system is shared, and its ideals are practiced by a group. Central myths Stories that express the religious beliefs of a group are retold and often reenacted. Examples of central myths include the major events in the life of the Hindu god Krishna, the enlightenment experience of the Buddha, the exodus of the Israelites from oppression in Egypt, the death and resurrection of Jesus, or Muhammad’s escape from Mecca to Medina. Scholars call such central stories myths. The term “myth,” as scholars use it, is a specialized term. It does not in itself mean (as in popular usage) that the stories are historically untrue, but only that the stories are central to the religion. Ritual Beliefs are enacted and made real through ceremonies. Ethics Rules about human behavior are established. These are often viewed as having been revealed from a supernatural realm, but they can also be viewed as socially generated guidelines. Characteristic emotional experiences Among the emotional experiences typically associated with religions are dread, guilt, awe, mystery, devotion, conversion, “rebirth,” liberation, ecstasy, bliss, and inner peace. Material expression Religions make use of an astonishing variety of physical elements—statues, paintings, musical compositions, musical instruments, ritual objects, flowers, incense, clothing, architecture, and specific locations. Sacredness A distinction is made between the sacred and the ordinary; ceremonies often emphasize this distinction through the deliberate use of different language, clothing, and architecture. Certain objects, actions, people, and places may share in the sacredness or express it. Each of the traditions that you will study in the pages ahead will exhibit most of these characteristics. But the religious traditions, like the people who practice them, will manifest the characteristics in different ways and at different times. The SacredAll religions are concerned with the deepest level of reality, and for most religions the core or origin of everything is sacred and mysterious. This sense of a mysterious, originating holiness is called by many names: Brahman, Dao, Great Mother, Divine Parent, Great Spirit, Ground of Being, Great Mysterious, the Ultimate, the Absolute, the Divine, the Holy. People, however, experience and explain sacred reality in different ways, as you shall see in the chapters that follow.

One familiar term for the sacred reality, particularly in the Western world, is God, and monotheism* is the term that means a belief in one God. In some systems, the term God often carries with it the notion of a Cosmic Person—a divine being with will and intelligence who is just and compassionate and infinite in virtues. God is also called omnipotent (“having total power over the universe”). Although God may be said to have personal aspects, all monotheistic religions agree that the reality of God is beyond all Page 8categories: God is said to be pure spirit, not fully definable in words. This notion of a powerful God, distinct from the universe, describes a sacredness that is active in the world but also distinct from it. That is, God is transcendent—unlimited by the world and all ordinary reality. In some religions, however, the sacred reality is not viewed as having personal attributes but is more like an energy or mysterious power. Frequently, the sacred is then spoken of as something immanent within the universe. In some religions, there is a tendency to speak of the universe not just as having been created but also as a manifestation of the sacred nature itself, in which nothing is separate from the sacred. This view, called pantheism (Greek: “all divine”), sees the sacred as being discoverable within the physical world and its processes. In other words, nature itself is holy. Some religions worship the sacred reality in the form of many coexisting gods, a view called polytheism. The multiple gods may be fairly separate entities, each in charge of an aspect of reality (such as nature gods), or they may be multiple manifestations of the same basic sacred reality. In recent centuries, other views have become prominent. There can be a tendency to deny the existence of any God or gods (atheism), to argue that the existence of God cannot be proven (agnosticism), or simply to take no position (nontheism). (Such tendencies are not strictly modern; they can also be found in some ancient systems, such as Jainism; see Chapter 5.) However, if one sees religion broadly, as a “spiritual path,” then even systems based on these three views—particularly if they show other typical characteristics of a religion—can also be called religions. Religious Symbolism Religions present views of reality, and most speak of the sacred. Nevertheless, because religions are so varied in their teachings and because the teachings of some religions, when taken at face value, conflict with those of others, it is common to assert that religions express truth symbolically. A symbol is something fairly concrete, ordinary, and universal that can represent—and help human beings intensely experience—something of greater complexity. For example, water can represent spiritual cleansing; the sun, health; a mountain, strength; and a circle, eternity. It is common to find symbolism, both deliberate and unconscious, in religious art and ritual. Symbols and their interpretation have long played an important part in analyzing dreams. It was often thought that dreams were messages from a supernatural realm and that they provided a key to the future. Although this type of interpretation is less common nowadays, most people still think that dreams are significant. Sigmund Freud introduced his view of the dream as a door into subconscious levels of the mind. He argued that, by understanding dreams symbolically, human beings can understand their hidden needs and fears. For example, a dream of being lost in a forest might be interpreted as distress over losing one’s sense of direction in life, or a dream of flying could be interpreted as a need to seek freedom.

Carl Gustav Jung extended the symbol-focused method of dream interpretation to the interpretation of religion. Some religious leaders have been cautious about this approach—popularized by the mythologist Joseph Campbell—lest everything be turned into a symbol and all literal meaning be lost. And specialists in religion oppose the view that two religions are basically the same simply because they share similar symbols. Nevertheless, there are many scholars and religious leaders who recognize the importance of symbolic interpretation, and they say that the use of religious symbols may point to some structure that underlies all religions. There is no doubt that many of the same symbolic images and actions appear repeatedly in religions throughout the world. Water, for instance, is used in all sorts of religious rituals: Hindus bathe in the Ganges River; Christians use water for baptisms; Jews use water for ritual purification; and Muslims and followers of Shinto wash before prayer. Ashes also have widespread use among religious traditions to suggest death and the spirit world: ashes are used by tribal religions in dance ceremonies, by Hindu ascetics to represent self-discipline and detachment, and by some Christians, whose foreheads are marked by ashes in observance of Ash Wednesday. Likewise, religious buildings are placed on hills or are raised on mounds and reached by stairs—all suggesting the symbol of the holy mountain, where the sacred can be encountered.

We also see in various religions the recurrence of a symbolic story of transformation: a state of original purity degenerates into pollution or disorder, or a battle to fight disorder culminates in a sacrificial death that results in a renewed sense of purity and order. Scholars point out, too, that religions frequently use words in a symbolic way; for example, the divine is often described as existing “up above,” insight can be “awakened,” and a person can feel “reborn.” When viewed this way, religious symbols, myths, and terminology at times suggest a universal symbolic “language” that all religions speak. Those who are interested in religious symbolism hope that understanding the “language” of symbols will help uncover what is universally important in all religions. Speculations on the Sources of Religion Why does religion exist? The most evident answer is that it serves many human needs. One of our primary needs is having a means to deal with our mortality. Because we and our loved ones must die, we have to face the pain of death and the inevitable questions it brings about whether there is any soul, afterlife, or rebirth. People often look to religion for the answers. Religion can help us cope with death, and religious rituals can offer us comfort. Human beings also desire good health, a regular supply of food, and the conditions (such as suitable weather) necessary to ensure these things. Before the development of modern science, human beings looked to religion to bring about these practical benefits, and they often still do. Human beings are also social by nature, and religion offers companionship and the fulfillment that can come from belonging to a group. Moreover, religion often provides a structure for caring for the needy.

Human beings have a need to seek out and create artistic forms of expression. Religion stimulates art, music, and dance, and it has been the inspirational source of some of the most imaginative buildings in the world. Religion not only makes use of multiple arts, but it also integrates them into a living, often beautiful whole. Perhaps the most basic function of religion is to respond to our natural wonder about ourselves and the cosmos—our musings on a starry night. Religion helps us relate to the unknown universe around us by answering the basic questions of who we are, where we come from, and where we are going. Issues relating to the origins of religion have engaged thinkers with new urgency ever since the dawn of the age of science. Many have suggested that religion is a human attempt to feel more secure in an unfeeling universe. The English anthropologist E. B. Tylor (1832–1917), for example, believed religion was rooted in spirit worship. He noted how frequently religions see “spirits” as having some control over natural forces, and how commonly religions see those who die—the ancestors—as passing into the spirit world. Fear of the power of all these spirits, he thought, made it necessary for people to find ways to please their ancestors. Religion offered such ways, thus allowing the living to avoid the spirits’ dangerous power and to convert that power into a force that worked for the good of human beings. Similarly, the Scottish anthropologist James Frazer (1854–1941), author of The Golden Bough, saw the origins of religion in early attempts by human beings to influence nature, and he identified religion as an intermediate stage between magic and science. Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) theorized that belief in a God or gods arises from the long-lasting impressions made on adults by their childhood experiences, in which their parents play a major part. These adults then project their sense of their parents into their image of their God or gods. According to Freud, these experiences—of fear as well as of security—are the basis for adults’ attempts to deal with the anxieties of a complicated present and an unknown future. Freud argued that since a major function of religion is to help human beings feel secure in an unsafe universe, religion becomes less necessary as human beings gain greater physical and mental security. Freud’s major works on religion include The Future of an Illusion, Moses and Monotheism, and Totem and Taboo.

Another psychologist, William James (1842–1910), came to his ideas on religion via an unusual course of study. Although he began his higher education as a student of art, he made a radical switch to the study of medicine. Finally, when he recognized the influence of the mind on the body, he was led to the study of psychology and then of religion, which he saw as growing out of psychological needs. James viewed religion as a positive way of fulfilling these needs and praised its positive influence on the lives of individuals. He wrote that religion brings “a new zest” to living, provides “an assurance of safety,” and leads to a “harmonious relation with the universe.”5The German theologian Rudolf Otto (1869–1937) argued in his book The Idea of the Holy that religions emerge when people experience the aspect of reality that is essentially mysterious. He called it the “mystery that causes trembling and fascination” (mysterium tremendum et fascinans). In general, we take our existence for granted and live with little wonder. Occasionally, though, something disturbs our ordinary view of reality. For example, a strong manifestation of nature—such as lightning or a violent thunderstorm—may startle us. It is an aspect of reality that is frightening, forcing us to tremble (tremendum). But it also brings a feeling of fascination (fascinans). The emotional result is what Otto called numinous awe.6 He pointed out how often religious art depicts that which is terrifying—such as Durga, a powerful Hindu goddess.7Carl Gustav Jung (1875–1961), an early disciple of Freud, broke with his mentor because of fundamental differences of interpretation, particularly about religion. Page 13In his books Modern Man in Search of a Soul, Psychology and Alchemy, and Memories, Dreams, Reflections, Jung described religion as something that grew out of the individual’s need to arrive at personal fulfillment—which Jung called individuation. According to Jung, many religious insignia can be seen as symbols of personal integration and human wholeness: the circle is an unending line, the cross is made of lines that join at the center, and the sacred diagram of the mandala is often a circle within or enclosing a square. Jung called such signs “the path to the center, to individuation.”8 He pointed out that as people age, they can make a healthy use of religion to understand their place in the universe, and they can use it to prepare for death. For Jung, religion is a noble human response to the complexity and depth of reality. The skeptical view of Karl Marx (1818–1883) about religion is often mentioned. Yet it may have been gentler than that of the Russian and Chinese forms of Marxism that emerged from it. While many types of Marxism have been strongly atheistic, Marx himself was not so militant. He indeed called religion an opiate of the masses. Yet for him religion had both a bad and a good side. Religion, he thought, emerged naturally because people felt poor, powerless, and alienated from their work. On the other hand, Marx also thought that religion gave great consolation, for it spoke of a suffering-free life after death. For Marx, religion was a symptom of the poverty and inadequacy of modern society. The need for religion, he thought, would dissolve when society improved. Some recent theories do not look specifically at religion. However their wide-ranging insights are applied in the study of the origin of religions, as well as in many other fields. Among these theoretical approaches are structuralism and post-structuralism, along with the technique of deconstruction. You will look at some of these ideas and applications later. Various scholars have attempted to identify “stages” in the development of religions. Austrian ethnographer and philologist Wilhelm Schmidt (1868–1954) argued that all humankind once believed in a single High God and that to this simple monotheism later beliefs in lesser gods and spirits were added. The reverse has also been suggested—namely, that polytheism led to monotheism. Influenced by the notion of evolution, some people have speculated that religions “evolve” naturally from animism (a worldview that sees all elements of nature as being filled with spirit or spirits) to polytheism and then to monotheism. Critics of this view feel it is biased in favor of monotheism, in part because it is a view originally suggested by Christian scholars, who presented their belief system as the most advanced. Scholars today hesitate to speak of any “evolution” from one form of religion to another. To apply the biological notion of evolution to human belief systems seems biased, oversimple, and speculative. Even more important, such a point of view leads to subjective judgments that one religion is more “highly evolved” than another—a shortsightedness that has kept many people from appreciating the unique insights and contributions of every religion. Consequently, the focus of religious studies has moved from the study of religion in general to the study of individual religions, a field that assumes that all religions are equally worthy of study.

When we study religions in a comparative and historical sense, we are not looking to validate them or to disprove them or to enhance our own belief or practice—as we might if we were studying our personal religious tradition. Instead, we want to comprehend the particular religions as thoroughly as possible and to understand the experience of people within each religion. Part of that process of understanding leads us to see patterns of similarity and difference among religions. Although we do look for patterns, we must recognize that these patterns are not conceptual straitjackets. Religions, especially those with long histories and extensive followings, are usually quite complex. Furthermore, religions are not permanent theoretical constructs. Rather, they are constantly in a process of change—influenced by religious leaders, governments, historical events, changing technology, and the shifting values of the cultures in which they exist. First Pattern: Views of the World and Life Religions must provide answers to the great questions that people ask. How did the universe come into existence, does it have a purpose, and will it end? What is time, and how should we make use of it? What should be our relationship to the world of nature? Why do human beings exist? How do we reach fulfillment, transformation, or salvation? Why is there suffering in the world, and how should we deal with it? What happens when we die? What should we hold as sacred? The questions do not vary, but the answers do. Given the great variety in their worldviews, religions, not surprisingly, define differently the nature of sacred reality, the universe, the natural world, time, and human purpose. Religions also differ in their attitudes toward the role of words in expressing the sacred and in their relations to other religious traditions. By examining different views on these concepts, we will have further bases for comparison that will lead us to a more complete understanding of the world’s religions. The nature of sacred reality Some religions, as you have seen, speak of the sacred as transcendent, existing primarily in a realm beyond the everyday world. In other religions, though, sacred reality is spoken of as being immanent; that is, it is within nature and human beings and can be experienced as energy or holiness. Sometimes the sacred is viewed as having personal attributes, while elsewhere it is seen as an impersonal entity. And in certain religious traditions, particularly in some forms of Buddhism, it is hard to point to a sacred reality at all. Such facts raise the question as to whether “the sacred” exists outside ourselves or if it is better to speak of the sacred simply as “what people hold to be sacred.” The nature of the universe Some religions see the universe as having been begun by an intelligent, personal Creator who continues to guide the universe according to a cosmic plan. Other religions view the universe as being eternal; that is, having no beginning or end. The implications of these two positions are quite important to what is central in a religion and Page 15to how the human being acts in regard to this central belief. If the universe is created, especially by a transcendent deity, the center of sacredness is the Creator rather than the universe, but human beings imitate the Creator by changing and perfecting the world. If, however, the universe is eternal, the material universe itself is sacred and perfect and requires no change. The human attitude toward nature At one end of the spectrum, some religions or religious schools see nature as the realm of evil forces that must be overcome. For them, nature is gross and contaminating, existing in opposition to the nonmaterial world of the spirit—a view, known as dualism, held by some forms of Christianity, Jainism, and Hinduism. At the other end of the spectrum, as in Daoism and Shinto, nature is considered to be sacred and needs no change. Other religions, such as Judaism and Islam, take a middle ground, holding that the natural world originated from a divine action, but that human beings are called upon to continue to shape the world. Time Religions that emphasize a creation, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, tend to see time as being linear, moving in a straight line from the beginning of the universe to its end. Being limited and unrepeatable, time is important. In some other religions, such as Buddhism, however, time is cyclical. The universe simply moves through endless changes, which repeat themselves over grand periods of time. In such a religion, time is not as crucial or “real” because, ultimately, the universe is not moving to some final point. Consequently, appreciating the present may be more important than being oriented to the future.

Human purpose In some religions, human beings are part of a great divine plan, and although each person is unique, individual meaning comes also from the cosmic plan. The cosmic plan may be viewed as a struggle between forces of good and evil, with human beings at the center of the stage and the forces of good and evil at work within them. Because human actions are so important, they must be guided by a prescribed moral code that is meant to be internalized by the individual. This view is significant in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In contrast, other religions do not see human life in similarly dramatic terms, and the individual is only part of much larger realities. In Daoism and Shinto, a human being is a small part of the natural universe, and in Confucianism, an individual is part of the family and of society. Such religions place less emphasis on individual rights and more emphasis on how the individual can maintain harmony with the whole. Actions are not guided by an internalized moral system but by society, tradition, and a sense of mutual obligation. Words and scriptures In some religions, the sacred is to be found in written and spoken words, and for those religions that use writing and create scriptures, what is important is the reading, copying, and using of sacred words in ceremony, music, and art. You see the importance of words in indigenous religions—which primarily pass on their traditions orally. You also see it in Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Other religions—such as Daoism and Zen Buddhism—show a certain mistrust of words. They instead value silence and wordless meditation. Although Zen and Daoism utilize language in their practices and have produced significant literature, each of these religions finds language limited in expressing the richness or totality of reality. Exclusiveness and inclusiveness Some religions emphasize that the sacred is distinct from the world and that order must be imposed by separating good from bad, true from false. In that view, to share in sacredness means separation—for example, withdrawal from certain foods, places, people, practices, or beliefs. Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are among the religions that have been generally exclusive, making it impossible to belong to more than one religion at the same time. In contrast, other religions have stressed inclusiveness. Frequently, such religions also have emphasized social harmony, the inadequacy of language, or the relativity of truth, and they have accepted belief in many deities. Their inclusiveness has led them to admit many types of beliefs and practices into their religions, to the point that it is possible for an individual to belong to several religions—such as Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism—all at the same time. Such inclusiveness has led to misunderstanding at times, as in the case of a Christian missionary having “converted” a Japanese follower only to find the new convert still visiting a Shinto shrine. Second Pattern: Focus of Beliefs and Practices Realizing the limitations of all generalizing, you nonetheless might gain some perspective by examining the orientations exhibited by individual religions. When you Page 17look at the world’s dominant religions, you see in their conception and location of the sacred three basic orientations.10Sacramental orientation The sacramental orientation emphasizes carrying out rituals and ceremonies regularly and correctly as the path to salvation. In some religions, correct ritual is even believed to influence the processes of nature. All religions have some degree of ritual, but the ceremonial tendency is predominant, for example, in most indigenous religions, in Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christianity, in Vedic Hinduism, and in Vajrayana Buddhism. Making the Catholic sign of the cross, for example, is done in a certain way: only with the right hand, beginning with a touch on the forehead, then on one’s chest, and finally on each shoulder.11Prophetic orientation The prophetic orientation stresses that contact with the sacred is ensured by proper belief and by adherence to moral rules. This orientation also implies that a human being may be an important intermediary between the believer and the sacred. For example, a prophet may speak to believers on behalf of the sacred. Prophetic orientation is a prominent aspect of Judaism, Protestant Christianity, and Islam, which all see the sacred as being transcendent but personal. The television crusades of evangelistic ministers are good examples of the prophetic orientation in action. Mystical orientation The mystical orientation seeks union with a reality greater than oneself, such as with God, the process of nature, the universe, or reality as a whole. There are often techniques—such as seated meditation—for lessening the sense of one’s individual identity. These techniques help the individual to experience a greater unity. The mystical orientation is a prominent aspect of Upanishadic Hinduism, Daoism, and some schools of Buddhism. (Master Kusan [1909–1983], a Korean teacher of Zen Buddhism, described the disappearance of self in the enlightenment experience of unity with this memorable question: “Could a snowflake survive inside a burning flame?”12) Although the mystical orientation is more common in religions that stress the immanence of the sacred or that are nontheistic, it is an important but less prominent tendency in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam as well. Any one of these three orientations may be dominant in a religion, yet the other two orientations might also be found in the same religion to a lesser extent and possibly be subsumed into a different purpose. For example, ceremony can be utilized to help induce mystical experience, as in Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, Japanese Shingon Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, Daoism, and even Zen Buddhism, which has a strongly ritualistic aspect of its own. Third Pattern: Views of Male and Female Because gender is such an important part of human life, religions have had much to say about the roles of men and women, both on earth and in the divine spheres. Because of differences in how religions view these differences, they may constitute another underlying pattern that we can investigate when studying religions. Page 18Thus, conceptions of what is male and what is female provide another basis for comparing religions.

In many influential religions today, male imagery and control seem to dominate. In them, the sacred is considered male, and the full-time religious specialists are frequently male. Yet this may not always have been the case. Tantalizing evidence suggests that female divinities once played an important role in many cultures and religions. The most significant female deity was particularly associated with fertility and motherhood and has been known by many names, such as Astarte, Asherah, Aphrodite, and Freia (the origin of the word Friday). Statues of a Mother-Goddess have been found throughout Europe, as well as in the Middle East. Is it possible that female images of the divine were once more common and that female religious leadership once played a more important role? It has been Page 19argued that male dominance in religion became more common as the result of the growth of city-states, which needed organized defense. In this argument, city-states elevated the status of men because of their fighting ability. In Israel, worship of a female deity was stamped out by prophets who preached exclusive worship of the male god Yahweh and by kings who wanted loyalty paid to them and their offspring. We read passages like this in the Hebrew scriptures: “They abandoned the Lord and worshipped Baal and the Astartes. So the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel” (Judg. 2:13–14).13 The Christian New Testament contains words that sometimes have been interpreted to mean that women should not play a prominent role in public worship: “I do not allow them to teach or to have authority over men; they must keep quiet. For Adam was created first, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and broke God’s law” (1 Tim. 2:12–14).14 In Asia, Confucianism has been distrustful of women in general and has ordinarily refused them leadership roles. In Buddhism, despite recognition in scripture that women can be enlightened, in practice the great majority of leaders have been men.15

A century ago, great numbers of people across the world had little experience of the different beliefs and practices in other regions. Yet radio, television, the Internet, cell phones, and other technologies have changed this. Thus it is no surprise that long-established customs regarding gender should now be challenged and changed. Such changes may not come easily. In some religious traditions, the possibility of changes can produce a rift. This is happening today—for example, in the Christian Anglican Communion and several other Christian denominations. You can expect similar disruptions in other religious traditions, as technological changes bring knowledge of different cultures. Knowledge of other cultures will continue to grow, and the study of other religions will contribute to this process. Such study will open people’s eyes not only to the gender expectations in religions of the past, but also to today’s evolving practices. This is nudging several religious traditions to accept women in areas where in earlier centuries they were not expected to have a role. There are many resultant tensions—those in Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam are currently receiving publicity. However, you can expect that women will be widely successful in receiving full acceptance in roles of leadership. MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF RELIGION Religion has influenced so many areas of human life that it is a subject not only of religious studies but of other disciplines, as well. As you have seen, the social sciences have long studied religion. More recently, linguistics, literary theory, and cultural studies have offered new ways of seeing and interpreting religion. There are other approaches, too. You can focus your study on a single religion or look at several religions at the same time. Believers may opt to explore their own religion “from the inside.” On the other hand, nonbelievers may want to concentrate on the answers that several religions have given to a single question, such as the purpose of human life. Following is a list of some common approaches to religion: Psychology Psychology (Greek: “soul study”) deals with human mental states, emotions, and behaviors. Despite being a fairly young discipline, psychology has taken a close look at religion because it offers such rich human “material” to explore. A few areas of study include religious influences on child rearing, human behavior, gender expectations, and self-identity; group dynamics in religion; trance states; and comparative mystical experiences.

Mythology The study of religious tales, texts, and art has uncovered some universal patterns. Mythology is full of the recurrent images and themes found in religions, such as the tree of knowledge, the ladder to heaven, the fountain of life, the labyrinth, the secret garden, the holy mountain, the newborn child, the suffering hero, initiation, rebirth, the cosmic battle, the female spirit guide, and the aged teacher of wisdom. Philosophy (Greek: “love of wisdom”) in some ways originated from a struggle with religion. Although both arenas pose many of the same questions, philosophy does not automatically accept the answers given by any religion to the great questions. Instead, philosophy seeks answers independently. Following reason rather than religious authority, it tries to fit its answers into a rational, systematic whole. Some questions philosophy asks are these: Does human life have any purpose? Is there an afterlife? How should we live? Philosophy is essentially the work of individuals, while religion is a community experience; philosophy tries to avoid emotion, while religion often nurtures it; and philosophy is carried on without ritual, while religion naturally expresses itself in ceremony.

Theology (Greek: “study of the divine”) is the study of topics as they relate to one particular religious tradition. A theologian is an individual who usually studies her or his own belief system. For example, a person who is in training to become a Christian minister might study Christian theology. The arts Comparing patterns in religious art makes an intriguing study. For example, religious architecture often uses symmetry, height, and archaic styles to suggest the sacred. Religious music frequently employs a slow pace and repeated rhythms, which induce tranquillity. Religious art often incorporates gold, haloes, equilateral designs, and circles, which suggest otherworldliness and perfection. Anthropology (Greek: “study of human beings”) has been interested in how religions influence the ways different cultures deal with issues such as family interaction, individual roles, property rights, marriage, child rearing, social hierarchies, and division of labor. Archeology (Greek: “study of origins”) explores the remains of earlier civilizations. In its work, it often uncovers the remains of religious buildings from ancient cultures. When possible, archeologists translate writings left by these earlier people, much of which can be religious in origin. Archeology occasionally sheds light on how one religion has influenced another. For example, the excavation of a cuneiform library at Nineveh revealed a story (in the Epic of Gilgamesh) that is similar to—and may have influenced—the biblical story of Noah and the flood. Archeology can also reveal religious material that enables scholars to decipher an entire writing system. For example, the discovery in the early nineteenth century of the Rosetta Stone—because it contained the same inscription in three different scripts—helped lead researchers to unlock the meaning of Egyptian hieroglyphics. Linguistics and literary theory The study of linguistics has sometimes involved a search for patterns that may underlie all languages. Linguistics has also suggested general patterns and structures that may underlie something broader than language alone: human consciousness. This interest in underlying patterns has brought new attention to the possible structures behind religious tales, rituals, and other expressions of religious beliefs and attitudes. Linguistics has also examined religious language for its implications and often-hidden values. (Consider, for example, the various implications of the religious words sin and sacred.) Literary theory, on the other hand, has studied the written texts of religions as reflections of the cultural assumptions and values that produced the texts. Literary theory, for example, has pointed out some of the ways in which religions have treated women and minorities as different from more dominant groups. Literary theory also has shown that non-written material—such as religious statues, paintings, songs, television shows, and films—can be viewed as forms of communication and that they can be studied in many ways that written texts are studied. The use of theory for the study of religion is not limited to the fields of linguistics and literature. In fact, an increasing number of academic disciplines are studying Page 22religions as part of the human search for understanding. Thus a scholar in the field of art may see and interpret religions as forms of art. Specialists in psychology may interpret religions primarily as expressions of individual human needs. Sociologists may see religions as ways of shaping groups and of promoting and maintaining group identity. The viewpoints of these and other disciplines can also be adopted by scholars of religion as keys to understanding the complexities of religions. The Study of Religion Originally, religions were studied primarily within their own religious traditions. The goal of this approach was that faith and devotion would be illuminated by intellectual search. Although this approach continues in denominational schools, the study of religion began to take new form two centuries ago. There were several causes for the change. First, the early scientific movement accepted belief in a creator-god, but it rejected belief in miracles, and it demanded scientific proof for beliefs. The emerging scientific movement thus forced people to revise some of their traditional religious beliefs. Second, because of the growth of historical studies, academic experts began to question the literal truth of some statements and stories presented in the scriptures. (For example, did the story of Noah and the Ark actually happen, or was it meant mainly to be a teaching parable whose real purpose was moral?) Third, because of the growth of trade and travel, even faraway cultures were becoming known. Their religions proved to be not only colorful but also wise. The morality taught by Buddhism, the sense of duty found in Confucianism, the love of nature taught in Shinto—all these seemed admirable. Yet what did this mean for other religions? In the next two centuries this question intensified, as more information became available through history, anthropology, and sociology. Scriptures and ritual texts were translated, and anthropologists began to have direct experience of even small and rare religions.In the university world, the study of religions was at first fragmented. The great questions of religion were studied in philosophy departments. Other aspects of religion could be found in departments of history, psychology, anthropology, and art. There was as yet no department of religious studies that unified these interests. The fragmented academic approach changed in the middle of the twentieth century, as departments of religious studies were formed and became a regular part of academic life. At first it was uncertain if these departments of religion would survive. However, the popularity of some courses in religion—particularly those in world religions, death and dying, and the psychology of religion—demonstrated the worth of having separate, permanent departments of religious studies. The study of religion has further expanded, and in the present century we are able to examine religions from additional and sometimes unexpected points of view. For example, one of the most provocative new perspectives is neurology. Are religious beliefs and practices a part of our genetic makeup, or are they merely manufactured by cultures and learned by people? Is a religious experience the intrusion Page 23of a sacred being on individual consciousness, or is it the activity of a particular chemical in the brain? Similar questions may be asked about morality. Are moral demands a part of our physical constitution, or are they simply rules taught by society? As academic disciplines expand and additional disciplines emerge, new aspects of religion will be discovered. Recent Theories Recent thinking about religion has been influenced by the field studies of anthropologists and other behavioral scientists. Archeology has also contributed much to newer thinking. At one time it was thought that religions were best traced to a “great founder,” such as Moses, the Buddha, Jesus, or Muhammad. This is no longer the common approach. Rather, sociologists have pointed out how religions seem to emerge from whole tribes and peoples. One of the first thinkers to speak of this was the French sociologist Émile Durkheim (1858–1917).16 He noted how religions reinforce the values of groups, and his approach was empirical, based on research. His approach has been continued by later French thinkers, such as Claude Lévi-Strauss. Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908–2009) did fieldwork in Brazil, where he studied the mythology of tribal groups. There he began to see great similarities in the myths of indigenous peoples. This led him to see large structural similarities among kinship patterns, languages, and social relations. He theorized that structures in the human mind formed these similarities. His thought, called structuralism, has influenced the study of religion, particularly regarding taboos, marriage, and laws about food purity. A countermovement, called post-structuralism, soon emerged. It emphasized the individuality of each experience and argued that belief in grand structures may keep investigators from appreciating that individuality. Michel Foucault (1926–1984) is thought of as its primary exponent. His work especially focused on those marginalized by society—prisoners, medical patients, and the insane. Jacques Derrida (1930–2004) began with a structuralist approach, but he moved away from grand theories in order to focus on language, meaning, and interpretation. He is known for going behind the ordinary interpretation of texts in order to discover new cultural meanings. This method is known as deconstruction. In the area of religion, it can be quite effective. For example, traditional religious texts can be looked at from many new points of view. For example, you can look at scriptural passages to investigate underlying attitudes toward the treatment of women, slaves, indigenous people, children, and the old. Deconstructive principles can also be used to investigate religious art, architecture, and music. Increasingly, religious investigation relies on anthropologists who have lived with native peoples and learned their languages. One researcher of this type was E. E. Evans-Pritchard (1902–1973), who lived among the Azande and Nuer people in Africa. Another esteemed anthropologist was Clifford Geertz (1926–2006), who lived in Indonesia and Morocco and wrote about practices there. Geertz championed what he called thick description—a description not only of the appearances of rituals and religious objects, but also of their meaning for the practitioners.

The so-called phenomenological approach to religious studies has been very popular. This approach emphasizes direct experiential research to gather data. It seeks to understand religious acts and objects from the consciousness of the believers, and it tries to avoid projecting the researcher’s beliefs and expectations into the data. Specialists of this type have sometimes focused on one religion. Contemporary examples are Wendy Doniger (O’Flaherty, b. 1940) and Diana Eck (b. 1945). Both of them have specialized in Hinduism, but their writings and other work have incorporated other world religions. KEY CRITICAL ISSUES The research-based approach to the study of religions, although valuable, brings problems and questions. Are we genuinely listening to the voices of the practitioners, or are we only paying attention to the experiences of the observer? Can outsiders be truly objective, or are outside observers merely imposing the theories of their own culture? Doesn’t scientific observation contaminate the people and culture being observed? Could informants give deliberately false answers to questions that they think are inappropriate? (They do.)

References

Books Armstrong, Karen. The Great Transformation: The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions. New York: Knopf, 2006. An exploration of the evolution of the world’s major religious traditions, written by a popular historian of comparative religion.

Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2006. A book by an evolutionary biologist that argues the case against belief in God.

Feierman, Jay, ed. The Biology of Religious Behavior. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO/Praeger, 2009. Explanations of religion that attempt to bridge the gap between religion and science.

Foucault, Michel. Religion and Culture. Ed. Jeremy Carette. New York: Routledge, 1999. Writings of Foucault that show his lifelong interest in religious topics.

Juschka, Darlene, ed. Feminism in the Study of Religion: A Reader. New York: Continuum, 2001. A discussion by feminist scholars of religion from a multicultural perspective.

Lewis-Williams, David. Conceiving God. London: Thames & Hudson, 2010. A study of the psychological origin of belief in God.

Pals, Daniel L. Nine Theories of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014. An excellent survey of major theories of the origin and purpose of religion, including theories of Freud, Marx, Eliade, Durkheim, and Geertz, with biographical sketches of the thinkers.

Wright, Robert. The Evolution of God. Boston: Little, Brown, 2009. A tracing of the evolution of the concept of gods and God.

Film/TV

Bill Moyers on Faith and Reason. (PBS.) A seven-part miniseries that explores the tension between belief and disbelief in religion.

Freud. (Director John Huston; Universal International.) A classic film that sees the young Freud as a hero in a painful search for new understanding of unconscious motivations.

In Search of the Soul. (BBC.) An examination of Jung’s vision of reality.