R O U T L E D G E . T A Y L O R & F R A N C I S

Key Titles in Religion Extracts from our bestselling titles

www.routledge.com/religion Contents

Religion and the Problem of Definition 1 A Critical Introduction to the Study of Religion, 2nd Edition by Craig Martin Introduction 19 Christian Theological Tradition, 3rd Edition by Catherine Cory, Michael Hollerich Background to Buddhism 36 Introducing Buddhism by Charles S. Prebish, Damien Keown Vedic Religion and the Sanskrit language 58 Introducing Hinduism, 2nd Edition by Hillary P. Rodrigues Introduction: Approaching the Subject 90 Introducing Islam, 2nd Edition by William E. Shepard How to Study Religion 103 Introducing Religion, 4th Edition by Robert Ellwood Scripture and Tradition in Judaism 116 Jews, Christians, Muslims, 2nd Edition by John Corrigan, Frederick Denny, Martin S Jaffee, Carlos Eire Understanding the World’s Religious 133 Heritage Many Peoples, Many Faiths by Robert Ellwood, Barbara Mcgraw Studying and Describing Religion 155 Religion in America by Julia Corbett Hemeyer How to Study Religion 168 Religions in the Modern World, 3rd Edition edited by Linda Woodhead, Christopher Partridge, Hiroko Kawanami

www.routledge.com/philosophy Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Religion and the Problem of Defi nition

Words and concepts have a history; their meanings, the terms with which they’re associated, and the objects or referents they select from the world change over time. A trivial example: the word “thong” once was used to refer to what we today call a “fl ip fl op,” but the word now more commonly refers to a particular type of underwear. A more signifi cant example: in ancient Israel, a “marriage” was a social relationship where girls beyond the age of puberty were given by their fathers to other men in exchange for a dowry. When a man raped an unmarried virgin, he was legally required to pay the father a fee and marry the woman, since she was, for all practical purposes, damaged property. A man could have as many wives as he wanted, although wives could only have one husband. Quite literally, the Bible says that men “marry” and women, by contrast, are “taken” or “lorded over.” By contrast, in the middle of the twenti- eth century—at least in the United States—the word “marriage” referred to a mutually voluntary, legally certifi ed relationship between one adult man and one adult woman. Today, at the beginning of the twenty-fi rst century, the word has been changed to refer to voluntary, legally certifi ed, relationships between two adults, of whatever gender or sex. If a community changes the use of a word, the objects (or types of relationships, in this case) to which the word points can be partly or even completely diff erent. In addition, as is clear in the case of “marriage,” the changes are contested and highly political. Th is is espe- cially true of the word “religion,” which has changed dramatically over the last several centuries. However, before looking at the complicated history of the word “religion,” let’s consider a very diff erent politicized word.

Political Defi nitions: Wetlands

In Defi ning Reality: Defi nitions and the Politics of Meaning (2003), Edward Schi- appa provides an account of how the defi nition of the word “wetlands” changed in the United States during the early 1990s. At the time, conservationists who

1 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution wanted to protect wetlands were in competition with developers who wanted to build houses, strip malls, etc. on existing wetlands. For the conservationists, the keys to defi ning a “wetland” were threefold. (1) Th e soil had to be suffi ciently saturated with water such that (2) less oxygen could get into the soil, creating conditions in which (3) only certain types of plants adapted to soil with less oxygen—called “hydrophytes”—could thrive. Th eir defi nition was not random, and nor was it based on a simple description of patches of land that were sort of wet. On the contrary, the conservationists were concerned fi rst with protecting those species of plants and animals that could only live in these types of wetlands. Second, wetlands—at least on this defi nition—absorb and hold sediments that we, as humans, don’t want in our drinking water, keeping the water table cleaner. Th ird, this sort of soil can also absorb excess water during heavy rainfall, thus protecting humans to some extent from possible fl oods. So the conservationists fabricated a defi nition of “wetland” precisely because they wanted to save certain plants and animals, improve drinking water, and protect us from fl oods. By contrast, developers had another sort of human interest: they wanted to make money by building on the properties designated and protected as “wetlands.” When George H.W. Bush was running for president of the United States in 1992, “wetlands” were a crucial political issue, and Bush needed to earn the votes of those citizens sympathetic to the conservationists. Consequently, one of his central campaign promises was that under his presidency he would ensure that no wetlands would be lost to development. However, at the same time he also wanted to please the developers so as to continue to get their support—developers can donate more campaign money than conservation- ists. When Bush fi nally came into offi ce, he signed into existence legislation that protected “wetlands,” but the legislation completely changed the defi nition of wetlands in ways designed to serve the interests of the developers. Specifi - cally, the legislation said that wetlands had to be very wet , not just below the surface of the soil, but also at the surface. Bush said, “I’ve got a radical view of wetlands. I think wetlands ought to be wet” (Schiappa 2003, 87). Th is bene- fi tted the developers because it greatly reduced the number of “wetlands,” as, based on the defi nition of the conservationists, not all of the “wetlands” were really wet or had water on the surface. Estimates suggested that probably 30 to 50 million acres of land that had been “wetlands” on the conservationists’ defi nition were reclassifi ed as “not wetlands”—reducing the number of wetlands by a third or by half—so that the developers could build houses and strip malls. A great deal of money was made, and Bush could claim he kept his campaign promise: he did in fact approve legislation that protected the “wetlands,” even as he redefi ned the term to suit his purposes. It was a successful bait-and-switch. Th e conservationists, of course, were unhappy with these results, insofar as the “really wet” wetlands were so diff erent from the “wetlands” they had singled

2 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

out that the new legislation no longer served their interests. “Really wet” wet- lands couldn’t absorb sediments dangerous to human drinking water in the same way, couldn’t absorb fl oodwaters, and didn’t sustain the types of endan- gered species that thrived in the type of “wetlands” that fi t their defi nition. On the new defi nition, all of the desires of the conservationists were thwarted. For Schiappa, what is interesting about this case is that both defi nitions of “wetlands” are tied to human interests, just diff erent sets of interests. What is a wetland? Th e answer to that question depends on whether one wants a clean water table and to avoid fl oods, or if one wants to build a suburb. Note: we cannot simply answer that question by going out and looking at one. Whether a particular patch of land is a “wetland” depends not on whether it is wet—just looking at it won’t help us. Th e very same patch of land might look like a wet- land for the conservationists but not for Bush and the developers. Another crucial point for Schiappa is that these defi nitional decisions are always related to political power, which is why they’re so contested. At the end of the day, what is crucial is the legal defi nition enforced by the state . Conser- vationists can defi ne “wetlands” diff erently all they want, but their defi nition has no real-world consequences as long as the state is endorsing and enforcing another defi nition. Schiappa concludes that abstract questions like “what is a wetland?”—espe- cially when considered outside of any social or political context—are generally useless. Rather, “the questions to ask are ‘Whose interests are being served by this particular defi nition?’ and ‘Do we identify with those interests’ ” (82)? Do we want to make money or save houses from fl oods?

Political Defi nitions: Religion

“Religion” is a lot like “wetland”: how the term is defi ned, as well as what’s included or excluded in the defi nition, depends on the interests of those mak- ing up the defi nition. Consider, for instance, two legal cases about whether “yoga” falls under the defi nition of “religion.” Th e state of Missouri began taxing yoga studios in 2009, treating them the same as any other business—like gyms—that provides such services. Th e own- ers and operators of yoga studios immediately objected to the policy. Th ey insisted that yoga was religious, or spiritual, and as such should be tax exempt, just like churches and other “religious” institutions. “Yoga is a spiritual prac- tice. It’s not a purchase. . . . Somehow, we need to get the state to realize that” (Huff stutter 2009). Despite the fact that yoga is a highly profi table, $6 billion industry (Huff stutter 2009), yoga enthusiasts were successful in getting the state of Missouri to change the policy. By contrast, consider another case from California in 2013. Following the recommendation of yoga enthusiasts, yoga began to be taught in physical

3 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution education courses in public schools. Soon thereaft er, two conservative Chris- tian parents who were uncomfortable with their children being taught yoga fi led a lawsuit alleging that, insofar as yoga is “religious,” teaching it in public schools violated the separation of church and state. According to the parents’ lawyer, “If yoga is a religion and has religious aspects, it doesn’t belong in the public schools” (Graham 2013). Th e lawsuit failed, and the judge ruled—in favor of the yoga instructors—that the yoga was not religious. So, is yoga religious? If we follow Schiappa’s lead, this is an unhelpful ques- tion to ask. Instead, let us ask: according to whom and in what social con- text is yoga religious? What are the interests of the various parties involved? Yoga enthusiasts in Missouri defi ned yoga as religious, because they didn’t want to pay taxes to the state. Yoga enthusiasts in California defi ned yoga as not religious , because they wanted to be able to teach it in the public schools. Th e defi nition of religion in this case turned on the interests of the parties involved—these defi nitional games are self-serving. Do we want to make money or get some exercise? Ask other yoga enthusiasts if yoga fi ts into their defi nition of “religion,” and we’re likely to get diff erent answers depending on their individual social and political contexts. What is included and excluded from the defi nition of religion varies, depending on the politics of the defi ners. Th us, rather than ask ourselves “What is religion?,” it would be better to ask, “Why does this group defi ne religion this way rather than that way, what do they hope to accomplish, and how does the defi nition serve their interests?” As with wetlands, what do we want to put into our defi nition, and why? What do we want to protect, or what do we want to sell?

Defi ning Religion: A Brief Historical Survey

Today people oft en think of “religions” as special cultural traditions organized around the belief in a god, as well as a set of rituals and communal practices related to that belief. It is oft en assumed that religion is a matter of individual, personal choice, and a private matter that ought to be kept separate from pol- itics. Th is contemporary use of the word “religion” has a long history, starting with early modern European politics. Th ere is, in fact, no equivalent word for the modern term “religion” prior to the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century. For reasons we’ll discuss below, it was not until the Refor- mation that people began to characterize “religious” institutions as private, separate from politics, and related to spiritual rather than material or bodily concerns.

“Religion” before Modernity Prior to the Protestant Reformation, the worship of gods was not seen as a spe- cial part of life fundamentally segregated from politics or other social spheres.

4 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

For instance, in ancient Rome many emperors were worshipped as divine, and people made sacrifi ces to gods in the hopes that the gods would protect their health, their wealth, or their businesses. Similarly, the Bible presents the kings of ancient Israel as appointed by God; the king’s duty was to implement the divine law given to Moses—including, for example, the Ten Commandments. In ancient Greece, ancient Rome, or ancient Israel, a distinction between “reli- gion” and “politics” would have been nonsensical. If we look at modern English translations of premodern texts, we’ll oft en fi nd that translators do, however, use the word “religion” in their translations. For instance, in the Qur’an—written long before the Protestant Reformation— there is a passage that is typically translated in the following way: “I [Allah] have perfected religion for you” (Surah 5:3). If there is no premodern equiva- lent for the word “religion,” then what ancient Arabic word is being trans- lated here? We could ask the same question about translations of ancient texts from many premodern languages: Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Sanskrit, etc. If there is no premodern word for religion, what are these translators translating? As J.Z. Smith once said in an interview, “It’s a well-known conundrum: nobody else has a word remotely like that. If you really want to falsify a translation, fi nd the word religion in any other language” (see https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=iTVeX4Jp418). Translations are oft en deceptive. In Before Religion: A History of a Modern Concept (2013), Brent Nongbri looks at many of these instances of problematic translation. He fi nds that the Latin word religio is oft en translated as “religion,” but in ancient Rome the word religio did not mean a private institution, separate from politics, which prepared one for the aft erlife. On the contrary, the word meant something like “scruples,” “devotion,” “reverence,” or “rules.” Of course, this use overlaps a little bit with some modern uses of “religion,” but only slightly. In ancient Rome, one could have religio or scruples with respect to any kind of life circumstance—obeying the law could constitute religio . Religiones were not “religions” but, rather, any set of “rules or prohibitions instituted either by gods or by humans ” (emphasis added; 28). Similarly, the Arabic word in the Qur’an oft en translated as “religion” is dīn , which simply meant “custom” or “law.” Th us, “I have perfected religion for you” is a misleading translation; a translation closer to the Arabic would be “I have perfected the law for you.” Nongbri demonstrates the same with many other premodern words that continue to be poorly translated. When we translate premodern terms as “religion,” we are actually projecting our own, contemporary ideas back into the past. Th e scholarly term for this is “anachronism”; an anachronism is something that is out of place in history (for instance, talking about automo- biles in ancient Greece would be anachronistic, since automobiles were not invented until much later in human history). Translations that fi nd “religion” in premodern texts are anachronistic, and we must guard against making such errors.

5 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

“Religion” in the Early Modern Era How did “religion” come to be seen as a special kind of institution or cul- ture, fundamentally separate from other forms of culture or politics in gen- eral? Prior to the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic church was involved in the political aff airs of all Western European states. Aft er the Protestant Reformation—when Protestant churches began to secede from the Catholic church—some European kings sided with the Catholics, and others sided with the Protestants. Th ose kings who had allied with the Catholic church attempted to suppress the growing Protestant movement, as they saw Prot- estantism as a threat to the unity of their state. Many people were killed, and several wars ensued. Th e Protestants responded to the violence and attempts at suppression by claiming that their institutions should be tolerated, as they were not, in fact, a threat to political unity (although the fact that they were literally warring with the Catholics made this a bit of a disingenuous argument). Martin Luther—the initiator of the Protestant Reformation—argued that states and churches had completely separate jurisdictions. Th e duty of a king was to oversee bodies and the welfare of the nation; the duty of ministers was to oversee the prepa- ration of souls for the aft erlife. In an important treatise on the essential diff er- ences between religious institutions and state institutions, Luther wrote that the state is supposed to oversee “laws that extend no further than the body, goods and outward, earthly matters” (Luther 1991, 23). Since the jurisdiction of churches did not overlap or interfere with the jurisdiction of the state on Luther’s account, the state should tolerate minority religious groups whose aff airs were indiff erent to “earthly matters” (see Martin 2010 for a summary and critique of these arguments). Th is was a very radical view at the time: the Catholics certainly understood the duty of the church as concerning both this world and the next. However, the Protestants were eventually successful in earning the right to be tolerated, largely because, at some point, ongoing war between Catholics and Protestants became a losing situation for all parties. Tolerance of hated enemies became preferable to perpetual fi ghting. In this instance, defi ning religion as a cultural sphere separate from politics and law fi rst served the interests of the Protes- tants, protecting them from Catholic oppression, and eventually served the interests of everyone who wanted to avoid the wars over these competing political allegiances. Th e philosopher John Locke wrote what is probably the most famous defense of religious tolerance. Th e basis of his argument was, as with Luther, jurisdictional: Th e care of the souls cannot belong to the civil magistrate, because his power consists only in outward force; but true and saving reli- gion consists in the inward persuasion of the mind . . . And such is

6 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

the nature of the understanding, that it cannot be compelled to the belief of anything by outward force. Confi scation of estate, impris- onment, torment, nothing of that nature can have any such effi cacy as to make men change the inward judgment that they have framed of things. (Locke 2003, 219)

Th e latter claim is, of course, clearly false: governments persuade people to “believe” things all the time through mandatory state education, propaganda campaigns, outlawing competing views, etc. Nevertheless, making the distinc- tion between persuasion and force led him to the following conclusion:

Th e church itself is a thing absolutely separate and distinct from the commonwealth. Th e boundaries on both sides are fi xed and immov- able. He jumbles heaven and earth together, the things most remote and opposite, who mixes these societies, which are, in their original, end, business, and everything, perfectly distinct, and infi nitely diff er- ent from each other. (226)

Th is too was false; Locke was making an argument in favor of tolerance precisely because states were mixed up in the business of the churches. However, it was a useful lie: insofar as the claim was received as persuasive, the assertion that states and churches don’t have anything to do with one another—even though they obviously did—was a way to get states to stop interfering with churches. (Notably, Locke allowed for several exceptions to his rule; he thought that some “religions,” like Islam, were such a threat to the commonwealth that the state should obviously outlaw and repress them (see Martin 2010)). What is crucial here is that—much like “wetlands”—this jurisdictional defi - nition was a new invention; before this time no such “religion-as-a-private- matter” was thought to exist. Just like George H.W. Bush or our enterprising yoga instructors, Martin Luther and others invented a new defi nition in order to serve their unique political interests. Notably, however, even though tolerance was won with the argument that the jurisdiction of churches did not overlap with the jurisdiction of the nation, it is clear that churches—both Catholic and Protestant—continued to involve themselves in social and political matters. Th e idea that “religions” were pri- vate matters was a useful fi ction to end wars, but by no means did it change the churches’ behavior or end their involvement in political matters. Th is is unchanged still today: institutions we presently call “religions” continue to be involved in social and political matters, and vice versa. Indeed, the stereotypes that “religion makes people moral” or “religion can help make the world a better place” presume that the jurisdiction of “religion” concerns social welfare and thus overlaps with the jurisdiction of the nation-state.

7 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

“Religion,” Colonialism, and Cultural Chauvinism Th e only “religions” of particular concern in the defi nitional disputes of the sixteenth century were Catholicism and Protestantism. However, in the seven- teenth century Christian Europeans begin to consider other cultural traditions as potentially deserving the status of “religions.” At the time, their concern was primarily to separate out the defi nition of “true religion” from “false religion,” and thus books on “religions” tended to focus on distinguishing the merits of “true religion”—that is, Christianity—from the errors of “false religions,” such as Judaism or Islam, as well as what they called “idolatry,” “paganism,” or “heathenism.” In the eighteenth, nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Europeans (and later, North Americans) developed an evolutionary schema, according to which they defi ned religions and cultures as entities that evolved over time from worse to better. Th us they separated the “backwards” religions like those of “primitive savages” from the “advanced” religions like Christi- anity and Judaism; these accounts put “Christianity” at the peak, as the most advanced—and therefore the best—religion among all the others. In his devas- tating critique of theories of “primitive religion,” E.E. Evans-Pritchard writes,

[i]n these theories it was assumed, taken for granted, that we [Europe- ans] were at one end of the scale of human progress and that so-called savages were at the other end, and that, because primitive men were on a rather low technological level, their thought and custom must in all respects be the antithesis of ours. We are rational, primitive peo- ples prelogical, living in a world of dreams and make-believe, of mys- tery and awe. . . . Primitive man was thus represented as childish, crude, prodigal, and comparable to animals and imbeciles. (Evans-Pritchard 1965, 105)

Evans-Pritchard concludes that

[a]ll this fi tted very well with colonialist and other interests, and some were prepared to admit that some of the discredit must go to the American ethnologists who wanted an excuse for slavery, and some also to those who desired to fi nd a missing link between men and monkeys. (106)

In summary, presenting “primitives” as evolutionarily backward was useful for justifying colonialism and slavery. Th eir defi nitions and caricatures of “reli- gion” were blatantly acts of cultural chauvinism. Th ese theorists found “in primitive religion a weapon which could, they thought, be used with deadly eff ect” (15).

8 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

Although his work did not directly support colonialism, Christian theolo- gian Rudolf Otto defi ned “religion” as a sensing or feeling of “the Holy.” On the surface that doesn’t sound particularly chauvinistic, but when we look into the details, we fi nd that his defi nition was designed to present Christianity—and, more specifi cally, Protestant Christianity—as the most “rational” religion and “unsurpassable” (Otto 1958, 82). For Otto, Christians sensed or felt “the Holy” and put that feeling into rational terms better than any other religion. By con- trast, Otto argued that Judaism and Islam were slightly less rational, and, in the case of Islam, more “fanatical” (91). Otto viewed the “barbaric” (130) reli- gions of “primitive savages” as so far behind in the progress of evolution and so “rudimentary” (117) that they shouldn’t be considered “religions” so much as “pre-religions” (124). For Otto, the defi nition of the word “religion” was useful not for an objective account of how “religions” are diff erent from other cultural traditions; rather, it was a tool for ranking cultures and putting his favorite at the top. Otto too was reinventing the defi nition of words to serve his interests, thereby presenting his culture as superior to all other cultures. Scholars have long noted the connections between these types of defi nitions of “religion” and European colonialism. Starting in the fi ft eenth century, Euro- pean nations developed and expanded their empires by sending ships all over the world to conquer territory, seizing foreign land as their own, and appro- priating natural resources for sale or trade. Th e ideology of the “white man’s burden” was used to justify colonization; that is, the so-called “more evolved” races had a moral duty to help the more “primitive” races catch up in the march of progress. Similarly, the view that there are advanced and primitive religions taught that it was acceptable to conquer and subjugate “backwards” religious groups in order to help them “evolve.” It is therefore no surprise that one of the early defi ners of “religion,” Samuel Purchas, defended the East India Com- pany’s administration of the British colonial endeavors in India—the British invasion of India was seen as being for the greater good, insofar as it modern- ized trade and brought Christian missionaries to the region (see Fitzgerald 2007). Of course there is always a great deal of “collateral damage” in colo- nization; countless natives across the globe were killed as European nations expanded their empires. Quite literally, as Evans-Pritchard put it, defi nitions can be deadly weapons of war. Th ese early defi nitions of “religion” and the ranking of cultures they entailed were chauvinist and imperialist in nature, justifi cations for colonizing whatever areas of the globe the Europeans saw as profi table.

The Christian Ideal Most scholars of religion have moved away from this explicitly ethnocentric, Christian perspective. Many scholarly defi nitions leave out the ranking aspects of the earlier defi nitions, and instead defi ne “religion” more neutrally as

9 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution including the religion of Christianity and other forms of culture that are struc- turally similar—usually Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism, among others. However, some scholars argue that one problem of this more neutral approach is that we’re still left setting up “Christianity” as an ideal against which all other religions are compared. Even if scholars no longer accept that Christianity is somehow intrinsically superior to other religions, we may still be setting it up as a universal standard. On this type of defi nition, religions:

1 are started by a founder—like Jesus; 2 have central beliefs and doctrines that practitioners must believe in—like the Christians’ Nicene Creed; 3 have sacred texts in which those core beliefs are recorded—like the Bible; 4 have rituals designed to reinforce remembrance of those doctrines—like the Eucharist; and 5 have communities of worshippers organized around the sacred texts, doctrines, and rituals—like the Christian church.

Th is defi nition of religion encourages comparisons between the Bible and the Qur’an as sacred texts, or comparisons between Jesus and Muhammad as founders, or between the Eucharist and Muslim rituals such as praying fi ve times a day or traveling to Mecca. In a way this approach is less biased than the earlier attempts at defi nition, insofar as Christianity is considered alongside other religions, rather than above them. Unfortunately, this approach still sets up Christianity as the ideal type , which has resulted in a kind of Christian privilege, especially when it comes to the history of legal cases related to “religious freedom”—particularly in the United States. For a long time, Native American practices weren’t protected by laws governing religious freedom because the Native Americans didn’t have sacred texts or churches like the Christians did. Indeed, at some points in the history of the United States, Native American practices were outright prohib- ited by law, in part because American Christians considered them demonic. As Suzanne Owen writes in Th e Appropriation of Native American Spirituality (2008), “[i]n 1883, despite the First Amendment of the United States consti- tution that guarantees religious freedom, Henry Teller, Secretary of the Inte- rior, developed laws prohibiting Native American ceremonial activity. Th ose who were caught disobeying were imprisoned” (30−31). To secure some of the freedoms that Christians enjoyed, Native Americans eventually had to present their culture as somehow fi tting the mold of Christianity. Black Elk was one fi gure who made great eff orts in this cultural battle by creating nar- ratives that became the basis of a Native American “spirituality.” In order for the Lakota tribe to be seen as having “a ‘true’ religion not unlike Christian- ity . . . Black Elk . . . employed a Catholic framework to explain Lakota ceremo- nial traditions,” inventing both a “founder” of the religion and a set of seven

10 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

“sacraments” (43). To earn the rights that Christians already enjoyed, Black Elk and others had to manipulate and transform their cultural traditions until they looked like a “religion” that Christians could recognize as familiar. Similarly, religious freedom laws protected Christian “conscientious objec- tors,” giving them the right not to kill in war, while for a long time “consci- entious objectors” who weren’t part of a “religious” tradition that looked like Christianity weren’t protected. In one interesting court case, analyzed by Win- nifred Fallers Sullivan in Th e Impossibility of Religious Freedom , (2005) some Jews and Catholics in Florida lost a “religious freedom” lawsuit—the lawsuit concerned whether they could decorate cemetery graves with “religious” shrines—because the Protestant judge didn’t see the litigants’ “religion” as suf- fi ciently “religious” to warrant legal protection; to him, their religion didn’t look enough like his religion to count. Th is is what happens when Protestant Christian views of their own tradition are set up as the norm or the ideal model for all other forms of culture potentially deserving of legal protection.

Irrational “Religion” One major shift in the way scholars talk about “religion” took place in the nine- teenth and twentieth centuries, when scholars increasingly began to defi ne “religion” as essentially irrational in some way, as opposed to other forms of knowledge that were considered rational or scientifi c by contrast. Rather than seeing religions along a continuum from better to worse—or from civilized to barbaric or savage—these scholars presented “science” as civilized and defi ned all “religion” as backward, unscientifi c, or intrinsically misguided in some way. Th is approach holds on to the evolutionary schema like Otto’s discussed above, except that it puts “science” or “secular” forms of knowledge at the peak of evolution rather than “Christianity.” Th e problem with this approach is that there’s no clear way to demarcate “scientifi c” reasoning from so-called “reli- gious” reasoning. Social scientifi c research shows us that all groups—whether labeled “religious” or “nonreligious”—appeal to authoritative fi gures or texts, have unquestioned background assumptions, show in-group bias for their own group’s views, etc. (see Chapter 5 for more on this). From the perspective of social science, all human groups behave in similar ways, and thus the pre- sentation of “nonreligious” groups as more reasonable than “religious” groups looks a lot like the self-serving narratives written by those scholars who pre- sented Christianity as the highest evolved religion. Consider those who defi ned “Islam” as essentially irrational aft er the 9/11 attacks on New York in 2001. Al Qaeda’s attack killed almost 3,000 civilians and was publicly viewed as irrational and immoral. By contrast, the subse- quent invasion of Afghanistan by the United States resulted in the deaths of 92,000 people, more than 26,000 of whom were civilians (see costsofwar.org, hosted by Brown University, for more information about the death tolls of

11 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution recent global confl icts). Despite the fact that this resulted in almost 9 times the number of civilian deaths as Al Qaeda’s attack, almost no one views the inva- sion of Afghanistan as “irrational.” As William Cavanaugh notes in his book on the myth that religions are intrinsically and irrationally violent, “revulsion toward killing and dying in the name of one’s religion is one of the principle means by which we become convinced that killing and dying in the name of the nation-state is laudable and proper” (Cavanaugh 2009, 4−5). Defi ning religion as irrational is a convenient way to justify killing enemies we can successfully label as irrationally “religious.” Once again, we have a situation where the contested terms are defi ned in ways that serve the interests of the defi ners. Finally, it is worth pointing out that one of the legacies of the tradition of distinguishing and ranking advanced religion and primitive religion is that people make a distinction and ranking between individual religion and orga- nized religion, or—which seems to be the same thing—between spirituality and religion. Th e stereotype is that while organized religion is oppressive and constraining of individuality, spirituality is more liberating in that it allows for individual creativity. What counts as “religion” and “spirituality” is, as before, tied to the interests of those using the terms. In practice, “organized religion” seems to refer to any “religious tradition” a group dislikes, and “spir- ituality” is any “religious tradition” a group likes (see Martin 2014, especially the chapter titled “Our ‘Religion’ of the Status Quo”). Ironically, there are orga- nized communities of “spiritual” people who oppose “organized religion,” and those communities have their own rules, social norms, and demands for conformity—just like all human groups. Th e claim that their group’s ideology is “spirituality” rather than “organized religion” is in many ways little diff er- ent from the chauvinistic rankings of the imperialists who saw fi t to conquer indigenous communities who had only a “primitive religion”—the only diff er- ence is that the insulting caricatures of “primitive religion” are recycled and revised, and then used to malign “organized religion.”

*** In summary, these are just some of the problems with the history of the word “religion”:

• Although we talk about “religions” existing prior to the modern era, this is problematic because premodern civilizations did not have a word for “religion,” nor did they see what we might call “religion” as distinct or separate from other forms of culture or society. • Protestant reformers appealed for tolerance on the basis of the fact that “church” and “state” had completely diff erent jurisdictions, thereby obscuring the fact that those institutions we call “religions” are always actively involved in social and political projects (and vice versa).

12 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION

• Many accounts of the nature of “religion” were designed to justify the cultural superiority of Christian Europe and to justify imperialism and colonialism. • Even when diff erent “religions” are seen as equal rather than better or worse, Christianity oft en gets used as the ideal model for what “religion” looks like, thus resulting in a legal bias in favor of Christians when it comes to religious freedom court cases. • Although scientifi c studies show that all human groups require confor- mity, show irrational bias, and discriminate against other groups, “reli- gions” are oft en assumed to be more irrational or more violent—despite the fact that we have no evidence for that assumption. • Some groups today claim to be “spiritual” and contrast themselves with “organized religions,” but in doing so repeat the rhetorical gestures of imperialist Europeans who separated “Christianity” from “primitive reli- gion” in order to claim superiority for their own group and justify colo- nial endeavors. All of these uses of the term “religion” and “spirituality” are normative, mean- ing that the defi nitions of the terms are tied to a set of subjective and oft en controversial evaluative norms or values. Th is is problematic from an aca- demic perspective because the defi nitions of academic terms are not supposed to center around the subjective, normative assumption that one’s own group is superior to others’ groups. Academic standards prohibit scholars from merely cheerleading for their own favorite institutions, even when their cheers are disguised beneath clever defi nitional work. “Religion” is a term with perhaps too much normative baggage, as almost all uses from the early modern period to the present are tied up with assertions of cultural superiority. Can the word be saved?

Toward a Better Defi nition?

Would it be possible to come up with a defi nition of religion that avoids the biases that existed in previous uses of the term, or a defi nition that isn’t simply self-serving for the group using it? Some scholars have attempted just this—to come up with a defi nition of religion without normative baggage, or one that would be neutral or unbiased. Th e problem, however, is that we cannot formu- late a non-normative defi nition—that is, a defi nition that isn’t tied to problem- atic or subjective social norms—that fi ts with the everyday colloquial use of the word. Usually when we try to formulate a defi nition, we look at all the dif- ferent things that word is applied to and try to see what they have in common with each other—what’s the lowest common denominator among all of these things? For instance, we could look at lions and tigers and try to fi gure out what they each have in common with their own species that simultaneously

13 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Table 1.1 Forms of culture potentially called religious

Judaism Indigenous cultures Feng shui Christianity Practice of yoga Visiting a medium Islam Personal meditation Marxism or existentialism Hinduism Reading self-help books The Metallica fan club Buddhism Reading astrology reports American nationalism

distinguishes them from the other species: those big cats we call tigers all have stripes, and those big cats we call lions have manes (at least when it comes to the males in the species). “Stripes” would go into our defi nition of tigers— since they all have that in common—and “manes” would go into our defi nition of lions. Th ere would be more to it than this, but this would be a start. However, this method of formulating a defi nition will not work when we come to all those things we commonly refer to as “religion,” because there are no features that are uniquely common to all the traditions we typically call religions . People have tried to make an offi cial defi nition that fi ts our colloquial everyday use, but they inevitably fail. Consider the things in Table 1.1 that one might fi nd in the world, and which the word religion might or might not group together. Which of these things would be picked up by the word religion? I think most people would generally agree that the colloquial use of the term would probably group together all of the things in the fi rst column (with a small ques- tion mark next to Buddhism for all of those people who say it is a philosophy and not a religion). From the second column, the term might include indige- nous cultures or the practice of yoga (another couple of small question marks), but probably not the other things. Colloquial uses of the term religion rarely, if ever, include anything in the third column. Now look at the following defi nitions of religion; we can see that none of them will pick up the same thing that the colloquial use of the term picks up.

• Religion as a “belief system.” Th is defi nition includes both more and less than the colloquial use. It will probably pick up Marxism or existential- ism, for example. In addition, the Metallica fan club may well be orga- nized around the belief that Metallica is the best band there ever was. However, some Jewish and Buddhist practitioners specifi cally emphasize that one’s practice (ritual or meditative) is all that is important to them, and that one’s beliefs are irrelevant for membership in their community. Th is defi nition would probably not pick up those particular forms of Judaism and Buddhism. • Religion as something that specifi cally concerns “supernatural” matters . Th is defi nition will also group together more and less than the colloquial use. Insofar as some forms of Christianity and Buddhism are atheist, this

14 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION sort of defi nition would not include those forms, although the colloquial use probably would. Also, this term might pick up astrology, feng shui, or visiting a medium, and some uses of Ouija boards, although the collo- quial use probably would not. • Religion as “matters of faith .” Th is sort of defi nition oft en trades on the association of “religion” with “faith” and the association of “science” with “reason.” However, if we understand “faith” to be “faith in things that can- not be proven,” then one will fi nd “faith” in elements of all of the things on the list. It cannot be “proven” that Metallica is the best band ever, nor can the nationalist faith in America be “rationally” justifi ed. At the same time, if we understand “reason” to concern “things that can be proven,” then one will also fi nd “reason” in elements of all of the things on the list. It seems “reasonable” to claim that a man named Gautama preached about dukkha a few centuries bce , to claim that a man named Jesus lived, preached, and developed some sort of following in the fi rst century, to claim that Metallica is a heavy metal rock band, or to claim that the 4th of July celebrates the day on which the Declaration of Independence was signed. Th ese things are part of Buddhism, Christianity, the Metallica fan club, and American nationalism, but they are not simply matters of faith; they are facts. Th ere are both matters of “faith” and matters of “reason” in every cultural tradition; the faith/reason binary will not neatly segregate those traditions colloquially called religions from other traditions. • Religion as concerning “the meaning of life.” Concerns about the so-called “meaning of life” are rather recent and bourgeois. Ancient Jews and fi rst-century Christians, for instance, didn’t talk about the “meaning of life,” and most poor people spend their lives searching more for the sat- isfaction of minimal needs than the “meaning of life.” Th is vocabulary is really one of recent coinage, and is used most oft en by those who have the leisure time to search for this sort of “meaning.” Th is defi nition would not pick up much of anything prior to the twentieth century. However, we can take part of this idea, and transform it slightly; perhaps concerns about the “meaning of life” belong under the category of “concerns about one’s place in the universe.” Th is more general category will pick up all of the things the colloquial use of the term religion does, and several more. One can fi nd concerns about one’s place in the universe in some forms of yoga, self- help books, Marxism and existentialism, and some forms of American nationalism (those forms that focused on manifest destiny, for instance). • Religion as concerning “spirituality” or “spiritual well-being.” What this will pick up will depend on what one means by “spiritual,” a vague term that is easily exploited on account of its vagueness. Nevertheless, if we let “spir- itual” be used broadly, this defi nition of religion will probably pick up all of the things the colloquial use does, as well as yoga, meditation, self-help books, and perhaps feng shui.

15 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

• Religion as “communal institutions oriented around a set of beliefs, ritual practices, and ethical or social norms.” Th is defi nition—which is close to some scholarly uses of the word—will probably pick up all of the things the colloquial use does, but it will probably also pick up some forms of yoga (maybe not those forms that are simply exercise, but probably those that are communally practiced), Marxism, the Metallica fan club, and American nationalism. In fact, this defi nition is very broad, and would probably pick up a whole host of things not colloquially understood to be religious: karate centers, Oprah’s book club, businesses that have an important corporate culture, the local university’s department of reli- gious studies, etc.

One might come a little closer to the colloquial use by combining the last defi nition with some qualifi cation about the importance of supernatural ele- ments. However, such a defi nition would still pick up American nationalism, which oft en has a theistic infl ection, and would fail to pick up atheist forms of some traditions colloquially called religions. None of these defi nitions match the colloquial use exactly . Th e problem here is simple: the reason why we can’t formulate a defi ni- tion that fi ts the colloquial use is because the colloquial use groups together dissimilar things . Th is is, of course, in part because of the long history of the term, where its application shift ed over time depending on the interests of those using the term. Since the word was used in many competing ways, of course the term has come to refer to a lot of dissimilar things. All of those things we colloquially call “religions” simply do not share a set of core properties. A radical consequence of recognizing this fact is that we will not be able to make any generalizations about those cultural traditions we call religions. It is easy to make generalizations about something that is used with precision: all “fi sh” live in water and breathe with gills. But a term like “sea creature” is broader than “fi sh,” and groups together a wider variety of things, many of them dissimilar. We could say that “all fi sh breathe with gills,” but we couldn’t say “all sea creatures breathe with gills,” because whales and dolphins do not. Th e word “religion” is much more like “sea creatures” than “fi sh”—a lot of dif- ferent things are grouped together under the word religion—and that prevents us from making any substantial generalizations. Anyone who begins a sentence with the phrase “all religions . . .” is certainly saying something false. It is therefore incorrect to say that all religions are about private matters, belief, faith, the supernatural, spirituality, mystical experience, or anything else. Because the colloquial use of the word “religion” groups together so many dis- similar things, these generalizations are simply not true. In addition, if the word “religion” groups together dissimilar things, there will not be anything that fundamentally distinguishes those things called

16 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution RELIGION AND THE PROBLEM OF DEFINITION religions from other sorts of cultural traditions. Consider the “sea creatures” example. We might try to make an essential distinction— “sea creatures are fun- damentally diff erent from land animals because the former breathe with gills and the latter breathe with lungs”—but it will not work, since the characteris- tics of both groups overlap: some sea creatures do, in fact, breathe with lungs, like some of the land animals. Th e same problem is true with “religions”—they cannot be essentially distinguished from other cultural traditions. For instance, what is it that fundamentally distinguishes “religion” from “nationalism”? One might say that “nationalism” is concerned with politics but “religion” is not, but that would be false: many of those traditions we call reli- gious are extremely political. American evangelical Christians, for instance, are very politically active. One might say that nationalism concerns a national territory , but religions do not, but that would be false: some of those tradi- tions we call religious are in fact linked to a territory or piece of land. Hindu nationalism is an important contemporary movement in India, and one that sees Hinduism as intrinsically linked to “Mother India” as a specifi c territory. One might say that nationalism doesn’t have any supernatural elements , but religions do, but that too would be false: many forms of nationalism have supernatural elements. For instance, Hindu nationalism has a number of supernatural elements, as does American nationalism—as evidenced by the slogan “In God We Trust” on US money, and the inclusion of “one nation, under God” in the US pledge of allegiance. And, even if we eliminated all of these references to God from American nationalism, we would still have mys- terious, almost supernatural ideas like “unalienable rights” which, according to the American constitution, were given to us by God. In the end, it turns out that there aren’t really any fundamental diff erences between those things we colloquially call nationalisms and those things we colloquially call religions. Th ere is no substantial reason to call the 4th of July a nationalist celebration as opposed to a religious one—the only reason why we call the 4th of July nation- alist rather than religious is force of habit. Before concluding, I would like to clarify what I am not arguing. I am not saying that religion can’t be defi ned. Just like a “wetland,” “religion” can be defi ned in lots of diff erent ways, depending on whose interests we want to serve. However, what I am saying is we can’t come up with a defi nition that fi ts all of the everyday uses of the term . Of course conservationists can defi ne “wetland” in a particular way; what they cannot do is defi ne “wetland” in a way that fi ts the colloquial use, their usage, and the usage of George H.W. Bush at the same time—simply because the word is used in competing ways across dif- ferent contexts. Similarly, we can defi ne “religion” in a lot of diff erent ways, but none of our defi nitions will simultaneously fi t the colloquial use and the use of the word by folks like Martin Luther, and Rudolf Otto, and scientists who think religion is irrational—they’re using the word in competing or potentially even opposite ways, so there isn’t a lowest-common-denominator to be found.

17 CHAPTERCopyright 1Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Conclusion

Th e history of the word “religion” is tied up with normative interests, Reformation-era politics, Christian ethnocentrism, European imperialism, and more. In each of the historical cases considered, “religion” was defi ned in a way specifi cally to serve the interests of some groups at the expense of others. In addition, even if we attempt to set aside the problematic history of the defi - nition of “religion,” our common, everyday use of the word “religion” is rela- tively sloppy, arbitrary, and unsophisticated. I’m sure that psychologists refer to some of their patients as “crazy” on occasion, but you wouldn’t fi nd an entry for “crazy” in a psychology textbook, simply because it’s an unsophisticated term. Similarly, there is nothing particularly wrong with utilizing the word “religion” in everyday conversation; however, as scholars we must be aware of the normative baggage associated with the term, resist making generalizations, and avoid positing any fundamental distinctions between “religion” and other types of cultural traditions. “Religion” might be no more useful in an academic setting than “crazy” is in a psychology class. In addition, it would presumably be more neutral for us, as scholars, to resist taking sides with some defi nitions over others. Rather than say “yoga is religious” or “yoga is not religious”—that is, rather than taking sides with those who want to dodge taxes or those who think it makes for great exercise— perhaps we should simply point out how the game of defi nition works. In his analysis, Schiappa did not say “this is what a wetland really is”; on the contrary, he merely noted how this defi nition serves these interests, and that defi nition serves other interests. Similarly, perhaps we—in our role as scholars—should avoid taking sides in contested political battles and instead confi ne ourselves to pointing out how the diff erent defi nitions of “religion” serve diff erent social or political interests in diff erent contexts. Much like sportscasters who don’t take sides in their commentary, we as scholars could strive for less bias by lim- iting ourselves to analyzing how others play the game. What follows in this book does not presume that any particular form of culture is fundamentally “religious” or “not religious.” Since all forms of cul- ture tend to function in similar ways, making a distinction between “religious” and “not religious” does not appear to be particularly fruitful. Th us we will look at forms of culture commonly considered “religious,” but we will also draw analogies or make comparisons to forms of culture oft en considered “not religious.” Although this book is intended as an introduction to the critical study of religion, it could just as well have been called A Critical Introduction to the Study of Culture. What we say about so-called “religious” culture will be transferable to culture in general.

18 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Chapter INTRODUCTION1

ho are we? Why are we here? How should we act? How should we understand and Wrelate to the world in which we live? Is there a deity, perhaps a power or a personal being, that exists beyond ourselves? If so, how do we relate to this power or personal being? Everybody, in one way or another, faces questions about the meaning of human exis- tence. The responses people propose to these questions are sometimes organized into a worldview. This worldview provides an overall way of seeing and relating to ourselves, other people, the world in which we live, and possible realities beyond this world. Starting from experience, they ask what that experience means and how it shapes our responses to the people, objects, forces, and events that surround us. Eventually people’s responses to these questions coalesce around a set of beliefs, distinctive rituals, and acceptable ways of being in the world, thus creating a worldview. Religion is a comprehensive worldview that accounts for these questions of human existence and allows for believing in something beyond the “ordinary”—in God or gods, some unseen power or powers, something beyond human existence. There are many religions in the world. The most prominent are Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, tribal religions (of Africa, Asia, North America, Australia, etc.), Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism, and Judaism. Of these Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are monotheistic religions, based on a belief in “one God” (monos “one” ϩ theos “god”). Hinduism, Shintoism, and most tribal religions are usually considered polytheistic reli- gions, based on a belief in “many gods” (polus “many” ϩ theoi “gods”). Perhaps surprising to some, there are forms of Buddhist religion that are agnostic (unsure about the existence of God or gods) or atheistic (denying that God or gods exist at all). The Jewish, Christian, and Muslim traditions, which are among the most influential in the Western world, believe God to be personal, all-knowing, all-powerful, just, loving, and the creator of everything that exists.

19 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution 2 Introduction

However, as stated previously, religion is more than a collection of statements or beliefs about God and the spiritual aspects of reality. It is a comprehensive worldview. It includes experiences, rituals, symbols, institutions, stories, habits, attitudes, and norms of behavior through which human beings, as groups or individuals, relate to the physical, social, cultural, and spiritual world in which they live. How then does one study religion and religious activity? Probably since the dawn of human civilization, people have talked, won- dered, and written about religious questions, so this activity is not new. However, the work of people who study religion changes over time because of changing social and cultural con- ditions that affect the way humans experience their world. For example, a thirteenth-century Korean shaman (healer and intermediary between the earthly and heavenly realms) would have had very different ways of talking about deities and divine powers than did Thomas Aquinas living in Europe in the same time period. Likewise, an eleventh-century Tibetan Buddhist master would have trained the young monks in his care very differently than a Muslim imam or a Jewish rabbi in the present-day United States of America might advise his or her community concerning right living. Among people of Western cultures, the Age of Enlightenment was a decisive turning point for the study of religion, resulting in entirely new approaches to religious questions and even new kinds of questions. The Age of Enlightenment, in the eighteenth century or perhaps as early as the seventeenth century, represents the beginning of the modern period of history and the emergence of entirely new ways of thinking about God, creation, and the human person. The beginnings of the modern scientific method developed in this period. Great thinkers in the area of philosophy, including Immanuel Kant and René Descartes, turned people’s attention to the value of reason and the necessity of empirical evidence as proof for statements of belief. It was no longer acceptable to say that some- thing was true because God had revealed it. Thus, reason and empirical evidence began to dominate discussions about the characteristics of truth, even challenging long-standing religious assertions about the nature of God and God’s interactions with the created world. In the aftermath of the Age of Enlightenment, two modern approaches to the study of religion began to take shape, namely, theology and religious studies. Actually, the academic discipline of theology was already in existence for centuries before the Enlightenment. However, the social and cultural conditions of the Age of Enlightenment and its distinctive worldview forced theologians to rethink the ways they were approaching theological ques- tions. This shift in thinking came about with a great deal of frustration and anxiety, because the Age of Enlightenment appeared to threaten the very existence of religion and religious thinking. In the meantime, some religious scholars began to be more interested in the social and psychological dimensions of religion. Simply stated, instead of asking what we can know about God, they began to ask what humanity’s tendency toward religious enagement tells us about the nature of human beings. This new approach to religious questions eventually gave birth to what we now know as religious studies. In content and methodology, religious studies is different from theol- ogy. Whereas theology focuses on God and spiritual realities as its subject matter, religious studies focuses on humanity and humans’ experience of the divine. Moreover, whereas the- ologians struggled against the presuppositions and methodologies that characterized Age of Enlightenment thinking, scholars of religious studies embraced this worldview and used its approaches toward the accomplishment of their goal—the scientific study of humanity. Samuel Preus, one of the seminal writers in the religious studies movement, described the 20 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

positive benefits of this academic discipline, compared to theology, in his 1987 publication entitled Explaining Religion: Criticism and Theory from Bodin to Freud:

The naturalistic approach is at once more modest and more ambitious than the religious one: more modest because it is content to investigate the causes, motivations, meanings, and impact of religious phenomena without pronouncing on their cosmic significance for human destiny; ambitious, in that the study of religion strives to explain religion and to integrate its understand- ing into the other elements of culture to which it is related. (211; cited in Wiebe 1999, 7)

The phrase naturalistic approach refers to religious studies, which is contrasted here with the religious approach, that is, theology.

RELIGIOUS STUDIES AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE

Intellectual disciplines explore reality from particular perspectives. They employ distinct methods to arrive at their conclusions and a specialized vocabulary to report their conclu- sions. For example, geology is an intellectual discipline that explores the earth from the per- spective of its material composition and transformation, using the methods of natural science; it employs a specialized vocabulary, including terms such as igneous rock and plate tec- tonics. Similarly, psychology is an intellectual discipline that explores the human mind and human behavior, using the methods of both the natural and the social sciences. Although some academic disciplines share certain methods (i.e., ways of approaching the subject matter) and vocabulary, one must be careful not to confuse the methods and vocabu- lary of the different disciplines. While statistical analysis of human group interaction might be very useful in sociology, it has less value in art history. Musicians, sea captains, and baseball fans all use the term pitch, but in widely varying ways. Moreover, one should recognize that each of the disciplines has definite limits. One would not ask a geologist about stock market fluctua- tions, even though Wall Street is located at a particular site on the globe. Similarly, religious studies has its own methods and vocabulary. These are the tools of the academic discipline. Anyone who is familiar with religious studies will tell you that there is not one single way to engage this academic discipline. Rather, religious studies is an umbrella term that encompasses a variety of social–scientific and philosophical approaches to questions con- cerning humanity’s engagement with religion and religious phenomena. Religious studies scholar Seth Kunin has offered one way to map out the areas under this umbrella in a book entitled Religious Studies and Theology: An Introduction, which he coedited with Helen Bond and Francesca Aran Murphy. In it, he surveys the historical development of religious studies in four areas, which he calls theories of religion: psychological, phenomenological, anthro- pological, and sociological (2003, 32–93). At the risk of oversimplifying a very complex field of study, we will briefly describe each area and provide a few examples of the kind of work being done in these areas.

Psychological Theories of Religion

In general, psychological theories of religion focus on the individual and the individual’s experience of religion as a social institution. Some extend their focus beyond the individual to the larger society to which he or she belongs. Scholars who work with these theories see 21 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

religious experience as analogous to other kinds of human experience, except for the fact that the subject of the experi- ence is religious. They also see religious emotions as similar in kind to other emo- tions except that the object of the emo- tions is religious. Although some would acknowledge the existence of an external “other” who exerts control on the believer’s life, most who espouse these theories argue that this “other” is, in fact, internal and seated in the subconscious or the collective unconscious. Further, they argue that the collective uncon- scious contains archetypes (e.g., inher- ited memories or symbolic objects) that Figure 1–1 Psychiatrist Sigmund Freud (1856–1939). become the basis of all religious experi- ences. Concerned about what religion does, rather than what it is in the abstract, most of these theorists suggest that religion makes it easier or more satisfying for the individual to do what he or she already needs to do for human well-being. Some also argue that religion can contribute to the maturation of human culture (Bond, Kunin, and Murphy 2003, 31–45). Some of the most notable figures in the history of the development of psychological theories of religion are William James (1842–1910), Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), Carl Jung (1875–1961), and Joseph Campbell (1904–1987). A brief excerpt from Carl Jung’s Psychology and Religion illustrates what is distinctive about this approach to the study of religion.

Religion appears to me to be a peculiar attitude of the human mind, which could be formulated in accordance with the original use of the term “religion,” that is, a careful consideration and observation of cer- tain dynamic factors, understood to be “powers,” spirits, demons, gods, laws, ideas, ideals, or whatever name man has given to such factors as he has found in his world powerful, dangerous, or helpful enough to be taken into careful consideration, or grand, beautiful, and meaning- ful enough to be devoutly adored and loved. . . . I want to make clear that by the term “religion” I do not mean a creed. . . . The psycholo- gist, in as much as he assumes a scientific attitude, has to disregard the claim of every creed to be the unique and eternal truth. He must keep his eye on the human side of the religious problem, in that he is con- cerned with the original religious experience quite apart from what the creeds have made of it. (Jung 1938, 5–7)

Phenomenological Approaches to Religion

In philosophical circles, the word phenomenology describes the study of things as they are perceived by the senses. Scholars who Figure 1–2 Psychologist Carl Jung take a phenomenological approach to religious studies seek to (1875–1961). describe and classify common observable elements of various 22 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

religions so that they can better understand the form and structure of religion. In other words, they are looking for patterns of ideas or structures that form the bases of all religions. Therefore, this approach could be described as comparative studies in which the investigator looks for what is universal and/or essential in this phenomenon that we call religion. However, in order to arrive at the universal or essential dimensions of religion, individual aspects of a particular religion are often stripped of their specific cultural contexts. Thus, a particular per- son’s reflection on his or her religious experience will likely not correspond exactly with schol- arly descriptions of the phenomenon of religion even though they build their model of religion using patterns of observable data (Bond, Kunin, and Murphy 2003, 45–53). Samuel Kunin identifies W. Brede Kristensen (1867–1953), Mircea Eliade (1907–1986), and Ninian Smart (1927–2001) as three of the most notable figures in the history of the development of phenomenological approaches to the study of religion (Bond, Kunin, and Murphy, 2003, 45–53). The following is a brief description of Ninian Smart’s Seven Dimensions of Religion (1989, 10–21).

1. Experiential/Emotional. There are certain experiences that seem to give rise to religion: encountering natural or supernatural forces that produce a sense of fear or awe, con- templating one’s own death, having an “otherworldly” vision, encountering a person who seems to possess the key to salvation or personal happiness, feeling united with all of reality, or experiencing very strong emotions (such as at the birth of a child or the death of a loved one). 2. Social/Institutional. People who have these experiences seek out others with similar experiences and form groups for support. Gradually, these groups grow in size and complexity and, as a consequence, require organizational structures to keep them functioning effectively. 3. Narrative/Mythic. In the group, people pass on their experience in stories. In many cases, these stories are eventually collected in written form and become the sacred texts of the religion—their scriptures. 4. Doctrinal/Philosophical. As people ask questions about the experiences and the stories, they explain them rationally, as best they can. Some meanings cannot be expressed rationally but must remain as expressed in the stories themselves. 5. Practical/Ritual. If the group understands their experiences to relate to powers or beings beyond visible, everyday reality, they work out concrete ways of relating to those powers or beings (for example, liturgy or worship). They also work out formalized ways of relating to people and things that are part of their everyday lives. 6. Ethical/Legal. The group decides what actions and way of life are appropriate to their experiences and their understanding of those experiences. They also develop laws to govern the community they have formed. 7. Material/Artistic. In living out the preceding six dimensions, the group produces mate- rial things (buildings, songs, art objects) in a way that is expressive of and appropriate to their experiences and their understandings of those experiences.

These dimensions are not independent units of a religion, in the sense that they can be treated separately from one another. Rather, they are facets or aspects of a religion that are interrelated and interact with one another. Smart’s Seven Dimensions of Religion provide us with one useful way of thinking about the phenomenon of religion. However, approaches such as this one can also mask 23 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

important differences within a religion and among different religions. Let us take Christianity as an example. Although all Christians profess faith in Jesus Christ, there are considerable differences among the various forms of the Christian religion, just as there are considerable differences between Christianity and other world religions. Related to the experiential/emotional dimension, some Christians can be described as “world embracing,” because they find a kind of compatibility between the Christian worldview and the values of the dominant culture. Others, like contemplative monks, are sometimes described as “world rejecting,” because they live a way of life that is different from the dominant culture in order to seek God in solitude. Still others, like social activists, can be described as “world trans- forming,” because they seek to change the dominant culture to make it conform better to Christian values. Related to the social/institutional dimension, some Christian traditions, such as the Roman Catholic tradition and Orthodox traditions, tend to be hierarchically structured with bishops, priests, deacons, and so on, in positions of leadership. Others, like the Society of Friends, or Quakers, consider everyone in the group to have the same status. With respect to the narrative/mythic dimension, all Christians would claim the Bible as sacred scripture. However, certain groups of Christians disagree over the status of some books of the Bible. They would also vary in their judgments concerning other types of Christian literature. Related to the doctrinal/philosophical dimension, disagreements among Christian churches on statements of belief can be especially fierce. For example, in past cen- turies, there have been intense arguments about what God has or has not revealed, how to interpret the Bible, how Christianity ought to relate to other world religions, and whether a certain course of action is faithful to the vision of Jesus. The most visible differences among religions may be observed in the practical/ritual dimension: for example, the use of incense at an Orthodox liturgy, extensive preaching in a Presbyterian worship service, and the practice of speaking in tongues at a charismatic revival. Related to the ethical/legal dimension, Christian churches differ on such concrete issues as the morality of the death penalty, how a society is to spend its taxes, whether Christians can serve in the military, or whether abortion is permissible under any circum- stances. Finally, Christians differ in terms of the material/artistic dimension of religion. Some Christians will build towering and elaborate Gothic cathedrals while others will erect plain structures like the wooden, white-washed congregational churches found in the small towns of New England. Some Christians will vocalize Gregorian chants, others vigorously sing Lutheran chorales, while others will sway to the sound of spirituals. In sum, phenomenological approaches to the study of religion can help us understand the patterns of ideas or structures that form the bases of all religions, but they do not help us recognize and appreciate the distinctive characteristics of individual religions.

Anthropological Theories of Religion

The term anthropology describes the study of humankind with special attention to human culture and the progress or development of human society. Anthropological theories of religion tend to focus on aspects of religious experience that are culturally conditioned. Ritual (symbolic action), rites of passage, myths, and religious symbols are perhaps the most significant. Contemporary anthropologists acknowledge that this approach to the study of religion was sidetracked for a while by mistaken assumptions that so-called prim- itive religions had to be treated differently than modern religions and that modern Western religions represented a high point in the evolution of culture and therefore were 24 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

superior to other religions. Today, how- ever, a more comprehensive approach is favored with the result that religions of all cultures are analyzed using the same methods and theories. Unlike psychologi- cal theories of religion, anthropological approaches give much more attention to the social dimensions of religion—in par- ticular, the status of the individual in rela- tionship to the whole and the group’s ability to exert control on the individual. Also, like phenomenological approaches to religion, anthropological approaches take on the appearance of comparative Figure 1–3 Cultural anthropologist Mary Douglas (1921– ). studies. In this case, the investigator looks for what is universal and/or essential in various cultural expressions of religious experience (Morris 1987). Some of the major figures in the history of the development of anthropological theo- ries of religion are Edward Tylor (1832–1912), James Frazer (1854–1951), Lucien Lévy- Bruhl (1857–1939), Emile Durkheim (1857–1917), E. E. Evans-Pritchard (1902–1973), A. R. Radcliffe Brown (1881–1955), and Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908– ). Another well-known anthropologist, Mary Douglas, provides us with this commentary on the symbolic structures of purity and impurity (i.e., what is sacred and what is not), which she compares to ancient and modern cultures’ treatment of dirt:

The more we know about primitive religions the more clearly it appears that in their symbolic structures there is scope for meditation on the great mysteries of religion and philosophy. Reflection on dirt involves reflection on the relation of order to disorder, being to non-being, form to formlessness, life to death. Wherever ideas of dirt are highly structured their analysis dis- closes a play upon such profound themes. This is why an understanding of rules of purity is a sound entry to comparative religion. (Douglas 1966, 7)

Thus something as seemingly insignificant as dirt becomes the key to unlocking the signifi- cance of important universal religious themes.

Sociological Theories of Religion

The distinction between anthropological and sociological theories of religion is somewhat artificial, because both belong to the social sciences, and scholars of one approach freely employ the methods and theories of the other. However, because scholars associated with these two approaches have also developed their own sets of presuppositions and their own research literature, we will treat them separately here. Sociological theories of religion focus on the practice of religion, that is, what peo- ple do when they put their religious beliefs into action and relate to others in society. Therefore, to some extent at least, sociological theories of religion give attention to the ethical dimensions of religion. They also tend to be more concerned about religion’s effect on group order and group identity than the individual’s religious experience. In 25 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

particular, sociologists of religion are interested in religion’s role in maintaining social order and the ways in which it can be an agent of social change. They are also interested in the ways that society shapes religious practice over time. Topics that are typically addressed by sociologists of religion today pertain to relationships between race and religion, gender and religion, and social class and religion. They also address questions involving pluralism (the presence of different religious or cultural groups within a sin- gle society), secularism (the belief that religion has no place in the civic or political realm), and the relationship between religion and culture (Christiano, Swatos, and Kivisto 2002). Some of the more important figures in the development of sociological approaches to religion include Auguste Comte (1798–1857), Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859), Karl Marx (1818–1883), Emile Durkheim (1858–1917), Henri Bergson (1859–1941), Max Weber (1864–1920), and Peter Berger (1929– ). In the following excerpt, observe how Berger uses sociological concepts and terminology to write about religion in a pluralistic society. He begins with the observation that religion, as a social institution, has always been influenced by ordinary activities and trends in society:

Religion has always been susceptible to highly mundane influences, extending even to its most rarified theoretical constructions. The pluralistic situation, however, introduces a novel form of mundane influences, probably more potent in modifying religious contents than such older forms as the wishes of kings or the vested interests of classes—the dynamics of con- sumer preference. To repeat, the crucial sociological and social-psychological characteristic of the pluralistic sit- uation is that religion can no longer be imposed but must be marketed. It is impossible, almost a priori, to market a commodity to a population of uncoerced consumers without taking their wishes concerning the commodity into consideration. . . . This means, furthermore, that a dynamic element is introduced into the situation, a princi- ple of changeability if not change, that is intrinsically inimical to religious traditionalism. In other words, in this situation it becomes increasingly difficult to maintain the religious tradi- tions as unchanging verity. (Berger 1967, 145)

Examples of sociological terminology employed in this excerpt include commodity, consumer preference, population, and marketing. In the contemporary situation where religious pluralism is common, Berger argues that religion is affected by consumer preference, in this case, the freedom of people to choose among a variety of religions and religious experiences based on personal preference. Further, Berger argues, because people in a consumer culture do not feel compelled to accept or maintain commitments of loyalty to a particular religion, religion must be marketed. However, when something is marketed, the product needs to be changeable. If large, blue, plastic “thingamajigs” do not sell well in the U.S. market, the mar- keter needs to be able to change the color, size, or even function and substance of the thingamajig to make her product successful. In most cases, such changes are considered an inevitable part of doing business. But when consumer preference is applied to religion, its impact is dramatic. Suddenly, religious traditions, which once were described as universal or everlasting truths, can no longer bear the weight of such claims. In a pluralistic, consumer- driven culture, some might even argue that particular religions have no right to make any claims of absolute truth. In simple terms, this is Berger’s sociological analysis of the chal- lenges faced by religion in a pluralist society.

26 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

THEOLOGY AS AN ACADEMIC DISCIPLINE

Unlike the academic discipline of religious studies, which examines religion from the per- spective of human experience, theology explores religion from another perspective, namely God as ultimate ground and goal of all reality. The term theology comes from two Greek words: theos, meaning “God” or “the divine,” and logos, meaning “discourse,” “teaching,” or “word.” Thus theology is “the study of God” or “discourse concerning the divine.” St. Anselm (d. 1109) defined theology as “faith seeking understanding.” In the case of Christian theol- ogy, it is the attempt to understand better the object of faith, namely, the God of Jesus Christ and God’s will for humanity and the rest of creation. As an academic discipline, theology involves careful examination and analysis of the doctrines (official religious teachings) and practices (ways of relating to God and to the world), bringing reason to bear on faith. Theology draws upon sources, which it considers authoritative, and employs methods and approaches that are comparable to those used in other academic disciplines. Over the cen- turies it also has developed a specialized vocabulary to clarify its questions and articulate its responses in its exploration of God and the rest of reality in the light of God. The major difficulty for understanding theology as an intellectual discipline comes from the fact that God is not available for human investigation in the same way that the earth is available for a geologist, reports of dreams and neurotic behavior are available for a psy- chologist, or musical scores or field recordings are available for a musicologist. Theology’s prime subject matter will always remain elusive and mysterious. But this does not mean that theology cannot exist as an intellectual discipline. “The past” is elusive and mysterious, but it can be explored by historians; “love,” “courage,” and “justice” are also elusive and mysterious, but they can be explored by philosophers and poets. Thus theologians assert that God and reality understood in the light of God can be investigated, though the sources and methods appropriate for this investigation will be different from those used in other disciplines. Let us begin our overview of theology with two concepts that are central, but not exclu- sive, to Christian theology. These are revelation and faith. Were we to talk about Jewish the- ology or Muslim theology, for example, we might refer to these same two concepts. They are noteworthy because scholars’ acceptance of revelation and faith as legitimate subjects of inquiry, albeit not measurable by scientific standards, help to highlight the differences between the academic disciplines of theology and religious studies.

Revelation

Most of the monotheistic and polytheistic world religions claim not only that God (or the gods) exist, but also that our knowledge of God (or the gods) depends, not solely on human reason, but also on revelation, that is, the deliberate self-disclosure of God (or the gods) to humanity. More specifically, from the perspective of the monotheistic world religions, reve- lation is a term that refers both to God’s act of disclosing God’s self to believers and to the content of that revelatory act—that is, revelation about the true nature of God, humanity, and the created order, as well as God’s will for humanity and the rest of God’s creation. Christian theologians distinguish between general and special revelation. General rev- elation is given to all human beings. The means by which general revelation takes place include nature and conscience. From a Christian perspective, nature—the people and things with whom we have contact in the world—is said to reveal God in a general sense

27 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

because, although it points beyond itself to a creator, this revelation is partial and imperfect: We cannot tell from nature that the Creator is a personal Being or that the creator cares for us as individuals. The human conscience—which we can describe informally as a kind of intuitive, inner sense of what is right and wrong, or a recognition of a fundamental moral law—is also said to reveal God. However, the revelation given through conscience is also par- tial and imperfect: It can be severely distorted by social pressures in cultures where, for example, theft or killing is honored or human sacrifice is practiced. In contrast, special revelation is given to particular groups of human beings. The means by which special revelation takes place include prophecy, mystical experience, and history. Prophecy refers to God’s communication through a chosen spokesperson: the prophet. Mystical experience describes the direct and individual contact that a human might have with a transcendent power (God, an angel, or other heavenly being); it may be expressed in visions (things seen), locutions (things heard), dreams, and the like. For Christians, personal encounter with Jesus Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit is viewed as the premiere form of special revelation. For some faith traditions, special revelation is understood to be communicated through human history, because it is the site for God’s contact with and intervention on behalf of humanity. For example, Jews point to God’s actions in rescuing slaves from bondage in Egypt as a revelatory event. Christians describe Jesus as the fullness of revelation and the life of Jesus as the revelatory event. Muslims point to Muhammad as the last and most important of God’s prophets and to his visions as the final and perfect revelation of God to human beings. These visions, which were received through the angel Gabriel, are compiled in the Qur’an. All of these examples are instances of special revelation in history. Finally, we can speak of personal revelation. Unlike special revelation, which is a pub- lic revelation given for the sake of a particular group of people, a personal revelation is a pri- vate revelation granted to a single individual to fulfill a specific need or address a particular issue. Individual faith traditions have different processes and criteria for testing the authen- ticity of these personal revelations, but most tend to proceed with caution. On the one hand, they want to affirm that God’s revelation can come through many different avenues. On the other, they are suspicious of private or personal revelations that appear to contradict or challenge the doctrines or approved practices of their faith tradition. One of the most important sources of special revelation is sacred scripture. It contains special revelation that has been handed down to later generations both by word-of-mouth and in written form. This is known in theology as oral and written tradition (from the Latin word tradere, “to hand on”). For Jews, Tanakh (later called the Old Testament by Christians) is the record of oral and literary traditions comprising the special revelation granted to them. Christians, recognizing the revelatory character of this material, incorporated it into their Bible, which also includes records of oral and literary traditions about Jesus of Nazareth and his earliest followers (later called the New Testament). Muslims accept the sacred books of both Jews and Christians as the word of God, albeit corrupted in its trans- mission from the time it was first revealed. However, for the followers of Islam, the Qur’an holds pride of place as the collection of directly dictated revelations given to the prophet Muhammad. He is not the author of the Qur’an in any sense, only its transmitter. Revelation is enshrined in the practices of communal worship. Thus, people learn about aspects of revelation from hymns, from the prayers and readings that are recited dur- ing worship, and from the biblical stories that are recalled and retold in the worship ser- vices. Revelation may also be confirmed in the lives of those who are held to be exemplars 28 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

of the way of life that is espoused by a particular faith tradition. In some faith traditions these persons are called saints (literally, “holy ones”). Thus, we can see how special revela- tion is handed down in a variety of ways: oral teaching, written scriptures, worship and devo- tional practices, the lives of those whom the community holds up as role models, and in the ongoing life of the community itself.

Faith

Many people think that faith refers only to the sets of beliefs that one holds. However, like revelation, faith has many aspects. We can talk about faith in at least four ways: (1) as belief in or acceptance of a set of truths, (2) as trust, (3) as action or practice, and (4) as personal insight or experience of the divine. Christian faith, which is a response to revelation, begins with belief in God and in God’s son, Jesus Christ. Thus, in many Christian denominations, persons who present themselves for Baptism and admission to the church are expected to recite a creed (a statement of belief) before being baptized. In denominations that practice infant Baptism, an adult sponsor recites a creed on the child’s behalf. But proclaiming state- ments of belief is only the beginning. Faith also involves trust in God and Jesus. The word trust carries connotations of commitment to or reliance on another. Therefore it has a dis- tinctively personal or relational quality. Through faith believers commit themselves whole- heartedly to the vision of reality and the promise of fulfillment manifest in the Christian revelation. Trust and commitment to God should also lead to action that will further God’s pres- ence in the world: One must practice what one preaches by carrying on works of justice and charity. This kind of faith-in-action is not optional for the believer, and therefore is some- times described in terms of obedience to God’s will. Finally, through belief and trust in God and obedience to God’s will in one’s life, faith is deepened as one gradually develops a per- sonal insight or experience of God, which is similar to personal revelation.

Subdivisions of Christian Theology

Academic disciplines normally divide their investigations among a variety of specializations. Some sociologists study family interactions; others criminal behavior; still others trends in urban, suburban, and rural populations. In the discipline of business, one can specialize in a variety of fields, such as accounting, marketing, finance, or management. Similarly, the investigations of theology are divided among various specializations. Traditionally, theology has been divided into four major categories. Biblical studies focuses on the written documents found in the Bible and the literature that is contemporaneous with it. Biblical scholars usually specialize in either the Old Testament or the New Testament. They investigate how these documents were formed, how they were selected to be part of the Bible, what they meant to the original authors and audi- ence, and how they make meaning today. Biblical theologians also explore what these sacred texts might mean for contemporary belief and practice and how they constitute God’s revelation to humanity. The Bible has been called the “soul of theology,” because Christians claim the Bible as a primary source for coming to know God and God’s relation to the world and humanity. Therefore, Christian theologians, whatever their subdiscipline, regularly begin with the Bible when they address questions of theology. 29 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Historical theology investigates how Christian faith developed in the various periods of history after the biblical era. It focuses on how Christian beliefs and practices were shaped by persons and events of different historical periods and how Christianity sees itself in rela- tionship to other social, cultural, and political movements of the time. Historical theolo- gians usually specialize in a particular period, for example, ancient Christianity (the “patristic” era), medieval Christianity, the Reformation, or the modern period. Systematic theology studies the basic formulations of Christian belief (called dogmas or doctrines) and how they relate to one another. Employing the information gained in bib- lical and historical theology, systematic theologians try to understand the realities affirmed in Christian teaching and attempt to express them in language understood by contempo- rary believers. Systematic theologians may treat such subjects as the Trinity (the three-in- oneness of God), Christology (the person and the work of Jesus Christ), theological anthropology (how human beings are viewed in relation to God), or ecclesiology (the meaning and mission of the church). Moral theology focuses on the values arising from the Bible and Christian beliefs and practices and attempts to identify the behaviors that are congruent and incongruent with these values. Moral theology has both individual and social dimensions, because it addresses issues such as character formation, growth in holiness, and virtues and vices, as well as right relations in international affairs, human rights, and social justice. Moral theologians attempt to determine what ought to be done in light of the findings of biblical, historical, and systematic theology.

Other Categories of Theological Inquiry

As the needs and interests of faith communities change over time and in different historical and cultural contexts, so does the academic discipline of theology. Here are just a few exam- ples of new categories of theological inquiry that have been added in the past century. Practical theology attempts to interrelate abstract theological concepts with particular concrete situations encountered by individuals and communities of faith through a process of theological reflection. More than simply application of theological principles, the task of practical theology is to extend the circle of those who do theology to the church community itself with the goal of transforming faith communities and the world in which they live. Closely related, in methodology at least, is pastoral theology, which trains people to minis- ter to communities of faith through activities like preaching, teaching, spiritual direction, and counseling and advocacy for persons in need. Sacramental theology, also known as liturgical theology, focuses on the study of Christian worship. Sacramental theology was once a part of systematic theology, but as it began to be recognized as a distinct specialization within theology its interdisciplinary char- acter became more evident. Today, it draws upon biblical studies to investigate the scriptural foundations of the sacraments and upon historical theology to gain theological insights con- cerning the development of worship forms from the period of the early church to the pre- sent. It also draws upon philosophy and anthropology to learn how the words and symbols of religious ritual create meaning for those who participate in worship. The goal of sacra- mental theology is to enhance the faith community’s understanding and appreciation of Christian worship. Spirituality investigates various forms of prayer and religious practice that orient per- sons toward God (or the divine) and that direct the way they live in the world. In the area of Christian spirituality, scholars trace the development of certain practices like asceticism30 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

(denying the body of physical pleasures in order to focus oneself on God) from the time of the early church to the present. They inquire about the distinctiveness of different kinds of spirituality, for example, following the example of Benedict of Nursia (480–543 A.D.) or Francis of Assisi (1182–1226 A.D.), or a spirituality that characterizes a particular Christian tra- dition, for example, Methodist spirituality or Anglican spirituality. They also investigate sys- tematic questions like the role of the Holy Spirit in orienting a person toward God in prayer. Comparative theology is, as its name suggests, a comparison of the views of various reli- gious traditions on theological themes like revelation, the nature of God, sin, and salvation. It also examines the different theological methods and resources of the traditions under investigation to better understand how they formulate their theology. Comparative theology is not the same thing as the study of world religions, which we might describe as a historical and cultural investigation into the beliefs and practices of various religions such as Buddhism, Shintoism, or Islam. However, depending on the topic under investigation, it might well include these religious traditions in its dialogue. Theologians cannot predict what new categories of theology will evolve over time, but certainly there will be others, because one of the primary goals of theology is to respond to the needs of the time and to be a resource to faith communities who seek to understand, in their own place and time, what it is that they believe and how they ought to live their lives.

WHY LEARN ABOUT RELIGIOUS STUDIES OR THEOLOGY?

Today, with the rapid rise of secularism and religious pluralism, particularly in Western cul- tures, some people might conclude that religion has become irrelevant or unimportant in contemporary society or that differences in religious worldviews are inconsequential. Others might be frustrated by the fact that it can be difficult to find agreement among the- ologians or scholars of religion on a given issue, or they might be afraid that the subject mat- ter of religion is just too confusing to those who have never studied it before. As a result, some students wonder whether they would be better off not to study theology or religion at all. What reasons are there for studying religion and theology? First, most people throughout history have been religious. In all ages except our own (the early twenty-first century), the predominant shapers of beliefs and values have been religious systems, which have usually taught that the supreme good of human beings lies not simply in material prosperity or in unbounded pleasure, but in a proper and harmonious relationship with the unseen spiritual world or ultimate Reality to which religion is a bridge. Even today, a devout Hindu, Christian, Jew, Muslim, or Lakota Sioux would probably agree in this basic belief. Thus, one reason for studying religion seriously and critically is that per- haps the religious claim is true. Perhaps a right relationship with the unseen world of God is as important, or even more important, than material prosperity or pleasure, even though these latter values are the ones stressed by twenty-first century U.S. culture. Second, many of the students taking this course will probably identify themselves as Christians. However, because we live in a more secular world, educated people today prob- ably know and understand less about their own faith than at almost any other period in Christian history. Understanding the sources, history, and development of Christianity should deepen their understanding of their faith and their own heritage. Third, much of what is identified as Western civilization has been formed and shaped by the Christian theological tradition. Without knowledge of the Bible and Christian history, much of Western architecture, art, music, poetry, and literature is simply unintelligible.31 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Fourth, even if one were to decide that God does not exist and that all religious world- views are false, that person will come in contact with other people who believe in the exis- tence of God and who commit themselves to particular religions. Moreover, many of the major struggles that our world faces today involve religion in one way or another. If one expects to interact peacefully and productively with people of diverse backgrounds, it would be helpful, if not necessary, to understand their worldviews.

THE PURPOSE OF THE CHRISTIAN THEOLOGICAL TRADITION

The overarching purpose of this textbook is to introduce students to the Christian theolog- ical tradition. The term tradition should not be understood simply as family or group cus- toms that are passed down from generation to generation. Rather, in a religious sense, it is the accumulated wisdom of the believing community, the church, which is refined over time in its doctrines and celebrated in its worship for the good of its people and all of God’s cre- ation. It is conducted within the community of faith and enriched by the experiences and reflections of many persons over many centuries. Given that our focus is the Christian theological tradition, we identify its source, first and foremost, as the word of God revealed in the person of Jesus Christ and in the Christian scriptures, the Bible. Therefore, we will begin our textbook with an introduction to the lit- erature of the Bible, its major themes, and the characters that make its stories come alive for contemporary readers. We will also introduce some strategies for reading the Bible that are consistent with a Christian understanding of revelation as it develops through history and is systematically explored and presented in theology. Because our focus is the Christian theological tradition, this textbook will give consider- able attention to the development and articulation of Christian doctrine. An easily accessible and fairly accurate way to describe or understand a religion at any particular point in time is simply to list the major beliefs held by its leaders and practitioners. However, theological inquiry does not take place in a vacuum. Rather, particular theological questions become important in a given place and time because of the situations in which people find themselves. Likewise, the responses of theologians and church leaders, though thoroughly grounded in scripture and tradition, are conditioned by their historical and cultural setting. Therefore, we will survey the Christian theological tradition as it unfolds historically. You will be able to read about some of the major people and movements that shaped Christianity from its beginnings in the first decades after the death and resurrection of Jesus to the present, and about those who contributed to its richness and diversity as we know it today. This book will also introduce you to some of Christianity’s most important theological literature—the writings of Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, and Martin Luther, to name just a few. Hopefully along the way you also will have opportunities to learn about the goals, tools, and methods of theology.

KEY QUESTIONS AND THEMES

Although The Christian Theological Tradition presents itself as a general survey of the history of Christianity and an introduction to its religious literature, there are two overarching sets of questions—questions that almost every religion must address—that govern the selection of topics and themes for each chapter. These are theological anthropology and soteriology. 32 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Theological anthropology pertains to the study of human beings in relation to God and God’s creation. The nature of human beings is of crucial importance to religion. Here is a sampling of the kinds of questions that theological anthropology addresses: Is there something about human nature that explains things like the persistence of war, oppression, torture, corruption, criminal activity, quarrels, and broken relationships? If so, what is it about humanity that explains these effects, and what is the cause of this situation? Are some humans “good” and others “evil”? If so, how do we distinguish one from the other? How do we account for the fact that people commit evil acts? Soteriology pertains to the study of salvation. Here are some of the questions that sote- riology addresses: If, as most people throughout history have agreed, there is something very wrong with human beings and their interactions in the world, what might be done to respond to this situation? Can we be saved, rescued, or enlightened? What form does the rescue take? Should it be conceived in terms of the development of an authentic humanity in this life, survival of a spiritual soul in heaven, resurrection of the body in a new life, or entry into a mysterious state that is not “existence” and not “nonexistence”? How do we obtain salvation? Can we do it for ourselves, or do we need outside help? What role do suc- cess and comfort play in the good human life? What is success? What brings happiness? In addition to these two overarching sets of questions that govern the selection of materials that are covered in The Christian Theological Tradition, this book addresses five themes that are key to the way in which Christianity answers these questions. The five themes are God, creation, revelation, Jesus, and the church. For each theme we have listed some theological questions that relate to it.

1. God. Does God exist? If so, what is God like? Is God personal and conscious or some sort of impersonal force? Is God good or evil? Can God be trusted? How much does God know, and how much can God do? Does God interrelate with the world of our experience, and, if so, how? Does God know us personally? Does God care about us? Are we called by God to act justly toward other humans? 2. Creation. Was the world we live in created, has it always existed, or did it just happen by the chance interplay of physical forces? Is it even real or just some sort of illusion? Does God interact with the world of our experience in a continuing way? If God cre- ated the world, can God do what he wants with it, make changes in it, or work mira- cles? If God cares about humans, does God have the power to make things turn out well for the humans God favors? Or are God’s powers limited? 3. Revelation. Has God made an effort to communicate with humans? Does God ask humans to respond in some way? If so, does this revelation take a public form, which those who receive it then pass on to others in an authoritative way? In other words, do other humans have some obligation to believe what certain humans say about what God has revealed to them? Can an individual have visions or other psychic or spiritual experiences, and, if so, what authority do these private revelations have? Does God answer prayers? How should humans pray? 4. Jesus. Who is Jesus? Did he actually exist? Is he a human “just like us,” or was (is) there something special about him? What significance, if any, does his life have for humans today? Is his significance limited to his wise sayings and the upright moral example he provided? Does he have some role to play in the salvation of human beings? Is he con- sciously alive somewhere, does he know who we are, and does he want to have a per- sonal relationship with us? 33 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

5. Church. Is it important for humans to relate to each other and form cooperative associ- ations (churches) as they pursue these questions and seek salvation? Or can we do what needs to be done on our own? Do humans form churches on their own initiative, or is there some sense in which God calls us together? How does God relate to the churches that exist? Are the churches the way they are because God wants them to be like that, or have the churches developed in response to human cultures in a way that might change in the future? How do, or should, different churches relate to each other?

Throughout the textbook, these questions will be addressed with a view to the religious and sociopolitical situations of the historical period being studied. As you read, try to imagine what experiences lie behind the different ways that people at different times and in various places have attempted to answer these questions. Pay special attention to the experiences on which these answers have been based. Then ask whether your worldview has been influenced by similar experiences. Such an exercise can keep the Christian tradition and other traditions you study from becoming just words. We believe that you will find your own curiosity being activated, you will begin to notice new connections between old ideas and experiences and contemporary religious life, you will understand better why other people think the way they do, and perhaps you will better understand and appreciate your own religious worldview.

Key Terms

religion theology practical theology monotheistic doctrines pastoral theology polytheistic revelation sacramental theology agnostic faith spirituality atheistic biblical studies comparative theology religious studies historical theology tradition pluralism systematic theology anthropology secularism moral theology soteriology

Questions for Reading

1. What is religious studies, and how does it differ from theology? 2. What are four major theories or approaches to religious studies, and what distin- guishes each approach? 3. What are the seven dimensions of religion proposed by Ninian Smart? Explain these categories by relating them to a faith tradition with which you are familiar. 4. What is the distinction among general, special, and personal revelation? What are some of the various ways in which special revelation is thought to occur? 5. Describe the four aspects of faith. 6. What is theology? How does it differ from religious studies? 7. Describe the four traditional subdivisions of theology. 8. What are some of the newer specializations in theology? What are some of the condi- tions that make it possible to add new specializations? 34 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Works Consulted/Recommended Reading

Berger, Peter L. The Sacred Canopy. Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. New York: Doubleday, 1967. Bond, Helen K., Seth D. Kunin, and Francesca Aran Murphy, eds. Religious Studies and Theology. An Introduction. New York: New York University, 2003. Cady, Linell E., and Delwin Brown, eds. Religious Studies, Theology, and the University. Conflicting Maps, Changing Terrain. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 2002. Christiano, Kevin J., William H. Swatos, Jr., and Peter Kivisto. Sociology of Religion. Contemporary Developments. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira, 2002. Cipriani, Roberto. Sociology of Religion. An Historical Introduction. New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 2000. Douglas, Mary. Purity and Danger. An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1966. Jung, Carl. Psychology and Religion. New Haven: Yale University, 1938. McGrath, Alister E., ed. The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Modern Christian Thought. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1993. Morris, Brian. Anthropological Studies of Religion. An Introductory Text. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University, 1987. Musser, Donald W., and Joseph L. Price, eds. New & Enlarged Handbook of Christian Theology. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 2003. Preus, Samuel. Explaining Religion: Criticism and Theory from Bodin to Freud. New Haven, CT: Yale University, 1987. Rausch, Thomas P. The College Student’s Introduction to Theology. Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press/Michael Glazier, 1993. Smart, Ninian. The World’s Religions. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. Wiebe, Donald. The Politics of Religious Studies. The Continuing Conflict with Theology in the Academy. New York: St. Martin’s, 1999.

35 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

1 Background to Buddhism

In this chapter The appearance of Buddhism in India in the sixth century bce was preceded by some two thousand years of Indian civilization. This chapter sketches the main historical, religious and philosophical developments during this period. It looks first at the indigenous Indian civilization that arose in the Indus valley and whose decline coincided with the arrival of Aryan migrants from the north. The religion the Aryans brought with them developed in interesting ways in the new homeland and when Buddhism arose it defined itself by accepting some parts of the preceding tradition and rejecting others. The second half of the chapter introduces important pan-Indian beliefs about cosmology, reincarnation, and karma that are fundamental to Buddhism’s understanding of human life and its destiny. The perspectives on the cosmos, time and history presented here are quite different to the familiar Western ones but are essential to an understanding of the Buddhist worldview and the religious teachings we will encounter in the following chapters.

Main topics covered •• The Indus Valley Civilization •• Vedic Culture •• The Age of the Wanderers •• The Cosmos in Indian Thought •• The Six Realms of Rebirth •• Karma

The Indus Valley Civilization In the third millennium b.c.e., peoples from the neolithic cultures of Baluchistan moved into the fertile flood plains of the Indus River and established cities at

36 CopyrightFoundations Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Harappā, Mohenjodaro, and other sites. They engaged in considerable trading as far as Mesopotamia; the southern city at Lothal had a sophisticated dry dock system. The well laid-out streets, consistent city plans, almost modern sanitation facilities, centralized food storage areas, and the presence of citadels in the hearts of the cities all suggest a strong and conservative system of government. This Indus Valley Civilization developed its own writing system, which is as yet undecipherable, although there has been some fruitful speculation that it was used to write a proto-Dravidian language. This writing is found in short inscriptions on beautifully carved seals, probably giving the name of the owner, with well-conceived and naturalistic pictures of animals and what may well be gods. Another clue to the religious life of these people is found in the presence of large ritual baths associated with the central city and indicating a profound concern for bodily purity – a concern reflected also in the sophisticated sewage system. By the time this civilization had reached its full growth, it covered a territory over a thousand miles long, greater than that of any other ancient civilization. By around 1200 b.c.e. the cities were dying: craftsmanship and organization were disappearing, and huddled skeletons with crushed skulls in the most recent levels suggest either invasions or internecine warfare. The Indus River seems to have no longer been under control, perhaps because of a shift in its flow, and there may have been excessive floods. It is debated whether the Indo-European invaders from the north-west were the actual destroyers of the cities; but in any case they probably found a civilization in the final process of decay.

The Indus religion From the seals and the baths we can make some uncertain inferences about the religion of the cities. They seem to have shared in the cult of the Mother Goddess common in the Near East, producing terracotta figurines of female figures, nude except for a short skirt. This goddess, as represented on the seals, seems often to have been associated with horned animals, even being represented herself as a theriomorph. We find scenes of religious processions approaching what seem to be sacred trees, occasionally with a goddess – or a tree spirit – depicted in the branches; one seal depicts a female figure, upside down, with a tree growing from between her parted legs. Several figures are shown sitting in what came to be called a yogic posture, with legs tightly crossed and the hands placed on the knees, often being paid homage by others. Here too we may mention the ritual baths, and the extreme importance that seems to have been laid upon bodily purity and the proper disposal of human wastes: water itself seems to have carried considerable religious significance.W e find, finally, large numbers of seemingly phallic objects, perhaps presented as offerings to the goddess as part of rituals of growth and fertility.

37 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology

The Indus inheritance We may speculate on the elements of this religious culture that were passed on to its scattered descendants and absorbed into the mainstream of Indian religion. The Mother Goddess especially reappears in later Hinduism, but played almost no role at all in the Buddhist cult. But we find local spirits of trees and streams as central figures in early Buddhism: these are the yakṣas and serpent-like nāgas who appear constantly in the canonical texts. The sacred tree, too, appears in Buddhism as the tree of enlightenment. There are, for example, any number of Buddhist representations of the Buddha seated cross-legged beneath the tree, protected by the giant hood of the serpent Mucalinda. The three basic elements in the portrayal may all be derived from the Indus Civilization. The Indus emphasis on purity of the body and the presence of what may have been yogic practices give some evidence of a basically transcendent perspective in Indus religion. We may postulate the presence of a sacerdotal class who ran the sacred baths and interceded with the goddess for the fertility of the crops. But even more, there may well have been a special class of religious practitioners whose aim lay in the induction of trance-like states of bodily immobility, and the impenetrability of the body to pollution. The entire yogic ideal of absolute withdrawal from sensory input cannot easily be traced to Indo-European antecedents; but in the Indus concern for the integrity of the bodily integument and in their representation of figures in cross- legged immobility, we may find a clue to what would become a major element of Indian religion.

Vedic culture The Indo-European invaders who trod upon the warm corpse of the Indus Civilization were, by their own account, a hard-drinking, hard-riding band of stalwart warriors, who used with considerable efficacy their own invention of war, the horse-drawn chariot. They brought with them a pantheon of sky gods, families of professional reciters of hymns and performers of ritual, and a substance called soma that produced states of divine ecstasy and magical power. Thissoma may well have been the psychotropic mushroom Amanita muscaria. The religious professionals – the technicians of the sacred – opened up the shining world of the gods, and in their rituals of offerings and praise asked boons of the devas, the shining ones. Yet in their ecstatic power they were able to control even the gods themselves, and the rituals grew with time into complex magical simulacra for the processes of the entire cosmos, owned and controlled by human agency. This growing homologization of the ritual to the universe took place as the secret of soma was being lost among the priests. But the ideal of ecstatic trance and magic power continued to be expressed, and paradox and metaphor became the vehicles for

38 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution a literary alteration of consciousness. The magical correspondences of the ritual were expanded, and even in the latest hymns we find the sacrificer still flying in space, his spirit among the gods, while mortals see only his body here below.

Vedic literature The basic texts This visionary tradition was early formulated into orally transmitted texts. The priestly families kept collections of their own inherited hymns, and shortly before the first millenium b.c.e. these were in turn collected into an anthology known as the Ṛg-veda. As the rituals grew more complex, specialized functions were introduced. A priest was appointed specifically to handle the physical actions of the sacrifice and to manipulate the sacred implements, each of which had to be empowered by the recitation of stereotyped magical formulas. The utterances of this performance were then collected into another anthology, the Yajur-Veda. Again, another specialized priest took on the role of cantor, and chanted the sacred verses to special melodies, and these verses were collected, along with their musical notation, in the Sāma-Veda. In addition to these texts, the threefold sacred knowledge, a fourth collection of hymns called the Atharva-Veda was made specifically for the magical averting of evil. These rituals against death, disease, and hostile witchcraft seem to have been the property of less orthodox religious specialists who lived somewhat closer to the everyday life of the people.

The expositions Around 800 b.c.e. there began the composition of compendious prose expositions of the Vedic ritual. These Brāhmaṇas deal in sacerdotal detail with the homologies of the sacrifice and the cosmos, and there are the first hints of later doctrines of liberation. If the ritual granted magical power and control of the universe through the magic namings of the priest, then might there not be the single thing whose name is the name of all? There had already been some speculation that all the gods and the universe itself came from the One: if this one thing could be known, then the ultimate power, and the ultimate freedom, might be gained. These doctrines were expanded upon in the Āraṇyakas, books whose secret and sacred lore could be learned only in the solitude of the forests. The archaic modes of ecstasy were turned to realization, and in meditations called vidyās, the practitioner internalized the cosmic dimensions of the ritual and could gain the knowledge and power of the ritual without its actual performance. Very shortly before the time of the Buddha himself, there began to be composed the earliest prose Upaniṣads, teachings imparted only from a master to a disciple.

39 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology

Here the quest for the One was carried on in true earnest. Ritual elements increasingly disappear, and the secret and shockingly new truth of transmigration and its terror of repeated death becomes the central motivation for knowledge. The single thing whose name is the essence of the world process is identified as that which is changeless in the midst of change, the ultimate cause of all effects, that which cannot nonexist: to know it – and thus to possess it – is the key to liberation from death. The One was approached from several directions. It was considered to be the substance of which all things were made, and thus the unchanging ground of phenomenal appearances. As such it was identified with the magic oral powers that created and sustained the cosmos, and was called the Brahman. Again, the One was sought within the individual, as that without which life and consciousness could not be, and was thus the unchanging ground of the transmigrating self. As such it was identified with earlier speculations upon the sustaining power of the breath and was called the ātman. A final step was taken in the most secret teaching of all, that in reality this Brahman and this ātman were the same. This teaching is enshrined in the most sacred utterances of the Upaniṣads, the great sayings such as ‘Tat tvam asi’ (‘You are That’) or Brahmo‘ ‘ham’ (‘I am Brahman’). It was by meditation upon such sayings that the practitioner gained knowledge in a flash of realization; he perceived directly the unchanging reality that underlay the shifting panorama of experience, and his knowledge freed him forever from the terrible round of death.

The Vedic inheritance Such teachings were of paramount importance for developing Buddhism. The Buddha’s own enlightenment was a visionary and ecstatic experience in the mythic mode of the earliest Vedic tradition. The doctrine of transmigration is central to the Buddhist quest, and the idea of nirvana would be unintelligible without it. The Buddhist process of insight meditation is a direct continuation of the meditations on the great sayings of the Upaniṣads, wherein the practitioner internalizes a concise doctrinal formula as a direct and personal realization of the truth. However much the metaphysical superstructure may have differed – and it differed considerably – the quest for freedom as a state of being within the phenomenal world, and the contemplative techniques used in the search, were inherited from the Vedic tradition.

The Age of the Wanderers For several centuries before the birth of the Buddha, a revolution had been under way in India. Iron technology had developed, creating a new type of military specialist and a new impersonal mode of warfare. Iron implements cleared great

40 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution forests for cultivation and constructed the vast timber palisades of fortified cities. The iron-tipped plough produced a surplus economy that could support great governmental and religious institutions. And from the West came the new concept of the centralized imperium, the world-conquering monarch, and the uses of war for power rather than for gain. There was vast social upheaval as rival kings sought to establish their empires, as religious ritual was increasingly turned to the support of centralized government, and as the family and tribal structures of earlier times dissolved under the pressures of impersonal imperialism. Independent tribal groups were swept up into larger political units, until by the time of the Buddha only sixteen city-states ruled over what had once been a vast series of independent peoples. Some tribal groups in the foothills of the Himalayas held to their independence, but the writing was clearly on the wall. Soon the state of Magadha would inaugurate a final solution to the tribal question.

The two traditions Opposition to these new forces took many forms, including military resistance. The philosophical quest for freedom was inextricably bound up with a new social movement, the wanderers (parivrājakas) who left home and family to seek a way of liberation in the world. Social anomie was expressed creatively in religious seeking, and it was from this movement that Buddhism directly derived. We may note that the movement was inherently conservative politically, a reaction against the release of new social forces; the Buddha himself modeled his monastic institution upon the old customs of the independent tribes. We may distinguish two main religious postures in the wanderer movement itself. Some sought freedom in transcendence, in an enstatic withdrawal from all sensory input, and in total immobility of the body, the breath, and the mind. Progressive states of trance gradually drew the meditator further and further from the realm of phenomena, until he achieved a state of isolation and monadic impenetrability. This practice was closely bound up with concepts of purity and pollution, for action was seen as a sort of defiling substance that weighted the soul and bound it to the world. The process of trance was often viewed as a means of burning away impurities. If our speculations concerning the Indus Valley religion are valid, we have a clear source for these ideas and practices. The basic functional term would seem to be inviolability: the purity of body is a way of preserving its unitary integrity, establishing the skin as the ultimate ego-boundary, just as the immobility of the mind becomes a means of transcending the defilements of sensory input. Other wanderers sought freedom in immanence, in the visionary and ecstatic experience that rendered all things new, and in the magic knowledge that granted power over the world. The quest was for insight rather than for isolation, for the infinite manoeuvrability available to the one

41 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology

who knew how the universe worked. Here was the direct continuation of the Vedic tradition, which was to culminate in the vision of the Upaniṣads.

The philosophical problematic The above is a much simplified view of a complex phenomenon. Although transcendence and immanence remained the basic polarities of the entire Indian contemplative tradition, there was considerable borrowing of techniques from one tradition to the other. We shall see later how Buddhism dealt with the implicit contradictions of its dual contemplative inheritance. These contradictions further generated an entire series of philosophical problems that both Buddhism and Hinduism had to deal with. If ultimate reality is immanent, then there arises the epistemological question of why the practitioner has not realized it already. The choice of transcendence raised ontological problems, and the choice of immanence raised epistemological ones. What is the relationship between the body and the soul? If the soul is a permanent and unchanging entity somehow trapped within the phenomenal world in spite of its transcendence, then what is the historical process by which this ontological fall took place? Or if the soul participates in change, then what is the psychological process by which it enters into an epistemological relation with an unchanging reality? We must account for personal change and the possibility of spiritual progress on the one hand and for personal continuity and the persistence of memory on the other. If the soul is permanent and unchanging, then how can it be said to transmigrate? Problems such as these were early put in specifically Buddhist terms. The problem of karma remained a central issue for over a thousand years, for the Buddhist maintained that there was no permanent entity within the personality: how then can we say that it is the same person who suffers for his past deeds, or who attains enlightenment? The problem of perception remained equally central: how can one impermanent entity perceive another that is already past? But even more important were the most fundamental soteriological issues raised by the implicit contradictions of the tradition. What is the moral value of action in the world? What happens to an enlightened person when he dies? The Buddha is taken for the model for all religious action, but what was the central act of his life – the enlightenment or the nirvana? The entire history of Buddhist thought can be seen as a search for answers to these questions.

The cosmos in Indian thought Buddhism and Hinduism share a perspective on human life that is in important respects very different to that found in theW est. Western conceptions of individual

42 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Figure 1.1 1,000 Buddha images, Taeansa Monastery, South Kyongsang, Korea existence have been profoundly shaped by the teachings of its three main religions – Christianity, Judaism and Islam – which have their roots in the common cultural soil of the Middle East. All three of these religions teach that human life is a unique event: we are born, we live, and we die. This view of individual life derives from an underlying perspective on time. Broadly speaking, time is understood in the West as linear and punctuated by a series of unique events. In the East, however, time is commonly conceptualized as repetitive and cyclic. Thus while the West tends to see history as a generally forward-moving drama (interpreted in secular terms as ‘progress’ or religiously as the working-out of divine providence), in parts of Asia – and particularly in India – history is seen as a series of potentially infinite cycles in which similar patterns of events recur with no fixed goal or purpose. Whereas Western religions teach that the universe came into being as the result of a unique act of creation, Indian religions believe that the cosmos has always existed, undergoing vast cycles of evolution and decline lasting for billions of years. Indian cosmology is in some respects closer to the natural patterns observed in nature, which are predominantly cyclic. The seasons follow their regular course, and the agricultural cycles of birth, growth, death, and renewal are repeated year after year. Periodically nature seems to die and be reborn, as when flowers bloom in the spring after a bleak winter (in India the seasons are different, and the renewal of

43 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology nature comes each year with the monsoon rains which fall between May and June). Since human beings are a part of nature, it did not seem strange to Indian thinkers to conceive of human life following a similar pattern and passing through an extended series of births and deaths. Individual existences were thought of like pearls on a necklace – each one separate but strung together in an endless series. The origin of such ideas is pre-Buddhist and they are first mentioned in the mystical writings known as the Upaniṣads mentioned above. Since then belief in reincarnation has been deeply engrained in the Indian worldview and forms a fundamental part of the Buddhist outlook on life. Buddhist cosmology came to envisage the world as divided into two categories: animate and inanimate. It pictures the inanimate part as a kind of receptacle or container (bhājana) in which various kinds of living beings (sattva) make their homes. The physical universe is formed out of the interaction of the five primary elements, namely earth, water, fire, air, and space( ākāśa). In Indian thought space is considered as an element in its own right rather than just a void or the absence of other elements. From the interaction of these elements worlds are formed, such as the one we now inhabit. This world is not unique, however, and there are thought to be other worlds ‘as numerous as the sands of the Ganges’ inhabited by beings like ourselves. Groups of these worlds cluster together to form ‘world-systems’ (roughly equivalent to the modern concept of a galaxy) which are found throughout the six directions of space (to the north, south, east, west, above, and below). These world-systems were believed to evolve and be destroyed over vast periods of time known as kalpas, which last for millions of years. Worlds come into being through the interaction of material forces, flourish for a while, and then embark on a downward spiral at the end of which they are destroyed in a great cataclysm caused by natural elements such as fire, water or wind. In due course the process starts up again and the worlds once again evolve to complete a full cycle of time known as a ‘great eon’ (mahākalpa). Up to this point, Buddhist cosmological notions are not greatly different from those of modern astronomy, and it is when we turn to consider Buddhist notions about the inhabitants of these universes that distinctive conceptions arise.

The inhabitants of the cosmos The natural forces which shape the universe naturally have an impact on the living creatures who inhabit the worlds which are created and destroyed. Interestingly, some sources see the effect as two-way, and suggest that it is the actions of the inhabitants of the various worlds that to a large extent determine their fate. For instance, when people are greedy and selfish the rate of decline is accelerated, and when they are virtuous it slows down. This view at first seems at variance with the contemporary scientific viewpoint, but on reflection is in harmony with modern ecology, which holds

44 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution that the selfish exploitation of natural resources involved, for example, in burning large quantities of fossil fuels, plays a part in the decline of the natural environment by causing global warming. According to Buddhist belief, a world in which people are wise and virtuous would last considerably longer and be a more pleasant place to live than one inhabited by an ignorant and selfish population. Buddhist cosmology, therefore, seems to have important implications for contemporary ecology, a subject we will return to in Chapter Twelve. In Buddhism there is no creation myth as such, but a well-known early text called the Aggañña Sutta tells an interesting story about how the world began. It takes us back to the time when a previous world-system had been destroyed, and a new one was once just beginning to evolve. When a world is destroyed, the living beings which inhabit it are reborn into a spiritual realm where they await the eventual evolution of a new world. When the new world begins to appear, they are reborn into it as ethereal beings with translucent bodies showing no distinction between the male and female genders. Slowly, as the fabric of the new world becomes denser, the spirit- like beings reborn there begin to consume its material substance like food. As they do this, their bodies become grosser and more solid, like the bodies we have now. As the food is consumed, the myth recounts, it becomes scarcer, and competition for it leads to violent conflict. In order to keep the peace the people elect a king, who then imposes laws and punishes those who break them. This event marks the beginning of social and political life. Some scholars interpret this text not so much as a creation myth as a satire on the beliefs of the Buddha’s Brahmin rivals who believed that the structure of society envisaged in the caste system was divinely ordained. Whichever way we read it, however, the myth presents a view of the origins of the world which is quite unlike the one taught in Christianity . In the Buddhist account the world is not the work of a divine creator, and creation is not a once-and-for-all event. Both faiths do seem to agree that mankind is in its present predicament because of a particular moral failing. The Judeo-Christian tradition believes there was a primordial fall caused by pride and disobedience resulting in Adam and Eve being cast out of the Garden of Eden. Buddhism does not believe in a ‘fall’ as such, and attributes the human predicament to the deep-rooted psychological problems of craving and ignorance.

The Six Realms of Rebirth Within any given world-system there exist qualitatively different modes of existence, some more pleasant than others. The sources commonly speak of six domains or ‘realms’ into which an individual can be reborn. Some of these realms are visible to us here and now, while others are not. The ones we can see are the human and animal realms, and the ones we cannot see are those of the gods, the asuras (explained below), and hell. On the borderline is the realm of the ghosts, beings who hover on

45 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology

Figure 1.2 Thebhav acakra or ‘wheel of life’ depicted in a Tibetan thangka.

46 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution the fringes of the human world and who are occasionally glimpsed as they flit among the shadows. As the wheel of saṃsāra moves around, beings migrate through the various realms of rebirth in accordance with their karma, or the good and evil deeds committed in each life. The scheme of the six realms is commonly depicted in the form of a wheel known as the ‘wheel of life’ (bhavacakra), which sets out the relative position of each of the six domains. If we look at the circular diagram of the wheel of life, we see three realms below the line and three above. This simple division reflects a qualitative difference in that the three realms below the middle line (hell, the ghosts, and animals) are unfortunate places to be reborn, while those above the line (heaven, the asuras, and the human world) are more pleasant. The wheel of life is often depicted in Tibetan thangkas or wall hangings. The wheel is a symbolic representation of the process of cyclic rebirth or saṃsāra, and is sometimes depicted as showing the six realms of rebirth in the grasp of the demon Yama, the Lord of Death (also known as Māra and by other names). Skulls in Yama’s head-dress show that he represents death, time and impermanence. On some accounts the wheel represents a mirror held up by Yama to a dying person revealing the various possibilities for the next rebirth open to them. The very center of the wheel often shows three animals: a cock, a pig and a snake, which represent the ‘three poisons’ of greed, hatred and delusion. It is these forces that create bad karma and fuel the endless cycle of rebirth. Placing these mental forces at the center of the diagram reveals the important place that Buddhism accords to psychology and the profound influence it has on our experience of the world by causing us to be reborn in one realm or another. The close connection between psychology and cosmology is also seen in meditational theory, where the various levels of trance (dhyāna) are classified in the manner of physical planes in the scheme of thirty-one levels explained below. Most schools of Buddhism believe that the transition from one realm to another at death is instantaneous (one authority compares it to someone swinging across a river on a rope tied to the branch of a tree). Some Buddhist schools, however, notably those in Tibet, believe there is an intermediate state known as the bardo which acts as a buffer between lives and in which the spirit of the deceased person remains for up to forty-nine days before being reborn. During this time the spirit glimpses all six realms of rebirth before being attracted – as if by magnetism – to the one most in keeping with its karmic state. Perhaps the view of the world just described seems alien and strange, but the notion of the cosmos having various realms or divisions is not unfamiliar in the West. Traditional Christian teachings depict God dwelling at the summit of his creation surrounded by angels and saints, while Satan inhabits an infernal region beneath our feet. Human beings are somewhere in between, poised, so to speak, between two eternal destinies. Traditional teachings also speak of a fourth domain – purgatory – existing as a temporary abode for departed souls undergoing purification in order

47 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology to be worthy to enter heaven. This gives us a total of four possible states or modes of existence, all of which are found in the Buddhist scheme. To these four Buddhism adds another by subdividing the world we now inhabit into separate domains for animals and humans. It then adds a final one, namely the domain of the asuras mentioned above. These are figures from Indian mythology who did battle with the gods as part of an eternal struggle between good and evil. In Buddhist teachings they are depicted as warlike demons consumed by hatred and a lust for power who cannot refrain from expressing their violent impulses in a futile struggle for a victory they never achieve. Instead, their conduct reveals that hatred breeds only hatred, and one battle leads simply to the next. However, as noted, the asuras are not of great importance in this scheme of things and are omitted in the earliest descriptions, which speak only of five realms (it is not impossible that they were added to the scheme simply to balance the circle). There are also some important differences to the Christian conception of the cosmos. The most notable is that in the Buddhist scheme no one is condemned to abide permanently in any given realm. Hell is not a place of permanent damnation, and heaven is not a place of eternal happiness. The wheel revolves continuously, and individuals may move repeatedly in and out of any of the six destinations or ‘gatis’, as they are known. In this respect the Buddhist hell is more like the Christian concept of purgatory. The second difference is that the Buddhist hell is more varied, and is thought to have cold as well as hot areas in which the departed spirits suffer until their evil karma is purged. The world of the ghosts is a realm of suffering of a special kind. The denizens of this realm are pictured as beings who were selfish and greedy in their previous life and who are now suffering the consequences by being denied the ability to enjoy the pleasures they crave. In popular art they are depicted with swollen stomachs and tiny mouths through which they can never pass enough food to satisfy their constant hunger. Generosity (dāna) is highly valued in Buddhism, and the greedy seem to merit a special punishment all of their own. These sad wraiths live in the shadows of the human realm, coming out at night to consume the food left out for them as offerings by pious layfolk. The last of the three unfortunate realms is that of the animals. Rebirth in animal form involves physical suffering due to being hunted both by humans and other predators, as well as the inability to reason and to understand the cause of their predicament. Driven mainly by instincts they cannot control, and without a language capable of communicating the subtleties of Buddhist teachings, animals can only hope for an existence relatively free from pain and to be born in a better condition in the next life. Buddhist folk-tales depict animals as being capable of virtuous behavior to some degree, and modern studies also suggest that the higher mammals are capable of altruistic behavior, but for the most part animals are limited in their capacity for autonomous moral choices. Although there is no dogma on this point

48 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Buddhism seems to envisage the realm of animal rebirth as limited to mammals, which means that, contrary to popular belief, you are unlikely to come back as an ant. The Jātakas – a collection of stories about the Buddha’s previous lives – depict the Buddha at various times as having been a deer (no. 12), a monkey (no. 20), a dog (no. 22), a bull (no. 28), a bird (no. 36), an elephant (no. 72), and many other creatures. However, there are also some early sources which speak of human beings being reborn as scorpions and centipedes (A.v.289) or even worms and maggots (M.iii.168), so it is not possible to be categorical on this point. The most pleasant of the six realms of rebirth is undoubtedly heaven, which appears at the top of the diagram. Heaven is the residence of the gods (deva), namely beings who have accumulated sufficient good karma to justify a rebirth in paradise. These are somewhat like angels in the Christian tradition who reside in the various mansions of heaven. In Buddhism there are no special theological implications associated with a heavenly rebirth: the gods do not create the cosmos, control human destiny, forgive sins, or pass judgement on human beings. Humans may make offerings to the gods and seek their help, but while the gods are revered they are not worshipped in the fashion of the theistic traditions. Nor is heaven a place of permanent salvation: the gods are subject to the law of karma just like anyone else, and in due course they will be reborn in a lower realm when their good karma expires. Mythology locates the heavens above a great mountain known as Meru which was believed to lie at the center of the world. Later sources (from the fifth century c.e. onwards) subdivide the heavenly realm into twenty-six different levels or ‘mansions’ which are increasingly sublime. If we add to these the five other realms of rebirth shown in the wheel of life (bhavacakra) we reach a total of thirty-one possible rebirth destinations. The lower heavens were thought of as being on the slopes of Mount Meru, the higher terrestrial ones on its summit, and the more sublime heavens floating above it in space. The gods at different levels live for different periods of time. At the lower levels their lifespans are hundreds of times those of humans, and at the top their lives are measured in millions of years. Time is believed to be relative, however, and the gods perceive it differently according to their station: thus a million years of human time might seem like a week to the gods on the lower levels, and a day to the gods at the summit. The top five heavens are known as the ‘Pure Abodes’, and are reserved for those known as ‘non-returners’ (anāgāmin): these are individuals in the human world who are on the point of gaining enlightenment and will not be reborn again as human beings. It might seem strange to Western ears to hear that rebirth in heaven is not the ultimate goal, and this statement needs some explanation. In practice, many (if not most) Buddhists would be only too happy to find themselves in heaven in their next rebirth, and almost all (both monks and laymen) make efforts to bring this about. However, Buddhists believe that heaven is only a proximate goal, and the final aim is to attain nirvana and put an end to rebirth altogether. There can even be a danger

49 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology

in being reborn in heaven – that one may become complacent and lose sight of the omnipresence of suffering and impermanence. It is thought that being insulated from suffering causes the gods to lose sight of the painful realities of life the Buddha drew attention to in the First Noble Truth (see Chapter Three), and to slacken their efforts to reach nirvana. For this reason the human world is thought preferable as a place of rebirth since it contains a better balance of pleasure and suffering. The human world is found in the fifth segment of thebhavacakra and is thought to be very difficult to attain. The great advantage of human existence is that it reminds us constantly of the realities of suffering and impermanence, and so keeps our minds focused on those factors which spurred the Buddha to attain enlightenment. Had he remained cosseted within the palace walls as a young prince (a situation analogous to that of the gods) he would never have found a permanent solution to life’s problems. Human beings, unlike animals, are also endowed with reason and free will, and are in position to use these faculties to understand Buddhist teachings and choose to follow the Noble Eightfold Path. While suffering certainly exists in human life, so does pleasure, such that the human realm offers a ‘middle way’ between the higher and lower realms which are either too pleasant (heaven) or too painful (hell). It is thus believed that suffering works like the grit in the oyster to produce the pearl of nirvana.

Karma In the cosmology set out above, karma is the mechanism that moves people around from one realm of rebirth to another. We could picture it as a kind of elevator that takes people up and down inside a building. Good deeds result in an upward movement and bad deeds in a downward one. In popular usage in the West karma is thought of simply as the good and bad things that happen to a person, like good and bad luck. However, this oversimplifies what for Buddhists is a complex of interrelated ideas which embraces both ethics and belief in rebirth, and which is summed up in the word saṃsāra (‘flowing on’). The doctrine of karma is concerned with the ethical implications of Dharma, or the Buddha’s teachings. Karma is concerned primarily with the moral dimension of those teachings and denotes primarily the consequences of moral behavior. For Buddhism, karma is thus neither random – like luck – nor a system of rewards and punishments meted out by God. Nor is it destiny or fate: instead it is best understood as a natural – if complex – sequence of causes and effects. In the Buddhist scholastic tradition known as Abhidharma it is classified (for example, Atthasālinī 2.360) as karma-niyama: this means that it is seen as just one aspect of the natural order, specifically as one function of the universal law of causation known as dependent origination (pratītya-samutpāda) which will be explained in Chapter Three.

50 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

The Three Spheres of Rebirth Buddhist cosmology often seems untidy and contradictory, and this is because it is made up of competing schemes which do not always integrate perfectly with one another. Different conceptions of the world developed in a random fashion in myths and legends, and Buddhism absorbed many popular ideas from folklore and local tradition. Alongside the scheme of the six realms of rebirth, for example, is found an ancient Indo-European conception of the world as divided into three layers – known variously as avacaras, dhātus or lokas – and probably based originally on the idea of earth, atmosphere, and sky. In this tripartite model the surface of the earth is the world of human beings, and above that are various atmospheric phenomena such as clouds, lightning and thunder, which became personified and regarded as divinities. Just as the earth’s atmosphere becomes more rarified in higher levels like the stratosphere, in the scheme of the three spheres matter becomes increasingly refined at the upper levels, eventually tapering off into realms which appear to consist of pure thought. The lowest and most earthly of the three spheres is known as the ‘sphere of sense-desires’ (kāmāvacara), and includes all of the realms up to the sixth heaven above the human world. Next is the ‘sphere of pure form’ (rūpāvacara), a rarefied spiritual space in which the gods perceive and communicate by a kind of telepathy. This extends up to level twenty- seven. Highest of all is the ‘sphere of formlessness’ (arūpāvacara), a state without material shape or form (rūpa) in which beings exist as pure mental energy. The gods in the four highest levels, those of the sphere of formlessness (arūpā­vacara), are thought to apprehend phenomena in four increasingly subtle ways: in the lowest (level twenty-eight) as if all that existed was infinite space; in the second (level twenty-nine) as if there were nothing but infinite consciousness; in the third (level thirty) as ‘nothingness’, or the idea that even consciousness has been transcended. After leaving behind even the thought of ‘nothingness’, there arises an ineffable state of mind known as ‘neither perception nor non-perception’ (level thirty-one). This is the summit of existence and the highest state in which anyone can be reborn. As already noted, Buddhist ideas about cosmology dovetail with its meditational theory, and the names of the two highest levels of rebirth (levels thirty and thirty-one) bear the same names as the two highest stages of meditation. Access to these places or states can thus be gained either by being reborn in them or by tuning into their ‘frequency’ through meditation. Here we see the close association between psychology and cosmology in Buddhist teachings.

51 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology

The literal meaning of the Sanskrit word karma is ‘action’, but karma as a religious concept is concerned not with just any actions but with actions of a particular kind. The Buddha defined karma by reference to moral choices and the acts consequent upon them. He stated ‘It is intention (cetanā), O monks, that I call karma; having willed one acts through body, speech, or mind’ (A.3.415). In this emphasis on intention the Buddha modified the traditional understanding of karma, which tended to see it as a product of ritual rather than moral acts. In a discussion with a follower of Jainism concerning which of the three modes of actions – body, speech or mind – is most reprehensible, the Jain states that bodily action has the greatest power to produce bad karma. The Buddha disagrees, stating that mental actions are the most potent of the three, thereby illustrating the innovative ethical perspective adopted by Buddhism. So how can we tell if an action is good or bad in terms of karma? From the way the Buddha defined it the main criterion seems to be one of intention or free choice. In Buddhist psychology there are said to be three basic kinds of motivation known as ‘roots’. These have two forms, good and bad, giving a total of six in all. Actions motivated by greed (rāga), hatred (dveṣa), and delusion (moha) are bad (akuśala) while actions motivated by their opposites – non-attachment, benevolence, and understanding – are good (kuśala). It will be recalled that these are the same as the ‘three poisons’ depicted at the center of the wheel of life (bhavacakra). Sometimes these terms go by different names, for instance ‘craving’ (rāga) is often called ‘attachment’ (lobha), but the different terminology is of little importance. What matters to a Buddhist is to ensure that his or her motivation is always of a wholesome kind, since this is the way that good karma is accumulated and progress to nirvana is made. Agriculture provides a familiar metaphor for karma in Buddhist sources, and creating karma is often likened to the planting of seeds in the earth. Some seeds are good and some are bad, and each bears sweet or bitter fruit at the appointed time. So it is with good and bad deeds. The karmic choices we make today will come to ‘maturation’ (vipāka) or bear ‘fruit’ (phala) tomorrow. Sometimes karma will bear fruit in the same lifetime, but other times it may manifest itself many lifetimes in the future. An example of how karma bears fruit in the present life is the way the features of an angry person become progressively distorted and ugly with time (M.3.203–6). Various aspects of the life to come are said to be karmically determined, including the family into which one is born, one’s caste or social standing, physical appearance, character and personality. Any karma accumulated but not yet spent is carried forward to the next life, or even many lifetimes ahead. In this sense individuals are said to be ‘heirs’ to their previous deeds (M. 3.203). The precise manner in which karma operates, and the mechanism that links given acts and their consequences, is a matter of debate among Buddhist schools. The Buddha simply described the process as profound, and as inconceivable (acinteyya) to anyone except a Buddha (A.4.77).

52 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

It is important to grasp that the doctrine of karma is not the same as determinism. This is the belief that everything that happens to a person is preordained and brought about by fate or destiny. The Buddha made a distinction between karma and deterministic fate (niyati) in this sense, and accepted that random events and accidents can happen in life. Not everything need have a karmic cause, and winning the lottery or catching a cold can be simply random events. In the Aṅguttara Nikāya (3.61), for instance, the Buddha disagrees with certain of his contemporaries who held the view that ‘whatever good, bad, or neutral feeling is experienced, all that is due to some previous action’, explaining that certain illnesses, for example, could be attributed to physical causes (the ‘humors’) rather than the effect of karma.

Merit Good karma is highly prized by Buddhists, and is often spoken of as ‘merit’ (puṇya, Pāli: puñña ). Its opposite, bad karma, is referred to as ‘demerit’ or pāpa. A good deal of effort is put into acquiring the former and avoiding the latter. The purpose of acquiring merit is to enjoy happiness in this life and to secure a good rebirth, ideally as a god in one of the heavens. Some Buddhists think of merit as if it were a commodity, like money in a bank account which can be earned and spent. Some even go to the extreme of carrying a notebook in which they record their good and bad deeds and total up their ‘balance’ every day! This materialistic conception of merit is not one the orthodox teachings would support, since the motivation behind it seems to be largely a selfish one. If a person is motivated to do good deeds simply for personal gain, then one could say the underlying motivation is actually greed, and accordingly not likely to generate much merit. In practice in most cases of this kind the motivation is probably a mixed one, partly selfish and partly altruistic, so

Merit transference Many Buddhists believe that merit can be transferred from one person to another, just like donations can be made to charity. Many rituals and good deeds are preceded by a dedication to the effect that any merit that arises from the act should be directed towards a named recipient or group. This practice of ‘merit trans­ference’ has the happy result that instead of one’s own karmic balance being depleted, as it would in the case of money, it increases as a result of the generous motivation in sharing. It is doubtful to what extent there is canonical authority for notions of this kind, although at least the motivation to share one’s merit in a spirit of generosity is karmically wholesome and would lead to the formation of a generous and benevolent character.

53 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology a limited amount of merit may be produced, but such behavior cannot be said to be acting in accordance with the spirit of Buddhist teachings. In particular it misses the important point that merit is produced as a by-product of doing what is right and should not be sought as an end in itself. A very common way to earn merit, particularly for the laity, is by supporting and making donations and offerings to thesangha or order of monks. This can be done on a daily basis by placing food in the bowls of monks as they pass on their alms round, by providing robes for the monks at the annual Kaṭhina ceremony held at the end of the rainy-season retreat, by listening to sermons and attending religious services, and by donating funds for the upkeep of monasteries and temples. Merit can even be made by congratulating other donors and empathetically rejoicing (anumodanā) in their generosity.

Western perspectives We have explained Buddhist ideas about karma and rebirth at the start of the book because these notions are often puzzling to Western readers who are exposed to different cultural presuppositions about time and history, as alluded to earlier. In particular, many questions often arise concerning the coherency of such notions. For example, it might be asked why, if we are all reborn, do so few people remember previous lives? In part this may have to do with the way we are brought up and taught to think in certain ways. In societies where there is no supporting framework for a belief in reincarnation, such as in the West, memories of previous lives may simply go unrecognized or unacknowledged. When such memories are reported by children they are commonly dismissed by teachers and parents as the product of an overactive imagination. Again, individuals may experience peer-pressure and be unwilling to risk ridicule by reporting experiences that society (and in particular the scientific establishment) does not accept. There is, however, a growing body of evidence from individuals who claim to recall previous lives, many of which it is difficult to account for unless the memories are genuine. It must be admitted, however, that vivid and detailed recollections of past lives are rare, even in cultures like India and Tibet where rebirth is accepted. The Dalai Lama, for instance, the leader of Tibet’s Buddhists, does not claim to recall his previous life in any detail. One explanation sometimes given for this is that death and rebirth are traumatic experiences which tend to erase almost all memories from the upper levels of the mind. The only way to recover them subsequently is by entering altered states of consciousness such as the kind induced by meditation or hypnosis, or to be born with a particular aptitude or gift of recall. However, Buddhists do not regard such questions as of great importance: in their view what matters is not speculation about the past but doing good deeds in the present.

54 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

There is also often curiosity among Western students of Buddhism as to how reincarnation can be squared with population statistics, and, in particular, why the earth does not fill up with all the people who die and are reborn. Once again this question is based on certain anthropocentric assumptions about the nature of the cosmos (for example, that there is only one planet in the universe where people live), and overlooks the nfact that i each world-system there is thought to be constant transit between the realms of the gods, humans, asuras, animals, ghosts and the hells. Is belief in the six realms an article of faith for Buddhists, and do all Buddhists believe in the possibility of being reborn as an animal? Buddhism has very few dogmas, and the traditional worldview described above is not something in which Buddhists are required to believe. Some may believe in the literal truth of the scriptures (just as some Christians believe in creationism) while other may believe in more modern theories (as other Christians believe in evolution). Although most Buddhists – and in particular those from Asian countries – do accept the traditional teachings, not all do. In particular, many Western Buddhists tend to reject the more ‘medieval’ elements of the traditional scheme and replace them with notions more congenial to the modern age, perhaps interpreting the six realms as referring to other dimensions of existence, levels of reality, parallel worlds, or simply states of mind. Indeed, some contemporary Buddhists reject the idea of rebirth altogether, although in doing so they seem to cast aside a large body of traditional belief without having much to put in its place. According to the scriptures, the recollection of his own previous lives, and af vision o how other people die and are reborn in accordance with their karma, both formed a key part of the Buddha’s enlightenment experience as he sat under the Bodhi tree, as we shall see in the next chapter. It is hard to see how that aspect of the experience can be disentangled from the rest of his ‘awakening’, and if the texts are mistaken about his vision of previous lives, how can we have faith in their claim that the Buddha gained enlightenment? To reject the belief in rebirth, accordingly, seems to throw the baby out with the bathwater. For most Buddhists, belief in a continued personal existence in some form or other after deatho seems t remain an important part of their understanding of Buddhist teachings. So is the aim for Buddhists to move from one life to another in an upward trajectory experiencing greater happiness each time round? In practice this does seem to be a goal many Buddhists – both monks and laymen – would be happy to achieve, but it is not the final solution to suffering that the Buddha left home to seek. As we shall see, the Buddha was dissatisfied with the temporary bliss he attained through meditation and would accept nothing less than a permanent solution to the problem of human suffering. This is because however much good karma one accumulates, it is finite and will eventually expire, not unlike the energy of a spacecraft in a decaying orbit. Sooner or later the good karma that results in a

55 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Karma and cosmology heavenly rebirth will run its course and even the gods will die and be reborn. The solution the Buddha proclaimed was that the answer to the problem of suffering does not lie in a better rebirth in the cycle of reincarnation (saṃsāra), and that only nirvana offers a final solution.

Key points you need to know •• The Indus Valley civilization was the earliest civilization in India and flourished between 2,500 and 1200 bce •• Aryan immigrants established the Vedic civilization following their arrival in India in the middle of the second millennium. •• Buddhism emerged from a dissident social movement composed of wanderers (parivrājakas) who rejected the orthodox beliefs of the later Vedic tradition known as Brahmanism. •• Buddhists believe the universe is infinite in space and time, and undergoes periodic cycles of evolution and destruction known as kalpas. •• Time is conceived of as cyclic rather than linear. Individuals live over and over in the endless cycle of rebirth known as saṃsāra. •• There are six realms of rebirth: the gods, asuras, humans, animals, hungry ghosts, and in hell. None of these is permanent. •• Movement between the six realms of rebirth is determined by karma – the good and bad deeds a person performs in the course of a lifetime. •• The only way to escape from saṃsāra is by attaining nirvana. This is the ultimate goal of all Buddhists.

Discussion questions 1. What role did the Mother Goddess and yoga play in the religion of the Indus Valley? 2. What was innovative about the teachings of the Upaniṣads? 3. Describe the pattern of social change that was taking place in the Buddha’s day. 4. How does Buddhism understand the nature of the cosmos with reference to a) time and b) space? 5. What are the ‘Six Realms of Rebirth’ and how are they described in Buddhist teachings? 6. Explain the main features of karma as understood in Buddhism.

56 FoundationsCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Further reading Kloetzli, Randy. Buddhist Cosmology: From Single World System to Pure Land: Science and Theology in the Images of Motion and Light. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1983. McGovern, William Montgomery. A Manual of Buddhist Philosophy: Cosmology. Lucknow, India: Oriental Reprinters, 1976. Obeyesekere, Gananath. Imagining Karma: Ethical Transformation in Amerindian, Buddhist and Greek Rebirth (Comparative Studies in Religion & Society) . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002. O’Flaherty, Wendy Doniger. Karma and Rebirth in Classical Indian Traditions. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1980. Reichenbach, Bruce R. The Law Of Karma: A Philosophical Study. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press, 1990. Reynolds, Frank and Mani B. Reynolds. Three Worlds according to King Ruang: A Thai Buddhist Cosmology. Berkeley, CA: Asian Humanities Press, 1982. Sadakata, Akira. Buddhist Cosmology: Philosophy and Origins. 1st English ed. Tokyo: Kosei Publishing Company, 1997. Sankaranarayan, Kalpakam, Kazunobo Matsudu, and Motohiro Yoritomi. Lokaprajñapti: a Critical Exposition of Buddhist Cosmology. Mumbai: Somaiya Publications, 2002. Sunthorn, Na-Rangsi. The Buddhist Concepts o f Karma and Rebirth. Bangkok: Mahamakut Rajavidyalaya Press, 1976.

57 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

1 Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

In this chapter The Āryan heritage produces an indelible imprint on the character of Hinduism, and is particularly evident in Vedic religious literature, beliefs, and practices. Various genres of Vedic religious texts, such as the hymn collections, ritual manuals, and works of speculative philosophy are explored here, as are works on health and astrology. The chapter presents close examinations of certain Vedic rituals, some of which are humanity’s oldest enduring rites. It also offers characterizations of important Vedic deities. The crucially significant conception of the Vedic Absolute, or the One, is introduced, as is its relationship to the pervasive notion of sacrifice. This chapter also offers a comprehensive introduction to Sanskrit, the sacred language of Hinduism, offering a brief survey of its origins before discussing the work of some of its brilliant grammarians. Because grammar, language and sacred utterance (mantra) figure less strongly in many other religious traditions, these topics tend to be understudied or even overlooked in introductory texts on Hinduism. This is a serious oversight, because their functions in Hindu religion are extremely significant. We will discuss the structure of the Sanskrit alphabet and offer pronunciation guidelines. These serve as a basis for a discussion of some Hindu linguistic theories and provides an indispensable foundation for understanding the crucially important roles of sonic theologies in virtually all dimensions of Hindu practice.

Main topics covered •• The Vedic saṃhitās •• Vedic deities •• Ṛṭa and cosmic order •• Thebrāhmaṇas •• Vedic rituals ◦◦ Case Study: Theaśvamedha ◦◦ Case Study: Theagnicayana

58 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

•• Soma •• The Āraṇyakas •• The Upaniṣads •• Ātman and Brahman •• Śruti and smṛti •• Other Vedic literature ◦◦ Astrology ◦◦ Ayurveda •• The Sanskrit language •• A brief history of Sanskrit •• Structure of the Sanskrit alphabet •• Pāṇinī and the Aṣṭādhyāyī •• Thesphoṭa theory of language •• Mantra and the theology of sound

The Vedic saṃhitās The most highly regarded literary works of the Āryans are hymns in praise ṛg( ) of various deities. Many of these hymns were chanted during a New Year festival centered on a ritual to prepare, offer, and imbibe a sacred beverage, Soma. The oldest collection (saṃhitā) is the Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā, which consists of over 1000 hymns arranged in ten books known as maṇḍalas. Scholars who have scrutinized this collection surmise that the first and last of thesemaṇḍalas were among the last to be added to the collection. So, despite the antiquity of the Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā, there appear to be discernable stages in its compilation. The exact dates of its composition are still debated; some proponents postulate dates as early as 5000 bce or even earlier, whereas very conservative scholarly estimates suggest that the Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā reached its final form by about 300 bce. A prevailing number of estimates suggest a date of about 1000 bce. There are Hittite-Mitanni treaty tablets from the region of modern Iraq, dated at about 1400 bce, which mention the Vedic gods Indra, Mitra, and Varuṇa, suggesting that portions of the Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā were composed at about the same time. In the ensuing centuries two other Saṃhitās were produced. These were theSāma Veda Saṃhitā and the Yajur Veda Saṃhita, which together with the Ṛg Veda constituted early orthodox Āryan scripture. TheSāma Veda mostly contains verses from the Ṛg Veda and presents these in a form to be chanted (sāman) by udgātṛs, a special class of priests, during the sacrificial offerings of Soma (a sacred plant) in Vedic rituals. TheYajur Veda consists of verse prayers (yajus), also mostly drawn from the Ṛg Veda, to be learned by adhvaryus, priests who performed the main features of Vedic rituals, such as the construction of the fire- altars, and so on. It also contains prose instructions on how to perform rituals such as the horse-sacrifice. TheYajur Veda Saṃhitā exists in two recensions, popularly

59 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language known as the Black and the White Yajur Vedas. TheBlack Yajur Veda or Taittirīya Saṃhitā is challenging to decipher because of the arrangement of its contents. By contrast, the White Yajur Veda or Vājasaneyi Saṃhitā, which contains essentially the same material, is more accessible in its structure. An examination of these three Vedic Saṃhitās reveals a progressive development in Vedic ritual art, with greater specialization on the part of priests (e.g., udgātṛ, adhvaryu) entrusted with particular duties in the performance of rites. Geographical references suggest a movement from the regions around the Indus to the Gaṅgā river basin, leading to postulations that the Āryans migrated from the northwest of the Indian peninsula to the east and south. These movements resulted in interactions with the local cultures whose religious beliefs and styles were partially assimilated into the compositions of the Saṃhitās and the rituals that accompanied them. The Saṃhitās are composed in verse in an archaic language known as Vedic Sanskrit to distinguish it from subsequent forms of the Sanskrit language that comply with more accessible grammatical structures. The fourthV edic Saṃhitā, the Atharva Veda, was accepted into the orthodox Āryan canon several centuries later. There is no mention of it in certain early authoritative textual sources, such as the Laws of Manu, or the Buddhist Jātakas, which refer to the triad of the Ṛg, Sama, and Yajur Vedas. The Atharva Veda is markedly different from this triad. Although about a sixth of its hymns are common to theṚg Veda Saṃhitā, the Atharva Veda contains hundreds of original hymns dealing with different themes, which are often categorized as benevolent or malevolent. Within the beneficial class are spells and chants for the cure of illnesses, for the acquisition and retention of fertility and virility, and even for success in securing a lover. Within the malevolent category are incantations and formulae to bring harm to others. The Atharva Veda Saṃhitā reveals ancient techniques of medicinal practice, warfare, and ritual, as well as astrological knowledge and philosophical speculation. Indeed, many of its prayers and accompanying rites may derive from non-Āryan and pre-Āryan sources, and it appears that the astrological and medicinal concerns of the Atharva Veda priestly lineages were initially not regarded favorably by the Āryan priesthood. Thus theA tharva Veda may have been initially resisted, and only included as the fourth canonical Saṃhitā later in time. However, many of its hymns suggest an origin as early, if not earlier, than the other three hymn collections. Contemporary scholarly studies are beginning to note compelling continuities between the religious concerns voiced in the Atharva Veda and the beliefs and practices of Tantra, whose literature emerges more than a thousand years later.

Vedic deities Of the various deities to whom hymns are addressed in the Ṛg Veda Saṃhitā, Agni (Fire) and Indra (God of Storms and Lightning) each receive about 200 hymns,

60 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

suggesting their high status among the gods of the Āryan pantheon. There are hymns to Sūrya (the Sun), Dyaus-pitṛ (God of the Heavens), Vāyu (the Wind), and Varuṇa (God of the Waters), and even to Soma (a sacred plant and the intoxicating drink prepared from it). The pantheon ofV edic deities is mostly populated by male gods, but there are a few hymns to such goddesses as Uṣas (the Dawn), Rātrī (the Night), and Pṛthivī (the Earth). Scholars conjecture that the prevalence of male deities, some of whom, like Indra, have warrior natures, reveals a patriarchal social structure among the Āryans. Others suggest that because goddesses form a sizeable part of current Hindu worship, quite in contrast to their representation in the Saṃhitās and other early Vedic literature, these feminine deities may have figured significantly in non-Āryan worship traditions, which progressively influenced the dominating Āryan culture. Through early studies of the deities in the Vedic pantheon, influential Indologists such as Max Müller speculated on the origin of religion itself. The close relationship between the Vedic deities and forces of nature led Müller to suggest that human beings, in awe of natural phenomena such as the sun and lightning, and even such purely abstract qualities as “brilliance,” began to attribute anthropomorphic (i.e., resembling the human form) qualities to these, and subsequently to envision divine actors behind the manifestation of these powers. So the Ṛg Vedic linguistic term dyaus, rendered by Müller as “shining” or “radiant,” was eventually identified with a particular deity, Dyaus-Pitṛ. In fact, Müller suggested that the cognate words in Indo- European languages, such as deva, deus, theos (general terms for “god”), eventually became particularized into specific gods such as Zeus, Dyaus-Pitṛ, and Jupiter. Thus Müller argued it was a “disease of language” that led human beings to mistake words originally used for abstract principles and reify them (i.e., concretize an abstraction) into imagined realities. Most scholars acknowledge the close linguistic relationship between the names for Vedic deities such as Dyaus-Pitṛ and those of the western Indo-European gods, such as Zeus and Jupiter, or between Varuṇa and Uranus, which suggests common socio-cultural origins. However, theorizing on the origin of religion has fallen out of favor in the last century, because there is little evidence to evaluate the truth behind such speculations.

Ṛta and the cosmic order Among the concepts encountered in Vedic literature is ṛta, which may be translated as “the right way,” and is often rendered as “the cosmic order.” It reveals that Āryan civilization was aware of an overarching orderliness to the workings of the cosmos, evident in the movement of the heavenly bodies, the seasonal changes, and the course of human life. One discerns a sense of acceptance of an inexorable principle, akin to “Fate” in its controlling power, but different in that it was not necessarily capricious, but orderly. Ṛta controlled the way plants grew, rivers flowed, and persons developed.

61 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language

In time, it becomes apparent that alignment with this cosmic order is regarded as beneficial, whereas to be in discord with it is harmful. The concept ofṛta eventually disappeared from usage, and was taken up by the term dharma. Dharma developed into a notion of individual human and social actions in relationship with the overarching cosmic order. Dharmic action is in accord with ṛta; undharmic action is not. Religious authorities, regarded as having intuited the nature of this orderly “course of things,” which was now seen as encapsulating a divine, moral order, began to prescribe how individuals should behave through the course of their lives in order to follow the way of religious righteousness.

The brāhmaṇas A genre of texts next emerged that primarily dealt with the power (brahman) within the recitation of sacred verses (mantra), and with the ritual practices of the priestly class (brāhmaṇa; Brahmin in this text, to minimize confusion). The Brāhmaṇas, as these texts are called, are composed in Vedic Sanskrit prose, and extol the virtues of sacrificial rites known asyajña . They contain commentaries on hymns from the Vedic Saṃhitās, and describe a variety of rituals in detail. They also offer interpretations of aspects of ritual practice, and explanations for their origins. The interpretations often strive to demonstrate parallels between three realms: the macrocosm, which is the abode of the gods, the mesocosm, which is society and the worldly realm, and the microcosm of individual human life and ritual action. Hence, the fire sticks that are rubbed together to kindle the sacrificial fire are equated with the sexual union between a Vedic god and goddess, and the clarified butter used to stoke the fire is likened to the rain, to semen, and to the divine child produced by their sexual union. The content of these texts, although once dismissed as being of little merit, is attracting renewed attention by some scholars engaged in ritual studies.

Vedic rituals (yajña) The term originally used forV edic sacrifices isyajña , and the patron who commissioned such a rite is the yajamāna. Nowadays, it is much more common to hear the term homa used for such Vedic-styled rituals of offerings into the fire. The Brāhmaṇa literature begins to emphasize yajña even more than the gods to whom the offerings are made, insinuating that it isyajña that gives the gods their powers, or that it is because the gods themselves performed yajña that they gained prestige. Thus theV edic gods are seen as dependent on the performance of yajña, and in turn on the ritual acts of the priests who are capable of conducting the rites. The Vedic deity Bṛhaspati, regarded as the high priest and wise spiritual preceptor to the gods themselves, served as a divine model for the earthly members of the priestly class, who presided at yajñas. The performance ofyajñas was deemed vital

62 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

Figure 1.1 Brahmins chant Vedic verses and make offerings as a Brahmin patron pours ghee into the flames during this modernhoma ritual, derived from ancient yajña procedures

for anyone desiring entry into heaven. Yajñas were thought to maintain the very order of the cosmos by providing nourishment for the gods. The gods consumed the essence of the offerings that were made into the fire, requiring these offerings as their sustenance. What was left behind were the empowering consecrated remnants of the offered food that the gods had tasted. Although the term “sacrifice” often conjures up images of animal offerings, Vedicyajñas , and certainly contemporary homa rites, rarely involve offerings of flesh and blood. Milk, clarified butter or ghee, yogurt, rice or other grains and pulses, and even parts of sacred plants such the datura fruit, wood-apple leaves (bilva patra), or Soma, might be offered into the sacred fire. The most ancient types of yajña were rituals performed for the benefit of the social or cosmic good. Collectively known as śrauta rites, they involved the use of three sacred fires. The patron (yajamāna) of these rites was typically a king, to whom particular benefits of the ritual would accrue. However, śrauta rites were supposed to be performed in accord with the rhythms of the natural world, for instance, during seasonal changes, in accord with lunar cycles, or even at junctures of the day. By commissioning priests and staging these śrauta rites, some of which were on an exceptionally grandiose scale, the ruler demonstrated his own largesse, secured the harmonious workings of the cosmos, and obtained the beneficial fruits of the

63 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language sacrifice. These fruits might include prosperity of the kingdom, fertility of his lineage and of the land, or revitalization of his own power. While the earlier pattern of yajña, as suggested in the hymns of the Vedic Saṃhitas, appeared to reiterate events of a cosmic battle between gods and titans, order and chaos, as exemplified by the warrior-god Indra’s mythic defeat of Vṛtra, the Brāhmaṇas emphasize the science of ritual itself. The timely performance of these yajñas, with exactitude in adhering to the system of rules of ritual action, was eventually perceived as essential for the proper functioning of the cosmos. Thus human beings, through the indispensable mediation of the Brahmin priests, were thought to have substantial control over their world. Yajñas that were prescribed for individuals, which involved the use of a single sacred fire, were known asgṛhya or household rites. The simplest of these could be performed by the householders of the upper classes themselves. In time, the number of prescribed rituals increased, as did the belief that erroneous performance could result in dangerous consequences for the yajamāna. The responsibility for the correct performance of yajñas flowed in the direction of the priestly classes, as did those materials offered during the rite that were not consumed in the sacrificial fire. It became commonly understood that without the dakṣiṇā, the monetary or material payment for services provided, even the spiritual benefit would go to the priest(s) who performed the rite, rather than to the patron. Dakṣiṇā was regarded as the “spouse” of yajñā, and an indispensable exchange payment to bring about the transfer of spiritual merit from the ritualist to the patron.

Case study: The aśvamedha One of the grandest of all śrauta yajñas was the aśvamedha, or horse sacrifice. Only the wealthiest and most powerful of kings could afford to commission thisyajña because it was financially costly and politically provocative. The ritual was designed primarily to extend and consolidate a king’s dominion, as well as to obtain offspring. In the Rāmāyaṇa, a Hindu epic of a later period, King Daśaratha performs an aśvamedha that leads to the birth of Rāma, the hero of the tale. The horse sacrifice would begin with the selection from the king’s stable of his finest stallion, which would undergo a three-day rite of purification and consecration. Marked with an insignia of the king, the stallion would then be released to roam freely for an entire year. It would be followed by an entourage of the king’s warriors. If the horse wandered into a neighboring monarch’s territory it set the stage for potential conflict. If that ruler allowed the horse free access to his lands, he essentially submitted to the stallion’s owner. However, if he seized the animal for himself, he would initiate a battle for sovereignty over his own land. If the horse’s wandering progressed smoothly, the stallion of the victorious emperor would return to the capital at the end of the year.

64 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

In accord with its concerns for fertility, the chief queen played a central role in the concluding rites, over which several priests presided. The king would cleanse himself by gargling, and shaving his beard and head. Together with the chief queen, he would perform an all-night vigil before a sacred fire on the night of the new moon. The next day, the horse would be adorned and anointed, while a variety of animals were sacrificed. Among these was the dog, a symbolic antagonist of the horse, and thus a symbol of the king’s enemies. The chief officiating priest, the horse, and the king would be identified with theV edic creator deity, Brahmā Prajāpati. Rice, representing the stallion’s virile semen, would also be cooked in the rite. It was equated with the gold given by the king, who was the patron of the rite, to the priests. Finally the horse would be “quieted,” although its vital breaths would be “restored.” Some scholars suggest that this meant the animal was suffocated. In keeping with the rite’s concerns with fertility, the chief queen would lie beside the horse, who symbolized the king, be covered with a cloth, and enact a mock copulation. The horse would subsequently be dismembered, offered into the sacrificial fire, and portions of its flesh would be consumed by the participants. The consumption of the cooked rice was believed to distribute the stallion’s virility among Prajāpati, the priests, and the king. In a description of the horse sacrifice in a version of theRāmāyaṇa epic, portions of the rice are consumed by the chief queen and king Daśaratha’s next two chief wives, all of whom subsequently bear children. The performance of 100aśvamedhas was reputed to grant to a human ruler the throne of Indra, king of the gods. However, because the rite took over a year to perform, this was hardly possible. There are mythic tales of gods themselves, such as Brahmā, and kings, such as Yudhiṣṭhira of the Mahābhārata epic, having performed the aśvamedha. Several historical kings are also known to have performed the rite. Among these was Samudragupta of the Gupta dynasty, who cast coins commemorating the event. In the city of Banāras, a renowned spot (ghāt) on the banks of the river Gaṅgā bears the name Daśāśvamedha Ghat, because a local royal dynasty reputedly performed ten (daśa) aśvamedhas there. A recent performance of the rite was by Sawai Jai Singh II, a king of Jaipur in the eighteenth century. A repeating motif in Hindu sacrifice is based on the notion that the creation is the result of the dismemberment of the creator deity Prajāpati. By building the sacrificial altar and making offerings into it, Prajāpati, and the creation itself are temporarily reconstituted and restored.

Case study: The agnicayana Another example of Vedic yajña is the agnicayana, perhaps humanity’s oldest surviving religious ritual. The Nambudiri Brahmin community from the state of Kerala has maintained knowledge of ancient Vedic traditions with little change. However, because the agnicayana was a costly rite it was rarely performed by them,

65 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language and even if conducted, had not been witnessed by outsiders. A detailed study of this ritual was conducted by renowned Indologists who commissioned the rite in 1975. It was filmed by a visual anthropologist, photographed, and studied, providing us with a remarkable record of the procedure. Since the 1975 performance, a few others have been commissioned, suggesting a revival and endurance of this ancient rite. An elaborate 12-day ritual, the agnicayana is typically commissioned by a patron in order to attain vitality, offspring, or even immortality. It requires the ministrations of 17 priests and many months of preparation. It is performed in the fortnight between the new and full moon in spring. The ritual takes place in a temporary enclosure built according to prescribed specifications where measurements are related to various dimensions of the human body. The ritual enclosure is typically a thatched roof supported by wooden posts. A stick, measuring from the toes to the tips of the middle fingers of the patron’s upstretched arms, raised as if in prayer, serves as the main length against which all other measurements are made. The ritual site is a reconstruction of the cosmos itself, whose dimensions are mirrored in that of the human microcosm. One sees, in this ancient rite, early applications of the astronomical sciences in the necessary timings of each event, of mathematics, in its computations and structural geometries, and of the physical sciences in the casting of bricks, the making of fire, and the offering of oblations. One sees applications of culinary art in the production of the Soma sacrifice and other oblations into the fire, as well as sonic science in the recitation of Vedic chants with their varied metrical forms. Theagnicayana weaves together an elaborate tapestry, with threads of technological knowledge transmitted from antiquity, in the service of a vision of the world that integrates human beings (e.g., the patron) with the broader cosmic reality, through the agency of indispensable priestly functionaries who are custodians of that arcane knowledge. The centerpiece of the agnicayana is an elaborate brick altar (vedi) fashioned from over 1000 bricks placed in five layers and laid out in the shape of a bird. It is located in the Great Altar (mahāvedi) section of the sacred enclosure while the other section holds the domestic altars and fire pits. This domestic section represents the home of the patron (yajamāna) who must preside over the ritual with his wife, who holds a parasol to keep her partially concealed from the view of onlookers. Only a Brahmin who has maintained the tradition of keeping three domestic fires burning in his household is entitled to commission the agnicayana, the “piling up of fire” rite. The ritual process in summary is as follows. On the first day of the rite, the patron and priests enter the enclosure carrying three fires. Clay pots are constructed, an animal sacrifice is traditionally performed for the god Vāyu (the Wind), and fire, generated through churning a wooden shaft in a wood receptacle, is placed in one of the pots. The patron undergoes some purification rites and takes a vow of silence for the duration of the ritual, except for the utterance of various prayers. A sacrificial

66 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

pole is prepared in the domestic section, while the dimensions and placement of the Great Altar are laid out in their appropriate place. Construction of the bird-shaped Great Altar begins on the fourth day, with the second, third and fourth layers of bricks laid on successive days. The patron voices a prayer that each of the bricks be transformed to cattle to enhance his wealth. The construction of the altar reiterates the reconstitution of the divided creator deity Prajāpati. The fifth and final layer is positioned on the eighth day. Appropriate Vedic hymns are chanted throughout the ritual by the priests specialized for the task. Oblations of water and ghee are made and one of the old domestic altars is replaced with a new one. An animal sacrifice is performed. Continuous rites follow from the tenth to the twelfth day. These include the pressing of the stalks of the sacred Soma plant to produce a consciousness-altering beverage. Hymns are chanted in honor of the divine plant. At various points in the ritual, the Soma is consumed by the priests and patron, or offered into the fire. The gods, including Indra, are invited to participate in the oblations. Eleven more animals are sacrificed. In the 1975 enactment of the ritual, non-animal substitutes were used for what would typically have been goat sacrifices. At the conclusion of the rite, the patron and his wife take a purifying bath and don new clothes. Another animal is sacrificed and the ritual enclosure is set ablaze. The patron departs with fire to install in his domestic altars which have been rejuvenated in the process. Thereafter, he will be expected to perform the domestic agnihotra ritual daily, for the remainder of his life. The agnihotra is a simple ritual to be performed at sunrise and sunset in which offerings of rice and ghee are made into a fire fuelled by dried cow dung. Prayers to Sūrya (the Sun), Prajāpati, and Agni (Fire) are uttered during the rite.

Soma The identity of the sacred Soma plant continues to puzzle scholars. V edic descriptions of its preparation and properties suggest that it had intoxicating and possibly even hallucinogenic capacities, and differed from mere alcoholic beverages. The golden-hued liquid was obtained by pressing Soma between stones. There are over a hundred Vedic hymns in praise of Soma, and they tell that the gods Indra and Agni drink it in large quantities. The mycologist R. GordonW asson made a compelling case that Soma was likely the “fly agaric” mushroom,Amanita Muscaria. This fungus has been used by Siberian shamans in various cultures to induce altered states of consciousness. Recent discoveries of ephedra, and other plant substances, in jars at sites of the ancient Zoroastrian haoma ritual, which parallels the Vedic Soma rite, have led other scholars to consider that these plants might have been Soma. However, in both India and Persia, quite an assortment of plants have been substituted for whatever might have been the original Soma/haoma.

67 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language

The Āraṇyakas The Āraṇyakas are a loosely defined genre of texts that bridge the concerns of the Brāhmaṇas and those of the Upaniṣads. They are even sometimes classified within those categories. Thus theBṛhadāraṇyaka , which is attached to the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa, is regarded as an Upaniṣad. Like the Brāhmaṇas, the Āraṇyakas, or wilderness (āraṇya) texts, concern themselves with sacrificial rituals of offerings into sacred fires, and like the Upaniṣads, endorse the value of meditative practices. The Aitareya Āraṇyaka even designates itself as an Upaniṣad. As their name suggests, the Āraṇyakas uphold the value of retreating beyond the outskirts of the village to study their teachings. In fact, their content is held to be dangerous and to be studied in secret while adhering to an ascetic lifestyle. As such, they are eventually associated with the forest-dweller (vanaprastha) stage of life prescribed by orthodoxy. However, the concerns of the texts may actually derive from the ritual practices of nomadic warriors who herded cattle and dwelt apart from village communities. The Āraṇyakas emphasize symbolic speculation on the nature of rituals rather than exclusive attention to the performance of the rite itself, and thus, although they are primarily concerned with Brāhmaṇa-like ritual action, are clear forerunners of the speculative spirit encountered in the Upaniṣads.

The Upaniṣads The oldest Upaniṣads, which may have been composed as early as the eighth century bce, are appended to the Āraṇyakas or partially embedded within them. There are as many as 18 principal Upaniṣads – “principal” because they are appended to the previously mentioned genres of Vedic literature, namely the Vedic Saṃhitās, the Brāhmaṇas, and the Araṇyakas. Of these 18, the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaṇisad (attached to the White Yajur Veda) and the Chāndogya Upaniṣad (attached to the Sāma Veda) are the earliest, and composed in Vedic Sanskrit prose. The expressionV edānta is often used when referring to the Upaniṣads and their teachings, because they form “the end or concluding sections (anta) of revealed Vedic literature.” Other principal Upaniṣads include the Īśa, Śvetāśvatara, Kena, Kaṭha, Jābāla, and Māṇḍukya Upaniṣads. They appear to have been composed in subsequent centuries, some in verse, and others in classical Sanskrit prose. There are over a hundred other “lesser Upaniṣads,” some of which were composed only a few hundred years ago. These reflect the concerns of specific philosophical schools, such as those of Sāṅkhya or Yoga, or have sectarian orientations towards particular deities, such as Śiva or Viṣṇu. Actually, tradition holds that any text with secret teachings is an Upaniṣad, but scholars classify them according to their style and thematic content. The term upaniṣad is said to derive from the classic image of a student sitting (ṣad) down (ni) beside (upa) a spiritual mentor. The format of many of the Upaniṣads reflects this

68 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

Figure 1.2 In the classic Upaniṣadic image of the student sitting next to the teacher, a father recites from a Sanskrit text teaching his son the value of such learning terminology because they are framed as conversations between a disciple (śiṣya) and teacher (guru). Although there are considerable variations in the content of the Upaniṣads, they are generally classified as texts of speculative philosophy, and become a cornerstone of the Indian philosophical tradition that subsequently develops. The primary concern of the Upaniṣads is with the nature of Absolute Reality (Brahman), the true nature of the individual self (ātman), and the relationship between Brahman and Ātman. This focus reflects a trend prefigured in the Āraṇyakas, to uncover an underlying principle of coherence that unifies the apparent diversity of the created world. TheBṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, which bridges the two genres of Āraṇyaka and Upaniṣad, exemplifies this in its cosmological interpretation of the Vedic horse sacrifice aśvamedha( ). What is significant is not the performance of the rite, but an intuitive grasp of underlying principles and metaphysical connections. These could include relationships between specific features in the realm of human ritual action and the fullness of the universe. For instance, the Upaniṣadic sage proclaims that Dawn itself, both the goddess in Vedic myth and the natural phenomenon, is the head of the sacrificial horse. So, too, the Sun is the horse’s eye; the wind, his breath; the sacrificial fire, his open mouth; the seasons, his limbs; the stars, his bones; plants and trees, his hair, and so on. When the horse shakes himself, there is thunder; when he urinates, it rains; and Speech itself is his voice (Bṛhadāranyaka Upaniṣad I.1.1). Thus the pantheon of Vedic deities, and their corresponding natural phenomena,

69 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language such as dawn and the sun, are united and symbolically interpreted as parts of a unity. In this case that unity is the sacrifice, again understood as a whole, comprising both the sacrificial offering( i.e., the horse and his faculties) and the sacrificial fire (I.2.7). The implication is that what appears to unskilled eyes as merely the immolation of an animal, to those who have the insight to recognize it, is “verily” (vai) the revelation of a mystery. A hidden power, the veritable source of all “selves” in creation, took up form in the particular manifestation of the sacrificial animal. In the act of sacrifice, the particular form of the hidden power is released, and reunited with itself. Those who realize this truth become one with that power and transcend the realms of life and death. Generally, the Upaniṣadic sages refer to that unseen power, principle, or reality as Brahman or the Self (ātman).

Ātman and Brahman The word brahman originally referred to a hallowed power within the sacred utterances (mantra) of the Vedic ṛṣis, but by the time of the Upaniṣads was used to signify ultimate reality itself. This is not to say that the Upaniṣads as a whole are consistent in the way they depict Brahman. Vedānta philosophy, for instance, which is rooted in interpreting the teachings of the Upaniṣads, has produced an assortment of schools that reflect the variations in Upaniṣadic depictions of the nature of Brahman. Brahman can represent the underlying essence of the material world. Brahman is mostly unseen, hidden to the senses, and even to rational thought. The Upaniṣads depict Brahman as supreme (parā-brahman), and it is also designated as Nirguṇa Brahman (Brahman beyond attributes) and as Saguṇa Brahman (Brahman that can be characterized). Brahman is consistently identified as intrinsically connected to the innermost being of all things in existence, including our “selves.” Thus the Self (ātman) is often used as a synonym for Brahman, with which it is identified. In theKatha Upaniṣad, for example, the youth Naciketas consults the Lord of Death, Yama, on the question of whether anything endures beyond the death of one’s body. Yama delivers a teaching on Brahman and Ātman, pointing out that the Supreme Lord is the innermost Self (ātman) of all beings, who although one, appears to have manifold forms. Only the wise, who recognize the Supreme Lord (i.e., Brahman) within themselves, attain eternal joy (Katha Upaniṣad II.ii.12). TheB ṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad (I.4.10) also presents this perspective when it points out that whoever knows “I am Brahman” (aham brahmāsmi) becomes all of reality. Not even the gods can prevent it, for that person is then the very Self (ātman) of the gods. However, the gods are displeased with this for such an individual is freed from serving them. Just as animals serve human beings, so too those who do not know the Self serve the gods. In the Chāndogya Upanisad, a young man named Śvetaketu is instructed by his father Uddālaka Āruṇi in the knowledge that he did not receive despite 12 years

70 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

of conventional Vedic education. Although he was proud and arrogant, thinking himself to be well educated, Śvetaketu was surprised to discover that he did not learn how that which is unperceived may be perceived, and how the unknowable may be known. Uddālaka explains to his son that just as a close examination of a pair of nail scissors can lead one to discover that it is actually made of iron, discovering the underlying essence of seemingly diverse particular things is a vital beginning. By knowing iron, one may then know the nature of all things made of iron, because the particular form that it takes is simply linked to a word that names it. Although this verbal designation appears to give it a distinct existence, in fact it is really still just iron. So too, when the underlying essence of all things is known, all things that derive from that underlying essence may be known. That underlying essence Uddālaka calls Being, only one reality, without any other. All the various manifestations of the cosmos, Uddālaka explains, from fire to water to plant life and the myriad creatures in existence, from a lion to a mosquito, have their root in Being, have Being as their abode, and Being as their support. The whole world has this subtle essence as its Self. Uddālaka exclaims in what has become one of the most well-known of Upaniṣadic sayings, “That is theT rue. That is the Self (ātman). That is You (tat tvam asi), Śvetaketu.” Uddālaka further explains that just as rivers appear to be different even though their source and destination is the ocean, so too creatures imagine themselves to be separate beings, unaware of their true source in Being. Just as a tree does not die when one of its branches is cut, the Self does not die, he explains, when the body dies. Asking Śvetaketu to break apart the tiny seed of a fig (nyagrodha) tree, Uddālaka demonstrates that there is virtually nothing visible remaining, and yet the majestic tree exists precisely because of that subtle essence within the seed. Asking Śvetaketu to sip salt water from a glass repeatedly, his father illustrates how, although the salt is invisible, it permeates the water thoroughly. So too, he explains, the Self is not perceived, although it is everywhere. Uddālaka emphasizes that finding a spiritual teacher enables one to recognize one’s predicament of bondage to ignorance until one fully realizes the Self.

Śruti and smṛti The four genres ofV edic literature that are appended to each other – namely, the Saṃhitas, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas, and Upaniṣads – are collectively regarded as śruti. The term śruti, comes from the Sanskrit verbal root śru, to hear. It is intended to evoke the idea that the contents of these texts were divinely perceived (i.e., heard) or revealed to the ṛṣis. Thus the authorship of this literature is purported to be some greater unseen power, channeled through the semi-divine perceivers (ṛṣi) with whom their teachings are associated. All other religious literature is classified assmṛti , which derives from the Sanskrit verbal root smṛ (“to remember”). Thussmṛti is literature

71 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language that is held to have been composed by human beings and passed down as tradition through the generations. Śruti and smṛti set up a dichotomy between “revealed” and “traditional” religious literature, granting a special status and authority to what are loosely called the Vedas, the Veda, or Vedic scripture. Despite the distinction between śruti and smṛti, the categories are somewhat permeable. For instance, we note that for certain orthodox groups, only the Ṛg, Sāma, and Yajur Vedas were originally regarded as śruti, with the Atharva Veda only becoming a later addition to the category. Similarly, subsequent religious literature often strives to be included in the sacrosanct, revealed category. TheMahābhārata epic, for instance, lays claim to being a fifth Veda, although this claim is not taken very seriously. However, the Bhagavad Gītā, which is part of the Mahābhārata, enjoys a remarkable authority and sanctity among contemporary Hindus, giving it the status of śruti in all but its official designation. Some Hindus would like to deem it an Upaniṣad to include it within the category of śruti. And while the Brāhmaṇas and Āraṇyakas enjoy the prestige of being śruti, their content is little understood by most Hindus and has marginal impact on their religious lives. The so-called “lesser Upaniṣads” could arguably be categorized as either śruti or smṛti. The influence and authority of some of these “lesser Upanisads” is greater on particular Hindu sects than the so-called “principal Upaniṣads.” An early classification scheme, found in a Dharma Sūtra text, claims that there are both Vedic and Tantric (or Āgamic) śrutis. This would appear to be reasonable, because the Tantras and Āgamas have been arguably even more influential in the fabric of Hinduism than the Vedas. However, orthodoxy does not accept Āgamic scripture as śruti. Thus while the conventional designation ofśruti i s a telling hallmark of orthodoxy, smṛti literature plays no less of a role in shaping the religious lives of Hindus. A significant feature of sacredness relates to whether or not a text is transmitted orally or in writing. Although we now tend to think of “texts” as written objects, prior to the advent of writing texts were memorized and transmitted orally. Śruti literature continues to be transmitted orally because committing it to writing is regarded as diminishing its sacredness. This does not mean that theV edas were never written down. The Brahmin scholar Sāyaṇa wrote valuable commentaries on theV edic Saṃhitās and other Vedic literature in the fourteenth century, and many scholars think that written versions of the Vedas may have existed by the third century bce. However, despite being part of the written tradition for centuries, particular families of Brahmins have maintained the tradition of memorizing and reciting the Vedas. The Upaniṣads were only rendered into written Latin in the early nineteenth century from seventeenth-century Persian translations.

72 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

Other Vedic literature By the fifth century bce, a variety of texts had developed that were classified as primary and secondary appendages (aṅga) to the Vedas. The primary appendages are called the Vedāṅgas and the secondary ones are the Upāṅgas. These appendages developed as adjuncts to the knowledge (veda) deemed necessary for the priestly class, or were aids for the performance of priestly duties. They are often composed in the form of sūtras (aphoristic verses). There are six categories of Vedāṅgas. These are: 1) Śikṣā, literally, “instruction” in the rules for proper pronunciation of the Veda; 2) Vyākaraṇa, or “grammatical analysis,” such as the works of Pāṇini; 3) Chandas or “prosody,” which explain the various meters used in Vedic recitation; 4) Nirukta, or “lexicon” of the meanings of Vedic terms, such as that by Yāska; 5) Jyotiṣa, or “astrology”; and 6) Kalpa, or explanations on ritual action. The Kalpa literature, or Kalpa Sūtras, followed the divisional scheme of the four Vedas and were appended to them. Thus the Kalpa Sūtras attached to theSāma Veda would be studied by Sāma Veda Brahmins. Each Kalpa Sūtra has four parts: 1) Śrauta Sūtras, which dealt with elaborate public rites; 2) Gṛhya Sūtras, dealing with life cycle rites (saṃskāra) and household rituals; 3) Dharma Sūtras, on moral prescriptions for householders; and 4) Śulva Sūtras, concerning the measurement and construction of ritual spaces, demonstrating aspects of early mathematical sciences. The Upāṅgas are traditionally grouped as follows: 1) Purāṇa, or “antiquities,” which are mythological texts with pseudo-historical content; 2) Nyāya, or treatises on “logic”; 3) Mīmāṃsā, which refers to textual interpretation or “investigation” of the Vedas; and 4) Dharma Śāstra, or the codices on behavior regarded as appropriate and aligned with the cosmic order (i.e., dharmic).

Astrology Astrology has played a significant role in Hindu life from Vedic times, when its study was regarded as supplementary to the Vedas themselves. The study of luminaries (jyotiṣa) in the heavens was deemed vital for determining the appropriate times for conducting rituals. The celestial forces are known asgraha , literally “graspers,” semi-divine forces that affect human activities. The ninegrahas or nava-graha are: Sūrya (the Sun), Candra (the Moon), Maṅgala (Mars), Budha (Mercury), Guru or Bṛhaspati (Jupiter), Śukra (Venus), Śani (Saturn), and Rāhu and Ketu (North and South nodes of the moon, related to the points where the lunar orbit intersects the solar ecliptic). Rāhu and Ketu are thus not “planets” or even heavenly bodies like the Sun and Moon, but astronomical points in space. When the Sun and the Moon simultaneously fall on Rāhu and Ketu a solar or lunar eclipse occurs. This exemplifies the grasping power of these celestial phenomena, which periodically “swallow” the Sun or the Moon. Like Western astrology, Hindu astrology recognizes

73 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language the same twelve signs of the Zodiac. However, it adds a system of 24 lunar mansions (nakṣatra), which enriches the sophistication of its interpretations. A Hindu myth, widespread across many parts of Asia, tells how the gods and demons cooperated briefly to churn the ocean of milk and extract “nectar of immortality.” The gods were the first to drink of this nectar, but a demon disguised himself as a god and sat among them. Just as he sipped the nectar, the Sun and the Moon, between whom he was seated, discovered his disguise. Viṣṇu immediately hurled his discus and severed the demon in two. Unfortunately, it was too late, for he had tasted the elixir of immortality. His fierce, four-armed upper part is Rāhu, and his dragon-tailed lower half is Ketu. Burning with anger and thirsting for vengeance, Rāhu and Ketu try to devour the Sun and Moon whenever they come near, leading to partial or total eclipses. During eclipses, it is still a tradition to shriek at the heavens to repel the divided demon from his act of revenge. Rāhu and Ketu stand as an example that challenges simplistic categorizations and interpretations in the study of religious phenomena. Hinduism is replete with such phenomena. For one, Rāhu and Ketu belong to a branch of Hinduism, astrology, which many would nowadays not classify as traditionally “religious.” But the grahas form a vibrant component of Hindu religion. Many Hindu temples have nava-graha shrines, which receive regular attention, particularly on Tuesdays and Saturdays.

Figure 1.3 A woman makes an offering to Rāhu, one of the inauspiciousgrahas , at a temple dedicated to the Navagraha, the nine “graspers” in Hindu astrology (Assam)

74 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

Tuesday is said to be ruled by Mars, and Saturday by Saturn, both of which, like Rāhu and Ketu, are pernicious grahas. Offerings are made to thegrahas , and other deities may also be worshipped to solicit their aid in warding off inauspicious planetary influences. Auspiciousness and inauspiciousness are weighty categories in many spheres of Hindu belief. Astrological considerations play an important role in determining the appropriate periods in the year for weddings and times in the day that are most auspicious for the performance of religious rituals. Astrological charts are routinely consulted when determining whether marriageable partners are suitable. Hindu astrology is also closely paired with gemology, the fabrication of jewelry, and the bodily sciences. Gemstones, metals, and even fabrics are manipulated in the belief that they interact with the flow of vitalenergies in living organisms, which are influenced by broader forces, such as those emanating from thegrahas . For instance, an astrologer might prescribe wearing a necklace made of crystal beads or a ruby set in a silver ring placed on a particular finger of a particular hand in order to circumvent inauspicious influences. Rāhu and Ketu also demonstrate that jyotiṣa includes the science of astronomy, for their “positions” are not based on visible heavenly bodies but on mathematical calculations grounded in astronomical observations. Furthermore, the tales of the demons reflects a juxtaposition of astronomical science and mythic creativity. It is also evident that the astronomical understanding of the phenomenon is ancient, and coexists with its mythic exposition even today. Immature studies often fail to penetrate the complex layers and multiplicity of meanings embedded in the symbols of the Hindu tradition. It is instructive to remind ourselves of this in our exploration of Hinduism.

Āyurveda The traditional Hindu knowledge( veda) of life ( āyus) forms a body of literature sometimes classified as an Upaveda, a supplement to theV edas. Other Upavedas include treatises on the fine arts and music, on politics, and warcraft. Āyurvedic medicine is still widely practiced in India today, alongside with modern Western- styled medicine. The three most highly regarded classical texts of Āyurveda are the Caraka Saṃhitā, the Suśruta Saṃhitā, and the Vāgbhaṭa Saṃhitā, each named after the physician-sages who codified the teachings of ancient ṛṣis that are believed to have been originally transmitted from divine sources. The works themselves date from the first to the seventh century ce, but certainly are based on medical knowledge from preceding centuries. Āyurveda differs from the host of other regional and folk healing methods because it is grounded in a complex philosophy and theory of bodily science. Illness (roga, vyādhi) is typically believed to be caused by an imbalance of humors of the body. There are three humors( tri-doṣa): phlegm (kapha), bile (pitta), and wind (vāta),

75 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language associated with the water, fire, and air elements respectively. The Āyurvedic approach to healing consists of diagnosing which of the humors are out of balance and then prescribing primarily herbal medicine or dietary changes to restore the balance. The study of Āyurveda, therefore, requires an understanding of the various qualities (guṇa) inherent in substances in the body (e.g., blood, bone, fat) and the created world. While there are three fundamental guṇas, there are 20 subcategories of these. The fundamental guṇas are the sattva (pure, luminous), rajas (energetic), and tamas (dark, heavy). Among the subcategories are heat-producing, cooling, slimy, and rough substances. The three guṇas are associated with the Sāṅkhya school of Indian philosophy. In its theories of matter and atoms, Āyurveda also draws upon concepts derived from Vaiśeṣika philosophy. A person’s bodily constitution is primarily categorized according to the doṣa that is dominant, although most people’s constitutions are combinations of all three. Since the vāta or vāyu doṣa (the air/wind humor) is believed to control breathing, expulsion of wastes, and the movement of thoughts, an imbalance can lead to worries and insomnia, or constipation. And because the kapha doṣa (the water/phlegm humor) is associated with bodily fluids, an excess can produce congestion, or laziness. The pitta doṣa (the fire/bile humor) is believed responsible for digestion; thus imbalances can produce indigestion and ulcers. Internal imbalances are believed to be triggered by external causes, and Āyurveda also incorporates diagnoses based on pernicious agents such as poisons (e.g., snake bites), injury, and affliction by a wide range of spiritsbhūt ( a), particularly for psychological illnesses. Besides dietary modifications, treatments include surgical procedures, massage, fumigation, enemas, baths and sweating. The preparation and wearing of amulets, recitation of sacred phrases, and the performance of special rituals are also among its therapeutic prescriptions. Physicians and patients who are exploring approaches to healing beyond those conventionally associated with modern Western medicine have been turning to some aspects of Āyurveda. A well-known current exemplar is Deepak Chopra, whose teachings on psycho-physical health combine non-dualistic Vedānta philosophical perspectives with Āyurveda and Western medicine. Various Indian institutions such as the Banāras Hindu University have been offering accredited degrees in Āyurveda.

The Sanskrit language Imagine, if you will, this scenario You have arrived in Vārāṇasī (Banāras) to conduct research. A fellow scholar tells you about a learned man (paṇḍita) who is accepting students to study Sanskrit. You have already studied Sanskrit for several years with some of North America’s best

76 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language instructors, and have fared very well in their evaluations. However, your knowledge is a bit rusty. Although your field-research is primarily conducted in Hindi, the vernacular language of the city, you decide to approach the pundit for instruction. You bicycle to the Śivāla quarter of the city to his home, painted with a pale blue wash, and climb the stairs to the first floor. His son first greets and then directs you to the upper terrace, where the pundit is catching some of the cool evening breezes. The sunis low on the horizon, and the sky is alive with hawks, crows, high circling vultures, and paper kites. He is a short, stocky man, bespectacled and balding, with graying hair and a warm smile. He is clothed in a dhoti, a finely woven white cotton garment which is wound around the waist and between the legs. His upper body is bare except for a loop of thread draped over a shoulder and across his torso. You introduce yourself and express the reason for your visit. “So you say you know some Sanskrit,” he says, and instantly proceeds to speak to you in that language. You are somewhat dumbfounded. All your previous training has emphasized studying Sanskrit in its written form. Although your teachers had required you to read out aloud, and enunciate the sounds of the language, instruction was never approached in the oral style as one might, for instance, take up the study of Spanish before venturing on some travels in Guatemala. The Sanskrit that emanates from the pundit’s mouth is at once familiar and alien. It sounds something like the Hindi that is spoken all around you in the city, and you are able to discern the sounds of some of the endings of verbal conjugations and noun declensions which you had spent years memorizing; but it is otherwise incomprehensible. You continue to stare at him in wide-eyed silence. In a sharp twist from his disarming greeting, he bluntly says, “You do not know Sanskrit. We will start at the very beginning, with a teaching system that I have developed. It is called the Yoga of Speech. Be here tomorrow at 7:00 a.m.” He now appears strangely aloof and distant. The next morning you arrive at the pundit’s home and are directed to his library, where the classes are held. A student is already leaving the premises, having finished an earlier class. You doff your sandals at the door, and follow the behavior of the two or three other students, Westerners and Indians, who have arrived just before you. You learn that one of these students is an Indian Catholic priest who is interested in learning about Hindu religion and culture, and its ancient language. You respectfully touch the pundit’s feet as you enter the room and seat yourself on a cushion on the cool marble floor. He is seated cross-legged on a wooden bed, behind which is a chalkboard used for instruction. Built-in stone shelves along the walls of the library room are crammed with published books, notebooks, and stacks of yellowing papers. Large, framed lithographs of the elephant-headed god Gaṇeśa, the goddess Sarasvatī, four-armed and playing a musical instrument, and Śiva are hung high overhead. They are draped with garlands of fresh flowers. Guru-jī, as you begin to call the paṇḍita, is dressed in a similar garb as the previous evening, except that each of his upper arms

77 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language is smeared with three stripes of paste, and his forehead is anointed with a yellow dot within which is placed a red dot. Instruction begins, and you soon discover that you indeed have much to learn in this milieu, not only about Sanskrit, but about the teacher–student relationship in the home of a Brahmin scholar where Sanskrit is one of the family’s spoken languages. Over the course of a year and a half, you find that Guru-jī is a man of enormous intellectual vigor. He bathes daily in the Gaṅgā River, which flows nearby, and performs rites of worship in his home before classes begin. He sleeps little, and mostly teaches and writes, by his admission, having authored or edited nearly 100 books and articles. His students study a range of literature from the ancient Vedic hymn collections, treatises on grammar and philosophy, and the narratives of the Hindu Epics, to the devotional literature of the Purāṇas. “I decided to learn Russian so I could translate to Sanskrit,” he once said. “Have you actually translated anything into Russian?” you ask, somewhat impressed by his interests. “No. I like Tolstoy,” he remarked. “I think that good literature should be available in all the great languages. So I decided to translate some portions of Tolstoy into Sanskrit.” Your mind reels. While your attitude about Sanskrit has been to regard it as an ancient, near-dead language, Guru-jī’s experience of it is quite the reverse. “My three sons do not know how to speak Sanskrit well,” Guru-jī later confides to you. “They do not think it is necessary to learn it anymore.” However, his granddaughter, a curious three-year old, frequently wanders into the library and listens to his Sanskrit teachings. A decade and a half later you will see her grown into a vivacious young woman whose voice can move you to tears as she sings hymns of devotion in flawless Sanskrit.

A brief history of Sanskrit The earliest evidence of writing on the Indian subcontinent is the Indus Valley Civilization script found on its unearthed seals. Unfortunately, the language has not been deciphered, but was quite likely some form of early Dravidian. When the Indus Valley Civilization ended, writing seems to have also stopped, for reasons yet unknown. The last evidence of writing from those sites dates to about 1700 bce, and puzzlingly, evidence of writing does not emerge until the fourth century bce, possibly the by-product of Alexander the Great’s invasion of the subcontinent. Researchers wonder why the tribes that formed from the dispersal of the Indus Valley Civilization did not take some forms of writing with them. It is conceivable that the Indus Valley script does not reflect a fully developed written language, but

78 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language a sophisticated symbol system that was closely tied to an oral language, whose non- written character was culturally valued. However, it is equally unusual that the Āryan tribes that entered the subcontinent, according to the Āryan Migration Thesis, did not bring writing with them, for they would surely have been exposed to Sumerian cuneiform and other Mesopotamian scripts. And yet, without any apparent written language for over a thousand years, Indian civilizations produced some of the most complex linguistic systems, elaborate ritual procedures, and profound philosophical teachings. They maintained vast armies and managed large domains. When Indian empires did resume the use of writing, they adopted forms of Aramaic script used by Alexander’s Macedonian scribes. One of the earliest such scripts was Kharoṣṭhī, in which early Buddhist manuscripts from northwestern India are written. The Brāhmī script developed from Kharoṣṭhī and spread widely, since it was used by the Mauryan emperor Aśoka whose inscribed edicts are found throughout his vast empire. By the twelfth century, Brāhmī had developed into Devanāgarī ([Writing of the] Divine Abode), the script in which Sanskrit is still currently written. The scripts of many north Indian languages, such as Gujarati and Bengali, are related to the Devanāgarī script. Brāhmī script was also introduced to the South Indians, who adopted it for their Dravidian-based languages. Thus the host of South Indian Dravidian languages, such as Tamil and Telugu, and the North Indian Sanskritic languages, such as Hindi, all share Brāhmī as a common ancestral script, even though the Dravidian and Sanskritic languages themselves have different ancestral sources. Despite the differences in North and South Indian languages, Sanskrit holds a privileged place in Hinduism, because one of its early forms, Vedic Sanskrit, or simply Vedic, is the language in which the Vedas are composed. Moreover, much of the finest and most influential religious literature of Hinduism is composed in Sanskrit, which became a marker of the elite, educated upper classes. The English word “Sanskrit” derives from the Sanskrit word saṃskṛta, which means “refined” or “purified,” and stands in contrast to all other languages which were regarded as prākṛta (Prākrits), or “unrefined/vulgar.” The story of the development of Sanskrit on the Indian subcontinent involves its interactions with these other vernacular languages or Prākrits, such as Ardhamāgadhī and Pālī. Many of the early Buddhist and Jain scriptures are composed in Prākrits. Aśokan inscriptions in Brāhmī script are in Pālī and other Prākrit languages, suggesting that while Brahmin orthodoxy promoted the use of Sanskrit, Prākrit languages may have been more in use among the ruling and other classes. Sanskrit belongs to the Indo-European family of languages, whose modern offspring include English, German, French, Spanish, Greek, Welsh, Russian, Farsi (Persian) and Hindi. Early Indologists postulated that Vedic Sanskrit might be the mother of all Indo-European languages, but it is now surmised by the majority of linguists that Vedic Sanskrit, along with ancient Iranian languages such as Avestan, probably had a hypothetical common ancestor, designated Proto Indo-Iranian. Vedic

79 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language

Sanskrit is among the oldest within the Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-European languages. The Indo-Iranian branch, along with other branches such as the Anatolian languages of the Hittites, are extrapolated back to a hypothetical common ancestor known as Proto Indo-European, which may have originated in Anatolia or in the steppes north of the Caucasus Mountains, somewhere between 7000 and 4000 bce. Vedic Sanskrit yielded to Classical Sanskrit, the language of the Mahābhārata and Rāmāyaṇa, and the literary works of Kalidāsa and Bāna, when grammarians such as Pāṇinī codified and composed structural rules that kept the written language from rapid mutation. Classical Sanskrit began to diminish in use as a spoken language from the first century ce, and experienced a rapid decline after the fifth century ce, when Apabrahṃśa languages, precursors to the modern vernaculars such as Hindi began to grow dominant. Sanskrit prayers are still recited during religious rituals, and some Hindus continue to compose literature, classical vocals, and even produce television shows in the language. Sanskrit is designated as one of the 22 official languages of India, and is often offered as a course in public secondary schools in India. While fewer than 200,000 claimed it as a second language in the 1960s, through efforts to sustain the language and promote its use, more than 14,000 identified it as their first language in India’s 2001 census. Some sources claim that about 50,000 now speak Sanskrit fluently, and four million people have some speaking or reading ability.

Structure of the Sanskrit alphabet Sanskrit is made up of 49 phonemes. The vowels – that is, sounds that can be voiced on their own – are: a (as in “hut”), ā (as in “father”), i (as in “tin”), ī (as in “seen”), u (as in “put”), ū (as in “loot”), ṛ (as in “riff”), and ḷ (as in “sickle”). There are also long forms of ṛ and ḷ. The diphthongs – that is, combined vowel sounds – are: e( as in “play”), ai (as in “smile”), o (as in “home”), and au (as in “town”). Sanskrit consonants are arranged in groups according to where they are produced, beginning from the throat and moving forward towards the lips. The Gutturals, produced in the throat, are k, kh, g, gh, and ṅ. The first (k) is a hard guttural. The second (kh) is aspirated, because it pushes out air as it is sounded. The third (g) is a softened guttural. The fourth (gh) is soft and aspirated. And the fifth (ṅ) is a nasal guttural that sounds like the ng in rung. This pattern is followed for the subsequent groups. The Palatals are produced at the rear of the mouth, by the palate. They are c (pronounced like the ch in chip), ch (aspirated), j, jh, and ñ (pronounced as ny in canyon). The Retroflex consonants are produced by curling the tongue to touch the roof of the mouth. These are ṭ, ṭh, ḍ, ḍh, and the nasal, ṇ. The Dentals are produced by having the tongue touch the back of the teeth. These are /t//th// d//dh//n/ The Labials are sounded with the lips. These are p, ph( as the p-h in “cup-handle”), b, bh, and the dental nasal, m. There are four semi-vowels: y, r, l, and v. There are also three sibilants: ś, pronounced like sh in shoe; ṣ which sounds similar to ś, but which is a retroflex produced by placing

80 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language the tongue at the roof of the mouth; and s. Finally there is a voiced aspirate, h; an unvoiced aspirate, ḥ, known as the visarga, which echoes the preceding vowel; and ṃ, known as the anusvāra, which nasalizes the preceding vowel.

Pāṇinī and the Aṣṭādhyāyī Pāṇinī, who composed his extraordinarily sophisticated work of grammar known as the Aṣṭādhyāyī (Eight Chapters), is reputed to have lived in northwest India sometime between the seventh and third centuries bce. His references to Vedic Sanskrit indicate that spoken forms of it were already in decline. Pāṇinī mentions other grammarians before him; however their works do not survive, making the Aṣṭādhyāyī the oldest extant Sanskrit grammar. It is actually one of the oldest works of linguistics and is of such remarkable elegance that it has not been surpassed. In fewer than 4000 sūtras (aphoristic verses) Pāṇinī lays down the entire structure of the grammar of Sanskrit, a language to whose grace and complexity its students repeatedly, even tearfully, testify. Pāṇinī’s morphology – that is, his explanation of the forms of Sanskrit words – virtually unchanged since its composition, constitutes the basis of Classical Sanskrit until the present day. Building from about 800 verbal roots, together with various affixesprefixes, ( infixes, suffixes, and so on) applied in accord with its system of rules, the morphology is able to generate all of its words. In recognition of this extraordinary achievement, and in keeping with the ancient tradition that acknowledges the sacred structure of grammar (vyakāraṇa), which is a Vedāṅga, or disciplinary appendage of Vedic knowledge, when explaining concepts, such as karma or dharma, teachers often begin by pointing out the verbal root, such as “kṛ” or “dhṛ” from which the word develops. Some have seen similarities between Pāṇinī’s treatise and highly sophisticated computer programming languages. It is all the more remarkable that he might have produced this monument of erudition without the use of writing.

The sphoṭa theory of language The grammarian Patañjali( second–first century bce) wrote the Mahābhāṣya, a commentary (bhāṣya) on Pāṇinī’s work. Patañjali is sometimes identified with the author of the Yoga Sūtra, who was likely a different person. Patañjali is also credited with presenting a substantive introduction to the sphoṭa theory of language. Sphoṭa means “bursting forth” and refers to how meaning is conveyed through sound. Although sounds in language may vary with regional accents, or even in the speed with which they are voiced, to those who know the language, meaning is still transmitted. So sphoṭa is the invisible and inaudible vehicle through which meaning bursts forth the instant a word is voiced and heard by a listener. Bhartṛhari (c. fifth century ce), another Sanskrit grammarian (also known for his poetry), elaborates extensively on the sphoṭa theory in his Vākyapadīya (On Sentence

81 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language and Word). He bases his ideas on the Vedic concept of the unitary Brahman, which undergoes differentiation.Sphoṭa first arises in the mind of the speaker, who conveys it through words (pada) or sentences (vākya). The instant those auditory vibrations are adequately received by the listener, the meaning bursts or shines forth in the mind of the listener. Thus the speaker who wishes to convey something is first gripped by an impulse to express. The idea he or she wishes to express is thesphoṭa , which is already a movement away from the primary unity of the Absolute. This movement consists of both the particular meaning to be expressed, and the specific sounds and words that will be used to convey that meaning. Sphoṭa is both components of this movement. The sounds in a particular word, or the words in a particular sentence, which are uttered, convey sphoṭa, but meaning intuitively bursts forth to the listener, apart from the separate and sequential bits of the sounds. These sounds may be examined by the listener after the meaning has been attained. So, in essence, there is a unitary whole that is perceived, as in viewing a painting, apart from its individual colors and brushstrokes. However, the sounds are necessary components of the movement of sphoṭa, which does not stand apart from them. Meditation on the sounds may also allow meaning to blossom. Sacred utterances, such as mantras, when repeated, may thus serve as auditory vehicles through which their profound meanings may be revealed.

Mantra and the theology of sound Novice students to Hinduism might wonder why one should attend to the structure of the Sanskrit language. Not only is Sanskrit the language of much of Hindu sacred literature, but its sounds also play important roles in Hindu philosophy and ritual. The Sanskrit alphabet, as well as the language, is regarded as sacred. The sacred utterance, Aum or Om, is said to be Brahman as sound. In the terminology of the sphoṭa theory described earlier, meditatively voicing or hearing the sound Aum could actually reveal the nature of Brahman. Thus, the entire Sanskrit language is said to derive from Aum, which is the regarded as the beginning and end of all speech. Hindu religious teachers sometimes point out that Aum is formed by the opening and closing of the mouth, beginning with the first vowel, a, and ending with the final anusvāra, ṃ. Thus all vowels and consonants are contained within it.Aum is not merely a symbol of Brahman, but is often regarded as Brahman itself, manifest in the form of sound. In the Yoga Sūtra, Aum encapsulates Īśvara, the Lord of Yoga, and sustained contemplation on Aum, known as the pranava (vibratory hum), will reveal its meaning by purifying consciousness of its defilements. In some Tantric Hindu formulations, the Absolute Unity, Brahman, is conceived of as composed of two complementary polarities, called Śiva and Śakti, the quiescent male and active female principles. The vowels of the Sanskrit alphabet, self- empowered since they can be sounded on their own, are said to be Śakti. Consonants,

82 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

however, as the term suggests, need to be empowered by vowels, “sounded in concert” with them, and thus are likened to the male Śiva principle. Through their union, language is generated. Mantras (thought instruments) are utterances believed to derive from the single source, the Absolute Brahman. Just as the single syllable, Aum, is regarded as encapsulating all of the Vedas and thus all sacred knowledge, every Vedic syllable is an elaboration upon or expansion of Aum. Every Vedic sound and verse is thus a mantra, an instrument through which Brahman sacrificially differentiates itself, and the instrument through whose contemplation the multiplicity may be sacrificially reintegrated. Amantra is primarily a mental vibration, a thought (man), intuitively perceived by ṛṣis (the seers). It is closest to the undifferentiated source (i.e., the Absolute Brahman) when it is not uttered, yet a powerful instrument of differentiated manifestation as it takes on progressively grosser forms (as audible sound) and more complex articulations (as lengthy prayers and other formulations), which constitute the divinely heard śrūti. Words are thoughts made apprehensible to the other senses. Therefore, inV edic philosophy, through mantra the world is made manifest, and through mantra, the world is reabsorbed. Thusmantras play a central role in virtually all features of Hindu ritual activity. They may be used to invoke the

Figure 1.4 Brahmins skilled in recitation, read aloud from a sacred text. Even simply listening to the sound of the Sanskrit verses is believed to be beneficial to the listener

83 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language presence of a specific deity, to worship that deity, and finally to dismiss it. And they may also be used as contemplative aids in internal embodied yogic sacrificial rituals aimed at liberation. The Maitrī Upaniṣad (6.22) states that Brahman should be meditated upon as both sound (Aum) and non-sound, but only through the former is the latter revealed. However, the sound that is Brahman is also characterized in other ways than Aum. Like the sound of the space within the heart when the ears are closed with the thumbs, it is also compared to the sound of a river, a bell, rain, and speech in stillness. By moving beyond these forms of “Brahman as sound” one merges into Brahman beyond sound. In the Mīmāṃsā school of philosophy, Vedic mantric sounds are not arbitrary and idiosyncratic signifiers chosen to convey meaning( the signified). They are the sonic manifestations of the intrinsic features of Ultimate Reality as it is differentiated. They have been discerned or “seen” by theṛṣis , or been intuitively heard, and then uttered as Veda. Thus every sound in theV eda, every verse, is an actual vibratory manifestation of the thing signified. There is no deity different from the Vedic mantra that sounds out its name, for the sounded name is merely a grosser vibratory manifestation of its nature. Extrapolating this thinking, all mantric sounds, intuitively derived from Vedic Sanskrit, are both signifiers and the signified. The wordis the thing, at least at some degree of that thing’s intrinsic expression.

Key points in this chapter ••The Vedic Saṃhitās are the most esteemed literary works of the Āryans. The oldest saṃhitā is the Ṛg Veda, which consists of over 200 hymns. ••The Atharva Veda contains hundreds of original hymns dealing with an assortment of topics with differing concerns from the other three Saṃhitās. ••Some scholars speculate that most Vedic deities are male due to an Āryan patriarchal social structure. ••The “cosmic order” was important to Āryan civilization, as was the degree to which all aspects of life were aligned with it. ••Sacrificial rites (yajña) were elevated in the Brāhmaṇas to an importance that surpassed the gods, for it was believed that yajña itself maintained the cosmic order. ••Tradition holds that any text with secret teachings is an Upaniṣad. The Āraṇyakas, forerunners of the Upaniṣads, have similar associations with secrecy and philosophical speculation. ••The Upaniṣads are concerned primarily with the nature of Absolute Reality (Brahman), the true nature of the individual self (ātman), and the relationship between the two.

84 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

••The four genres of Vedic literature that are appended to each other – namely, the Saṃhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas, and Upaniṣads – are regarded as śruti (divinely revealed), whereas all other religious literature is regarded as smṛti (traditional). ••By the fifth century bce, texts developed that were classified as primary and secondary appendages (aṅga) to the Vedas, namely the Vedāṅgas and the Upāṅgas. ••Astrology, a vital supplement to the study of the Vedas themselves, plays an important role in Hinduism, influencing a range of activities from marriage to the timing of rituals. ••Āyurveda is considered supplemental to the Vedas, and this status ensures that Āyurvedic styles of medicine are well regarded and still widely practiced in India today. ••The earliest evidence of writing on the Indian subcontinent is the Indus Valley script. ••When the Indus Valley Civilization ended, writing appears to have stopped, and emerged again in the fourth century bce. ••Devanāgarī is the script in which Sanskrit is most commonly currently written. ••Sanskrit, which belongs to the Indo-European family of languages, comprises 49 phonemes. Sanskrit is revered in Hinduism, because Vedic Sanskrit was used to compose the Vedas. ••Pāṇinī composed the Aṣṭādhyāyī (Eight Chapters), the oldest extant Sanskrit grammar. ••Sphoṭa means “bursting forth” and refers to how meaning is conveyed through sound. ••In Tantric theologies of sound, the Sanskrit language is generated through the union of vowels, which represent the active female principle (Sakti), and consonants, which represent the quiescent male principle (Siva). ••Aum, which is the beginning and end of all speech, is regarded as Brahman manifest in the form of sound. Since every Vedic syllable is an expansion on Aum, every Vedic utterance is a mantra, a mental vibration made audiible. ••In Vedic philosophy, mantras play a central role in virtually all features of Hindu ritual activity as the world is both made manifest and reabsorbed through mantra. ••According to Mīmāṃsā philosophy, every Vedic sound is a vibratory manifestation of the thing signified.

85 54Copyright Vedic Taylor religion & Francis Group. and Not the for distributionSanskrit language

Discussion questions 1. Āyurveda is widely practiced today. Discuss possible reasons for its continued success and why Western society has begun to take growing interest in it. 2. What appear to be similar motifs in the aśvamedha and agnicayana rituals? 3. What do elements of the aśvamedha yajña suggest about the relationship between the Brahmin priest and the king? 4. Discuss the nature of Brahman and Ātman, and the relationship between them. 5. Explain what is included in the categories of śruti and smṛti. Discuss the differences, and the various complexities that arise from such designations. 6. What do the types of literature that are included in the “limbs” of Vedic literature tell us about the values of Āryan society? 7. In what ways might Hindu notions of purity and impurity enter into the realm of Indian language? 8. Are such ancient works as Pāṇinī‘s grammar, the Aṣṭādhyāyī, still significant in the context of modern-day India? 9. Explain the concept of sphoṭa and how it relates to mantra. 10. What is Aum or Om, and why is it so important to the Sanskrit language? 11. Philosophically, what role does Brahman play in relation to the Sanskrit language? 12. Why is the Sanskrit language regarded as so distinctive and even sacred to Hindus?

Further reading

On Hindu religious literature Farquhar, J. N. (1967) An Outline of the Religious Literature of India. Reprint. Varanasi: Motilal Banarsidass. Macdonell, A. A. (1961) A History of Sanskrit Literature. Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Santucci, J. A. (1977) An Outline of Vedic Literature. Missoula: Scholars Press. Winternitz, M. (1927-67) A History of Indian Literature. S. Ketkar and H. Kohn (trans.) 3 vols. Reprint. Calcutta: University of Calcutta.

On the Vedic Saṃhitas, Brāhmaṇas, and Āraṇyakas Gonda, Jan. (1963) The Vision of the Vedic Poets. The Hague: Mouton & Co. Gonda, Jan. (1975) Vedic Literature (Saṃhitās and Brāhmaṇas). A History of Indian Literature, vol. 1. fasc. 1. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrasowitz. Griffith, R. T. H. (trans.) (1957)Hymns of the Yajurveda. Reprint. Benares: Chowkhamba.

86 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

Griffith, R. T. H. (trans.) (1957)The Texts of the White Yajurveda. Reprint. Benares: Chowkhamba. Griffith, R. T. H. (trans.) (1963) Hymns of the Ṛgveda, 2 vols. Reprint. Benares: Chowkhamba. Griffith, R. T. H. (trans.) (1963)Sāmaveda. Reprint. Varanasi: Chowkhamba. Jamison, Stephanie W. and Brereton, Joel P. (trans) (2014) The Rigveda. 3 vols. New York: Oxford University Press. Macdonell, Arthur A. (1898) Vedic Mythology. Reprint. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1995. O’Flaherty, Wendy Doniger (1981) The Rig Veda: An Anthology. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

On the Upaniṣads Deussen, Paul (1906) The Philosophy of the Upanishads. Reprint. New York: Dover, 1966. Hume, R. (trans.) (1921) The Thirteen Principal Upaniṣads. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Olivelle, Patrick (2008) Upaniṣads (Oxford World Classics). New York: Oxford University Press. Radhakrishnam, S. (1967) The Principal Upanisads. London: Allen & Unwin.

On Vedic religion and ritual Elizarenkova, Tatyana J. (1995) Language and Style of the Vedic Ṛṣis. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Gonda, Jan (1990) Vedic Ritual: The Non-Solemn Rites. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Heesterman, Jan (1985) The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Jamison, Stephanie W. (1991) The Ravenous Hyenas and the Wounded Sun: Myth and Ritual in Ancient India. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Reprint 2011. Kalyanaraman, S. (2004) Indian Alchemy: Soma in the Vedas. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers. Macdonell, A. A. (1954) “Vedic Religion.” In Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics. E. Hastings (ed.) (Ss edn), vol. 12, pp. 601–618. Neufeldt, R. F. (1980) Max Müller and the Ṛg-Veda: A Study of its Role in His Work and Thought. Columbia, MO: South Asia Books. Patton, Laurie L. (2005) Bringing the Gods to Mind: Mantra and Ritual in early Indian Sacrifice. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Staal, J. F. (1983) AGNI: The Vedic Ritual of the Fire Altar, 2 vols. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

87 VCopyrightedic religion Taylor & Francis and Group. the SanskritNot for distribution language

Wasson, R. Gordon (1968) Soma, the Divine Mushroom of Immortality. Ethno- Mycological Studies I. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.

On Vedic sciences Chatterjee, S. K. (1998) Indian Calendric System. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Filliozat, Jean (1964) The Classical Doctrine of Indian Medicine. New Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal. Kakar, Sudhir (1982) Shamans, Mystics, and Doctors: A Psychological Inquiry into India and Its Healing Traditions. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Khanna, Madhu (2004) The Cosmic Order. New Delhi: D. K. Printworld. Kutumbiah, P. (1962) Ancient Indian Medicine. Reprint. Bombay: Orient Longman, 1999. Pingree, D. (1981) Jyotihśāstra: Astral and Mathematical Literature. A History of Indian Literature 6, fasc. 4. Weisbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. Wujastyk, Dominik (2003) The Roots of Ayurveda: Selections from Sanskrit Medical Writings. London: Penguin Books. Wujastyk, D. and F. M. Smith (ed.) (2008) Modern and Global Ayurveda: Pluralisms and Paradigms. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

On Sanskrit language and grammar Coulson, Michael (1976) Sanskrit: An Introduction to the Classical Language (Teach Yourself Books). New York: David McKay Company, Inc. Goldman, Robert P. and Sally J. Sutherland (1980) Devavāṇīpraveśikā: An Introduction to the Sanskrit Language. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Lanman, Charles (1971) A Sanskrit Reader: Text and Vocabulary and Notes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Perry, Edward (1936) A Sanskrit Primer. Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1986. Whitney, William Dwight (1889) Sanskrit Grammar: Including both the Classical Language, and the older Dialects, of Veda and Brahmana. Reprint. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981.

Sanskrit dictionaries Apte, V. S. (2004) The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Containing Appendices on Sanskrit Prosody and Important Literary and Geographical Names of Ancient India. Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass. Monier-Williams, Sir Monier (1899) A Sanskrit-English Dictionary: Etymologically and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

88 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Vedic religion and the Sanskrit language

On mantras, sonic theology and language Alper, Harvey P. (1989) Understanding Mantras. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Beck, Guy L. (1993) Sonic Theology: Hinduism and Sacred Sound. New York: Columbia University Press. Coward, Harold G. (1976) Bhartṛhari. Boston, MA: Twayne Publishers. Coward, Harold G. (1986) The Sphoṭa Theory of Language. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Coward, H. G. and K. K. Raja (1990) The Philosophy of the Grammarians. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Gonda, Jan (1963) “The Indian Mantra.”Oriens 16: 244–297. Killingly, D (1987) “Om: the sacred syllable in the Veda.” In Julius Lipner, ed., A Net Cast Wide. Newcastle upon Tyne: Grevatt and Grevatt, pp. 14–31. Matilal, B. K. (1990) The Word and the World: India’s Contribution to the Study of Language. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Padoux, A. (1990) Vāc: The Concept of the Word in Selected Hindu Tantras. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Patton, Laurie L. (2005) Bringing the Bods to Mind: Mantra and Ritual in Early Indian Sacrifice. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Pollock, Sheldon (2006) The Language of the Gods in the World of Men: Sanskrit, Culture, and Power in Premodern India. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Renfrew, Colin (1987) Archaeology and Language: The Puzzle of Indo-European Origins. London: Jonathan Cape. Staal, F. (ed.) (1973) A Reader on the Sanskrit Grammarians. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. Sastri, G. (1981) A Study in the Dialectics of Sphoṭa. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Vasu, Sirisa Candra (ed. and trans.) Pāṇini’s Aṣṭādhyāyī, 2 vols. Reprint. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass.

Audio-visual resources Altar of Fire (1994) Robert Gardiner and Frits Staal, producers. Berkeley, CA: University of California. Extension Center for Media and Independent Learning.

89 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

1 Introduction Approaching the subject

This chapter discusses the approach to Islam taken in this book, in particular the goal of “empathetic understanding”. It also provides an introductory overview of Islam from a Muslim perspective.

In this chapter • Who represents Islam? • What is Islam? • Is there a “true Islam”? • Empathetic understanding • Apologetics • Two problematic pairs • From Orientalism to Islamic Studies • The role of the media • Issues of language and related matters • Dates • An introductory overview of Islam

Who represents Islam? Islam has been very much in the news in recent years but all too often for the wrong reasons. Media attention to high profile terrorist actions such as the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York on 11 September 2001 (“9/11”), wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and political turmoil in other places, has led many to associate Islam with violence and fanaticism. We hear much less about the vastly larger number of Muslims who express their faith by going quietly about their work or household chores, educating their children, donating to charity, lending a helping hand to their neighbors and working for their communities, as well as performing their prayers and participating in other prescribed practices. This book seeks to give its primary attention to this latter group,

90 IntroductionCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution which is certainly more representative of the Muslim community as a whole, but will not neglect the more radical and violent elements, both past and present.

What is Islam? We may begin by saying that Islam is the religion of those people who have for some fourteen centuries followed the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. Today they number more than one-and-a-half billion, living throughout the world but concentrated particularly in the swath of lands stretching from Morocco eastward to Indonesia and from Central Asia southward to sub-Saharan Africa. Going further, we may understand the word “Islam” at three levels. At the most basic level it means submitting or committing oneself to God, essentially an inward mental action though with outward consequences. The one who does this is termed a Muslim. This was the earliest meaning of the terms Islam and Muslim. At the second level Islam refers to a religion, that is, a system of beliefs and practices believed to be ordained by God, and Muslims are the adherents of this religion. At the third level Islam may refer to a culture and a civilization, indeed several cultures and civilizations, created by Muslims over the course of time but also shared by many non-Muslims. Islamic civilizations integrated into themselves ideas and practices from other civilizations, including those of Greece, Iran and India, and were among the great civilizations of human history. Today, particularly, there are some who may be called “cultural Muslims” – who sit loosely by the religion but are heirs to the culture and civilization and identify with them. According to conventional history Islam in the first two senses began with the career of the Prophet Muhammad (c. 610–632 ce), although Muslims say that it began much sooner, as we shall see later. Islamic civilization also began to develop at this time but took two or three centuries to reach its first full flowering. Islam as a civilization is a constantly developing tradition, varying from one time and place to another. Many, including the author of this book, would say this is also true of Islam as a religion, although most Muslims would say that the essentials of the religion of Islam do not change. This book will focus primarily on Islam as a religion, presenting the symbols, ideas, practices and institutions of which it is composed and tracing their historical development as much as possible. It will also deal with culture and civilization because religion is embedded in these and the line between them and religion is often hard and sometimes impossible to draw. The precise form of the religion of any particular group of Muslims will depend considerably on its cultural context. The diversity of culture has resulted in considerable diversity of belief and practice throughout the Muslim world, with the result that many scholars prefer to speak of “Islams” rather than “Islam”. Nevertheless, there is still considerable agreement among Muslims on the core elements of the religion.

91 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

In fact, however, it is not the religion or the culture that are most important. It is the people. Religion and culture exist only in the people who practice and participate in them. Apart from people they are abstractions. Because the people commit themselves with varying degrees of conviction and consistency and with diverse interpretations, there is enormous diversity at the personal level. We can almost say that there are as many “Islams” as there are Muslims. While we cannot avoid the abstractions and generalizations of religion and culture, especially in an introductory presentation, we must always try to see or imagine the actual people.

Is there a “true Islam”? Many Muslims believe that there is a “true Islam” or a “real Islam”, which is properly followed only by some. They differ, however, as to exactly what this true Islam is. What is essential for some is heterodox or mere culture for others. This question is of understandable concern to Muslims, but it is one that as scholars in Religious Studies (or in most other academic disciplines) we do not ask or seek to answer. The closest we come is to note that certain beliefs and practices are more common or agreed upon, and thus more “mainstream”, while others are less common and more contested. Having said this, though, we do take account of the Muslims’ interest in the “true Islam” in our efforts at understanding. Some non-Muslims may also claim that there is a true Islam, which consists of certain beliefs and practices that they wish to privilege for reasons of their own. Some stress the more attractive aspects of Islam in order to defend it and some stress the more violent practices in order to justify their claim that Islam is a threat, something we often see in the Western media today. We try to avoid both agendas. In principle every form of Islam is for us significant and worthy of attention. In practice, of course, we will give more attention to those beliefs and practices that are “mainstream”, but we will not ignore the less widespread beliefs and practices. We will also give more attention to some forms of Islam than their numerical following would dictate because they are interesting or important in some way. One example is Islamic philosophy (falsafa), which mainly involved a small elite but is intellectually interesting and had considerable influence on both later Islamic andW estern thought. We will likewise give more attention to contemporary terrorists than their numbers dictate because of their impact. We will take them seriously as representing one form of Islam, though one that is quite aberrant in relation to mainstream forms.

Empathetic understanding If we do not ask which is the true Islam, we also do not ask whether any version of Islam is true. We do not, at least initially, pass any theological judgment on the doctrines and practices or the people and groups we study, nor usually any moral

92 IntroductionCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution judgment. Our first and most important task is simply to understand them, as well and as fully as possible, from their own perspective. This is not always so simple. In the first place, we must get the facts. For example, what do Muslims (or some particular group of Muslims) actually do when they pray? Second, and crucially, we must try to understand what the facts mean to the people. What does praying mean to Muslims (and to particular Muslims)? To find this out we also need to know some of the social and historical circumstances of those involved. This understanding must be at least an empathetic and, if possible, a sympathetic understanding. By empathy I mean imaginatively entering into the experience of another person and seeing the world as they see it. Sympathy adds to this a favorable attitude toward them and their experience. In either case, we try mentally to walk the proverbial mile in their moccasins. In order to do this we must often temporarily set aside many of our own beliefs and disbeliefs, values and presuppositions, and ask what would follow if the beliefs, values and presuppositions of those we are studying were in fact true. This is called “bracketing”, because we bracket off for the time being our own views. It may lead us to appreciate that if we were in the situation of those we are considering we would have done what they have done, or at least been tempted to do so. This is possible because we and those we study are all human and on that common humanity understanding can be built. Likewise, our cultures are human cultures and we can usually find parallels that will illuminate any case, although these parallels must be handled carefully, as we shall see. This, of course, applies to the study of all religions and, ideally, to all human beliefs and practices. Undoubtedly this is difficult with some, such as the perpetrators of 9/11. This is an extreme example and yet for that reason a good “test case” for the possibility of empathy. Is sufficient information available about their beliefs and attitudes and the forces playing on them? I believe so. Were they human with recognizably human motivations? We may wish to say no, but the answer is yes. Bracketing our revulsion will not be easy, but for that reason will be all the more necessary. Can we find parallels in our own culture that will help us? The answer is yes, if we recognize that they were ideologues and “soldiers” willing to die for their cause, and that our culture, too, has its ideologies and those who are willing to die for a cause. Sympathy is undoubtedly out of the question in this case, but empathy is possible and very much needed. An effort to do this will be made in chapter 20. Fortunately, almost all of this book will deal with less extreme cases, where sympathetic as well as empathetic understanding is attainable. We should note, though, that situations and elements in Islam that appeal to us or seem familiar present their own challenges for understanding. We may think we understand them before we do. For example, as we shall see, the Qur’an is the Muslim scripture, so it is natural for Westerners initially to draw comparisons with the Jewish or Christian Bible. These are helpful to a point, but soon we learn that in some ways the Qur’an is more to be compared with the person of Jesus Christ in Christian thinking than with the

93 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Bible. Drawing analogies from our own culture and experience is one of the methods of attaining empathy, but it must be done with care. It should be noted that while empathy requires imagination and even intuition, it also requires critical thinking to sift the information on which they are based and to discipline their outcomes. Empathetic understanding, of course, does not preclude our making moral judgments and acting on them. In the case of 9/11 and many others, we must sooner or later remove the brackets, judging and acting in terms of our own values and beliefs. Likewise, those whose actions and beliefs accord with our values often deserve our open approbation and support. The point is to do these thingsafte r we have achieved as much empathetic understanding as we can. The process of empathetic understanding, itself, must be as little influenced by our own values as possible. Empathetic understanding, likewise, does not mean that we reject the critical study of Islamic religion and history that has been carried out by mainly Western scholars over the last two centuries. Their accomplishment is impressive and this book relies heavily on it. Muslims have often viewed Western critical study as an attack on Islam (and in some cases they have been right) but there has been some acceptance. Critical study is not inconsistent with empathetic understanding, but it applies it in its own way. For example, if a critic gives a radically novel interpretation to the first generation of Muslim history (see chapters 3 and 5), this critic is (or should be) undertaking an empathetic understanding of the Muslims of that generation, not the present one. For an empathetic understanding of the present generation of Muslims one has to recognize that most of them do not accept Western critics’ radical reinterpretations of some parts of Muslim history. Where there is a significant difference between most Muslims’ views of some matter and the views of (mainly) Western academic critics I shall attempt to explain both. In fact, today many Muslims participate in the (Western) academic study of Islam and accept many of its critical views and methods, as noted later.

Apologetics A distinction has to be made between empathetic understanding and apologetics. Apologetics is the effort to defend a particular view or position and recommend it to others, frequently by overstating the virtues of that position and understating its defects while doing the reverse with opposing positions. Often it proceeds by contrasting one side’s ideal with the other side’s reality. Christian apologists may contrast Christ’s teachings of love and forgiveness with the violence of Muslim conquest while downplaying the violence in Christian history. Muslims may do the reverse. In fact, there has been a lot of apologetic writing among modern Muslims, as we shall see in the later chapters of this book. Apologetics has a legitimate place in religious life but is separate from religious studies. Empathetic understanding seeks to be much more balanced. Nevertheless, the critical study of apologetic writings can help us in our quest for empathy.

94 IntroductionCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Two problematic pairs Writings on Islam, including this one, commonly contrast “Islam” with the “West” (i.e. Europe, mainly Western Europe, and the societies deriving historically from them) and tradition with modernity. This language is unavoidable in my view but carries serious dangers. In the first place it suggests that all four of these are more monolithic and unchanging than is the case. Second, it tends to suggest a certain picture of history in which the West and Islam have mainly been in conflict and in which modernity, which is secular and derived from the West, is now displacing tradition, which is associated with Islam and with religion generally. This picture is simplistic at best and has been very much put into question by the events of recent decades, as we shall see. Third, it obscures the degree to which terms of each pair interpenetrate each other. The most traditional person is modern in some respects (e.g. use of technology) and the most modern (or post-modern!) person is conditioned by the tradition they come out of, often in ways they do not recognize. Islam and the West have not only interacted and influenced each other but today there are many who are both Muslim and Western. This could be said of many educated Muslims who have adopted Western ways of thinking and acting and even more of the many Muslims who live in the West, particularly those born in the West. Nevertheless, all four of these terms denote important realities and suitable replacements have not been found. So the reader is urged to bear these things in mind when these terms appear in this book.

From Orientalism to Islamic Studies Until about the middle of the twentieth century or a bit later, those who engage in the academic study of Islam were usually called “Orientalists” and their discipline “Orientalism”. In more recent years, and particularly since the publication of Edward Said’s book, Orientalism, in 1978, this term has become associated with a kind of scholarship that focuses on the study of written texts, tends to treat Islam as if it were unchanging over time and unvarying from place to place, and often intentionally or unintentionally supports and justifies Western imperialism. Still, it has to be said that the Orientalists produced a vast quantity of valuable scholarship and today’s scholars presume much of this accomplishment and stand very much on their shoulders. Most scholars of Islam today seek to avoid or at least minimize the negative tendencies associated with Orientalism and call themselves “Islamicists” and their discipline “Islamic Studies”, terms appropriate not only for scholars in Religious Studies but also those in other fields, such as History, Anthropology, Political Science and others, who focus primarily on some aspect of Islam. Most of them have sought a significant level of empathy with Islam and Muslims. The term “Islamicist” should be distinguished from “Islamist”, which refers to one who calls for an Islam

95 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

state and society, a position discussed in Part III. (See text box on “Tendentious terms” in chapter 15.) An important recent development is the increasing number of Muslims who are participating in what has been Western Islamic Studies and accepting many or most of its critical views and methods. Their commitment and experience enriches the field and provides for a level of dialogue and mutual understanding that has not been possible in the past. This is another example of the interpenetration between Islam and the West and also between “tradition” and “modernity” since many have had “traditional” educations upon which they build.

The role of the media Much of our information about Islam and Muslims inevitably comes from the media, whether newspapers and magazines, radio and television or the internet in its various forms. In and of itself this is not to be disparaged, since the media usually provide our first information about new developments and often about other aspects of Islam. Unfortunately, however, the media tend to sensationalize, oversimplify and play to existing prejudices in order to get and hold an audience. They often stress what is dramatic, violent, happening today and perceived as directly affecting us (whoever “us” may be in any situation). Historical, cultural and linguistic background sometimes appears but is likely to take second place. An example can be found in the reporting of Muslim efforts to have theShar i‘a recognized in Western countries. What tend to be emphasized are the harsh punishments and unequal treatment of women in traditional interpretations of the Shari‘a. Rarely does one see much on the varying interpretations of the Shari‘a or the complexities around the definition of Shari‘a that are such as to raise questions as to what the recognition of the Shari‘a in the West would mean. In defense of the media it has to be said that they have to report what people are interested in if they are to stay in business and reporters often do not have much time to get the necessary background on breaking stories. Some media sources are more dependable than others and it is usually possible to find out which these are in any place. It is hoped that this book will help the readers to sort out the wheat from the chaff in media reports.

Issues of language and related matters Challenges to understanding arise from the problems of translation. For example, one of the most important practices is called ṣalāh in Arabic (also written salat) and namaz in Persian, Urdu, etc. These words are usually translated “prayer” or “worship”, but neither English word gives an adequate idea of what actually happens. In this case one has simply to learn what Muslims do and, if at all possible, use the Arabic or Persian

96 IntroductionCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution term. In other cases an English term may be more or less adequate but is still likely to mislead. For example fiqh is often translated as “law” or “ jurisprudence”, but given the differences between the Islamic andW estern legal traditions I prefer usually to use the Arabic word. Still another sort of problem is illustrated by the word “Islam” itself. I translate it as “submission” or “commitment”. The former is the usual translation and linguistically the most accurate, but “submission” for most English speakers has a negative connotation, whereas for Muslims “Islam” never does. Therefore, I think “commitment” often comes closer to the force the word has for Muslims. I shall therefore introduce and use the Arabic (or other Islamic language) words for the most important terms and encourage the reader to become familiar with them. With proper names I sometimes use the recognized Anglicized form, e.g. Umayyad (proper transliteration is Umawi), and sometimes use the Arabic form in preference to a recognized Anglicized form, e.g. Ibrahim for Abraham, Salah al- Din for Saladin, depending on my sense of the appropriate compromise between precision and familiarity.

Dates With dates I opt for familiarity over precision and use Western dates almost exclusively rather than Muslim dates, although it is important for an understanding of Islam to have an awareness of its calendar. Appendix III contains information about the Islamic calendar. When appropriate, ce (Common Era) or bce (Before the Common Era) will be used because they are a bit more ecumenical than ad (Anno Domini, TheY ear of the Lord) and bc (Before Christ). If a Muslim date is given it will be labeled Hijri or h.

An introductory overview of Islam As has been suggested, there are almost as many Muslim views of Islam as there are Muslims. The following is one such view that might be given by an educated person with fairly good knowledge of the West. (It has been written by the author but shown for comment to several Muslims. Since it is putatively by a Muslim, it is in the first person, “we”.) Although this is only one of many possible statements, and in particular presents a Sunni perspective (discussed in chapter 8), I believe it can serve as good starting point in the quest to understand Islam, but not an ending point. Islam means submission or commitment to God and what this involves is stated in the words by which we witness to our faith, known as the shahāda or “Formula of Witness”: “There is no god but God; Muhammad is the Messenger of God.” The rest is commentary, but commentary is necessary. God is the source and ruler of the universe and nature submits to Him. The stars in their galaxies, the sun and its planets, the mountains, the plains, the rivers and

97 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

oceans, the plants and animals, large and small, all follow the courses of action He has laid out for them. In fact, the orderliness of nature is one of the most powerful evidences of the existence of one God. The main exception to this is human beings. Our bodies obey God as do other natural things, but when it comes to moral decisions we have the power to disobey God and we often do. In short, nature is always muslim (submitting to God) but humans have to choose to be so. God placed the first man and woman in a paradise, but they disobeyed and so he placed them here on earth, where life is a struggle. They expressed sorrow for their disobedience and God forgave them but they remained on earth where their descendants continue the moral struggle, to be rewarded or punished after death depending on their faith, their actions and God’s grace. How do we know what God wants us to do? In part we can discover this from the laws of nature and also from our human nature insofar as we are born with a God-given inclination to worship and obey Him (called fiṭra), though our lower impulses and our society draw us away from this to a greater or lesser degree. God has therefore also sent us prophets and messengers to inform and remind us of His will. The first messenger was the first man, Adam, and others have included Nūḥ (Noah), Ibrāhīm (Abraham), Mūsā (Moses), Dāwūd (David) and ‘Īsā (Jesus). These and many others brought messages from God to their societies. In all cases the core of the message was that there is no god but God, that no idols or natural forces or human rulers should be considered worthy of worship or complete obedience, which are due only to God, and that we should not give undue rein to our personal desires or to worldly success. In addition they brought specific moral and social rules that varied slightly due to differences among their societies. Some received scriptures from God for their people, such as the Tawrā (Torah) given to Moses, the Zubūr (Psalms) given to David and the Injīl (Gospel) given to Jesus. Their later followers, however, made changes in their teachings. Jesus, for example, was a messenger, but his followers made him into the son of God and part of a divine trinity, something that we reject. Some six centuries after Jesus, God sent his final messenger to confirm the messages of the previous messengers and clarify points where disputes and misunderstanding had arisen. This was Muhammad, the son of Abdullah, who was born in the city of Mecca, in Arabia, in 570 ce and received his first revelation from God in 610. For the next thirteen years he preached God’s message to a small group of followers in the face of increasing opposition and persecution from the Meccan leaders. In 622 he had the opportunity to move with most of his followers to another city, which we now know as Medina. This event is called theHijra or “Emigration” and was the turning point in his efforts. In Medina he was able to create what amounted to an Islamic state in today’s parlance. He could not avoid armed conflict with his Meccan opponents, whose forces were initially stronger than his, but after eight years of struggle he prevailed. He then received the Meccans into his community, forgiving

98 IntroductionCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution even his most bitter opponents. He died two years later, in 632. Under his immediate successors the rest of Arabia accepted Islam. Muslim armies then spread Muslim rule beyond Arabia until, within a century, it covered a large stretch of land from Spain in the west to what is now Pakistan in the east. These lands were now open to the preaching of Islam although their inhabitants were not compelled to become Muslims. Eventually, however, the attractions of Islam, including its pure monotheism and its concern for human brotherhood and social justice, led most to accept it. In time Islam spread further, mainly through peaceful activities of merchants and others, and an Islamic civilization developed with accomplishments in philosophy, science, art, architecture and social organization that made it one of the great civilizations of all time. Later Western accomplishments in philosophy and science have been built on foundations laid by Muslims. For Muslims God’s will, as well as other knowledge, is revealed through the Qur’an and the Sunna (teaching and example) of Muhammad. The Qur’an consists of the verbatim words of God, revealed gradually to Muhammad over the twenty- three years of his career, memorized by him and others and written down by scribes. God has preserved it from any modification. The Sunna consists of words and deeds of Muhammad, which were also recorded and somewhat later collected as we have them now. These are not direct revelation in the sense that the Qur’an is, but God protected Muhammad from error. The Qur’an and theSunna are the basic sources for the Sharī‘a, the law of God by which we are called to live. Scholars have interpreted these sources in order to apply them to new situations and this interpretation is called fiqh (literally “understanding”, more often translated as “law” or “ jurisprudence”). We believe that God has guided these scholars though not to the same level as the Holy Qur’an and the Sunna. Islam is also concerned for the inner spiritual life and this has been expressed especially in the Ṣūfī movement, whose teachers provide guidance for individuals in their personal quest for God, as well as providing for certain social needs. The central beliefs of Islam are belief in God, His angels, His scriptures, His messengers, the Last Day, when all will be raised from the dead and judged, and His determination of good and ill. The most important practices, or Pillars, of Islam are affirmation of the shahāda, ṣalāh (a structured form of prayer five times a day, often written salat), fasting in the month of Ramadan, giving zakāh (alms or poor tax, often written zakat), and performing the Ḥajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) at least once in one’s lifetime if one is able. To this some would add jihād, striving in the path of God whether in war or in moral and spiritual struggle. Jihād is undoubtedly important but most do not include it among the Pillars. Islamic practice is not limited to these, however. In fact, we believe that the Shari‘a applies to all areas of life, whether worship, personal and family life, economics, politics and all forms of culture. We are called on to discover God’s will and follow it in all areas of life and to do this, not only as individuals but also as societies.

99 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Some speak of giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s, but in reality everything is God’s. Therefore, politics is important to Islam. In fact, the major division between Muslims, that between Sunnis and Shi‘is, began with political differences among Muhammad’s followers. Although important differences continue between them, they generally agree on the most basic things. While the Shari‘a guides all areas of life, it is not unduly restrictive because it takes account of human weaknesses and its interpretation is sufficiently flexible to deal with all situations. God in the Qur’an tells us that He has not made our religion hard for us. Over the last two centuries Western domination and influence have resulted often in putting Western secular institutions and practices in the place of Islamic ones. Today there is an effort to re-Islamize society. For many this means establishing Islamic states, i.e. states governed according to the Shari‘a, and also using Islamic banks, wearing Islamic clothing and other things. Others believe it is not necessary to go so far and believe many Western-derived practices are in accord with God’s will. It is also worth noting that many Westerners have been attracted to Islam and find it meets their spiritual needs. Ever since Adam and Ḥawwā (Eve) were expelled from paradise, human life has been a struggle. We hope for material success in this struggle, but the real success is to struggle in the way God wants us to. The person who calls us toṣalāh says, “ … come to ṣalāh, come to success”.

Key points • The violence associated with Islam in the media in recent years does not represent most Muslims. • Islam exists at three levels, personal commitment, religion as a system of beliefs and practices, culture and civilization. • We do not here concern ourselves with whether Islam is true or what is the “true Islam”. • Our goal is at least empathetic, usually sympathetic, understanding of Islam and Muslims. • Translations of key terms can be misleading, so we must consider carefully what is being said. • Islam means submission or commitment to God and no worship of anything else. • Muhammad was the last of a series of messengers from God. His scripture, the Qur’an, and his Sunna constitute the basic sources of authority for Muslim life. • The Shari‘a in principle applies to all areas of life, including politics.

100 IntroductionCopyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Discussion questions 1. What would you say to someone who claims that Islam is a violent religion and cites various media reports? 2. Can we speak of an “essence” of Islam? If so, what might it be? 3. The Bible and the Qur’an are both scriptures. Would you assume that Muslims are keen to translate the Qur’an into as many languages as Christians have been with the Bible? (The answer will come in a later chapter, but see what you think now.) 4. “Islam is not a religion and Muhammad is not its founder” (G. Jensen, Militant Islam, London and Sydney: Pan Books, 1979, 17). What do you think? 5. On the basis of this chapter, what do you think will be the most interesting and the most difficult things in your efforts to understand Islam?

Critical thinking box 1.1 In an article about teaching the Bible in schools entitled “Religion Without Truth” Stanley Fish questions whether we can actually “bracket” the truth claims of religion given that these truth claims are central to religions such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam. “The secular project … counsels respect for all religions and calls upon us to celebrate their diversity. But religion’s truth claims don’t want your respect. They want your belief and, finally, your soul. They are jealous claims. Thou shalt have no other God before me.” Does this represent a valid criticism of the position taken in this chapter’s text? For Fish’s whole article see http://select.nytimes.com/2007/03/31/ opinion/31fishs.html (accessed 5 September 2013).

Critical thinking box 1.2 Reread carefully the section on “An introductory overview of Islam” and ask yourself what questions this raises in your mind and/or in what ways this statement challenges your own personal beliefs.

Companion website Includes some basic statistics and a brief but important quote on empathy.

101 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Introduction

Further reading Al-Faruqi, Ismail R. (1979) Islam. Niles, IL: Argus Communications. (Basic introduction by a prominent Muslim scholar and leader in the United States.) Haeri, Shaykh Fadhalla (1989) Living Islam: East and West. Shaftesbury, UK: Element Books in association with Zahra Publications. (By a contemporary spiritual leader. Moral and spiritual approach, organized topically.) Haeri, Shaykh Fadlallah (2004) The Thoughtful Guide to Islam. Winchester and New York: O Books. (Historical approach. Also under the title Elements of Islam.) Mahmud, Abdel Haleem (1978) The Creed of Islam. London: World of Islam Festival Trust. (Basic introduction by a leading traditional Egyptian scholar.) Mawdudi (Maududi), Abul A‘la (1960) Towards Understanding Islam. Lahore: Idara Tarjumanul-Quran. (By a leading Islamist, very readable.) Martin, Richard C. (ed.) (1985 [2001]) Approaches to Islam in Religious Studies. Oxford: Oneworld. (Foreword and chapter 1 provide a critical history and survey of the field to the mid-1980s, with a brief updating in the Preface. Other chapters deal with particular aspects of the study of Islam and will be relevant to later chapters.) Ernst, Carl and Martin, Richard (eds.) (2010) Rethinking Islamic Studies: From Orientalism to Cosmopolitanism. Columbia, SC: The University of South Carolina Press. (The Introduction provides a good discussion of the recent history and current state of the field, though a bit advanced for the beginner. Other chapters relate more to the later chapters of this book.) Ernst, Carl (2004) Following Muhammad: Rethinking Islam in the Contemporary World. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. (Chapters 1–2 deal with our approach to Islam; other chapters deal with the sources of Islam, ethics and spirituality.)

Online resources Please refer to the electronic resources listed in the further reading section on pp. 405–6 and also the websites listed at the end of some chapters.

102 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

chapter

1 How to Study Religion

The door to an ancient temple at Angkor, Cambodia, suggesting the mysterious adventure of a spiritual quest (Chris Lees/Alamy)

103

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 1 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

Learning Objectives After reading this chapter, you should be able to: • Explain why you think it is, or is not, important to study religion today. Then offer examples of your own of what religion is in the twenty-first century and has been in the past. • Say what is meant by referring to religion as postulating “another reality.” • Explain the definitions of religion of representative thinkers past and present. • Formulate and defend the descriptive definition of religion that seems best to you. (This means a definition not based on what you believe is the right or true religion but one which simply describes what religion is in human life.) Compare the definition you formulate now with what you would have said before reading the chapter. • Explain Joachim Wach’s three forms of religious expression. • Reflect on what might be the view of religion appropriate to different disciplines, such as history, sociology, and psychology. • Understand the arrangement of chapters in this book.

PICTURES OF RELIGION What does it mean to study religion in the twenty-first century? In our generation, one finds many different attitudes toward religion. However, most agree that it is important to understand religious faith for several reasons. Religion is essential for understanding history, including the history of art, archi- tecture, and literature. Flip through any history book, and see how many conflicts, and significant causes from the spread of Islam to the abolition of slavery, are linked to religious movements. Go to an art museum, and note how much traditional painting and sculpture is religiously inspired. Check out the great buildings in any traditional society, and see how many cathedrals, temples, or mosques are among them. It would be hopeless to try to get inside this history and art without some comprehension of the motivation inspiring religious works and their creators. Nor is it just a matter of times past. Any reading of or listening to the news, including the speeches of politicians, reminds us that religion has considerable social, political, and even economic influence today. Its institutions, and people’s beliefs toward marriage, medical procedures, the role of women, the role of the state in edu- cation and welfare, all are major parts of the debates of our times. On a larger scale, religion is still invoked on behalf of war and the foreign policy of several nations, even if it may not be the only factor involved. It is also the case that religious attitudes and experiences continue to have an effect on personal psychology, and so can help us understand why some people act and feel the way they do. Finally religious claims raise important philosophical questions that thoughtful people should want to think through. Is there a God? What is the real nature and

104

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 2 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

purpose of human life? How should I act when ethical decisions are difficult? And much else. Clearly, this is something we should know more about. What is religion? Everyone has some idea, perhaps some mental picture, to go with the word. If one tries to turn that idea or picture into a clear, comprehensive defi- nition, however, the task may be surprisingly difficult. First, then, let us look at two quite different examples of the phenomena often called religious. Picture the great shrine at Ise (pronounced Ee-say) in Japan on the eve of the Harvest Festival. Ise is the preeminent place of worship of Shinto, the religion of the ancient gods of the island nation. Here at Ise are worshiped Amaterasu, the solar god- dess said to be ancestress of the imperial family, and Toyouke, goddess of food and bestower of plenty. Each of these high goddesses has her own shrine, the two nearly identical temples being about 5 miles apart. Each shrine is a simple, rustic house of unpainted but gold-tipped wood set in a rectangular field spread with white gravel. The field, which holds three or four auxiliary buildings, is surrounded by four wooden palisades. Every 20 years, the entire shrine complex is rebuilt with new wood in exact imitation of the old on an adjacent alternative site, also spread with white gravel. On the night of the Harvest Festival, torches flare in the crisp October air when a procession of white-robed priests bearing boxes of food offerings, their black wooden shoes crackling like snare drums on the white gravel, approaches the shrine. The priests enter behind the fences and are lost to the observer’s view as they carefully spread the plates of rice, water, salt, rice wine, vegetables, and seafood before the encased mirror that represents the presence of Amaterasu. One can, however, hear the shrill, mysterious music of the reed flutes, so suggestive of uncanny divine activ- ity. A prayer is read, and then the offerings are slowly and solemnly removed from the boxes and presented on an offering table. The priests next proceed to a smaller shrine on higher ground above the principal temple. This is a shrine to the aramitama, the “rough spirit” or aggressive side of the divine Amaterasu. Here offerings are also presented. Later, in early morning while it is still dark, the whole ritual is repeated. The following night it is repeated—again, twice—at the shrine of Toyouke. Why it is done twice and why it is done at night are matters lost in centuries of tradition at the Ise shrines (if there ever existed an explicit reason). The very sense of mystery evoked by the feeling of something lingering from a half-forgotten past, and the atmosphere of mystic wonder in which actions seem weighted with meanings the human mind does not quite grasp, give Shinto rites their particular kind of religious aura. Now turn to another scene. It suggests not only one kind of religious experience, conversion, but also one major type of religious personality, the founder of a great religious movement lasting many centuries, in this case Jesus. Although based on real experiences, the following retelling is a stylized and idealized account of religious experience in a Christian context. It is not presented as being representative of all Christian experience. It offers, however, a subjective counterpart to the preceding reli- gious expression in rite. An American girl was in her room reading the New Testament and praying. As she read, a vivid image came before her mind’s eye. She saw Jesus on a hill, and he seemed to be surrounded by beseeching figures in ragged garments, some clearly sick

105

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 3 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

The Grand Shrines of Ise, consisting of the Kotai-jingu, or Naiku (Inner Shrine, pictured here), and the Toyouke-daijingu or Geku (Outer Shrine) (Gideon Mendel/Corbis)

or deformed. He stood out because he was taller, was dressed in something a bit fuller and whiter, and was on higher ground. Above all, he had an air of power and calm amidst the suffering, and his hands were raised in healing. His face possessed a simple majesty, and his eyes made you want to keep looking at them. Then he seemed to step out of the gospel scene to look directly at the American girl. He beckoned. She prayed on. Deep and warm feelings about the image sang through her, rising and falling like cresting surfs of molten light. She saw other scenes from the story— the manger, the cross with the bleeding flesh on it, and the garden where the ecstatic women saw the same person in calm white outside the empty tomb. These tableaux grew brighter and brighter. In contrast, her life, as it came into view beside the mind- painted images, was gray, lacking all sparkle or color. Indeed, much in it seemed worse than gray as she thought of things she wished could be washed out or made to belong to another life. She recalled people she liked and even envied who talked of accepting Christ and of being forgiven or being saved. She saw the beckoning hand wanting to make her a part of this story. She felt herself entering the vision and prayed still more deeply. She then sensed clear and distinct words being spoken in her, almost as though by a new person com- ing into being within her mind and body, words of accepting Jesus Christ as the center of her personal faith. She arose, tingling, feeling full of light, and almost floating, with a queer but beautiful sort of quiet deep-seated joy. She sat down, with little sense of time or place, just bathing in the new marvelous experience.

106

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 4 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

ANOTHER REALITY You have just read two very different vignettes that have one thing in common. Both would be accepted by most people as expressions of human religion or culture, first of all because they are thoughts, feelings, or actions that do not meet ordinary, practical needs in ordinary, practical ways. They do not directly spin cloth or pick grain. Even if they were directed toward a practical end, such as a better harvest, they do not go about it through a practical course of planting and cultivating. They add to what is practical by implying another point of reference and another level of activity. If that point of reference or level is more than human, probably it would be called religious. Even if a religious act is a dance or prayer for rain, it does not set about meet- ing this practical need by using ordinary deduction about cause and effect. Contrary to what some have believed, primitive peoples are nearly as aware as moderns of the distinction between the practical and the nonpractical. Certainly modern Shinto priests at a Harvest Festival are as aware of the facts of meteorology and agricultural science as are Americans expressing gratitude to God on Thanksgiving Day. Religion, however, adds other dimensions full of color, stylized acts, and sym- bols that outsiders sometimes see as bizarre and totally nonsensical. In this they are akin to such human practices as wearing clothes even in hot weather, writing poetry, or flying to the moon. These are also impractical things that like religion must be profoundly human, for they are only dimly foreshadowed in the behavior of our animal kin. Something in these gestures must be making a statement about a side of being human that is not just concerned with practicality. They must be trying to tell us—emphatically—that there is another side to being human. Apart from speech and fire, in fact, what most obviously separates even very primal human societ- ies from animals are such artifacts as haunting masks, paintings on stones of spirit ancestors, and the magic rocks or tufts of grass of sorcerers. They tell us across great gulfs of cultural development that here were creatures who did not just deal in practicalities but who feared pictures in the mind; thought about who they were and where they came from; told stories; sensed the working of indirect invisible currents of force in the cosmos as well as the obvious; and doubtlessly knew wonder, humor, joy, and dread. We could go back to the very beginnings of human culture as we know it, the stunning cave paintings of such sites as the Lascaux and Chauvet caverns in southern France. The latter, discovered only in 1994, contains the oldest known cave paint- ings of all, the earliest made perhaps some 35,000 years ago, and was the subject of a remarkable documentary by Werner Herzog, Cave of Forgotten Dreams. These incredibly dynamic and graceful pictures, nearly all of powerful animals, drawn far underground in pitch darkness except for the light of torches, may—according to various theories—have represented hunting magic, the site of initiations, myths told in a sort of code, or the visions of shamans. We may never know. But clearly they had some significance far beyond the immediate and practical in the everyday sense; they were a way of enhancing the meaning of human life through symbol and creativity.1

107

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 5 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

DEFINITIONS OF RELIGION Now let us summarize the definitional and interpretive ideas about religion of a few representative philosophers and scholars to give an impression of their range and perspective. An important reminder: Bear in mind the difference between a personal definition of religion—what religion means to me—and a general, descriptive one that would enable one to answer the question—what is the religion of this or that society? For religious studies, one needs to have a working view of what religion is generically, whether or not one agrees with or likes it. This is looking at religion from the outside. It is, of course, all right to have one’s own religious beliefs and practices—religion looked at, as it were, from the inside. For purposes of religious studies, it is important to try to keep them separate. However, sometimes it is hard to keep the two apart, and even the best scholars have not always been successful at this. Here are some scholarly examples of definitions of religion. For Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834), generally recognized as the founder of modern liberal Protestant theology, who under the influence of the romantic move- ment recognized the importance of emotion as well as logic in religious understand- ing, religion is an individual expression of a “feeling of absolute dependence.”2 Émile Durkheim (1858–1917), one of the founders of modern sociology, viewed society as the real sacred, and therefore society and religion as virtually inseparable and indispensable to each other. Moreover, “religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden.”3 However, this does not set those things apart from society, but only from the ordinary, everyday, “profane” aspects of society; religious rites and objects are special precisely because they are that which unifies and legitimates society on a higher level than the everyday. That all-important role comes out in ceremonies such as sacred dances. Religious occasions happen when the social “effervescence” generated by the group makes real a sense of the people’s sacredness as a society.4 William James (1842–1910), the American pragmatic philosopher and psycholo- gist, swung back toward a more individualistic view of religion as grounded in personal experience in his great work, The Varieties of Religious Experience. Religion is “the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they appre- hend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine.”5 As to what lies behind that sense of the divine, James tells us it “consists of the belief that there is an unseen order, and that our supreme good lies in harmoniously adjusting our- selves thereto.”6 This could, of course, be a society’s collective adjustment, but clearly for James the real locus of religiosity is in the individual, not the Durkheimian society as a whole. Perhaps that is because James’ book dealt with personal religious experiences, many of them in more individualistic recent times, whereas Durkeim treated of primal societies like those of Australian aboriginals. However, it is also a matter of perspective; we will later reflect on ways in which religion is inevitably a social experience in its lan- guage and concepts even when it most seems individual, even when it is secret. For Karl Marx (1818–1883), whose ideas greatly influenced modern socialism and communism, religion was basically the result of an unhealthy society, in which one class—capitalist owners of the means of production—exploited another—the

108

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 6 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

workers—for their labor. For the exploiting class, religion could justify their privi- leged place by saying it was God’s will, and they could use it to control the masses. For the exploited, religion offered the consolations of piety and the hope of a better world after death. In this context Marx made the famous statement that religion is “the opium of the people.” However, Marx deserves that his whole statement be heard:

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is re- quired for their real happiness.7

For another major figure in the modern critique of religion, Sigmund Freud (1856–1939), the father of psychoanalysis, faith was a symptom or expression of incomplete or pathological development within a personality. It might take the form of an adult still yearning for an all-perfect, problem-solving, rule-enforcing parent figure remembered from childhood, now “projected” into a divine Father or Mother on high. Or it may be the “oceanic” consciousness of the infant before her limits are well understood, now become mysticism. The point is that, amidst the confusion, dis- appointments, and frequent feelings of helplessness in life, we desperately want these concepts to be true. Religious ideas, Freud said, are “illusions, [but] fulfilments of the oldest, strongest and most urgent wishes of mankind. The secret of their strength lies in the strength of these wishes.”8 For Freud’s one-time disciple, Carl Gustav Jung (1875–1961), who broke with the older man largely because of Freud’s emphasis on the sexual and pathological explanation of religion, religion is instead a treasure house of resources for under- standing our innermost nature. The world’s myths and rituals are like a diorama of great figures that occur over and over in story, and also in dreams: the Wise Old Man, the Great Mother, the Hero, the Maiden, the Shadow. These are real aspects of the self, and can be rightly aligned as one individuates, or becomes who one truly is, through inner processes somewhat parallel to religious initiation and ritual. Jung has had con- siderable influence in religious studies, above all in the study of myth. Moving back to immediate psychological experience, the German theologian and historian of religion Rudolf Otto (1869–1937) perceived religion as experience of the Holy, or the numinous. The Holy, when truly met in revelation or when inwardly felt, is mysterium tremendum et fascinans, always mysterious, strange, tremendous, and fascinating. It draws us by its uncanny power, yet also fills us with dread. Religion evokes a kind of feeling, but Otto heavily stressed the difference between a God evok- ing the numinous kind of feeling from the God of reason, or even the deity of ethics or devotion. Writing of Yahweh in the Hebrew Scriptures, Otto contended that this deity’s “holiness,” like his “fury,” his “jealousy,” his “wrath,” his nature as a “consum- ing fire,” is the result not only of divine “righteousness” or humanlike emotion, but is all “enclosed and permeated with the ‘awfulness’ and the ‘majesty,’ the ‘mystery’ and the ‘augustness,’ of His non-rational divine nature.”9

109

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 7 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

Several of these strands of social and experiential religion come together in the work of the historian of religion Mircea Eliade (1907–1986). The title of one of his basic books, The Sacred and the Profane, is a key to his thought. Drawing from Durkheim’s work, he perceived humankind yearning for transcendence of the ordinary, “profane” world of everyday space and time. We want, at least some of us, also to share in the mythic and absolute world of origins, the “other time” when the gods made the world and heroes walked the earth. Times of religious festival and rite are sacred times that try to recapture the strong primal time; temples, holy mountains, and sacred trees represent sacred space, places set apart as ways of access to that other world. Religion, then, is that which shows ways in which homo religiosus, “religious man,” “attempts to remain as long as possible in a sacred universe.”10 Looking for such patterns or structures as sacred space and time, symbolic ways of transcendence, and the importance of a New Year’s festival, consistent through many religions though the names and externals may change, characterized the work of Durkheim and Eliade, and is called structuralism. Finally, we will mention certain recent scholars of religion who have taken a quite different, untraditional approach. Recognizing the immense complexity and diversity of what has been called religion, whether by religious practitioners themselves or by students like those above endeavoring to find some common theme that would enable to say what is or is not religion anywhere, at any time, they have concluded that this is the wrong way of going about it. It is asking the wrong question. Acknowledging that a tremendous amount of data exists out there about myth, ritual, and all the rest, no one such thing as “religion” as a collective term or concept appears, they say. It’s all facets of culture, psychology, or history, which could be looked at in several ways, but not necessarily as “religion” in the sense of something special or unique. As Jonathan Z. Smith, a progenitor of this school, put it in arguing that religion as we study it in the classroom is an artificial construct, “It is the study of religion that invented ‘reli- gion.’”11 We call something religion in order to define and study it, just as a biologist might define a fish as belonging to a particular species, but that does not mean our human labels have any meaning outside the laboratory, or the library. Russell McCutcheon has gone on to insist that this labeling happens out in the cul- ture as well. Religion as social formation is so branded by the culture, and different cul- tures may have different ways of using this nomenclature. Therefore, following John F. Wilson, McCutcheon contends that “the study of religion has no special methodology,” but rather is, or should be, “a nonessentialist, multidisciplinary field.”12 (As we will see later, “essentialism,” a notion much criticized by some philosophers today, means attrib- uting a special character to a whole class of entities, like religion in all its variety, as in saying that religion as such is sui generis, of its own type and like nothing else.) Another scholar, Talal Asad, has narrowed the definition down to the point of calling religion social and ritual activities that possess special authority within their particular culture.13

THREE FORMS OF RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION AND A WORKING DEFINITION Clearly a definition of religion adequately covering everything usually considered “religion” in a balanced way is very difficult. Indeed, as W. Cantwell Smith has pointed out, religion in the sense the word is used today, to speak of different “religions” such

110

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 8 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

as Judaism or Hinduism, is a modern idea.14 So, to an increasing extent, is the idea that one’s religion is entirely personal and as it were detachable from the rest of cul- ture, so that one can consider oneself a good citizen without adhering to the religion of that society. There are no words in classic languages such as Greek or Sanskrit mean- ing exactly what religion now means, and most ancients would not have thought of the cultus of Athena or the Vedic sacred fire as “their religion” in the modern sense of something separate from the rest of their culture, which you could either participate in or not according to your personal “beliefs.” It was just part of who they were, like the kind of food they ate or who they might marry. So it is that today, to a significant extent, religion is a matter of what individual students, including yourself, want to call religion. In this book, we will find examples of everything from “hardcore” Islam or Christianity to Disneyland or the “cult” of Elvis spoken of as in some way religious. You decide. For the purposes of this book, though, here is what we will regard a working defi- nition of religion. We will start with William James’ reference to belief in a transcen- dent or “unseen order.” Then we will say that, to be religion in the full historical sense of the term, that “unseen order” must be visibly expressed through the three “forms of religious expression,” proposed by the sociologist of religion Joachim Wach.15 According to Wach, the three basic forms of religious expression are the theo- retical, which covers what is thought and said, the stories, rhetoric, doctrines, and ideologies of religion; the practical, which includes what is done, the rites, worship, spiritual techniques, and customary practices; and the sociological, referring to the types of groups, leadership, and interpersonal relations that appear. All these are best understood if they are seen as ways in which one component of experience—the tran- scendent experience—evokes response in ideas and stories, in actions, and in forming

A girl praying, suggesting the inner life of religion (robyelo357/Fotolia)

111

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 9 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

groups. (Later in this book, we look in more detail at these three forms. Chapter 4 deals in large part with the practical form of rite and related practices. Chapter 11 treats the sociological side of religion, showing how a religious group or institution is in itself a symbol of transcendent reality. Chapter 12 discusses the theoretical form of religious expression and endeavors to demonstrate how religious words, sentences, stories, and concepts are symbols at the same time.) A word might be said about this “working definition” in response to the critiques cited above of the academic study of religion as too much is based on an “essentialist” (that is, having its own unique nature) view of the subject. These critics, discussed fur- ther toward the end of Chapter 12, very rightly point out that different people respond differently to religion, some being nonreligious virtually by nature. From the subjec- tive human perspective, certainly there is no one unique thing that is religion, but practically as many religions, or nonreligions, as there are people. However, it could be responded that to look at the matter just from the subjective angle is one-sided. That may be a scholarly bias here akin to that of those styles of reli- gion that put all their emphasis on inner faith or feeling. We could also ask what is “said” by such outer structures usually regarded as religious as art, architecture, and ritual, regardless of the feeling they evoke, or do not evoke, in various persons. The Shinto torii or distinctive gate of itself may suggest a passageway from the secular world to a sacred space, whether or not everyone who passes through it has such a feeling. In the same way, Christian Holy Communion, or Muslim prayers toward Mecca, or Buddhist monks in their saffron robes seem to make a statement to the world whether all the world hears

Prehistoric cave painting or cow and horses at Lascaux, France, recalling the distant beginnings of symbolism and perhaps sacred rites (Glasshouse Images/Alamy)

112

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 10 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

it or not. As the structuralist would point out, these are often consistent: Many religions have sacred times, like festivals; demarcate sacred places, like temples or shrines or churches or even an inward sacred place in the heart; and designate people who have special religious roles sometimes marked by special dress. Whether one calls a view like this “essentialism” or not may be a matter of choice, but in any case it would not necessarily imply any supernaturalist view of religion, only that for whatever reason our human ways of expressing an “unseen order” tend to fall into common patterns or forms of expression. Religion, in short, has many sides. As we will see in various ways throughout this book, its origin and meaning has been understood as an evolutionary adaptation in early humans, with roots in animal behavior; anthropologically and sociologically as a system of social identity and control; and psychologically, for its role in dealing with problems, or even neurologically, “hardwired” into the biology of the brain. It is no less understood experientially, if one takes into account experiences of “the Holy” or “the Sacred,” whether in revelation or in mystical experience. Last, but not least, there is the role of religion as response to intellectual and philosophical questions about the origin, nature, and destiny of the world and humanity; about evil; about ethical obliga- tions; about justice and the social order. In the chapters following, we will suggest, at least, the place of all these perspectives in religious studies.

THE STRUCTURE OF THIS BOOK After this introductory chapter, and after one giving necessary background on the his- tory of religion, we will get down to business with a series of chapters on different ways of looking at religion, followed by example chapters. The sequence of chapter topics seeks, broadly speaking, to follow the way a per- son like you or me might actually become acquainted with a religion, whether it is a familial religion learned in childhood or an adult encounter. By extension, we can take that same process to escort us through familiarization with the broader social and scholarly meanings of religion. By and large, it is not really the abstract doctrinal concepts or advanced philo- sophical arguments that one first meets, but rather a faith’s stories, symbols, rites, and sociological matrix. Here we strive to follow the order in which religion is learned: beginning with childhood or novice listening to myth or story, then going on to seeing symbol and rite, then to the psychology of religion to keep pace with the new feelings and thoughts one has had in hearing the stories and seeing the rites. On from there we engage with the religious groups our growing child or seeker will inevitably encoun- ter on his or her quest, and then will face religion in its artistic and popular forms, including today’s religion on the Internet. The quester will next want to deal with the philosophical and belief issues the journey presents, and finally with its expression in action: How does one then live? Described topically, then, the chapters will be as follows: Chapter 1. We first present this Introduction to religious studies. Chapter 2. In order to get a larger perspective, we then survey the history of what we call religion on planet earth.

113

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 11 20/11/13 12:07 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

Chapter 3. In this book, after each substantive chapter, will come one presenting a concrete example of the topic. Following history, the example will be mythology, a form of religious discourse undoubtedly known to humanity from our earliest origins as speaking and imagining beings. Chapter 4. Along with myth, the first humans must have made or done things, like the cave paintings mentioned above, to create what we would call symbol and rite. These will be the topic of this chapter; anyone encountering a religion is likely first to hear its stories and see its symbols and practices. Chapter 5. It will now be time to reflect on the psychology of religion, to under- stand what is going in the mind as it deals with myth and symbol as the individual matures in the faith. Chapter 6. To provide examples to go with the psychology of religion, we will look at various spiritual paths and means of salvation presented in religion. Chapter 7. Perhaps the deepest problem dealt with by religion in its myths and practices as well as its psychology and philosophy is the problem of evil. It is time now to look at it. Chapter 8. Next comes the sociology of religion, the groups, institutions, and forms of leadership incumbent in religion as we know it. Chapter 9. All of the forgoing is expressed in religious art, from the colorful im- ages embedded in its mythology to the architecture of the buildings within which its people gather, and the music performed therein, together with its poetry and stories. Chapter 10. A special case of the expression of religion is its popular forms; pop- ular religion offers examples of religious art and groups. Chapter 11. By way of further example of religious art and sociology, we will consider the remarkable role of religion in the computer age, which is changing so much about how we live. Chapter 12. It is now time to deal with religious ideas, doctrines, and philosophy; they did not come first, since religion is most often encountered first in its more everyday phenomena, but a faith’s great ideas are very important. Chapter 13. As examples of religious doctrine, we will study beliefs about the afterlife and the end of the world. Chapter 14. Finally, how does religion affect the way we made decisions about right behavior? We come now to religion and ethics. Chapter 15. As a case study in ethics, we will take the all-important issue of reli- gion and war.

Summary In this chapter, we have first asked the question: What does it mean to study religion in the twenty-first century? Some reasons are: It is important for understanding his- tory, including the history of art and literature; it still has important social and political influence; and it influences the behavior of people in many ways, whether medical

114

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 12 03/12/13 4:09 PM Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • How to Study Religion

choices or in personal psychology; the philosophical questions raised by religion remain important. Examples of religion are given from Shinto ceremony to American conversion; we may see how they all reflect awareness of another reality from the ordinary. We next examine definitions of religion presented by a number of important thinkers, noting the wide variety of approaches to this topic represented by them. Our own working definition is James’ “unseen order” expressed through Joachim Wach’s three forms of religious expression: the theoretical, practical, and sociological. The chapters in this book are arranged roughly so as to present the way in which a child would gradually learn about the religion of his or her family and culture, or in which a person encountering a religion would perceive and begin to understand it, go through the historical, mythological, practice, sociological, philosophical, and ethical dimensions of religion.

Key Terms mystical, p. 11 sacred, p. 6 mysticism, p. 7 sociology, p. 6 numinous, p. 7 structuralism, p. 8 priest, p. 3 subjective, p. 3 rite, p. 3 three forms of religious expression, p. 9 ritual, p. 3 transcendence, p. 8

115

M01_ELL7597_04_C01.indd 13 04/12/13 2:30 PM M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 3

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution CHAPTER 1

Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

THE BIBLE’S HISTORY AND THE HISTORY OF JUDAISM According to the stories recorded in Genesis, the first book of the Hebrew Bible, Judaism has its histori- cal origins in an act of obedience. One day long ago, for reasons never clearly explained, the Creator of Heaven and Earth announced to an obscure Mesopotamian peasant named Abram a stunning proposal:

Go forth from your native land and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you. I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you and curse him that curses you; and all the families of the earth shall consider themselves blessed through you. Abram went forth as the Lord had commanded him. (Gen. 12:1–3)

Abram, the Bible relates, went forth as he was told, neither questioning nor resisting the divine command. God soon changed his name to Abraham, “the father of a multitude of nations” (Gen. 17:5). And the rest, as they say, is history. The pages that follow trace the impact of the Hebrew Bible’s image of Abraham’s obedience, as well as that of many other biblical heroes, upon the history of Judaism. But in order to do so, it is important to keep a basic postulate in mind: the history of Judaism portrayed in the Hebrew Bible, as a history beginning with Abraham’s act of obedience, is a vividly imagined interpretation of the Israelite past that has a profound impact upon later Jewish generations. But, for all that, it is not an actual record of an event from the past. Before beginning our discussion of the history of Judaism, we must explore for a moment the meaning of this observation and its implications. As comparative historians of religion, our task is not merely to repeat the biblical story of the origins of Judaism. Rather, our task is, first, to offer a theory of how that story came into focus at a particular moment in the history of the Jews. Second, we attempt to show how that story was understood through centuries of interpretation. We ask, How did the story of Abraham’s obedience come to define a model of piety in ancient Judaism? How was it transformed, as successive generations of Jews found in it the meaning of their own obedience to God?

The Interaction of Scripture and Tradition In order to begin historical thinking about the Hebrew Bible’s depiction of the origins and history of Judaism, it is important to keep in mind two terms of special significance for historians of religions. These terms are “scripture” and “tradition.” By scripture, we mean a writing or a collection of writings 116 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 4

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

preserved by religious communities as authoritative which tradition is important in understanding the sources of teaching or worship. Scriptures are com- life of scriptures. As scriptures are handed on from monly memorized, recited aloud as the basis for inspi- generation to generation, they must be interpreted so rational teaching, may be quoted in the course of a that the unchangeable text continues to remain community’s prayer services, and commonly serve as meaningful to those who revere it. the basis of elaborate interpretive reflection by mem- Unfamiliar words, used by authors now centuries bers of religious communities. removed from their current readers, cannot be replaced The main point to remember about scriptures is with more up-to-date terms; rather, they must be that they are historical objects crafted in human cul- defined. Obscure concepts or morally troubling events tures. The texts are preserved by human memory and or teachings cannot be revised to suit contemporary recorded in human languages, even if they are tastes; rather, they must be explained. In many cases, believed to have originally been delivered to the translations must be made for those who are unfamiliar writers, complete and perfect, by a God or heavenly with the original language of the scriptural texts. All of messenger. They enjoy special prestige as “holy” or this work of transmitting the meaning of scriptures “sacred” texts only because human communities without altering the original texts is also tradition—the have at some point agreed to treat them in certain tradition of interpretation. Commonly, religious commu- ways. Any text regarded as scripture came to be so nities sharing identical scriptures—think of Judaism because a community, formally or informally, so and Christianity in relation to the Hebrew Bible—will decided. This decision is often a source of conflict, as differ dramatically in their interpretive traditions. Such different segments of a larger community might dis- differences of interpretive tradition have nourished pute whether this or that writing is truly authoritative religious controversy, given birth to competing reli- for all members. Thus it often happens that a text that gious communities, and even inspired religiously is treated as “scripture” in one community is regarded motivated persecutions of communities stigmatized as simply as “a book” in another. The disputes within “nonbelievers” or “heretics.” the early Christian communities over the status of the Scripture and tradition, to summarize, are inter- “Old Testament” as a Christian scripture—about twined realities, two sides of a coin. Scripture is the which you will read elsewhere in this part—are a case collective term for literary traditions that enjoy the in point. veneration of a specific community. A “canon,” or The decision to regard a text as scripture often closed collection of scripture, is also a tradition, passed brings into play the second term we have intro- on as a unique and unchangeable record of communal duced, “tradition.” Most simply, tradition means memory, belief, and discipline. Finally, there are con- “that which has been handed down from the past.” tinuously evolving traditions of scriptural inter- It is the tradition of reciters and readers that sustains pretation, which transmit to new generations the rich a writing in the life of a religious community long meanings latent in the unchanging scripture. We can enough for it to acquire the exalted status of scrip- perhaps capture the intertwined life of scripture and ture. There are relatively few examples of writings tradition in a single phrase: fluid literary traditions solid- penned by a single known author that have attained ify into unchangeable scripture; scripture in turn generates scriptural authority in that author’s own lifetime; new forms of fluid literary tradition through interpretation.1 even the Qur’an, as you will learn in your study of Islam, is an ambiguous case. Usually, a writing has Abraham and the Origins of Judaism been transmitted for some generations—or even centuries—before achieving its scriptural place in a Perhaps this excursion into the nature of scripture community. That is, a particular writing was a tradi- and tradition will help us clarify the problem with tion, a book handed on as valuable, before it became a which we began—the relation of the biblical picture scripture, a book authoritative because it is holy. of the Israelite past, such as the story of Abraham’s Once a traditional literary work becomes scrip- obedience, to actual records of historical events. ture, it is usually preserved in a more or less fixed The Hebrew Bible, which sketches the core images text that can be changed or emended only with diffi- of Judaic origins as remembered by all forms of culty. Copies are made, but great effort is invested in Judaism, did not come into being all at once as a col- ensuring that the text is reproduced word for word lection of writings between sober black covers. and letter for letter, for nothing in the holy writing Rather, it began life as an amorphous body of diverse can be lost or altered. This leads to yet another way in traditions, many preserved in oral form, in virtually

117 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 5

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel

The biblical books of 1 Samuel, 2 Samuel, 1 Kings, and 2 part of the background of the Genesis stories describing Kings describe the history of the two kingdoms that di- Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Judean traditions, for example, vided Israelite political and religious life from the tenth claim that King David’s first capital, Hebron—a Judean through the sixth centuries BCE. The Kingdom of Judah town—was purchased by Abraham (Gen. 23). Similarly, was, according to the biblical texts, founded by David northern traditions portray Jacob as having purchased (ca. 1000 BCE). A dynastic battle ensued after the death of Shechem, the capital city of the Kingdom of Israel (Gen. his son Solomon (ca. 961–922 BCE). This resulted in the 33:19). Both southern (Gen. 28: 10–19) and northern tradi- formation of two kingdoms, that of Judah in the south- tions (Gen. 35:1–7) locate Abraham’s grandson Jacob at the ern part of Canaan, and that of Israel in the north. Israel shrine at Beth El, which lies in a territory over which each fell to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, and Judah was con- kingdom claimed control. quered by Babylonia in 587 BCE. It is impossible to prove that such stories first origi- Many historians claim that the competition of nated in the context of political and religious rivalry between these kingdoms for religious and political legitimacy is the two kingdoms. But the coincidences are suggestive.

complete independence of one another. These tradi- not have been composed in its present form earlier tions were formulated at a time well before anyone than the fifth through the fourth centuries BCE. could point to a Bible as the official collection of So, although the image of the absolute obedi- revealed writings. ence of Abraham makes a powerful statement of what This means that nearly all of the literature of the it means to follow the God of Israel, it is not a state- Bible reached written form many centuries after the ment that originates in the eighteenth century BCE. events it describes. That is, most biblical writings Rather, as we know it from the book of Genesis, it were composed by people who did not personally seems to be a product of a more recent period. It tells witness the history they recorded. Rather, they relied us that Jews of that (as yet unspecified) period believed upon stories received from tradition for their knowl- in their ancient origins, and it tells us how they pro- edge of the past. Moreover, they often revised or posed to act in light of those beliefs. But we learn combined traditional stories in order to make points nothing from it about the actual religion of Abraham of contemporary relevance. As you might imagine, or even whether he ever existed as a human of flesh this has important implications for our interpretation and blood. The Bible’s story of the first Hebrew, Abraham, of the Abraham story. is best read as a picture of what later Jews sought to become. On the basis of the lifestyle ascribed to him in This sobering thought applies equally to all of the the book of Genesis, that of a herder sometimes forced Bible’s most famous depictions of the early history of to migrate with his flocks in search of food, Abraham Israel—including God’s rescue of his people from seems to have lived a life typical of the Middle East in Egyptian oppression, God’s revelation of covenantal the early second millennium BCE. The problem with teachings to Moses and all Israel at Mt. Sinai, and claiming that stories about him come from that era is God’s exile of his people from their land as a punish- simple: the same kind of life was not unusual ment for disobedience. The Bible provides eyewitness throughout all subsequent centuries and, in fact, con- accounts of none of these events, except, perhaps, for tinues to be lived by some Middle Eastern peoples the last. Nearly all of these images have their origins in even in modern times. More important, stories about literary traditions that, only gradually, were compiled Abraham do not seem to have been known until the into the collection of writings we call the Hebrew Bible. eighth or ninth centuries BCE. These were the early When historians of religion speak of “the ori- centuries of the ancient Israelite kingdoms of Judah gins of Judaism,” therefore, we must mean some- and Israel. In these kingdoms, stories of Abraham’s thing different from what the Hebrew Bible or Jewish migrations in the land were closely associated with tradition means. We cannot begin our historical religious or political centers important to each king- account with Abraham’s act of profound and silent dom. Finally, the present version of the Abraham obedience, or even with the Bible’s vivid depiction of story is recorded in a written text, the book of Genesis, God’s thunderous revelation of his eternal will at which most contemporary historians believe could Mt. Sinai and Israel’s submission to it. These biblical

118 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 6

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

images of Judaism’s origins are not windows reveal- changed to Israel to indicate a transformed relation- ing ancient events, but murals that obscure whatever ship to God (Gen. 32:23–33; 35:9–12). These might lie beneath the surface. In order to identify the family-centered covenants are later broadened into a painters of this mural, we begin by trying to identify national covenant agreement between God and all a time and a place in which such traditions about of Jacob/Israel’s descendants at Sinai (Exod. 20–25). obedience and other similarly heroic actions began to In return for the people of Israel’s obedience, God be gathered together into a coherent collection of promises to grant it a rich land and protection from authoritative writings. We search, in other words, for its enemies. The narrative continues in Nevi’im, those recorders of Israelite tradition who found in the which describes the history of Israel’s life in the land recitation of the acts of such heroes as Abraham com- chosen for it by God, the rise and fall of the king- pelling images upon which to model their own lives. doms of Israel and Judah, and the events surround- Our search begins, therefore, not in ancient ing the loss of the land at the hands of Assyrian and Mesopotamia or even in Pharaonic Egypt, but at a Babylonian invaders. The major thesis of Nevi’im is somewhat more recent moment, practically “mod- that the land was lost because of Israel’s repeated ern” by comparison. Judaism most probably has its violations of its covenant agreement of obedience to traceable origins in the post-Exilic Persian province God. The story concludes in the last books of of Yehud, part of a larger territory known to its origi- Ketuvim, which depict the eventual resettlement of nal inhabitants as “Canaan,” to ancient Jews as “the the land by a remnant of the original people. That Land of Israel,” and to their later Roman conquerors return, as the Bible interprets it, was made possible as “Palestine.” only by Israel’s sincere repentance of its earlier dis- Judaism has its origins, to be sure, in profound obedience and its commitment to comply with all acts of human obedience. But these are not the obedi- aspects of the original covenant. ent acts of Abraham. The obedience, rather, is that of The basic plot of the Hebrew Bible, then, is sim- other Jews who, it must frankly be said, described an ple: it narrates the history of a covenant. That Abraham they sought to emulate. Judaism has its covenant is made in the Torah, broken by Israel in source, therefore, in a remarkable act of historical Nevi’im, and restored by God in Ketuvim. In addi- imagination, one that created an image of the tion to this basic narrative line, the Bible contains a Israelite past so powerful that, through it, a future wide variety of writings as well that, in one way or was secured as well. How did this act of imagination another, supplement or amplify the plot. They are come about, and who is responsible?2 distributed throughout the canons of Nevi’im and Ketuvim in particular. The former canon supple- ments the sad history of Israel’s loss of its land The Torah in the Canon of the Hebrew Bible (Judges-Kings) with a series of books of poetic con- An answer emerges from an examination of the pres- demnations of the faithlessness of Israel and celebra- ent version of the Hebrew Bible itself and the way it tions of the covenantal loyalty of God. These are unfolds the story of Israel’s past. In the form preserved ascribed to ancient seers known as “prophets.” The in Jewish tradition, the Hebrew Bible is divided into Hebrew word for “prophet,” navi (plural: nevi’im), three smaller canons called the Torah (“Teaching”), the means “spokesperson.” Their message—alternately Nevi’im (“Prophets”), and the Ketuvim (“Writings”). of despair and great hope—dominates this canon Each of these canons is a kind of peg upon which hang and explains why it acquired the name Nevi’im. The the narrative strands of the biblical story. Ketuvim, for its part, introduces its optimistic image The Torah describes the origins of the world of Israel’s return to its land with a diverse collection and the history of the Israelite nation from its begin- of writings. These include, among others, prayer nings with Abraham to the death of its great leader, texts (the book of Psalms); philosophical reflections Moses. The central focus of the Torah is the descrip- on the meaning of suffering and happiness (the tion of a series of covenants, or promises, sealed books of Proverbs, Job and Ecclesiastes); and stories between God and Israel. Abraham, his son Isaac, about ancient sages and pious, courageous women and his grandson Jacob receive the first covenants. (the books of Jonah, Daniel, Ruth, and Esther). The earliest covenantal promises assure God’s The canonical version of the Hebrew Bible, then, is human partner of numerous offspring and a home- essentially a drama in three acts that contains its own land (e.g., Gen. 15:4–7; 28:13–15). Upon Jacob’s commentary—a sophisticated piece of literary work. reception of the covenant promise, his name is The Torah sets the fundamental theme, which is then

119 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 7

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

The Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures as Preserved in Rabbinic Judaism

Torah (Teaching) Nevi’im (Prophets) Ketuvim (Writings)

Bereshit (Genesis) Yehoshua (Joshua) Tehilim (Psalms)

Shemot (Exodus) Shofetim (Judges) Mishlei (Proverbs)

Vayiqra (Leviticus) Shemuel 1–2 (Samuel) Iyyov (Job)

Bamidbar (Numbers) Melakhim 1–2 (Kings) Shir Hashirim (Song of Songs)

Devarim (Deuteronomy) Yeshayahu (Isaiah) Root (Ruth)

Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) Ekhah (Lamentations)

Yehezkel (Ezekiel) Kohelet (Ecclesiastes)

Hoshea (Hosea) Ester (Esther)

Yoel (Joel) Daniyel (Daniel)

Ahmos (Amos) Ezra (Ezra)

Ovadyah (Obadiah) Nehemyah (Nehemiah)

Yonah (Jonah) Divrei Hayamim 1–2 (Chronicles)

Meekah (Micah)

Nahum (Nahum)

Habakuk (Habakuk)

Tzefanyah (Zepheniah)

Haggai (Haggai)

Zekharyah (Zachariah)

Melakhee (Malachi)

amplified in exquisite detail in Nevi’im and Babylonia, granted to the exiles of his domain the Ketuvim. In order to discern the elements of this right of repatriation. drama prior to their canonical presentation, we must The plot of the Hebrew Bible, therefore, raises first ask when its basic plot might have originated. and answers questions that were fundamental to We begin by pointing out a simple fact: the Bible ends descendants of those Judeans who had resettled the its story—in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah—with Land of Israel and wished now to abide safely in it. the return of small groups of Jews to the Land of The story they told was essentially a confession of Israel from a captivity in Babylonia. If, like all stories, guilt. It explained how God’s special people were the Bible begins with the end already in mind, we descended from a great hero of absolute obedience. may conclude that much of the Bible’s depiction of But it also showed that through persistent violation early Israelite history is told from the perspective of of Abraham’s example, Israel came to suffer the loss those who are telling the story whole from the of its political independence and homeland. What vantage point of their own day. Accordingly, the core would it mean in such a setting to begin the history narrative of the Hebrew Bible was probably not conceived of Israel with the now-famous story of Abraham’s until sometime after the return of Judean exiles to their obedience? The image of Abraham’s wordless obedi- ancestral territory. Such a return began no earlier than ence in leaving his native Babylonia for an unknown 539 BCE, when Cyrus, the Persian conqueror of land proclaims that the restoration of Jews from

120 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 8

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

Babylonian captivity was more than an arbitrary reconstructed by Babylonian Jews intent on govern- action governed by the Persian emperor. Rather, it ing the ancient homeland of Israel as they believed was under the control of the very God whom it always ought to have been governed—by the Abraham obeyed. The descendants of the exiles, revelation given to Moses at Sinai. Thus, they most of whom had known no other home than organized the diverse narrative and legal traditions Babylonia, modeled their own repopulation of the of the restored community of Israel into a carefully Land of Israel after that of Abraham and saw in plotted epic of Israelite history and a program for Abraham’s obedience to the divine call a way of national survival. In later Jewish writings, the first expressing their own. The present generation sought part of this epic was called the Torah of Moses. In to secure the promise to Abraham—of progeny, land, the canonical version found in synagogue scrolls and blessing—by reenacting his obedience and per- and printed Bibles until the present day, it is, as we fecting the life of obedience once and for all. have said, a history of the universe from the The origins of the biblical narrative and those of moment of its creation by the God of Israel down to Judaism are, therefore, closely bound together. The the death of the people’s greatest prophet and Judaism we find in the Hebrew Bible emerged as a leader, Moses. Organized into five scrolls or books, distinct communal identity after 539 BCE, among a it makes a single simple case: that everything Israel small group of Judean exiles who resolved to secure needs to serve God in perfect obedience was long their life in their ancient homeland. There, with the ago displayed in the loyalty of patriarchs such as blessing of the Persian crown, they built a center Abraham and revealed once and for all in the reve- of sacrificial worship and civic administration, a lation of God’s covenant law at Sinai through Temple. On the one hand, this Second Temple repre- Moses. The main concerns of early Judaism can be sented a religious commitment—the community’s surmised from the single-mindedness of the intention to serve the Creator of Heaven and Earth. Torah’s retelling of the past. No matter what sort of On the other, it served an important political pur- ancient Israelite traditions it gathers together, it pose, for it proclaimed the divine guidance of the makes sure to structure the narration around a priestly leaders who, by Persian decree, administered single theme: God’s overpowering love for this the law of the society. So the Temple symbolized the creation is constantly rebuffed by the rebellious claim of the priestly political leadership to embody desires of humanity. the ancient covenant community of Israel. It author- Legends, for example, about pre-Israelite ized them to shape all of Israel by their covenantal human history are told in such a way as to fore- traditions. We suppose, therefore, that the priestly shadow the later rebellious behavior of Israel under administrators of this Second Temple played a cen- its covenant with God. The well-known story of the tral role in drawing together what remained of the first man and woman in the Garden of Eden is a case ancient historical traditions of pre-Exilic Israel into in point (Gen. 2:4–3:24). Given by God everything the beginnings of a coherent national history, a his- they could possibly require by way of material com- tory of ancient covenants with the same God now forts, Adam (whose name means “earth-creature”) worshiped in the restored Temple. Indeed, the cen- and Eve (“fecundity”) are commanded only to trality given in the Hebrew Bible to the priestly scribe refrain from certain forbidden fruits in the center of Ezra in teaching the Torah of Moses to the restored the Garden. This they prove unable to do, and neither community (see, for example, Neh. 8–9) points do they show any genuine remorse when God dis- toward the primacy of priestly groups and scribal covers their act. As punishment, God expels the intellectuals in the formation of the new covenantal humans from his Garden, making it impossible for society and its literary tradition. them ever to return. As the story tells it, this is the But here we are only supposing, for the cen- moment that pain, suffering, and death enter turies between the mid-sixth and the late-fourth the world. At the very origin of human history, then, centuries BCE—what historians call the “Persian the Torah finds a spirit of human rebellion that incurs Period”—are the most obscure in the entire history the divine punishment of exile. of Judaism. Nevertheless, it is clear that the Persian The Torah, moreover, sees Israel’s history as a Period provided the context for a crucial transition reenactment of human history within the confines in early Judaism. The cultural remnants of the of a single people. The covenant-making event at vanished Israelite kingdoms of antiquity were Mt. Sinai is described in the book of Exodus (18–25)

121 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 9

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

as a moment of close bonding between God and ing his commands, and holding fast to him. Israel, with Israel eagerly entering into agreement to For thereby you shall have life and shall observe all the laws of God. Yet forty days after long endure upon the soil that the Lord entering into that agreement of its own free will, your God swore to your ancestors, with Moses still on the mountain communing with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give to them. God, Israel begins to pine for a substitute deity and creates for itself a golden calf to worship (Exod. The Torah ends with this choice ringing in the ears of 32:1–35). its audience: obedience or rebellion? life or death? the As the Torah describes it, only Moses’ active Garden or Exile?3 intervention on behalf of his people prevents God from destroying them in punishment. Then God permits the Israelites to build a wilderness Tent of Toward a Uniform Collection of Scripture Meeting in which God promises to make his pres- Although the basic scriptural story extending from the ence available among the people (Exod. 35–40). creation of the world until Israel’s return from From that Tent he reveals all of the laws by which he Babylonia seems certainly to have existed by the is to be worshiped and through which Israel will fourth century BCE, the present literary division of that express its love of him (the book of Leviticus). Yet story into the canons of Torah, Nevi’im, and Ketuvim what is Israel’s response? Much of the fourth book and the inclusion of various supplementary writings of the Torah, called Numbers, relates stories in took many centuries. Certainly the Torah and the his- which Israel complains against the rigors of its torical narrative of Nevi’im were revered as uniquely desert wanderings, yearns longingly for its period authoritative very early on. But the process by which of Egyptian servitude, and in other ways forgets or the entire present collection of writings came to consti- evades its responsibility to God (e.g., Num. 11:1–34; tute scripture—like so much else in early Judaism—is 12:1–16; 14:1–36). difficult to reconstruct with certainty. The Torah ends, in Deuteronomy, with a long Indeed, it is remarkable that any uniform col- speech of Moses in which he predicts that if this spirit lection of Jewish scriptures emerged at all. In the first of disobedience continues after Israel is brought into place, the Jewish world after the fourth century BCE its land, the promise of the land will indeed be was anything but homogeneous. In addition to a revoked. The chilling choice offered by Moses in the small community centered around Jerusalem and following passage is only one of many examples other locations in the ancient homeland, most Jews of (Deut. 30:15–20): this period were scattered in lands as far apart as Egypt and Babylonia. Despite the superficial unifor- See, I set before you this day life and pros- mity of a shared Hellenistic culture, which we dis- perity, death and adversity. For I command cuss in Chapter 4, Jews lived under competing and you this day, to love the Lord your God, to often warring political empires and spoke a variety walk in his ways, and to keep his com- of languages from Greek to Aramaic. The restored mandments, his laws and his rules, that Temple in Jerusalem and its priesthood enjoyed high you may thrive and increase, and that the prestige among most of the dispersed Jewish world, Lord your God may bless you in the land but no authoritative religious or political institutions that you are about to enter and possess. But extended from Jerusalem to legislate on such crucial if your heart turns away and you give no matters as the nature and content of scripture. heed, and are lured into the worship and By the third century BCE, Jews of Egypt became service of other gods, I declare to you this so comfortable with the Greek culture of Hellenized day that you shall certainly perish; you Egypt that they began to translate the Torah and other shall not long endure on the soil that you Hebrew writings into that language. This collection, are crossing the Jordan to enter and pos- which came to be called the Septuagint, gathered sess. I call heaven and earth to witness together many works not found in later versions of the against you this day: I have put before you Hebrew Bible. Aramaic- and Hebrew-speaking Jewish life and death, blessing and curse. Choose communities of Palestine as well preserved a wide life—if you and your offspring would variety of writings that seem to have enjoyed scrip- live—by loving the Lord your God, heed- tural status for a time, even though they are not found

122 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 10

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

in the present collection of the Hebrew Bible. Some of of the present canon of the Hebrew Bible can be these writings were also translated into Greek and pre- placed in the hands of a group of first- and second- served in later versions of the Septuagint. One of these century CE teachers who called each other by a versions serves as the foundation of what Christians distinctive honorific term “rabbi,” “my Master.” call the “Old Testament.” But, however much they Rabbinic writings from the third century and onward, might have been valued by some Jewish groups of this which discuss the names and even arrangement of period or to emerging Christianity, these other scriptural books, correspond closely to the present writings ultimately had little impact upon later Judaic Hebrew Bible. So there seems to be some important tradition. The primary reason is that they did not find connection between the rabbis and the current canon their way into the main collections of scripture trans- of scriptures. Since the religious vision of the rabbis is, mitted by most Jews after the rise of Christianity. in any event, crucial to the development of Judaism To conclude: the process by which certain books from the second century until well into the sixth and attained scriptural status whereas others enjoyed it seventh, it is important to focus on the nature of this for a time and then ultimately lost it is difficult group, its own understanding of its origins and teach- to trace. It does seem likely, however, that major ing, and the ways its grasp of the Torah shaped later responsibility for the preservation and transmission Jewish interpretative tradition.

Tradition and the Shaping of Judaism’s Scripture

The Hebrew Bible did not happen all at once. The 2. 450–400: Completion and updating of written chart that follows attempts to isolate key stages in the histories of pre-Exilic Israel (Joshua-Kings) transformation of prescriptural traditions of ancient 3. 450–350: Systematic compilation of prophetic oracles Israel into the canonical collection accepted by (“the Twelve,” Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel) rabbinic Judaism and its medieval and modern 4. 400–350: Completion of written history of post-Exilic descendants. restoration community (Chronicles and Ezra- Nehemiah) Principal Sources of Ancient Israelite Tradition, Hellenistic Period, ca. 323–63 BCE ca. 1000–587 BCE 1. 350–160: Composition of Esther, Ruth, Job, Primarily Oral Traditions Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Daniel 1. Epics of Israel’s origins and history (e.g., patriar- 2. 250–200: The Torah is translated into Greek (the chal narrative, Moses and the Exodus from Egypt) Septuagint) by Egyptian Jews 2. Public oratory (prophetic oracles of Nahum, 3. 200: Canon of Nevi’im circulates with Torah as a Hosea, Isaiah, etc.) scriptural collection 4. 200–100 CE: Psalms and “Sacred Writings” are cited Primarily Written Traditions as scripture 5. 200–100 CE: Jubilees, the Temple Scroll, and other 1. Civil and ritual law codes of priestly and royal writings compete with Torah, Nevi’im, and Ketuvim scribes (e.g., compiled in Exodus-Deuteronomy) as authentic scriptures 2. Royal archives (e.g., books of Samuel-Kings) 3. Priestly genealogical and historical records (genealogical lists in Genesis, Chronicles, etc.) Roman Period, ca. 63 BCE–320 CE 4. Scribal wisdom writings (e.g., early collections of 1. 100–200 CE: Rabbinic tradition defines the present Proverbs) boundaries of the Hebrew canon 5. Songs of the Temple liturgy (e.g., Psalms) 2. 190–367: Christian scriptures are divided into an Old and New Testament 3. 250: Rabbinic Oral Torah begins to claim exclusive Persian Period, ca. 539–323 BCE legitimacy as the true meaning of Written Torah 1. 539–400: “Torah of Moses” becomes the “constitu- 4. 300: Septuagint is abandoned by Jews and becomes tion” of Persian Judah basis of Christian Old Testament

123 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 11

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

SCRIPTURE AND INTERPRETIVE of the first century. There they are identified with a TRADITION IN RABBINIC JUDAISM group known as the Pharisees, by all accounts rather important participants in the political and religious The Origins of Rabbinic Judaism life of Jerusalem prior to the destruction of the Temple. The early rabbinic movement reflects one aspect of a Although rabbinic Judaism cannot be equated with general Jewish reaction to a devastating political defeat, the Judaism of the Pharisees, it is likely that at least the 70 CE sacking of the Second Temple in Jerusalem by some Pharisees were instrumental in the formation of Roman armies. The Temple’s destruction, the death what later came to be rabbinic Judaism.4 blow to an anti-Roman Jewish revolt begun in 66 CE, One can perhaps think about this with the help of was catastrophic for a variety of reasons. It destroyed a model drawn from American history. Although the the symbol of Jewish political independence and oblit- founders of the American polity were deeply influ- erated a major center of financial and cultural wealth. enced by a European political philosophy named the Most important of all for the history of Judaism, the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment’s ideas played a principal site of Jewish sacrificial worship was razed. key role in the American Constitution, the American Let us focus on this last issue. For centuries, polity and its constitution continued to grow and both native and exiled Judeans throughout the develop long after the Enlightenment vanished as a Mediterranean and Middle Eastern worlds had coherent political and philosophical movement. So, too, viewed the Jerusalem Temple as the tangible symbol with rabbinic Judaism. Pharisees contributed, along of God’s covenantal protection. Within it was housed with other Jews of the post-Destruction era, to what the earthly manifestation of God’s presence. The sac- became rabbinic Judaism. But Pharisaic Judaism, which rificial offering of animals to God in the Temple was a vanished by the second century CE, did not define what principal means of drawing divine blessing into the rabbinic Judaism would ultimately become. Land of Israel and its people. In response to priestly Just who these Pharisees were is not an easy sacrifice, it was believed, God brought the rains and question to answer. Readers of the Christian gospels made the land, herds, and the Israelites themselves meet the Pharisees as religious hypocrites who chal- fertile. The sacrificial service, moreover, made atone- lenged Jesus’ authority and who may have had a ment for inadvertent violations of the Torah covenant hand in his crucifixion. Fanatically loyal to what the and thus cleansed the people and individuals who Gospel of Mark calls “traditions of the elders” (e.g., felt polluted by sin and, therefore, bereft of divine Mark 7:1 ff.), the Pharisees are said to have been blessing. Without the Temple, how would the people more concerned with having clean hands and tithed maintain the atoning practices that erased the effects food than with true love of God and humanity. of sin and brought healing to the world? How would Other first-century CE writings, particularly those of the covenantal relationship be enacted and where? a Jewish historian named Josephus, portray the The founders of rabbinic Judaism seem to have Pharisees as a popular political party concerned emerged within a half century after 70 CE with at least with fostering deep loyalty to the Torah among the the outline of an answer. We can reconstruct the out- masses as well as teaching certain ancestral tradi- lines of that answer only on the basis of sayings tions not included in the Torah itself (e.g., Jewish preserved in later rabbinic writings of the third to sixth Antiquities, 13:11–17, 288 ff.). The later rabbis, we centuries. With the Temple in ruins, they are said to have seen, recall at least some Pharisees as being have taught, the effects of the abandoned sacrificial sys- important transmitters of ancient tradition. tem could now be secured by alternative media: prayer- Whether the Pharisees were hypocrites, as the ful self-scrutiny before God, on the one hand, and the gospels claim, or religious democrats as Josephus diligent study of God’s revealed will, on the other. With holds, is not for us to determine, for we have little the means of sacrificial atonement annihilated, total evidence other than these partisan depictions. But obedience to God’s will, as expressed in detailed loyalty what does seem certain, because it is the only thing to his commandments, served in their stead. that our otherwise irreconcilable sources agree upon, It is not easy from our present standpoint to is that the Pharisees placed a great premium on identify the social origins of these rabbis. But there are something called “ancestral tradition,” which was clues. Some teachers who were recalled by later rabbis not written in the Mosaic Torah, but somehow gov- as being important transmitters of early tradition— erned its application to life. Historians know very men with names such as Shemaiah, Avtalion, and little of what this pharisaic tradition might have Gamaliel—are also mentioned in nonrabbinic writings contained. But what we do have is the testimony of 124 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 12

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

KEY: 1. Tha Antonian Fortress 10. The Entrance Gate 2. Retaining Wall 11. Solomon’s Portico 3. West Wall Street 12. The Mount of Olives 4. Wilson’s Arch 13. The Court of Gentiles 5. Robinson’s Arch 14. The Entrance to the Platform 6. Shops 15. The Exit from the Platform 7. Porticoes 16. Steps and Balustrade Prohibiting Gentiles 8. The Royal Portico 17–32. The Temple and Inner Sanctum 9. The Exit Gate

FIGURE 1.1 Herod’s Temple Compound in the First Century CE.(Source: Reproduced by permission of the artist, Leen Ritmeyer.)

later rabbinic Judaism, in which the term “Torah” rabbinic wisdom, the title of which is probably best figures prominently as something far richer than the translated as “The Founders” (Hebrew: avot): physical scroll of Mosaic teachings read in syna- gogues, richer even than the entire collection of Moses received Torah on Sinai, and passed scripture itself. Torah comes to stand for the entire it on to Joshua, Joshua to elders, and elders body of Jewish religious tradition, both what is to prophets. And prophets handed it on to written in the Torah of Moses and the interpretations the men of the great assembly. They said needed to embody the Torah of Moses in life. three things: (1) Be prudent in judgment. In the aftermath of the loss of the Jerusalem (2) Raise up many disciples. (3) Make a Temple as the principal means of atonement before fence around the Torah. (Mishnah Avot 1:1) God, it is likely that the rabbinic focus on prayer and study as rituals of atonement was grounded by The passage continues with a lengthy list of later these sages in their distinctive understanding of an- sages, living well after the return from Babylonian exile, cestral tradition as Torah. If God required absolute each of whom receives Torah from his predecessor and obedience, and if the destruction of the Temple passes it on to disciples. This list of teachers, which made many of his commandments impossible to includes pharisaic figures and rabbinic sages known to fulfill, then it was only through interpretive tradi- have lived as late as the early third century CE, makes tions preserved outside scripture that Jews could the claim that the tradition passed on as Torah by the begin to reconstruct their covenantal relationship rabbis begins with Moses and remains intact for well with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.5 over a thousand years, throughout the Biblical period and on into Persian, Hellenistic, and Roman times. One of the interesting things about this list of The Rabbinic Written and Oral Torah teachers—apart from the extraordinary claim for con- An important insight into the nature of rabbinic tinuity of teaching itself—is the way in which Torah, interpretive tradition and its relation to scripture is received by Moses and passed on to his disciples, is recorded in a third-century CE composition of distinguished from the Torah, the actual document 125 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 13

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

recording the Mosaic legislation. One builds a “fence” This perception of the inseparability of rabbinic around the textual Torah of Moses with the interpretive tradition and the Mosaic scripture is expressed in tradition of Torah preserved by the rabbis. Indeed, in rabbinic writings of the late-third through fifth cen- rabbinic perspective it is precisely tradition that con- turies in a remarkably apt image. These writings, stitutes the fence around the Torah (Avot 3:13). which we discuss more extensively later, speak of two From Avot’s perspective, traditional Torah passed Torahs having been revealed on Sinai. One of these, on in rabbinic teaching constitutes a systematic safe- called the Written Torah, is the actual scroll of Mosaic guard against the violation of the scriptural Torah teachings preserved in the scriptures and read in the of Moses. Rabbinic Torah, as ancient interpretive synagogues. In a derivative sense, it includes as well tradition, enables Jews to properly embody laws, val- the entire canon of the Hebrew Bible. The second, ues, and norms of the scriptural Torah in their own called the Oral Torah, is claimed to have been pattern of life. That pattern of traditional belief and transmitted by God to Moses by word of mouth behavior, transmitted in rabbinic teaching and practice, alone. This memorized, orally recited Torah has is nothing less than Torah itself, the embodiment in accompanied the Written Torah since the beginning public and private life of what God wanted for Israel and, indeed, constitutes the authentic interpretation when he revealed its basic outline, the Torah, to the of the Written Torah’s many commandments. Most entire community on Sinai. Thus, according to rabbinic important, the only way this Oral Torah can be Judaism, rabbinic tradition and scripture together constitute learned is by long and diligent discipleship to a rab- Torah; indeed, each requires the existence of the other in binic sage who has committed the essentials of the order for genuine covenantal obedience to exist. Oral Torah to memory.

Mishnah Avot’s Chain of Transmission Linking Mishnaic-Rabbinic Tradition to Sinai

The Prophetic Chain of Transmission (Mishnah Judah b. Tabbai and Shimon b. Shetakh Avot 1:1) Shemaiah and Avtalion Moses Hillel and Shammai Joshua Rabbinic tradition views “The Pairs” as holding the Elders the offices of Patriarch and Supreme Court the Prophets Justice respectively throughout the Hasmonean and early Roman Period in the Land of Israel. This chain carries the tradition of Torah They are known primarily from rabbinic texts. through the period from Moses to the destruction of the First Temple. The Age of the Mishnaic Sages (Late Second Temple–Post Temple) (Mishnah Avot 1:16–2:4) Transmitters of the Early Second-Temple Period (Mishnah Avot 1:1–3) Rabban Gamaliel I Men of the Great Assembly Rabban Yokanan b. Zakkai Shimon the Righteous Rabban Shimon b. Gamaliel I Antigonus of Sokho Rabban Gamaliel II Rabban Shimon b. Gamaliel II This chain carries the tradition of Torah from roughly the time of Ezra up to the Rabbi Judah b. Shimon b. Gamaliel (the Patriarch) early second century BCE. The Men of the Rabban Gamaliel b. Rabbi Judah the Patriarch Great Assembly and Antigonus of Sokho The title Rabban (Our Master) is a form of Rabbi are known only from rabbinic texts. (My Master) and appears first with these figures. All but Rabban Yokanan b. Zakkai are recalled in The Age of the Pairs (Late Second-Temple rabbinic tradition as having served as Patriarch. Period) (Mishnah Avot 1:4–15) Rabban Yokanan is recalled as reconstituting the Yose b. Yoezer and Yose b. Yokanan of Jerusalem study of Torah in a coastal town called Yavneh Joshua b. Perakhyah and Nittai the Arbelite after the Destruction of the Temple in 70 CE.

126 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 14

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

It is small exaggeration to say that the crucial Mishnah are clear: God spoke once in the Torah of human relationship of early rabbinic Judaism Moses and revealed his commandments; he contin- occurred between the rabbinic sage and his disci- ues to speak through the traditional Torah of the ple. The disciple, a kind of apprentice rabbi, served rabbis. This latter Torah explains how to perform his the sage in a variety of capacities, from butler to commandments so that they can have their healing death-bed consoler, much like other young men in impact upon the covenantal relationship. The sum the Hellenistic world might serve a teacher of of rabbinic explanations is called halakhah or “proce- philosophy or rhetoric. In return, the disciple had dure,” that is, procedure for implementing the com- the opportunity to study his master’s every word mandments. To follow the rabbis’ halakhic and gesture as an exemplification of what it means procedures is to do God’s will, as transmitted to to fully master Torah. Although some sages or their Moses on Sinai. disciples might have recorded some teachings in The interpretive tradition of Oral Torah did writing, the essence of the sage’s teaching were his not stop with the Mishnah, but it continued to grow words of Torah and the way his behavior embodied in subsequent centuries as the Mishnah spawned Torah. later schools of technical interpretation. Gradually, Rabbinic tradition, then, worked in two ways. the interests of rabbinic students of the Written and As a pattern of behavior learned by imitation, it was Oral Torah ranged far beyond strictly halakhic tradition transmitted by example. By imitating the matters and soon included extended reflection sage, a disciple incorporated Torah into his very upon other concerns central to the interpretation being. As an interpretive tradition for the transmis- of the Bible: ethical issues, historical recollections, sion of the meaning of scripture, rabbinic tradition and theological speculation. These fell under the was an intellectual commodity learned by studying category of aggadah, “teachings” designed to foster and mastering the rabbi’s oral teachings. To the a desire to serve God in obedience to the rules of degree that many sages argued that their patterns of halakhah. behavior were themselves based on interpretation of Eventually, these two types of interpretive the Torah, these two types of tradition were often tradition were gathered together into immense, fused into one. It is for this reason that the actual liter- encyclopedic compilations of rabbinic teaching. The ature of rabbinic Judaism, when it came to be written two most famous and important of these compila- down, consisted almost entirely of words of Torah tions are called the Talmud (Hebrew: “curriculum”) ascribed to specific rabbis and depictions of how of Palestine (ca. 375–400) and the Talmud of these words were exemplified by their actions in spe- Babylonia (ca. 500–620). Both Talmuds are Mishnah cific contexts. commentaries that, in the course of exploring halakhic applications of the Mishnah, cite enormous The Literature of the Oral Torah quantities of supplementary texts from the entire body of accumulated oral tradition. The Babylonian The earliest document recording rabbinic tradition, Talmud in particular includes vast amounts of compiled roughly around 200–225 CE, is called the midrashic-aggadic commentary on the Hebrew Mishnah (i.e., “Repeated Tradition”). Later rabbinic Bible. It remains today the most revered classic of historical memory unanimously ascribes the rabbinic teaching among observant Jews. Palestinian Mishnah’s compilation to Rabbi Judah the sages, by contrast, were more sparing in their use of Patriarch, a rabbinic sage who also served as aggadic materials in their Mishnah commentary; Rome’s governor of the Palestinian Jewish commu- instead they created, from the third to the sixth cen- nity (see Chapter 19). The work called Avot, from turies, numerous collections of texts that were which we quoted earlier, is included in the Mishnah intended to supplement the study of scriptural along with more than sixty other treatises on vari- books. These were given the generic title midrash ous aspects of Jewish law. Each treatise, in whole or (“commentary,” “interpretation”). Unlike the in part, is devoted to a specific legal topic and pres- Talmuds, which are organized as Mishnah commen- ents diverse rabbinic discussions about how best to taries, works of midrash are normally organized implement the divine commandments contained around books of the Bible as explicit Bible commen- in the Torah of Moses regarding that topic. The taries. Although such midrash can be of an halakhic basic assumptions governing the compilation of the or an aggadic character, most of the surviving

127 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 15

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

Terminology and Chronology of Rabbinic Literature

In the historical study of rabbinic literature, it is con- 3. Mekhilta (one attributed to Rabbi Ishmael and one venient to distinguish between types of tradition in attributed to Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai)—third- to which knowledge was transmitted, forms of their fourth-century Palestinian midrashic compilations in transmission prior to their editing into finished which the legal portions of the book of Exodus are pro- compilations, and, finally, the works into which these vided with both halakhic and aggadic comment. All traditions are compiled. rabbinic authorities mentioned in the Mekhiltas are from the first to early third centuries. Mekhilta means Types of Tradition “measure” in the sense of “interpretive principle.” 1. Halakhah—“procedure, rule”; tradition about 4. Sifra—An almost exclusively halakhic midrash on proper legal or ritual practice Leviticus. It is probably from third- to fourth-century 2. Aggadah—“narration, exposition, or teaching”; Palestine. All rabbinic authorities mentioned are tradition about history, ethics, or theology from the first to early third centuries. 5. Sifre—A pair of midrashic works on Numbers and Forms of Literary Transmission Deuteronomy, mixing both halakhic and aggadic types of tradition. Most authorities are identical to 1. Midrash—“scriptural inquiry”; halakhic or aggadic those of Sifra and the Mekhiltas. tradition transmitted as an explanation of a bibli- 6. Bereshit Rabba—An enormous compilation of aggadic cal verse traditions that comment on every verse of Genesis. It 2. Mishnah—“repetition”; halakhic or aggadic tradi- is rich in traditions in the names of third- and fourth- tion transmitted without reference to a biblical century sages and is probably edited in the Galilee by verse the sixth century. 3. Talmud—“study”; analytical discussion of a 7. Vayikra Rabba—This aggadic midrash focuses on halakhic or aggadic tradition framed either as Leviticus, using the first verses of the scriptural midrash or mishnah chapters as occasions for long homiletic discourses. Like Bereshit Rabba, it is probably from sixth-century Major Compilations of Rabbinic Tradition Galilee. 1. Mishnah—The halakhic collection of “repeated/ 8. Talmud Yerushalmi—The “Palestinian Talmud,” a memorized tradition” supervised by Rabbi Judah mostly halakhic commentary on the Mishnah, edited the Patriarch in the Galilean city, Sepphoris, ca. primarily in Tiberias, ca. 375–400. “Talmud” as the 200–225. title of a literary work probably means “curriculum.” 2. Tosefta—A halakhic collection similar to, but 9. Talmud Bavli—The “Babylonian Talmud,” compiling larger than, the Mishnah, edited anonymously by halakhic and aggadic materials into an encyclopedic 300 CE in Palestine. Tosefta means “supplement,” commentary on the Mishnah (Mesopotamia, ca. that is, to the Mishnah. 500–620).

midrashic literature of the third century and later is the Jews they influenced experienced an intimate dominated by aggadic themes. sense of continuity between past and present, a self- In all, within five or six centuries after the evident trust that their pattern of life and belief now catastrophe of 70 CE, Judaism had undergone a conformed to the sacred patterns and beliefs repre- monumental transformation under the guidance of sented by scripture and tradition. Their halakhah the rabbis. Halakhic inquiry had constructed a sys- was nothing but the Torah of Moses, whom the rab- tem of Jewish ritual observances that served as a bis knew as “Moses, Our Master,” the source of all whole to replace the ancient Temple’s sacrificial me- authoritative teaching. Their obedience was nothing dia of atonement. Theological and historical but the obedience exemplified at the very beginning midrash had constructed powerful links between of Israel’s history by the wandering herder known the biblical images of Israel and contemporary as “Abraham, Our Father,” who, as the Babylonian Jewish self-understanding. Reading the Written Talmud claims (Yoma: 28b), “fulfilled the Torah Torah through the spectacles of the Oral, rabbis and even before it was revealed.”6

128 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 16

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

Tannaim and Amoraim

By the fourth century, rabbinic scholars in both Palestine themselves, they coined the title “Amoraim,” (Aramaic for and Babylonia had begun to distinguish between their “expounders”). The very name indicates their own aware- own post-Mishnaic generations and those sages whose ness of being late commentators on the authoritative teachings were encoded in the Mishnah and other Tannaitic traditions. Generally speaking, rabbinic works earlier compilations of halakhic and aggadic tradition. compiled prior to the fourth century are designated by his- To the generations of sages mentioned in such works as torians as “Tannaitic” works. Later works, compiled as late the Mishnah, the Tosefta, the Mekhiltas, Sifra, and the as the sixth or seventh century, are designated “Amoraic.” Sifres, they assigned the honorific title of “Tannaim”, an The main sources of Amoraic tradition are the later Aramaic term meaning “repeater of oral traditions.” For midrashic collections and the two Talmuds.

SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION IN THE the first time since Alexander the Great’s conquests HISTORY OF JUDAISM of the fourth century BCE. But more importantly, the Islamic policy regarding the subject religious minori- Many centuries were to pass before rabbinic ties of the empire was to organize them under their Judaism—the religion of small groups of rabbinic own native clerical leadership to be governed as much disciples and their teachers—became the Judaism as possible by their traditional laws and customs. As of most Jews. In the Middle East and Europe, the we shall see in Chapter 19, by the middle of the eighth victory of rabbinic Judaism was not complete until century this meant that the entire Jewish community roughly the tenth or eleventh century. Even after under Islam was to be governed by a single religious- rabbinic Judaism became the dominant form of legal authority, centered ultimately in Baghdad. The Judaism, it underwent a number of important office of the Exilarch—the political head of the Jews in transformations in medieval times. In modern Exile—had been established in the third century by times, the transformations have been especially the Zoroastrian Sassanians. Under the Abbasid profound, as we shall see in some subsequent administration, this office continued; it was supple- chapters. For the moment, though, it will be help- mented by a new office, the Geonate. While the ful to survey some important developments in the Exilarchate functioned as the “executive” branch of role of scripture and tradition in the diverse Jewish Jewish self-governance, the Geonate functioned as the communities of the Islamic Middle East and “legislative” branch. The Gaon was appointed from Christian Europe from the tenth through the four- among the leading rabbinic teachers of the ancient teenth centuries. But whether we consider antirab- Mesopotamian academies of Sura and Pumbeditha. binic forms of medieval Judaism, such as the He was the final authority on Jewish law. As a rabbinic Karaties, or highly secretive communities of rab- sage, of course, the only source of law he would recog- binic mystics, such as the Kabbalists of Spain and nize would be ancient tradition of the sages that went southern France, we’ll find that all take the back, in rabbinic views, to Moses on Sinai.7 rabbinic distinction between Written and Oral Thus did rabbinic Oral Torah come to be the Torah—scripture and tradition—as a fundamental only law applicable to Judaism within Islamic lands. point of departure. As Muslim armies swept across the Strait of Gibralter into the Iberian Peninsula, Jews followed, bringing THE “RABBINIZATION” OF MEDIEVAL with them the earliest Geonically endorsed manu- JUDAISM script versions of the Mishnah and the Talmud. From Muslim territories in Sicily and Palestine, Jewish The most important historical factor in the transforma- traders began to bring rabbinic Judaism into Catholic tion of rabbinic Judaism, from a kind of scholastic de- Italy, and from there into central and northern bating society into the religion of virtually all who Europe. identified as Jews, was the Islamic conquest of the Momentarily we will see how the rabbinization Middle East and North Africa in the century following of Jews under the influence of the Geonic leadership, the death of Mohammed in 632. The Muslims unified engendered among the Jews of Islam the antirabbinic this vast territory under a single political regime for reaction that has come to be known as “Karaism.” 129 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 17

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

But in Catholic Europe, with its sparse and scattered mudic tradition (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot: 63a) Jewish populations of relatively recent immigrants, that, in preparation for the creation of Eve, Adam rabbinic authorities and their Oral Torah were had to “know” all the animals in Eden in the same greeted as welcome teachers and administrators. By way he would eventually come to “know” Eve. the tenth or eleventh century, the Jews of northern Rashi’s innovative commentary on the Written France, England, northern Italy, and the German Torah inspired many others, his methods were elabo- lands all embodied a common form of rabbinic rated upon for generations, and his influence spread Judaism, complete with local variants and customs. even to rabbinic scholars in Islamic lands. Eventually, The most culturally productive of these communi- medieval Jewish interpreters of the Written Torah ties, centered in the Rhineland, came to call itself came to recognize no less than four distinct levels of “Ashkenaz” (see Chapter 19 for details). It was here, scriptural meaning in a way quite congruent with in the eleventh century, that a French-speaking classical Christian teachings (see p. XX). These were vintner and businessman, Rabbi Solomon Itzhaki abbreviated as “Pardes.” The word pardes is origi- (1040–1105: known by the acronym, Rashi), devel- nally Persian, where it refers to a garden or orchard. oped a method of teaching Torah—and a literary In some passages of the early rabbinic literature (e.g., form for transmitting his teachings—that would Tosefta Hagigah 2:3), the term appears to refer to a revolutionize Jewish Torah study everywhere.8 heavenly “paradise” (pardes is, in fact, the root of the As a teacher of the Bible, Rashi’s goal was to English “paradise” as well) or other sort of mysteri- demonstrate the rabbinic assertion that the scrip- ous place of great fascination and danger. Four rabbis tural Written Torah and the traditional Oral Torah of are said to have entered this Pardes; one died, one the rabbis were in fact a single, mutually illuminat- lost his mind, one became a heretic, and the fourth ing revelation. His method was to show that even alone “entered and left whole.” the most trivial aspects of the Written Torah’s text Whatever the Tosefta and the Talmuds under- concealed puzzles that could only be resolved by stood by this Pardes, for many medieval Jewish reference to the traditions of the Oral Torah students of the Bible it was understood as an acrostic ensconced in the Mishnah, the midrashic works of naming the four levels of scriptural meaning: Peshat the classical rabbis, and, of course, the Talmuds. His (the simple or literal-contextual meaning); Remez commentary on the Torah and many other biblical (the allusive or allegorical meaning); Derash (the books took the form of a line by line companion to expounded meaning as understood in midrashic the scriptural text. For each verse, he would nor- traditions); and, finally, Sod (the secret or mystical mally clarify obscure words by translating them meaning). Presumably, these layers correspond to the into the French vernacular of his day. He would also abilities of readers as well. It is sufficient for the sim- try to focus on the various levels of textual meaning. ple to grasp the peshat and the more sensitive to grasp For the most part, he preferred to highlight the sim- allegorical and midrashic layers of meaning. But only ple sense (peshat) of the words in the context of the people of exceptional learning and spirituality were passage at hand. To achieve this, he often compared initiated into the mysteries of Sod! instances of a single word in a variety of contexts to By the thirteenth century, Jewish biblical tradi- grasp the precise nuances. When commenting upon tion in Christian and Islamic lands recognized in legal passages that, naturally, had implications for scripture a repository of multiple interlocking layers concrete behavior in a halakhic framework, he of meaning, all contained within the tradition of the reported how the halakhic discussions of the Oral Torah. At the very end of this chapter, we will Mishnah and the Talmuds understood the passage. see how this conception laid the foundations for kab- As a master of the Oral Torah, he was also very balistic approaches to biblical interpretation in Spain skilled at identifying levels of meaning that, while and southern France. But, first, let’s move a few not literally present in the scriptural words, had centuries backward in time toward the Islamic been discovered by centuries of midrashic interpre- framework in which the rabbinization of Judaism tations of the rabbis. Thus, many times, Rashi will had its home. explain of a given verse: “This is it’s peshat, but midrashically it is possible to interpret it other- The Karaites wise.” Thus, in a passage that has puzzled many later interpreters, Rashi interprets an odd turn of Karaism began as an explicit rejection of the rabbinic language in Genesis 2:23 in light of an obscure tal- concept of Jewish tradition that served as the basis

130 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 18

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Part 1 • Scripture and Tradition

for Geonic authority in the Islamic world. Historians distinct from and stricter than those preserved in know little about how Middle Eastern Jews re- rabbinic halakhah. sponded to the rabbinic interpretation of Torah. The Since halakhic tradition determines, among Talmuds, it is true, acknowledge the existence of Jews other things, the texts of prayers, the dietary practices, who showed disrespect to rabbis or tried to evade the calendar of religious festivals, and the procedures their laws. Archeologists have dug from the earth of marriage and divorce, it soon became clear that synagogue remains and other artifacts that suggest rabbinic and Karaite Jews could not pray together, eat that many Jews of the third through seventh cen- at the same table, celebrate holidays at the same time, turies practiced their Judaism in relative disregard of or even intermarry. Although Karaism did not replace rabbinic norms (see Chapter 16). Nevertheless, it is rabbinic Judaism, it nevertheless remained powerful not until the eighth century and thereafter that we enough to resist Geonic harassment and to pursue its are able to trace a fully developed antirabbinic own life for centuries. What is important about Judaism with its own legal traditions, theology, and Karaism in the present context is the way its intellec- institutions. Originating in Baghdad, the capital of tual leaders came to formulate their understanding of the Islamic Abbasid Empire, it came to bear the name the relation of scripture and tradition. of Karaism, “Scripturalism.” As did rabbinic Judaism, Karaism accepted the Both Karaite and rabbinic historians link the Written Torah as the binding revelation to Israel. There origins of Karaism to a talmudic scholar, Anan b. was no attempt, for example, to broaden or diminish David, who became convinced that the rabbinic Oral the scriptural canon accepted by the rabbis or to use Torah was a human construct serving the interests of versions of texts other than those accepted by rabbinic rabbinic authority. Anan’s teachings about the tradition as Written Torah. Of interest is the way human origins of rabbinic Oral Torah were highly Karaism solved the question of tradition’s relation to controversial. Moreover, they were taken up and scripture. Rejecting the Oral Torah of the rabbis, amplified by other like-minded individuals who, for Karaism nevertheless was compelled to substitute the a variety of reasons, challenged rabbinic authority to results of its own biblical interpretation as another govern the religious and political lives of Jews in the form of binding tradition. This is called by such terms Islamic lands. In response, generations of Geonic as the “yoke of inheritance” (sevel hayerushah) or, sim- leaders used both intellectual polemics and political ply, “tradition” (ha’atakah). Even though Karaite com- attacks to try to suppress the diverse antirabbinic munities were permitted in principle to formulate communities. It is unlikely that Karaism was ever a their own rules based on “individual” interpretations single centralized movement. But by the tenth cen- of the Torah, as a matter of fact the results of such tury, it had clearly fragmented into a number of dis- interpretations often defined communal discipline as tinct Judaic communities that existed mostly in surely as any rabbinic halakhah. So, apart from its ide- Islamic countries and the Balkans until the twentieth ology, the Karaite rejection of rabbinic tradition was century. There remain Karaite communities in the not a rejection of the necessity of tradition in order to United States and in Israel to this day. live a life of covenantal obedience to God. Rather, it The controversial nature of Karaite teaching is was a rejection of the rabbis as guardians of tradition. not hard to appreciate. Karaite polemicists, such as Its antitraditionalism, quite simply, created an alterna- the tenth-century Jacob al-Kirkisanai, adduced bibli- tive tradition, also regarded as intimately linked to the cal and even rabbinic texts to prove that Oral Torah Torah of Moses.9 stemmed not from Moses, but from the rabbis them- selves. It had, therefore, no binding authority over the practices of Jews. But the core of Karaite polemics The Kabbalists concerned the centrality of the scriptural text for defining Jewish covenantal life. Various Karaite bibli- In contrast to Karaism, other forms of rabbinic cal scholars, using the most advanced means of Judaism enriched Jews’ appreciation of the Written linguistic analysis available in the Islamic world, Torah not by rejecting the Oral Torah but by filling claimed to recover the original meaning of biblical it with vastly new meanings. The emergence in rules. They showed, moreover, how these rules con- the eleventh through the thirteenth centuries of formed to Karaite, rather than to rabbinic, customs. Kabbalah is a case in point. Kabbalah, which we dis- Under their influence, Karaite communities devel- cuss in greater detail in Chapter 4, seems to have oped their own practices, which were often quite emerged in Northern Spain and southern France as a

131 M01_CORR8253_02_SE_C01.QXD 1/17/11 5:06 PM Page 19

Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Chapter 1 • Scripture and Tradition in Judaism

kind of speculative philosophy about the inner life of adore her beautiful soul, obscured as it is under the God. Kabbalists, however, did more than think about “garments” of laws and stories that cover her. the divine life. They believed they could, through Now who, in the kabbalistic view, transmits certain meditative practices associated with the per- these truths regarding the esoteric meaning of the formance of commandments, experience that life in an Torah’s laws and stories? From whom does the intimate way. Kabbalah, in other words, was a crucial Kabbalist draw his mysterious knowledge? If you supplement to the life of halakhah as a means of have understood rabbinic Judaism, you will already securing complete atonement and thus encouraging have guessed the answer. The Kabbalah is claimed to the continued flow of divine blessing into the world. be Mosaic teaching transmitted in highly secret form Unlike Karaism, Kabbalah is not an antirabbinic to the early Mishnaic teachers and from them to the movement, but a profoundly rabbinic one. All the Kabbalists themselves. The Kabbalah’s complex early Kabbalists we know about were fully obedient theories of the divine life are, in other words, nothing rabbinic Jews, and many were, in fact, famous more or less than the innermost form of the Oral halakhic authorities and students of the talmudic Torah revealed on Sinai. For Kabbalists, the true writings. The great thirteenth-century French meaning of the Written Torah is, as it is for all rab- talmudist Moses b. Nahman (Nahmanides) is only binic Jews, found in the Oral Torah. But, as we see in the most illustrious example. The Kabbalists’ com- Chapter 4, the kabbalistic version of the ultimate mitment to rabbinic tradition is evident particularly knowledge contained in the Oral Torah is unimag- in the way in which they imagined the relation of ined by the Oral Torah known to the talmudic rabbis their own theories about the inner life of God to the of late antiquity.10 quite different images of God assumed in the Written The examples of Karaism and Kabbalism, and the Oral Torah. It is summed up in the term although sketchy, should illustrate the immense “Kabbalah” itself, an old Hebrew word that means power of the rabbinic concept of Oral and Written “tradition.” For the Kabbalists, however, Kabbalah Torah over Judaic thought regarding the Hebrew refers to a hidden tradition of scriptural interpreta- Bible. No Judaism emerging in the wake of rabbinic tion known to a few, a tradition of the secret meaning Judaism could imagine the Torah without at the same of the Written Torah. They often refer to this time imagining a supplementary tradition of inter- Kabbalah as containing the “secrets of the Torah,” the pretation that spelled out the covenantal implications “esoteric Wisdom,” or the “path of Truth.” In more for contemporary Jews. In rabbinic and antirabbinic general medieval terms, Kabbalah is the Sod of the communities alike, there was no covenantal relation- Pardes. Borrowing images from Spanish romantic ship between God and Israel without the aid of an poetry of the day, Kabbalists refer to themselves as authoritative tradition linking a Jewish community’s “lovers” of the Torah who court the lovely Lady and practices to the primal revelation in scripture.

132 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution CHAPTER 1

Understanding the World’s Religious Heritage

CHAPTER OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, you should be able to ■ Talk about what you mean by religion, and what a religion includes. ■ Discuss religion in terms of the human experience of a split-level universe—as conditioned and unconditioned reality. ■ Cite and interpret Joachim Wach’s Three Forms of Religious Expression, plus expression in ethics, religious experience, and art. ■ Discuss other methods for approaching the study of religion: descriptive, critical, and historical. ■ Begin the study of religion, governance, and political life and the role of religion in the lives of women.

A NEW DAY OF RELIGIOUS ENCOUNTER The world’s many religious pathways are no longer far away. Think of your friends, neighbors, classmates, or workmates. The chances are many of them are of a different religious background than yourself. Think of the products you buy in today’s global economy: electronics from Malaysia, household items from China, chocolate from Africa. The chances are the hands that prepared them for your use belonged to persons of diverse religions, or no religion at all. The religions of the world—the words themselves may evoke a panorama of colorful images, perhaps drawn from a host of stories, movies, TV documentaries, the Internet, travel, or family background. Incense and temple gongs, yogis in contorted postures, ancient and mysterious chants, joyous shouts of praise, the slowness of ancient rituals—all these and more sweep past our inner eyes and ears. Sometimes, what most fascinates us is that which is far away or long ago. But the study of the religions of the world is no longer a matter of reading about what may seem strange or is faraway. In today’s world of pluralism* and rapid travel, almost any faith anywhere is a presence and an option throughout the world. The temples of Hindu Americans and the mosques of Muslim Americans embellish larger American cities. American Zen centers, quiet with the great peace of

*Terms in bold throughout this text are defined in the Glossary. 133 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

the Buddha, teach Eastern meditation. Christianity and Judaism in all their manifold forms have long existed here side by side, just as Christianity has been carried by American and other missionaries to the homelands of Hinduism and Buddhism. All of this makes “now” an exciting time to study religion. We who come to the study of religion today bring with us expectations shaped by these times. The presence of many options, and the ferment within most of them, is something we sense inside ourselves as well as in the outside world. A glance at virtually any morning paper or evening TV news reminds us that now is also an important time to study religion for grimmer reasons. In the post–Cold War world, religion, often linked to passionate nationalism, appears as a major factor in many of the planet’s tragic conflicts. Reports from India, the Middle East, the Balkans and, after September 11, 2001, New York and Washington, remind us of this terrible reality over and over. While the religions invoked in these often-bloody disputes cannot usually be solely blamed for them, no full comprehen- sion of the Earth’s current crises is possible without an in-depth understanding of the faiths involved. In assessing our own attitudes toward religious belief, we are forced to deal with the fact that religion is not always a good thing by ordinary human values. Our increasingly global world and economy mean that the adult careers of many American students will bring them in close contact with, perhaps even residence in, societies like those in India, China, Japan, or the Middle East, while many of Americans’ DPVOUFSQBSUT
JO
UIPTF

DPVOUSJFT
XJMM
DPNF
UP
UIF
6OJUFE
4UBUFT
8IFUIFS
POFT

QSJNBSZ
interests are in law, business, diplomacy, or academic study, the greatest success in these endeavors will be achieved by those with a deep understanding of how a society works, including sensitivity to its religious heritage. In this book we will see, for example, how a sense of enduring Confucian values helps one to grasp how both Japanese corporations and the Chinese People’s Republic really function. These examples indicate how complex religion is. It is now time to sort out this complexity by introducing some categories through which religion can be under- stood. Our task will now be to answer these questions: r
8IBU
EP
XF
look for when we look at the religion of another culture and try to understand what it means in that culture and to the people for whom it is important? r
8IBU
BSF
EJGGFSFOU
XBZT
JO
XIJDI
SFMJHJPO
expresses itself? (For example, as beliefs, as ways of worship, as social institutions like churches and temples, through ethical values, in art and literature.) r
8IBU
LJOE
PG
UFSNT
EP
XF
VTF
XIFO
XF
BSF
KVTU
USZJOH
UP
describe a religion? r
)PX
EP
XF
MPPL
BU
SFMJHJPO
critically, that is, when it may not be a good thing, in ways that are fair, that try to accept cultures different from our own, yet in ways that are also true to what we consider to be the highest human values? r
8IBU
IBWF
CFFO
UIF
basic stages of religious history on planet Earth? r
$BO
SFMJHJPO
CF
defined? or is it always just a fairly elusive word used to cover a variety of things?

VISITING A STRANGE LAND What is religion, then? Suppose you are taking a trip to a country whose culture is completely foreign to you, and you want to determine the religion of that culture. Suppose, further, that

134 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

because you cannot speak the language of the country well enough to ask anyone about it, you have to look for clues in what you see around you and in what people do. What would you look for? Most of what you see has obvious explanations—basic human needs for shelter, food, drink, security, and pleasure in this world. Most buildings up and down the streets are houses where people live or shops where craftspeople work or merchants sell goods to meet everyday needs. Most of the people scurrying about are out on business or seeking recreation. Once in a while, though, you may see something that has no such “ordinary” interpretation. A structure may be neither a home nor a shop, yet it is obviously set apart and perhaps elaborately ornamented. A human activity may be neither work nor play; it may not produce food, exercise the body, or challenge one’s skill in any ordinary way. Yet it is clearly of great importance. It may be marked by a solemn or festive air. Both the building and the activity may be associated with symbols and gestures that make no sense to an outsider; yet they seem to be of deep significance to people. You suspect these are places and practices connected to the religion of the land. You know you could be wrong. The special building might be a court instead of a temple; the activity, a game or dance instead of a rite. The rites of state and of religion are often intermingled. Often games and dances combine pleasure with cele- brating a religious festival or occasion: think Carnival in Rio or Thanksgiving football games in America. Even ordinary activities like planting or harvest may come with religious “extras” to relate them to the people’s beliefs, like the American harvest-time Thanksgiving festival. These “extras,” like the mysterious buildings and practices, go beyond what it takes to meet everyday needs or ordinary fun and games. They may there- fore point to the society’s awareness of more-than-ordinary reality. The rhetoric of preaching and the quiet of meditation, the ornate garb and stylized motions of elaborate ritual, and the gladsome tones of gospel music—all say reality has more to it than the everyday. These “signs” also say that this extraordinary reality, this “something more,” touches human life and can be felt, channeled, and made mani- fest by special means. Rites and symbols, preaching and meditation, are ways of connecting to that “something more.”

CONDITIONED AND UNCONDITIONED REALITY What is that “something more”? One thing many religions tell us is that we live in a split-level universe. Or, to use the expression of the historian of religion Mircea Eliade, that reality is “nonhomogeneous.” In homogenized milk, the milk and the cream are thoroughly mixed together. When it is not homogenized, the cream is at the top and the milk at the bottom, making two layers. However, some religions, like Hinduism and many indigenous religions, tell us that reality is actually one homoge- neous whole and that we just need to be enlightened to this truth. Most religious people see two kinds of reality. As we have seen, there is ordi- nary, everyday reality, and there is also the special reality of the temple, the festi- val, the “extras” pointing quietly to “something more” mixed in with everyday life. Certain visible places, people, and events are more in touch with that “something more” than others. They are sacred places, persons, and activities. We may think of the layers of this split-level, “nonhomogeneous” universe— the ordinary and the “something more”—as conditioned and unconditioned reality. (These relatively neutral terms are borrowed from Buddhist thought.)

135 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

Let’s start by talking about conditioned reality, because that’s what most of us are living in most of the time. To say something is conditioned simply means it is limited or restricted. We are all conditioned in time and space. If we are living in the twenty-first century, we are not also in the ninth century with Charlemagne or in the twenty-third century with Star Trek. If we are living in Ohio or Oklahoma, we are not also in Hong Kong or on the planet Neptune. Furthermore, we are conditioned by the limitations and habits of our minds. We can think about only one thing at a time, and we forget far more than we remember. Even the greatest genius can know only the tiniest fragment of what there is to know or to think more than the minutest fraction of what there is to think. Moreover, we continually put limits around ourselves when we say, “I’m a person who does this but not that,” “I believe this but not that,” or “I like this but not that.” Consider now what unconditioned reality, the opposite of all the above, would be like. It would be equally present to all times and all places. Its knowledge, wisdom, and mental power would be unlimited, and would include all that could possibly be known or thought. If it (or he or she) had preferences as to doing, believing, or liking, they would be based on omniscient (all-knowing) wisdom, not the bundle of ill-informed fears and prejudices by which we too often act—and react. 6ODPOEJUJPOFE
SFBMJUZ
XPVME
JO
GBDU
CF
OP
EJGGFSFOU
GSPN
UIF
%JWJOF
PS
6MUJNBUF
Reality of religion and philosophy. It goes by different names and has varying degrees of personality, but in most religions, it is believed that some unconditioned pole of reality stands over our very-much-conditioned everyday lives. (Even the legions of secondary entities that inhabit the religious world—the many gods, buddhas, bodhisattvas, angels, spirits—have their significance because of ultimate uncondi- tioned reality. They are in a special relationship to it and send out its light or energy in some special way.) We can illustrate conditioned and unconditioned reality and its names in vari- ous religions like this: Unconditioned Reality Brahman (philosophical Hinduism) Nirvana (Buddhism) The Dao (Daoism) Heaven (Confucianism) God (Judaism, Christianity, Islam [called Allah in Islam]) Awareness of Presence of Spirits (Shamanism)

Conditioned Reality* Maya (philosophical Hinduism) Samsara (Buddhism) 6OEFS
)FBWFO
%BPJTN
$POGVDJBOJTN Choice of Death (Judaism) The “World” (Christianity) Realm of War (Islam) Evil Spirits (Shamanism)

*These are only examples of the many terms that are used in different religions. It should be made clear that these “conditioned” categories are not necessarily evil; they are just arenas of ignorance and separ- ateness where evil or sin is possible.

136 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF DOORS AND WINDOWS TO THE ULTIMATE One point remains—a very important one. When religion is seen as split between conditioned and unconditioned reality, the wall between them nevertheless is not hard and solid. It is not as though the two realms are hermetically sealed off from each other. Instead, the main idea behind any religion is that the wall is full of doors and windows. Gods and people can look through from one side to the other. Revelations, gods, angels, saviors, and spirits can walk through the doors from the other side to visit us; our prayers and good thoughts can go through from this side to the other; and a few favored people—and perhaps the souls of many of us after death—may pass through those doors to join that other level of reality. This porous borderline, where the action is, is the sphere of religion. All reli- gions believe that certain teachings, practices (such as prayer or meditation, rites, and services), and modes of ethical behavior best express or fit in with the nature of ultimate reality. Those things are therefore like doors and windows. Through prayer, mystical experience, or worship, we can open them and pass through them in spirit. Certain persons or institutions are also in especially close touch with unconditioned reality and are also like those portals. So also are works of religious art, music, and literature. By all these means, religious people may enable themselves to move through the windows or doors. Some will object that not all of what is ordinarily called religious, or that has to do with gods and the like, is really concerned with unconditioned reality. They might point out that people go to church or temple or conduct rituals for social reasons or merely because they like the music. Yet understanding religion should not always be limited by the conscious intention of the religionist, often hard to judge in any event. Even if a person goes to church only to meet someone, or if a particular hunt- ing chant is a tradition that bonds the tribe, something more is implied. In the church or temple, God will be spoken of and things done that make no sense if there is no God. The hunting chant tells us that there is more to the hunt than just human beings hunting. Both chant and church open up in back, so to speak, to that invis- ible realm beyond ordinary existence. In the end, they imply doors and windows to ultimate reality.

FORMS OF RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION What then is this religion with its doors and windows all about? What is it made up of? To start with, it is made up of what people say, do, and form organizations around. The essence of religion may be unconditioned reality, and teaching about that may vary. But the outer forms of these doors and windows have much in com- mon throughout the world. When we look carefully at religion all over the world, we find that certain basic patterns, like old friends, keep reappearing despite all the variety. The sociologist of religion Joachim Wach (1898–1955) gave us one useful set of pegs for those patterns.1 While the essence of religion may be beyond words, he tells us, religion expresses itself in human life in three ways. He called these three ways the theoretical (meaning what is said: for example, beliefs and stories); the practical (meaning what is done: for example, worship, prayer, meditation, pilgrimage); and the sociological (meaning the kinds of groups: for example, social institutions and other groups; leadership; and a group’s relationship to society). These will be referred to from time to time. Let’s now consider more specifically what is meant by each.

137 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

160° 140° 120° 100° 60° 20° 80° IT

60°

° I 40 J PACIFIC H B OCEAN

Tropic of Cancer J 20°

ATLANTIC H OCEAN World ReligionsEquator 0° Majority Religion Significant Minority (at least 75%) Hinduism H IT Buddhism B 20° TropicIslam of Capricorn I Christianity C Chinese Religion Ch (Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism) Japanese Religion Ja (Shinto, Buddhism) ° Korean40 Religion K (Confucianism, Buddhism, Christianity) Judaism J Indigenous, IT Tribal Religion Note: In most cases religion codes follow Minorities 60° national boundaries and indicate the predominant religion of that nation. If none S Sikhism is at least 75%, both codes are shown. A Antarctic Circle few regions of distinct religious tradition Jn Jainism different from the rest of the country, like Z Zoroastrianism Tibet in China, are also indicated. 80°

Theoretical Expression: What Is Said in Religion Here we consider the query, “What do they say?” People say things in religion. They talk about God, angels, salvation, answered prayers, and much more. They tell stories about what God or Gods did in times past and about great religious saints or heroes, and they say what their doctrines or beliefs are. Religions say things about certain basic, ultimate issues—how the spiritual universe is set up, what unconditioned reality is, where the world came from and where it is going, and where humans came from and where we are going. Religions talk about how we know ultimate truth and how we are helped to get from here to the ultimate. This is what Joachim Wach refers to as the theoretical form of religious expression. The theoretical is expressed in two fundamental ways: myth, or narrative story, and doctrine . In the history of religion, the term myth is used in a special way to mean stories that express in narrative form the central values of the society and

138 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

20° 40° 60° 80° 100° 120° 140° 160° 80° ARCTIC OCEAN IT

60°

C 40° C PACIFIC C C OCEAN S B C Jn Z I 20° C Ch

Equator Ch 0° C IT INDIAN H OCEAN

20° IT Tropic of Capricorn

IH

60°

0 1000 2000 Miles

80° 0 1000 2000 3000 Kilometers

the way it views what the world means. This is different from the popular meaning of the word: a fable or story that is not true, as when we say, “That’s just a myth.” In the history of religion, the use of this word is only a statement of its function, and its use does not imply passing judgment on whether or not the narrative story is true. What about myth? A storyteller of the Australian aboriginal Arrernte tribes, an elder man or woman recognized as a lore keeper among these people who for some forty thousand years have inhabited the vast desertlike central areas of the island continent, is speaking to a group of young boys or girls, perhaps preparing them for tribal initiation. He is telling a story of how, according to wisdom now passed on to the latest generation, this immense and seemingly barren world came into being. For those whose lives have been so intimately a part of that rough terrain for so long, the immense empti- ness is far from barren; rather, it is full of secrets and hidden wellsprings of life, and the storyteller knows how to crack its code. He recites in a reverent, chanting voice appropriate to ancient mysteries.

139 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

The Three Forms of Religious Expression

THEORETICAL

(doctrine and myth) "What do they say?"

Central Experience SOCIOLOGICAL PRACTICAL

(leadership, (worship, prayer, groups, relation pilgrimage, to larger meditation, ritual) community) "What do they do?" "How do they organize?"

At first, he tells the young, all was a dark empty plain, containing neither life nor death. Then something stirred beneath the earth, as primal beings sleeping there moved from sleep without dreams to dreaming, then arose into what is called the Dreamtime. In this state they wandered the earth, calling to life plants, animals, and birds; as they wandered and worked, they sang. Their pathways are now called “songlines,” and even now, by singing their songs, dwellers on Earth can follow their trails and renew their labors. In time, the Eternal Ones of the Dreamtime found deposits of plant and animal material for the making of human beings, usually near water holes or lakes; these they carved into final form. Labors done, the Eternal Ones then went back to sleep, but they left as marks of their presence sacred rocks and trees, often enhanced by rock paintings to show their presence. Today Arrernte can leave their harsh world to reenter the Dreamtime anew through dance and initiation and by following the songlines.2 Here we see, up close and in action, the theoretical form of religious expression as myth, or narratives that express the fundamental worldview and values of a society. Of these, none is more important than the story of creation, or how our world came into being, for we humans tend to assume that if we know where something came from, we know important things about its meaning and purpose. What do you think is the basic message about our life as human beings in the Australian myth? Here creation is not an act of divine fiat or sacrifice; rather, it is more like acting out a dream, and the power of those primal times, the Dreamtime, can be accessed through dance and song, and storytelling. Take another example, the Judeo-Christian creation account. The beginning of the Bible tells us that God created the universe from chaos and that God stood outside it as its maker and master, pronouncing it originally very good. This cre- ation account tells us that God is not to be identified with the creation or with

140 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF ourselves but that he is above it as its Lord and is One with whom we can have a deep relationship of faith and love, though not one of absolute identity. A Hindu myth, in contrast, implies a very different kind of relationship between the Divine and the world. That myth tells us that God made the world out of himself by dividing up his body in a primal sacrifice. Thus, the world is, so to speak, God in disguise; in our innermost nature we are one with that same God. What about doctrine? Consider an assembly of bishops, teachers, or leading monks in one of the historical religions, like Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, or Islam. They are reflecting on what general statements about religious truth can be deduced from the stories that have long been told about divine beings and their activities. It as though they are saying, “If the stories tell us that God, or Gods, at different times did this, and this, and this, what can we say about them that is true all the time?” So they may say that stories and teachings like those of the Bible, the Qur’an, the Hindu Vedas and other sacred texts tell us that God is omnipotent or all-powerful, omniscient or all-knowing, or loving, and that he treasures those who believe and trust in him. They may say that the world was created at one definite point and will end at a later point in time with divine judgment. Or they may say that the universe is cyclical and eternal. Such statements give people something clear and definite to believe in that is relevant to all times and places and to all situations in which they find themselves. Religions can present still other answers to “What do they say?”: sermons, testimonials, lives of saints and heroes, folklore, poetry, novels. The list goes on and on.

Practical Expression: What Is Done in Religion This form of religious expression answers the question, “What do they do?” “Practical” here does not mean practical in the sense of something that works; it means “practices,” what is done. It covers such aspects of religion as worship, rites, ways of prayer and meditation, pilgrimages—everything actually done for the sake of the religion from the most public to the most private. This is what Joachim Wach refers to as the practical form of religious expression. All real religion has some kind of practice. If people were involved only in the realm of theoretical ideas, they would be involved in philosophy and not religion. But religious practices vary immensely, from an ornate ancient ritual to a simple Protestant-type service, from speaking in tongues to Zen meditation, from devotion to Gods in a Hindu temple to prayers in a Muslim mosque without images. Many years ago, I* had an opportunity to see one of the noro, or priestesses, of Okinawa, a now-Japanese island in the Ryukyu chain, south of the main islands. The religion of these islands, though related to the Japanese religion known as Shinto, is often considered the only traditional religion in the world definitely under the full leadership of women, who are its clergy and spokespersons. The woman I saw, pointed out to me as a noro, was tall, dressed entirely in long white garments, and impressively dignified. Four times a year, in one of their many rituals, a small group of noro gather at a shrine to the local kami, or local god, in the central square of the village. They light incense, pour sake (rice wine) from a cup over three sacred stones; then each takes a sip of the sake as a sort of communion, first offering it toward the altar and praying in a low voice.

*Robert Ellwood

141 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

They then proceed to the outer steps of the shrine, where they bedeck themselves in a five-piece white robe and a crown decorated with leaves and straw. This means the women are now, in effect, kami, or local gods, themselves. A male attendant hands each woman a small cup of sake anew; each woman lifts it and prays. The women then join the other villagers by taking assigned seats in the square and receive more offerings, and the occasion gradually becomes one of general festivity.3 Or, by way of contrast, consider the great variety of forms of worship within the Christian tradition. At one pole, there is the traditional Quaker meeting, in which persons sit in rows, or more often today, a circle, waiting in silence for the guidance of the Inner Light. From time to time individuals may feel moved to rise and say a few words or a prayer. At the end of the meeting, usually an hour, everyone stands to shake hands. A traditional Protestant service emphasizes the singing of hymns by the congregation, the reading of scripture, and the offering of prayers by the minister or other leaders, and it centers most of all on the sermon delivered by the minister, giving admonishment, advice, and support to those present who are endeavoring to lead a Christian life in this difficult world. At another pole, the traditional liturgies of the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox churches, while different, have in common a feeling of richness and timelessness. There are colorful vestments, offerings of incense, soaring music, and choreographed movements as the priests and others celebrate the offering and distribution of bread and wine by Christ at the Last Supper, now a festive banquet which is the central rite of a large part of Christianity. What do these and all other “practical” forms of religious expression have in common? First, however different, one knows that these words and actions are “something extra” which cannot be explained solely in terms of ordinary everyday life, but have a special meaning outside it or pointing to something outside it. They construct a special “sacred time” in which, ideally, life is lived on another plane from the ordinary. Very often, this “sacred time” makes the place of worship different, too—a “sacred space”—perhaps a place in which one instinctively acts differently than one does on the street or in the shop. At the same time, worship is supposed to have meaning connected to everyday life, as “doors and windows” transmitting pardon and power for life’s living. The important thing for understanding is to look behind the form of the practice and see what the “message behind the message” is. How do the “doors and windows” of religious practices help people best get in touch with God or unconditioned reality? If it is an ancient rite, then it says we best get in touch with ultimate reality by getting out of the one-dimensionality of the present and entering something that has deep roots in the past, perhaps getting us in touch with family and ethnic heritage. The rite probably has a strong aesthetic component—the sight of gorgeous altars and vestments, the smell of incense, the sound of wonderful music—to make us feel lifted up into another realm. If, on the other hand, the rite is a simple service with emphasis on hearing scripture and sermon, then it says we best get in touch with ultimate reality through hearing and the feelings that hearing truth can evoke. If the rite is inner prayer or meditation, then it says we best get in touch by releasing our inner self, or by letting the Spirit speak freely within us. Of course, remember that all worship has some kind of set form and in some way comes to us out of the past in a form that is traditional in a particular religion. This aspect of a rite, together with the sacred words used, is what makes it clear it is religious and not just entertainment or a lecture.

142 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

Sociological Expression: Groups and Leadership in Religion This form of religious expression, dealing with the social organization of the religion, must encompass three questions instead of just one like the other two forms: What kind of groups do they form? What kind of leadership does the religion have? What is the religion’s relation to the rest of society? The main idea is that religion, as it appears in actual history and society, is generally social: followed by families, communities, and voluntary groups together. This means that, like any society, it has structure, that is, ways in which decisions are made and tasks assigned, as well as leadership and ways the group defines the boundaries between it and the outside. From here on one finds countless variations. A moment’s reflection should remind one of religious groups that are very democratic and of others that are very authoritarian in structure. Leaders may find their place in “institutional” ways, going through the established schools and ordination procedures of their group or denom- ination, or a religious group may be “charismatic,” claiming a special inward call that manifests itself through the particular power of their preaching and perhaps miracles. Or a religious group may be a combination of each. So also there is consid- erable variation in the relation of religion to the outside. All of this is what Joachim Wach refers to as the sociological form of religious expression. Religious groups are of many different kinds. Some religions are so dominant in a particular society as to be almost identified with it, as is, at least nominally, Roman Catholicism in Spain or Lutheranism in Sweden or Hinduism in much of India. Sometimes the predominant religion is divided into different, often competing groups or denominations with their own subsets of beliefs and practices, like Christianity in UIF
6OJUFE
4UBUFT
PS
#VEEIJTN
JO
+BQBO
4PNF
SFMJHJPVT
HSPVQT
NBZ
CF
TNBMM
BOE
BU
odds with the larger society; these may be called sects or cults, though those words should be used with caution since they have become pejorative and stereotyping. Like the practical expression, each kind of religious group has its own “message behind the message” about the “doors and windows” that help people to get in touch with ultimate reality. If it is a broad-based religion, having national churches or larger denominations, it will have an important role in that country’s history and heritage; its leaders will be recognized as major spiritual figures, and it will doubtless have imposing churches or temples. At the same time, whatever its theoretical stance, because it includes so many people at all levels of spiritual development, in practice it will have to be fairly accommodating and tolerant. For those who sincerely adhere to this kind of religion, the message behind the message is, “It is better to go with a large religious group, even if there are imperfect people in it, than to set oneself apart; one can find everything one needs in that religion and help others in it, and in so doing one is identifying with a rich heritage.” On the other hand, those who join a small, probably more devoted, group are saying, “Large religions are inevitably corrupt and lukewarm; I have to be with a close-knit, intense group of people who are as serious as I am, who practice without compromise and who will give me the kind of support I need in my faith.” Or those who join a small group may be saying, “I listen to a different drummer; what reso- nates with me seems to be a religion of a different kind from that of the majority; I have to seek it out and follow it whether it’s popular or not.” Without denying the validity of anyone’s religious experience, one can probably imagine the kind of child- hood and personality type that might go with each of the responses. Take as an example the Prophet Muhammad and the beginnings of Islam with one man. It became the religion of a whole region, and eventually a major world religion.

143 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

As we will see in more detail later on, Muhammad started as a purely charismatic leader, first receiving the revelations that became the Qur’an, the sacred book of Islam, from an archangel while alone in a mountain cave. Soon enough, though, his religion was not purely private. The first convert was his wife Khadijah, who believed in his message. Today Islam is the second largest religion in the world with many sects, each with their own particular theoretical, practical, and sociological expres- sions of the revelation originally received by Muhammad.

Ethics, Religious Experience, and Art Three more forms of religious expression, not mentioned by Joachim Wach as separate, ought to be cited: ethics, religious experience, and art. Although these forms could be included in either the theoretical or practical forms of religious expression—or both—each is so important that it ought to be discussed separately. We will look at ethics first.

ETHICS One has to deal with ethical issues all the time. Suppose someone shows you a way—or you figure out a way yourself—that you could cheat on an exam or pla- giarize a paper in school, with very low risk of getting caught. How do you respond? Or when you get home or get together with friends, you get into a hot and heavy argument about sexual morality. Is abortion ever justified? Is sex before—or outside of—marriage ever right? What about homosexuality? Suppose a homeless person approaches you on the street wanting money. Should you give it to him or her or try to help in some other way, or should you say that just giving money doesn’t really help? Questions like these confront us almost every day. They are closely related to religion, because many people say that their religious teachings, or values, help them decide or actually provide the answers.

RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE Another important vehicle is religious experience, some- times called mystical experience. (Some authorities would define mystical experi- ence as a sense of oneness with God or infinite reality, while saying a nonmystical religious experience simply offers a sense of divine presence, of deep prayer, or of being profoundly moved by a religious service or music.)4 For many people, the most important thing about religion is the experiences it provides: of closeness to or oneness with God, of conversion and inner purifica- tion, of prayers answered, of love for all beings. These feelings may be imaged and described in the language of various religions. But they are found in nearly all faiths, and appear to have some points in common everywhere. The recipient reports being inwardly moved, perhaps to sense a new start in life, and to know spiritual truth directly. At the same time, characteristics of religious experience can vary, too. Shamans and others feel contact with, or possession by, individual deities rather than universal oneness, though these can be very powerful experiences. Sometimes the experience may be of what Rudolf Otto called the numinous—the sacred as fearsome as well as compelling.5 More common today, though, are religious experiences described as warm and joyous. Religious experience is not always intensely related to a particular religion. Roger Bannister, the first man to run the four-minute mile, tells of his first experi- ences running on the beach. After taking in the wonder of the nature all around him (though he says that he “could not absorb so much beauty”), he then started run- ning virtually out of sheer joy: “No longer conscious of my movement I discovered

144 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF a new unity with nature. I had found a new source of power and beauty, a source I never dreamt existed.” Bannister added that it was from moments like this that his love of running grew.6 Bannister’s experience is what others might have termed a union with God.

ART Let us use the term “art” broadly to include painting, sculpture, architecture, music, and literature—anything made by human craftsmanship for the sake of its beauty or truth-bearing capacity. Clearly, all these can serve as “doors and windows” to the Divine. The best analogy is a stained glass window in which the white light of the sun is colored and shaped to take on the form of haloed saints and conventional symbols of faith. Art has always been important to religion. Indeed, it may well be that the earliest known art, the Paleolithic cave paintings, had religious meaning. The art of the earliest civilizations, in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and ancient India, was heavily religious—obviously because religion deals in beings that are ordinarily invisible— Gods, angels—or in beings from out of the past—saviors, saints, buddhas, prophets, sages. They must be portrayed to make them real. So also must basic religious symbols, or foci for meditation like the mandalas of the East, be made real. Art can also tell us quite a bit about a religion’s view of human nature and human society in the way it represents persons through art in all sorts of ways: as devout, as sinners, as wise and foolish, as turning to God or showing the nature of a life without religion. This last is especially the province of great novelists who have dealt with religious themes, such as Fyodor Dostoevsky or Graham Greene.

The Interrelationship of the Forms of Expression In any religion, the forms of expression—three or six—work together to form a uni- fied experience. It is usually a mistake to think that one comes first and the others fol- low after. Children learn about religion more or less through all forms of expression at once: they hear the stories and feel the special atmosphere of a church, a temple, or a religious rite when they are taken there by their parents, and they pick up the tone of its social life as they play with friends and relatives who share the same faith. Even an adult convert will probably be drawn by all forms and will participate in all simultaneously. So the forms of religious expression unite to become a single unified experience, which points to the ultimate nature of the sacred and becomes a part of the inner life of each person touched by it.

DESCRIPTIVE AND CRITICAL APPROACHES You may ask, is it enough just to talk, in a neutral way, about the shape of a religion’s “doors and windows” as they open toward unconditioned reality? It is not the purpose of a study such as this to decide about the truth or falsity of any religion. We are simply trying to know and understand religion better, using a descriptive and empathic approach—attempting to see each religion, in a sense, from the inside out. Even so, does one look on everything in the religious world— from human sacrifice to the healing work of a Mother Teresa—with exactly the same understanding gaze? Is there no place for a critical look that says one kind of reli- gious practice is simply better than another? In the twenty-first century, religion seems to have a newly important role in world affairs. The clash of religious beliefs and the cultures they foster have been painfully brought to the fore, making it all too clear that religion can have a dark side. In this environment, too much empathy certainly can get in the way of even seeing where the

145 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

problems are, and world religion scholars realize that they need to be a part of the discussion about such matters. Important questions have been raised around the world about religion and the oppression of women, about religion’s role in maintaining exploitative economic systems, about ways in which religion can hinder (through allegedly outmoded religious beliefs) solutions to current problems, like overpopulation—solutions that are deemed more reasonable by those who propose them. The religious rheto- ric and energies behind international conflict and terrorism, as well as scandals in major religious institutions, have alienated some people from religion, or at least some forms of it. On the other hand, some of those involved in such conflicts are NPWFE
UP
FNCSBDF
B
NPSF
QSPGPVOE
DPNNJUNFOU
UP
UIFJS
GBJUI
"OE
JO
UIF
6OJUFE
States, divisive issues such as the conflict over the appropriate role of religion in politics and the conflict between science and religion (as in battles over teaching evolution or medical research using human stem cells) abound. Such issues have found some religious people on one side and some on the other. In any case, the power of religion to divide as well as to unite, to oppress as well as to uplift, and to seem dark as well as to enlighten is apparent. Yet in the thick of these conflicts, one thing is clear: beneficial change will not occur unless questions are asked and criticisms made. Nevertheless, faith and effective change require the most accurate informa- tion and authentic insight possible. For this reason, there remains a vital place for religious studies that just attempts to present a clear and unvarnished account of the way things are. And that is why it is especially important to maintain an empathetic perspective when studying or observing a religion that is from a cultural context quite different from the one of the student or the observer. If an attack is made, for example, on a certain religion’s endorsement of war, one needs to be sure that one understands how this matter is understood by believers, not just how it looks from the outside. One also needs to know exactly who endorses the policy on behalf of the religion: the great majority of members, authoritative leadership, or only certain extremists that take it on themselves to interpret the religion’s teaching. It is also important to analyze to what extent this policy differs from the teaching and practice (not always the same thing!) of one’s own and other religions. One would also need to be clear about the values to which one is appealing in advancing the criticism and why she or he believes those values should be con- sidered superior to those of the religion itself. Only then would one properly be able to make a critical yet responsible statement challenging the religion to reassess its position on war. Our main goal in this book is to be descriptive. This is primarily a work that provides information and attempts empathetic insight. But it does not preclude criti- cism, and the authors hope that what is presented here will help readers to view religion both empathetically and critically.7 Criticism made honestly on the basis of knowledge and insight is ultimately necessary if we are to come to our own conclu- sions about the validity or rightness of a religious expression that is foreign to us in our own cultural context. Criticism is essential in any open and honest inter religious discourse; we must be prepared to deal not only with our criticism of the religions of others, but also with their criticism of ours.

RELIGION THROUGH TIME Think of pictures you may have seen of paintings on the walls of caves by our early ancestors, some going back as far as 35,000 years or more. They suggest that “something more” was added by human hand, mind, and spirit to nature. We do

146 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF not know exactly why the lavish cave paintings were made. In part, they may have been a kind of magic to enhance the availability of animals the people hunted. The depth of the cave may have been considered an otherworldly kind of place, where access to a realm of divine beings or departed spirits was possible and through which animal and even human life entered our realm. There is evidence that the caves were not only art galleries but places of religious rite or initiation. In one cave recently studied, the archeologists found that the sandy floor was trampled by many tiny human feet some thirty millennia ago: children dancing in some rit- ual, perhaps their initiation? These remains are from the Paleolithic era, or Old Stone Age: the time when hunters and gatherers predominated, before the discovery of agriculture. Religion is oriented, in part, toward what is perceived to be the source of our life, in this case the animal, and also what is perceived to be that other world that is the source of dreams, of the visions of shamans, of life itself and its invisible powers. The cave religion of Paleolithic peoples may be perpetuated in the barrows or underground artificial burial caves or tunnels of ancient Ireland and Britain, or even the pyramids of Egypt, which are like artificial mountains with their internal caves for burial and access to the world of the dead and the Gods.8 With the discovery of agriculture, the plant and its cycle of seedtime and harvest, of “death” and then “rebirth” were sacralized. Sometimes this mystery was viewed as a model of human life, and even of the life of the Gods, as well. In ancient Babylonian religion, Ishtar was the most loved and worshiped of all the Goddesses. Her brother and spouse was Tammuz, a vegetation God, and a dying-rising deity. Tammuz was said to die and go to the underworld in the fall. Ishtar then wept for him, descended into the realm of shades, and triumphantly brought him back in the spring with vibrant rejoicing. This myth had great worship expression among the common people. Women wailed with Ishtar for her charming yet dying child, and farmers danced when his return meant the return of fertility and new crops in a new year. This pattern was commemorated by the great temples of Babylon and by Babylon’s kings as well. That worship hints at something else too: agriculture meant people stayed in the same place, meaning villages, then towns, then great cities and empires like those of Egypt or Babylon or China. Such great civilizations meant bountiful trade, together with surplus wealth that could support priests and philosophers. That brought a momentous development, one even more important than cities, empires, trade, and priests, though it was related to them: the invention of writing. Writing first originated perhaps in the records kept by men of commerce. But soon it meant chronicles of kings and the sacred books of the priests. Oral traditions that had been passed down from generation to generation took on new significance as they were reified in the written word. A quick glance at chronicles going back over years and centuries told readers that things change and do not change back. Empires rise and fall, peoples move about, plagues come and go. Take the Chronicles of the Hebrew Scriptures. They told ancient readers, as they tell us, that the people of Israel went through many vicissitudes: slavery in Egypt, entry under Moses into the Promised Land, innumerable wars, and exile. Each age brought new challenges, and none were quite the same as those of yesteryear. This discovery of a sense of history called for a larger religious perspective than that of cave or tribe. In the new civilizations, lives were more specialized and individual than in the old tribes. In religion, too, there was more emphasis on individual responsibility, on one’s own sin and guilt, on one’s merit and salvation, and on how one’s own life fit in the larger society.

147 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

Moses standing on the top of Mount Nebo.

All this was reflected in new religious visions, which were provided by a just a handful of persons—Moses, Zoroaster, the Buddha, Confucius, Laozi, Jesus, Muhammad—who were the founders of major religions, several of which came to dominate the spiritual landscape of vast expanses of the globe. Although their traditional lives have no doubt been mythologized, it is significant that the founders were, or were taken to be, historical personages who lived at a definite time in human history, not mythological beings. For the most part these founders lived over a relatively brief period within the whole scope of human history, from about 500 B.C.E. to 500 C.E. This period, or its first century, has sometimes been called the Axial Age, because on it so much turned.9 Not least of this was the use and institution of sophisticated writing, which enhanced the awareness of historical time (mentioned above) and centered religion on set texts rather than oral tradition, which could evolve in its telling over time. Although the major religions to come out of this period carried over much from before, cumulatively they marked a tremendously important new start in Earth’s spiritual history. Believing that a definite word was delivered by a divine voice within the midst of human history, which was memorialized in sacred texts, like the Bible, the Sutras, or the Qur’an, they could sometimes be stricter and more intolerant than what went before. Yet they also showed that the onward march of human history can have sacred meaning: God or the Gods are working in it. In India, at approximately the same time as the emergence of the founder religions, the traditions that were to CFDPNF
)JOEVJTN
QSPEVDFE
XSJUUFO
UFYUT
PG
TVDI
UFBDIJOHT
BT
UIF
6QBOJTIBET
BOE
the Bhagavad-Gita. In them the central theme is the oneness of the true self with the Divine, transcending history through making absolute the state of consciousness or angle of philosophical vision in which timelessness shows is above time. The founder religions that were successful, such as Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Confucianism, and parallel developments in Hinduism, became associated with major empires, like Christianity and the late Roman Empire under Constantine, Buddhism with the Ashoka in India, Islam with the Caliphate, and Confucianism in the Han dynasty of China, which gave them a foothold from which they spread, sometimes over continents and many diverse cultures. Parallels among them can be seen in how they developed devotional patterns, had an era of reformation like that of Europe in the sixteenth century, and produced philosophies and literatures, ancient and modern.10

148 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

Looking Forward It is clear, then, that religion is always in a state of flux and transition. Each genera- tion has always been melting into the next. There are always constant themes in reli- gion, but their ways of expression continually shape themselves anew. The process is a complex interaction of tradition and new ideas, working through expression in word, act, and group formation, expressed through symbols or concepts that may be as old as cave art or inspired and imaginatively created only yesterday. And it should be remembered that virtually nothing of significance that appears in the long history of a religion is ever really lost.

RELIGION, GOVERNANCE, AND POLITICAL LIFE *O

&MJ[BCFUI
**
XBT
DSPXOFE
2VFFO
PG
&OHMBOE
BOE
UIF
6OJUFE
,JOHEPN
JO
B
solemn and highly religious ceremony in Westminster Abbey. The actual corona- tion took place in the heart of the Eucharist, or Holy Communion, the central rite of much of traditional Christianity, celebrated according to the usage of the Church of England. Later, in 1990, Akihito was made Emperor of Japan in ceremonies which included a very ancient Shinto rite called the Daijosai. Virtually alone, the ruler prayerfully took sips of rice wine twice in the dead of night in thatch-roofed structures, appar- ently communing with Shinto deities and his divine ancestors in this quiet and mys- terious ceremony. In the twentieth century, these impressive rituals had resonances of something from another era, when a state church or some other form of union of religion and government had real authority. For that matter, neither the British nor the Japanese sovereign possesses real political authority, but each is considered the embodiment of the whole people—a check on ordinary state power but whose function is actually symbolic. For traditionalists, the symbolic religious enthronement of symbolic rul- ers evokes warm nostalgia, from others, criticism for the apparent presumption that all citizens share one religion or that government has any business so endorsing a religion. In the West, we tend to think of religion as a phenomenon more or less different from the public life of politics and government. Thus i may surprise many a Western reader to discover that in most cultures around the world, throughout time, there was not even a word to identify religion as something different from the society and culture as a whole.11 Even today, nearly all of what we now refer to as “religion” aims toward an ideal not only for individuals, family, and the religions’ own institutions but also for all of society. So to study a religion without addressing its vision of society, including gov- ernance and political life, would be taking it out of context. What we find is that the world religions’ aspirations for government and society have much in common, in that they address common fundamental questions: How can society achieve stability, safety, justice, prosperity, and fairness for its people? What kinds of characteristics and character do we want our governors to exemplify? What role should religion play in politics or government, if any at all? What is a good society? Differences arise, of course, in the various ways in which the world religions have attempted to answer such questions. And the reader will want to keep these questions in mind as we explore religion, governance, and political life in the sec- tions on that topic throughout this text.

149 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF WOMEN IN THE WORLD RELIGIONS One might ask: Why have the authors included special sections on women in the chapters that follow and not a complementary one on men? The reason is that too often what we study about religion is a generalization of human experience using men’s experience as the norm. This is called being androcentric. The study of women in religion is an effort to undo this androcentric perspective to provide a more holis- tic understanding of religion. We have already looked at one example of women in religion, the Okinawan noro or priestesses. But a more typical situation would be that in medieval Europe, where women had no hope of a leadership position in the official hierarchy, from village priest to pope, but who might participate in what is sometimes referred to as the “little tradition” of folk myths and practices that were intermingled with officially sanctioned doctrines or through unofficial but sometimes significant influence from the sidelines as saint and advocate. Take St. Catherine of Siena (1347–1380). This medieval Italian woman claimed to have had an ecstatic vision of Jesus when she was only five or six years old, and at sixteen she was asked by her family to marry the widower of her recently
EFDFBTFE
TJTUFS
#POBWFOUVSB
6UUFSMZ

VOXJMMJOH
to enter into this union, Catherine adopted a tactic she had learned from Bonaventura. The latter, callously treated by her spouse, had refused to eat until he changed his ways; he finally did so. Now Catherine, aware of the power as well as of the status fasting could give women in a society controlled by men, declined to eat until her father relented and let her remain unmarried. Catherine later became a Dominican sister, and in a famous mystical experience, she believed she was inwardly wedded to Jesus. She now reportedly ate very little but the Holy Communion, and as a now-celebrated ascetic, she sent letters and traveled about, promoting church reform and, particularly, striving to end the papal schism, in which rival popes reigned in Rome and in Avignon in France. Gregory XI in Avignon was apparently sufficiently impressed by the spiritual power of this impassioned woman, evidenced by her fasts, that he returned his administration to Rome. The role of women in religion will be a major concern of this book all the way through. Occasionally, as with the Okinawan noro and, more recently, in some religious communities in which reforms have equalized the genders, women have had positions of institutional leader- ship. But most of the traditional major faiths that, since the Axial Age, have dominated the spiri- tual landscape have been governed by males, regardless of what their founders may have Woman praying at a temple in Thailand. intended. That is, a patriarchal social pattern, or

150 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

Fundamental Features of Religions

Theoretical Basic Worldview How the universe is set up, especially in its spiritual aspect—the map of the invisible world. God or Ultimate Reality What the ultimate source and ground of all things is. Origin of the World Where it all came from. Destiny of the World Where it is going. Origin of Humans Where we came from. Destiny of Humans Where we are going. Revelation or Mediation between How we know this and how we are helped to get the Ultimate and the Human from here to our ultimate destiny.

Practical What Is Expected of Humans: Worship, What we ourselves must do. Practices, Behavior

Sociological Major Social Institutions How the religion is set up to preserve and implement its teaching and practice; what kind of leadership and groups it has; how it interacts with the larger society.

“patriarchy” developed where the patriarch or the father is the authority. Because of this, women were subject to male religious leaders, fathers, husbands, and even sons on the basis of religious tenets that did not permit individual status and authority for women. Still, the positions of women have been varied. As wives and mothers they have, of course, had a role in the shaping spiritual life and wisdom on the domestic level. Sometimes, perhaps like the noro, perpetuating shamaness and priestess roles going back long before the Axial Age, they have been folk religion visionaries and ritualists. Sometimes, as nuns and abbesses, they have carved out a niche with definite, though limited, authority within the system. Certain women, like Catherine of Siena, have exercised no small influence through their own inner spiritual charisma, whether as ascetics, saints, writers, counselors, or even founders of new religious movements, GSPN
$ISJTUJBO
4DJFODF
JO
UIF
6OJUFE
4UBUFT
UP
5FOSJLZP
JO
+BQBO More often, though, women have found that their gender has caused them to face implacable barriers in life, whether in exercising institutional or intellectual spir- itual leadership or in marriage, where the prevailing religion has often taught wifely submission to the husband and has made divorce or even remarriage after widow- hood very difficult. Some women have invented ways around these situations; some have known deep inner happiness, nonetheless; some have found life very hard. All these matters will be reflected in the upcoming sections on women in the various world religions, as they ask the “woman question” what are the proper roles and status of women in religion and society?

151 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF FUNDAMENTAL FEATURES OF RELIGIONS That each of the world’s religions has a history and encompasses each of the forms of religious expression means that they all have common patterns. They usually ask and answer certain questions. All have a basic worldview, ideas about the Divine or 6MUJNBUF
3FBMJUZ
JEFBT
BCPVU
UIF
PSJHJO
BOE
EFTUJOZ
PG
UIF
XPSME
BOE
PG
JOEJWJEVBM
humans, a revelation or authority or mediation between the Divine and humankind, standards about what is expected of humans (that is, patterns of worship, spiritual practices, and ethics or behavior), and an institutional or sociological expression. In order to provide a convenient guide to these fundamental features, a chart that presents the three forms of expression from Joachim Wach (the theoretical, practical, and sociological) has been prepared for each religion discussed in this text. An introductory outline for the charts is presented on page 19 so that the reader can see what will be covered in each of the categories used. It should be remembered that these charts are able to present only the dominant or traditional interpretation of the religion; variations often exist but cannot be taken into account in the charts, although they may be in the text. It is now time to turn to the religions themselves.

Summary

This chapter has tried to present some basic major historical periods of human religion. We also perspectives for understanding the religions of the discussed the “woman question” in the world reli- world comparatively. We discussed religion as the gions and how the answer to that question impacts “doors and windows” between conditioned and women’s lives and shapes the societies in which unconditioned reality. We presented the forms of they live. Finally, we indicated that each actual, liv- religious expression: theoretical (narrative and doc- ing religion contains tensions and seemingly conflict- trine), practical (styles of worship), sociological ing motifs that it tries to resolve into a pattern. (forms of group life), ethics, religious experience, This may all make religion appear very and art. We reflected on ways in which both descrip- complex and difficult, but if you will look within tive and critical approaches to religion are valid and yourself, you will see that your own life is ordered important. We discussed religion’s aspirations for in much the same way. By increasing your under- the political dimensions of society. We talked about standing of yourself as a human being, you will the problems and possibilities inherent in discussing grow in your ability to understand the complexity religion in terms of its history and summarized the of human religion.

Questions for Review

1. Discuss whether or not you agree with the conten- 4. Name and explain Joachim Wach’s three forms of tion that today is a particularly exciting time to study religious expression, together with ethics, religious world religions. experience, and art. 2. Describe some of the problems in today’s world 5. Describe how religious doctrine develops from myths that seem to be involved with religion and some and narratives. ways religion can help intergroup and international 6. Discuss what sort of messages might be transmitted understanding. nonverbally by the practical (style of worship) and 3. Explain the difference between conditioned and sociological expressions of a religion. unconditioned reality and religion’s role regarding 7. Explain how the forms of religious expression them. interact.

152 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution
$IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

8. Present the values of both descriptive and critical 13. Explain some of the major characteristics of the approaches to the world religions. Give examples of modern experience and how religion has responded both based on your own observation. to them. 9. Discuss the advantages and possible pitfalls of an 14. Discuss some of the issues raised by postmodern historical approach to understanding a religion. consciousness and how religion has responded to 10. Summarize the main periods in the history of human them. religion with an understanding of the importance of 15. Summarize the main issues involved in the study of the Axial Age. religion, governance, and political life. 11. Indicate the main ways in which religion has responded 16. Discuss the “woman question” in the world religions to the experience of the “discovery of history.” and how an androcentric point of view might provide 12. Describe some common characteristics of founder only a limited perspective of religion. religions, especially Buddhism, Christianity, and 17. Discuss how religions both contain and try to resolve Islam. the tensions common to human existence.

Suggested Readings on the Study of World Religions

Almond, Gabriel A., R. Scott Appleby, and Emmanuel Gross, Rita M., Feminism and Religion: An Introduction. Siran, Strong Religion: The Rise of Fundamentalism Boston: Beacon Press, 1996. Around the World
$IJDBHP
6OJWFSTJUZ
PG
$IJDBHP
Haddad, Yvonne Yazback, and Ellison Banks Findly, eds., Press, 2003. Women, Religion and Social Change. Albany: State Armstrong, Karen. The Great Transformation: The 6OJWFSTJUZ
PG
/FX
:PSL
1SFTT
 Beginning of Our Religious Traditions. New York: Hitchcock, Susan Tyler, with John Esposito, The Knopf, 2006. Geography of Religion. Washington, DC: National Bowie, Fiona, The Anthropology of Religion, 2nd ed. Geographic Society, 2004. Malden, MA and Oxford: Blackwell, 2006. Idinopulos, Thomas Athanasius, Brian C. Wilson, and Bowker, John, ed., The Cambridge Illustrated History James Constantine Hanges, eds., Comparing Religions: of Religion. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge Possibilities and Perils? Leiden: Brill, 2006. 6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 James, William, The Varieties of Religious Experience. New Browning, Don S., M. Christian Green, and John Witte, York: Longman, Green, 1902 (many later editions). Jr., Sex, Marriage, and Family in the World Religions. Jaspers, Karl, The Origin and Goal of History, Michael /FX
:PSL
$PMVNCJB
6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 Bullock, trans. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1953. Carmody, Denise Lardner, Women and World Religions. Lerner, Gerda, The Creation of Patriarchy. New York: Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1989. 0YGPSE
6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 ———, and John Tully Carmody, How to Live Well: Ethics Lincoln, Bruce, Holy Terrors: Thinking About Religion in the World Religions. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1988. after Sept. 11
$IJDBHP
6OJWFSTJUZ
PG
$IJDBHP
1SFTT
Christ, Carol P., and Judith Plaskow, eds., Weaving the 2003. Visions: New Patterns in Feminist Spirituality. San MacDonald, Margaret Read, The Folklore of World Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1989. Holidays. Detroit, MI: Gale Research, 1992. ———, Womanspirit Rising: A Feminist Reader in Religion. Matthews, Clifford N., Mary Evelyn Tucker, and Philip San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1979, 1992. Hefner, eds., When Worlds Converge: What Science and Eliade, Mircea, Cosmos and History. New York: Harper Religion Tell Us about the Story of the Universe and Our Torchbooks, 1959. Place in It. Chicago: Open Court, 2001. ———, Patterns in Comparative Religion. Cleveland: Morgan, Peggy, and Clive Lawton, eds., Ethical Issues in Meridian Books, 1963. Six Religious Traditions
&EJOCVSHI
6,
&EJOCVSHI
———, The Sacred and the Profane. New York: Harper 6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 Torchbooks, 1961. Neusner, Jacob, World Religions in America: An Ellwood, Robert S., Myth: Key Concepts in Religion. Introduction, rev. ed. Louisville, KY: Westminster John London and New York: Continuum, 2008. Knox Press, 2000. ______, Cycles of Faith. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira, 2003. Otto, Rudolf, The Idea of the Holy. London and New York: ______, The Politics of Myth: A Study of C. G. Jung, Mircea 0YGPSE
6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 Eliade, and Joseph Campbell
"MCBOZ
46/:
1SFTT
Pals, Daniel L., Seven Theories of Religion. New York: 1999. 0YGPSE
6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 ______, Introducing Religion, 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Sharma, Arvind, ed., Today’s Woman in World Religions. Prentice Hall, 1993. "MCBOZ
4UBUF
6OJWFSTJUZ
PG
/FX
:PSL
1SFTT


153 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution $IBQUFS

r
6OEFSTUBOEJOH
UIF
8PSMET
3FMJHJPVT
)FSJUBHF

———, and Katherine K. Young, eds., Feminism and ———, The Comparative Study of Religion. New York: World Religions
"MCBOZ
4UBUF
6OJWFSTJUZ
PG
/FX
:PSL
$PMVNCJB
6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 Press, 1999. Waardenburg, Jacques, ed., Classical Approaches to the ———, Her Voice, Her Faith
#PVMEFS
$0
BOE
0YGPSE
6,
Study of Religion. New York and Berlin: de Gruyter, Westview Press, 2003. 1999. Smith, Huston, The World Religions: Our Great Wisdom Weber, Max, The Sociology of Religion. Boston: Beacon Traditions. San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1999. Press, 1963. Smith, Jonathon Z., Imagining Religion. Chicago: Winzeler, Robert S., Anthropology of Religion. Lanham, 6OJWFSTJUZ
PG
$IJDBHP
1SFTT
 MD: AltaMira Press, 2008. Smith, Wilfred C., The Meaning and End of Religion. New The student is also referred to good encyclopedic treat- York: Harper & Row, 1962, 1978. ments of particular topics, such as those in the Swidler, Arlene, ed., Homosexuality and World Religions. Encyclopedia Britannica; Keith Crim, ed., Perennial Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1993. Dictionary of Living Religions. HarperSanFrancisco, Thrower, James, Religion: The Classical Theories. reprint, 1990; Lindsey Jones, ed., The Encyclopedia 8BTIJOHUPO
%$
(FPSHFUPXO
6OJWFSTJUZ
1SFTT
 of Religion, 2nd ed., 15 vols. Detroit: Macmillan van der Leeuw, Gerardus, Religion in Essence and Reference, 2005; Robert Wuthnow, ed. in chief, Manifestation, 2 vols. New York: Harper & Row, 1963. Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion, 2 vols. Wach, Joachim, Sociology of Religion
$IJDBHP
6OJWFSTJUZ
Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2007. of Chicago Press, 1944.

154 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

1 Studying and Describing Religion

Before you read this chapter, think about how and where you have learned about religion so far. What kinds of things did you study? What was the pur- pose of your study? Also, think about how you define or describe religion. All of us have some idea of what religion is. What does the word religion mean to you?

Why Study Religion? Many, perhaps most, of you reading this are studying religion to receive aca- demic credit for a course. But there are other reasons for studying religion. Those of us who are religious study our own religion to learn more about this significant dimension of our lives. Our commitment to it matures as we base our devotion on greater knowledge and understanding. Our religion also helps define who we are culturally and who we are in dif- ferent contexts. Someone may identify as a Muslim American in one context, while in another, the emphasis will be different, and she or he will identify as an American Muslim. I sometimes say I am a Buddhist Unitarian Universalist, while at other times, I’m a Unitarian Universalist Buddhist. Why study other people’s religions? Doing so can help us to understand other people. Religion is an important, even essential part of many people’s lives, and by understanding and appreciating it, we come to know them bet- ter. As you read in the Introduction, all of us will increasingly meet and get to know people of many faiths and of none. Prejudice often results in part from a simple lack of knowledge and information. While knowledge and under- standing do not guarantee freedom from prejudice, a lack of knowledge greatly increases the likelihood of prejudice. It is also important that we understand religion because it has had an impor- tant role in history and continues to have a significant impact on contemporary events. Religion has had and continues to have an impact on cultural forms such as literature, art, and music. Finally, because all religions have deeply human roots, to understand anyone’s religion helps us understand ourselves better. By understanding the similarities and differences between our own reli- gion and those of other people, we also come to know our own better.

155 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Studying and Describing Religion Statements by notable religious studies scholars highlight several important themes, including the practical applicability of religious studies, which helps to relate the study of religion to the discussion of religious diversity. Amanda Porterfield, who analyzes the role of religion in the culture of the United States, notes that the discipline of religious studies helps to stabilize the public role of religion. Religious studies:

encouraged respect for religious difference along with increased self-­ consciousness about how religious symbols work and a general tendency to understand religion in humanistic terms. . . . [Religious] studies contrib- uted to greater understanding of the ways in which religion functions to divide people from one another and the ways in which it could function to promote equality and build community. . . . Through its approach to religion as a universal human phenomenon manifest in a variety of different cultural forms, religious studies has contributed to the respect for religious difference that distinguishes the United States from countries where religious difference feeds violence and civil war.1

Studying Religion as a Part of the Humanities The study of religion has many dimensions. Studying religion as a part of a course of study in the humanities may involve attitudes and methods that are new to you. Most of us who think about religion first learned to do so within our fami- lies and later in a religious organization or a community of faith. Maybe it was in preparation to become a member of a church or synagogue. Perhaps it was learning about our own religion in Sunday school or Hebrew day school classes. For some, it was learning the prayers of our faith from our parents. This way to study religion is sometimes called theology. This is study undertaken by members of a community of faith when they learn or study the practices and beliefs of their own religion. Therefore, we can call it an inside perspective. It involves the personal faith commitments of both teachers and students. It is, in Saint Anselm’s classic definition, “faith seeking understanding.”2 Theology uses intellectual concepts to understand a particular religious tradition and to express its relevance for the present. It takes as its beginning point the faith of the community, the givens accepted as a part of their tradition. For Christians, for example, the uniqueness of Jesus and Jesus’s special role in God’s plan for the world is such a given. For Jews, the oneness of God has a similar role. Bud- dhists3 take the early teachings of the Buddha as foundational. These starting points are often found in or derived from the group’s sacred writings. The goal of this kind of study is that those who engage in it will become more knowledgeable about and more committed to their faith. It need not involve assertions of the superiority of one’s own faith, although it sometimes does. It is an important part of educating people in their faith and helping

156 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Preliminary Considerations them to mature as religious persons. It is a significant aspect of the growth and development of any religion. A firm understanding of one’s own faith is also one foundation for dialogue with others. The academic study of religion differs from theology in that it makes no assumptions about the beliefs or lack of beliefs of the scholar. Religious stud- ies teachers and students alike may be believers, nonbelievers, or agnostics (people who believe that we cannot be certain about religious matters in their personal religious lives. Rather than concentrating on only one religion, the academic study of religion promotes a lively awareness of the diversity of the religious beliefs, practices, and experiences that people have. It encourages open-minded inves- tigation of that diversity. It investigates religions in their historical and cultural settings and examines a broad range of materials to provide the most balanced treatment possible. It distinguishes between things that most people accept as historical facts and other things that are taken as true only within the context of a particular community of faith. For example, most people in the United States would agree that the founder of Christianity was an historical person named Jesus who lived in the area of Nazareth. Non-Christians usually do not accept that Jesus was in a unique sense the Son of God or that Jesus is the savior of humanity. In studying religion from an academic standpoint, we may try to explain religious behaviors and beliefs as well as simply describe them. However, such explanations should never become reductionistic. Reductionism is an oversimplification that claims to exhaust the meaning of a phenomenon by explaining it in terms of some other, external factor. For example, saying that people are religious because economic deprivation in their earthly lives makes “pie in the sky by-and-by” attractive is a case of reductionism. While there may be some truth to this for some persons, it hardly exhausts the meaning of religion. When we study religion academically, the study takes place in an atmos- phere that is free of advocacy. It promotes neither religion nor nonreligion. It educates about all religions and neither favors nor belittles any. It is loyal first of all to the guidelines of public scholarship. Its commitments are to knowledge and understanding for their own sake and to religion as a vigorous dimension of humanity’s story (Figure 1.1. It does not involve the personal beliefs of its teachers and students. It is especially important to keep the dis- tinction between theology and the academic study of religion clear in public, tax-supported schools, colleges, and universities. An institution supported by taxes paid by people of all faiths and by those who are not religious cannot favor one religion over others. Nor can it favor either religion or secularity. To do so clearly violates the disestablishment clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Our personal religious views may change when we study religion academically, but, if that happens, it is a personal by-product of the study and not its goal. One study4 has looked at how religion is studied on four college campuses in the United States. One is a state university, two are religiously supported

157 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Studying and Describing Religion

Figure 1.1 The study of religion is an integral part of education in the humanities. (Image provided by Julia Corbett-Hemeyer.) schools, and the fourth is an historically black college that describes itself as nondenominational. This study of four representative institutions found sev- eral common themes:

• Religious studies is a “vital and appealing” topic on all four campuses. • In addition to religious studies classes, religion is a topic in many other classes as well. • General education and core curriculum classes, especially, expose many students to the study of religion as a part of their educational experience. • Even at the religiously sponsored schools, teachers do not try to convert students to their own point of view. Students at all four schools reported feeling free to express their own views in class. Religious studies classes in the religiously affiliated schools tend to promote religion more than do their secular counterparts. Religious diversity and pluralism are freely acknowledged, and critical inquiry into religion is encouraged. • That having been said, faculty often try to relate course content to stu- dents’ own lives and spiritual journeys. Students make this connection even when faculty do not.

The 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Abington v. Schempp ruled that public schools and school personnel could not mandate devotional activities in their schools and classrooms. People who favored activities such as prayer and Bible reading in the public schools charged that the Court had, in effect, supported the religion of secularism (nonreligion). Justice Tom C. Clark, in replying to this charge, distinguished between the practice of religion, such as devotional exercises, and study about religion. He went on to say that study about religion as a part of human culture and the humanities is well within the guidelines established by the First Amendment to the Constitution. This Supreme Court decision allows for the academic study of religion at all levels of public education.

158 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Preliminary Considerations Religious groups cannot be barred from using public school facilities or other public buildings, however. If secular groups can use these facilities, then religious groups must have the same privilege. The Equal Access Act was passed by the 98th Congress in 1984 and upheld by the Supreme Court in Board of Education of Westside Community School District v. Mergens (1990. For example, if a school board permits such noncurricular clubs as a chess club or Boy or Girl Scouts to use their facilities for meetings, then a Bible study club must have the same right. Usually, interpretation holds that teachers or other school personnel may not be officially involved in such groups. If a city or county building has a public meeting room, then religious groups must be allowed to use it on the same basis as secular groups. The combined effect of Abington v. Schempp and Mergens is that schools cannot actively promote religious activities, but neither can they prohibit them. You may be wondering whether religious studies is defined by having a distinctive method or a distinctive subject matter. Religious studies scholars do not agree on the answer. In my opinion, religious studies is a distinct and identifiable academic discipline because it investigates the subject of religion in all its forms. Its subject matter is distinctive. In its investigation of its sub- ject, it uses many methods. Human religious behavior is a very complex phe- nomenon and calls for many investigative tools. There is no single best way to study religion. A variety of methods is necessary, and no one of them can claim primary authority. Within the academic study of religion, we can distinguish two interrelated types of inquiry. The social-scientific study of religion focuses on observa- tion and on data that are quantifiable. Its goal is to be as objective as possible. The data that it provides makes a crucial contribution to our understanding of religion. Psychologists and sociologists who study human religious behavior often use social-scientific methods. The widespread use of computers for data processing and analysis has greatly enhanced this branch of the academic study of religion. People study religion as a part of the humanities to understand a religious group, belief, or practice from the standpoint of what it is like for those who follow it. This approach encourages students and teachers to enter empathi- cally into the life and experience of the religious other. It seeks imaginative participation, developing what can be described as an inside–outside point of view. We can, with practice, become increasingly able to see religions other than our own as if from the inside, while remaining on the outside. We do not become followers, but we learn to value and appreciate the meaning that the religion has for those who are participants in it. The academic study of religion may come under attack from either of two sides. On one side are traditional believers who are threatened by any view- point that refuses to judge the truth or falsity of religious beliefs. On the other side are those who refuse to take religion seriously and think that it must be explained away in terms of social, psychological, or economic factors. As the philosopher of religion Ninian Smart writes, in either case, people “forget that

159 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Studying and Describing Religion religions are what they are and have the power they have regardless of what we may think about their value, truth, or rationality. They also forget that . . . we have to listen to one another”5 in a nation that is as religiously diverse as the United States. Perhaps you have felt one of these two ways at times, or perhaps you do now. You might occasionally find yourself feeling threatened by some of the material studied, by the way it is studied, or by your classmates’ comments. Remember that the study of religion from an academic viewpoint allows every- one ideological space in which to exist. All that is required is that you extend to the beliefs and practices of others the same respect that you wish for your own.

Describing Religion Religion is an ambiguous word. People use it to mean various things. Even scholars in religious studies cannot agree on its meaning. We do, nonethe- less, have some idea of what religion is. If someone asks, for example, “What religion do you practice?” we know how to answer the question. If someone mentions a religious service, we have a general idea of what sort of activity is meant. By itself, this everyday, unreflective approach is inadequate. It is proba- bly limited to our own experiences with religion. Our understanding might be biased in some way, based on what we have been taught about religion. People’s everyday definitions differ, and the same person may use different definitions at different times. For purposes of study, we must have a good working description. A working description is one that is useful and adequate, but it is not the only possible one, nor even the only good one.

• A good working description of religion is broad enough to include all religions. It should not define religion in a way that leaves out some mani- festations of religion. Nor should it leave out any specific religion. For example, if we say that religion means belief in God (having in mind God as Muslims, Jews, and Christians think about God), we will leave out those people who worship many deities and those who worship none at all. This description also focuses on belief and excludes other important dimensions of religion. • At the same time, it must be sufficiently specific to distinguish religion from other similar things, such as a nonreligious philosophy of life or a deeply held and passionate commitment to a social or political cause. “What you value the most highly is your religion” does not adequately distinguish religion from other things. • It also needs to be as free of prejudice or bias as we can make it. Descrip- tions that state what true or genuine religion is often fall into the trap of imposing one person’s or group’s bias on the description of religion generally.

160 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Preliminary Considerations

Box 1–1 Working Description of Religion

A developed religion is an integrated system of beliefs, lifestyle, ritual activities, and social institutions by which individuals give meaning to (or find meaning in) their lives by orienting themselves to what they experience as holy, sacred, or of the highest value.

We will use the working description given in Box 1–1. It is important to know and understand this description because it underlies everything that fol- lows throughout the book. Religions are also communities of faith and practice. They are groups of people knitted together by their shared commitment to a common worldview and their participation in shared experiences. The nature of religious commit- ment and experience means that it often claims its adherents’ greatest, most intense loyalties. The ties within communities of faith are frequently among the strongest and most meaningful of human relationships. Let’s discuss this description of religion in greater detail. A developed reli- gion is an integrated system. Ideally, all the dimensions in a religion hold together to make a comprehensive, coherent whole. Its various parts work together without conflict and with mutual support. The extent to which this is the case varies from one religion to another and from one person to another. But ideally, a religion does have coherence among its various dimensions. These dimensions include beliefs, a lifestyle, rituals, and institutions. Beliefs take many forms. Beliefs are the ideas of a religion. For example, most religions have an idea about the purpose of human life. Most have beliefs concerning how the world came into being and what happens to people after death. These beliefs are found in scriptures, statements of faith, creeds (official written statements), hymns, stories, and theology books, to name but a few locations. The beliefs of a community of faith also exist in what its members actually affirm as truth for themselves. Nearly all religions have guidelines for their members’ daily lifestyle. These include codes of conduct and standards of behavior, as well as carefully worked out ethical systems. They involve both formal requirements and customs and less formal folkways and habits. Examples include the dietary regulations fol- lowed by Jews and Seventh-day Adventists and the dress codes followed by certain Christian groups and many Muslims. Religions also include ritual activities. These are the ceremonial actions, usually repetitive in nature, that people perform as a part of their religious behavior. Religious rituals include worship, along with prayer, chanting, meditation, the lighting of candles, pilgrimages, and the devotional reading of religious books, to name but a few examples. There are religious rituals that are public and corporate, and there are those that individuals and families do privately. For many religious people, the rhythm of regular participation in

161 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Studying and Describing Religion the ritual life of their religion is more important than is reflection on religious beliefs. Finally, although religion has to do with individual people, it also includes social institutions. Like-minded people join together for instruction, for ritu- als, and for fellowship. Structures for governance and decision making are necessary. Also in this category are arrangements for admitting members to the group and expelling them from it, educational functions, and arrangements for the selection, training, and support of leaders. Religion is one way that people give meaning to or find meaning in their lives. Any religion is a human creation or development. Its beliefs, lifestyle, rituals, and institutions are the products of human thought and activity. It is continuous with the many other ways that we either create or find meaning in our lives, such as through the personal relationships that are dear to us, the work that we do, and the values, ideals, and causes to which we give our loy- alty. Religion is continuous with these other structures of meaning and shares their profoundly human roots. Religion involves that which people experience as sacred, holy, divine, or of the highest value. Although religion is continuous with other structures of meaning, it is also unique. Most interpretations of religion hold that its unique- ness is in its reference to the sacred or to the highest value. It reaches beyond the individual and the ordinary concerns of day-to-day living. Religion puts us in touch with the sense of mystery that glimmers through the cracks of our common world. It has to do with the most comprehensive, fullest expression or embodiment of reality. Our working description of religion has both functional and substantive elements. When functionalists describe religion, they are interested in what it does—what its functions or roles are. Our description identifies religion as something that has to do with meaning in human life. It also has a substantive element in that the distinguishing feature of religion is its core experience of the holy or sacred, in whatever way that may be experienced and labeled.

Popular Religion Earlier in the chapter, I defined religion in a way that emphasizes religions as structured social systems, institutions, or organizations. This aspect of religion can be called institutional religion. The words ecclesial and ecclesiastical are sometimes used to describe this aspect of religion. There is another aspect of religion in the United States that is at least as significant: This is popu- lar religion—religion that occurs outside the formal boundaries of religious institutions. Although the term popular religion is frequently difficult to define unambiguously, it is nonetheless quite useful in identifying aspects of religion that we might otherwise overlook. The existence of widespread and flourishing popular religion in the United States indicates that, as one scholar puts it, the “determination of what counts as religion is not the sole preserve of academics.”6 (See Figure 1.2.

162 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Preliminary Considerations

Figure 1.2 This interstate billboard in Ohio is a good example of popular religion. (Image provided by Julia Corbett-Hemeyer.)

Popular religion does have a number of features that distinguish it from institutional or ecclesial religion.7 There is a strong emphasis on the super- natural, an emphasis that has been downplayed in mainstream “rational, post- ­Enlightenment culture.” There is the sense that the entire cosmos is permeated by magical, unseen divine forces. Many people, for example, believe in mira- cles such as divine healing or foretelling future events based on biblical books such as the New Testament book of Revelation. Authority and control in popular religion does not derive from formal edu- cation and recognition by a religious tradition in ordination but is vested in those who claim a special divine calling or who can testify to certain kinds of experiences attributed to such a calling. Popular religion is a thoroughly laity- led manifestation of religion. Similarly, popular religion conveys a sense that the common people—ordinary men and women—are wiser in the ways of faith than are the educated and moneyed cultural elites. Popular religion has long existed in books, in popular music, and on televi- sion and radio, as well as in individuals and families. Its strongest presence now is on the Internet, the breadth and availability of which have dramatically changed it. Most people in the United States belong to some sort of religious commu- nity; they are Protestants within particular denominations, Catholics, Jews, or Buddhists, for example. Many, however, supplement their formal membership

163 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Studying and Describing Religion and participation with a variety of other religious activities that do not come directly from their community of faith—participating in revivals, watching religious television, engaging in various devotional activities such as private prayer and reading, chanting, and meditation, wearing religious jewelry, or placing religious bumper stickers on their cars and trucks. For some, these activities and others similar to them become the primary focus of their reli- gious life. The Wall Street Journal has reported on what it called Do-It-Yourself Reli- gion. Some Americans are participating in a variety of special interest reli- gious groups to supplement or in some instances replace participation in a more traditional community of faith. These groups may be organized around worship, prayer, discussion, or other interests of the participants. Not a new phenomenon, these groups are similar to the Christian “house churches” and Jewish havurah of the 1960s. Similar groups have come and gone at various times, and the Journal article notes that, although the movement is strong now, history indicates that its lifespan is limited.8 In the commercially oriented culture of the United States, the strength of popular religion is shown in part by how well it sells. Religious retail is a multibillion-dollar industry. Some people place statues of Jesus, Mary, Saint Francis, or the Buddha in their yards, or cross or fish symbols on their cars or trucks. Many people wear religiously themed T-shirts. Religious music comes in any format people can ask for. The musicals Jesus Christ, Superstar and Godspell continue to attract audiences. Gift items such as religiously oriented figurines, decorative items, and greeting cards sell well in religious book and supply stores and in secular stores as well. There are religious-theme com- puter games and educational software to help children learn about the Bible or Qur’an.9 Most popular religion in the United States is in at least some sense Christian. However, it is not exclusively Christian. A number of catalogs offer a variety of items for people devising their own spirituality. One such catalog has an umbrella that features the eight major symbols of Tibetan Buddhism, as well as items reflecting Native American (and other religions. In another catalog, those of the Jewish faith can choose from a vast assortment of Jewish religious items such as prayer shawls, menorahs, Passover plates, and mezuzahs (all of which are described in Chapter 8. Several sources exist for Buddhists to obtain statues, meditation cushions and benches, and audiotapes or videotapes. Hinduism Today, a magazine for North American Hindus, routinely advertises Hindu religious articles such as deity statues, beads, and incense. Although a large part of popular religion concerns material culture, it also involves religious practices, many of which are learned and practiced in peo- ple’s homes. Countless parents pass on to their children the practice of saying bedtime and mealtime prayers, often the same prayers they themselves learned as children. Parents read stories of faith to their children. College students pray for aid on exams. People wear cloth bracelets bearing the letters “WWJD?” The acronym stands for “What would Jesus do?”—a reminder to wearers to

164 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Preliminary Considerations

Figure 1.3 A Buddhist home shrine is another manifestation of popular religion. (Image provided by Julia Corbett-Hemeyer.)

ask that question when they cannot figure out the answer to a moral dilemma. I’ve also seen “WWBD,” “What would Buddha do?” (See Figure 1.3.) Many people read devotional magazines, watch religious television, and listen to reli- gious radio programming.

Questions and Activities for Review, Discussion, and Writing 1. Write a paragraph in which you explain what you hope to gain from your study of religion in the United States. Are your goals academic, personal, or a combination of both? Compare your answer with those of other people. 2. Visit the American Academy of Religion website (www.aarweb.org) to learn how they answer the question, “Why study religion?” Look at the Mission Statement especially. 3. What are some classroom activities that would be prohibited under Abing- ton v. Schempp? What activities would be allowed? 4. Do you think that religious clubs such as student Bible study clubs or prayer groups should have the same opportunities to use classroom space before or after school hours as do nonreligious groups? Why or why not?

165 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Studying and Describing Religion 5. Take an issue in which religion has been involved, such as the abortion controversy or recent Middle Eastern wars, and analyze it from the per- spective of theology, the social-scientific study of religion, and the human- ities approach to the study of religion. 6. Ask several of your friends how they describe religion, and compare their answers. How are they alike? Different? 7. Look up the definition of religion in any standard dictionary, and write an essay in which you evaluate it based on what you have learned in this chapter. 8. If you are a part of a religious group, think about how the four dimensions of religion we discussed apply to it. 9. Discuss with others in your class the manifestations of popular religion with which you are familiar. Organize a “popular religion scavenger hunt” for a day or two in which people are alert for evidence of popular religion and then report what they find.

Important Terms deity: a general term referring to a divine or semidivine being such as a god or goddess Enlightenment (historical period): mid- to late eighteenth century in the United States, a time when scientific reasoning came to be applied to human life in general, notably to religion, and Humanism flourished laity or laypeople: nonordained members of a religious organization, the “people in the pews” ordination: a rite or ceremony by which people are set apart for profes- sional service in a religious organization, as a minister, priest, or rabbi, for example synagogue: a place for Jewish study and worship

For Further Reading Clark, Terry Ray, and Dan W. Clanton, Jr., Understanding Religion and Popular Cul- ture. New York: Routledge, 2012. This engaging volume, with numerous case stud- ies, uses many approaches to examine religion as reflected in popular culture. Iwamura, Jane, Virtual Orientalism: Asian Religions and American Popular Culture. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Iwamura deftly combines attention to the American fascination with all things Asian with an understanding of contemporary media to reveal both truths and stereotypes in how Asian religions are portrayed in American popular culture. Kramer, Ross, William Cassidy, and Susan L. Schwartz, Religions of Star Trek. New York: Basic Books, 2003. If you are a fan of the Star Trek movies, you might enjoy this thorough look at the religious themes that the authors demonstrate pervade the series. Nye, Mallory, Religion: The Basics. New York: Routledge, 2003. Professor Nye’s book is a very accessible introduction from the perspective of religious and cultural studies.

166 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Preliminary Considerations Pals, Daniel L., Eight Theories of Religion, 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006. Pals’ study of eight of the classical theorists of religion includes bio- graphical information, exposition of the theory, and analysis and critique in a very usable format. Segal, Robert A., The Blackwell Companion to the Study of Religion. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. This comprehensive survey of approaches to the study of religion ranges from anthropology and phenomenology to the economics of religion. Till, Rupert, Pop Cult: Religion and Popular Music. New York: Bloomsbury Academic Publishing, 2010. Examines the ways in which popular music has to some extent taken on the functions of religion for many young people.

Relevant Websites The American Academy of Religion: www.aarweb.org The Center for the Study of Religion and American Culture: www.iupui.edu/~raac The Society for Biblical Literature: www.sbl-site.org

Notes 1 Amanda Porterfield, The Transformation of American Religion: The Story of a Late-Twentieth-century Awakening (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), pp. 203–204. 2 Saint Anselm was a Christian theologian who lived between 1033 and 1109 c.e. The abbreviations c.e. for Common Era and b.c.e. for Before the Common Era have replaced a.d. (Anno Domini, the year of our Lord) and b.c. (Before Christ) in most scholarly writing. 3 You will learn more about Buddhism in Chapter 11. 4 Conrad Cherry, Betty A. DeBerg, and Amanda Porterfield, Religion on Campus: What Religion Really Means to Today’s Undergraduates (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2000). 5 Ninian Smart, Worldviews: Crosscultural Explorations of Human Beliefs (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1983), p. 17. 6 David Chidester, “The Church of Baseball, the Fetish of Coca-Cola, and the Pot- latch of Rock’n’Roll: Theoretical Models for the Study of Religion in American Popular Culture,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 59:4 (Fall 1996), p. 760. 7 Charles H. Lippy and Peter W. Williams (eds), Encyclopedia of Religion in Amer- ica (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2010), pp. 1701–1728. 8 Elizabeth Bernstein, “Do-It-Yourself Religion,” Wall Street Journal (June 11, 2004), pp. W1 and W5. 9 The Muslim sacred scripture. See Chapter 9 for more discussion of Muslims and the Qur’an.

167 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution

Chapter 1

How to study religion Kim Knott

■ Introduction 16 ■ The study of religion as a discipline 18 ■ Theory, methods, methodology 19 ■ Studying key issues in contemporary religion 22 ■ Studying religion at different scales 30 ■ Summary 35 ■ Key terms 36 ■ Suggested reading 38

168 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

Introduction

As Linda Woodhead and Christopher Partridge have suggested in their introduction, particular issues arise for religions as they engage with modernity; they cannot be treated separately from their contexts or indeed from one another. These points have conse- quences for how religions are to be examined in terms of the theories, approaches, and methods to be used, all of which are subject to development as religion itself changes. After a general introduction to how religions are studied and researched, some key issues in the study of religions in the modern world will be identified and their theoretical and methodological implications examined. These include religious traditions old and new, the connections between religions and between the secular and the religious, reli- gious identity, and the place of religion in public life. After that, consideration will be given to the question of how we study contemporary religion at a variety of different scales, from the body and objects to the world and globalization. But we will begin with a particular case, the Danish cartoons crisis of 2006 in order to see how a modern event generates a range of issues and methodological considerations for the study of religions. On 30 September 2005, Jyllands-Posten , a major Danish national newspaper pub- lished twelve cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, which were later reprinted in newspapers in various countries and on the internet. They were highly offensive to Muslims, partly because they breached the Islamic teaching that the Prophet should not be depicted, but also because they portrayed him as a terrorist. In February 2006, the publication of the cartoons became the subject of international protest resulting in more than fi fty deaths worldwide. There were many political and diplomatic rami- fi cations in Denmark and beyond. The popular and intellectual responses of Muslims, secularists, and other interested groups and individuals were varied, often measured but occasionally strident and accompanied by verbal or physical violence, and the issues raised were complex, from debates about human rights, freedom of expression and incitement to hatred, to the clash of cultures, integration, and the relationship of race and religion. The crisis raised a great many potential issues for the study of religions. In terms of Islam, it revitalized the question of the Prophet and his depiction, in the Qur’an and Hadith and also in later texts and contexts. Modern secular Denmark provided a new theatre for this age-old religious debate and for the expression of religious ver- sus liberal secularist positions and competing claims about human rights and ethics (including freedom of expression and the right to protection from religious hatred). The publication and its aftermath undermined community relations in Denmark and further afi eld as Muslims felt themselves to be ridiculed and vilifi ed. The tension

169 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion

FIGURE 1.1 Danish cartoons crisis London, UK – 18 February 2006: A public demonstration in London’s Trafalgar Square as Muslims react against the controversial cartoons in a Danish newspaper. pxl.store / Shutterstock.com.

between national and religious identities, the place of religious minorities in secular nation states, and the integration and cohesion of faith and ethnic communities came to the fore. In addition, mass protests in countries round the world raised issues of the defense of religion and, at times, of religion and violence. As we will see in the second part of this chapter, such issues are central to the study of religion in the modern world and invite a variety of theoretical and methodological responses. They require a range of scholarly methods, tailored to the particular case or problem to be examined, and raise complex questions about the standpoint of the student or researcher and the ethics and politics of their work. In the third part of the chapter, we will consider how religion can be the subject of investigation at the small scale (e.g. at the level of a

170 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

cartoon or daily newspaper); at national and regional scales (e.g. in the Danish context and in subsequent developments across Europe); and at the global scale (in the media and on the internet and in various transnational movements).

The study of religion as a discipline

The study of religion has developed substantially since the late nineteenth century in response to colonial expansion and interest in different places, peoples, and religions, as well as the growth of new academic disciplines and the impact of the sciences on the study of individuals, societies, and cultures. Prior to that, theology and philoso- phy were the preeminent disciplines; since then, historical, sociological, psychological, anthropological, and phenomenological approaches have contributed substantially to our understanding and interpretation of religion and religions. In the context of schools and universities and their academic pursuits, the term ‘ discipline ’ refers to the way in which natural, social, and cultural phenomena are studied and theorized and how knowledge about them is organized. A discipline – geography for example – normally has a focus of attention (the earth, its places, and people) and a number of attendant theories and methods. It organizes its subject matter into categories (such as physical and human geography) and subcategories (such as demography, migration, urban studies, sacred space, and pilgrimage). The case of ‘the study of religion’, and some other disciplines or academic fi elds such as gender studies or postcolonial studies, is rather different. Like geography and sociology, it has a dis- ciplinary focus, in this case, religion. Unlike them, it is poly-methodological insofar as it loosely includes a variety of different approaches to studying religion, such as those that I mentioned in the previous paragraph. The poly-methodological character of the study of religions is evident in books on the subject, like The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion in which chapters describe many of the different approaches that constitute the discipline. The Religious Studies Project , a web-based resource designed for those studying religion, refl ects this disciplinary and methodological diversity in podcasts of interviews with academics on their research. Before going further, it is important to say a little more about religion itself. Scholars are generally in agreement that ‘religion’ is a historical and social construct. This is not intended to belittle people’s experience of the sacred or to judge the verac- ity of their religious claims. Rather, it recognizes that ‘religion’ is a concept used to identify, delimit, and describe certain types of human behavior, belief, organization, and experience. It has a global history (matched by terms in other languages) and is capable of being separated – not without disagreement – from other concepts, such as ‘society’, ‘politics’, and ‘culture’, and studied independently. From the late seventeenth century in Europe when the term ‘religion’ and the idea of ‘religions’ in the plural began to be adopted, many beliefs, practices, individual and collective experiences, bodies, groups, artefacts, texts, works of art, and performances have come to be associ- ated with them. These provide research data for the scholarly study of religion all of

171 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion which can be utilized in association with various approaches, theories, and methods. When we study ‘religion’ in the modern world, we focus on its contemporary and recent historical facets, looking in particular at how they engage with and respond to the conditions, processes, and issues of modernity. We look at what ‘religion’ means now and how religions differentiate themselves and interact in the broader context of science, secularism, capitalism, globalization, and identity politics. The case of the Danish cartoons crisis above illustrates this.

Theory, methods, methodology

These are common terms used to denote the various tools used in scholarly study, whether in research or in the preparation of an essay or paper. Theory is a term gen- erally adopted to refer to concepts, laws, hypotheses, and explanations used to make sense of the natural and social world. The nature and reality of ‘the natural and social world’ about which people theorize, the ability of theory to represent that world, and the politics of theorizing are all contested. One interesting perspective on theory is offered by the American scholar Thomas A. Tweed. He presents the idea of theories as ‘itineraries’ and sees theories as journeys that scholars take from their own situated positions and then lay out as maps for others to use. The theories in use in the study of religions are of different types. Some are metatheories or grand theories that present an overarching explanation for society, culture, or religion as a whole, their origins, and their purposes. Émile Durkheim, in The Elementary Forms of Religious Life , offered such a theory, and the works of Marx, Freud, and Foucault, among others, have been used in this way. One book that reviews some of these grand theories is Seth Kunin’s Religion: The Modern Theories (see Suggested Reading). In most scholarly work on religion, such theories are not used as hypotheses capable of testing but rather as theoretical standpoints that locate researchers within scholarly traditions and explain their perspectives on such matters as the fundamental nature of society or religion, their origins, elementary forms and salience, social and economic relations, structure and agency, or power and discourse. Feminism and postcolonialism also offer theoretical and ethical stances that function in a similar way. Other broad theories can be used more directly in planning research on religion and have been developed, critiqued, and amended in light of empirical evidence: globalization theory and secularization theory are good examples, as can be seen in the relevant chapters later in this book. But theories can be useful in other ways too. In much scientifi c research, theo- ries function as starting points, often taking the form of research questions or hypotheses that can be tested. Two relevant examples, thinking back to the case with which this chapter opened, might be the hypothesis ‘Community relations in Denmark deteriorated as a result of the publication of the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad’, or the question ‘Were the causes of the Danish cartoons crisis reli- gious?’. They can be used as starting points in a deductive approach to research. Is

172 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott the hypothesis about community relations proven in an analysis of the data? Does an analysis reveal that the causes were religious, or were they social, political, or a mixture of these? Other scholars prefer an inductive approach, which, instead of relying initially on a theory, begins instead with an examination of a wide range of data on a sub- ject. Once data has been collected and analyzed, it is then used in the development of theory for later use. For example, interviews could be conducted on the right to freedom of expression with a range of actors in Danish society – Muslim and other religious leaders, newspapers journalists and editors, representatives of government and civil society, writers, and so on – leading to the development of either a model of ideal types or a theory about the relationship between the nature of ideological commitment and attitudes to freedom of expression. These would be open to testing in other similar cases. A further way in which theory may be employed in research on the case of the Danish cartoons is to start with the views of a particular theorist, either one who has worked on a comparable but different case such as The Satanic Verses controversy in the late 1980s to early 1990s, or one who has already offered a useful theory on the case in hand, such as Tariq Modood or Randall Hansen who debated the liberal response to the crisis in the journal International Migration in 2006. The relevant ‘microtheory’ can be applied or modifi ed and used on new data. This is a useful and common approach among students in dissertations or theses: take a theory off the shelf and test it on new material in a different context. Whether testing a theory or conducting inductive research, the researcher must nevertheless design her project, refl ecting on what kind of methodology and methods to use to answer her research questions, what people or documents to research, and how to analyze the data that will be collected. Generally, she will have had some pre- liminary training in a particular methodology – the term ‘methodology’ refers to how we study, our way of doing things, the systematic approach we take to research – such as sociology or psychology of religion, history, or theology – and will be familiar with its associated theories and methods. A comprehensive guide to appropriate method- ologies and methods can be found in Stausberg and Engler’s The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion . As this book and others I have referred to show, contemporary theories and methods have been cut free of their traditional disciplinary moorings and are now used widely in an interdisciplinary way. The poststructuralist theory of Foucault, for example, has been drawn on by scholars in philosophy, sociology, linguistics, literature studies, healthcare studies, criminology, gender studies, and religious studies. Similarly, the interview method – and I’ll say more about methods below – is now used in research across the disciplines despite having its origins in social science, particularly sociology and social psychology. Likewise, documentary and discourse methods that may once have been associated primarily with history or other text-based subjects are now used widely, not least by scholars researching websites and other electronic resources and those using visual documents such as photographs and video.

173 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion

Different problems and questions require different research designs, methods, and modes of analysis as is clear if we think about the two Danish cartoon crisis examples I gave earlier: the hypothesis ‘Community relations in Denmark deteriorated as a result of the publication of the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad’ and the question ‘Were the causes of the Danish cartoons crisis religious?’. Both of these could be addressed using existing primary and secondary sources of various kinds, but, equally, they are open to new research. Testing the fi rst would require longitudinal social research (examining community relations before and after publication), though documentary research and discourse analysis may also be of value (looking at what people said about community relations in the media, for example). The notion of ‘community relations’ in the Danish context would need some examination, though it is likely that, in light of the centrality of Muslim and secularist voices in the crisis, ethnic, religious, and ideological groups and their relationships would be to the fore. The researcher might choose to focus on one or more places in Denmark, on particular communities, and/or designated timeframes. Narrowing down the research in this way would make it more manageable. Several social research methods could be used for examining commu- nity relations. Opinions about past and present relationships could be collected using questionnaires, interviews, or focus groups. Current relationships could be researched ethnographically, with the researcher spending time in communities, talking to people, attending meetings, interviewing leaders and community workers. The question ‘Were the causes of the Danish cartoons crisis religious?’ would require a historical analysis of events and opinions leading up to the crisis, involving textual methods applied to relevant documents (e.g. religious and secularist texts, government reports, bills and papers, newspaper articles and editorials, social media, etc.), though it would also be possible to conduct interviews with key public, civic, and religious leaders to obtain their views. In both cases, which methods to use would depend on how the research was focused, what it was for (essay, thesis, policy recommendation, or book) and how much time the researcher could dedicate to the task. In both, a review of relevant literature would shed light on what research had been done already and would provide a context for the project. Increasingly, for ethical reasons, the subjects at the center of research are invited to contribute to its formulation and analysis. Research subjects are interested parties who have views about the value of research, the extent to which they are willing to be involved and on what terms, and on how the research should be presented and disseminated. Engaged research and participatory methods are responses to this. So, in the case of the Danish cartoons crisis and its impact in different contexts, Muslim or liberal secularist subjects might be involved in the research, not only as passive interviewees or questionnaire respondents but as diarists, photographers, interviewers, or facilitators of focus groups. They might contribute to writing up the research or dis- seminating it in other ways, within their own communities or in public presentations. Ethical issues more generally need to be borne in mind in planning research studies, particularly around gaining the consent of those agreeing to be involved, anonymity, sharing results with research subjects, and reporting their views fairly and

174 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

with respect. Consciousness of one’s own standpoint – religious and other ideological beliefs, class, gender, age, status, and researcher role – is also important, particularly when analyzing data and writing up results, but also in essay writing more generally. Refl exivity – the ability to be self-aware and knowledgeable about where we stand in relation to the subjects we write about and to use this awareness constructively – has become important in academic study, an area no less affected by power relations than other aspects of social life. Having considered some general points about theory, methodology, and methods, we move on now to consider these in relation to four key issues in the study of reli- gion in the modern world.

Studying key issues in contemporary religion

Studying religious traditions, old and new Religious traditions have been the principal preoccupation within the study of religions since the 1960s. Key introductory books divided the territory of the discipline into major world religions, sometimes clustering these under different headings such as ‘East’ and ‘West’, ‘Abrahamic religions’, ‘wisdom traditions’, and so on. The category ‘world religion’ of necessity demanded the production of other ‘non-world’ categories, such as ‘primitive religions’ (a term often criticized as orientalist and patronizing), ‘nature religions’, ‘new religions’, and ‘indigenous religions’. Departments of religious studies, as distinct from theology (though sometimes the two are combined), focused their programs of study and staff expertise around different religions, and publish- ers and conference organizers often followed suit, with book series and conference panels on Islamic studies, Jewish studies, Buddhist studies, new religions, and so on. To reflect scholarly interest in common dimensions, themes, and comparative mat- ters, the discipline was also divided into areas such as myth and ritual, beliefs, sacred texts, religious experience, sacred place, and pilgrimage. Religions and their traditions, and the dimensions and themes that cut across them, formed the warp and weft of the study of religions in the second half of the twentieth century. One scholar whose work illustrates this is Ninian Smart (see Suggested Reading). Although this approach to organizing knowledge about religions continues, its limitations have been recognized. Scholars have questioned the tendency to treat all religions as if they were alike, often on the basis of the implicit model of Christianity, with religious traditions constituted by texts, words, beliefs, monotheism, priesthood, sacraments, and so on. Timothy Fitzgerald, in The Ideology of Religious Studies, has criticized the ‘family resemblance’ model at work in Ninian Smart’s dimensional view of religions and has suggested that a liberal, Christian ecumenical approach lay behind his categorization of religions. Some scholars have queried the difference between world religions and other religions and religious movements, some the adequacy of any single ‘religion’ to refer to and encapsulate the range of diverse phenomena within

175 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion it, and others the categorization of religions as either ‘traditional’ or ‘new’. Some have gone as far as proposing the abandonment of the category ‘religion’ altogether and the use instead of ‘culture’ (though others have pointed out that this merely defers the problem of defi nition); others, including Meredith McGuire, have turned from a tradition-based approach to one focused on everyday lived religion. A useful introductory discussion of some of these debates can be found in the fi rst chapter of Religion: The Basics by Malory Nye. Despite these critiques, there is no doubt that the concepts ‘religion’ and dif- ferent ‘religions’ are widely used in ordinary social situations and public discourse as well as academic study. They may have begun life as philosophical, social, and political constructs in the work of European early modern theologians and theorists such as Calvin, Zwingli, Bacon, Hobbes, and Grotius, but their use and application is now widespread. People are asked to identify themselves by religion in surveys and population censuses. Books are classifi ed by religion in libraries and book shops, and pamphlets, articles, and programs on different religions are circulated in the media. Furthermore, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists in other parts of the world debate the adequacy of the term ‘religion’ and its attendant dimensions for their own systems of thought, practice, organization, and experience. Despite the exceptional case of Europe in which many identify as nonreligious, the majority of people globally think of themselves as ‘religious’ and as having ‘a religion’ and see themselves as part of a community of religious believers and practitioners differentiated from other religions, denominations, sects, churches, or movements (or the equivalent terms in their own languages). In most cases, they would be able to give examples of the things that distinguish them from other religious peoples and of the ‘traditions’ they share – the practices, concepts, tenets, norms, values, and social forms they received from others and that they live by. This does not in itself constitute evidence of religion as an essen- tial element of human experience (that there is such a essence is much debated), but it does suggest that the social construction of ‘religion’ and ‘religions’ is a global matter intensifi ed by the mass media, new communications technologies, and the movement and travel of people and ideas. In this sense, it is important that religions and the traditions that constitute them continue to be studied, though contemporary contexts and new challenges raise dif- ferent issues to those that were the focus of scholars half a century ago. That is why the authors who have written many of the chapters in this book have considered how the traditions on which they focus interact with modernity. The appropriation by religious and nonreligious groups and individuals of other people’s religious traditions, for example, is discussed in Chapter 10. There is recognition too of the alternative ways in which religious practices, beliefs, and impulses are now conceptualized, as ‘new age’, ‘neo-pagan’, ‘NRMs’, and forms of ‘spirituality’. The ways in which these new movements and trends are seen by their adherents, sometimes as more fl uid and less bounded than ‘religions’, and often as global networks rather than formal locally based organizations, raise issues about how ‘religion’ might best be defi ned and studied in a late-modern, global context.

176 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

In the past, religious traditions were generally studied by theologians, textual spe- cialists, historians, and phenomenologists of religion. Theologians explored their own traditions from within using various scholarly tools to build up a systematic approach or to develop a particular sectarian perspective. Textual scholars with the appropriate philological skills examined sacred texts and their role in the development of religious traditions. Historians examined issues of continuity and change; of the movement, mission, and growth of particular religions; and of the way in which traditions were interpreted to invoke claims of orthodoxy, heterodoxy, and schism. And comparativists in the fi eld of phenomenology of religions took on the task of describing and examining similarities and differences of belief, symbol, myth, and ritual between religions and of building comparative models. Although these approaches continue to be used, there is now a greater awareness of the way in which class, gender, and power operate to reify certain traditions and their associated texts, beliefs, and rituals and more atten- tion to multiple and alternative readings. Feminist and postcolonialist approaches, in particular, have offered new resources to theologians, textual specialists, and historians studying religious traditions. Focusing today on religions as discrete entities involves thinking about new issues and methodological approaches. Understanding how religious traditions and their pat- terns of authority and legitimation, belief, and belonging change has become important. New research questions are appropriate for the study of religions in the modern world. How do contemporary religions distinguish themselves from one another and autho- rize themselves in the context of competition for resources and followers, migration, and new forms of representation and communication? What effect has the late-modern ‘turn to the self’ had on the willingness of individuals to accept religious authority and thus on the way it is presented by leaders? Are people more interested in personal experience than collective discipline, and, if so, what effect is this having on the way religious traditions are mediated and represented, particularly to younger people? What new patterns of both belief and belonging are at work in different religious and social contexts, and how will this change the way in which religious traditions are transmitted? And what challenges do such questions pose for the theoretical and methodological resources of the study of religions? The role and making of tradition has come under scrutiny, with historians, anthropologists, and political scientists refl ecting on the way in which traditions are invented, invoked, manipulated, and abandoned by people past and present as they make their religions fi t for purpose, adjust them in light of contemporary concerns, and as they dialogue or engage with others. The process of ‘de-traditionalization’ has been theorized and debated by sociologists, but scholars have also noted a process of ‘re-traditionalization’ taking place among diasporic communities, with migrants resist- ing change as a way of trying to secure their moorings and hold on to familiar beliefs and practices in a new context. One scholar who offered a critique and new approach to researching religious traditions was Gavin Flood. In Beyond Phenomenology: Rethinking the Study of Religion , he noted that traditions are subject to change as a result of processes of modernization,

177 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion globalization, and the condition of refl exivity and that, as such, they warrant an appro- priate retheorization and new methods. The phenomenological methodology once lauded within the study of religions is now unsuitable, being too disengaged, rational- ist, and universalist for understanding contemporary religions and their traditions. He advocated a dialogical and narrative approach that engaged seriously with the many voices within and beyond religions and that recognized both global context and local differences.

Studying the interconnections between religions and between the religious and the secular This social, political, and religious context calls for a new approach in which religious groups and their discourses are understood to be interconnected. It is still possible to study the traditions of a single group, but this must be done with awareness that the group may well have a global presence and that it contains diverse speakers in conversa- tion with one another and with those outside the group. This need not imply that the boundaries between religious groups are any more porous than at earlier times. They may even be more firmly constructed and policed than before. Those groups that are often referred to as ‘fundamentalist’ are formed on strict principles based on what the group perceives to be original teachings contained in sacred scriptures. The boundary between those who accept these principles and outsiders may be rigid, but despite this, debates and active struggles with outsiders continue to take place across the boundary. These outsiders may be the members of other more liberal religious groups who have different ideas about how to interpret scripture; they may be nonreligious people for whom a religiously fundamentalist position may be anathema. The latter group may include those with staunchly held atheist or secularist views whose convictions lead them to preach against supernaturalism and the acceptance of religion in public life and to speak up for various liberal rights such as unequivocal freedom of expression. Contemporary controversies such as the Danish cartoons crisis or the debate around the teaching of intelligent design in schools (creationism versus evolution), fought out in the context of global media communications, bring people with opposing views into the same arena. They are interconnected despite their differences. What theoretical and methodological resources are available for tackling these interconnections? The recognition by some religious people of the claims of others from different branches of the same religion or other religions has led to the develop- ment of ecumenical and interfaith dialogue and encounter and their academic study. Flood’s dialogical approach, building on the theoretical contributions of Ricoeur and Bakhtin and based on the analysis of multiple, locally specifi c discourses, can be used to examine in depth the voices of all those involved. It takes seriously the religious identities of individuals, the dialogue between them, the linguistic and rhetorical devices they use to negotiate and the historical context in which their conversation takes place. The scholar – no less than the subjects – is part of this interpretive, dialogical process.

178 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

The very nature of this issue – interconnection – suggests relevant method- ological strategies. Inter-religious and religious/secular connections, as well as being dialogical, are historical, social, and spatial in type, inviting studies that focus on social relationships and the spaces in which they occur. Historical relations between the religious and the secular have become an important focus for interrogation in the work of Talal Asad, Charles Taylor, and Timothy Fitzgerald, for example. Social network theory has been used for analyzing ‘weak’ religious relationships, the way in which religious beliefs and practices are communicated, conversion and personal infl uence, predictions of religiosity, and the relationship between religion and ethnicity, often in association with quantitative social science research . Charles Kadushin’s work on network theory and informal social networks among Jews in the United States is one such example. But interconnections between groups and the positions they hold, as well as the boundaries they must cross in order to come into contact – positively or negatively – with one another, also take place in space. These physical, social, and discursive interactions can be examined using spatial theory and method. In The Location of Religion , I developed a methodological approach for locating religion in secular contexts, which I have gone on to apply to relation- ships and controversies between religious, secularist, and postsecular exponents, for example in healthcare, education, and the media. Contemporary approaches to spirituality, the sacred, and religious identity (see next section for discussion of the latter) are helping to bridge the gap between what for many decades were the separate territories of religious and nonreligious ideologies and worldviews, with political scientists investigating ideological claims and positions associated with nationalism, liberalism, and secularism, and religious studies scholars, sociologists of religion, and theologians investigating those associated with religion. But that is now changing. The argument for a ‘spiritual revolution’ has been made by Paul Heelas and Linda Woodhead (see Chapter 11 and Suggested Reading), with Gordon Lynch proposing ‘belief beyond religion’ in the context of new spirituality, and Abby Day and others examining ‘social identities between the sacred and secular’. These authors offer useful theories on the ways in which spiritual matters have been taken up by people who are not formally religious. The concept of the ‘sacred’ is increasingly used to refer to people’s non-negotiable beliefs and values, whether they are religious or nonreligious and whether they refer to God, the nation, equality, or freedom. As Veikko Anttonen has suggested, people’s use of this concept and other related terms provides data for those interested in examining and comparing religious and secular beliefs, practices, and values today and in the past.

Studying religious identity In late modernity, religion, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and nationality have become the focus of processes of identity formation and identification, in and beyond the West. How people see, label, and represent themselves and others; the work they do to fashion ‘selves’ and ‘others’; and the way in which they identify with particular groups,

179 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion communities, and networks and sometimes stigmatize outsiders are matters of major social and political concern. In the Danish cartoons crisis, many Muslims were troubled not only by the violation of Islamic teaching against the depiction of Muhammad but by the fact that some of the cartoons made a connection between Muhammad and terrorism. They felt that their Prophet and indeed Muslims more generally were being identified implicitly as terrorists. ‘Islamophobia’, the negative representation of Islam and Muslims, like anti-Semitism, stigmatizes a particular group and the individuals associated with it on their basis of their religious (and ethnic) identity. As a result of the publication of the cartoons, Muslims in many countries gathered to demonstrate their views in public settings, expressing and endorsing their common religious identity. Studying either Islamophobia or Muslim public demonstrations requires analyzing discourse – what the media and Muslims say about identity issues and what linguistic and rhetorical strategies they use to make their case. The ‘politics of identity’ has been recognized as a signifi cant contemporary phe- nomenon that has come to the fore as identity groups have sought to fi nd ways to be recognized, to compete for resources, to gain a public voice, to argue for their rights, and, in some cases, to win converts and friends. Religion has always played an impor- tant part in both identity formation and identity politics at the local, national, and global levels, and the study of religions – along with other disciplines – has responded by developing appropriate theoretical and methodological resources. Religions have often developed their own terms for signifying those who are acceptable ‘insiders’ and those who are deemed to be ‘outsiders’. References such as ‘heretic’, ‘funda- mentalist’, ‘witch’, ‘devil-worshipper’, ‘apostate’, ‘heathen’, ‘kaffi r’, and ‘pagan’ are all examples of religious slur. Examining how and when such terms have been used can itself be informative in revealing boundaries and relations between groups and the way in which they come to the fore or recede as political, social, and religious circumstances change. Psychologists and sociologists of religion, in particular, have been interested in studying religious identity, its formation, engagement with other types of identity, and change. Psychologists, for example, have developed tools for looking at religious identity and identity changes among adolescents and students and have considered conversion and stages of faith development. One well-known study that has been widely used but also criticized is Lewis Rambo’s Understanding Religious Conversion. He offered a model that could be used and tested on conversions to a variety of different groups. How and why people choose religions has also been the subject of rational choice theory. First developed in the context of economics, it came to be used to explain the need for religion. This approach, associated particularly with the work of Laurence Iannacone and Rodney Stark, has been criticized for its focus on rationality, instrumentalism, and economic modelling and its failure to take seriously emotional, historical, and other social explanations for behavior. Scholars from a range of disciplines have also studied the intersection of religious and other forms of identity, considering, for example, relationships between gender, ethnic, national, and religious identities and increasingly the clash over religious

180 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott and sexual identities. For example, in a major program of research in the UK on Religion and Society (funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council and the Economic and Social Research Council), researchers collaborated on projects to study religion, youth, and sexuality in the UK and to analyze and compare clerical and lay responses to homosexuality within African, British, and American branches of global Anglicanism. Although issues of religious identity and identity politics have come to the fore in public debate and scholarship since the 1980s, they are not entirely new issues. One area in which religious identity has been signifi cant for more than a century is in public statistics, censuses, and surveys. In India, from 1871, those registering in the population census were asked to state their caste, tribal, and religious sectarian identities. Despite the move in 1947 from British imperial rule to Indian indepen- dence, the collection of such data continued to inform national and regional deci- sion-making. In Great Britain, on 30 March 1851, a religious census was conducted in which information on attendance at worship was collected. It did not ask for people’s religious affi liation as such – political opposition prevented this – rather it considered their outward conduct (attendance) and the church facilities available to them. It was not until 2001 that the next national census on religion was conducted in the UK when, after much consultation and political deliberation, a question on religious identity was included in the population census. Similar questions have been included in recent censuses in Australia and Canada. In the United States, religious adherence and identity have been the subject of large national surveys, such as the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey conducted in 2007 and analyzed by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life in which 35,000 adults were interviewed about their religious affi liation. Changes in affi liation were analyzed in relation to gender, age, ethnicity, education, and income. Data from such censuses and surveys is available online along with various tools for the production of statistics, charts, and cross-tabulations. A different type of resource is represented by British Religion in Numbers, a website that consolidates statistics from various sources and time periods and helps academics, students, and policy makers understand quantitative data on religion. These national projects are large-scale examples of the use of quantitative research for the collection of information about religious identity and adherence, but there are many smaller-scale studies that utilize similar methods, including student projects in which modest questionnaires are prepared and administered and their results analyzed using a simple statistics package such as SPSS. At the other end of the scale are attempts to create global data-sets on religion from diverse national information. Coordinating and gathering together statistics for all countries and religions is a diffi cult task because approaches to collecting and holding information on religion vary from one country to another. The World Christian Database – despite its name – holds statistical informa- tion on world religions and ethno-linguistic groups as well as Christian denominations. Resources such as this provide useful background information for local, national, and comparative studies on religious identity.

181 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion

Studying religion in public life We can surmise from the recent interest in collecting information on religious iden- tity that such data are important for the conduct of government business and public life more generally, for example, in relation to ethnic and religious monitoring in the workplace. Other evidence of the increasingly important place of religion in public life is found in references to religion, faith, and belief in government policies, political speeches, legal decisions, and new acts, bills, and directives on religious rights, religion in education, religious holidays, and church-state relations. It is also reflected in media coverage of religious issues, the most prominent of which in recent years has been that of religious extremism in the context of terrorist activities conducted in the name of Islam from 9/11 in New York in 2001 to more recent events in the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia, and Europe. The place of religion in public life and the portrayal of religion in the mass media have provided new research opportunities and challenges for students and scholars of religion, and I have already noted some of these in relation to the Danish cartoons crisis. That public event and others in which religion plays a major role provide timely occasions for ‘engaged research’ when scholars and those directly involved beyond the academy can work together to answer questions and design and conduct socially benefi cial research. Such projects might include journalists and academics getting together to examine how religious issues are portrayed in the media, how different groups are represented, and what language is used, or university researchers work- ing collaboratively with those in government departments and representatives from religious communities on how young people become radicalized and open to recruit- ment by terrorist networks. The challenges involved in such projects should not be underestimated, however, because people outside universities understandably bring different interests, motives, and resources to research from those who work within them. Negotiation is often required about the purpose, conduct, speed, and writing up of research and about ethical issues concerning the people being researched and the publication of results and recommendations. When religious people are directly involved in research, questions often arise about their representativeness. Some indi- viduals and groups experience research overload, having been the subject of so many studies, questionnaires, interviews, and visits that they close their doors to researchers. Others are unwilling to open their doors in the fi rst place. There are many areas in which religion now has a bearing on public life, some of which were the subject of a series of highly publicized debates in the UK in 2012 involving researchers, policy makers, and other professionals. One of the most con- tested topics in the Westminster Faith Debates , as they were called, was education, especially faith schools and the teaching of religion. What sort of education on reli- gion should be offered in state-funded schools and whether it should be confessional, multicultural, or focused around the demands of citizenship is debated in countries all over the world with varying answers and solutions being agreed. Should the state fund faith-based schools? Should children be allowed to take religious holidays, wear

182 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

religious dress, or make religious claims on the school regarding provision of food and permission to be excluded from particular activities? These are normative questions for nation states, educational authorities, and religious and secular groups to debate; they are not research questions as such. How they are answered, however, forms the context for research on religion and education. Whilst research on the political and legal status of religion in state education may require the examination of public controversies and the changing legislative framework, research on religion in schools is often based on case studies. Such studies of one or more school, which may well involve observing, interviewing, or running workshops with children, raise ethical issues about safeguarding them from harm and practical ones about how research can be conducted during the busy school day, bearing in mind the demands of the cur- riculum. Educational projects, for example on the role of children’s religious identity or spirituality in curriculum development or on their school-based interfaith encounters, sometimes take the form of action research , in which researchers – who are often themselves teachers – seek to bring about change, to develop the curriculum, or to improve social relationships in the classroom or playground. Finding ways to monitor and evaluate change is built into the research process.

Studying religion at different scales

In the modern world, religions play important roles at the local and global levels. They affect individuals, communities, groups, networks, and institutions. They have consequences for the body, for objects, for places and regions, for global communica- tions, and for population movements. How we study religion differs according to the scale at which we operate.

Small-scale studies I have always been interested in the way a small thing can encapsulate and tell the story of much larger events and processes. A similar idea is expressed in the title of a well-known introduction to social and cultural anthropology by Thomas Hylland Eriksen, Small Places, Large Issues. It challenges the preconception that the study of small, local, or particular objects, places, or communities is parochial, small-minded, or unrevealing. In fact, in methodological terms, the discipline of anthropology has traditionally been rooted in the principle of careful, detailed observation and inductive study of small social, cultural, and geographical units leading to the development of social models and theories of, for example, the development and use of tools, patterns of kinship, ritual practice, hierarchy and status, and stages of life. Some small things have been universally recognized as powerful, socially signifi - cant and worthy of study, such as the totem, the gift, the symbol, and the icon. By their very nature, they signify or stand in for a force, being or process greater than themselves, embodying a conception, relationship, or action. The Christian cross is an

183 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion obvious example. Marking buildings as places of worship, books as holy, and bodies as identifi ed and disciplined by Christianity, it carries the weight of the story of the crucifi ed son of God. It is recognized and shared by people across boundaries around the globe but may also mark one group off from another – not only Christians from non-Christians, but types of Christian from each other. Insofar as ‘the sign of the cross’ is a gesture and practice as well as an object, it separates Orthodox and Catholic Christians from most Protestants. However, in addition to the general meanings that can be attributed to the cross as a Christian symbol, every use of that symbol has its particular location, context, meaning, and signifi cance. Although these may in some cases be quite trivial, each tells a different story, one that is intimate, about the place of a cross in an actual landscape, the choice of a person to identify outwardly as a Christian, the struggle of an artist to be true to religious ideals in a world that may be hostile to them, or the commitment of a priest to his or her vocation. Placed alongside other symbols, the cross may speak of a shared interfaith journey. The in-depth investigation of a particular symbol in use can be a fruitful and often surprising study. I know this from my own experience of having chosen to focus on the left hand as a context for exploring religious and secular relationships. I was interested in examining the location and operation of religion at various scales and wanted to start with the human body or one of its parts. A well-known sociological essay on the right hand had been written in 1909 by Robert Hertz, one of Durkheim’s circle. It was clear from this that the right was experienced and represented as the preeminent and favored hand in most cultures and commonly associated with the sacred. What then of the left hand? Was it associated with nonreligion and the profane, or with deviant forms of spirituality? Reading contemporary online texts (identifi ed by Google searches on keywords such as ‘left hand’ and ‘left-handed’), I distinguished between ‘religious’, ‘secular’, and ‘postsecular’ examples and analyzed how their authors used the left hand to make their case, to self-identify and differentiate themselves from others. The key point here is that focusing on particular, small-scale examples can help us to see larger questions, movements, and relationships. What is striking, however, is that it is not only special or iconic objects, persons, events, and places that have biographies or that are important for people; everyday things can have that power too. Ordinary things like shoes and spectacles in extraor- dinary places – such as Holocaust memorial sites – can move visitors in ways that less intimate historical reportage cannot. But everyday objects can create strong emotions too because they are often the focus of memories or a stimulus for the imagina- tion: a photograph of family members who have passed away, a stone from a beach once visited, the words from a hymn or popular song, a favorite blanket or cushion. The individual and subjective meaning of such things and the feelings they evoke may well be attributed with spiritual or sacred signifi cance by those who experience them. They can be the subject of informative and original research. The rise of inter- est in material culture as worthy of study by scholars of religion and culture can be seen, for example, in the work of Colleen McDannell. Through an examination of American family bibles, gravestones, portraits of Jesus, and holy water, she proposed a

184 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott relationship between experiencing physical religious representations and the develop- ment of Christian norms, values, and beliefs. Some of the methodological issues involved in researching at the small scale can best be illustrated by looking at a particular case. On 15 February 2003, a ‘Stop the War’ protest was held in London to demonstrate against US and UK plans for military action in Iraq. Between 750,000 and 2 million people participated, and it was just one of a number of similar events held around the world. The following questions might be posed for the study of religion: where was religion located in this event, if at all? What role did it play? The fi rst is a spatial and cultural question; the second an historical one with signifi cance also for sociology, political science, and theology. How would we go about answering them? Tackling the fi rst, we might look for signs of religion during the event itself. Where was it held and did any acts of worship, prayer, or meditation take place? Was there evidence of religious symbols in the paraphernalia of procession (banners, T shirts, etc.), and of religious sentiments in the chants and songs? Who was involved? Had religious groups organized transport to the event, marched together, and supported one another? Having gathered information by observing the event; by examining media cover- age, photographs, and video footage; and by interviewing those involved, we might then consider the second question about the role of religion. In addition to asking leaders for their views, it would be necessary to consider the beliefs and attitudes of participating groups on war and nonviolent protest; the signifi cance of religion in events leading up to the protest (including public statements and pronouncements by churches and Muslim organizations, the mobilization of religiously inspired peace groups, etc.); and the role of Islamic, Christian, and Jewish groups or individuals in the organization and advertising of the march. We would also need to bear in mind that, for many participants, the event was not religious at all. Supporters of CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament) and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign were involved some of whom were eager to join forces and share a platform with Muslim, Christian, and Jewish groups whilst others were more dubious. A broader, cross-cutting consideration of the beliefs and values underlying the protest – whether religious or secular – would also be informative. A third question then arises. What might be inferred from this event about the relationship between religion and antiwar protest that could then be tested elsewhere? This is a methodological question about how an inductive approach to gathering and analyzing data in a case study can lead to the development of a grounded theory that might then be used in later studies. A careful examination of available data on this event might produce a hypothesis, theory, or model about the role of religion in nonviolent protest that could be used in research on demonstrations held in other times or places. Apart from its high-profi le, public nature, one reason for choosing this event as an example of a small-scale case for the study of religion in the modern world is its evident intersection with larger-scale issues, movements, and protests and its role in the global production and circulation of antiwar rhetoric and representation. This is

185 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion

FIGURE 1.2 Antiwar protest ‘Stop the War’ (STW) march in London, September 2002. Taken by William M. Connolley. ‘London antiwar protest banners’ by Users AK7, William M. Connolley. CC: Wikimedia Commons. referred to as the presence of ‘the global in the local’ and can be taken as evidence of the relationship between globalization and localization in which, not only do global processes affect what occurs in particular places, but those places and the events and ideas that occur there can be globalized and replicated elsewhere (see Chapter 15 on Religion and Migration).

186 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

Large-scale studies Like the Danish cartoons crisis, the war in Iraq and protest against it were global issues that led to diverse regional and national consequences. The formal relation- ship of religion and state, the role of Muslim organizations in political lobbying and public demonstration, and the expression of conscientious objection to war have been publicly visible in many countries since 2003, and it would certainly be possible to compare these issues in different national contexts. The comparison of different cases, whether within a single country or across national or continental boundaries, is one way in which research in a single location can be ‘scaled up’. In the European Union, for example, many major research projects start life as national pilot studies and are then widened to include research in a variety of European countries. A huge research program of research on welfare and values in twelve countries first began life as part of a project funded by the Swedish government on the relationship between individu- als and the state. This was then widened into a comparative study in eight countries of the role of churches as agents of social welfare and then still further into a project called WaVE (Welfare and Values in Europe ) in which in-depth, qualitative research was conducted in a number of medium-sized towns on the values of majority and minority communities as expressed through the provision of welfare. Another example shows the scaling up of research using a quantitative and deduc- tive approach. It involved the deployment of a multidimensional model for measuring diversity among organizations and adherents fi rst developed by Volkhard Krech and other scholars in the sociology and psychology of religion during research on religious pluralization in the North Rhine-Westphalia region of Germany. It was then applied in three European locations with the aim of testing a rational choice hypothesis that ‘pluralization leads to religious vitalization’. Comparing religion in various national locations is rather different to examining its global presence. The fi rst assumes the possibility of comparing broadly similar reli- gious data in different contexts, the second, of examining the transnational circulation of religious organizations, people, ideas, and practices and the interrelationships that develop as a consequence. It involves researching the historical processes whereby religion moves between and beds down in different places, societies, and cultures, and the relationships and fl ows that help to sustain that religion as a global force as well as a multilocal presence. Simon Coleman’s work on the globalization of charismatic Christianity, for instance, showed how one Swedish group, Livets Ord or ‘Word of Life’, used organizational, theological, iconographic, media, architectural, and narra- tive resources to become a global movement working in many countries and in thirty languages to spread the gospel of prosperity. Such work needs to take on board the major issues and processes that have faced the world as a single scale made up of interconnected countries and regions in the last 200 years: the condition of modernity and the processes associated with it; the impact of colonialism and subsequent postcolonial developments; the economic, social and cultural aspects of migration and globalization; and the impact of the ideology

187 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion of Western liberalism, democracy, human rights and the war on terror, the interna- tional development agenda, the rise of powerful multinational corporations, religious extremism, the anticapitalist movement, and the women’s movement. Although no single project can do justice to all of these, the study of religion at the global scale requires sensitivity towards such explanatory factors. For instance, making sense of the symbolic representations and personal meanings and values associated with the wearing of the hijab , niqab , and other forms of head-covering and veiling by Muslim women in different social and religious contexts cannot be done without recognition of the way these broader issues are manifested locally. Taking such issues seriously is not without its diffi culties, however. Criticisms have been levelled at scholars who focus on universal rights, goods, and responsibilities (on the grounds that they are exporting Western norms and values and judging on the basis of them), as well as at those who have lent their weight to prioritizing local cultures and traditions (on the grounds that they are cultural relativists who have fallen under the sway of a locally dominant leadership at the expense of marginal voices). Studies of African ‘female circumcision’ or ‘female genital mutilation’ are a case in point with many writers sworn to expose both the cruelty of this ritual for the young women concerned and the complex issues of power that underlie the practice of tradition, but others inclined to defend the right of certain Muslim communities to produce sexual and gendered bodies in their own way and to mark them with their own rites according to their established traditions. This debate raises the question of universal human rights and of the extent to which beliefs, practices, and values from one culture should be the measure of what is acceptable in another. For the student or scholar, it foregrounds questions about personal standpoint and the role of self-identity, subjec- tive judgement, and advocacy in writing about other people’s religions. There are no defi nitive answers to such questions, and academics continue to debate the possibility and desirability of objectivity and the politics of research. However, being able to articulate and make reasoned judgements about these issues, and to be refl exive about one’s own position, is now considered to be essential for any kind of social research. Whether large or small scale, focused on one or more religion or issue-based, the study of religion in the modern world offers rewarding opportunities for original projects. Being aware of the context of modernity, the complex historical, social, politi- cal, and economic forces at work, the choice of potential approaches and methods, as well as the consideration of personal standpoint and ethics will produce an informed approach to researching and writing about contemporary religion.

Summary

■ The study of religion in the modern world calls for theories, approaches, and methods that engage with the issues and processes that have affected the world within the last 200 years, such as the impact of colonialism and subsequent post- colonial developments, globalization, and the rise of global religious movements.

188 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

■ Theories can be used in various ways in the study of religion: to inform our theo- retical approach to broad questions about such things as the nature of religion and nonreligion; its relationship to society, class and gender; and its ability to discipline bodies and institutions or as starting points for research, for generating questions, hypotheses, and propositions. The theoretical conclusions of other researchers can be put to the test on new data. And grounded theories can be developed through an inductive research process. ■ A range of methodological approaches continues to be used in the study of reli- gion, including historical, sociological, anthropological, theological, geographi- cal, psychological, and discourse-based approaches. Contemporary problems and issues in the study of religion often require interdisciplinary research involving mixed methods. ■ Because of earlier interest in sacred texts and beliefs, the study of religions was traditionally associated with textual methods of various kinds, but social research methods are now commonly used, including questionnaires, inter- viewing, and participant observation. The use of visual media such as photo- graphs and video, participatory, and dialogical methods that engage research subjects, and spatial approaches have all been added to the toolkit of scholars of religion. ■ Certain key issues have come to the fore for the study of religions as a result of the challenges of modernity and the growing importance of religion as an important social force in the modern world. These include new questions about the signifi - cance of traditions, the interconnected nature of religions and of the religious and the secular, and religious identity and the re-emergence of religion in public life, all of which have consequences for building theory, honing and developing methodology, and selecting research methods.

■ Religion in the modern world can be studied at different scales, whether through small-scale bodies, objects, places, events, or communities or large-scale nations, regions, global processes, or the circulation of populations, ideas, or movements. It is clear, though, that the local and global are interlinked, and this needs to be refl ected in the conclusions we draw. ■ As individual students and scholars, the way we study religion is affected by our own standpoint and background. Being self-aware and conscious of ethical, gender, and power issues in how we represent and research other people’s religions as well as our own is important.

Key terms

action research Research, led by or involving practitioners, in which the aim is to improve action and/or respond to a problem or issue.

189 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion

case study A research approach that focuses on a single individual, group, or entity over a designated period of time. It usually involves close observation and description and may be preliminary to more extensive research or further case studies. construct/social construct A concept, meaning, or category that is created, shaped, and interpreted by individuals and groups. Social constructionism is the theory that reality is socially constructed rather than naturally given. discipline A branch of knowledge. engaged research Academics working with those outside the academy on research in which they both have an interest; bringing the tools of academic research to bear on a nonacademic problem or issue; using research to answer policy, business, industrial, or other questions of public importance. interdisciplinary research Collaborative research opportunities that bring scholars from different disciplines together to work on a common problem; individual research projects that require a scholar to use tools from more than one discipline. methodology How we study; the system of rules and methods we use; the disciplinary or interdisciplinary approach we adopt. methods The tools and resources we use to gather and analyze data to answer a research question. participatory methods Those methods that involve the research subjects or partici- pants directly in all or part of the research process: devising and designing the research, gathering and analyzing data, and writing up and presenting fi ndings. poly-methodological A research approach that draws on multiple methodologies (such as history and sociology) and/or methods (such as textual analysis and focus groups).

qualitative research An approach that is interpretative; it focuses on the beliefs, atti- tudes, and values people hold and the meanings they attribute to their behavior and decisions. quantitative research An approach that focuses on objective measurements and uses statistical or numerical data to analyze and generalize across groups. refl exivity Refl ecting on the conduct of research and on the role and standpoint of the researcher; thinking critically about the way in these may affect research outcomes. research data The material or information gathered or produced by researchers, using a variety of research methods, which is then open to analysis, comparison, and the drawing of conclusions. research questions and hypotheses The former are those questions that a piece of research is intended to answer; the latter are suppositions that are in need of further investigation. Either of them can be the starting point for a research project.

190 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

scaling up Using the research process, fi ndings, or theoretical developments from an initial case study, pilot study, or piece of research with a small sample to design a larger- scale project or set of case studies; bringing together previously dispersed sets of data or statistics to create a larger database or model. standpoint The theoretical, ideological, religious, and wider social position of a stu- dent or scholar that may – intentionally or not – contribute to the research process, including how that person conducts research, analyses and interprets fi ndings, and writes them up. theory A universal law or hypothesis devised to explain or make sense of the natural or social world; a map or model that has explanatory power and can be used and tested by others.

Suggested reading

On theory, methodology, and methods

Alan Bryman: Social Research Methods (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 4th edition, 2012). A comprehensive guide to the research process and the relationship of theory, methodology, and methods. Émile Durkheim: The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2001). Trans. Carol Cosman. A formative theoretical study of the social nature and foundations of religion. Robert Hertz, ‘The Pre-Eminence of the Right Hand: A Study in Religious Polarity.’ In Rodney Needham (ed.): Right and Left: Essays on Dual Symbolic Classification (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1973), pp. 3–31. Originally published as: ‘La Prééminence de la main droite: etude sur la polarité religieusé,’ Revue Philosophique 68 (1909), pp. 553–580. Thomas Hylland Eriksen: Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology (London: Pluto Press, 2nd edition, 2001). Timothy Fitzgerald: The Ideology of Religious Studies (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000). Debates the nature, ideology, and politics of the discipline of religious studies. Gavin Flood: Beyond Phenomenology: Rethinking the Study of Religion (London: Cassell, 1999). A critique of the phenomenology of religion and presentation of a new dialogical approach. John Hinnells (ed.): The Routledge Companion to the Study of Religion (London and New York: Routledge, 2005). Presents various methodological approaches and discusses key issues including insider/ outsider perspectives, gender, postcolonialism, ethnicity, pluralism, and religion and science. Kim Knott: The Location of Religion: A Spatial Analysis (London and Oakville: Equinox, 2005). Presents a spatial approach to studying religion and examines the relationship between the religious, secular, and postsecular with reference to the left hand. See also the introductory article on spatial approach in the study of religion in Religion Compass (2008). Seth Kunin: Religion: The Modern Theories (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2003). Includes accounts of key methodological approaches and theories of Marx, Durkheim, Weber, Freud, Jung, and Otto. Malory Nye: Religion: The Basics (London and New York: Routledge, 2003).

191 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution How to study religion

Russell T. McCutcheon (ed.): The Insider/Outsider Problem in the Study of Religion: A Reader (London: Continuum, 1999). Jonathan Z. Smith: ‘Religion, religions, religious’. In M. Taylor (ed.) Critical Terms for Religious Studies (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1998, pp. 281–285). A landmark essay on the academic and historical construction of ‘religion’ in a useful book about key concepts. Rodney Stark and William Bainbridge: A Theory of Religion (Bern: Peter Lang, 1987). A key work on religion and rational choice theory. Michael Stausberg and Steven Engler (eds): The Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religions (London and New York: Routledge, 2011). Thomas A. Tweed: Crossing and Dwelling: A Theory of Religion (Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press, 2006). A spatial, movement-based theory of religion.

On issues and scales in the study of religions

Veikko Anttonen: ‘Sacred’. In Russell T. McCutcheon and Willi Braun (eds): Guide to the Study of Religion (London: Continuum, 2000, pp. 271–282). Discusses the scholarly history and value of this concept for examining data from a wide range of religious and nonreligious contexts. Talal Asad: Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003). Anthropological theory of the relationship between religion and secularity in the West. Simon Coleman: The Globalisation of Charismatic Christianity: Spreading the Gospel of Prosperity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Abby Day, Giselle Vincett, and Christopher Cotter (eds): Social Identities between the Sacred and the Secular (Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2013). Essays that examine and challenge the boundary between contemporary sacred and secular identities. Laura Donaldson and Pui-Lan Kwok (eds): Postcolonialism, Feminism and Religious Discourse (New York: Routledge 2002). Essays that bring together feminist and postcolonial approaches to the study of religion. Paul Heelas, Linda Woodhead et al.: The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion Is Giving Way to Spirituality (Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005). Offers a theory of contemporary religious change based on a case study of spirituality in an English town. Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (eds): The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992). Groundbreaking collection of essays that shows that traditions are socially con- structed, malleable, and subject to change. Darlene M. Juschka (ed.): Feminism in the Study of Religion: A Reader (London: Continuum, 2001). Charles Kadushin and Laurence Kotler-Berkowitz: ‘Informal Social Networks and Formal Organizational Memberships among American Jews: Findings from the National Jewish Population Survey 2000–01’. ( Sociology of Religion 67, 2006, pp. 465–485). Richard King: Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and the Mystic East (London and New York: Routledge, 1999). Offers a postcolonial approach to the study of Indian religion. Volkhard Krech, Markus Hero, Stefan Huber, Kimmo Ketola, and Richard Traunmüller: ‘Religious Diversity and Religious Vitality: New Measuring Strategies and Empirical Evidence’ ( Interdisciplinary Journal of Research on Religion 9, 2013, article 3). A new approach to measuring religious diversity based on findings from three countries. Gordon Lynch: New Spirituality: An Introduction to Belief beyond Religion (London: I. B. Tauris, 2007). Contends that contemporary belief extends beyond conventional religious terrain into new spiri- tual forms.

192 Copyright Taylor & Francis Group. Not for distribution Kim Knott

Colleen McDannell: Material Christianity: Religion and Popular Culture in America (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1996). Major study of Christianity from the perspective of its popu- lar material culture. Meredith McGuire: Lived Religion: Faith and Practice in Everyday Life (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2008). A new approach to understanding religion through everyday behavior. Tariq Modood: ‘The Liberal Dilemma: Integration or Vilification?’ and Randall Hansen: ‘The Danish Cartoon Controversy: A Defence of Liberal Freedom’ (International Migration 44(5), 2006, pp. 1–16). Scholars debate liberalism in the context of the Danish cartoons crisis. Lewis Rambo: Understanding Religious Conversion (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993). An influential theory about stages in the process of conversion. Ninian Smart: The Religious Experience of Mankind (London: Fount, 1971); The Phenomenon of Religion (Seabury Press, 1973); and The World’s Religions (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989). Works by a renowned phenomenologist of religion that illustrate how ‘world reli- gions’ were categorized and studied in the 1970s and 1980s. Charles Taylor: A Secular Age (Cambridge, MA, and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007). A historical and theological approach to the relationship between the religious and the secular. Linda Woodhead and Rebecca Catto (eds): Religion and Change in Modern Britain (London and New York: Routledge, 2012). A comprehensive multiauthor guide to religious diversity and change in postwar Britain.

Websites

AHRC/ESRC Religion and Society Research Programme: Religion and Society. www.religionand society.org.uk/, accessed 8 December 2014. A research resource that informs public debate and advances knowledge and understanding about religion. British Religion in Numbers. www.brin.ac.uk/, accessed 8 December 2014. An online religious data resource for Britain, with statistics and analysis. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: U.S. Religious Landscape Survey. http://religions.pewforum .org/, accessed 8 December 2014. An informative resource for research on contemporary American religion. The Religious Studies Project. www.religiousstudiesproject.com/, accessed 8 December 2014. Podcasts and resources for the study of religion. Welfare and Values in Europe (WaVe). www.crs.uu.se/Research/former-research-projects/WaVE/ ?languageId=1, accessed 8 December 2014. Archive and reports of cross-national study on wel- fare and values in Europe, with particular reference to religion, minorities, and gender. Linda Woodhead and Charles Clarke, Westminster Faith Debates. http://faithdebates.org.uk/, accessed 8 December 2014. A major point of reference for research and debate on religion and secularity. World Christian Database. http://worldchristiandatabase.org/wcd/, accessed 8 December 2014. A useful ‘World Christian database’ that also includes data on other religions on a country-by- country basis.

193