'l'HJi! JilfrHRO^aLiO&IOiUj AJPHlUisCH
Tu THJS S'ltfDY OF RJJJLIGION
R i c h a r d B u r g h a r t
S c h o o l o f o r i e n t a l and i i f r l c a n s t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y o f Bondon
May 1969
ProQuest N um ber: 10752709
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The qu ality of this repro d u ctio n is d e p e n d e n t upon the q u ality of the copy subm itted.
In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u th o r did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be note d . Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved,
a n o te will in d ica te the deletion.
uest
ProQuest 10752709
Published by ProQuest LLC(2018). C op yrig ht of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346
^BOTRxiOlL*
S i n c e t h e l a s t w a r t h e r e h a s b e e n a r e n e w e d I n t e r e s t among a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s I n t h e s t u d y o f r e l i g i o n . To d a t e , h o w e v e r , t h e r e h a s n o t b e e n a n y c o m p a r a t i v e a n a l y s i s
a n d e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e s e r e c e n t d e v e l o p m e n t s I n r e l i g i o u s a n t h r o p o l o g y a T h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s t h e s i s i s a n I n v e s t i g a t i o n I n t o c o n t e m p o r a r y a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h e s t o t h e s t u d y o f r e l i g i o n . S i x s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t e m p o r a r y
a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s o f r e l i g i o n , r e p r e s e n t i n g s o c i a l , c u l t u r a l , a n d s t r u c t u r a l a n t h r o p o l o g y , h a v e b e e n s i n g l e d o u t f o r
a n a l y s i s ^ T h e i r a p p r o a c h e s ax*e c o n t r a s t e d w i t h e a c h o t h e r a s w e l l a s e x a m i n e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e t r a d i t i o n a l a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h e s t o r e l i g i o n . T h e f i n a l s e c t i o n o f t h e t h e s i s c o n t a i n s a g e n e r a l c r i t i c i s m o f t h e s e v a r i o u s a p p r o a c h e s a n d o f f e r s s u g g e s t i o n s f o r t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f r e l i g i o u s a n t h r o p o l o g y .
'i'ABIiJS UF COHPiiilffia
I n t r O d U C tX O n # » o e o 4
F a r t Ones T h e T r a d i t i o n s o f R e l i g i o u s A n t h r o p o l o g y * 16
C h a p t e r One.; T h e I n v e n t o r s IV
C h a p t e r Twos T h e M a s t e r s 3 o
F a r t Two; C o n t e m p o r a r y R e l i g i o u s A n t h r o p o l o g y Q , • 4 2
'{ ^ C h a p t e r One; B,F» Nad e l 4 3
C h a p t e r Twos F&mund L e a c h 5 4
C h a p t e r T h r e e s R o b i n H o r t o n 66
C h a p t e r F o u r s M e i f o r d B p i r o 9 o
C h a p t e r F i v e s V i c t o r T u r n e r 129
C h a p t e r S i x : C l a u d e L e v i ~ 3 t r a u s s 153 F a r t T h r e e : T o w a r d s t h e D e v e l o p m e n t o f
R e l i g i o u s A n t h r o p o l o g y ® « « , * , * • « « , « « « 18 2 B i b l i o g r a p h y , , , $ e » * & © « © © © • » » ® *> 2 4 9
INTROBDCT ION
The purpose o f t h i s t h e s i s I s an a n a ly s is and e v a lu a tio n o f th e a n th r o p o lo g ic a l approach, to th e s tu d y o f re lig io n ®
a
h i s t o r y o f a l l t h a t has been w r i t t e n on th e an th ro p o lo g y of r e l i g i o n s in c e th e d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n o f a n th ro p o lo g y
from th e o th e r s o c i a l s c ie n c e s d u rin g th e n in e te e n th
c e n tu r y u n t i l th e p re s e n t tim e would be n e i t h e r a mammoth t a s k
motan a l t o g e t h e r i n s t r u c t i v e one® I n i t i a l l y plagued by polem ics and m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and l a t e r by a la c k o f i n t e r e s t , i t h as o n ly been d u rin g th e p a s t tw e n ty y e a rs t h a t a n th r o p o lo g is ts have renew ed t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n r e ligion® We need th e r e f o r e t o e s t a b l i s h some s o r t o f c r i t e r i a f o r s e l e c t i n g t h a t w hich i s wox’th y o f c o n s id e r a tio n from th e g e n e r a l l i t e r a t u r e on th e s u b je c t*
I s h a l l assume h e re t h a t i t w i l l h o t be n e c e s s a ry t o know
th o ro u g h ly a l l t h a t has been w r i t t e n on r e l i g i o u s a n th ro
pology® iuzra Pound i n h i s ABO o f R eading m a in ta in s t h a t
l i t e r a t u r e h as been c r e a t e d by th e fo llo w in g c l a s s e s o f
p e rs o n s : th e in v e n t o r s , th o s e who fo und a new p ro c e s s ;
th e m a s te r s , th o s e who developed a new p ro c e s s o r s e v e r a l
such p ro c e s s e s and employed them as w e ll o r perh ap s even
b e t t e r th a n th e in v e n to r s ; th e d i l u t e r s , th o s e who came a f t e r and d id n o t do th e jo b q u it e as w e ll . H is c l a s s i f i c a t i o n sy stem c o u ld be a p p lie d e q u a lly as w e ll to a n th ro
pology* X would o n ly add a f i n a l c a te g o ry ; o n e fs contem
p o r a r i e s , th o s e who have c o n tr ib u te d c o n s i s t e n t l y to one*s f i e l d o f I n t e r e s t d u rin g th e p a s t t e n o r f i f t e e n y e a rs*
I m a in ta in t h a t i t i s th e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f th e a n th ro p o lo g is t d ev o ted to th e s tu d y o f r e l i g i o n , as w e ll a s anybody who ta k e s h is i n t e r e s t s s e r i o u s l y , t o have a
th o ro u g h u n d e rs ta n d in g o f h i s I n v e n to r s , h i s m a s te r s , and h i s contem poraries® T h is th e n w i l l be th e b a s is f o r s e l e c t
in g from th e v a r io u s a n th ro p o lo g ic a l ap proaches th o s e which w i l l be c o n s id e re d i n t h i s th e s i s *
I t rem ains th e n to e s t a b l i s h w hich a n th r o p o lo g is ts who have w r i t t e n on th e s u b je c t o f r e l i g i o n were th e in v e n to r s
and who were th e m a sters* I f one were to s e a rc h f o r th e s o u rc e s o f contem porary a n th ro p o lo g ic a l ap p ro ach es to
th e s tu d y o f r e l i g i o n , one would come up w ith th r e e names:
^dward T y lo r , R o b e rtso n S m ith , and aigmund Freud* These
th r e e s c i e n t i s t s X c o n s id e r to be th e in v e n to rs * X i n
c lu d e T y lo r because h i s d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n proposed
n e a r ly a c e n tu ry ago s t i l l stan d s* In d e e d l t v l s e n jo y in g
p r e s e n t l y somewhat o f a p o p u la r r e v i v a l , f o r no l e s s th a n
th re e
s i g n i f i c a n t contem porary a n th r o p o lo g is ts have w ith in th e p a s t decade u rg ed a r e t u r n t o T y l o r 1 s o r i g i n a l d e f in -
1
i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n . X in c lu d e R o b e rtso n Sm ith f o r h is d is c o v e ry o f a s o c i o l o g i c a l approach to th e s tu d y o f r e l i g i o n i n h i s book, i ’he R e lig io n o f th e S em ites (1 8 8 9 ).
Sigmund F re u d , o f c o u r s e , was n o t an a n th r o p o lo g is t by t r a d e , b u t b ecau se many contem porary c u l t u r a l a n th r o p o lo g i s t s b ase t h e i r a n a ly s e s o f r e l i g i o n upon F re u d ia n p s y c h o a n a ly tic th e o r y , i t would be Im p o ssib le t o n e g le c t him h e r e .
X'hfree o th e r a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s , F u s t e l de C oulanges* H enri
B ergson, and D ucien D evy-B ruhl, have c la im t o be c o n s id e r e d in v e n t o r s . F u s t e l de C oulanges and R o b e rtso n sm ith b o th d is c o v e re d th e s o c i o l o g i c a l approach to r e l i g i o n ; how ever, th e r e was a m ajor d if f e r e n c e betw een th e a n th ro p o lo g y o f F u s t e l de C oulanges and t h a t o f h is co n tem p o rary , R o b e rt-
son S m ith . F o r th e form er i n h i s stu d y o f r e l l g l o h s i n s t i -
1 . Goody, J . , " R e lig io n and R i t u a l : th e D e f i n i t i o n a l Prob
lem?* . B r i t i s h J o u r n a l o f S o cio lo g y . XIX.2 .
H o rto n , ^ . Y ' ^ D e f in itio n o r R e lig io n , and i t s u s e s " . J o u r n a l o f th e R oyal a n th ro p o lo g ic a l i n s t i t u t e . AC .:
a p i r o , M., '‘R e lig io n : Problems o f D e f in itio n and iiixplan- a tlo ao r. A n th ro p o lo g ic a l Approaches to th e Study o f
R e l i g i o n T ' A B S : S . --- ---
t u t io n s o f a n c ie n t G reece and Rome (X»a O ite A n tiq u e . 1 8 6 4 ), an u n d e rs ta n d in g o f r e l i g i o n came p r i o r t o an under s ta n d in g o f s o c i e t y w hereas f o r th e l a t t e r , i n h i s s tu d y o f r e l i g i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n s o f th e S e m itic t r i b e s o f a n c ie n t A ra b ia , an u n d e rs ta n d in g o f s o c ie t y came p r i o r to an u n d e rsta n d in g o f r e l i g i o n . I t was t h i s l a t t e r em phasis w h ich , v ia Bmile
Durkheim and R ad cliffe-i> ro w n , came to dom inate th e a n th ro p o lo g ic a l t r a d i t i o n , and f o r t h i s r e a s o n I p r e f e r t o con- a id e r R o b e rtso n Sm ith th e more Im p o rtan t o f th e two in v e n to r s oft th e s o c io l o g ic a l ap p ro ach .
H enri B ergson i n h i s c l a s s i c , has Detuc S ources de l a m brale 8 tu d e l a r e l i g i o n (1 9 3 2 ), d is tin g u is h e d betw een two k ih d s
o f r e l i g i o n ; s t a t i c r e l i g i o n and dynamic r e l i g i o n ; and two
c o rre sp o n d in g k in d s o f s o c ie t y ; c lo s e d s o c i e t y and open
s o c i e t y . A ccording t o B ergson man i s b a s i c a l l y a s o c i a l
anim al endowed w ith i n t e l l i g e n c e . But human i n t e l l i g e n c e
i n i t s more d i v i s i v e aspec&s poses a t h r e a t t o s o c i a l
c o h e s io n . To c o u n te r a c t t h i s p o t e n t i a l t h r e a t to th e
s o c i a l o r d e r , B ergson proposed t h a t a second f a c u l t y
developed w ith i n th e human m ind. T h is second f a c u l t y
B ergson c a l l e d th e 1 myth-making f a c u l t y 1, and w ith t h i s
f a c u l t y man c o n s tr u c te d b e l i e f system s about g o d s, g h o s ts ,
a n c e s t o r s , e t c * , o r what B ergson c a l l e d s t a t i c r e l a t i o n . The m ythm aking c a p a c ity o f th e mind was th e b a s is f o r
s o c i a l c o h e s io n and th e c lo s e d s o c i e t y . But Bergson spoke o f a n o th e r k in d o f r e l i g i o n . T h is second ty p e ,
w hich he c a l l e d dynamic r e l i g i o n , i s m y s tic a l and o r ie n t e d tow ards hum anity I n g e n e ra l r a t h e r th a n to w ard th e narrow c o n s t r i c t i o n s o f th e c lo s e d s o c i e t y . B ergson saw t h i s
second ty p e o f r e l i g i o n as th e c r e a t i v e im pulse made m ani
f e s t as l i f e . lynasaic r e l i g i o n c o rre sp o n d s to s t a t i c r e l i g i o n as l i f e en erg y c o rre sp o n d s to m a t t e r . A ll m oral and s p i r i t u a l p ro g re s s i s a r e s u l t of th e i n f u s io n o f
th e fo rm er in t o th e l a t t e r . B ergson1s unique c o n t r i b u t i o n to th e stu d y o f r e l i g i o n was t h a t r e l i g i o n , d e fin e d i n term s o f th e myth-making f a c u l t y and th e c r e a t i v e im p u lse , becomes an I n s t i n c t , a n a t u r a l f u n c ti o n o f th e human m ind.
Whereas m ost a n th r o p o lo g is ts i n v e s t i g a t e d s o c i a l b e h a v io r and s o c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , juevy-Bruhl fo c u s e d h i s a t t e n t i o n upon th o u g h t p ro c e sse s* He proposed t h a t p a r t i c u l a r modes
The two m ajor modes o f th o u g h t w hich he c o n s id e re d were
p r im itiv e th o u g h t and c i v i l i z e d th o u g h t (Ba Ment a l i t e
p r i m i t i v e . 1 9 2 2 ). F or Jjevy-Bruhl th e p r im itiv e m e n ta lity
i s p r e lo g io a l i n th e sen se t h a t i t i s i n d i f f e r e n t to
c o n t r a d i c t i o n and m y s tic a l i n th e sense t h a t p r im itiv e
of th o u g h t p a r t i c u l a r ty p e s o f s o c i e t i e s .
man p a r t i c i p a t e s i n an environm ent in h a b ite d by s u p e r
n a t u r a l b ein g s a s w e ll as human b e in g s . F or n r lm itiv e
man p e r c e p tio n o f s u p e r n a tu r a l b ein g s i s as e p is te m o lo g ic a l- l y v a l i d as th e p e r c e p tio n o f human beings* C i v i l i z e d
m e n t a l i t y , on th e o th e r h a n d , i s l o g i c a l l y o r ie n t e d and baaed upon th e o b je c tiv e p e r c e p tio n o f cau se and e f f e c t* Knowledge i s b ased upon e m p ir ic a l e v id e n c e . I f f a c e d w ith a n e x p e rie n c e which i s u n e x p la in a b le ,
c i v i l i z e d man assumes t h a t t h i s i s so becafese h i s know
le d g e o f o b je c tiv e n a t u r a l p ro c e s s e s i s in a d e q u a te .
What W estern Europeans n o tic e d as p e c u l i a r i t i e s o f prim i t i v e th o u g h t was due t o d i f f e r e n t inodes o f p e r c e p tio n , d i f f e r e n t modes o f th o u g h t, and d i f f e r e n t p r i n c i p l e s o f i n t e g r a t i n g e x p e r ie n c e , and n o t due to an i n f e r i o r m en tal
i - ... * c a p a c ity a s T y lo r , F r a z e r , and th e o th e r e v o l u t i o n i s t s contended*
These c o n t r i b u tio n s o f H enri Bergson and L u c ie n Levy- B ruhl f a i l e d to p e n e tr a te in t o th e m ain stream o f a n th ro pology d u rin g th e 1930*3. B ergson was th o u g h t to be more o f a s o c i a l p h ilo s o p h e r th a n a s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t , and h is unique th e o r y t h a t r e l i g i o n i s a n a t u r a l f u n c t i o n o f th e
human mind was n ev er s e r i o u s l y c o n s id e re d by a n t h r o p o l o g is ts .
Xievy-Bruhlfs c o n t r i b u t i o n was w id e ly a tta c k e d a s w e ll as m isu n d e rsto o d by s o c i a l a n t h r o p o l o g is ts , and h i s th e o r y n e v e r r e a l l y in f lu e n c e d th e a n th ro p o lo g ic a l t r a d i t i o n # F o r t h i s r e a s o n th e n , nam ely m inim al in f lu e n c e upon th e
t r a d i t i o n , X w i l l n o t c o n s id e r th e th r e e Frenchm an, F u s te l de G o u lan g es, H en ri B ergson, and h u c le n L dvy-B ruhl, i n t h i s th e s i s *
i
Who th e n a re th e m a ste rs? o n ly two a n th r o p o lo g is ts r e a l l y s ta n d above th e r e s t : ffinile Durkheim and A*R. R a d c l i f f e - Brown* Durkheim devloped th e p a th o r i g i n a l l y v e s t a b l i s h e d
eA
by R o b e rtso n Sm ith and F u s t e l de C o u la n g es, and R a d c l i f f e - Brown, who was In flu e n c e d by a l l th r e e o f th e s e men, went on to e s t a b l i s h what has become th e dominant t r a d i t i o n i n th e s o c i a l a n th r o p o lo g ic a l approach to th e stu d y o f r e l i g i o n . Two o th e r a n t h r o p o l o g i s t s , how ever, need m e n tio n in g :
James F r a z e r and B ronislaw M alinow ski. F r a z e r to o k up a l e s s e r t h e s i s o f R o b e rtso n S m ith, v i z . , th e e v o lu tio n a r y approach to m ag ic, r e l i g i o n , and s c ie n c e , and added an o r i g i n a l b ut u n e n lig h te n in g c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f magic#
M alinow skifs ap p ro ach to r e l i g i o n was p s y c h o lo g ic a l, p ra g
m a tic , and I n d iv id u a l o r i e n t e d . F or M alinowski magic and
r e l i g i o n f u n c tio n e d as s a f e t y v a lv e s o r c r u tc h e s i n o rd e r
t o h e lp men overcome s i t u a t i o n s o f em o tio n a l s tr a i n * T h is approach owed a g r e a t d e a l to F ra z e r and M arett
and can n o t be c o n s id e re d a v e ry o r i g i n a l th e o r y . Second, M alinowski*a a p p ro a c h , w hich f o r th e la c k o f a b e t t e r name c o u ld be c a l l e d th e c r u tc h th e o ry o f r e l i g i o n , i s nonsense f o r anyone f a m i l i a r w ith th e l i v e s and works o f John Bunjran, Fyodor D ostoyevsky, o r Lev T o ls to y .
a s
W illia m James c l e a r l y showed i n The v a r i e t i e s o f
R e lig io u s E x p erien ce (19o2) r e l i g i o n i s as much a c r e a t o r o f e m o tio n a l s t r e s s as i t i s a r e s o l v e r o f em o tio n al
s t r e s s . T h ir d , M alinow ski*s ap p ro ach , w ith i t s em phasis upon what f u n c tio n s magic and r e l i g i o n p erform r a t h e r th a n how th e s e f u n c tio n s a re p erfo rm ed , does n o t o f f e r much I n s i g h t i n t o th e n a tu re o f e i t h e r magic o r r e lig io n * I would c o n s id e r , th e n , b o th F r a s e r and M alinowski to be
» ,1
d i l u t o r s and n o t w orthy o f f u r t h e r a n a l y s i s h ere*
S o c ia l a n th r o p o lo g is ts o f th e 193ofs and 194of s whd w ro te on r e l i g i o n in c lu d e Meyer F o r t e s , Raymond Firth,
iS.F. JaJvans-Rr i t c h a rd , M.H. B rln v a s , and D a ry ll F o rd e .
A lthough some o f t h e i r work has been w r i t t e n i n more
r e c e n t tim e s , t h e i r I n t e l l e c t u a l developm ent o c c u rre d
d u rin g th e 1930*3 and 194o*s, and f o r th e most p a r t
th e y have a l l fo llo w e d w e ll w ith in th e t r a d i t i o n s
e s t a b l i s h e d by th e in v e n to r s and m a s te r s .
C u lt u r a l a n th r o p o lo g is ts o f t h i s tim e who w ro te on
r e l i g i o n in c lu d e Paul R a d in , Edward B a p ir, R o b ert Low ie, R alph L in to n * C lyde K luckhohn,
a, I r v in g H a llo w e ll, and R uth B e n e d ic t. l*heir m e n to r, FramK B oas, was a m a ste r
o f e th n o g ra p h y |b u t h i s im p o rtan ce f o r th e developm ent of
!
th e th e o ry of r e l i g i o n was m inim al. F o r th e most p a r t I see th e work o f th e s e c u l t u r a l a n th r o p o lo g is ts as a r e s u l t o f th e in f u s i o n o f G e s ta lt psychology and psycho
a n a l y t i c th e o r y i n t o th e m ainstream o f Am erican e th n o graphy* 1‘aken s i n g l y each o f th e s e a n th r o p o lo g is ts does n o t seem im p o rta n t enough to m e rit I n c lu s io n I n t h i s t h e s i s , l e t th e d i v e r s i t y o f t h e i r ap p ro ach es makes an o v e r a l l tre a tm e n t o f th e c u l t u r a l a n th ro p o lo g ic a l approach t o r e l i g i o n d u rin g th e 1930*8 and 194o*s alm o st im p o s s ib le . H a llo w e ll w i l l be ta k e n up i n th e f i n a l s e c t i o n o f th e
t h e s i s . A m ajor contem porary c u l t u r a l a n th r o p o lo g is t w i l l be in c lu d e d i n th e c e n t r a l s e c ti o n o f th e t h e s i s * F reud*s in f lu e n c e w i l l be d is c u s s e d i n th e n ex t c h a p t e r . Because o f l i m i t a t i o n s o f sp ace we must c o n te n t o u rs e lv e s w ith
■. I
t h i s l i m i t e d tr e a tm e n t o f c u l t u r a l a n th ro p o lo g y .
I t rem ains th e n to s e l e c t th e contem porary a n th r o p o lo g is ts
t o be In c lu d e d I n t h i s t h e s i s . The c o n te m p o ra rie s a r e numerous and in c lu d e G odfrey L ie n h a r d t, C l i f f o r d G e e rtz , V.W. T u r n e r , M elford S p ir o , R obin H o rto n , J a c k Goody,
Mary D ouglas, Claude L e v i- S tr a u s s , John M id d le to n , Ed
mund L each, and P e te r W orsley. -all o f th e s e a n th r o p o lo g is ts have w r i t t e n a r t i c l e s and books on s u b je c ts w hich come
w i^ th ln th e scope o f r e l i g i o u s a n th ro p o lo g y . S ince t h i s t h e s i s i s on th e a n th ro p o lo g ic a l approach to r e l i g i o n , X w i l l ex clu d e th o s e c o n te m p o ra rie s whose c o n t r i b u tio n s to th e approach have been m in im al, T h iisfo r th e p u rp o ses o f t h i s t h e s i s R obin H orton who has w r i t t e n numerous a r t i c l e s on m ethodology i s more im p o rta n t th a n JOhh M id d leto n who h a s been con cern ed w ith em ploying a p a r t i c u l a r m ethodology w ith r e f e r e n c e to c e r t a i n t r i b e s o f E gst A f r i c a . The fo llo w in g a n th r o p o lo g is ts I have s e le c te d f o r a n a l y s i s and e v a lu a tio n because th e y a r e e i t h e r d e v e l
oping a new ap p roach o r c o n tr ib u tin g to th e development o f an app ro ach a lr e a d y e x i s t e n t i n th e t r a d i t i o n : E. R.
L each, R obin H o rto n , M elford B p iro , V.W# T u rn e r, and
Claude L e v i- S tr a u s a . one o th e r a n t h r o p o l o g is t, B#F . h a d e l,
I have in c lu d e d because h i s ap p ro a c h , a lth o u g h n o t new
i n any se n se o f th e w ord, s t i l l c a r r i e s some m easure o f
a c c e p ta n c e i n a n th r o p o lo g ic a l c i r c l e s to d a y .
14
Mary Douglas and C l i f f o r d Cxeertz a ls o d eserv e to be i n - clmded h e r e , b u t a f t e r some th o u g h t I r e a l i z e d t h a t th e y have n o t , to d a te , w r i t t e n enough on t h e i r approach to p e rm it a v e ry s y s te m a tic a n a l y s i s , The c o n t r i b u tio n s o f Mary Douglas w i l l be m en tio n ed , how ever, i n th e f i n a l s e c t i o n o f th e t h e s i s * Thus a lth o u g h t h e r e a re some la m e n ta b le ab sen ces on my l i s t , th e s ix c o n te m p o ra rie s t h a t I have ch o sen do r e p r e s e n t a f a i r l y a c c u r a te c r o s s - s e c t i o n o f r e l i g i o u s anth ro p o lo g y * s t r u c t u r a l a n th ro p o lo g y i s r e p r e s e n te d by C laude D e v i- s tr a u s s and c u l t u r a l a n th ro pology by M elford S p iro * From s o c i a l a n th ro p o lo g y th e r e i s jfidmund Deaoh and R obin Horton* T here i s a l s o 3 .F . Xiadel and V.W* T u rn e r who f i t i n w ith th e so fcial a n th r o p o lo g ic a l t r a d i t i o n b u t v a r io u s a s p e c ts o f t h e i r method ex ten d
beyond o r have r e le v a n c e o u ts id e t h a t t r a d i t i o n .
The most r e c e n t a n a ly s is and e v a lu a tio n o f th e a n th ro p o lo g ic a l app ro ach t o r e l i g i o n was M.J3* &vans* F r i t c h a r d*s T h e o rie s o f P r im itiv e R e lig io n U 965)* a lth o u g h p u b lis h e d
o n ly f o u r y e a rs a g o , th e book does n o t r e a l l y cover th e
developm ents i n r e l i g i o u s a n th ro p o lo g y o f th e l a s t tw e n ty
y e a rs* s in c e t h e r e h a s n o t been any co m p arativ e a n a l y s i s
and e v a l u a ti o n o f th e developm ents i n r e l i g i o u s a n th ro p o lo g y
over th e p a s t tw en ty y e a r s , 1 have d e c id e d to devote th e
m ajor p a r t o f t h i s t h e s i s to contem porary c o n t r i b u tio n s t o r e l i g i o u s an th ro p o lo g y * The f i r s t s e c t i o n o f th e t h e s i s w i l l contaiijfe.il a n a ly s is o f th e in v e n to rs and m a sters* The
purpose o f t h i s s e c t i o n i s sim ply to d e l i n e a t e th e dom
in a n t t r a d i t i o n s i n r e l i g i o u s a n th ro p o lo g y i n o r d e r to u n d e rs ta n d w ith some d ep th th e b ases o f contem porary a n th r o p o lo g ic a l ap p ro ach es to r e l i g i o n . The secondhand m a jo r, s e c t i o n w i l l c o n ta in th e c o n te m p o ra rie s . The t h i r d s e c t i o n w i l l c o n ta in v a rio u s s u g g e s tio n s f o r i th e developm ent o f th e a n th r o p o lo g ic a l ap p ro ach to th e s tu d y o f r e l i g i o n b a se d upon th e p r i o r a n a ly s e s o f th e con
te m p o ra rie s as w e ll as th e c o n t r i b u tio n s o f v a rio u s
t h e o lo g ia n s , p s y c h o lo g i s t s , p h ilo s o p h e r s , and l i n g u i s t s *
EART I
THS TRiiDXTIONb
OF HELXGI0U3
aM'BRORXLG&X
1* THL I M m M R S
L et us b e g in w ith -^dwafd T y lo r . T y lo r would be s i g n i f i c a n t i f f o r no o th e r re a s o n th a n he was one o f th e f i r s t a n th r o p o lo g is ts t o ta k e r e l i g i o n s e r io u s ly * ut h e r i n t e l l e c t u a l s o f h i s tim e on th e s id e of C h r i s t i a n f a i t h d i s m issed p r im iti v e r e l i g i o n as h eath en ism w hereas i n t e l l e c t u a l s on th e s id e o f re a s o n were a p t to d ism iss
p r im itiv e r e l i g i o n f o r i t s supposed i r r a t i o n a l i t y . T y lo r i n s t e a d to o k a s c i e n t i f i c i n t e r e s t i n th e r e l i g i o n o f p r im itiv e peo p les* L ike many o f h is e v o l u t i o n i s t o r ie n t e d c o n te m p o ra rie s T y lo r a tte m p te d to e x p la in th e o r ig i n s
and developm ent o f r e l i g i o n , .assuming t h a t complex form s
emerge o u t o f s im p le r o n e s , T y lo r p roposed a u n i l i n e a l
p a th o f e v o lu tio n w ith W estern European c i v i l i z a t i o n
c i r c a n in e te e n th c e n tu r y as th e complex and p r im itiv e
t r i b e s o f th e non-W estern w o rld as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f
th e s im p le r forms* T y lo r assumed t h a t th e s t a t e o f
c i v i l i z a t i o n i n .A fric a , A s ia , and L a tin am erica d u rin g
th e l a s t c e n tu r y was g e n e t i c a l l y and l o g i c a l l y p r i o r
t o th e s t a t e o f n in e te e n th c e n tu ry W estern European
c i v i l i z a t i o n * Thus i n o rd e r to d is c o v e r th e o r ig i n s o f
r e l i g i o n T y lo r i n v e s t i g a t e d th e r e l i g i o n s o f p r im itiv e
p eo p les l i v i n g i n th e n in e te e n th century*
A ccording t o T y lo r th e concept o f th e s o u l o r ig i n a te d w ith man*s atte m p t to i n t e r p r e t and u n d e rsta n d h i s dream
and h a l lu c in a to r y and o th e r p sy ch ic ex p erien ces* From t h i s id e a o f th e s o u l as an e n t i t y d i s t i n c t from th e body and d e ta c h a b le from th e body d u rin g s le e p and tr a n c e s t a t e s t h e r e d ev eloped th e b e l i e f i n th e e x is te n c e o f s p i r i t
beings* T hus, f o r T y lo r , r e l i g i o n emerged o u t o f man1 s a tte m p t to u n d e rs ta n d h i s ex p erience* As a minim#* d e f in i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n T y lo r proposed “ th e b e l i e f i n s p i r i t u a l bein g s* ', o r what he c a l l e d animism il8 7 3 , p*424)* s p i r i t u a l b e in g s c o u ld be made m a n ife st i n humans as w e ll as p la n ts and non-human b eings* a c c o rd in g to T y lo r animism was vyM=
th e most p r im itiv e form o f r e l i g i o n , and from t h i s sim ple b e l i e f i n s p i r i t u a l b ein g s d id a l l th e h ig h e r form s o f r e l i g i o n , such a s g h o s t - b e l i e f s , im m o rta lity o f th e s o u l,
* • i ‘ if
s a c r i f i c e , g o d s, and monotheism , e v e n tu a lly develop*
T y lo r* s th e o ry o f th e o r ig i n s and development o f r e l i g i o n was i n t e l l e c t u a l l s t i c * He saw p r im itiv e man as a home
spun p h ilo so p h e r a tte m p tin g to i n t e r p r e t h i s e x is te n c e
p u rp o slv e ly * From s u c c e s s iv e a tte m p ts a t th in k in g th ro u g h
human e x p e rie n c e more d i f f e r e n t i a t e d and complex system s
o f r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s evolved* T here was no a f f e c t i v e e l e ment i n T y lo r* s approach* He o f co u rse acknowledged t h a t r i t u a l p r a c t ic e s were a p a r t o f r e l i g i o n , b u t f o r T y lo r r e l i g i o n was p r im a r ily a system of b e l i e f s w ith re f e r e n c e t o a p a r t i c u l a r c l a s s o f supermundane beings* Because of th e e v o l u t i o n i s t framework to h is th e o r y , th e la c k o f an a f f e c t i v e elem ent i n h i s ap p ro ach , and th e e x c lu s io n o f any r e f e r e n c e to s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e , c u l t u r a l p a t t e r n s , o r p e r s o n a l i t y t y p e s , much o f TyJ.or’ s approach to th e stu d y o f r e l i g i o n was d is c a r d e d by l a t e r a n th ro p o lo g is ts * j&ven though h i s approach h as been su p e rse d e d , h i s d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n has s u rv iv e d to t h i s day* S e v e ra l contem porary a n th r o p o lo g is ts go so f a r as t o p ro c la im th e e x is te n c e o f a n e o -T y lo rla n school* The two most n o ta b le p roponents o f n e o -T y lo ria n is m , M elford a p ir o and R obin H o rto n , a lth o u g h from r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t a n th ro p o lo g ic a l t r a d i t i o n s , b o th
d e riv e t h e i r approaches from T y lo r 1a d e f i n l t o n o f r e l i g i o n and from h i s u n d e rly in g view t h a t r e l i g i o n e x p la in s ex
p erien ce*
T y lo r saw r e l i g i o n as a r i s i n g from th e I n d iv id u a l * s need
f o r u n d e rs ta n d in g ; R o b e rtso n Sm ith saw r e l i g i o n as a r i s i n g
from th e n a tu re o f p eople l i v i n g to g e th e r* I n R e lig io n of
th e se m itea R o b e rtso n smith, w ro te :
R e l i g i o n i s n o t a n a r b i t r a r y r e l a t i o n o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l man t o a s u p e r n a t u r a l power?
i t i s a r e l a t i o n o f a l l t h e members o f a com m u n ity t o t h e pow er t h a t h a s t h e g o o d o f t h e com m un ity a t h e a r t , t p . 5 5 )
F o r R o b e r t s o n S m ith r e l i g i o n c o u l d n o t b e d i v o r c e d fr o m e t h i c s , o r t h e v a l u e s o f t h e co m m u n ity , u n l i k e ‘1‘y l o r who f o c u s e d m a in ly u p on m a g ic and c u r i o u s r e l i g i o u s b e l i e f s . R o b e r t s o n S m ith d i s m i s s e d m a g ic a s an e a r l i e r fo rm d i s
c a r d e d a lo n g t h e r o a d o f e v o l u t i o n an d i n s t e a d I n v e s t i g a t e d s o c i a l l i f e .
1
To le n d su p p o rt t o h i s t h e s i s he t r a v e l l e d to S y ria to do fie ld w o rk on th e S e m itic t r i b e s o f a n c ie n t A rabia* Con
tem p o rary a n t h r o p o l o g is ts , how ever, do n o t g r a n t much
cred en ce t o h i s ethnography* The d i f f i c u l t i e s , of c o u r s e , a re obvious* But th e v a lu e of R o b ertso n Bmith l i e s w ith h is approach r a t h e r th a n w ith th e in fo rm a tio n he g a th e re d on a s o c i a l system t h a t c e ased to e x i s t th o u san d s o f y e a rs ago* A ccording to him th e S e m itic t r i b e s o f a n c ie n t A rabia were o rg a n iz e d i n t o m a t r i l i n e a l c l a n s , and each c la n pos
s e s s e d a to tem which was s a c re d to th e members o f t h a t
clan* Clansmen c o n c e iv e d them selves and t h e i r totem to be
o f th e same blood* They b& lieved th e to tem to be th e god
o f th e c l a n as w e ll as l i t e r a l l y and f i g u r a t i v e l y th e f a t h e r o f th e clan* So much f o r R obert son S m ith1 a e t h nography* H is i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e to te m ic system e s ta b l is h e d th e s o c io lo g ic a l ap p ro ach , -according to R o b e rtso n Sm ith th e god of th e c la n was none o th e r th a n
th e c la n i t s e l f c o n c r e tis e d and e x t e r n a l i s e d , T h is p ro j e c t i o n o f th e c la n as god was sym bolised i n th e to te m ic c r e a t u r e w hich was w orshipped i n communion, a t communion th e to te m ic anim al was s a c r i f i c e d . S in ce c l a n members and th e to te m ic c r e a t u r e were o f th e same b lo o d , th e s la y in g and subsequent e a tin g o f th e to te m ic c r e a t u r e sym bolized th e ren ew al and u n ity o f th e c l a n .
Thus f o r R o b ertso n Sm ith r e l i g i o n had i t s o r ig i n s i n r i t u a l and th e community, .among p r im itiv e p e o p le s;
R e lig io n wws made up o f a s e r i e s o f a c ts and o b s e rv a n c e s , th e c o r r e c t perform ance o f which was n e c e s s a ry o r d e s ir a b l e to s e c u re th e fa v o u r o f th e gods o r to a v e r t t h e i r a n g e r, and i n t h e i r o b serv an ces ev ery member o f s o c ie ty had a sh a re marked o u t f o r him e i t h e r i n v i r t u e o f b ein g b o rn w ith i n th e fa m ily and community o r i n v i r t u e '"
o f th e s t a t i o n w ith in th e fa m ily and com
m unity t h a t he had come to h o l d ...R e l i g i o n d id n o t e x i s t f o r th e sav in g o f s o u ls b u t f o r th e p r e s e r v a tio n and w e lfa re o f s o c i e t y ,
i p . 29-30*
U nlike T y lo r who d e fin e d r e l i g i o n w ith r e f e r e n c e to b e l i e f s
i n a p a r t i c u l a r c l a s s o f b e in g s , R o b ertso n Wraith d e fin e d
r e l i g i o n w ith r e f e r e n c e to th e b e lie v in g community.
One reasibn f o r R o b e rtso n s m ith ’s im p o rtan ce i s t h a t he in f lu e n c e d th r e e o f h e r m ajor s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s : James F r a z e r , sigmund F re u d , and Em ile Durkheim, F r a s e r to o k R o b e rtso n s m ith ’s l e s s e f t h e s i s c o n cern in g th e e v o lu tio n
a ry developm ent o f m agic, r e l i g i o n , and s c ie n c e ,
ash a s been shown by Mary Douglas t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n betw een m a g ical and r e l i g i o u s r i t e s i s a g r o s s m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e r e a l n a tu r e o f b o th magic and r e l i g i o n ^Mary D ouglas, 1966,
p . 7 - 2 8 ) , F reud i n h i s book T ot era and Tab&o il9 1 3 ) dreir e x te n s iv e ly from R o b e rtso n Sm ithes th e o ry o f totem ism and s a c r i f i c e . F i n a l l y Durkheim to o k alm o st i n whole R o b e rtso n S m ith ’s d e f i n i t i o n as w e ll as ap p ro ach to th e
s tu d y o f r e l i g i o n .
I t i s n e c e s s a ry to be v e ry c a r e f u l i n a n a ly z in g th e F reu d ia n ap p ro ach t o r e l i g i o n . Among s o c ia l a n th r o p o lo g is ts i t s e e m th e u s u a l p r a c t i c e t o a v o id coming t o g r ip s
w ith th e F re u d ia n app ro ach by r i d i c u l i n g a few o f F re u d ’s id e a s th e n d is m is s in g a l l o f F re u d . R a th e r th a n th ro w in g out th e baby w ith th e b a th w a te r , many c u l t u r a l a n th ro p o lo g i s t s c o m p le te ly a c c e p t p s y c h o a n a ly tic th e o r y w ith o u t
q u e s tio n in g th e l i m i t a t i o n s o f t h i s ap p ro a c h . F o r F re u d ’s
o u tlo o k was l i m i t e d i n many ways# He was th e product
o f h i s own c u l t u r a l * h i s t o r i c a l , and r e l i g i o u s background.
F u rth erm o re he was a p s y c h o lo g is t a t a tim e when psychology was j u s t g e t t i n g s ta r te d # J u s t as an th ro p o lo g y a t t h a t
tim e la c k e d a s u b s t a n t i a l body o f e th n o g ra p h ic a l s tu d ie s so psychology la c k e d an ad eq u ate number o f c a se s tu d ie s * and b o th s c i e n t i f i c d i s c i p l i n e s were s tr u g g lin g to develop an I n s t r u c t i v e and c o h e re n t t h e o r e t i c a l b a s is # T h e re fo re to d ism iss F re u d fs p s y c h o a n a ly tic th e o r y , as some a n th ro -' p o lo g is ts have done IF#F. F v a n s - ^ r itc h a r d , 1965, p # 4 1 -4 3 ), b ecause o f th e p re p o s te ro u s n e a s o f th e myth o f th e s la y in g
o f th e p rim a l f a t h e r would be as u n s c i e n t i f i c as d is m is sin g R o b ertso n Sm ithes so c io lo g ism because o f h i s su sp e c t
ethnography#
What th e n i s th e F re u d ia n approach to th e s tu d y o f r e l i g i o n ? Like th e o th e r two in v e n to r s , F reud was an e v o l u t i o n i s t , b u t w ith a d iffe re n c e # A pplying th e b i o l o g i c a l th e o ry t h a t phyiogeny r e c a p i t u l a t e s ontogeny to a n th ro p o lo g y and
p sychology, F reud co rresp o n d ed th e d i f f e r e n t h i s t o r i c a l s ta g e s o f c u l t u r e w ith th e d i f f e r e n t s ta g e s i n th e d evelop
ment o f th e human p e rs o n a lity # A ccording to th e e v o lu tio n
i s t s c u l t u r e p assed th ro u g h th r e e s u c c e s s iv e s ta g e s : m agic.
r e l i g i o n , a n d sc ie n c e # F reu d co rre sp o n d e d th e s e t h r e e s ta g e s w ith c h ild h o o d , a d o le s c e n c e , and m a tu rity # Magic and c h ild h o o d s'Mfe s ta g e s o f w i s h - f u l f i l l m e n t ; a d o le sc e n c e and r e l i g i o n yaudSe s ta g e s o f o b j e c t - f i n d i n g j and m a tu r ity and s c ie n c e a r e s ta g e s o f r a t i o n a l i t y #
Let us c o n c e n tr a te on Freud*a th e o ry of r e l i g i o n , f o r magic and s c ie n c e do not d i r e c t l y c o n c e rn t h i s t h e s i s . F or F reu d th e b a s is o f r e l i g i o n was a sen se o f g u i l t #
F reud p roposed t h a t a v e ry lo n g tim e ago d u rin g th e p rim a l s t a t e o f human s o c i e t y men l i v e d i n hordes# I n th e horde one man, th e f a t h e r , c o n t r o l le d a l l th e women and k e p t t h e i r s e x u a l s e r v ic e s f o r h im se lf# The f a t h e r fs d o m in atio n over th e women provoked th e h a tr e d o f h i s s o n s , b u t because o f h i s power and a u t h o r i t y th e sons a ls o r e s p e c te d t h e i r f a th e r # Thus t h e em o tio n al re sp o n se o f th e sons to t h e i r f a t h e r was a m b iv a le n t. B'or some p a r t i c u l a r r e a s o n , which was o f no c o n c e rn t o F re u d , th e sons i n t h e i r h a tr e d
s la y e d t h e i r f a t h e r th e re b y g a in in g a c c e ss t o th e women#
h u t l a t e r o u t o f t h e i r r e s p e c t and lo v e f o r t h e i r f a t h e r
th e y f e l t a sen se o f g u i l t . T h is g u i l t cau sed them to
i d e n t i f y a to te m as a s u b s t i t u t e f o r t h e i r f a t h e r , and
th e y made i t a crim e to s la y th e to te m ic c r e a tu re # On
s p e c i a l o c c a s io n s th e b r o th e r s commemorated th e p a r r ic i d e by s a c r i f i c i n g th e t o t w l G c r e a t u r e . F u rth erm o re th e y made I t a crim e to m arry th e women whom th e y now c o n t r o l l e d . Thus m urder and i n c e s t became th e two most h ein o lis crim es
o f p r im iti v e s o c i e t y . F or F reu d th e o r i g i n o f r e l i g i o n i s to be fo u n d i n to tem ism , and th e o r i g i n o f c u l t u r e i s to be found i n th e i n c e s t ta b o o . I n th e words o f F reu d :
S o c ie ty I s now based on th e c o m p lic ity i n t h e common c rim e , r e l i g i o n on th e sen se o f g u i l t and consequent re m o rse , w h ile m o r a lity i s b ased p a r t l y on th e n e c e s s i t i e s o f s o c ie t y and p p r t l y on th e e x p i a tio n w hich t h i s se n se o f g u i l t demands, 11938, p . 919)
I f T y lo r* s ap p ro ach to th e s tu d y of r e l i g i o n c o u ld be l a b e l l e d i n t e l l e c t u a l l s t i c and B o b e rtso n Sm ith*s approach s o c i o l o g i s t i c , th e n F reud *s ap p roach I s c e r t a i n l y em otion- a l i s t l c . H e llg io n i s j u s t so much o f an a tte m p t to d e a l w ith man1 s sen se o f g u i l t . By a d m ittin g t h a t o n ly f e e l i n g s o f g u i l t , s u b m is s io n , and dependence c o u ld be r e l i g i o u s , F reud w eakened h i s c a s e , The whole sp ectru m o f r e ll g M u s f e e l i n g d is c u s s e d by W illiam s James i n The V a r i e t i e s o f R e lig io u s iftcperience i s narrow ed down so r a d i c a l l y t h a t r e l i g i o n ap p ears alm ost u n re c o g n iz a b le . M oreover i n d i r e c t o p p o s itio n t o T y lo r , F reu d c o m p le te ly e lim in a te d th e im p o rt
ance o f th e c o g n itiv e f u n c tio n o f r e l i g i o n . I n t h i s r e g a rd
Ereud was c lo s e to R o b e rtso n Sm ith f o r b o th based t h e i r t h e o r i e s upon th e a f f e c t i v e e le n $ g t i n r e l i g i o n . F reud was n o t concerned w ith f a i t h b u t w ith i n s t i t u t i o n s . : He was more i n t e r e s t e d i n n in e te e n th c e n tu ry C h r i s t i a n c u l t u r e th a n th e te a c h in g s o f J e s u s . I n f a c t F reud n o t o n ly w rote about C h r i s t i a n c u l t u r e ; he a ls o a tta c k e d i t . I t must be remembered t h a t f o r F reud p e r s o n a li ty development b eg in s w ith th e c o n f l i c t betw een I n s t i n c t u a l d e s ir e s and a r e p r e s s iv e c u l t u r e . R e lig io u s c u l t u r e , and e s p e c i a l l y G h r ls tia n c u l tu r e a t th e t u r n o f th e l a s t c e n tu r y , F reud found p a r t i c u l a r l y r e p r e s s i v e . R e lig io n i s n o t j u s t an a ttem p t to d e a l w ith m an's se n se o f g u i l t ; I t a ls o s u s t a i n s t h a t sen se o f g u i l t . T h is I s what R a d c l if f e-brow n u n d e rsto o d and M alinowski d id n o t i n t h e i r argument con
c e rn in g th e r e l a t i o n s h i p betw een a n x ie ty and r i t u a l . F or F re u d , s c ie n c e , and e s p e c i a l l y p sy c h o th e ra p y , i s more
s u i t e d th a n r e l i g i o n f o r c u rin g 's i c k s o u l s ', a n d , being
th e p o s i t i v i s t t h a t he w as, F reud b e lie v e d t h a t e v e n tu a lly
s c ie n c e b ased upon re a s o n would re p la c e r e l i g i o n as th e
b a s is o f c u l t u r e . Thus F re u d , a lth o u g h a p s y c h o lo g is t,
was more a n th r o p o lo g ic a lly o r ie n te d th a n many r e a l i z e ,
f o r he n ev er r e a l l y a tte m p te d to come to g r i p s w ith th e
n a tu re o f r e l i g i o n as Jung d id ; r a t h e r he to o k f o r r e l i g i o n
o n ly th e c u l t u r e i n whlGh r e l i g i o n o p e r a te d .
There i s one o th e r a s p e c t o f F re u d ia n p s y c h o a n a ly tic th e o r y w hich needs m e n tio n in g . For F reud th e c o n sc ie n c e
{
su p ereg o ) and I n s t i n c t u a l d e s ir e (Id ) wex*e i r r a t i o n a l f o r c e s w i t h i n th e human pspfche. Reason was lo c a te d I n th e e g o , and I t was th e f u n c ti o n o f th e ego to c o n t r o l urn-
d e s i r e s flo w in g from th e i d and to f r e e i t s e l f as much as p o s s ib le from th e t y r a n n i c a l c o n s t r a i n t s o f s o c i a l m o r a l i t y . Thus re a s o n i s th e c o n t r o l l i n g o r med
i a t i n g a g e n t o f th e p sy c h e . I t would be w rong, how ever, to I n f e r from t h i s t h a t F reud th o u g h t man was by n a tu re a r a t i o n a l a n im a l. P la t o , on th e o th e r h an d , l o c a te d th e c o n sc ie n c e w ith i n r e a s o n . R eason i s th e so u rce o f
m oral ju dgm ent. The ego and superego a r e one and th e same.
Man i s by n a tu re a r a t i o n a l a n im a l, s o c i a l a n th ro p o lo g y f o r th e most p a r t f i t s w ith in th e P la to n ic t r a d i t i o n .
F reu d and th o s e c u l t u r a l a n th r o p o lo g is ts who fo llo w F re u d do n o t f i t w ith i n t h i s t r a d i t i o n . F or th e s o c i a l a n th r o p o lo g is t w i t h i n th e P la to n ic t r a d i t i o n man chooses betw een v a r io u s c o u rs e s o f a c t i o n by r a t i o n a l l y I n v e s t i g a t i n g
th e r e l a t i v e m e r its o f eaeh a l t e r n a t i v e . I n t h e 'h e a t o f
th e moment1 one may make a poor c h o ic e , b u t th e c h o ic e I s
28
o n ly c o n s id e re d to be a poor one b ecau se one*s p r i o r ana**
l y s i s o f th e m e r its o f each a l t e r n a t i v e was f a u l t y o r in a d eq u ate* IFhis b a s ic assu m p tio n co n c e rn in g th e n a tu re o f man*s d ec isio n -m a k in g f a c u l t y u n d e r l i e s , f o r exam ple, th e work o f F r e d r ik B a rth ( P o l i t i c a l L e a d e rsh ip among th e Swat P a th a n s . 1 9 5 9 ), tfdmund Beach ( P o l i t i c a l Bystems o f
H ighland Burma* 1 9 5 4 ), and many o th e rs * F o r c u l t u r a l a n th ro p o lo g i s t s w ith in th e F re u d ia n t r a d i t i o n , how ever, a p a r
t i c u l a r p e r s o n a l i t y ty p e , i n o rd e r t o s u s t a i n i t s e l f , must s a t i s f y c e r t a i n needs p e c u lia r to i t s p e r s o n a l i t y , a p e rso n may w x e re ise f a c u l t i e s o f r a t i o n a l c h o ic e i n d e c id in g how he w i l l f u l f i l l th e s e n e e d s , b u t t h i s c h o ic e i s i r r e l e v a n t , f o r th e p e r s o n a l i t y needs have a lre a d y been d e term in ed i n c h ild h o o d e x p e rie n c e * I n o th e r w ords, a p e rs o n does n o t become a communist because he h as r a t i o n a l l y a n a ly z e d th e problem s o f c a p i t a l i s t s o c ie t y and b e lie v e s communism t o 5 be th e b e s t s o l u t i o n t o th e s e problem s; r a t h e r a p e rso n becomes a communist b e c a u s e , due to c e r t a i n c h ild h o o d ex
p e r ie n c e s , h i s p e r s o n a l i t y c a n o n ly be s u s ta in e d th ro u g h r a d i c a l a c t i v i t y * 5?h© c o n te n t o f h is r a d i c a l b e l i e f s i s
unim portant* i’h i s h y p o th e tic a l communist c o u ld j u s t as w e ll have become an a n a r c h i s t , a h a z l , o r a B ib le-th u m p in g
f a i t h - h e a l i n g S o u th e rn B a p tis t m i n i s t e r , ‘fhua F reu d s to o d
P la to on h i s head*
Bike th e o th e r two in v e n to r s F reu d i s not remembered to d a y f o r h i s p o s l t i v i s t l e optim ism co n c e rn in g th e dawn
o f a r a t i o n a l age*
m vi s he e s p e c i a l l y remembered f o r h is e th n o g ra p h y o f th e p rim a l horde* However, h i s th e o r y t h a t r e l i g i o n i s a p r o je c tiv e system w hereby th e c o n c e p tio n s
o f s u p e r n a tu r a l b e in g s a re th e p r o je c tio n s o f th e c h i l d 's
p a r e n ta l im ages h as been ta k e n up by many c u l t u r a l a n th ro
p o lo g is ts * F u rth erm o re h is n o tio n o f r e l i g i o n as a p r e -
s c i e n t i c th e r a p y f o r c u l t u r a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d n e u ro se s
and h is th e o r y o f th e dynamics o f th e human psyche and
th e r o l e o f re a s o n I n d ecisio n -m ak in g have a ls o found
a home i n America*
S o
2 *
w&
MASTERSLot us now t u r n to th e m a s te rs : Emile Durkheim and
a . R .R adcliffe-B row n* Durkheim was g r e a t l y I n debt to R o b e rt
son Sm ith f o r h i s approach to th e stu d y o f r e l i g i o n . R o b e rtso n Sm ithes s o c io l o g ic a l I n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f to te m -
Ism , p lu s h i s c o n te n tio n t h a t totem ism was th e most prim
i t i v e form o f r e l i g i o n , p lu s h i s d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n were ta k e n alm ost w ith o u t a l t e r a t i o n by Durkheim. Durk
heim* s im portance th e n i s t h a t he a s s im i la t e d th e th e o r ie s o f R o b ertso n Sm ith as w e ll as F u s te l de G oulanges and o th e rs In to ^ n a r t i c u l a t e c o h e re n t s o c io lo g ic a l approach* He was th e f i r s t t o do th is * I n t h i s way th e n Durkheim *s so c
io lo g ism p ro v id e s a co n v en ien t d iv i s i o n betw een n in e te e n th and tw e n tie th c e n tu ry anthropology* a n th ro p o lo g y p r i o r to Durkheim was more a k in to s o c ia l philosophy* The two
dominant sc h o o ls o f s o c ia l p h ilo so p h y a t t h a t tim e were
th e p o s i t i v i s t s and th e s o c i a l c o n tr a c t t h e o r i s t s su ch
as Hobbes and Locke. F or Hobbes and Locke th e c o l l e c t i v e
l i f e o f s o c ie t y a ro se from th e in d i v i d u a l . The b a s is o f
s o c ie ty was th e s o c i a l c o n tr a c t form ed i n r a t i o n a l s e l f -
i n t e r e s t by i t s component members* T y lo r , o f c o u rs e , was
p a r t o f t h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n * F or T y lo r r e l i g i o n
o r ig i n a te d o u t o f man*s a tte m p t to u n d e rs ta n d h is e x p e r
ie n ce* Durkheim* s th e o r y o f s o c i e t y and r e l i g i o n was
r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r n t * F or Durkheim, even th o u g h th e i n d i v i d u a l i s th e u ltim a te b e a r e r and t r a n s m i t t e r o f s o c i a l
l i f e , s o c i e t y i s th e more fu n d am en tal o f t h e two r e a l i t i e s * S o c ie ty tra n s c e n d s th e i n d i v id u a l i n t h a t i t has a lo n g e r tim e -s p a n and i n t h a t i t i s n o t dependent upon p a r t i c u l a r i n d i v id u a l s w h ile a t th e same tim e s o c i e t y i s imminent i n th e i n d i v id u a l f o r th e in d iv id u a l p e r s o n a l i t y i s a pro d u ct o f s o c ie ty * From t h i s pfelnt o f view i t i s o n ly a s h o rt le a p to th e a s s e r t i o n t h a t god I s society*!;:*
Meaning and v a lu e a c c o rd in g t o ixirkheim a r e d e riv e d from tfoe c o l l e c t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f a p eo p le and t h e r e - fo rejk re s o c i a l i n o rig in * R e lig io n i s meaning and v a lu e
o b j e c t i f i e d and e x te r n a lis e d * God i s s o c ie t y w o rsh ip p in g I t s e l f * Or i n t h e words o f Durkheim, r e l i g i o n I s lia systbm o f b e l i e f s by means o f w hich in d iv id u a ls r e p r e s e n t th e
s o c i e t y o f w hich th e y a re members and th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , o b scu re b u t I n ti m a te , w hich th e y have w ith i t u * (1964, p* 323)
But r e l i g i o n a l s o h a s an a f f e c t i v e elem ent* I n a l l human
b e in g s a c c o rd in g to Durkheim th e r e e x i s t s a se n tim e n t
to come to g e th e r t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n th e c o l l e c t i v e l i f e *
32
T h is p a r t i c i p a t i o n i s th e means by w hich th e group p e r
i o d i c a l l y r e a f f ir m s i t s e l f and c o n s t i t u t e s th e s a c re d re a lm o f s o c i a l l i f e * f h e e x p e rie n c e o f th e s a c re d i s t h e f e e l i n g w hich th e e x p e rie n c e o f th e c o l l e c t i v e l i f e i n s p i r e s i n i t s members. I n c o n t r a d i s t i n c t i o n to th e l i f e o f th e s a c re d Durkheim p o s ite d th e e x is te n c e o f th e p ro fan e* The p ro fan e l i f e i s th e p r i v a t e , i n d i v i d u a l o r i e n t e d l i f e o f th e members o f s o c i e t y . R e lig io n th e n as d e fin e d by Durkheim i s u a u n i f i e d system o f b e l i e f s and p r a c t i c e s r e l a t i v e to s a c r e d t h i n g s , t h a t i s t o s a y , th in g s s e t
apaz*t and f o r b id d e n — b e l i e f s and p r a c t i c e s which u n it e I n to one s in g le m oral community c a l l e d a c h u rc h , a l l th o s e who ad h ere t o them1, (1 9 6 4 , p*4‘7}*
3o
much f o r Durkheim *s d e f i n i t i o n o f r e l i g i o n ^ w hat th e n I s h i s approach* R e lig io n h as i t s o r i g i n s i n s o c ie ty * th e r e f o r e r e l i g i o n I s a s o c i a l f a c t* a s a f a c t r e l i g i o n
i s e x t e r n a l to th e knowing s u b je c t an d , t h e r e f o r e , i s t o be s tu d ie d by s c i e n t i f i c ex am in atio n r a t h e r th a n by p h ilo s o p h ic in tr o s p e c tio n * S in ce r e l i g i o n i s a s o c i a l f a c t , I t can o n ly be e x p la in e d s o c i o l o g i c a l l y i n term s o f o th e r s o c i a l f a c t s * I t can n o t be e x p la in e d by non
s o c i a l phenomena. Durkheim s e t about t o d em o n strate th e
v a l i d i t y o f h is approach, by i n v e s t i g a t i n g A u s t r a li a n to tem ism , w hich was i n h i s o p in io n th e most p r im itiv e form o f r e li g io n * T h ere i s no need to go I n to th e d e t a i l s o f Durkheims a n a ly s is o f A u s tr a lia n totem ism here* I n b r i e f , th e A u s tr a lia n a b o r ig e n e , b ecau se o f h i s member
s h ip i n a p a r t i c u l a r c l a n , e n te r s in to a r e l a t i o n s h i p ■ w ith th e to te m of t h a t clan* The to te m ic c r e a t u r e o r
p la n t w hich i s w orshipped i s th e o b je c t o f numerous
tab o o s* I n o th a r w o rd s, i t i s s a c r e d , and i t i s c o n s id e re d s a c re d b ecau se o f th e d iv in e im p erso n al f o r c e , o r th e
to te m ic p r i n c i p l e , i n th e totem * Thus th e to te m i s b o th
a symbol o f god ( o r more s p e c i f i c a l l y th e to te m ic p r i n c i p l e ; a s w e ll as a symbol o f th e c l a n . Durkheim co n clu d ed t h a t t h e r e l i g i o u s f o r c e was th e c o l l e c t i v e f o r c e o f th e c l a n symbolfczed by th e totwm*
Many o f th e id e a s which Durkheim proposed i n The Element a r y Forms of th e R e lig io u s Djf e have now l o s t t h e i r a p p e a l.
H is a s s e r t i o n t h a t A u s tr a lia n totem ism was th e moat e l e
m en tary form o f r e l i g i o n i s n o t a c c e p ta b le to d a y , b u t
th e n a g a in th e i n t e l l e c t u a l s e a rc h f o r o r i g i n s i s no
lo n g e r a s f e r v a n t a q iit waa then* H is dichotom y betw een
th e s a c re d anfi th e p ro fa n e has been ta k e n up by M iroea
3 4
K tiad e and th e d e a th o f God th e o lo g ia n s i n America i Minoea E lla d e and th e D ia l e c ti c o f th e s a c r e d * Thomas A l t i z e r , 1963) and has been m o d ified by Edmund Leech
i!9 5 4 , p * lS « 1 3 ), but as an a n th ro p o lo g ic a l t o o l i t has n o t , on th e w hole, proved v e ry u sefu l* S e v e ra l themes
i n The E lem entary Forma of th e R e lig io u s l i f e * how ever, have s tr o n g ly In flu e n c e d th e a n th ro p o lo g ic a l t r a d i t i o n * F i r s t , h i s d e l i n e a t i o n o f th e li n k s betw een r e l i g i o n and th e s o c ia l s t r u c t u r e has become th e fo u n d a tio n f o r th e
s o c ia l a n th ro p o lo g ic a l approach to r e lig io n * Second, h i s tre a tm e n t o f r e l i g o n as a sym bolic sta te m e n t o f th e s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e has s tr o n g ly in f lu e n c e d th e th in k in g o f L each, L e v i-B tra u s a , and o th e rs * T h ir d , h i s a n a ly s is o f to te m ic c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system s and h i s a tte m p t to d is c e r n th e r e l a t i o n s h i p s betw een p a tte r n s of thought and th e s o c ia l
s t r u c t u r e h e lp e d pave th e way f o r t h e emergence o f s t r u c t u r a l anthropology*
T here a r e , how ever, s e r io u s w eaknessesvto Durkheimfs
approach* He c r i t i c i z e d T y lo r fs d e f i n i t i o n of r e l i g i o n
because i t was n o t u n iv e rs a l* He c i t e d Buddhism as an
example o f a r e l i g i o n w hich does not In v o lv e th e b e l i e f
i n s p i r i t u a l b e in g s . But Durkheim1 s c r i t i c i s m o f T y lo r
c o u ld be throw n back a t h im s ilf * a t th e v e ry b a s is o f
Durkheim*s approach l i e s th e assum ption t h a t meaning and v a lu e a r e s o c i a l i n o rig in * But f o r some form s
o f Buddhism, such as Zen, meaning and v a lu e a re certain**
l y n o t s o c i a l i n o r i g i n . Thus Durkheim*a d e f i n i t i o n
la c k s u n i v e r s a l i t y as w e ll , Dike F reu d , he s e l l s r e l i g i o n sh o rt* Because F reud to o k r e l i g i o u s c u l t u r e , r a t h e r th a n f a i t h , f o r r e l i g i o n , th e more unfathom able a s p e c ts o f r e l i g i o n a r e u n c o n v in c in g ly d ism issed as i n t e l l e c t u a l d i s t o r t i o n s o r i n f a n t i l e s e n tim e n t. Because Durkheim took r e l i g i o n as som ething fu n d a m e n ta lly s o c i a l , he i s fo rc e d to ig n o re r e l i g i o n s o f p e rs o n a l l i b e r a t i o n such as Zen Buddhism, xoga, and V ed an ta. Both th e t h e o r i e s o f F reud and Durkheim a re based upon p r o je c tio n . F or F reud God i s f a t h e r ; f o r Durkheim God i s s o c ie t y , T h e re fc j^
r e l i g i o n i s an i l l u s i o n . But why must r e l i g i o n be con
s id e r e d an i l l u s i o n f o r th e u n d e rly in g r e a l i t y o f p erso n a l i t y developm ent or s o c ie ty ? And what happens when people r e a l i z e t h a t t h e i r r e l i g i o u s c o n v ic tio n s a re based upkn
an i l l u s i o n ? Both F reu d and Durkheim re c o g n iz e d th e s o c ia l f u n c ti o n o f r e l i g i o n , but as h e i r s o f n in e te e n th c e n tu ry r a t i o n a l i s m th e y en v isag e d th e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f a more r a t i o n a l f u tu r e * Howeverji Durkheim, more th a n F re u d , e x p re s s e d f e a r t h a t re a s o n co u ld t u r n out a p o orer sub
s t i t u t e th a n r e l i g i o n f o r m a in ta in in g s o c i a l s o l id a r ity *
3 6
The f i n a l c r i t i c i s m o f Durkheim i s t h a t a lth o u g h he
m a in ta in e d o n ly s o c io l o g ic a l e x p la n a tio n s c o u ld e x p la in r e l i g i o n , h i s th e o r y i s b a s i c a l l y a p s y c h o lo g ic a l one.
In d eed h i s approach d e riv e s e x te n s iv e ly from s o c i a l psychology and c r t h e o r y . R e lig io n I s a f e e l i n g . R e lig io n o r i g i n a t e s i n th e sen tim en t among men to p a r
t i c i p a t e i n th© c o l l e c t i v e l i f e . R e lig io n l i k e s o c ie t y i n s p i r e s f e e l i n g s o f dependence upon th e in d i v i d u a l .
Thus Durkheimfs s o c io lo g y i s c o n tin u a lly red u ced to psych
o lo g i c a l a ssu m p tio n s. Few a n th r o p o lo g is ts , how ever, have ta k e n up th e th o u g h t t h a t because Durkheim was unable
to e x p la in r e l i g i o n pferoly i n term s o f s o c i a l f a c t s th e n
i l l 1, - A
