Religion as an object of anthropological study

Résumé du document

This article is based on the articles of the Clifford Geertz Religion as a cultural system and the article of T. Asad: The construction of Religion as an Anthropological Category. In Religion as a cultural system T. Asad 's opposition to C.Geert's theory underlines the difficulty in finding precise foundations of an anthropological study of religion. In this essay we will try to study some of the main debates raised by the opposition between those two anthropological visions of religion. To begin, Religion can be described on three scales. On a universal scale the problem would be to know if Religion is a phenomenon in itself which can be considered as universal. Can we find the essence of a religion as a single phenomenon and if yes what could be that essence? Religion also has a role on the scale of a society. What are the links between religion and the other sides of a society (politics, science, power, state)? What is the meaning of Religion and how can we study this phenomenon in different societies?

Extraits

[...] Finally it gives answers to the problem of moral paradox in human lives. But with Asad comes the problem of the links between beliefs and rituals.According to Geertz the rituals generates religious beliefs, they are a precondition for religion. Asad opposes that rituals are not the source but the expression of a belief: Ritual in the sense of a sacred performance cannot be the place where religious faith is attained, but the manner in which it is played out''. So all rituals are different ways to express a belief that questions the universalits conceptions of religion. [...]

[...] The main idea would be that a religion is composed by a system of symbols, which are the best support for an anthropological study of religion. According to Geertz Religion is made of cultural patterns and those are models of reality and for reality. That is to say that religion would be a medium that can express social structures but can also modify the social reality. From there we can deduct that according to Geertz symbols and the social life belong to different spheres. [...]

[...] To begin Religion can be described on three scales. First on an universal scale the problem would be to know if Religion is a phenomenon itself which can be considered as universal. Can we find an essence of a religion as a single phenomenon and if yes what could be that essence? Then religion has a role on the scale of a society: what are the links between religion and the other sides of a society (politics, science, and power, state) .What's the meaning of Religion and how can we study this phenomenon in different societies? [...]

[...] That's one of the main ideas in Asad's theory: an anthropological study of religion must focus on power and authority more than on symbols. One of the main concepts which arise difficulties is the concept of belief. Geertz centers his study on the meaning of belief. He tries to demonstrate that human beings need to believe in order to create order from chaos. For example when they face difficulties to explain a phenomenon they can use their believes to obtain a tangible explanation. [...]