Religion as a subject of study
1. The concept of religious studies. Theological-theological (A. Men) and philosophical approaches to the study of religion (L. Feuerbach, K. Marx and F. Engels)
2. Features of the scientific method of cognition of religion. The formation of the sociology of religion (O. Comte, M. Weber, E. Durkheim)
3. Psychology of religion on the nature of the religious phenomenon (W. Jeme, 3. Freud, C. G. Jung)
Religion has existed for many centuries, apparently as long as humanity has existed. During this time, it developed many varieties of religion. Peculiar religions existed in the Ancient World among the Egyptians and Greeks, Babylonians and Jews. At present, the so-called world religions: Buddhism, Christianity and Islam have become widespread. In addition to them, national religions continue to exist (Confucianism, Judaism, Shintoism, etc.). In order to understand the question of what religion is, it is necessary to find in all its varieties something common, repetitive, essential.
Continuing for a long time, attempts to explain what religion is, what are its essential characteristics, resulted in the formation of a special branch of knowledge - religious studies. Religious studies studies the process of emergence, functioning and development of religion, its structure and various components, numerous manifestations of religion in the history of society and in modern era, the role in the life of an individual, specific societies and society as a whole, the relationship and interaction with other areas of culture.
Religious science is a complex branch of human knowledge. It was formed as a result of the efforts of representatives of theological, theological, philosophical and scientific thought. But the methodology of approach to religion in each of these branches of knowledge is not the same.
Historically, the first form of religious knowledge is theology(from the Greek teos - God and logos - doctrine) - the doctrine of God in the Catholic and Protestant traditions and theology as a science of glorifying God in the Orthodox tradition, since Orthodoxy rejects any possibility of knowing God and considers only his glorification possible. Theology or theology arises from the desire to explain the basic provisions of a particular religion, to translate the images and dogmatic formulas contained in sacred books, decisions of councils into the language of concepts, to make them accessible to the mass of believers. Theological theological approach to religion is an approach to religion, as it were, from the inside, from the standpoint of religion itself. Religious belief is the basis of this approach. Theologians believe that only a religious person can understand religion. For a non-religious person, she is simply not enough foot.
The theological and theological approach to religion is characterized by its interpretation as a special, supernatural phenomenon, the result of a supernatural connection between man and God. Thus, from the position of theology, religion receives a supranatural, suprahuman, suprasocial status. Characteristic for theological and theological religious studies is the concept of religion, presented in the book of a famous Orthodox theologian and clergyman Alexandra Men "History of Religion" M., 1994, published on his behalf based on publications and manuscripts by his closest friends and like-minded people.
A. Men defends the position of the supernatural nature of religion. Religion, from the point of view of A. Me, is a person's response to the manifestation of the Divine essence. “It is not by chance that the word religion comes from the Latin verb religion What does it mean to connect. She is the power that binds the worlds, the bridge between the created world and the Divine Spirit. (“History of Religion”. In search of the Way, Truth and Life. Based on the books of Archpriest Alexander Men. M., 1994. S. 16-17). This connection, in the opinion of the Orthodox theologian, organically follows from the natural striving of the human soul for akin to it, but superior to the Divine substance. “Is it not natural to admit that just as the body is connected with the objective world of nature, so the spirit gravitates towards a related and at the same time superior reality” (Ibid., p. 81).
This connection, according to A. Men, is carried out primarily through a special kind of spiritual knowledge - religious experience. Religious experience, according to him, can be defined in the most general terms as an experience associated with a feeling of real presence in our life, in the being of all people and the entire Universe of a certain Higher principle, which directs and makes meaningful both the existence of the Universe and our own. Existence (Ibid., p.12).
A. Men was not an orthodox Orthodox theologian. In his works, there is a rather strong desire to overcome the narrowness of a one-sided confessional interpretation of religious teaching, to try to give the concept of religion from a universal standpoint. Therefore, in his concept, religious experience is not only the experience of Christians, but the experience of all believers, it is a universal experience. “Meeting with God,” he emphasizes, “occurs in the life of every person. And the religious experience of man is a universal all-human experience. The only difference is what result this meeting leads to, whether the person is aware of it or passes by. (Ibid., p. 16). The ultimate goal of the theological and theological approach is the defense and justification of religious dogma, proof of the enduring significance of religion FOR each individual and humanity as a whole. "
The theological and theological approach to religion as an approach "from within" is opposed by the philosophical and scientific ways of explaining religion as approaches "from the outside". This approach does not necessarily mean a negative attitude towards religion. It can be implemented with the same goal as the theological-theological approach, but rely on a different methodology. The theological and theological approach is carried out on the basis of the acceptance of religious dogma as the original and unconditional truth, within the framework of "religious experience". Philosophical and scientific methodology requires going beyond this experience, subjecting religion to a critical study from the standpoint of reason, logical-theoretical and empirical-scientific criteria of truth. With this commonality of starting positions, the methodology of philosophy and science in the study of religion has its own significant features.
Philosophical methodology is characterized by universalism and substantialism. Philosophy seeks to explain all the phenomena and processes of reality from the standpoint of revealing its all. general principles and laws, definitions of the "essence" of things, processes and phenomena. It is typical for her critical approach to all phenomena of reality, including religion. Philosophy, in difference from theology, is not content with taking it for granted, but everything is in doubt. This does not mean that it necessarily seeks to destroy the collective beliefs, the moral foundations of people's lives. Philosophers question everything in order to test how solid these human institutions are, discard those that have found their untruth, and place those that have passed the test on a more solid foundation of knowledge.
Of course, here, in very general terms, the specifics of the philosophical approach to religion are indicated. In reality, philosophy is a multitude of teachings, schools, currents and directions. Therefore, various approaches to religion can be implemented in it. There is a direction religious philosophy, in which, by means of philosophical methodology, the task of achieving the same goals as in the theological and theological approach to religion is set. Along with religious philosophy in the XVII - XVIII centuries is born philosophy of religion. In the philosophy of religion, a positive trend also prevails regarding the assessment of the role of religion in the life of a person and society. But the interpretation of religion goes beyond this or that direction of religion, religious denominations. This means that the origin of religion and its influence on human life in the philosophy of religion is not explained directly from one form or another. divine revelation, but is derived on the basis of some abstract logical schemes. Within the philosophy of religion, there is deism(from lat. deus - god) - interpreting God as the highest Mind, with the existence of which the structure of the Universe is connected, as well as pantheism(God in everything) - dissolving God in nature and culture.
A significant influence on the development of religious studies was exerted by the materialistic trend in the philosophy of religion, a prominent representative of which was the German philosopher L. Feuerbach(1804 -1872). In their works "Essence of Christianity" and "Lectures on the Essence of Religion" he tried to uncover the natural, earthly roots of religion. Religion, according to Feuerbach, is a human product, a consequence and a form of alienation by man of his essence. L. Feuerbach associated the emergence of religion with the helplessness and ignorance of primitive man, his complete dependence on the elemental forces of nature. Primitive man deified everything on which he depended, which seemed to him alien and mysterious. In this way, according to L. Feuerbach, all natural religions arose. In the concept of "natural religions" L. Feuerbach included all the various beliefs of primitive people, as well as the so-called "pagan religions" (polytheism). deeper human basis, according to L. Feuerbach, have so-called "spiritual religions" based on the recognition of one God (monotheism). In spiritual religions, Feuerbach believed, a person deifies his essence as the essence of the human race in general.
L. Feuerbach sought to reveal the emotional, psychological and epistemological mechanisms of the emergence of religion. He attached decisive importance in the formation of religious images to the power of imagination, fantasy, which he called the "theoretical" cause of religion. Human consciousness, according to L. Feuerbach, in the process of cognition has the ability to "depart" from reality. At the same time, some features of reality are reduced, while others are inflated, exaggerated. Under the influence of the mechanisms of imagination, hypostasis occurs (from the Greek. hypostasis - essence, substance) - the transformation of individual properties of the parties, relations into independent beings, endowing them with an objective existence. L. Feuerbach believed that mental images are endowed with an independent existence and become the subject of faith. Religious faith, from these positions, is faith in the objective existence of fantasized properties, connections, beings. “Every god,” wrote L. Feuerbach in “Lectures on the Essence of Religion,” “is a creature created by the imagination, an image and, moreover, an image of a person, but an image that a person believes outside himself and imagines as an independent being” (Feuerbach L. Selected Philosophical works, Moscow, 1955. T.I, p. 701). In the spiritual religions, which include Christianity, according to L. Feuerbach, such most common properties of the human race as reason, immortality, power, and good have undergone hypostasis. Hence such characteristics of the Christian God as “omniscient”, “all-good”, etc.
In the works of L. Feuerbach, abstract philosophical approach to an explanation of the earthly basis, the human source of religious beliefs. L. Feuerbach considered man in general as a natural being outside of his social characteristics. The younger contemporaries and students of L. Feuerbach, K. Marx (1818-1883) and F. Engels (1820-1995), due to the peculiarities of their creative inclinations and practical activities, formulated basic principles of socio-philosophical analysis of religion. According to Marx, L. Feuerbach's reduction of religion to its earthly basis is of great cognitive significance. However, “the main thing remains to be done, namely, the fact that the earthly foundation separates itself from itself and transfers itself into the clouds as a kind of independent kingdom can only be explained by the self-disintegration and self-contradiction of this earthly foundation” (Marx K. Theses on Feuerbach / / Marx K., Engels F. Soch. T. 3. P. 29). Man, according to Marx and Engels, is a social being. The essence of man is the totality of all social relations. Therefore, a truly philosophical explanation of religion can only be given on the basis of an analysis of social relations.
All social relations K. Marx and F. Engels divided into two types - primary material, basic relations and secondary, ideological, superstructural relations. They considered religion primarily as a superstructural phenomenon. Religion does not have "its own not from this world essence", its own history, "special content". It is a spiritual education the result of social reflection, a specific form of social consciousness and a social institution. With such an attitude, the explanation of the nature and essence of religion meant for K. Marx and F. Engels the disclosure of the process in which social individuals, in the course of material activity and social relations, develop such definitions and characteristics that are reflected in the public consciousness and become it (public consciousness) definitions and characteristics.
One of distinctive features the concept of religion by K. Marx and F. Engels is that religion as a social phenomenon has a historical nature And this means that it is not a product of eternal, but transient social conditions. Religion, according to Marx and Engels, is generated by such social phenomena that are characterized by a significant limitation of human life and activity, their dependence on the elemental forces of nature and society. In other words, religion is the result and form of reflection by a person of a society that has not yet found itself, a society dominated by perverse forms of organizing social life.
Religion is formed as a response to the situation of lack of freedom of man and the need to overcome the forces that dominate him. This need, under certain socio-economic and political conditions, cannot be satisfied in a real way, through a material and practical change in the world. The way out for a person from this situation is such a type of spiritual activity, the result of which is the creation of a special world of ideal transformed forms, a world of fantasy creatures, properties, connections and relationships, with the help of which a person expects to satisfy his needs.
The recognition of the historical nature of religion also meant the recognition of its temporary, transitory. Religion as a manifestation of man's lack of freedom historically outlives itself to the extent that the freedom and independence of man develops. According to Marx and F. Engels, it is possible to create such social relations when a person moves from the "realm of necessity" to the "realm of freedom". K. Marx and F. Engels called this type of social relations communist. The establishment of communist relations, in their opinion, means the natural withering away of religion. Thus, the disclosure of the earthly basis, the social nature of religion, meant for K. Marx and F. Engels not a call for the liquidation and the forcible imposition of atheism, but the demand for the liquidation of those conditions that prevent a person from fully realizing himself, and the creation of such conditions in which a person would act as a free, amateur subject of knowledge, activity and communication.
There are many definitions of religion. There is no point in listing them. It is more logical to systematize the existing approaches to the question of defining religion. The author proposes to identify three main approaches: confessional, scientific and philosophical.
Confessional (theological) approach. Within the framework of this approach, religion is understood “from the inside”, an explanation is made on the basis of the relevant religious experience. What these explanations have in common is that ideas about religion are built as a connection between a person and God, with the Absolute, with some kind of Power, with the Numinous, with Transcendence, etc.
It is appropriate, given the religious specificity of the majority of Russians, to turn to the experience of Christian theologians. Consider how Christian scholars explain religion. Despite the diversity of Christian denominations (Catholicism, Protestantism, Orthodoxy, etc.), there is something in common: religion is a “value sui generis (of a special kind)”, appears as a result of the relationship between God and man.
In Christian theology, two approaches to the definition of religion were initially formed: supranaturalistic and historical. The supranaturalistic approach proceeded from the importance of using the concept of "supernatural" to define religion. The term "religion" was used to denote a belief based on the belief that supernatural forces exist and that relationships with them are possible. However, this approach came into conflict with the fact that the evolution of Christianity depends on the development of society. The connection of Christianity with various social relations was subjected to a detailed analysis by representatives of the historical school in theology.
In this regard, the famous Protestant theologian, historian and sociologist of religion E. Troelch (1865-1923) applied a historical approach to the analysis of religion (Christianity). He believed that the religious state of a person is determined by a priori experience and at the same time raises the question of how the idea of independence and non-conditionality correlates. religious faith with the fact of influence on the spiritual forces of a person of various social circumstances - state, economic, family and other relations. For E. Troeltsch, religion is both a subjective attitude towards God and an objective historical reality. The formation of a person's orientation towards absolute goals occurs in the context of achieving private and relative goals, but the familiarization of the individual and the collective with the world divine mind serves as the basis for the independence and unconditionality of the Christian faith.
Further, within the framework of the confessional (theological) approach, two main trends were formed in the understanding of religion and its relationship with society: separating (dichotomous) and connecting (transcendent-immanent).
Representatives of the dichotomous version proceed from the distinction between religion and society as "independent quantities", as qualitatively different spheres from each other, recognize the transcendence (Latin transcendens - transcending) of the essence and content of religion. This essence of religion, expressed in dogmatic teaching, in worship, etc., is non-social, "non-worldly" and "transcendent". The specificity of religion is in its "eternal state of truth", in the presence of "timeless principles". Only the phenomena of religion have a social side, visible structures - organizations, institutions, etc.
The most striking representative of the dichitomic interpretation of religion is the Protestant theologian and philosopher R. Otto (1869-1937). According to R. Otto, religion is the "experience of the saint", its subject is the numinous (Latin numen - divine will, power, power of the deity).
The transcendent-immanent version is associated with the influence of modernist currents in theology. In accordance with them, Christian principles are used in the "world", they are used by people, therefore, one should not strictly oppose the "divine" and the "worldly". These are not mutually exclusive beginnings.
One of the brightest representatives of the transcendent-immanent approach is the American sociologist and evangelical theologian P.L. Berger (b. 1929). Together with T. Lukman, he studies religion in the context of pre-theoretical "ordinary knowledge" with which people deal in Everyday life. Intersubjective human consciousness produces a "social construction of reality", as a result of which a "life world" of individuals is created.
Sociology of religion. Negative assessment of the role of religion in the development of society (O. Comte, G. Spencer, K. Marx, F. Engels)
Another important science that studies religion is sociology. The sociology of religion begins to take shape as a scientific discipline from about the middle of the last century. It owes its appearance to a large extent to those processes in European society that were initiated by the Age of Enlightenment and anti-feudal bourgeois revolutions. One of the most important sources of the sociology of religion was the socio-philosophical criticism of feudal social relations and the church as a social institution, in particular by the French encyclopedists of the 18th century (Helvetius, Holbach, Diderot). This critique contributed to the awakening of interest in questions about the social conditioning of religion and its role in society. Religion stands out from the totality of social institutions as a phenomenon of a special kind, in relation to which all other social realities are considered as secular, secular.
Enlightenment thought considered a person primarily as a “reasonable person”. Such a person is capable, relying on his own mind, on science, to arrange his life on a reasonable and fair basis. Before him opens the prospect of limitless progress, leading to the "realm of the mind."
An important feature of the social development of Western society was the increasing complexity and differentiation of social institutions. In this regard, the question arose about the place of religion in a number of such phenomena as the economy, family, education, politics, etc., about the relationship of religion with them and about the problem of the unity of society, following the path of increasing complexity and differentiation. The question of the relationship of religious ideology, i.e., theology, to science, in which the Enlighteners saw the driving force behind the development of society, acquired particular urgency. If the radical critics of religion saw in it only the shackles of the development of reason and scientific knowledge, only a socially negative factor, the influence of which must be put an end to in one way or another, then the social science that replaces this criticism turned out to be able to raise the question more objectively: what is actually happening in the behavior of people and in the life of society, when does a religious faith exist in this society? Such a formulation of the question was also facilitated by the data obtained by scientific research that began somewhat earlier than in sociology in other areas of science - history, philology, anthropology and ethnology. In this direction in the 19th century the development of social thought went, represented by such names as K. Marx, E. Durkheim, M. Weber, but the name of the French philosopher, scientist O. Comte (1798- 1857).
Feuerbach's younger contemporaries and students K. Marx (1818-1883) and F. Engels (1820-1995), due to the peculiarities of their creative inclinations and practical activities, formulated the basic principles of the socio-philosophical analysis of religion. According to Marx (whose views can be considered not only within the framework of the sociology of religion, but also the philosophy of religion), Feuerbach's reduction of religion to its earthly basis is of great cognitive importance. Man, according to Marx and Engels, is a social being. The essence of man is the totality of all social relations. Therefore, a truly philosophical explanation of religion can only be given on the basis of an analysis of social relations.
K. Marx and F. Engels divided social relations into two types - primary material (basic relations) and secondary, ideological, superstructural relations. They viewed religion as a superstructural phenomenon. Religion does not have "its own not from this world essence", its own history, "special content". It is a spiritual formation, the result of social reflection, a specific form of social consciousness and a social institution. With such an attitude, the explanation of the nature and essence of religion meant for K. Marx and F. Engels the disclosure of the process in which social individuals, in the course of material activity and social relations, develop such definitions and characteristics that are reflected in the public consciousness and become it (public consciousness) definitions and characteristics.
According to Marx and Engels, religion as a social phenomenon has a historical nature, which means the idea of it as a product of transient social conditions, and not some kind of eternal phenomenon. Religion is generated by such social phenomena, which are characterized by a significant limitation of human life and activity, their dependence on the elemental forces of nature and society. In other words, religion is the result and form of reflection by a person of a society that has not yet found itself, a society dominated by perverse forms of organizing social life.
It is pointless to talk about the reasons for the origin of religion outside the context of a conversation about its essence. It is impossible to argue about why this or that phenomenon exists if we do not understand what it is. And as we said in the last section, in the scientific community there is not only a lack of unity of views on religion, but also at least some kind of fundamental similarity. Theories contradict each other, dispute each other, often without strong arguments and evidence.
Theological concept when explaining religion, it proceeds from the recognition of its supernatural source: God, the Absolute, the Supreme Mind, etc. According to this concept, human knowledge is too small and limited to describe God's providence. famous psychologist Viktor Frankl, who is inclined towards a religious perception of the world, created a characteristic metaphor: when doctors test some kind of medicine on monkeys, the experimental monkey does not understand the meaning of their suffering. But this does not mean that there is no point in her suffering, it is simply not available to her. In the same way, a person may not understand the meaning of what is happening, but, unlike animals, he is given the ability to assume the possibility of meaning. Let's listen to Frankl's logic: " Can a monkey who is used to produce polio serum and therefore punctures all the time - can this monkey understand the meaning of his suffering. Everyone unanimously answered - of course not. With her limited intelligence, she will never be able to penetrate the human world, i.e. the only world in which the meaning of suffering can be understood. Then I went further: "What about man? You are sure that the world of man is the highest point in the evolution of the cosmos. Is it not possible to imagine that there is another dimension, a world higher than human; a world in which the question of the final meaning of human suffering will find answer?" This final meaning is undoubtedly beyond the limited intellectual faculties of man; therefore in logotherapy we speak of supersense. Man is required not to endure the meaninglessness of life at all, as some existential philosophers teach; on the contrary, to reconcile oneself with one's inability to understand its unconditional meaningfulness in rational terms. Logos are deeper than logic».
This simple and deep reasoning in no way proves the existence of God or the higher worlds, it only makes one think. Frankl, undoubtedly, suffered through his theory: he endured the horrors of German concentration camps, lost almost all his relatives, and miraculously survived. Therefore, the question of the meaning of human suffering, of the possibility of accepting life, even after experiencing all its cruel grimaces, was by no means merely theoretical for him. However, we repeat, such reasoning indicates a problem, but does not solve it.
The well-known Russian theologian V. V. Zenkovsky wrote that irrational “axioms” precede any rational activity. One of these axioms is axiom that all acts of the spirit are directed towards the absolute sphere". In his opinion, " beyond the sphere of manifestation of religious life“There is something Higher, which creates in all mankind, already at the lowest levels of culture, a craving for religious life. Long before Zenkovsky, the outstanding German philosopher Johann Gottlieb Fichte wrote that the reality of the Absolute can be presented to man negatively as an eternal striving for the unattainable Absolute. It is curious, by the way, that Fichte, who eventually came to the idea of the Absolute and the Divine as the fundamental foundations of being, was deprived of his chair in his youth for atheism. True, Fichte's subjectivist atheism differed markedly from what we today consider scientific atheism, but the fact is the fact. As they say, the ways of the Lord are inscrutable.
At the same time, the relationship between the human mind and the world of higher meanings is interpreted in theology in different ways. In some concepts they are opposed, in others (for example, in Thomas Aquinas) they are harmonized. Thomas Aquinas put forward the principle: the truths of science and the truths of faith cannot contradict each other; there is harmony between them. At the same time, the priority of divine wisdom is beyond doubt. Of the three levels of wisdom in Thomas (science - theology - Divine revelation), science is given the most modest role.
Thus, the emergence and development of religious forms reflects the eternal desire of man to merge with the Absolute, the Divine.
Psychological concept . Its supporters try to substantiate the origin of religion by the processes of the formation of the human psyche. Most often, the question of the reality of God is either not raised or receives a negative answer. Thus, the American psychologist and philosopher William James* saw faith as a projection of human feelings. Religion, according to James, is useful, because a person finds joy and consolation in it. This is precisely its value, and all religious superstructures (dogmas, church institutions, etc.) are secondary and do not possess any truth. The existence of God, James did not deny or affirm. Strictly speaking, the question of God beyond the boundaries of man was not relevant for him. Despite the fact that many examples from James's book "The Varieties of Religious Experience" are today adopted by theology, despite the fact that he brilliantly describes cases when people experienced a feeling presence otherwise, we must not forget about the original thesis of James, written by him on the first pages: “ There is no doubt that the religious life, absorbing the whole person, makes him eccentric and unlike everyone else. I'm not talking about the vulgar type of believer, outwardly who adheres to the religious rites of his people, whether they are Christian, Buddhist, or Mohammedan. His religion is created for him by others, handed down to him by tradition, limited to fixed forms, and held together by the rigidity of habit. The study of this second-hand religion would do us little good. We will refer only to those primary sources of experience that served as the prototype for all further inspired feelings and imitative actions. Such an experience can be found only in people for whom religion is not a simple habit of life, but rather an acutely feverish state of mind.».
The famous psychologist Sigmund Freud found the nature of faith in the structure of the human psyche. Man is forever in a struggle with himself: the rational and the unconscious in him cannot be reconciled. This struggle, which is based on completely “earthly” instincts, gives rise to numerous symbolic acts and images, including religion. The desire to derive religion from the psychological problems of an individual is also characteristic of Freud's followers, who did not accept the frank biologism of his theory. The most significant figure in this regard is the founder of "humanistic psychoanalysis" Erich Fromm. Fromm believed that religion is explained by "existential conflict", a split between the soul and the body.
The body of man is part of nature, while his mind rises above nature. On the one hand, a person cannot live without trying to solve the problem of the split between the soul and the body, on the other hand, he can never find its solution. On this basis, a person's need for religious faith is born. In this sense, writes Fromm, there is not a single person who does not have a need for religion».
So, by psychologists, the phenomenon of religion is determined by the internal conflicts of a person, and the development of religious forms fits into the general vector of the development of culture.
Social-materialistic concept. Proponents of the concept social materialism, especially Marxism, saw religion primarily as a social phenomenon. The classical definition of religion in this vein was given in Anti-Dühring by Friedrich Engels: Every religion is nothing but a fantastic reflection in the minds of people of those external forces that dominate them in their daily life - a reflection in which earthly forces take the form of unearthly ones.". In the early stages, the dominant external forces were the forces of nature; over time, social relations not conscious of man begin to play a significant role.
Thus, the supporters of this approach saw religion as a product of society, fantastic and harmful (from the point of view of state of the art society) a reflection of natural and social processes.
As you can see, it is not possible to talk about any generally accepted ideas about the essence and causes of the origin of religion. The same facts will be interpreted differently depending on the position of the scientist. Our task is to show possible points of view, and the problem of choice is the exclusive right of every person.
Garage V I
religious studies
Title: Buy the book "Religious Studies": feed_id: 5296 pattern_id: 2266 book_
religious studies
Tutorial
for students
institutions of higher education
and high school teachers
The manual introduces the basics of religious studies as an independent scientific discipline. It discusses the main approaches to the study of religion, its place in the life of a person, society, provides an overview of the main stages in the formation of religions, both those that have become the property of history and those that exist today. A special place is given to the role of religion in the modern world.
Introduction. RELIGION AND THE SCIENCE OF RELIGION
1. The main approaches to explaining religion are theological,
philosophical, scientific.
2. Why is religion called religion?
3. Religion as a subject of scientific research*.
______________ * The term "religious studies" came into use relatively recently and is found in two spellings: religious studies and religious studies. In our opinion, the first option is preferable, formed according to the traditional model from the Russian "religion", and not from the Latin "religio" - Auth.
The word "religion" is found very often in everyday speech, and in scientific texts, in journalism and fiction. It may seem that, using this word, everyone means the same thing and knows what it is. In fact, for the most part, behind this word there are only ideas that express the external manifestations of religion, with which it is usually associated. This is a set of views on the world, which are most often based on faith in God, this world and man himself, who created and gave him knowledge in "revelation", which must be taken on faith, without requiring proof (therefore, religion is often called simply faith); religious beliefs constitute the ideological, intellectual component of religion. This, then, is a set of actions that make up a cult, in which a religious person expresses his attitude to God and enters into contact with him in prayer, sacrifice, etc. This is also a set of norms, rules, behavior that a person must follow as requirements, given to him by God. And, finally, these are associations of religious people in certain organizations, such as a church or sect, a monastic order, special groups of professional clergymen. Signs that fix the manifestations of religious life lying on the surface form what is called the phenomenon of religion. Not content with identifying and describing the signs of religion, human thought has long sought to explain the phenomenon of religion, to understand its nature and meaning, to understand what constitutes its essence.
1. BASIC APPROACHES TO EXPLANATION
RELIGIONS - THEOLOGICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL, SCIENTIFIC
Within the framework of religion, such attempts lead to the emergence (in the most developed religions) of theology, or theology (from the Greek teos - god and logos doctrine, literally theology - the doctrine of God) In the works of theologians, religion tries to understand itself, this explanation of religion, as it were " from within", from the position of a person who accepts the "truths of faith" and proceeds from them: religion is a "meeting" of a person with God. Religious faith provides the key not only to explaining the world and man, but also to the answer to the question of why religion exists, how it arose: if there were no God, his "revelation", there would be no religion. This means that the existence of religion should be considered as confirmation, evidence of the existence of God. The theological approach to explaining the phenomenon of religion assumes that only a religious person can understand the essence of religion, since he has a direct experience of "meeting with God." In other words, an explanation of religion is possible only from the standpoint of religion itself, only on the basis of the acceptance of religious faith as a premise and unconditional truth.
An approach to explaining the phenomenon of religion "from the outside", which does not presuppose the acceptance of its truth in advance, arises initially when philosophy begins to develop. The philosophical approach, in contrast to the theological approach, consists in trying to answer the question of what religion has foundations in human experience, and to what extent religious beliefs meet the criteria of true knowledge, without assuming in advance the existence of a "higher principle", "sacred".
This is how a critical approach to religion arises; critical not in the sense that it is necessarily negative, denying religion, but not content with simple acceptance on faith, questioning all judgments without exception and requiring confirmation of the validity of their truth.
Only in the 19th century develops, along with the theological and philosophical, another approach to explaining religion - scientific; Religion becomes the subject of research, relies on empirical material, carefully collects, accumulates factual data about religion and analyzes them using methods inherent in scientific thinking. By the end of the XIX century. Religious studies are constituted as an independent field of scientific knowledge as a historical-empirical science with its own well-defined, empirically given subject - religion as an integral part of culture in its broadest sense.
The subject of the science of religion is not the object of religious faith, the "sacred", God or gods. It studies religion in the real context of culture, in its connection and interaction with other areas of human life and activity: how and what image of reality is formed in religious consciousness, how religion explains the world and what methods of action, norms of behavior it offers, what obligations it imposes on a person, what feelings it awakens and how it affects the emotional life of people. The answers to these and other questions should make it possible to develop a definition of religion, to understand and explain the phenomenon of religion.
One of the first difficulties on the way to such an explanation lies in the fact that in reality there is no "religion", but there are many "religions" that are somewhat similar, and in some ways differ from one another, and sometimes quite significantly . So, it is impossible to define religion simply as belief in God, just because some religions are characterized by monotheism (monotheism), while others are polytheistic (polytheism).
One approach to solving this issue is to recognize that, in fact, religion really exists only in a variety of religions. Let's say, for example, if you are asked to draw a vertebrate, then you can draw a cat, a cow, a whale, or a human, but you are unlikely to be able to draw "a vertebrate at all." So the concept of "religion" is an abstraction that highlights features that are common to religions that differ in many other respects. In order to form such a concept, it is necessary to study as far as possible a large number of religions - both those that existed in the past and of which only the memory has been preserved, as about dead languages, which no one speaks today, and those that exist and are professed today by people inhabiting the Earth. Having studied them with all their inherent features and then, comparing them with each other, one can single out what is included in the concept of religion.
However, there is another, directly opposite, approach, according to which all religions, no matter how different they may seem, actually exist as variations of one religion, religion, as if embodying this concept, representing a certain standard. If, from the standpoint of the first approach, all religions are equal in the sense that none can be considered as a model against which others should be compared, i.e., we can only talk about whether this or that particular phenomenon belongs to the field of religion, falls under its definition or not, then from the point of view of the supporters of the second approach, religions can and should be compared with each other in such a way that it becomes possible and even necessary to distinguish between a "true" religion and a "false" religion. This example shows that in religious studies, as in other sciences, there are different directions, schools that differ in approaches, methodology for studying religion and their views on it.
Among the problems considered and solved by religious studies, along with those mentioned above, are questions about the origin of religion, its classification, and the identification of its role in the social and private life of a person.
2. WHY IS RELIGION CALLED RELIGION?
Among the issues considered by religious studies and differing in their significance is also the question of why religion is called religion, that is, what is the origin of this term. Religion is derived from the Latin word religio. The ancient Romans denoted by this word everything that was connected with the veneration (cult) of the gods. It is in this sense that the word "religion" was used, for example, by Cicero in the 1st century BC. BC e. Religion also included ideas about the gods (mythology), and the corresponding actions associated with these ideas and regulating the life of the Romans. What the Romans called religion was called chiao by the Chinese, dharma by the Hindus, and din by the Arabs.
When Christianity arose, it adopted this word "religion" from the Romans and used it for its own purposes, putting into it a content different from the previous one. Through Christianity, this word subsequently entered all European languages. By religion, Christians at first understood only their own, Christian faith. Only Christianity was called religion, in contrast to all non-Christian beliefs, which were united in the concept of paganism. The largest Christian theologian, one of the church fathers, Bishop Augustine, who lived in the 4th century, called Christianity a religion, considering this word as a derivative of "re-bind, reunite": Christianity is a religion, the way of reunification and reconciliation of man with God, - a man who has fallen away from God when he embarked on the path of sin. This is indeed a specifically Christian idea that cannot be transferred, for example, to ancient religions.
Thus, early Christianity was alien to the idea of other religions, non-Christian religions, that Christianity is one of many religions. The Christian religion unites people who are called to service by obligation, distinguishing them from the world of which pagan cultures are a part. Christianity, calling itself a religion, thereby opposes itself to pagan culture.
The first expansion of the concept of "religion" in the history of Christianity and the extension of this term to paganism initially had a purely polemical function: Christianity as a "true religion" was opposed to "false religions" - Greek and Roman, which were seen as an unsuccessful, demonic imitation of the divine model of the Christian religion. It also made it possible to tear paganism away from its cultural context, and thus opened the way for the reconciliation of Christianity with ancient culture, for its assimilation by Christianity.
Great geographical discoveries, acquaintance with the New World led to a further expansion of the concept of religion. It was extended to the beliefs of American Indians and other "savages". In the XVIII century. there is an idea that there are various manifestations of "natural religion", which is the basis and common property of all religions. "Natural religion" is embodied in specific religions, differing from each other in form of expression, but fundamentally similar. The features of different religions are due to the features of those societies, those cultures in which they exist, like differences in morality, art, in general - in the way of life and thinking. So by the beginning of the 19th century. the term "religion" appears and comes into use in its modern meaning: religion as one of the areas of spiritual life along with morality, philosophy, science, art. Such is the history of the word "religion". Now consider the development of ideas about the phenomenon that it denotes, as well as the main approaches that have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of religion, and the results obtained, i.e., those answers to the question of what religion is that we have today.
3. RELIGION AS A SUBJECT OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
Religion becomes the subject of scientific study, as already mentioned, in the 19th century, when, based on theological concepts and on philosophical analysis"essences" of religion - but also demarcating from these approaches, historical-empirically oriented studies are being created. From reflections on the "nature" or "mystery" of religion, which were ultimately based on the subjective experience of a particular thinker, historians and ethnographers (they - in the first place) managed to move on to the study of religion as an objective given, as a certain way of human self-expression. in a number of other ways and forms of human behavior and thinking. To do this, it was necessary to overcome an important barrier - the idea of \u200b\u200bthe "holiness" of religion, that is, that it lies beyond the limits of what is comprehensible to humans and, therefore, is inaccessible for study by methods developed and applied by science in the study of certain areas of natural and social reality. Thanks to the great efforts of scientists of various specialties, religion becomes the subject of scientific study, is included in the overall picture of the world, among the phenomena comprehended by human thought.
Scientific religious studies have confirmed the right to exist by the significance and value of their results: the knowledge about religion obtained with the help of scientific methods gives a lot for understanding it as a phenomenon that really exists in human life, and more broadly - the problems of culture as a whole.
The study of religion, which began in the last century, was in line with the general interest in culture, expanding the knowledge of Europeans about other cultures, human history in general. Thus, the prerequisite for the development of the science of religion was the conviction that religion can and should be studied as a certain human reality accessible to empirical research and theoretical analysis, i.e., the traditional idea of religion as a sphere of human spiritual activity, fundamentally inaccessible to rational explanation, "irrational", "superreasonable". The development of scientific religious studies has confirmed that, like the phenomena of nature and history in general, like morality or art, religion lends itself to scientific explanation. This explanation is intended to show what religion is, not to answer the question of how it should be treated. Scientific knowledge about religion is objective and differs in this from evaluative, ideological, aimed at drawing either a positive or negative image of religion. The science of religion does not assume the function of its defense, apologetics or, conversely, criticism, denial. The questions "how do you feel about religion" and "what do you know about religion" of course overlap, and yet they are different questions. Scientific knowledge about religion is in itself neither religious nor anti-religious. Among the scientists who worked successfully in the field of religious studies, there were both believers and non-believers. Scientific knowledge is acceptable for people of different confessions and even for researchers who, in principle, have different attitudes towards religion. The task of a scientist or a school teacher does not coincide with the tasks set by a religious preacher or an atheistic critic of religion.
Another thing is that the development of religious studies is associated not only with the discovery of new facts, but also with a change in the very ideas about religion. Of course, a scientist who studies religion is influenced not only by his own thoughts and experience, and not only by the ideas already established in science, but also by the ideas about the religion of that society, that era in which he lives. And the development of religious studies is one of the factors, as a result of which ideas about religion itself change in society. One of the consequences is that religion is deprived of the halo of "eternal truth", mystery. Therefore, especially at first, the development of religious studies met with resistance from those who saw in it a danger to religion. But along with this, attempts have also been made and are being made to use the data of religious studies in the interests of religion.
On the science of religion, as well as on any other social science, ideology exerts influence mainly through the development of the methodology of religious studies. This is the influence of sometimes opposite directions, theological and philosophical, religious and anti-religious views. But ultimately, the results of research in this area are judged and recognized on the basis of their compliance with scientific criteria, not ideological ones.
Religion is a complex and diverse phenomenon. Therefore, religious studies characterize not only a variety of approaches, methods, points of view, but also multidisciplinarity. The development of religious studies in the XIX century. went through the development of a whole set of disciplines, each of which considers religion in one of its aspects.
ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT
SCIENCES OF RELIGION
1. Comparative historical studies.
2. The contribution of anthropology and ethnology.
3. Sociological approach.
4. Psychological analysis.
1. COMPARATIVE HISTORICAL STUDIES
One of the directions in the development of religious studies was due to the fact that the discovery of new continents and peoples, not only living now, but also existing in the past, revealed a variety of forms and types of religion, including many that were practically unknown before. Over time, material was accumulated that significantly enriched knowledge about the religions of the East - Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism. Quite objective and detailed descriptions of the so-called primitive religions appeared, and along with all this, attempts to systematize the accumulated material, develop a typology of religions, attempts to find such an elementary form of religion, from which other forms subsequently developed, to present, if possible, a complete overview of religious phenomena and general history. religion.
Ancient texts were discovered, first Egyptian and Indian. So, in 1830, J. F. Champollion published a work in which he used the ancient Egyptian texts deciphered by him to describe the main directions of the Egyptian religion. Sanskrit specialists have discovered similarities between Indian myths, on the one hand, and Greek, Roman, and Biblical myths, on the other. This is how comparative religion began to develop and the idea was established that religion is a historical phenomenon and cannot be studied separately from history.
History of mythology. At first, the main attention was paid to the comparative study of mythology, so that the history of religion coincided to a large extent with the history of mythology. In mythology, they discovered a special, historically early way of expressing human experience and explaining reality, when natural phenomena and historical events were understood as facts of divine intervention. It was found that the gods of developed mythologies arose from folk beliefs. Folklore researchers, including the famous brothers Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, in the still surviving folk traditions, fairy tales, sagas revealed the remains of ancient myths, ideas about pagan gods. It turned out, therefore, that certain elements of the ancient religion have survived to our time in what may be called popular religion.
Continuing research in the field of mythology and comparative linguistics, F. M. Müller (1823-1900) played a decisive role in the development of religious studies as an independent scientific discipline. He is considered the founder of scientific religious studies. Müller set the task of understanding what religion is, what basis it has in the human soul, what laws it follows in its historical development. To solve this problem, he proposed a comparative method and argued that "he who knows one religion does not know any." In order to understand and appreciate the significance of a particular religion, it is necessary to identify its most ancient form, to compare it with other types of religion. Christianity is no exception in this regard, it is one of many religions, and therefore it can be compared with other religions of the world. To all forms of religion there must be an objective, unbiased attitude on the part of the science of religion.
History of religions. Each specific religion should be considered historically, in the context of world history, while the definition of the essence of religion should be philosophical, isolating the elements inherent in all religious forms.
This was the beginning of an objective study of religion, religious studies were established as an autonomous science, and within its framework, by the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries. developed primarily the history of religion.
The study of religion as a historical phenomenon proceeded in several directions. I. Ya. Bakhofen (1815-1887) tried to describe the development of mankind (from promiscuity to matriarchy and from it to patriarchy) as the history of the forms of its self-expression in religious symbols; he discovered the ancient culture of matriarchy and described its religious aspect. At the same time, Bachofen asserted the importance of all historically existing forms of manifestation of religion.
Christianity itself was also subjected to scientific research: the Bible, the life of Christ, the history of the church and Christian dogma. In Germany, much has been done in this area by F.Kh. Baur (1792 - 1860), in France - E. Renan (1823 - 1892), who tried to comprehend the gospel legends, excluding everything supernatural from them, and from the position of historical consideration to critically evaluate the traditional religious interpretation of Christianity. Being a Christian, sharing and accepting Christian doctrines, Renan believed that the study of religion requires the freedom of the scientist in search of truth and that the scientist should be guided solely by the desire to establish it.
Studying the history of religion in various civilizations, scientists come to the important conclusion that the roots of religious ideas and customs should be sought in the society in which they exist, that it is important to determine the functions of rituals, customs, and ideas in a given social structure. Historical research thus led to an understanding of religion as an element of the social environment, to the need to supplement historical methods of studying religion with sociological ones.
These studies led to the understanding that the religious history of mankind can be compared with the geological history of the earth's crust: in the process of it, there is no complete destruction of what was before, but others are superimposed on one, more ancient layers. Therefore, it is possible and very important in historical research to identify similarities between religious phenomena that existed at different times and in different territories, determining borrowings, influences of pre-existing religions on later ones. For example, intensive studies of Mesopotamian religion and civilization that unfolded at the end of the last century showed that a number of biblical myths and rituals originated in ancient Babylon, and then spread to the ancient world and ancient Israel. These studies convincingly proved that the Old Testament cannot be considered a unique, one-of-a-kind literary monument, that much of it is borrowed from more ancient Babylonian texts, for example, the history of the creation of the world, the Fall, the myth of the flood, the institution of the Sabbath, etc. It turned out that the emergence of the religion of monotheism in ancient Israel has a prehistory. These discoveries made problematic the traditional doctrine of the Old Testament as the "revealed word of God." Many religious scholars of the historical-critical school were persecuted by church authorities, including the Catholic E. Renan and the Protestant W. Robertson Smith.
History of Christianity. Along with the Old Testament, the New Testament was also critically analyzed from literary and historical sources. The history of early Christianity was considered in the historical context of the culture of the Hellenistic world, in which the first Christian communities arose and existed, Christian literature was created, experiencing the influence of the writings of "pagan" writers, borrowing something from them. Just like the study of the Old Testament, the analysis of New Testament texts by the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries. very sharply raised the question: who created the "sacred texts" - God or man? Controversy on this issue is noted in the works of any historian of religion of this and subsequent periods. But in any case, since then, theologians have taken many, including quite successful, maneuvers to remove this contradiction, preserving the doctrine of the inspiration of Holy Scripture. Thanks to historical research, interest arose and a number of works appeared (of which the books of D. Strauss, E. Renan, A. Schweitzer became especially famous) about the historical Christ, about his earthly life.
Thus, in the second half of the XIX century. the history of religion was formed as one of the disciplines of religion, its problems, research methods were defined, results were obtained that served as the basis for its subsequent study as a historical phenomenon. These studies made a significant contribution to the solution of the question of what religion is, how it can be defined.
2. THE CONTRIBUTION OF ANTHROPOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY
Works in the field of anthropology and ethnology, whose interest in religion in the 19th century, were closely adjacent to the historical studies of religion. focused mainly on the problem of its origin. It was believed that the answer to the question of the origin of religion provides the key to understanding its essence. In studies on the history of primitive society, the question was raised not only of the origin of religion, but of the family, the state, law, private property, and art. These works were significantly influenced by the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin ("The Origin of Species", 1859), an evolutionary approach to the study of various aspects of society, including religion, as well as the statement by O. Comte (1798-1857) that religion is the first the stage of human spiritual development, which is replaced by metaphysics, which is then replaced by science.
animistic theory. The starting point in this area was the work of E. B. Tylor (1832-1917). He traced the evolution of civilization from primitive man (the highest level of development of which he saw in the living, lagging behind in their development of the natives of Australia, etc.) to man, as he is in European culture. For religious studies, the theory of animism developed by E. Tylor (from Latin anima - soul) is especially important: belief in the existence of the soul is the initial elementary form of religion, which then developed into more complex religious ideas and actions. "Faith in spiritual beings" is what religion is in its simplest form, and at the same time it is "the foundation of all religion, from the religion of savages to the religion of civilized man." Animism includes the belief in the souls of individual beings that continue to live after death and the destruction of the body, and the belief in spirits that make up a hierarchy, up to the highest spirits of the rank of gods. Animism, belief in the animation of all things in practice develops into a cult of ancestors, who are feared (hence the protective rituals) and revered. This is how magical tricks and mythological representations begin to develop, in which ancestors are endowed with special properties, can turn into animals or other natural objects. Animals, plants, natural phenomena and celestial bodies endowed with souls are perceived as individuals with superhuman properties and abilities, the personification of nature and its veneration arise. A special case of belief in spirits is animalism (from Latin animal - animal) - the cult of animals, and primarily those that are hunted.
Tylor is not inclined to identify belief in the action of supernatural forces with the real state of things, he sees in this belief the creation of the human mind, and not supernatural intervention or insight. Religious phenomena for him are products of the natural development of man, and not something given from above. Otherwise, the science of religion would not be needed and possible. Tylor's evolutionary approach acts as a basis for denying everything supernatural and makes it possible to scientifically study religion. The consciousness of primitive man, who personified things and events, Tylor considered "childish", the beginning of all subsequent development of mankind, and not the result of human "fall", loss of original perfection. Tylor shared the views of scientists of his time that religion is based on error, delusion. The basis on which ideas about the soul and spirits arise, according to Tylor, are visions and hallucinations.
Magic and Religion. J. J. Fraser (1854-1941) sought to draw the history of the evolution of religious consciousness, collecting and subjecting to comparative analysis material relating to all historical eras. He was guided by the idea of evolution and the spiritual unity of mankind, believing that prejudices are always the opposite of a reasonable view of things. In his main book, The Golden Bough, he sets out his idea of the evolution of primitive religion in primitive society. Frazer came to the conclusion that magic and religion are opposed to each other and that magic historically precedes religion. Magic was, in Frazer's mind, a "primitive science" - what Tylor saw as animism in the primitive mind: the result of the misuse of the mind. Although both magic and animism were human attempts to find rational means to explain the world and act in it. Magic is not a religion, it is an elementary way of thinking. Religion arises when magic becomes obsolete. In religion, a person seeks to know himself, recognizing his dependence on the gods he worships, recognizing the existence of a superhuman consciousness and personified forces.
The theory of preanimism. Continuation of research in this direction led to the establishment of a form of religion, which is associated with belief in a certain "power". Studies that were carried out in the 70-80s of the last century in Melanesia found that the main concept in the religion of the Melanesians is the concept of "mana". This is some kind of exceptional, unusual, mysterious force acting everywhere, it can manifest itself in an impersonal form and have a magical effect, but more often it comes from higher spiritual entities, concentrating in certain natural phenomena, objects, personalities. It can decrease and completely disappear in some objects, and appear in others. The idea of "mana" reflects everything incomprehensible, mysterious, sacred in nature and in space. The Melanesian religion consisted in acquiring this power, mastering it for one's own purposes, using it for one's own good. Similar concepts have been found in other religions. The concept of "mana", in contrast to the concepts of "soul" or "higher being", according to R. Maretgu (1866-1943), means the recognition of the existence of some impersonal supernatural force that a person feels, but cannot express with the help of reason. Marett proposed his theory of pre-animism, or "dynamism", according to which belief in souls or spirits is preceded by an even older form of religion that is rooted in human emotions and expresses the experience of perceiving the "supernatural". The supernatural is the most important concept in Marett's theory. He switches attention in the study of the origin of religion from a historical to a psychological approach - a description of religious feelings and emotions, among which he singles out the "feeling of fear" as permeated with reverence and the most characteristic of religious feelings. A person first emotionally perceives and experiences the supernatural, and then intellectually expresses it in a conscious form. Magic and religion in "mana" have a common basis. At the level of psychological reality, this is the supernatural, experienced as "terrible", as a force that causes fear. Another direction in the development of religious studies based on anthropological and ethnological data is the study of ethical norms and moral ideas in various religions. Religious development is presented as a path leading from magic to elementary forms of religion, such as animism, dynamism, or totemism, and further to belief in a personal spiritual higher being, the creator of the world, to the emergence of an ethical religion in which God becomes not a formidable ruler. , but a "father", sanctioning morality, a source of goodness, a healer of souls, a "savior" of a world steeped in sin. The highest manifestation of faith in developed religions is not a magical rite, not a sacrifice, not blind obedience, but love for God.
3. SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACH
Since the middle of the last century, another scientific discipline, the sociology of religion, has been developing in religious studies and then gaining great development. It owes its appearance to a large extent to the processes in European society that it initiated in the 17th-18th centuries. the era of Enlightenment and anti-feudal, bourgeois revolutions. Interest is awakening in the question of the social conditioning of religion and its role in society.
religious stage of history. One of the first serious attempts to resolve these issues belonged to O. Comte, who introduced the very concept of "sociology" into use. He proposed to apply to the study of social life the inductive methods successfully used by the natural sciences. With the help of sociology, he was looking for ways to overcome the crisis in European society caused by the upheavals of the French Revolution, means that would ensure its stability and normal development. He faced the question of what underlies the social order, and in this regard, the question of the role of religion. The answer was given in the "law of three stages of history" put forward by O. Comte. The first stage is the religious, "theological state", when the human mind is dominated by fictions, inventions, and subjective arbitrariness that have no evidence. The second is the philosophical, "metaphysical state", when abstractions dominate, purely speculative speculative constructions are taken for reality itself. The third is positive, when an accurate assessment of the existing state of affairs is achieved with the help of science. Each of these three "states of mind" forms the basis of all social organization. "Theological state", i.e. belief in a god or gods determines military-authoritarian regimes and thus ensures the "harmonization" of conflicting interests, prevents the collapse of the social system, and maintains order in society. The last historical form of the theological order of things was, according to Comte, the mediaeval "Catholic and feudal regime" corresponding to Christian monotheism. Since Comte recognized the inevitable conflict between religion and positive consciousness, i.e. science, and predicted the victory of science over religion in the near future, since the liberating and enlightening influence of science leads, according to Comte, to the decline and inevitable death of religion, there is a threat breakdown of social ties. Until now, religious beliefs have been the binding force, the basis of social order. Religion performed an integrative function in society. Now that religion is in decline, this function is shifting to a positive synthesis of scientific knowledge, the core of which is sociology, and it is this that allows the ideas of order and progress to be tied together.
Subsequently, Comte was convinced of the fragility of hopes for the implementation of social reorganization with the help of enlightenment of minds and came to the conclusion that a "second theological synthesis" was needed as a spiritual support for social ties. He develops a "positive religion" - the cult of humanity as a single "Great Being", a huge social organism, all living, living and future generations of people.
Religion as a social phenomenon. K. Marx (1818-1883) also considered religion in its relationship with society, but in his understanding it was not the interaction of two independently existing quantities. Marx approached, in fact for the first time, religion as a social phenomenon, by its very nature included in the system of social ties and relations. Religion is rooted in social structures, in which the explanation of religion must be sought. Ideas about the supernatural, the sacred are generated by this foundation: religion lives off the Earth, not Heaven. Understanding religion as a social phenomenon also means understanding that it performs quite real functions in the life of society and meets quite specific needs. Religion as a social phenomenon is objective factor, externally and forcibly influencing people like any other public institution. Marx thus laid the foundation for the later developed functional method of studying religion. A distinctive feature of Marx's concept is the belief in the historical nature of religion as a product of not eternal, but transient social conditions, those conditions that are based on the system of appropriation of other people's labor, social inequality, the essence of which is that the freedom of some presupposes and means the enslavement of others; hence the social inequality of society, social antagonisms, class struggle. Religion, according to Marx, is more determined by these social relations than a factor that determines them. Religion is a superstructure over the economic basis that generates it, a derivative of it. Its social function lies in the fact that it interprets existing relations in a certain way, and does not produce them. Religion is ideology, its earliest, historically first form. Its social function is an ideological function: it either justifies and thereby legitimizes the existing order, or condemns it, denies them the right to exist. It can feed social conformity by serving as a brake on social development, or it can stimulate social protest by playing a revolutionary role. Throughout the almost two thousand years of the history of Christianity, from the time when the union of the "altar and the throne" was concluded, when Christianity was recognized as the state religion of the Roman Empire in the 4th century, its social principles they justified the existing social order, the exploitation of man by man, as an order established by God; reconciling with him, it promised compensation in the other world and explained that "the kingdom of God is not of this world." Religion was in this sense the "opium of the people." Religion may serve to integrate society, but it is not the only possible integrating force, and it can also act as a social disintegrator when religious conflicts arise. Religion, according to Marx, is the product of such social conditions that are characterized by a significant limitation of human life and activity. These are conditions under which a significant part of society are oppressed and despicable beings, forced to work all their lives for others; "others" own both their destinies and their thoughts, imposing on them their values, their understanding of the social order and life. These are the conditions for a deep split in society, when the interests of one part of it can only be ensured at the expense of another. Under these conditions, only irrational factors - beliefs and values that cannot be verified and are not subject to verification, which are, as it were, set from the outside as sacred (by religion in traditional forms or its ideological secular equivalents) - play a decisive role in maintaining social order, cultural integration. In such a society, it cannot be achieved otherwise - on some other, clear, reasonable contractual basis. In such a society, the law-abidingness of people, their unreasoning devotion to the system, cannot otherwise be ensured. In short, religion appears as a kind of ideology, that is, "alienated consciousness", as a product of a social process that develops in alienated forms. Religious alienation is only one of the manifestations of the main, economic alienation. Overcoming it means eliminating those conditions that are necessary for the existence of religion. It historically outlives itself to the extent that the freedom and independence of man develop. The starting point of the Marxist critique of religion is thus not atheism, but "the emancipation of man." In Marxism, the main thesis of irreligious criticism, according to which it is not religion that creates man, but man - religion, is translated into the language of sociological concepts. Religion is opposed by the idea of human self-fulfillment; criticism of religion ends with a categorical imperative requiring the elimination of those conditions that prevent a person from fully realizing himself.
The thesis about the compensatory role of religion played a central role in the teachings of Marx, as well as before him in L. Feuerbach, and later in Z. Freud. Religion is the "heart of a heartless world": the suffering and hardships of a person in "this world" are not in vain, for them he will be rewarded in the future life, he must treat them as a test and accept them with humility. This critical position in relation to religion continues the traditions of the Enlightenment, behind which is the experience of the 17th-18th centuries, when the sharpness of contradictions on religious grounds reached its limit and resulted in religious wars that devastated Europe. In order to achieve at least relative peace and tranquility in society, it was necessary to delimit the "spheres of influence" of the secular and spiritual authorities, the state and the church. At that time it was difficult to talk about the positive role of religion in society, especially about the integrating function of religion.
In the second half of the XIX century. the position is changing. The industrial revolution and the establishment of new social relations were associated with the allocation of fairly autonomous spheres of the life of society - the economy, politics, religion, morality, etc. The problem of social organization and social ties arose sharply. Under these conditions, scientists, who themselves are far from religious faith, begin to talk about the positive role of religion. In the foreground in the sociology of religion - a new direction, integration. The most indicative in this regard is the concept of E. Durkheim (1858-1917), who, unlike Marx, was specifically engaged in the study of religion and who is rightfully considered the founder of the sociology of religion as a scientific discipline. He considered religion as the basis of the unity of society.
Religion as a factor of social integration. Durkheim developed his theory of religion based on the study of totemism in Australia ("Elementary Forms of Religious Life", 1912). He connects religion not with social inequality or power, but with society as a whole: religion is a response to certain conditions of existence, it meets important social needs. The source of religion is society itself, and therefore it exists regardless of the existence or non-existence of God and the other world. Durkheim focuses on the study of primitive religion in order to identify the elementary form of religion (which is the most important and constant in religion, inherent in it in all its subsequent modifications), to determine the main function of religion in society.
Durkheim believed that it was totemism, and not animism, that represented such an "elementary form" of religion. Totem - an animal or plant that is considered by a group that forms a social whole (among Australian Aborigines, a clan), as its common ancestor and patron, as something that distinguishes this group from all others, as its symbol, sacred. Sacred objects are different from ordinary, profane, secular or "profane" as Durkheim calls them. Ordinary animals can be hunted, their meat can be eaten, but this cannot be done with sacred ones. Sacred animals serve for other purposes, they become the object of a special - ritual - activity, reverence, reverence. They are sacred as a symbol of the group, as its main value. The life of the totem embodies the life of society itself, whose members consider themselves descended from the totem. The veneration of the totem, the sacred - is the veneration as a shrine of the main social value, this society itself. Social life, according to Durkheim, is by its very nature collective. The experience of members of a social group uniting their connection with " higher power", represented by a totem, ritual activity, joint rites, including in such life situations as birth, marriage, death, strengthen the sense of group solidarity. Durkheim sees in religion a special social action that differs from all others in that it is aimed at the sacred object. This is the most important thing in religion - the distinction between sacred things and profane, ordinary. Ideas about the sacred are clothed in mythological forms and poured into rituals (sacrifices, purification rites, etc.), the role of which is that they open access to sacred objects and then provide a return to the profane world.Religious consciousness - the consciousness that distinguishes two worlds - sacred and profane, which do not mix with each other.
Totemic beliefs and rituals unite clan members into a single social whole. This is how Durkheim answers the question of what gives rise to religion, what makes people present this or that ordinary thing as sacred. Reverence towards the totem, veneration of it is the veneration of "one's" society, the strength of which is the guarantee of the continuation of the life of the family, this is the recognition of its unconditional power over each and all together. A totem is a sign by which a person marks his belonging to a certain social unity. The source of religious life is thus the very social mode of human existence. With all the changes in the course of the history of religious beliefs, rituals, and the organization of religious life, this main integrating function of religion in society remains. Durkheim defines religion as "a holistic system of beliefs and rituals related to sacred, i.e. separated (from ordinary. - V.G.), forbidden things, beliefs and rituals, which unite into one moral community, called the church, all, who follow them." In fact, this is a definition of religion that excludes the idea of the supernatural. In religion, society deifies itself; its meaning is to cultivate social feeling, to ensure the influence of the collective on the individual. Durkheim believed that evaluating religious beliefs in terms of truth and error is meaningless, the important thing is that it copes with its function. This does not exclude the possibility that in the history of society, some religions are replaced by others, the old gods die sooner or later, new ones are born. Moreover, Durkheim noted the weakening of the influence of religion in modern society and associated this with the fact that society, which has always been an object of religious worship, becomes the subject of scientific research. That social meaning, which was the soul of religion and was expressed in myths and symbols, is now affirmed in science, its explanation of the world, no longer hiding behind myths and symbols. Religious feeling receives a rational expression in morality. Secularization narrows the scope of traditional religion, various spheres public life become more and more secular. Sociology itself becomes a new creed, affirming the "scientific spirit" as opposed to clericalism, freeing society from ecclesiastical leadership, asserting humanism and social solidarity. This prediction about the future of religion in the traditional sense, when the "holy" church embodied in its gods - the prediction that the old religions will be replaced by a "religion of humanity", in which man will become a shrine - is due to the main idea of Durkheim's sociology: religion realizes the inherent ability of people to deify ordinary things, which are given a sacred character, thanks to which they become able to perform an integrating function, rallying society into a single whole.
Along with this main function, religion is able, Durkheim believed, to perform a "motor function", since it formulates the ideals that people aspire to and that stimulate social development.
Durkheim considers it necessary to study religions not in general, but in a specific social system. On the different stages history and in different types society, the role of religion is not the same. Archaic societies are characterized by a "mechanical" type of solidarity, which means the complete absorption of individual consciousness by the collective. In the course of history, the increasing division of labor leads to the fact that the "collective consciousness" loses its former strength, operates in a more limited area: "mechanical" solidarity is replaced by "organic" when the differences of individuals and their interdependence are taken into account. The predominant role of religion in society is associated with "mechanical solidarity", the collective consciousness here is identical to the religious one. That is why, with the development of society, religion plays an increasingly limited role and covers an ever narrower sphere of social life, losing its former power over minds and souls. It is quite obvious that at certain stages of history "without gods" people could not live. For Durkheim, this is not an apology for religion, but simply a recognition of the real state of affairs, a characteristic of its social usefulness and significance.
In Durkheim's theory there is a desacralization of religion, its reduction to social reality. But at the same time, society itself becomes an object of reverence, acquires the mystical features of some kind of "higher" reality, in this sense it becomes sacralized. The definition of religion that Durkheim gave turned out to be too broad and therefore causing the following difficulty in its application: in essence, Durkheim identifies religion with ideology, the specificity of religion is captured by this definition and the term "religion" acquires metaphorical meaning. From these positions, communism, for example, falls under the definition of religion as its functional equivalent, that is, it must be considered as a religion.
Another difficulty is Durkheim's main thesis about religion as a source of solidarity, cohesion of people in society. The fact is that the unification within one religious organization often occurs due to its opposition to others. The fact that the followers of a particular religion are united does not exclude, but often actually causes conflict with adherents of other religions or with a society in which a religious community exists, if this community does not accept the existing social order. In other words, religion can act as a source of tension and conflict in society, as a factor in its disintegration, split.
Religion as a factor social change. Along with Durkheim, the German scientist Max Weber (1864-1920) is considered to be the founder of sociology. He explored the place and significance of religion in a changing society, the influence of religion on the development of the economy, political systems, families. Another important aspect of M. Weber's research is the analysis of the forms of institutionalization of religion ("church - sect"). If Durkheim was interested in religion in its simplest forms, i. in a society at a relatively low stage of its development, Weber studied mainly world religions and their influence on the course of history. In the work that made him famous: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1904-1905), he explores the impact of Christianity on the history of the West, its economic development and social life. Protestantism gave a powerful impetus to the development of modern Western civilization, while Eastern religions served as a barrier that prevented industrial development in countries such as China and India.
Weber argued that the decisive role in the emergence of the "spirit of capitalism" was played by the theological teaching of one of the reformers of Christianity, J. Calvin, about predestination. According to this teaching, before birth, everyone is determined by his fate - salvation or eternal torment. No human efforts and the help of the church can change anything. Everything was decided by God when he created the world. No one knows what he is chosen for. As Weber showed, two points are important in this teaching from the point of view of sociological analysis - worldly asceticism and the search for an opportunity to overcome tormenting doubts, to find signs indicating the chosenness for salvation. The Calvinistic doctrine of predestination closed the path leading to heaven with the help of "good deeds" or the monastery - "out-of-the-world asceticism." The only field in which a person could achieve success, which would give hope, evidence of being chosen, remained professional activity, and the rest - art, contemplation - everything was idolatry. Everything that hinders success in business, the multiplication of wealth, must be discarded. This is how the mentality necessary for capitalist development is formed: work for the sake of work, the fulfillment of duty, self-restraint and the rejection of luxury. For its development, capitalism needed such powerful spiritual stimuli that at that time, in the 16th-17th centuries, only religion could give. Weber warned that his analysis of Protestantism in the economic development of the West should not be oversimplified. However, this was often done later by those who attributed to Weber the assertion that Protestantism was necessary for the development of capitalism. This, of course, is nonsense. Weber noted that other options for becoming market economy. That differently than in the West, the process of modernization will go on in countries such as China or India. Modern sociologists, using the approach proposed by Weber, have developed a theory explaining the role of Japanese religion in the rapid industrial development of this country in the 20th century. Weber's theory has its weaknesses and has been heavily criticized. However, the latest research has confirmed a reciprocal relationship between religion and the economic development of society, although this relationship cannot be simplified and reduced to some standard scheme.
To the same extent that capitalism as a special way of regulating production relations, the "economic ethics" determined by it and supporting it, were developed, capitalism acquired its own mechanisms that ensured its functioning, i.e. increasingly became, as Weber shows, independent of the support of religion. The result is capitalism, which is a secularized society, the economic development of which is now practically no longer connected with religion, does not depend on it.
Thus, from the analysis of the birth of capitalism and the religious roots of the modern era, Weber comes to the development of the second leading theme of his sociology of religion - the analysis of the so-called process of demagication. The demagicification of the world is a process in the course of which all magical means are gradually eliminated from human activity, the means used to achieve certain goals, they give way to oriented (only to achieve success, the desired result) means, methods of action. At the basis of this rationalistic mode of action lies the conviction that the world is "matter" that man is able to comprehend and subjugate. The very development of religious consciousness in Judaism and Christianity leads to such a conception of the world, which reaches its culmination in the Reformation, in Calvinism: the more the difference between the world and God is emphasized, the more God moves away from the world, which turns out to be completely "godless", in it nothing remains but bare "matter". Protestantism renounces fertility cults, everything that can be suspected of "idolatry": God acts only in history.
And another important part of Weber's sociology of religion is the study of types of religious organizations, which leads to the consideration of the "church-sect" system. Religion as an institution of culture. B. Malinovsky (1884-1842) should also be included among the founders of the sociology of religion. In the 1920s he studied the inhabitants of the Trobriand Islands (in Melanesia), on the basis of which he came to a new understanding of the thinking of the so-called primitive peoples. J. Fraser believed that at the lowest stage of human development, his thinking is of a pralogical nature. Delimiting magic and religion, Frazer believed that magic is rooted in incompetence and ignorance, dooming the efforts of a person resorting to it to failure. Religion, on the other hand, is rooted in the social nature of man, it is not connected with magic, and when science begins to develop, it dooms magic to death, comes to replace it (without affecting religion). Malinovsky showed that, in fact, these people think quite rationally where their activities are sufficiently subject to them - in their garden, in the lagoon for fishing. Magic comes into play where the element of risk and the unpredictability of the results of activity are great. Malinovsky outlined his conclusions in the book "Magic, Science and Religion" published in 1926. Magic and science are not two stages of the evolutionary process (science comes to replace magic), but two anthropological constants, i.e. exist side by side. Magic has its own and fairly strong place in human life, since it (life) is never completely in the power of a person and does not fit into any calculations. The degree, the scale of the influence of magic in a particular society depends on the degree of control achieved in this society over natural processes. Magic has a place in today's society. Malinowski thus offers a purely functional understanding of magic. He, like Frazer, sees its similarity with religion in that in both cases it is a means of obtaining the desired result, which are not verifiable. According to the functional view of religion and culture in general, in every type of civilization, every custom, idea, belief performs some vital function. Of these, the main one is maintaining stability. public order. The function of magic, according to Malinowski, is to help a person cope with seemingly hopeless situations over which he has no control, to help overcome fear, gain hope and thus overcome difficulties. From the point of view of functionalism, religion plays a similar role: it is, like Durkheim, a factor in the integration of society.
The works of these founders of the sociology of religion determined all its subsequent development, the main directions of research, problems, and methodology. By the end of XIX - beginning of XX century. the sociology of religion is emerging as an independent discipline.
4. PSYCHOLOGICAL ANALYSIS
The idea of religion will be incomplete if we limit ourselves to clarifying its place in society. It is not only a social, but also a psychological phenomenon, and therefore must also be considered in its relation to the inner world of man. The psychological analysis of religious ideas and beliefs is of independent importance along with the social one. These two approaches complement each other. Together they help to form a more complete and accurate picture of what religion is. Religion is the subject of psychological analysis to the extent that we are talking about the experiences of an individual or a group of people, to what extent and in what way religion influences them, what is their religious experience.
In the traditional sense, psychology - knowledge about the soul - has as its goal to help a person become better. In this understanding, psychology is guided by moral motives or religious ones - concern for the "salvation of the soul." Developed religions, especially Buddhism and Christianity, do have a fairly developed psychological system of influencing a person. Until now, the priest is perceived as a person who deals specifically with the soul. AT ancient egypt for example, priests were "healers of souls". In ancient Greece, this function was already performed by philosophers who relied on reason in their concern for human happiness. The psychology of religion is an area in which theology, philosophy, physiology, and religious studies border on each other.
The psychological approach to the study of religion takes shape as an independent discipline by the end of the 19th century. primarily thanks to the work of the American W. James and the German W. Wundt, and then 3. Freud. Its subject was individual feelings associated with religion (the religious experience of the individual), and "religious conversion", the acquisition of faith or the transition from one faith to another, the impact of religious experience on the behavior of individuals and groups of people. Religion is considered as the core, the basis of the inner spiritual life of the individual, and then as a means of group and social integration (social psychology). Over time, the question of the motives of human behavior acquires central importance in psychology.
In the first half of the XX century. There were three approaches to explaining human behavior: one of them reduced everything to innate instincts; another argued that there are no innate stimuli and human behavior is the result of social conditions and manipulation of a person by society, family (behaviorism), and, finally, the third approach is represented by psychoanalysis, coming from the works of 3. Freud.
Religious experience of the individual. W. James (1842-1910) was a supporter of the first direction. In The Varieties of Religious Experience, he argued that religion is emotional, not intellectual. Religiosity is the result of the peculiarities of the psyche of a person, the roots of religion lie in the field of individual feelings and moods. Some of us have inherent, necessary and useful "scientific experience", and others - "religious experience". From this point of view, religion is a deeply personal matter: everyone has their own religion, formed within the framework of their individual psyche. The social manifestations of religion are secondary and unimportant, derivative in relation to the religious experience of the individual. The experience of a few is of decisive importance: "primary religious experience" is given to exceptional individuals, "religious geniuses" who are able to sense, perceive the presence of a deity, mystically merge with him. From them, religious feelings are perceived and reproduced by ordinary people.
W. James studies the self-testimony of such "religious geniuses". He analyzes autobiographical literature, letters, diaries, etc. Djeme has collected a huge amount of material from such "psychological documents", which depict the attempts of people who lived in different countries and in different historical eras to express their religious experiences. They turned out to be pretty uniform. James' first conclusion regarding this experience is that religious experience is precisely religious experience, it is different from all other experiences and feelings - aesthetic, ethical, etc. This is a feeling of contact, meeting with another world, it comes closest to a feeling of reverence. It can be a feeling of beauty and spirituality of nature, some kind of mystery, miracle.
A distinctive feature of religious feelings - religious love, religious fear or joy, etc., according to James, is not in their psychological content, but in their orientation to a religious object. Religious love, for example, is a feeling of love common to all people, only addressed to God, as well as fear associated in religion with the fear of divine punishment. And another conclusion of James, which is of significant importance: religious experience lies beyond the differences between different religions. It is the same for Christians, Muslims, Shintoists, for all believers. This experience is universal, although different people have different degrees of religious gifts. Some are mystically receptive, and the beyond is "opened" to them, others remain deaf and "do not hear." Depending on the specific conditions, on the social affiliation of different people, this universal experience is clothed in various confessional forms, and a person becomes either a Catholic, or a Muslim, or a Buddhist, etc.
Religious experience is difficult to convey, to express in a concept, in a word. It is irrational in nature. Of course, a person can express a feeling or a thought only in a word, but in the sphere of religious experience the word acquires the meaning of a symbol, that is, a word behind which lies something inexpressible to the end. The forms in which religious experience is clothed are myth, symbol, icon.
Religion, according to James, hides in itself a certain psychological mechanism that has a beneficial effect on people. It brings relief from pain, instills hope in the desperate, becomes an incentive for the creative achievements of artists, thinkers, scientists, poets. Here is James's answer to the question of what this mechanism of religious influence is: "... The existence of God is a guarantee that there is a certain higher harmonic order that remains indestructible forever. The world will perish, as science assures, - it will burn or freeze ; but if it is an integral part of the highest harmony, then the plan of this world will not perish and will surely bear fruit in another world: where there is God, there tragedy is only temporary and partial, and collapse and death can no longer be the real end of everything that exists.
Psychoanalysis offers a different approach. 3. Freud (1856-1939) refers to the study of religion in a number of works, the most important of which are "Totem and Taboo" (1913) and "The Future of an Illusion" (1927). Freud's goal was to explain the passions that drive human behavior, that is, something inherently irrational, in a rational way, in order to help a person learn to control his passions. To do this, you need to understand what are the causes of love, hatred, envy, fear.
Psychoanalysis is the science of the irrational. In addition to cognitive and practical, it also has moral goals: to help a person understand himself, stop being a toy of passions, overcome the power of illusions, become free, become a mature, rational being. In this respect, Freud largely follows the ideals of the Enlightenment. Psychoanalysis preserves the basic premise of the psychology of religion, according to which - as, for example, in W. James, the main source of religion is in the person himself, in his inner world. The new moment that Freud introduces into the explanation of religion is that he establishes a connection between religion and subjective drives, the desires of the individual. Among these desires, which arise initially in the form of an unconscious intention or desire, the sexual instinct plays the main role. Social norms, we are forced to limit the arbitrariness of the individual, introduce his behavior into certain boundaries Otherwise, the joint life of people, culture is impossible. Suppression of powerful natural aspirations social norms and gives rise to religion. Religion, according to Freud, is nothing more than an illusory fulfillment of the oldest, strongest, obsessive desires of mankind, desires that remain unsatisfied and are forced out into the sphere of the unconscious. Religion is a way of protecting an individual from a social principle hostile to him, that bridle that restrains his natural instincts, limits his selfish, aggressive, sexual aspirations.
Religion, by virtue of what has been said, is also a way of protecting culture from the individual with his instincts, which lead to destruction and chaos, if they are given freedom. This method is based on the use and creation of illusions, when the desired is given out or taken as valid, when moral behavior is based on faith in God the Father, strict, but also caring. Freud considered this way of justifying morality and protecting humanity unreliable, since sooner or later illusions fail. Any activity based on illusion is fraught with failure. Stronger foundations are needed, and they can be provided by the human mind, science, and not religion - this universal obsessive neurosis.
A significant contribution to psychoanalysis and a new aspect to the understanding of religion was made by the studies of C. G. Jung (1875-1961). He revealed the role of past experience in the formation of subsequent stages of consciousness, the role of childhood experience in the formation of the individual, the role of primitive "archetypes of consciousness" in all subsequent diverse modifications of human consciousness. According to Jung, in the psyche of every person there is a "collective unconscious", it contains archetypes - symbols, ideas, ideas that are characteristic of the entire human race. Jung considered religious symbols and images to be one of these archetypes. If Freud saw in religion a "universal neurosis", then, according to Jung, faith in God is necessary for mental health. Jung addresses the question of what religion is in a number of his works: Psychology and Religion (1939); "On the Psychology of Western and Eastern Religions" (1963); "Introduction to the Essence of Mythology" (1941).
So, in the XIX-XX centuries. the boundaries of the study of religion have expanded significantly. It turned out that, like natural phenomena and historical events, like art and morality, religion lends itself to scientific description and explanation. It took considerable courage to decide to consider religion as a subject of empirical research and to begin to study it as a human "affair". After all, religion, unlike ordinary things and phenomena, due to its special, divine nature was considered "irrational", inaccessible to scientific analysis. Since the middle of the last century, intensive research has been carried out on mythology, which is considered as a kind of religion; comparative religion is developing on the basis of data from the history of culture, ethnology, and anthropology (Müller, Bachofen, Fraser, Tylor, Levy-Bruhl). The foundations for understanding religion as a historical phenomenon are being laid (Baur, Renan, Robertson Smith). The sociology of religion was born and developed significantly (Durkheim, Marx, Weber, Malinowski). There are different approaches to the study of religion as a mental phenomenon (James, Freud, Jung).
Gradually, on the basis of these studies, an idea is formed of religion as a complex cultural phenomenon that performs a number of important functions in society at different stages of its development that ensure its viability. By the end of the past - the beginning of this century, religious studies are gaining recognition as an independent branch of scientific knowledge.
LITERATURE
Tylor E.B. Primitive culture. M., 1989.
Fraser J. Golden Bough. M., 1986.
Weber M. Science as a vocation and profession // Izbr. prod. M., 1990.
James W. Variety of religious experience. M., 1910 (repr. 1993).
Max Muller*
______________ * M. Müller (1823-1900) is considered to be the founder of scientific religious studies. Only a comparison of different religions of the peoples of the world, including Christianity in this series, makes it possible to understand what religion is, "what foundation it has in the human soul and what laws it follows in its historical development." For this, M. Muller believed, "the science of religion" is needed. The course of lectures from which this fragment is taken was published in 1873 in London in the form of a book Introduction to the Science of Religion.
Religion as a subject of scientific study
Today, as I begin my course of lectures on the "science of religion" - or, more precisely, the consideration of those premises that make possible a truly scientific study of the religions existing in the world - I feel the same feelings that I experienced here (at Oxford. - In .G.), speaking with the justification of the science of language.
I know in advance that I will meet opponents who will deny the very possibility of a scientific study of religion, just as they denied the possibility of a scientific approach to the study of languages. I foresee an even more serious conflict with habitual prejudices and ingrained beliefs. But I feel ready to face my opponents, and I believe so much in the nobility of their intentions and love of truth, that I have no doubt that they will agree to hear me with calm impartiality, and no other considerations than the certainty of what I intend will affect their verdict. offer and advocate.
Nowadays, it is impossible to talk about religion without touching someone on the right or on the left. For one, religion appears to be a subject too sacred to be accessible to scientific study. Others put it on a par with alchemy or astrology and consider it as the result of delusion and hallucinations, unworthy of the attention of a scientist.
In a sense, I understand both opinions. Religion is indeed a sacred subject and, in its sublime and still imperfect forms, is entitled to unconditional respect. We can learn such a respectful attitude from those whom we are always ready to teach (...) I can promise that no one listening to these lectures - whether he is a Christian, a Jew, a Hindu or a Mohammedan - will hear a single insulting word to that kind of reverence which he renders to his God. However, true respect for this subject does not at all consist in declaring that it cannot be subjected to a conscientious and completely unprejudiced examination by us on the grounds that it is dear to us. We must decisively overcome this! True respect is manifested in the fact that we can subject any subject, whether it be the most dear to our heart, to impartial and unbiased research, without fear and reproach; with all care and love, certainly, but above all - with a steady and uncompromising striving for the truth.
In practical life, it is not very easy to take this kind of neutral position regarding these conflicting opinions. When we see that the respect due to religion is not being given, we are bound to protest; when we see that superstition saps the roots of faith, and hypocrisy and hypocrisy poison the sources of morality, we must take its side. But as researchers involved in the science of religion, we solve other problems. We study delusion as a physiologist studies a disease, finding out its causes, tracing the consequences, thinking about possible remedies, but leaving the use of these remedies to people of a different kind to surgeons and medical practitioners.
A division of labor according to the abilities and tastes of individuals always promises the best result. The scientist who studies the history of the natural sciences does not feel angry against the alchemists and does not enter into an argument with the astrologers; rather, he seeks to understand their view of things and to discover in the delusions of alchemy the germ of chemistry, and in astronomical hallucinations, the search and groping for true knowledge about celestial bodies. And the same applies to the scientist who is engaged in the scientific study of religion. He wants to reveal what religion is, on what it is based in the human soul, and what laws it follows in its historical development. To this end, the study of error is no less instructive to him than the study of truth.
The very name "science of religion" will sound, I know, unpleasant to the ears of many; special reverence for their religion and their god, which is experienced by an adherent of each religion, up to those who worship fetishes. I confess that I also shared these prejudices, but I managed to overcome them because I did not allow myself to change it. what I recognized as truth, and what is dearer than truth - the right to put everything to the test of truth. I don't regret it.
Why should we hesitate whether the comparative method should be applied to the study of religions, if this method in the field of other sciences leads to such brilliant results? I do not deny that the application of this method will lead to a change in many generally accepted concepts and views on the origin, character, development and decline of religions that have existed in the world. However, we must overcome the prejudice that the bold and independent course of action, which is our duty and pride in other areas of knowledge, is dangerous in relation to the study of religion.
When linguists working in the field of comparative linguistics adopted Goethe's paradox, which said: "who knows only one language, he knows none," this was at first surprising, but soon many felt the truth expressed in such a paradoxical form. Of course, Goethe did not mean that Homer did not know Greek, and Shakespeare did not know English, since both knew only their own language. Goethe wanted to say something else, that neither Homer nor Shakespeare had any idea of what language is in its essence, the language that they possessed with such impressive power. (...) However, it seems to me quite obvious that the most eloquent orator and the most inspired poet, despite all the wealth of expressions that they possess, despite their command of the word and stylistic skill, both would be in no small difficulty if they had to answer the question: "what is language?"
The same can be said about religion. He who knows one religion knows none. One can find thousands of people whose faith is akin to that which can move mountains, and who, however, would be forced either to remain silent or to speak about the external manifestations of faith, and not its inner being and true character, if they were asked: "what is religion?
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
XML error: XML_ERR_NAME_REQUIRED at line 112
I/ The concept of religious studiesTheological-theological (A. Men) and philosophical approaches to the study of religion (L Feuerbach, K Marx and f Engels). 2/ Features of the scientific method of cognition of religion Formation of the sociology of religion (O Comte, M. Weber, E Durkheim) Z/ Psychology of religion about the nature of the religious phenomenon (W. Jeme, 3 Freud, K Jung)
The concept of religious studies Theological-theological (A Men) and philosophical approaches to the study of religion (L Feuerbach, K. Marx and F Engels).
Religion has existed for many centuries, apparently as long as humanity has existed. During this time, it developed many varieties of religion. Peculiar religions existed in the Ancient World among the Egyptians and Greeks, Babylonians and Jews. At present, the so-called world religions: Buddhism, Christianity and Islam have become widespread. In addition to them, national religions continue to exist (Confucianism, Judaism, Shintoism, etc.). In order to understand the question of what religion is, it is necessary to find in all its varieties something common, repetitive, essential.
Continuing for a long time, attempts to explain what religion is, what are its essential characteristics, resulted in the formation of a special branch of knowledge - religious studies. Religious studies studies the process of emergence, functioning and development of religion, its structure and various components, numerous manifestations of religion in the history of society and in the modern era, the role in the life of an individual, specific societies and society as a whole, the relationship and interaction with other areas of culture.
Religious science is a complex branch of human knowledge. It was formed as a result of the efforts of representatives of theological, theological, philosophical and scientific thought. But the methodology of approach to religion in each of these branches of knowledge is not the same. J
Historically, the first form of religious knowledge is vlogia. (from the Greek teos - God and logos - doctrine) - the doctrine of God in the Catholic and Protestant tradition and theology as
the science of glorifying God in the Orthodox tradition, since Orthodoxy rejects any possibility of knowing God and considers only his glorification possible. Theology or theology arises from the desire to explain the basic provisions of a particular religion, to translate the images and dogmatic formulas contained in sacred books, decisions of councils into the language of concepts, to make them accessible to the mass of believers. The theological and theological approach to religion is an approach to religion, as it were, from the inside, from the standpoint of religion itself. Religious belief is the basis of this approach. Theologians believe that only a religious person can understand religion. It is simply inaccessible to a non-religious person.
The theological and theological approach to religion is characterized by its interpretation as a special, supernatural phenomenon, the result of a supernatural connection between man and God. Thus religion from the standpoint of theology receives a supranatural, suprahuman, suprasocial status. Characteristic for theological and theological religious studies is the concept of religion, presented in the book of the famous Orthodox theologian and clergyman Alexander Men "History of Religion" M; 1994, published on his behalf based on publications and manuscripts by his closest friends and associates.
A. Men defends the position of the supernatural nature of religion. Religion, from the point of view of A. Me, is a person's response to the manifestation of the Divine essence. “It is no accident that the word religion comes from the Latin verb religare, which means to bind. She is the force that connects the worlds, the bridge between the created world and the Divine Spirit ”(“ History of Religion. In Search of the Way, Truth and Life. According to the books, Archpriest Alexander Men. M., 1994. S. 16-17). This connection, in the opinion of the Orthodox theologian, organically follows from the natural striving of the human soul for akin to it, but superior to the Divine substance. “Is it not natural to admit that just as the body is connected with the objective world of nature, so the spirit gravitates towards a related and at the same time superior reality” (Ibid., p. 81).
This connection, according to A. Men, is carried out primarily through a special kind of spiritual knowledge - religious experience. Religious experience, according to him, can be defined in the most general terms as an experience associated with a feeling of real presence in our life, in the being of all people and the entire Universe of a certain Higher principle, which directs and makes meaningful both the existence of the Universe and our own. existence (Ibid., p. 12).
A. Men was not an orthodox Orthodox theologian. In his works, there is a rather strong desire to overcome the narrowness of a one-sided confessional interpretation of religious teaching, to try to give the concept of religion from a universal standpoint. Therefore, in his concept, religious experience is not only the experience of Christians, but the experience of all believers, it is a universal experience. “Meeting with God,” he emphasizes, “occurs in the life of every person. And the religious experience of man is a universal all-human experience. The only difference is what result this meeting leads to, whether the person is aware of it or passes by” (Ibid., p. 16). The ultimate goal of the theological and theological approach is the protection and justification of religious dogma, the proof of the enduring significance of religion for each individual and humanity as a whole.
The theological and theological approach to religion as an approach "from within" is opposed by the philosophical and scientific ways of explaining religion as approaches "from the outside". This approach does not necessarily mean a negative attitude towards religion. It can be implemented with the same goal as the theological-theological approach, but rely on a different methodology. The theological and theological approach is carried out on the basis of the acceptance of religious dogma as the original and unconditional truth, within the framework of "religious experience". Philosophical and scientific methodology requires going beyond this experience, subjecting religion to a critical study from the standpoint of reason, logical-theoretical and empirical-scientific criteria of truth. With this generality of the initial posi-. There are significant features in the methodology of philosophy and science in the study of religion.
Philosophical methodology is characterized by universalism and substantialism. Philosophy seeks to explain all the phenomena and processes of reality from the standpoint of identifying its universal principles and laws, determining the "essence" of things, processes and phenomena. It is characterized by a critical approach to all phenomena of reality, including religion. Philosophy, unlike theology, is not content with taking things for granted, but questions everything. This does not mean that it necessarily seeks to destroy the collective beliefs, the moral foundations of people's lives. Philosophers question everything in order to test how solid these human institutions are, discard those that have found their untruth, and place those that have passed the test on a more solid foundation of knowledge.
Of course, here, in very general terms, the specifics of the philosophical approach to religion are indicated. In reality, philosophy is a set of teachings, schools, trends and directions.
ny. Therefore, various approaches to religion can be implemented in it. There is a direction of religious philosophy, in which, by means of philosophical methodology, the task is to achieve the same goals as in the theological and theological approach to religion. Along with religious philosophy, the philosophy of religion was born in the 17th and 18th centuries. In the philosophy of religion, a positive trend also prevails regarding the assessment of the role of religion in the life of a person and society. But the interpretation of religion goes beyond this or that direction of religion, religious denominations. This means that the origin of religion and its influence on human life in the philosophy of religion is not explained directly from one form or another of divine revelation, but is derived on the basis of some abstract logical schemes.
Within the framework of the philosophy of religion, there is deism (from Latin deus - god) - interpreting God as the highest Reason, with the existence of which the structure of the Universe is connected, as well as pantheism (God in everything) - dissolving God in nature and culture.The development of religious studies was significantly influenced by the materialistic trend in the philosophy of religion, a prominent representative of which was the German philosopher L. Feuerbach (1804-1872). In his works The Essence of Christianity and Lectures on the Essence of Religion, he tried to reveal the natural, earthly roots of religion. Religion, according to Feuerbach, is a human product, a consequence and a form of alienation by man of his essence. L. Feuerbach associated the emergence of religion with the helplessness and ignorance of primitive man, his complete dependence on the elemental forces of nature. Primitive man deified everything on which he depended, which seemed to him alien and mysterious. In this way, according to L. Feuerbach, all natural religions arose. In the concept of "natural religions" L. Feuerbach included all the various beliefs of primitive people, as well as the so-called "pagan religions" (polytheism). A deeper human basis, according to L. Feuerbach, is the so-called "spiritual religions" based on the recognition of one God (monotheism). In spiritual religions, Feuerbach believed, a person deifies his essence as the essence of the human race in general.
L. Feuerbach sought to reveal the emotional, psychological and epistemological mechanisms of the emergence of religion. He attached decisive importance in the formation of religious images to the power of imagination, fantasy, which he called the "theoretical" cause of religion. Human consciousness, according to L. Feuerbach, in the process of cognition has the ability to "depart" from reality. At the same time, some features of reality are reduced, while others are inflated, exaggerated. Under air
the action of the mechanisms of imagination takes place hypostasis (from the Greek. hypostasis - essence, substance) - the transformation of individual properties of the parties, relations into independent beings, endowing them with an objective existence. L. Feuerbach believed that mental images are endowed with an independent existence and become the subject of faith. Religious faith, from these positions, is faith in the objective existence of fantasized properties, connections, beings. “Every god,” wrote L. Feuerbach in “Lectures on the Essence of Religion,” “is a creature created by the imagination, an image and, moreover, an image of a person, but an image that a person believes outside himself and imagines as an independent being” (Feuerbach L. Selected Philosophical works, Moscow, 1955. T.I, p. 701). In the spiritual religions, which include Christianity, according to L. Feuerbach, such most common properties of the human race as reason, immortality, power, and good have undergone hypostasis. Hence such characteristics of the Christian God as “omniscient”, “all-good”, etc.
In the works of L. Feuerbach, an abstract philosophical approach was carried out to explain the earthly basis, the human source of religious beliefs. L. Feuerbach considered man in general as a natural being outside of him social characteristics. The younger contemporaries and students of L. Feuerbach, K. Marx (1818-1883) and F. Engels (1820-1995), due to the peculiarities of their creative inclinations and practical activities, formulated the basic principles of the socio-philosophical analysis of religion. (According to K. Marx, L. Feuerbach's reduction of religion to its earthly basis is of great cognitive importance. However, “the main thing remains to be done, namely, the fact that the earthly basis separates itself from itself and transfers itself into the clouds as a kind of independent the kingdom can only be explained by the self-disintegration and self-contradiction of this earthly foundation” fMapicc K. Theses on Feuerbach // K. Marx, F. Engels Soch. T. 3. P. 29). Man, according to Marx and Engels, is a social being. The essence of man is the totality of all social relations. Therefore, a truly philosophical explanation of religion can only be given on the basis of an analysis of social relations.
All social relations K. Marx and F. Engels divided into two types - primary material, basic relations and secondary, ideological, superstructural relations. They considered religion primarily as a superstructural phenomenon. Religion does not have "its own not from this world essence", its own history, "special content". It is a spiritual formation, the result of social reflection, a specific form of social consciousness and a social institution. With such a setting
Religion as a subject of research) 5
ke explanation of the nature and essence of religion meant for K. Marx and F. Engels the disclosure of the process in which social individuals in the course of material activity and social relations develop such definitions and characteristics that are reflected in the public consciousness and become its (public consciousness) definitions and characteristics.
One of the distinguishing features of the concept of religion by K. Marx and F. Engels is that religion as a social phenomenon has a historical nature. And this means that it is not a product of eternal, but transient social conditions. Religion, according to Marx and Engels, is generated by such social phenomena that are characterized by a significant limitation of human life and activity, their dependence on the elemental forces of nature and society. In other words, religion is the result and form of reflection by a person of a society that has not yet found itself, a society dominated by perverse forms of organizing social life.
Religion is formed as a response to the situation of lack of freedom of man and the need to overcome the forces that dominate him. This need, under certain socio-economic and political conditions, cannot be satisfied in a real way, through a material and practical change in the world. The way out for a person from the situation that has arisen is such a type of spiritual activity, the result of which is the creation of a special world of ideal transformed forms, a world of fantasized beings, properties, connections and relationships, with the help of which a person calculates to satisfy his needs. The recognition of the historical nature of religion also meant the recognition of its temporary, transitory nature. Religion as a manifestation of man's lack of freedom historically outlives itself to the extent that the freedom and independence of man develops. According to K. Marx and F. Engels, it is possible to create such social relations when a person moves from the “realm of necessity” to the “realm of freedom”. K. Marx and F. Engels called this type of social relations communist. The establishment of communist relations, in their opinion, means the natural withering away of religion. Thus, the disclosure of the earthly basis, the social nature of religion, meant for K. Marx and F. Engels not a call for the liquidation and the forcible imposition of atheism, but the demand for the liquidation of those conditions that prevent a person from fully realizing himself, and the creation of such conditions in which a person would act as a free, amateur subject of cognition, activity and communication.
Features of the scientific method of cognition of religion. The formation of the sociology of religion (O. Comte, M. Weber, E. Durkheim)
the philosophical analysis of religion takes shape in European culture, starting from the 17th-18th centuries, it is dominant until the middle of the 19th century. From the middle of the 19th century, along with the theological and philosophical, a scientific approach began to take shape. What is the difference between philosophical and scientific approach in the study of religion? This difference lies both in the subject area and in research methods. The subject area of philosophy is the study of reality from the point of view of solving worldview problems. Therefore, philosophy focuses on the study of the ideological side of religion. For philosophers, the most significant is how the problem of the structure of being is solved in religion, which is primary: the spiritual or material principle, God created this world, including man, or man created God in his consciousness. This or that answer to this question serves as the basis for solving specific life-meaning questions. (The subject of the science of religion is not the problems of the structure of being, nor the object of religious faith - God and all his attributes. Science studies religion as one of the sides of social ^ "life, in its connections and interaction with other areas of this life: in what way religion is formed, how certain religious systems explain the world, what values, norms and patterns of behavior they form in people, how certain religious organizations operate, what are the functions of religion in society, etc. n.J >> The difference between philosophy and science is manifested not only in the subject area, but also in the methods of studying religion.Philosophy does not conduct an empirical study of reality.It mostly solves its problems speculatively, guided by certain attitudes that develop on the basis of a chain of logical Science, in its studies of religion, relies on empirical material, factual data obtained on the basis of direct studies of the worlds visionary ideas of certain peoples, their beliefs, customs, organization of life, etc.
In scientific religious studies, from the very beginning of its formation, the historical method has been widely used, which involves the study of religious systems in the process of their emergence, formation and development, as well as taking into account the interaction in this process of both general laws of history and peculiar specific circumstances. The historical method can be implemented as a genetic approach, when the researcher derives all subsequent stages from the initial phase. During this procedure, it is important
- ,-„ | ESS^iKJ ipbfl^^Knpe^T research 17
/--JHK. 036 I ^ , " , . ,-. .. , .. .." r4^>k I
A:G-SYSOGO
has to find all the intermediate stages in the chain of evolution of religion. It is actively used in religious studies and historical research. In the course of this research, a comparison is made of different stages of development of the same religion at different points in time, of different religions existing simultaneously, but at different stages of development, and a reconstruction of development trends is carried out.
[The use of the methods of anthropology and ethnography by E. Taylor, J. Fraser, B. Malinovsky, L. Levy-Bruhl and others had a great influence on the formation of scientific religious studies. This method is also actively used by sociologists E "; "Durkheim and M. Weber, psychoanalysts 3. Freud and C. Jung et al. ttoHitperaoe we will consider the application of this method later when we cover the topic "The origin and early forms of religion. .: .
Since religious studies is a complex discipline, it uses general philosophical, general scientific and private scientific methods. Based on the use of these methods, frontier branches of knowledge are formed. These borderline branches of knowledge include the sociology of religion and the psychology of religion. Let us briefly consider how these important sections of religious studies interpret the problem of the nature of religion.
[The sociology of religion is an integral part of the science of society - sociology. Sociology as an independent science has been formed since the middle of the 19th century for a long time. Sociological knowledge accumulated in the bowels of philosophy. The isolation of sociology from the bowels of philosophy is connected precisely with the fact that the “founding fathers” of sociology O. Comte, M. Weber, E. Durkheim set themselves the task of solving social problems, including the problem of religion, based on the use of scientific methods of cognition of reality! Founder of sociology french thinker O. Comte (1798-1857), solving the question of what underlies the social order, inevitably faced the problem of the role of religion in society. Answering this question, O. Comte formulated the law of three successive stages of human development: theological, metaphysical and scientific. According to Comte, at the first, theological stage, a person explains all phenomena on the basis of religious ideas, operates with the concept of the supernatural. Belief in gods or one God determines the stability of the social system. This stage corresponds to a long period of history, the peak of which is the Middle Ages.
At the second, metaphysical stage, a person tries to abandon the appeal to the supernatural and tries to explain everything with the help of abstract entities and causes. A striking example of such a period is the Age of Enlightenment. The task of this stage is
critical. Destroying religious ideas, it prepares the arrival of the third stage - positive or scientific. Comte considered the inevitable conflict between religion and positive knowledge - science, and predicted the victory of science over religion in the near future. Science, according to Comte, is called upon to replace religion not only in terms of the formation of a new worldview, but, above all, as a binding force designed to unite people and social institutions, to become the basis of a stable order. Establishing solidarity and harmony between people, Comte believed, is called upon to serve a new synthetic science - sociology.
Consideration of the problems of religion by O. Comte is carried out in the context of his solution of general sociological problems. The German thinker M. Weber (1864-1920) and the French thinker E. Durkheim (1858-1917) were directly involved in the scientific study of religion from sociological positions. It is they, in our opinion, who are the founders of the sociology of religion as a relatively independent branch of knowledge within the framework of religious studies.
M. Weber considered sociology as a science of social behavior. Behavior, according to Weber, becomes social if it makes sense, subjectively, meaningfully correlates with the behavior of other people, is oriented towards the expectation of certain of their behavior and, in accordance with this, is accompanied by a subjective assessment of the chance of success of one or another of their actions.
In accordance with this general concept of the subject of sociology, M. Weber formulates the specifics of the sociological approach to the study of religion. From the point of view of M. Weber, a sociologist, unlike a theologian and philosopher, should not touch upon the question of the source of religion, just as he should not establish a certain metaphysical “essence” of religion. The sociologist is not interested in the essence of religion, but in the conditions of its existence. In other words, for a sociologist, religion is interesting only as a special type of motivation. social behavior of people. Thus, sociology, according to Weber, should be limited to the study of the motivating effect of religious ideas and ideas, the identification of their influence on social life, without touching on questions about their truth or falsity, the sources of their origin.
Such an assessment of the subject matter of the sociology of religion follows from Weber's interpretation of the social function of religion. M. Weber considered religion as a socio-cultural institution that combines the features of a cultural system, that is, it determines the scope of meanings, symbols and values of the individual and society, and at the same time functions as an independent social institution. Let us consider in more detail what is religion as the basis of culture.
Religion as a subject of study
First of all, M. Weber presents religion as the primary basis of values, and as such, it is one of the most important ways to give meaning to social action, determines its meanings and goals. It is on the basis of religious attitudes that all events occurring in a person's life are qualified by him as meaningful or meaningless. The religious interpretation of the world is a means of orientation in it and regulation of behavior. Religion draws a certain picture of the world and at the same time sets a system of values and norms, in accordance with which some actions are prohibited, while others are allowed. Thus, it creates moral norms for human behavior.
M. Weber paid special attention to identifying the influence of the religious factor on the effective attitude of the individual to the surrounding reality. Some religions stimulate the departure from this world, a contemplative-mystical attitude towards it (for example, Buddhism), others aim at its conquest and transformation (for example, Christianity in its Protestant variety). M. Weber insists on the religious conditionality of not just the daily behavior of believing individuals, but also their "economic" (economic) behavior. One of the most important merits of M. Weber in the field of sociology is his substantiation of the influence of the Reformation on the formation and development of capitalist social relations. Protestant ethics, according to M. Weber, is the foundation of the "spirit of capitalism".
In his works, M. Weber proved not only the influence of the religious factor on the formation of certain social relations, but also the influence of the social factor on the formation of a particular type of religion. In The Economic Ethics of World Religions, he writes that for each given religion, those layers can be distinguished whose life behavior was decisive for the practical ethics of the corresponding religion. For example, in Confucianism it is bureaucracy, in Hinduism it is mastering the Vedic education of Brahma, in Buddhism it is monasticism, in Christianity it is urban artisans, etc. Rejecting accusations of simplified sociologism, M. Weber explains: the author’s thought does not boil down to the fact that The uniqueness of religion is a simple function of the social position of the stratum that acts as its characteristic bearer, as if its "ideology" or a reflection of its material and spiritual interests. On the contrary, no matter how deep in some cases the economic and political impact on religious ethics, its main features go back primarily to religious sources and, above all, to the content of the gospel and promises (Weber M. Economic ethics of world religions // Works of M. Weber on sociology of religion and culture.
Issue. 1.M., 1991. S. 63.64,). Religion as a social institution is studied by M. Weber in the context of studying various types of religious organizations, which will be discussed later in the corresponding section of the course.
A fundamentally different approach to the problems of studying religion is demonstrated by the French sociologist E. Durkheim. The specificity of the study of religion in the system of E. Durkheim follows from the general principles of obtaining sociological knowledge. According to E. Durkheim, sociology is based on the knowledge of social facts. The source of social facts is not in the thinking and behavior of individuals, but in society. In order for a social fact to arise, E. Durkheim pointed out, it is necessary that at least several individuals combine their actions and that this combination gives rise to a new result. And since this synthesis takes place outside the consciousness of acting individuals (since it is formed on the basis of the interaction of a multitude of consciousnesses), this has as its indispensable consequence the establishment and consolidation for individual consciousness of any patterns of behavior, values, norms, etc. that exist for these individuals objectively. Religion, like all other social institutions, is a "social fact" and the same methodology and the same evaluation criteria apply to its analysis as to any other social facts.
E. Durkheim considers religion as a social institution created by man, which is formed naturally as a response to certain conditions of its existence in order to satisfy certain social needs. The source of religion, according to Durkheim, is the very social mode of existence of people. In religion, society deifies itself. The meaning and purpose of religion is, first of all, to cultivate social feeling, to ensure the influence of the collective on the individual.
Thus, for E. Durkheim, all collective ideas and beliefs are religious if they are binding on all members of society, and thus bind the individual and society, subordinate him to the latter.What, from the point of view of Durkheim, gives collective beliefs and ideas a binding character, allows them to influence individuals and society in a mandatory way? Otherwise, Durkheim replies, religion is connected with the functioning of sacred objects in social interaction. The difference in the social life of two different areas - secular and sacred is, according to Durkheim, the main feature of religion. The mundane area is the realm of everyday life, with private interests and ordinary pursuits. The sacred is a separate area that
Religion as a subject of study
consists of special items, beliefs and rituals / Yvipennoe is endowed with special moral authority and power. Oy6> d - the object of reverence and worship, the source of the ban and prinueyAyaiya
In religious systems, representations about the sky are clothed in a mythological form and result in cult actions. E. Durkheim in religion attached decisive importance not to beliefs and dogmatic formulas, but to rituals and ceremonies, i.e., cult actions. In his opinion, the essence of cult actions lies in the fact that through them the social community opens its way to sacred objects and then provides a return to the ordinary world.
Cult actions are always performed qualitatively. And taking this fact into account, E. Durkheim offers such an interpretation of the religious phenomenon: the sacred is the veneration as a saint of the main social value of a given society - this community itself. And the performance of a cult action is an act through which a given social community each time asserts itself as a given community, in other words, it realizes self-identity. In accordance with this approach, E. Durkheim gives the following definition of religion. “Religion is an integral system of beliefs and rituals related to sacred things, that is, to special, forbidden things, it is a system of such beliefs and rituals that unite all those who recognize these beliefs and rituals into a single moral community called the church” . .
E. Durkheim gives an extended interpretation of religion, essentially identifying the social and the religious. "Sacred objects" he interprets as symbols of social unity. Among the Australian natives, such a symbol is a totem - an animal or plant that is considered by one or another social community as a common ancestor - a patron and a connection with which distinguishes this community from another. For Christians, this symbol is Jesus Christ. In modern society, new myths and symbols associated with the scientific explanation of the world have appeared.
Based on this premise, E. Durkheim puts forward the requirement for a concrete historical approach to assessing its role and influence:
“In the beginning, he writes, everything that is social, religious - both symbols are synonyms. Then, little by little, political functions; economic and scientific are liberated from religious ones and acquire an increasingly pronounced secular character. Thus, E. Durkheim recognizes the existence of a continuous process of liberation of all spheres of public life from the influence of religion. However, the development of this process does not mean the end of religiosity. Religion, in his opinion, will exist forever. There can be no society that does not feel the need to regularly revive and
reinforce collective feelings and ideas that affirm its unity and individuality. E. Durkheim believed that as a result of this process, the religion of creatures and gods would be replaced by "re
league of humanity.
Psychology of religion about the nature of the religious phenomenon
(W. Jeme, 3. Freud, K. Jung). Social philosophy and sociology explore the nature of religion from the point of view of the manifestation of social patterns in it. However, religion is not only a social, but also a psychological phenomenon. It is an integral part of the inner emotional-volitional and spiritual life of a religious person. It is on this side of religion that representatives of the psychology of religion, one of the sections of religious studies, which is at the intersection of philosophy and psychology, emphasize in their studies.
The psychology of religion takes shape as an independent branch of religious studies in the late 19th and early 20th centuries thanks to the work of the American W. James and the Austrian 3. Freud. The main premise of the psychology of religion is that the source of religion is not in the world around a person, but in the person himself, in his inner world, and not in the intellectual, but in the emotional-volitional sphere. W. Jeme (1842-1910) proposes to consider "religious experience" as the most important form of manifestation of religion. Religious experience, according to James, is rooted in the depths of the psyche of a particular person. It is inherent in all people, regardless of their nationality and religion. However, people have this experience to varying degrees. Some of them are exceptionally receptive to the presence of a deity in their soul, show great ability to mystically merge with it (religious geniuses), others are less gifted with such an ability (ordinary believers), and still others are completely deaf, do not hear the “voice of a deity” in themselves. (unbelievers).
According to James, the religious experience is basically the same for all believers - Buddhists, Christians, Muslims. But then the question arises: how do religious denominations, religious denominations appear? And here W. Jeme turns to the impact of social reality. He believes that, depending on the specific conditions of people's social existence, determined by the place of birth, the characteristics of upbringing, etc., a person becomes either a Buddhist, or a Catholic, or a Muslim. However, social manifestations, according to James, are secondary and unimportant for the religious life of the individual. Immediate feelings and experiences are decisive. From this follows the concept of W. James about the therapeutic function of religion. W. Jame
Religion as a subject of study 23
argued that religion contains certain psychological mechanisms that have a beneficial effect on people. It possesses the miraculous power to turn the most unbearable sufferings of the human soul into the deepest and most lasting happiness.
W. Jeme, drawing attention to the emotional-volitional nature of religious beliefs, does not explicitly postulate the existence of a supernatural source of these feelings - a deity. Another approach to explaining the nature of religion is offered by the founder of psychoanalysis Z. Freud (1856-1939). 3. Freud was brought up in the tradition of Enlightenment philosophy. He rejects the existence of a supernatural source of religion. Religion, in his opinion, is a natural phenomenon, a human product, one of the clearest consequences of man's dependence on the world around him. “I tried to show,” he writes in The Future of an Illusion, “that religious experiences arose from the same need as all other cultural conquests, from the need to protect oneself from the overwhelming superpower of nature. This is joined by the second moment - the desire to correct the painful imperfections of culture. However, Freud, agreeing with the enlighteners that religion is determined by external circumstances, focuses on the irrational mechanisms of the formation of religion. In his works, he establishes a connection between religion and unconscious subjective impressions, desires of the individual.
According to the teachings of 3. Freud, the human psyche is an interaction of three levels: the unconscious, the preconscious and the conscious. He considered the unconscious to be the central component, the deepest layer of the psyche. He considered the preconscious and conscious component only as a secondary superstructure over the unconscious. This deep layer of the human psyche, according to Freud, functions on the basis of natural instincts, "primary drives." As the basis of primary drives 3. Freud considered sexual drives, "libido".
3. Freud believed that the unconscious drives of the individual contained a huge destructive force for society. Society, seeking to curb these forces, creates various superstructural mechanisms in the form of social norms and other cultural institutions. The suppression of powerful natural aspirations by social norms, according to Freud, gives rise to religion. Religion is a way of protecting an individual from a social principle hostile to him, that bridle that restrains his aggressive natural instincts. The suppression of instinctive drives, according to Freud, leads to a disorder of the human psyche - neurosis. And religion is considered by Freud as one of the varieties of neurosis - a collective neurosis.
As you know, a neurotic state is a painful state of the human psyche. Being in this state, a person is not able to adequately perceive the world. He enters the world of illusions. Religion, according to Freud, is a form of illusory consciousness. And in this capacity, it plays a positive role for the individual, frees him from suffering. “The pious believer,” says Freud, “is highly protected from the dangers of well-known neurotic diseases: the assimilation of a universal neurosis relieves him of the task of developing a personal neurosis.”
Neurotic states of the individual 3. Freud tried to reduce mainly to the so-called "Oedipus complex". The Oedipus complex, according to his concept, is expressed in the boy's emotional attachment to his mother and the duality of his relationship to his father. Being attracted to his mother, the boy hates and loves his father at the same time. The displacement of this dual feeling from the sphere of consciousness into the sphere of the unconscious leads, according to Freud, to childhood obsessive neuroses. This individual childhood experience of a person serves as the initial material from which religion is formed. Man makes the forces of nature not just humanoid beings with whom he can communicate as equals. This would not correspond to the overwhelming impression of them, but gives them the character of the Father, while following not only the infantile, but also the phylogenetic prototype - Freud states in The Future of an Illusion. Thus, Freud establishes a close connection between the father complex and faith in God, unconscious drives and the realm of culture.
[^ A student of Z. Freud, and later one of his critics, a Swiss scientist, psychoanalyst C. G. Jung (1875-1966) also considers the unconscious as the basis of religion, "" but not the individual, but the collective unconscious. K. Jung draws a clear distinction between the individual and the collective unconscious. The individual unconscious reflects the personal experience of an individual and consists of experiences that were once conscious, but have lost their conscious character due to forgetfulness or suppression. The collective unconscious is a universal human experience, characteristic of all races and peoples. It represents the hidden traces of the memory of the human past, as well as the pre-human animal state. Thus, the collective unconscious, according to Jung, is supernatural, transpersonal-t
Religion as a subject of study
unconscious, archetypes have a non-biological ^ Tsk.p symbolic nature. At the same time, they are present in every person and can be revealed to consciousness in a dream in a myom trance or in a mystical revelation. The content of the archetypes is imprinted in folk myths, fairy tales and other products of the so-called folk creativity. One of the most important forms of manifestation of Jung's point of view is religion. From a content perspective, Jung argues, religion is based on the material of revelations ^ ^ which reflect the initial experience of mankind - |||| in its connection with the sacred. "It can be said that religion is a concept that means a mindset altered by the experience of the sacred," Jung squeaks in Psychology and Religion. Thus, if If a person makes an atheistic conclusion about this worldly, earthly source of origin: religion, Jung uses psychology to substantiate the supernatural source of religion.The Swiss thinker sees his main task in proving the idea that the human soul by nature it is religious. The human soul, - asserts K. Jung, is a window into the world of the sacred, the divine. "-
So, religion is a complex, MEVO-level phenomenon. Therefore, the study and interpretation of the religious phenomenon is carried out by a number of disciplines, the totality of which forms a specific synthetic branch of zyadiya - religion studies. Religious science is not a science in the true sense of the word. It is based on various approaches in the ascertainment of the origins, nature and purposes of religion. And this diversity does not allow religious studies to take an unambiguous ideological position, but calls for ideological shYoralism, equally respectful attitude to the nature of the argumentation of all its representatives.
Literature
/I urf&CfJUfffr^^u
Weber M. Economic ethics of world religions // Works of M. Weber on
sociology of religion and ideology. M., 1985.
Jeme V. Variety of religious experience. M., 1910.
Durkheim E. On the division of social labor. Method of sociology. M., 1990.
Marx K. To the criticism of the Hegelian philosophy of law // Marx K., Engels f.
Marx K. Theses on Feuerbach // Marx K., Engels F. Soch. T. 3.
Mev A. History of religion. In search of the Way, Truth and Life. M., 1955.
Freud 3. Psychoanalysis. Religion. Culture. M., 1991.
Jung K. Archetype and symbol. M., 1991.