The spaces of religion: a view from South Asia*

Anthropologists have spilt much ink deconstructing concepts inherited from the Enlightenment. Religion, possibly most misleading such concept, has proved highly resistant to acid of cross-cultural comparison. Debates about nature religion go back sociocultural anthropology's beginnings as a discipline and beyond. Proposed definitions been numerous, but none come close universal acceptance, mainly because conventional are secularized versions Abrahamic, especially Protestant, positions reproduce their essentialism intellectualism. I argue that by looking closely at way religious phenomena conceptualized in South Asia, how distinct types practised characteristically different spaces, fresh take on subject is possible. Religion not one thing least three activities should be such. But, if so, why totalizing view still so pervasive powerful? Seeking answer question takes us constitution modernity relationship nation-state. The forward contest which become last bastion pure essentialism. Les espaces de la : une vision sud-asiatique Résumé La déconstruction par les anthropologues des hérités du siècle Lumières fait couler beaucoup d'encre. religion, qui est peut-être celui ces égare le plus esprits, s'est avérée très résistante à pierre touche comparaison interculturelle. débats sur remontent aux débuts mêmes l'anthropologie comme discipline, voire au-delà. De nombreuses définitions en ont été proposées mais aucune ne même approchée d'une acceptation universelle, surtout parce que conventionnelles sont sécularisées approches abrahamiques, notamment protestantes, dont elles reproduisent l'essentialisme et l'intellectualisme. L'auteur affirme l'on peut trouver nouvelle manière d'aborder l’étude attentive façon phénomènes religieux conceptualisés Asie Sud, distincts pratiqués dans typiquement différents. Telle qu'elle pratiquée, n'est pas chose unique au moins trois activités différentes, doit être conceptualisée ainsi. Mais ce cas, comment pourquoi totalisatrice est-elle encore si omniprésente puissante ? Pour chercher réponse cette question, il faut remonter modernité liens entre l’État-nation. À partir là, pour avancer, contester devenue dernier l’état pur. In social anthropology, many other disciplines, we face increasing calls our students decolonize curriculum, usually meant: put more works non-White non-Euro-American authors reading list. Anthropology could it combating Eurocentrism its very beginning, this always raison d’être. True though might be, response would miss point. cannot deal itself ‘get out jail free’ card avoid all introspection reflexivity; needs for diverse voices, just disciplines must, anthropologists recognized quite some time ago (e.g. Gough 1968; Spencer 1997). any case, what want theory (Comaroff & Comaroff 2012; Menon 2022), offer here ideas Asia. interrogating is, surely makes sense engage with evolved religiously fertile regions world. These found classical texts region, also daily practice ordinary Asians. This approach opposite direction today, who work now flourishing subfield anthropology Christianity (Aiello 2014). Janet Hoskins (2014: S311) suggested historians succeeded provincializing Europe yet managed ‘provincialize Christianity’. What am suggesting if, change, described using derived Indic traditions, rather than around, make progress both making familiar strange constructing truly comparative religions. As into subject, let me start two slightly easier examples: ‘shaman’ ‘taboo’ specific notions did Euro-America, Siberia Pacific, respectively. They may deployed anywhere. Scholars, rightly, debate definitions, early sources, applicability concept particular contexts. So far know, no argued there complete moratorium outside or Pacific. However, British tradition hesitant use term Africa (Lewis 1986: 79), others expressed doubts whether coherent frequently used inside academy (Atkinson 1992).1 same intellectual process sifting reflexive adaptation properly done – started completed ‘religion’. On hand, assumed something that, form another, humans have, even when they claim anti-religious but, other, seems forms places. A small library formed books trying pin down, without success widespread agreement, definition phenomenon.2 currently hegemonic understanding ‘religion’ dominates legal political regimes truth knowledge animate nation-states international law derives Abrahamic specifically Judaism, Christianity, Islam. past, was belong these traditions; ‘pagan’, kind pre-scriptural lesser religion. ‘Proper religion’ had prophet-founder (or series prophets), belief an Almighty jealous God, scripture, set moral injunctions, sacred buildings specialists, clear boundary, enacted policed through ritual, between believers non-believers. Thanks history assumptions able talk religions ‘a faith’, think beliefs, assume God gods. Many my colleagues, those whose own research do continue this, often relatively unreflexively. All questionable Asia non-Abrahamic parts Thus far, argument believe, uncontroversial. My proposal dispose replace with, break down into, elements. derives, course, training scholar builds Asian scholars.3 try define see does, kinds doing fit together not, case be).4 things, one; things operate, explained below, spaces relationships human body. Different ‘needs’ can satisfied ‘religions’. Since nineteenth century, reform movements moved closer Protestant model. Modernization increases gap public affiliations listed census everyday, mandatory were before modern nation-state became norm. spite long purification, Asians live polytropic universe. ‘Polytropy’ felicitous term, discussed further introduced Carrithers (2000). It caught on, describes real phenomenon, namely universe presupposes powers dangers, propitiated wise person, require full range whom employed afford it.5 words, key concern propitiation polytheism; little interest pursuing consistency across spheres life rationalization Weber's terms. Chaves (2010) called search ‘congruence’. label aspects radically ways approaching R1 (soteriology salvation religion), R2 (social/communal R3 (instrumental religion). Starting bottom up, were, instrumental covers posit supernatural beings (now sometimes parahumans); humans’ relations them mostly avoiding mitigating misfortune. communal rituals attitudes focus society, short belonging. perspective, supernaturals guarantors of, expressions talking arrangements. Finally, religions, R1, disregard downgrade transcendent god principle. Each stance towards ritual. Given theories stances, surprising past each other. major recent sociological historical sociology believe entirely consistent Alan Strathern's Unearthly (2019). Building illustrious forebears (including Jaspers, Eisenstadt, Bellah, Taylor, Assman), Strathern posits fundamental difference immanent worldviews. Societies necessarily around. assumes like Karl Jaspers’ Axial Age, period 700 400 BCE transcendence entered world, discovered separately Buddha Indian sages Confucius, Lao-Tze, China, Greek philosophers Mediterranean, Zoroaster Persia. ‘transcendent (2019: ch. 1) corresponds soteriology R1.6 historian, primarily concerned explain kingship change; his theory, transcendent-immanent contrast enough. For purposes, ethnographer anthropologist, need distinguish, within category ends R2, belonging, R3, fair say world immanentist equivalent Carrithers’ world; essentially, terminologies thing. humanities scholars responded discovery conceptual declaring ‘X does exist’. Anthropologists, famously, kinship, ‘primitive society’, more. ‘Religion’ behind. followed Wilfred Cantwell Smith (2009 [1962]) denying single thing, certainly natural kind, corresponding word (cf. Saler 2000 [1993]). different, culture Werblowsky Wigoder inform ‘The Hebrew language originally … When necessary, loan Persian, dat, came use’ (1997: v, emphasis original). Thus, felt exists, named. tempted idea ‘the rise “religion” correlated decline itself’ (W.C. 2009 [1962]: 19). Even where existed, ancient Rome, meaning (in fact meant similar to, polysemous as, dharma Asia). survey changing over centuries led conclusion word, concepts, dropped’ 50). undoubtedly correct, field, contested. Just methodological nationalism rightly criticized migration studies (Wimmer Glick Schiller 2002), solecism, lower scale, ethnicism.7 field studies, error named religionism. Indeed, religionism said driving impetus creation ‘religious studies’. lines up compares root-and-branch critiques Fitzgerald (2000), McCutcheon (2003; 2019), Masuzawa (2005). product history, motivated interests. Within deconstruction conducted Asad (1993).8 There good reasons proclivity adaptive evolutionary mechanism, Astuti (2022), drawing psychologist Susan Gelman (2003), argued. Psychological necessary learning acquiring well interacting Astuti's ‘[P]sychological disposition essentializing minds spontaneously do’ (2022: 198). children learn, useful, deceptive. Deconstructing essences taken granted people kept science academics business decades. critique valid today; numbers accept force willing allow kind. example, Nesbitt recommends teachers schools adopt ethnographic precisely helps essentialism: ‘An teaching study reduces risk assuming bounded, static, internally homogeneous, depersonalized entities, presenting [a] reified essentialized way’ (2009: 980). encourages alert boundaries crossed categories conflated actual practice. five lessons teach first, noted above, call activity. Of connected, crossovers unclear cases, cultural contexts particularly likely Buddhist By large, activity them. ‘path’ ‘way’ (panth, yana, marg), likened vehicle boat cross sea existence. Westerners readily associate dharma, mean either hunch distant associated kuldharma ‘family dharma’ encompasses everything included under To designate learned kamya rites, vernacular colloquial best (Gellner 1992: 136-9). Independent confirmation salience distinction comes Gold's masterful rich account place pilgrimage village Hinduism (Gold 1988: 301). Local pilgrimages judged efficacy (‘Do deities deliver asked them?’): (R3). At end Ganges submerge bones ancestors, ‘communal celebration evoking vitality fertility’: (R2). simple ‘wandering’, third pilgrimage, ‘to crossing places divine beneficence release available’: (R1). schematized shown Figure 1. quick mnemonic is: Weber, Durkheim, Frazer, or, alliteration, Salvation, Society, Spells.9 Weber theorized typologized everything. But supreme achievement produce world-historical comparisons soteriologies’ economic effects lack thereof). Durkheim aware soteriologies magic, great reductionist, ended going sausage-grinder ‘Society’. inimitable words Evans-Pritchard, ‘It savage made society god’ (1956: 313). Personally, sure. Detailed ethnographies Newar collective Nepal Levy (1990) Toffin (1984; 2010) show cosmologies, collectively enacted, action playing one's part choreography city. Reflective participants conscious orchestration. One Bhaktapur interlocutors Levy's student Parish (1994: 74-5), Brahmin, told him directly god. second lesson purposes provided ritual and/or ideological system sense. Japanese represent arguably extreme functional differentiation, seven contexts, combination systems responsible.10 Japan possible identify four levels expressing creating belonging household nation: (R2) Buddhism Shintoism, both. Instrumental (R3) Buddhism, Daoism competition free market solutions problems life. Salvation overwhelmingly Buddhism. ethical code Confucianism, umbrella observers pointed out, almost never stop think, ‘Is Buddhist, Shinto, else?’ applies Chau writes, biggest problem attempts “mapping” China modeled confessional-affiliational mutually exclusive membership. important whole point book against (mis)understanding’ 11). helpfully distinguishes ‘modalities’ ‘doing religion’: discursive-scriptural, personal-cultivational, liturgical, immediate-practical, relational. less comfortable wholesale dismissal affiliation (Buddhism, Daoism, etc.). Rather, claims sixth modality intimately connected issues identity politics. return below. inheritors logic Jewish monotheism, instinctively apply principle contradiction beliefs; us, gods worshippers classified closed sets, consider antagonism. Statisticians, proceeding laughably literal-minded manner, calculate total number Buddhists, Confucians, Shintoists. An (Hindou), Chinaman, incapable (1991 [1905]: vol. I, 317). Another differentiation Tambiah's (1970) classic structuralist analysis northeast Thailand. summed diagram p. 338. shows contrasting complexes local ‘religion’, Tambiah plausibly treats single, carefully structured whole. He stresses ‘is model villagers’ (Tambiah 1970: 339). usual Theravada countries, locals separate opposed traditions. complex specialists overlaps mutual influences. dominant supplies overall framework values. teaches path umbrella, time. provides powerful protection, remedies. parallel Islamic Lambek's (1993) analyses practices Mayotte terms discourses: (1) Islam, (2) cosmology worldly knowledge, (3) spirit possession. Despite emphatic disagreement available ‘foreign anthropologist her sophisticated technology’ (Lambek 1993: 379), material subjected analysis. Thailand, traditions forming system. agrees societies dominated Japan, vast majority premodern interested classifying themselves followers another (religious matter). That begins change twentieth centuries, internal reasons, movements, external politics ethnicity, nationalism, anticolonial struggle. reconstruction increasingly begin resemble, outwardly, modernist (Gombrich Obeyesekere 1988; Van der Veer 1994). Anagarika Dharmapala, Sinhalese nationalist reformer, pushing (Kemper 2015). characteristics monks priests (even English them). Traditionally, remained probably purest know (with exception Jainism).11 wedding ceremony marriage thought nothing strictly morality, afterlife, salvation. Weddings therefore non-religious matter.12 (Mahayana different: among Newars, tradition.) With spread broadly notion arose ceremony, duly invented (Sakya 2000: 166-200). Likewise, catechisms Colonel Olcott flag, flown throughout world.13 fourth modernization formation leads widening labels assertions side, everyday ‘practice’ what, following Billig (1995), ‘banal religion’, other.14 decennial censuses beginning 1950s Nepal, obligation choose only affiliation, consequent politicization identity, tension categorial mild non-existent 1950, gradually increased. From 1990 onwards, activists several groups (principally Gurungs, Magars, Tharus) redefine group Buddhists Hindus, claims, practice, became, circles, obvious.15 wrong, however, imagine tensions severe country leaders Magars unified effective regard. decided wished returned support Brahmin hegemony, needed get give priests. fact, hundred years decision deep Hinduization. Magar seek remodel life-cycle priest, lay officiants providing liturgical handbooks contemporary movement occurring Tharus, tribal Tarai plains bordering India.16 Research Nepali diaspora United Kingdom supports cleavage formal Hausner 2018; 2019; Gellner 2012).17 Although based diaspora, every reason findings home shrines Nepalis UK migrants Kathmandu cities Nepal. interviewing Gurungs UK, man house state, ‘We Buddhist’. Later, photographing permission) shrine (sometimes corner shelf, occasionally occupying room), contain Hindu itself, sign contradiction: perfectly possible, contradictory, worship considerable between, identification, influenced and, evidence gendered division labour, former sphere being overwhelming male latter female. pressures purifications, (since century intensity twentieth), (Carrithers 2000; 2005). Their symbols multivalent. defines polytropy name ‘eclecticism fluidity [which is] thoroughly [T]he consumers actively turn persons goddesses, living mediums [P]olytropy qualities relationship’ (2000: 834-7). hierarchical worship; dynamic, practical, interactive. example known widely Matsyendranath, sage, Nathpanthi yogi. god's inner actually Karunamaya-Avalokitesvara, bodhisattva compassion Mahayana And beneath ‘Bungadyo’, Bungamati, brings monsoon rains farmers depend (Locke 1980). Sri Lanka Kataragama, worshipped Muslims alike chap. 5). approached done, surprise too, disaggregated types. Humphrey Laidlaw's archetypal actions (1994) useful points works. failed indigeno