A World Religions Reader

“This is the Reader I have long been looking for. This Reader will enhance and enliven any standard textbook by enabling students not just to understand but to feel, not just to study but to pass over to, what these religious communities have been and what they offer our contemporary world.”

Paul Knitter, Union Theological Seminary (of the previous edition).

“This will be an invaluable source for those in Religious Studies who need access to some central texts in translation. The commentaries, lists of data and questions for reflection will be particularly useful for those beginning a study of religions.”

Professor J. S. K. Ward, University of Oxford (of the previous edition).

“This new edition expands an already useful textbook – making it an improved resource for introducing world religions. By presenting excerpts from sacred texts and voices from within the traditions, this book provides more than mere facts about various beliefs; it allows insight into the world‐views and ethical concerns of adherents, making it the most valuable Reader on world religions to date to any stu-dent or teacher that seeks to study or teach the religious traditions of the world.”

S. Wesley Ariarjah, Drew University (of the previous edition)

“An accessible and sympathetic introduction to the world’s religions as understood by their adherents.”Ingrid Mattson, Hartford Seminary, USA (of the previous edition)

A World Religions ReaderFourth Edition

Edited by

Ian S. Markham and Christy Lohr Sapp

This fourth edition first published 2020© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Edition HistoryBlackwell Publishers Ltd (1e, 1996 and 2e, 2000); Blackwell Publishing Ltd (3e, 2009)

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by law. Advice on how to obtain permission to reuse material from this title is available at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

The right of Ian S. Markham and Christy Lohr Sapp to be identified as the authors of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with law.

Registered OfficesJohn Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, USAJohn Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

Editorial OfficeThe Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

For details of our global editorial offices, customer services, and more information about Wiley products visit us at www.wiley.com.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats and by print‐on‐demand. Some content that appears in standard print versions of this book may not be available in other formats.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of WarrantyWhile the publisher and authors have used their best efforts in preparing this work, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this work and specifically disclaim all war-ranties, including without limitation any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives, written sales materials or promotional statements for this work. The fact that an organization, website, or product is referred to in this work as a citation and/or potential source of further information does not mean that the publisher and authors endorse the information or services the organiza-tion, website, or product may provide or recommendations it may make. This work is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a specialist where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data

Names: Markham, Ian S., editor. | Sapp, Christy Lohr, editor. Title: A world religions reader / edited by Ian S. Markham and Christy Lohr Sapp. Description: Fourth edition. | Hoboken, NJ : Wiley-Blackwell, 2020. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2019036680 (print) | LCCN 2019036681 (ebook) | ISBN 9781119357094 (paperback) | ISBN 9781119357018 (adobe pdf) | ISBN 9781119357070 (epub) Subjects: LCSH: Religions–Textbooks. Classification: LCC BL80.3 .W658 2020 (print) | LCC BL80.3 (ebook) | DDC 200–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019036680LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2019036681

Cover Design: WileyCover Images: © arkira/Getty Images, © Jakkree Thampitakkul/Getty Images

Set in 9.5/11.5pt MinionPro by SPi Global, Pondicherry, India

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

For our children Luke Markham and Sadie & Riley Sapp

Brief Contents

List of Maps xiiiPreface to the Fourth Edition xvAcknowledgments xvii

1 Purpose and Method 12 Secular Humanism 133 Indigenous Religions 454 Hinduism 655 Jainism 1056 Buddhism 1157 Chinese Religion 1478 Shintoism 1799 Zoroastrianism 205

10 Judaism 21711 Christianity 24712 Islam 27113 Sikhism 29914 Emerging Religions 329

Worldwide Adherents of All Religions by Six Continental Areas, Mid‐2010 353Annotated Bibliography 357Credits 367Index 379

Contents

List of Maps xiiiPreface to the Fourth Edition xvAcknowledgments xvii

1 Purpose and Method 1

The Purpose 2Defining Religion 3Competing Methodologies 5Defending This Approach 9Use in the Classroom 10

2 Secular Humanism 13

Survey 14Readings in Secular Humanism 15The Secular Mind 15Worldviews 16Ethical Expression 24Modern Expression 34Fact Sheets 42

3 Indigenous Religions 45

Survey 46Readings in Indigenous Religions 48The Indigenous Mind 48Worldviews 49Institutions and Rituals 51Ethical Expression 55Modern Expression 58Fact Sheets 63

x contents

4 Hinduism 65

Survey 66Readings in Hinduism 71The Hindu Mind 71Worldviews 71Institutions and Rituals 87Ethical Expression 88Modern Expression 97Fact Sheets 102

5 Jainism 105

Survey 106Readings in Jainism 107The Jain Mind 107Worldviews 108Institutions and Rituals 109Ethical Expression 110Modern Expression 111Fact Sheets 112

6 Buddhism 115

Survey 116Readings in Buddhism 119The Buddhist Mind 119Worldviews 119Institutions and Rituals 133Ethical Expression 137Modern Expression 140Fact Sheets 143

7 Chinese Religion 147

Survey 148Readings in Chinese Religion 151The Chinese Mind 151Worldviews 152Institutions and Rituals 159Ethical Expression 162Modern Expression 168Fact Sheets 175

8 Shintoism 179

Survey 180Readings in Shintoism 182The Shinto Mind 182Worldviews 182

xicontents

Institutions and Rituals 185Ethical Expression 189Modern Expression 197Fact Sheets 202

9 Zoroastrianism 205

Survey 206Readings in Zoroastrianism 207The Zoroastrian Mind 207Zoroastrian Worldview 207Institutions and Rituals 210Ethical Expression 211Modern Expression 212Fact Sheets 213

10 Judaism 217

Survey 218Readings in Judaism 220The Jewish Mind 220Worldviews 221Institutions and Rituals 224Ethical Expression 227Modern Expression 237Fact Sheets 243

11 Christianity 247

Survey 248Readings in Christianity 250The Christian Mind 250Worldviews 250Institutions and Rituals 254Ethical Expression 257Modern Expression 260Fact Sheets 266

12 Islam 271

Survey 272Readings in Islam 275The Muslim Mind 275Worldviews 275Institutions and Rituals 282Ethical Expression 284Modern Expression 286Fact Sheets 295

xii contents

13 Sikhism 299

Survey 300Readings in Sikhism 302The Sikh Mind 302Worldviews 312Institutions and Rituals 313Ethical Expression 316Modern Expression 320Fact Sheets 325

14 Emerging Religions 329

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter‐Day Saints 331Survey 331Readings in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints 333Mormon Mind 333Worldview 333Institutions and Rituals 335Modern Expression 336Baha’i Faith 337Survey 337Readings in the Baha’i Faith 338The Baha’i Mind 338Worldview 338Institutions and Rituals 339Ethical Expression 340Rastafarianism 341Survey 341Readings in Rastafarianism 342Rasta Mind 342Worldviews 344Institutions and Rituals 346Modern Expression 347Fact Sheets 349

Worldwide Adherents of All Religions by Six Continental Areas, Mid‐2010 353Annotated Bibliography 357Credits 367Index 379

List of Maps

2.1 The distribution of secularists in the world 12 3.1 Areas where indigenous religions are significant 44 4.1 India 64 4.2 Significant communities of Hindus around the world 64 5.1 Distribution of adherents of Jainism 104 6.1 The origins of Buddhism 114 6.2 The location of the three main branches of Buddhism 114 7.1 Significant places for Chinese religion 146 8.1 Japan 178 9.1 Distribution of Zoroastrians 204 10.1 Jewish communities around the world 216 11.1 The origins of Christianity 246 11.2 The distribution of Christians around the world 246 12.1 The origins of Islam 270 12.2 The distribution of Muslims around the world 270 13.1 The origins of Sikhism 298 13.2 Sikh communities around the world 298 14.1 Emerging religions: birthplace of the Mormon faith 327 14.2 Emerging religions: birthplace of the Baha’i faith 327 14.3 Emerging religions: birthplace of Rastafarianism 328

Preface to the Fourth Edition

Our world needs a basic religious literacy. And it is a delight to see that A World Religions Reader is fulfilling this need. Every new edition is an opportunity. Once again we have retained fea-tures that professors and students find helpful. So, to enable cross‐religious comparison, the chap-ters in the Reader are structured in the same way to introduce: the essence of a tradition (which is called the ‘mind’), worldviews, institutions and rituals, ethical expression, and modern expres-sion. As a teaching tool, the Reader has retained ‘fact sheets’ at the end of each chapter, including a glossary, and an annotated bibliography. We have also retained the spirit of each chapter: the focus is to provide a sympathetic introduction to each tradition through the primary texts. The dark and destructive side of religion is outlined in the chapter on secular humanism, which is treated as a ‘faith tradition’ and also outlined in a sympa-thetic way.

These then are the features that we have retained. However, we have been persuaded that there needs to be a narrative survey of each tradi-tion that prepares the reader for the hard work of grappling with the primary sources. We have structured each of these substantial introductions

with the same format  –  Introduction, History, Teaching, Practice, Shadow Side, and Attraction and Appeal. It means that the student has an overview before realizing the inevitable distance between summary and primary texts.

The goal is a textbook that is both a gentle introduction and demanding exploration. Basic concepts are explained. Those who are completely unfamiliar with a tradition will have a sense of the journey and appeal of that religion; and those who are able and want to dig much deeper will have some good, technical, demanding, primary texts that require engagement.

This is a book that invites the student into a conversation. Around the table, we have the full spectrum of traditions, including a secular humanist. There are trends in our world that seek to polarise, divide, and distort; these trends are not interested in the conversation. This project seeks to celebrate the conversation; our human capacity to understand, engage, and listen to the other is a gift. We believe that we should utilise that capacity. And we hope that this volume will witness to the value of the conversation and chal-lenge those who would rather denigrate from afar rather than sit at the table and listen or engage.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to those in our lives who invited us to be curious and interested. It sometimes feels as if the world is becoming increasingly tribal, where difference is turned into a reason for hos-tility. So for our families, friends, teachers, and professors  –  those who made us seek to under-stand rather than caricature, we are deeply grateful.

This fourth edition of A World Religions Reader has been made possible by Rebecca Harkin (who originally asked us to do this new

edition) and by Catriona King (who oversaw the project through to completion). Elisha Benjamin took the book into production; Sandra Kerka improved the book at the editing stage; Lara Haft assisted with new research; and Katherine Malloy and Alison Malloy worked on the index.

A Conant grant made this project possible; we are grateful for the commitment of the Episcopal Church to fund such projects.

Ian Markham and Christy Lohr Sapp

CHAPTER 1

A World Religions Reader, Fourth Edition. Edited by Ian S. Markham and Christy Lohr Sapp. © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Published 2020 by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

1 PURPOSE AND METHOD

The Purpose

Defining Religion

Competing Methodologies

Defending This Approach

Use in the Classroom

purp ose and method2

Prophets of secularism keep on predicting the demise of religion: given the dramatic discoveries of science, they argue, it is only a matter of time before religion disappears. Yet each obituary seems a little premature. Neanderthal humans living 150,000 years ago were intensely religious and, despite all the progress and numerous differ-ences between then and now, they share this char-acteristic with the majority of citizens in the United States today. Religion continues to survive and thrive despite its secular opponents.

Yet religious people in the secular West cannot ignore the challenge of secularism. So many assumptions made in our schools, colleges, and universities constantly question the value of reli-gion. Can one affirm scientific discoveries and still be religious? Is it possible to be tolerant of diversity and be religious? Does everyday com-mon sense make religion plausible or practical? This is a reader intended for those who find themselves interested in religion, yet aware of and wanting to engage with these questions.

The next chapter will explore the case for sec-ular humanism. Science, philosophy, and concern for a tolerant society all come together to insist that religion is both untrue and damaging. The rest of the book invites each of the major religious traditions in turn to explain how the given tradi-tion is coherent and helpful to society. Each chap-ter invites the reader to enter into dialogue by empathising with each religion in turn. Each attempts to present its tradition in a sympathetic light. You do not have to agree, but you will be invited to understand.

This opening chapter is intended to explain the interpretative structure and method that will be used in this reader. So first, we shall outline what this book is not. Second, we shall attempt to define the subject matter of this reader. Here we shall examine briefly the thorny question of the defini-tion of ‘religion’. Third, we shall define the approach adopted here against alternative approaches used in other comparable texts and defend it against possible criticism. And, finally, we shall explain how best to use the text in the classroom. Much that follows will be quite demanding and it is required reading for those planning to use the text in teaching. However, for those simply interested in religion, it is perfectly possible to skip the rest of this chapter and move to the next chapter.

The Purpose

To start with, this book is a gentle introduction. It is possible simply to use the first section of each chapter, where the student is invited to under-stand the history, teaching, practices, shadow side, and appeal of each religion. We have kept technical language to a minimum. We want all students to find this world accessible. Then the book becomes a reader. To understand a tradi-tion, one needs to access the sources that define or typify that tradition. Ideally one needs to learn the necessary language(s), and then read the scriptures or other texts of the tradition in the original. But most of us do not have the time (let alone the skill) to master all the relevant lan-guages. So turning to good translations can pro-vide a helpful way in (though translations can never be perfect and free from interpretations). This is still called a reader because it brings together significant texts. At the end of each chapter one must be sensitive to the complexities of each tradition. Every one of them has had a long and enormously complex history. Many thousands of people have grappled with these texts for entire lifetimes; no course in the study of religion would be satisfactory if it did not leave the student slightly confused.

The vantage point that is taken is of a faithful adherent of a tradition; we have sought to identify the ‘mainstream’ Muslim or Buddhist. We have attempted to find representative conver-sation partners for each tradition. However, it must be recognised that this book is not a sys-tematic survey of all the strands of each tradi-tion. Put two humans together, and disagreements seem inevitable. Each tradition divides again into numerous subdivisions. So Christianity divides into Orthodoxy, Roman Catholicism, and Protestantism. Protestants divide into Anglicans, Baptists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Methodists – to name but a few. Major divi-sions of each tradition are taken account of (e.g. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism within Christianity, Sunni and Shia within Islam). But for more detail about the different schools, one needs to refer to a history or encyclopedia of religion.

The combination of the gentle introduction and the primary texts enables the student both to

3purp ose and method

get an overview and, simultaneously, grasp the complexity of each tradition. The overview is important because it is the way in for those who are unfamiliar. The complexity is important because it is all too easy to imagine that one understands that which is often very alien and very different. Working with the primary text is an important skill to learn. These are texts from scriptures, texts from authorities, texts from scholars, and texts from converts. There is hard work. Most of the texts were not written with the expectation that they would be studied in a twenty‐first‐century classroom. Inconsistencies were never ironed out. Ambiguous points were not clarified. St. Paul did not expect his letter to the Roman church to become a foundational text for the Christian Church and therefore subject to centuries of argu-ment. Religion would be much easier if one could ignore the messiness of the primary texts. But this would miss so much. The primary texts expose both the brilliance and the bumbling confusion that lie at the heart of most innovation. It is the brilliance that justifies the study; it is the confusion that makes the study so hard.

This then is the invitation. Enjoy easing into our conversation partners and then learn to struggle with the primary texts. Now as a ‘World Religions Reader’, we need to examine precisely what this is a reader of. In other words, what do we mean by the word ‘religion’?

Defining Religion

Consider the following definition of religion:

The real characteristic of religious phenomena is that they always suppose a bipartite division of the whole universe, known and knowable, into two classes which embrace all that exists, but which radically exclude each other. Sacred things are those which the interdictions protect and isolate; profane things, those to which these interdictions are applied and which must remain at a distance from the first. Religious beliefs are the representa-tions which express the nature of sacred things and the relations which they sustain, either with each other or with profane things.1

1 Emile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (London: George Allen & Unwin, 1915), p. 41.

Emile Durkheim, the brilliant sociologist, offered this definition after his careful study of primitive societies. It is a definition that stresses the distinc-tion between the sacred and the profane. This definition highlights, implicitly, the rituals and practices of a religion, and indicates that these overt religious practices are justified by a sense of the sacred. Now although this distinction is an important feature of much religion, it is by no means universal. Confucianism, for example, is not primarily preoccupied with it. Furthermore, Durkheim’s definition enabled him to reduce the significance of religion to its societal role. For example, the sense of the sacred is evoked within the individual by needs and conditions imposed by the greater entity – society as a whole. In other words, Durkheim’s definition stresses that feature of religion that served his academic interests and purposes. He has ensured that sociology should be the paramount discipline for understanding religion. Freud defined religion in terms of trans-ference and illusion, and hidden in his definition was the assumption that psychology is the key to illuminate the nature of religion.2

Even more overtly theological definitions of religion end up making the same mistake. So Paul Tillich, for example, defines religion thus:

Religion is the state of being grasped by an ulti-mate concern, a concern which qualifies all other concerns as preliminary and which itself contains the answer to the question of the mean-ing of our life. Therefore this concern is uncon-ditionally serious and shows a willingness to sacrifice any finite concern which is in conflict with it.3

This is a major theme found throughout Tillich’s work and he may well have identified correctly the attitude of most committed religious people. However, as a definition, it ignores all those who are nominal in their allegiances. Such people might still consider themselves religious

2 Peter Byrne and Peter Clarke illustrate this point with appropriate rigour in their important book Definition and Explanation in Religion (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1993).3 Paul Tillich, Christianity and the Encounter with the World Religions (New York: Columbia University Press, 1963), p. 6.

purp ose and method4

but do not feel it requires what they would prob-ably see as a fanatical identification with a tradi-tion. Furthermore, this definition ignores the content of religion (no mention of any beliefs in the supernatural); it simply concentrates on the attitude of religious people. The problem is that the same attitude can be found in politics or the arts. Some Marxists, for example, treat their com-mitment to the Revolution as their ‘ultimate con-cern’, but they would certainly not want to be described as religious.4 This tendency to define religion in such a way that one picks out what one thinks matters most is almost universal. In each case, one species or another of reductionism is at work.

It is difficult to see how we can find a defini-tion that embraces ‘Confucianism’ (mainly an ethical system) and ‘Christianity’ (emphasizing a revelation of God in Christ). We have already seen with Durkheim, Freud, and Tillich how many of the most influential definitions of ‘reli-gion’ have hidden implications about the nature and significance of religion and how limited they are. Definitions are not ‘value free’. From each dis-cipline or standpoint a definition is offered, and each produces a different key to unlock the secrets of religion.

Perhaps the way out of the definition prob-lem is to follow the advice of Wittgenstein. Wittgenstein felt that it was a mistake to search for the essence of a ‘thing’ which would embrace everything in that category. Consider the word ‘game’. It is very difficult to formulate a definition that embraces all games. If, for example, we try to define games around the word ‘sociable’, we could not include the card game solitaire. If we try to define games around ‘entertainment’, again we find problems. This would include activities like films, which are not games, and exclude other activities, which some find anything but enter-taining but many would see as undoubtedly a  ‘game’, like bullfighting. Instead, suggested Wittgenstein, certain defining words will cover some instances and exclude others, and other

4 For a good discussion of Durkheim and Tillich’s defini-tion of religion, see W. Richard Comstock, The Study of Religion and Primitive Religions (New York: Harper & Row, 1972). pp. 18–27. We are grateful for his illuminating dis-cussion of the problems involved in defining religion.

definitions will link in with each other. It is like a rope with no particular strand linking every part but different strands linking different parts, mak-ing a certain integrity for the whole. So some reli-gions are metaphysical, others are more ethical, whereas others again are more preoccupied with ritual. Others stress orthodoxy (correct belief) whereas others think orthopraxis (correct action) is central.5 As far as our present purpose is con-cerned, the point of this flexible approach is that no judgement about the significance of religion in general or of certain traditions in particular is implied by inclusion in the volume. Religion is not necessarily about ‘worshipping God’ or ‘hav-ing a certain lifestyle’. Indeed as we start the study of the religious phenomena, prepare to be sur-prised by the diverse forms it takes in the world.

After Wittgenstein the quest for an all‐embrac-ing definition that captures the essence of all forms of religion is no longer appropriate. Nevertheless a writer’s attempt at a definition sets the contours for subsequent analysis. So, with modesty and for practical purposes, we offer a ‘definition’ of religion that both underlies and embraces the descriptions that follow in this book. Religion, for us, is a way of life (one which embraces a total worldview, certain ethical demands, and certain social practices) that refuses to accept the secular6 view that sees human life as nothing more than complex bun-dles of atoms in an ultimately meaningless universe.

Positively, this definition stresses the poten-tially all‐embracing nature of religion; negatively, it stresses the religious hostility to the modern secular worldview. Not all those who call them-selves ‘religious’ would necessarily agree that reli-gion is all embracing, but the role models in all traditions (Jesus, the Buddha, etc.) do set just such an ideal. And even the most antimetaphysi-cal form of Buddhism would concede that

5 Byrne and Clarke make this suggestion: see Definition and Explanation in Religion (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1993), pp. 28–78.6 Timur Yuskaev correctly points out that the word ‘secular’ has different meanings in different contexts. The meaning used here describes the ‘aggressive atheism’ found in the West. The word ‘secular’ in many Muslim countries, for example, simply means ‘nonobservant’.

5purp ose and method

reductionist science is a distortion of the way the world is. Certainly, a textbook concentrating on the ‘orthodox’ (i.e. traditional and widespread beliefs) strands of all traditions would accept this definition as capturing an essential element of their tradition.

‘Secular humanism’ then is not a religion, although curiously it does share certain features with religion. Secular humanists often see them-selves as detached from religion; they stand out-side and view religion as ‘observers’. In many societies they have established a kind of norma-tive status. Despite the considerable strength of religious communities, the perception prevails that religion is in decline and increasingly irrele-vant  –  a perception often accepted by religious people themselves. The media seem to define the secular as the norm and the religious as odd. And where the practices surrounding religion have declined, religion becomes an anthropological curiosity. For many in the West, religion provokes feelings of strangeness: what an odd way to dress! How peculiar it is to be so preoccupied with met-aphysical issues! Yet what this attitude overlooks is that the secularised liberal Westerner is as strange to the religious adherent as religious adherents are to secularised Westerners (even though some religious people may live simultane-ously in both worlds). Since death is the only cer-tainty in our short lives (short, that is, compared with eternity), how can one be so presumptuous as to disregard the religious dimension of life? With the almost universal testimony of all other cultures (both historical and global) that we are not simply bundles of atoms facing extinction when we die, how dare the West assume a meta-physic of scientific reductionism? Indifference to religion is a ‘worldview’ and not merely a set of natural attitudes. And the factors that generated Western indifference have a history with major texts that attract converts. In other words, the Western secularist outlook, to which we are refer-ring here as ‘secular humanism’, has many simi-larities with a religious tradition. It is even a significant starting point for many teachers and students of religion, and offers a major challenge for the religious to answer.

This broadly post‐modern insight is crucial. We need to become much more sensitive to what Alasdair MacIntyre calls the tradition‐constituted

nature of all enquiry.7 All of us approach ques-tions from a given vantage point. There is no neu-tral standpoint from which all questions can be evaluated. We cannot transcend all cultures and peer down from on high. Being committed to Christianity as the fullest revelation of God, or an advocate of religious pluralism (i.e. all religions are equally valid and legitimate), or an indifferent secularist are all positions that have emerged from a culture with a history and have been for-mulated around texts. In these senses at least, all are on the same footing.

Competing Methodologies

Having given some sense of what this reader takes religion to be and to signify, we must now decide on the appropriate methodology. As we have already seen, methodology cannot be easily derived from questions about definition, so it is helpful to discuss method questions under a sep-arate heading. Methodology questions come in two parts. First, we have the question of approach. Are we committed to objectivity (e.g. in the form of a historical‐comparative method or a phenom-enological method) or are we more confessional (taking our stance within, for example, Islam or Christianity)? Second, we have the questions of content. For example, do we assume the socio-logical perspective when grappling with religion as the best way of identifying its significant ele-ments? Or do we take its ‘official’ list of tenets and prescriptions? We shall now deal with these two questions in turn.

We propose to discuss four different approaches to the teaching and study of religious studies. These are (a) the historical‐comparative method, (b) the phenomenological method, (c) the confessional approach, and (d) the empa-thetic approach. The first two have dominated the religious studies scene since the 1960s.8

The historical‐comparative method suggests that the study of religion should involve a

7 See Alasdair MacIntyre, Whose Justice? Which Rationality? (London: Duckworth, 1988).8 For a superb history of the study of comparative reli-gion, see Eric Sharpe, Comparative Religion: A History, 2nd edn (London: Duckworth, 1986).

purp ose and method6

comparison of the historical formulations of each tradition. It seeks to demonstrate historical con-nections and differences, thereby identifying independent occurrences of similar phenomena. Two assumptions need to be made explicit: first, that it is possible to access an ‘objective’ history or situation; and, second, this method ‘aims to be as objective as possible about the nature and power of a religion; it is not concerned with whether a particular faith is true’.9 Is it really possible to be genuinely objective? This is a problem that we shall return to. But there are other difficulties, such as a tendency to assume that we can identify homogeneity and ‘good doctrinal behaviour’ in a religion, whereas there is often virtually infinite diversity. And shared features are liable to be taken to exaggerate similarity whereas particular contexts differ greatly.

The phenomenological method defies easy description. Douglas Allen is correct to point out: ‘The term has become very popular and has been utilised by numerous scholars, who seem to share little if anything in common’.10 Phenomenological comes from phenomenon which literally means ‘appearance’. Thus most phenomenologists try to systematise and classify the phenomena of reli-gion – the things that ‘appear’ to us. Among the numerous schools using this method, the follow-ing features seem to be important. The study of religion should be empirical, in that one studies religion free from any a priori assumptions; it should be descriptive and historical, in that one  is trying to understand these traditions objectively; and, finally, it will be antireduction-ist (i.e. opposed to any attempt to turn religion into a branch of psychology or sociology). It accepts religion as a distinctive phenomenon in its own right.

The phenomenological approach shares with the historical‐comparative approach a stress on the need for objectivity when studying religion. Although it is true that some phenomenologists have suggested that the concept of epoché (i.e. a

9 Ninian Smart, ‘Comparative-Historical Method’, in Mircea Eliade (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1987), vol. 3, p. 572.10 Douglas Allen, ‘Phenomenology of Religion’, in Mircea Eliade (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1987), vol. 11, p. 273.

‘means of bracketing beliefs and preconceptions we normally impose on phenomena’11) provides a way of empathizing and understanding the object of study which removes the ‘coldness’ that may seem to be a drawback of the traditional detach-ment of the scholar, most phenomenologists have wanted to stress fairness and the objectivity which that entails.

Objectivity is at the heart of the first two approaches; it is often seen as the central aca-demic virtue. Teachers have power; it would be wrong to abuse that power by attempting to per-suade a person to a particular viewpoint. So, one should not admit affinity with any particular tra-dition. Instead, one simply reports each tradition dispassionately and accurately. Using the best contemporary scholarship, one offers appropriate judgements about the plausibility or otherwise of certain central narratives. So, for example, sci-ence has shown that miracles are very unlikely; therefore, it would be fair to suggest that the Krishna stories in Hinduism or the virgin birth story in Christianity are highly improbable, yet without dogmatizing.

This goes along with the assumption of liberal tolerance. One of the hopes that often lies behind religious studies as an academic discipline is the creation of a liberal and understanding culture. As people understand, so they can tolerate. Liberalism in this setting celebrates the right of each individual to affirm his or her own tradition, provided that this affirmation does not exclude others from affirming their traditions.

There is much that is commendable in this approach. Certainly, one hopes that knowledge of other religious traditions will convey an appro-priate sense of humility and mutual respect. And the quest for accuracy is a wholly appropriate aca-demic virtue. However, what these two approaches overlook is that the very claim to offer an objec-tive survey of these diverse traditions easily cre-ates a completely misleading impression.

The impression given by such cold, unin-volved accounts is of the essentially arbitrary or even bizarre character of religion. When the beliefs of these different traditions are reported with such detachment and neutrality, students are

11 Ibid., p. 281.

7purp ose and method

left bewildered. They are puzzled that anyone can be so certain about a particular religion that he would dedicate his life to it. Further, when they are presented with a stream of unfamiliar names and places, the raw data of a religion, they fail to see the achievement and the vibrant reality that attract people to it. ‘Objective’ study taught by the ‘dispassionate’ and ‘neutral’ teacher creates a world of curiosities. Religions are judged by the canons of neutral scholarship and exposed as equally odd and incredible. Religious traditions come across as antiquated anachronisms that resist progress and promote intolerance. The impression is given that the Western, liberal, sci-entific worldview is on the whole true and benefi-cent; tolerance, seen as a major social good, is better assisted by secularism.

The third approach to the study of religion is a strong and total reaction to the dangers in ‘objectivity’. This is the confessional approach. Advocates of this approach believe it is better for children and students to ‘inhabit’ and to be instructed within a particular religious tradi-tion, thereby taking religion seriously, than to end up with a secular indifference to all religion. A confessional approach assumes the truth or worth of one tradition, and then may offer an analysis and evaluation of the others. Similarities can be affirmed, but differences must also be confronted. Religious traditions do not all agree. Muslims disagree with Christians over the sig-nificance and status of Jesus. This is a disagree-ment about truth. Therefore both cannot be right – there is a significant issue to be consid-ered. A confessional approach is not afraid to acknowledge this; and it is willing to try to resolve disagreements from the vantage point of a certain tradition.

The difficulty with this approach is clear. By assuming the truth of a tradition, one can easily distort and misrepresent its rivals. So, for exam-ple, consider a Christian teacher offering judge-ments on Islam from the Christian perspective. It is all too easy to move from confronting disagree-ment to caricature and misunderstanding. So, from the understandable judgement that Muslims are too simplistic when they insist that the doc-trine of the Trinity undermines monotheism, it is all too easy to go on to suggest that the distortion was somehow perverse. Judging another tradition

by the standards internal to one’s own will easily lead to its distortion.

Clearly an alternative approach is needed. This book commends the fourth approach, which John Dunne calls the ‘process of ‘passing over’,12 but which we prefer to call the ‘empathetic’ approach.13 John Dunne gets to the heart of this approach when he describes the need to under-stand the outlook of others. He writes:

You find yourself able to pass over from the standpoint of your life to those of others, enter-ing into a sympathetic understanding of them, finding resonances between their lives and your own, and coming back once again, enriched, to your own standpoint.14

We know that every person comes to the study of religion with a particular perspective. Neutrality and objectivity are not options. However, it is a mistake to move from this fact to the conclusion that we are bound to distort and misrepresent each other. Fortunately, this is not the case. When we encounter difference in other areas of society, we find all sorts of ways to under-stand. It is often in listening to a person’s story that we find ourselves empathizing. Humans have a remarkable capacity to use the imagination to enter into positions they do not hold. The imagi-nation is vital in the study of religion.

In this book we have sought to ‘empathise’ with each tradition in turn. Each chapter has attempted to represent each tradition from the perspective of a fairly orthodox adherent, so that it is represented in its best or most typical light. Hinduism makes much of its age; Islam stresses rationality; and Confucianism offers its demanding ethic. All these claims can be disputed, and in other parts of the book these claims are challenged. The total

12 John Dunne, A Search for God in Time and Memory (London: Sheldon Press, 1967), p. ix.13 Our gratitude goes to Elizabeth Rowland for suggest-ing this term. Dunne’s term stresses the process, whereas ‘empathetic’ stresses the content. Although Dunne is right to say that one passes over to the object of enquiry and then returns enriched, we want to stress that the return should not happen until one is able to defend the other as if it is one’s own.14 John Dunne, A Search for God in Time and Memory (London: Sheldon Press, 1967), p. viii–ix.

purp ose and method8

experience of the book (and the course, when this book is used as the main text) exposes all the main arguments between the traditions by proceeding along these lines.

What the ‘best possible light’ actually means will vary from tradition to tradition. In persuad-ing others, some traditions are happier to be more self‐critical than others. Although Hindus might defend the theory of caste, few would defend the practice. Most Western Christians would distance themselves from the traditional (i.e New Testament) view of women, whereas many Muslims want to insist that the Qur’anic under-standing of the different gender roles is both appropriate and enlightened. In all three cases, we are talking about the majority of mainstream Hindus, Christians, and Muslims. Judgements of  this sort are very difficult to make; they are impressions based on the arguments commonly used to defend each tradition. However, such judgements are required by the empathetic approach. The reader will reflect these difficult judgements, in both the selection of texts and the surrounding commentary.

For some students, and perhaps some teach-ers, to empathise with a different tradition seems disloyal to one’s own. At this point, one needs to be persuaded that understanding from within a different tradition (in Dunne’s terms, ‘passing over’ to it and then ‘returning’) is not an act of disloyalty. In other fields it is considered essen-tial: a physicist wanting to defend her theory works very hard to make sure that the position of an opponent is understood. One does this pri-marily out of respect for the truth. If one really has the truth about the matter in dispute, then alternatives cannot undermine it. It is only in looking at a tradition with the greatest sympathy and inner understanding that one is really in a position to offer reasons why one might think it mistaken.

The empathetic approach suggests three stages in the study of other religions:

Stage 1: First recognise where one is coming from – the traditions that have influenced one’s own upbringing.

Stage 2: Using the imagination, attempt to under-stand the other tradition sufficiently well to defend it as one’s own.

Stage 3: In the light of the first two stages, now make decisions. This will involve either an act of clarification or an act of modification. If one is not persuaded, then one will be in a position to clarify the reasons why one prefers the initial position; if one is persuaded to some degree, then one will find the initial position modified.

Now that we have described and defended the methodological approach of this book, it is neces-sary to ask methodological questions about con-tent. The problem is that religion is such a complex phenomenon that the study of the data can come from a variety of perspectives. Richard Comstock lists five.15 First, one can start with the psychological perspective. Being human involves coping with our ‘drives’ – our feelings of friend-ship, sexuality, and our hopes for success or power. Freud believed that religious symbols played a repressive role, by controlling certain inner aspirations. Carl Jung believed that religion had a more positive role; it was in some sense necessary to human well‐being. The two men shared the belief that religion needs to be exam-ined from the psychological standpoint.

The second perspective is sociological. We have already seen in relation to Durkheim the way in which religion has primarily a social role. From this perspective, its paramount role is the way its community‐constructed symbols bind the community together. The third perspective is his-torical. The earlier two ignore the changes and developments in religion over time; they tend to  treat religion in the nonhistorical abstract. However, ideas arise because of and in relation to a certain context. Some sort of historical account can be offered for every idea; nothing happens in a vacuum. Accounting for change within a reli-gious tradition becomes the paramount task for the historical perspective.

The fourth perspective takes a particular idea (e.g. priest) from one tradition and compares it with the equivalents in other traditions. This is called the ‘form‐comparative’ perspective. By tak-ing a particular form (a rite or institution) one can compare across traditions. This approach tends to

15 W. Richard Comstock, The Study of Religion and Primitive Religions (New York: Harper & Row, 1972), pp. 13–17.

9purp ose and method

concentrate on the ways that traditions operate and coexist today.

The final approach Comstock calls the ‘her-meneutical or semiological approach’.16 Here the focus is on the symbols underpinning the overt discourse. Although many of the other perspec-tives take account of the symbolic in their analy-sis, a growing number of writers have made this much more central. For example, Claude Lévi‐Strauss believes that the symbolic is not the realm of blind emotion but reflects a high and demand-ing degree of order.

The empathetic approach does not start from any of these perspectives on content, although it may touch on all of them. From within, a believer does not organise her tradition into these differ-ent perspectives. Faith touches every part of a person’s life and presents itself as a whole. Religion touches both the things you believe and the way you behave. To explain from within, one does not use an external discipline (such as psychology) to make sense of one’s tradition. In this sense, the phenomenologists are right: religion cannot be reduced to another discipline.

So methodologically, this is a book with a difference. Each tradition is presented in the best possible light. The basic ideas are intro-duced within a narrative that attempts to per-suade the reader. The hope is that anyone who reads the chapter with which they identify will find it fair and persuasive. The total experience of the book is that one is led to sympathise with each tradition. We start with Secular Humanism; this is a context for many of our readers. Then we invite the following traditions to reply: indigenous traditions, Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Chinese religion, Japanese religion, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Sikhism, and emerging religious traditions. We understand, and we engage. Naturally, each chapter is only sufficient to provide an intro-duction, but it will convey something of the dis-tinctiveness of each tradition and provide basic knowledge sufficient for understanding more complex material on each tradition.

The book is structured to enable comparison across the chapters. Each chapter starts with the

16 Ibid., p. 16.

gentle introduction. Then it moves to the read-ings. The readings start with a short passage cap-turing ‘the mind’ of the tradition. This is a representative passage from the tradition, and aims to convey the feel of a tradition. Then we work through ‘worldviews’ (i.e. beliefs), ‘institu-tions and rituals’ (i.e. experiences of faith within the community), and ‘ethical expression’. Finally, each chapter concludes with the ‘modern out-look’ – an opportunity to look at contemporary trends in the tradition. In each case this section concludes with the story of a twentieth‐century adherent  –  sometimes a convert, sometimes a brilliant exponent. It is often in listening to a per-son’s story that we can best understand another tradition.

Under the ethics section, we have chosen to pay special attention to the ‘role of women’. Naturally, under the ethics heading any number of subjects could have been identified as special examples (e.g. war or ecology). However, an interfaith perspective on women is especially interesting. This is partly because we are per-suaded that the patriarchal abuse of women through religion is one of the greatest religious and ethical questions of our time, and partly because an interfaith perspective undermines some of the more simplistic critiques of patriar-chy. Anne Primavesi, for example, seems con-vinced that the eradication of dualism would transform gender power relations.17 The inter-faith perspective throws this into question because the monist traditions are as patriarchal as the dualist ones. The passing over and coming back will not necessary lead to easy or comforta-ble enrichment; it might instead lead to deep and disturbing bewilderment. This, we think, is the case with the global religious treatment of women.

Defending This Approach

Courses in the study of religions are under increasing attack. Most institutions find them-selves required to provide such courses, yet many teachers consider them inappropriate. The prob-lem is that global courses weaving through several

17 See Anne Primavesi, From Apocalypse to Genesis (Tunbridge Wells, Kent: Burns and Oates, 1991).

purp ose and method10

traditions create a misleading impression. Superficial (and therefore often misleading) simi-larities are identified; differences are not really understood. The student is granted the impres-sion of knowing, when in reality greater confu-sion reigns.

How do we respond to this attack? First of all, we can all agree that the ideal is for a student to spend at least six months living among the adher-ents of another faith. Perhaps they can master the language; certainly, they should be able to under-stand the way the lived tradition affects home and work. This is the ideal. However, it is hopelessly impractical. Resources and time will not permit such a global course.

So the question becomes: is it better to have some knowledge of all major traditions or consid-erable knowledge of a few? Most of us would agree that expertise can be attained only in one or two religions. However, some knowledge of the others is necessary for two reasons. First, we need to make sense of the diversity of religious tradi-tions in the world and perhaps in our own envi-ronment. To do this, we need some knowledge of the nature and extent of that diversity. Provided one is aware of the superficiality of that knowl-edge, it is still better to have some awareness than none at all. Second, our own cultural and reli-gious setting in the West will become unintelligi-ble unless we start understanding the other world faiths. Westerners can now form a strong identifi-cation with Buddhism even though they have not learned the primary languages or lived within an overtly Buddhist culture. In other words, part of our cultural setting includes Westerners adopting non‐Western traditions. If we want to understand our own cultural and religious situations, we need to understand the nature of such conversions. And to do that we need some understanding of the native traditions that are being developed.

The main anxiety is that a superficial under-standing ignores the complexity of the other world faiths. This is where a reader is invaluable. You cannot come away from primary texts of the major world faiths with the impression that you now know everything there is to know. Each tradition

is tricky. Numerous questions will be raised. The reader, by definition, cannot answer all of them, but it will make it abundantly clear that they exist. It is an introduction to the world faiths whose use-fulness will not easily be exhausted.

Although it is hoped that other people will pick up this volume out of interest, the majority of its readers will be students. Chiefly this textbook is intended for students taking an ‘Introduction to world religions’ course, or its equivalent.

Use in the Classroom

For teaching, this text should be used as a basis for lectures, seminars, and classes. It forces stu-dents to read some of the primary material underpinning each tradition. It is intended as a discussion starter, encouraging students to think through questions about truth, the relation of religion and society, the impact of religion on women, and the changing nature of a tradition in the modern world. Students should also be reminded to think through the particularities of premodern texts and should be dissuaded from projecting modern sensibilities onto these.

The fact sheets at the end of each chapter pro-vide a revision summary of the major points. The sheets include the following: A Selected Summary of Beliefs, Historical Highlights, Major Festivals, Key Terms, and questions for discussion and essays. These questions divide into two types: those that reflect on the material in the chapter and those that invite comparisons with other sec-tions of the book.

Trying to understand the unfamiliar is a diffi-cult task. The task is made harder by the enor-mous language barrier between the traditions. So, in an attempt to make life a little easier, the book has followed the following language rule. Where possible words in other languages (e.g. Sanskrit) are transliterated in a way that more or less reflects their English pronunciation. No distinc-tion has been made between long and short vow-els. Naturally, where a text has used a different principle, then this has been respected.