Picture the following scenes. Cave dwellers in Western Europe 35,000 years ago are burying one of the children
of their tribe, taking pains to arrange the body in a deliberate pattern, and adorning it with special ornaments
and pigmentation. An aged ascetic in India sits quietly in contemplation at the edge of a forest. A Buddhist monk
in Sri Lanka walks effortlessly along a pebbled pathway meditating in a monastery garden. A prophet in ancient
Israel announces the coming of the "Day of the Lord." Such gestures usually go by the name "religion."
And the purpose of this book is to make some sense of this amazingly diverse and persistent phenomenon. Activities
like those just mentioned have been going on for thousands of years, and in spite of the modern suspicion of religion
they are likely to continue for a lot longer. For years, too, scholars have been trying to understand religion,
but they are still at a loss to say exactly what it is. Nonetheless, they keep trying, and the present book continues
the effort to understand what is perhaps the most distinctively human of all our habits. Why do people engage in
religious activity? What do they hope to accomplish by such exceptional modes of consciousness and conduct? What
good does religion do? Its it any longer an essential aspect of human existence, even granted that it has certainly
been prevalent throughout human history? Is it an honest approach to life, or is it perhaps an escapist business
that we can easily dispense with today? What connection does it have to amorality, to the way we decide what is
good or bad, to the way we behave? Are its many ideas about "another dimension" or an "ultimate
reality" truthful or illusory? Is it compatible with reason and science? Does religion make us any happier
than we would otherwise be? How does it link up with the rest of life? These are some of the questions we shall
address in this text. The Distinctiveness of Religion I doubt that I would be using the term "religion,"
or that the reader would have any idea of what I am talking about, unless we had already tacitly agreed that there
is indeed something distinct about the phenomena to which the word "religion" seems to be pointing. But
it is not easy to put a finger on exactly what this is. Literally thousands of scholars have attempted to define
religion, always with less than satisfying results. No matter how carefully they "define" religion, other
experts will eagerly indicate what the definition has left out. Nevertheless, our detaching a certain type of activity
from the totality of human life and labeling it "religion" is given considerable assistance by the fact
that such gestures as those four listed at the beginning are already clearly different form "ordinary"
ways of behaving. They stand out on their own, at least as far as our modern way of looking at things is concerned.
It is difficult to avoid noticing their quality of being "set apart." Religious activity often takes
place in what seems to be artificially contrived time, space or modes of consciousness. Sacred places, liturgical
calendars, meditative moods, extraordinary fasting, self-denials, exceptional private or communal actions, praying,
sacrificing, meditating, prophesying-----all of these give the impression of being stylized deviations from normality.
They have a quality of caricature, of play-acting and sometimes unnaturalness to them. They stand out so obviously
from the everyday that it is difficult to avoid giving such commotion a special name. In our time this name is
"religion." Actually "religion" is a relatively modern concept. The ancient world had no word
for what we are calling religion, partly because religion blended so intimately with the rest of life and didi
not contrast sharply with profane or ordinary life the way it does today. It was not as noticeable, perhaps because
it was so pervasive. It is our modern sense of a mundane or secular sphere that makes religious activity stand
forth more obtrusively to us. We want to define and understand religion more carefully than religious people of
the past would have been interested in doing. In order to arrive at any instructive interpretation of religion
we need first to look at a range of "data from which we can draw such insight. Obviously we cannot explore
many of the manifestations of religion in this text. We have to be quite selective. But in order to gain some breadth,
in Part I. Then in Part III we shall begin to ask "why people have turned to religion. There we shall see
how religion fits into and grows out of other, more "natural," aspects of human life and awareness. And
finally, In Part IV we shall ask some critical questions about religion, in particular whether its reference to
an "ultimate" reality or an "ultimate" kind of fulfillment is a plausible interpretation of
reality and human existence. In order to sharpen these critical questions we shall bring religion into conversation
with modern skepticism. Dialogue with Skepticism We cannot discuss religion seriously today without being aware
of the suspicion in which it is held by much modern thought. And so I shall situate my discussion of religion in
the context of a "conversation" with modern secularism and skepticism. Such an approach is more fruitful
than one that ignores the fact that for may people today "religion" has completely lost its meaning and
appeal. Taking seriously the arguments of skeptics and critics of religion may actuarially lead us to a deeper
appreciation of religion. This will help us in our efforts to extract what is essential to it and allow us better
to discriminate the wholesome from the unwholesome aspects of it. It is no secret that secularism now threatens
religion in many parts of the world. Modern science, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment have together produced
a new preoccupation with our "immediate environment," or with what some religious people might call "this
world." As a result of modern infatuation with the exclusively "secular" realm, the province of
"mystery" upon which religions have been nurtured seems to have diminished or disappeared altogether,
and the world of immediacy, the one available to us in ordinary experience and scientific inquiry, has been enshrined
as the only real one. The religious outlook seems to have lost its luster for many sincere people today, especially
in the academic world. Thus we cannot understand religion in a satisfactory way, even in an introductory work such
as this one, without taking a look also at the modern distaste for or indifference to religion. With modern skepticism
we must face the fact that the story of religion has not been a uniformly edifying one. After all, religion is
something done by human beings, all of whom are inclined at times to narrow-mindedness and evil. That their religious
life and ideas often display tendencies toward childishness, resentment, escapism, ethnocentrism, sexism, elitism,
absolutism and various forms of oppression or exclusives should not completely surprise us. So we need not close
our eyes, as we often do, to the dark side of religion. Alfred North Whitehead is correct when he says that religion
". . . has emerged into human experience mixed with the crudest fancies of barbaric imagination." But
he may also be correct in observing that the religious vision is "our one ground for optimism," and that
"apart from it, human life is a flash of occasional enjoyments lighting up a mass of pain and misery, a bagatelle
of transient experience." (Whitehead, 1967 a, p. 192) In other works, we may seek the wholesome, enlivening
core of religion and distinguish this from its shadier side. Indeed that is exactly what authentic religious life
is all about: a search for the essence, kernel, substance or depth of any religious tradition into which we may
have been born or with which we may have become associated. Genuine religiousness requires a constant search for
the essence of religion. And some acquaintance with modern skepticism is today an important aspect of this search.
Religion as Route-finding One of the most accessible ways to understand religion in an introductory way is offered
by the British scholar John Bowker. He sees religion as a "route-finding" through the severest barriers
interfering with the continuity of human life. Religions formulate "ways" to move us past the most frustrating
"compounds of limitations" that we have to deal with as we make our way through life. Obstacles or limits
to the continuity of human life arise in extraordinarily frustrating ways at times, and religion is a response
to the most unbending of the limitations that interfere with human life-ways. many limits, of course, can eventually
be hurdled or pushed back by non-religious techniques. But then the focus of religion will shift toward the most
stubborn obstacles to the continuity of life,the obvious ones being suffering and death, the unrepeatable nature
of the past, the capriciousness of fate, the feelings of powerlessness, guilt and meaninglessness. And it is especially
in connection with these apparently intransigent roadblocks that the kind of route-finding we call religion begins
to take distinct form. (Bowker, 1973) Eventually religion discerns a realm of what we shall call "mystery"
looming up beyond life's limits. And in various ways it seeks to connect us to this mystery in which alone fulfillment
is deemed possible. It is quite easy to recognize "religions." Their symbols, rites and teachings, though
connected with the rest of life, tend to cluster in higher density around what are identified as the ultimate limits
to our quest for perfection. The function of religions is to fortify our trust that there is some "way through"
the barriers that block the road toward ultimate fulfillment. And the plausibility of religions, as Bowker points
out, depends upon the effectiveness of the paths they make through the most difficult obstacles. This interpretation
of religion as a king of rout-finding, even though it does not take into account every aspect of religion, the
"limits" of our experience will also help us to locate it more precisely in terms of the other aspects
of our lives. Why Study Religion? If you have read this morning's paper, or followed the course of world events
recently, you may have noticed how often the conflicts that dominate the news result directly form the high degree
of importance people attribute to their own beliefs and traditions. It is obvious, but it is also worth repeating
often, that people take their beliefs, ideologies and especially their religions very seriously. The conflicts
between Iran and Iraq, Israel and the PLO, Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, Christians and Marxists
in various parts of the world, Sikhs and Hindus in India, fundamentalists and liberals, creationists and evolutionists,
and countless other such battles-------these would not occur unless people put great stake in preserving a way
of thinking, a tradition, a set of meanings that provides the basis for their way of life. More often than not
there is a strongly religious dimension at the heart of international, social and political conflicts. If we fail
to understand the religious convictions that give purpose to the lives of others and ourselves, there can be little
hope for resolving many of the disputes that now endanger human life on earth. Some scholars have even gone so
far as to propose that the major source of world strife is our failure to understand the religions and ideologies
of others. Bowker, for example, notices that religions, like nations, are typically "systems" possessing
distinct boundaries. These boundaries, clearly defined by traditions, scriptures and doctrines, are considered
essential in order to give a definiteness and stability to the religious system and to keep it from being diluted
into a vagueness that would fail to motivate its adherents. Most religions have deemed to be necessary therefore
to defend and fortify their doctrinal boundaries. They must do so in order to ensure the transmission of their
highly valued information about ultimate issue on to the next generation. Hence religions have by and large been
rather conservative bodies. They have placed enormous significance on preserving for posterity the specific sense
of route-finding that they have found successful in combating the threat of disorder. For example, official teachers
in the Roman Catholic Church seek to exclude certain theologians who propose disturbing new interpretations of
traditional teachings. Or Islamic revolutionaries chastise religious thinkers who want to accommodate Islam to
the modern world. Such reactions illustrate religion's sensitivity to the invasion of any alternative visions that
appear to challenge the "successful" approach of a specific tradition. It is not surprising then that
"border incidents" would arise when one view of the most important side of life brushes up against an
alternative religious or secular vision. Conflicts occur largely because people take their religions so seriously.
Their religions are important to them, and maybe who have not yet fully understood why this is so. The search for
such understanding is one very good reason to study religion. (Bowker, 1988) We have failed to appreciate the importance
of religion to Muslim terrorists, Sikh militants or Buddhist pacifists, often fancying that only our own approaches
can be truly successful n negotiating the limits placed on human experience. It may not even occur to us that others
have defined or identified the "compound of limitations" and the most significant questions that give
rise to their religious systems in a way that differs considerably from our own. And so we failed to grasp the
most important dimension of their lives. For this reason alone the study of religion is perhaps one of the most
important components of any serious educational process. But there are also other reasons for studying religion.
On e of the most important is simply that of wanting to know how far our environment extends. What are the full
dimensions of our surroundings? Religions have almost universally made at least some kind of reference to "another
dimension," one that we shall refer to as "mystery." They have been dissatisfied with any suggestion
that the immediate environment, or the superficial world of appearances, is the sum total of reality. In one way
or another they have pushed beyond whatever "seems" to be the case or whatever "seems" to limit
our lives. For the most part they have not advocated a flight our of life and into the "beyond." In fact,
contrary to what many modern caricatures of religion have maintained, religions generally attempt to reconcile
people to the facts of their existence here and now. But more often than not they provide this contextualization
by speaking of a realm of beyondness, of mystery, of "transcendence" (from the Latin, transcend, "to
pass beyond") or of ultimate perfection. This transcendent realm or experience is not always a special or
clearly defined "place." Nor is it always considered a scene of survival after death. At least originally
most of the major religious teachers do share a premonition that what we ordinarily perceive to be the limits to
reality can "somehow" be gotten beyond. And they think it essential for our happiness or enjoyment"
here and now that we acquire the awareness of an ultimate environment, or perhaps an extraordinary "enlightenment,"
that lies "beyond" our immediate experience. As we shall see, this impression of some type of "beyond"
began to dawn very early in the history of religion. And it reached its most intense pitch in the centuries immediately
preceding the Common Era (somewhere around 600 B.C.E.). What are we to make today of this quest for a realm of
mystery or perfection situated beyond the immediacy of the here and now? Other reasons for studying religion may
be more personal, and each individual will approach the subject matter of this book with different questions and
expectations. One of the most obvious has to do with our own search for identity and meaning. Most readers probably
already have some connection with one religious tradition or another, although I am not going to presume that this
is true of all. And our traditions (even if they are purely secular ones) have given us some sense of how we are
and what our goals in life may be. But these aims are always in flux and never fully defined. The feeling of being
"unfinished" is universal, and it may lead at times toward a wider vision of ourselves in relation to
the rest of the world. There may be no better way of weeding such expansiveness than by a sympathetic "passing
over" into the religious world of others. (Dunne, 1972) We may have to make our way through the firm boundaries
of our own religious system at times in order to get a perspective both on it and on the others that make up our
complex world. Learning to appreciate what others have identified as the basic limits on life can help us in our
own efforts toward self-definition. Traveling with them as they seek religiously to transcend life's limits can
be a deeply rewarding personal journey. Finally, the serious study of religions, our own along with those of others,
may itself be one of the most important ways in which the ageless religious quest wends its way forward in our
own time. In fact, contemporary interest in "comparative religions" or "world religions" or
the "history of religions" is itself a fundamentally religious concern and not mere curiosity. For it
has been aroused by a new awareness of limitations, as have all creative religious developments in the past. In
this case it is a recognition of the limitations of our own traditions, a new awareness that our own religious
systems with their firm boundaries may in some way be confining and restraining us even while providing a needed
impression of order, security, and point of departure. Religion as a Response to Suffering Religions seek to provide
pathways through the "limits" that interfere with the human longing for ultimate fulfillment. We can
understand what is distinctive about the various religious teachings if we single out a universally troublesome
obstacle, and observe how it is surmounted by the particular kind of route-finding characteristic of each tradition.
And since in one way or another the problem of suffering is the concern of all religion, we shall be especially
interested in how it is addressed in each case. Since each of us knows at least something about suffering, and
has sought some way through it, such a focus will serve to draw us also into the circles of meaning sketched by
religions as a response to the problem of pain. The fact of death is the extreme instance of human suffering. And
the entire story of religion, in one way or another, responds to this most definitive of limits. More than any
other limit, our own sense of having-to-die draws us into conversation with all the religious traditions. Approaching
our subject in terms of the problem of suffering and death cannot communicate all the relevant features of a religion,
but it may get us initially involved with it. Religion and Theology Religion is not exactly the same thing as theology.
Theology is reflection on religion, usually undertaken by those already committed to a religious system. Theology
seeks to understand a religion in terms that will communicate its teachings to a specific audience. Depending on
what that audience is, theology will take on different shapes at different times. Religion first comes to expression
in the "naive" form of symbols, myths and rituals. But because the symbolic language of religion is never
completely clear, it invites constant interpretation. IT is the function of theology to provide this interpretation.
Symbols beg to be interpreted, and so religion inevitably gives rise to theology. Sometimes it is difficult to
say where religion leaves off and theology begins, since they are so closely related. But a good sign of theological
work is the "codification" of a religious system into a formalized set of teachings. These teachings
are usually called dogma. The various "creeds" of religions are results of theological reflection. For
example, the Nicene Creed recited by Christians ("I believe in God, the Father Almighty . . .," "I
believe in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord," etc.) is the end product of enormous and painful theological
discussion about the meaning of the basic religious symbols of Christian faith. The "Five Pillars" of
Islam and "Four Noble Truths of Buddhism" are also the result of the codification process undertaken
by theological reflection. But theology is not only concerned with producing formulas and dogmas. It is also at
time critical reflection on the meaning of religious symbolism and teaching. Theology is the work of religious
people who like the rest of us have inquiring and critical minds and who apply their reason to the understanding
of religion. Sometimes theology leads to the refinement of symbols and sometimes it leads to further confusion.
But it cannot be avoided by religions. Religions demand continuing reflection and criticism, partly because of
their extravagant claims, and partly because they tend at times to close themselves off from alternative perspectives.
What we are calling religion in this book includes both the primordial symbolic representations of a sense of "mystery"
as well as theological reflections on and codification's of the symbols. A Personal Note Recent studies of textbooks
used in colleges and high schools have concluded that students usually find them intolerably dull. The main reason
for this is that textbooks often simply list facts without providing any scheme for interpreting the data or without
hazarding any value judgments that might pull the students into a lively conversation with the subject matter.
I have found the same to be true of many introductory surveys of religion. Having used some of these in my own
classes, I have often wished that in addition to presenting the important data about religion, the authors would
risk some theoretical interpretation of it. I shall try to avoid here the pallid neutrality of the typical introductory
text. This book will not only set forth a scheme for making sense of religion, but it will also seek criteria for
determining what is and what is not authentically religious. That I do find something "authentic" in
religion will become clear as we go along. But will this favorable disposition toward religion on my part exclude
the possibility of objectivity? Would not a more neutral approach, by someone perhaps indifferent to religion and
personally unmoved by it, be more trustworthy? And would not a more dispassionate approach allow the data to emerge
without being skewed by an a priori favorable assessment? I have to admit that a lot can be learned about religion
employing such a detached method. And this text will utilize the results of scientifically disinterested studies
of religion. But, important as such external accounts might be, I think that religion can be discussed more "objectively"
by someone who is personally excited by it as well as willing to learn from those who are outsiders to it. I trust
that students of music would not want to be instructed by a teacher who was tone deaf. People who cannot resonate
with a melody, or who remain unmoved by it, might be able to tell you much about music theory or the physics of
harmony. Butt they could not lead you very far inside the rich world of music. Likewise those who are interested
in religion only from the point of view of psychology, history, anthropology or sociology and other "scientific"
approaches may not have the last word about it. perhaps they should not have the first word either. For that reason
I have gambled that students and other readers of this book, including those who will disagree with my interpretations
and conclusions, will not be put off by the fact that I am generally stirred by the substance of human religious
expression. In certain areas of knowledge such personal involvement is not an obstacle to, but a condition of,
objectivity. Religion, I think, is one of them.
Summary
Attempts to uncover what it is that religions have in common--the archetypal human need to find meaningful routes
through life and to stay in touch with their spiritual potential.
Table of Contents
Introduction
PART I: EXPRESSIONS OF RELIGION
1. Early Religion
2. Hinduism
3. Buddhism
4. Prophetic Religion
