THE ELEMENTARY FORMS OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE
The Elementary Forms of the Religions Life,is most important, fourth major sociological work of Durkheim, It was written between 1902 and 1911 and published in 1912. This work is often regarded as the most profound and original writings of Durkheim. This text is second-hand” study of the religion of Australian aborigines. Durkheim never went to Australia but uses the studies of those who has investigated these tribes first hand, with some extra evidence from studies of native However, this study is based on the description and detailed analysis of the clan system and totemic present in the Arena tribe of Australian aborigines. He assumed that all the essential aspects of religious life would be visible in the simplest religious forms and the most simple was totemic, found in societies closest to “the beginning of evolution”. In fact, Emile Durkheim presented what is probably the most influence interpretation of religion from a functionalist perspective. Durkheim began with a reputation of the reigning theories the origin of religion. Tyler of animism, i.e., spirit worship expression. Max Mueller put forth the concept of naturism, i.c., the worship of nature’s forces.
Durkheim made an observation on his theory of religion that throughout history worshipped any other reality, whether in the form of the totem or of God, than the collective social reality transfigured by faith. In fact, Buddhism and Confucianism recognise as well as Spencer supported the notion as the most basic form of religious men have never no central god or deity.
Basic Purpose of the Work:
The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life has five central aims: The first is to study primitive religion and explain its basic structure. This, Durkheim believed, would lead to an understanding of religion and the religious nature of society.
The second aim, according to Durkheim, is to arrive at an understanding of contemporary religions by going back to the most primitive. He believed that only by going back to the earliest religious institutions can we understand the nature of religious life.
The third aim of the study is to undertake an examination of religion from the perspective of positive science. This is based on the rejection of earlier views on religion, i.e., animism and naturism. This, he thought, leads to the discovery of most elementary forms of religious life.
The fourth aim of the study is to look of the relationship between religious ideas and organisation of bodies of knowledge and systems of classification.
Finally, the fifth aim is to demonstrate that, when reduced to its basic elements, religion is nothing more than the expression of society consecrated.
Origin of Religion:
Durkheim rejects, “animism” of Tylor and Spencer and “naturism” of Max Mueller as explanation of the origin of religion. Both these theories, according to Durkheim do not explain the distinction between the sacred and the profane. Religion is not a mystery, it is not belief in transcendental God, it is not an illusion. Throughout history any other reality than the collective social reality transfigured by faith and called God.
Durkheim explain the origin of religion with reference to totemism,’ an example of which he points out among the Australian tribes. He writes, “Totemism is the religion, not of certain animals or of certain men or of certain images, but of a kind of anonymous and impersonal force which is found in each of these beings, without, however, being identified with any one of them. None possesses it entirely, and all participate in it.
So independent is it of the particular subjects in which it is embodied that it precedes them just as it is adequate to them. Individuals die, generations pass away and are replaced by others. But this force remains over present, living and true to itself. It quickens today’s generation just as it quickened yesterday’s and as it will quicken tomorrow’s. Taking the word in a very broad sense, one ; but it is an impersonal God, without a name, without a history, abiding in the world, diffused in a countless multitude of things.” The definition of religion at which Durkheim arrives is: “A religion is an system of beliefs and practices regarding things which are sacred, that is to say, apart, forbidden, beliefs and practices which unite all those who follow them in a single moral community called a church.” Contrasting the true science of religion, as he calls his theory, to pseudo-sciences or the theories of animism and naturalism.
Durkheim points out, “It is inadmissible that systems of ideas like religion which have turned in all ages for the energy they need to live, should be mere tissues of illusion. It is commonly recognized today that law, morality, scientific thought itself are born of religion, have long been identified with religion, and have remained imbued her spirit. How could a vain phantasmagoria have fashioned human consciousness so firmly, so enduringly? Assuredly, it must be a principle for the science of religions that religion expresses nothing that is not in nature, for every science is concerned with natural phenomena.
Central Theme of Theory of Religion In the search of definition and central them of religion , Durkheim paid his attention on two central parts or elementary forms.
First ,he said that all religions can be defined in terms of a system of beliefs and rites .Beliefs refer to a set ideas and attitude held in relation to sacred things , whereas rites are defined as a system of action which is developed toward religions things or abject second is that all religions can be defined in terms of their tendency to divide the world into two kinds of phenomena , the sacred and _the profane .This division of the world “into two domains ,the one containing all that is sacred, the other all that is profane ,is the. Most distinctive trait of religious life.
Sacred and profane
The division between sacred and profane is the central principles of the social theory of religion and , in fact it is the most distinctive element of religious life .Durkheim believed that the sacred and profane forms the basis of religious life The sacred to things huaman beings set apart , including religious beliefs rites ,deities or anything’ socially defined as requiring special religious treatment .participation in the sacred order, such as in rituals and ceremonies gives a special prestige ,illustrating one of the social functions of religion ,” in this context , Ritzer puts it Durkheim concluded that society is the source of all religion .Society (through individuals) certain phenomena as sacred and others as profane. Those aspect of social reality that are defined as sacred – that are set apart and deemed forbidden -form the essence of religion .The rest are defined as profane – the everyday .The commonplace ,the utilitarian ,the mundane aspect of life .The sacred brings out an attitude of reverence respect ,mystery ,awe, and honour . The respect accorded to certain phenomena transform them the profane to the sacred ,In fact profane ,according to Durkheim ,is considered to be opposite to the sacred .In this respect ,the profane is something subordinated in dignity to the sacred which has the capacity to Contaminate the sacred and to this extent the sacred and profane are linked together .
Durkheim, mainly , outlined six characteristics of the sacred and the profane.
First , the sacred is always separated form all other objects and therefore constitutes things set apart.
Second ,a system of rotes and social practices arises which sets out how the sacred is to be approached and how members of the group are to conduct themselves in the presence of the sacred abject ,
Third ,sacred things are things protected by introductions which have the force of prohibition or taboos acting to product and isolate the sacred .
Fourth. sacred things are segregated form profane things and are thought to be superior in dignity .
Firth the sacred and natural form the spiritual world and in this way provides society with a model of opposites such as good and evil , clean and dirty ,holy and defiled and so on ,
Sixth, passage from the profane to the – sacred must be accompanied by rites which are thought to transform one state into the other through rituals of initiation or rebirth .
To give specific definition of religion, durkheim believed that three condition are assential for the development of religion .First there must be the development of a set of religious beliefs .These beliefs are ,the representation which express the nature of sacred things and the relation which they sustain , a either with each other or with profane things “ second a set of religious rites are necessary .These are the rules of conduct which prescribe how a man should comport himself in the presence of these sacred objects “ finally , a religion require a church .Or a single sacred ,beliefs rites and church led Durkheim to the following definition of a religion “ A religion is a unified system of beliefs and forbidden beliefs and prasticeswhich unite into one single moral community’ called a church ,all those who adhere to them . Let us now see how Durkheim grapples with the understanding of elementary forms by considering the institution of lotemism which forms the central part of the study.
Durkheim‘ s study of Totemism
To explain the more complex religion of the world , Durkheim believes ,one must understand first the simple forms . Instead of animism and naturis ,Durkheim took the notion of totemism ‘ present in arunta tribe of Australian Aborigines as the key concept to explain the origins of religion, Durkheim maintained that totemism is the most simple forms of religion . Totemism”101 is linked with the social organisation of clan . The members of the clan believe themselves to have descended form some common ancestor – an anima ,a plant or even some non living object. The ,” common ancestors “ is the totemic object . Ordinary objects, whether pieces of wood ,polished stones ,plants or animals ,are transfigured into sacred objects one they bear the emblem of the totem .It is the totemic objects that gives the clan it’s name and identity Many taboos are attached to the totemic object. It cannot be killed or eaten,it must be treated with reverence .All things arranged in the clan are connected with and extension of the totemic object . The clan members may not be related by blood , but they have a common name, a common emblem Religion and social organisations are intimately connected in such simple societies .
The totem, according to Durkheim , represent the group in three important respects .First it represents the collective beliefs and social practices of the group to the individuals who make it up. Second ,it represents the collective to itself historically in its legends and mythys .Theird,it represents the collective to self in the form of a total social reality .104 The totem may thus be described as an institution which leads to three distinct kinds of religious activity first is a system of beliefs and rites which unifies and binds the social groups together around a sacred object second is a system of interdiction that sets out what individual obligations are toward this saecred object. Third, totemism is a system of rites for worshipping the sacred object
Durkheim maintains that is not actually the animal or plant itself that is worshipped or held sacred bud a nameless and impersonal force which exists throughout the world and is diffused amongst all the material objects of the world .The totems ,thus ,are the material representation of the immaterial force that is their base . And that immaterial force is none other than collective conscience of society .Durkheim stated ,
Totemism is the religion ,note of such and such animal or images ,but of an anonymous and impresonalforce , which is found in each of these beings , without however being identified with any one of these .none posses it entirely and all participate in it .so independent is it of the particular subject in which it is embodied that it precedes them just as it adequate to them . Individuals die, generations pass away and are replaced by others . But this force remains over present , living and true to itself It quickens today s generation just as it quickened yesterday s and as it will quicken tomorrow’s
Totemism, and more generally religion is derived from the collective morality and becomes itself an imprsonal force .It is not simply a series of mythical animals, plants , personalites ,spirits or god’s The essence of totemism. according to Durkheim ,is the worship of an impersonal . anonymous force ,at once immanent and trascendent. This anonymous ,diffuse force which is superior to men and very close to them is reality society itself.
In short, totemism is a symbolic representation of the collective conscience , and the collective conscience in , turn ,is derived from society. Therefore society ,society is the source of collective conscience, religion and ultimately the concept of God In real sense Durkheim argued that God and society are one and the same In fact it remains true even today If religion is nothing but the indirect worship of society modern people need only express their religious feelings directly toward sacred symbolization of society In this context the worship of society strengthens the values and moral beliefs which from the basis of social life In worshipping society men are in effect recognising the important of the social group and their dependence upon it In this way religion strengthens the unity of the group it promotes social solidarity.
FUNCTIONALISM
French sociologist Emile Durkheim is well known functionalist. In his writings of concept of function takes a greater methodological significance and he is widely regarded as a functionalist by sociologists and social anthropologists .Functionalism for Durkheim was his alternative to both Comte ‘ s and Spencer ‘s teleological method . Much of Durkheim‘s work is concerned with function analysis, with seeking to understand the functional of social facts. He believes that society has certain functional prerequisites. These functional prerequisites play a crucial role in the maintenance of “ social order .”
The task of functional analysis is to clarify how institution and other social phenomena contribute to the maintenance of the social whole. Durkheim established the logic of the functional approach to the study of society by establishing a clear distinction between historical and functional types of enquiry and between functional consequences and individual motivations. The determination of function, says Durkheim , is necessary for the complete explanation of the phenomena … to explain a social fact is not enough to show the cause on which it depends :we must also show its function in the establishment of social order .
On the other hand, Haralambos sees Durkheim’s position on functional analysis in his concept “ collective conscience “ the collective conscience constrains individuals to act in terms of the requirements of society since the collective conscience is a social fact and therefore external to the individual it is essential that it be imposed upon him. Durkheim’s functionalism may be illustrated in the theory of Religion social order requires that individuals experience society within themselves realise their dependents upon it and recognise their obligations which are fundamentally social .
By symbolising society and so making it sacred religion meets these requirements. It makes social life possible by expressing, maintaining and reinforcing the sentiments or values which form the collective conscience .social obligations are represented in sacred terms and so transformed into religious dutie…. In symbolising society , religion awakens in the individual an appreciation of his reliance integrates the social group since those who share religious beliefs “ feel themselves United to each other by the simple fact that they have a common faith ,” The highly charged atmosphere of religious rituals serves to dramatise this unity and so promotes social solidarity. In this way religion functions to meet the essential requirement s of social life.
Conclusion
Durkheim’s monographic studies have proved the importance of purely social factors in the explanation of varied social phenomena. We can hardly ignore the social facts and the underlying forces. Durkheim is one of the key classical theorists in social science in general and sociology in particular .He is best know for finding sociology as a scientific discipline and defining the boundaries of its subject matter.
Durkheim has a major contribution in sociological concepts, perspectives approaches method and theories ,.He belongs to the functional school of thought. In this context, he tries to establish a distinct discipline of society , called sociology . Her , his primary concern was to discuss the issue of social solidarity or integaration of society .He mainly gives emphasis on the notion on sui generis .Durkheim in fact ,is not only concerned with the discussion of society as a whole but also the rise of individualism in society.
However, his method of explaining and characterizing social; order, as Durkheim discussed, is mainly focuses on consensus model of society. Durkheimian sociology is consider as most scientific in his explanation by the different contemporary sociologist. He discussed the nature and scope of sociology in his methodological part of writings. The rules of sociologist method is a programmatic statement about the causes of sociology as a discipline, which must have its own distinctive subject matter and methodology. In this sense, he deals with the concept of social facts that are external to individual. Durkheim here causal functional analysis, their genesis and their functioning Durkheim has applied his methodical orientation of social facts and the notion of si-generis in throughout his sociological writings.
Durkheim throughout his writings, tries to establish relationships between society and individual. However his center theme is the primacy of society over the individual this fact can be seen in his major writhing derision of labour in society suicide and the elementary from of religions live, in these writings Durkheim emphasized on the concept of collective conscience. Durkheim describes collective conscience as “the body of beliefs and sentiments common to the average members of a society “ in the division of labor in society Durkheim makes a fruitful attempt for the analysis of different types of society terms of traditional or trivial society (organic solidarity ) and modern society organic solidarity )in evolutionary way, in society in terms of traditional or trivial society (organic solidarity) and modern society (organic solidarity) in evolutionary way in which he tries to fiend out the causes of suicide in the social rule rather then individual or psychological phenomena letter part of his work, sociology of religion gives emphasis on the phenomenon of social cohesion, in sociology of religion he discovers the not of religious activity in the concept of tatamis a primitive and most simple from religion of the aruratries of an Australian aboriginal Durkheim would always be remembered for his contribution in the field of sociology as an distinct discipline.
Durkheim however is not free from criticism he mainly has been criticized for giving more emphasis on collectivity. He only emphasised on well integrated society. In this way he could not see the social function of conflict. As we know, conflict is also found in every type of society whether the society his primitive or modern. The difference only in the nature and frequency of the conflict. In addition to it, he could not adequately stress the role of differences of dissension in human society. Despite his various criticism,he still acknowledged as a pioneer and outstanding sociologist.
Difference only in the nature and frequency of the conflict. He therefore, criticized for not making any contribution in the social conflict. In dissension in human society. Despite his various criticism the still acknowledge as a pioneer and outstanding sociologist.