OK. Unlike previous weeks where we have explored a question or concern I offered as a provocation, this week I expect you to put forward your thoughts on the salient points that you have obtained from the class to this juncture. What particular issues has it introduced you to and what specific questions has it raised for you about religion, cults, magic, and the other phenomena we have studied? With these outstanding features I would like each of you to give some thought to the critical areas of focus that we should address as we wind our way toward the final presentations for the class.
On another interpretative front:
To provide some additional fodder for our continued reflection on the dialectical relations between religion and magic and cults and religion (as we talked about in some detail this week) here is a rather perceptive paragraph by the anthropologist Marshal Sahlins, who is commenting here on the manner in which the apparently incommensurate worlds of the Hawai'ians and Captain Cook and his men in 1778 actually overlapped meaningfully as each appropriated the other into their pre-existent categories of understanding.
QUOTATION:
The problem [e.g. finding a truer synthesis of
structure and historical event] comes down to the
relation of cultural concepts to human experience, or
the problem of symbolic reference: of how cultural
concepts are actively used to engage the world.
Ultimately at issue if the being of structure _in_
history and _as_ history. But, I begin more simply
by making two elementary observations, neither of them
novel or my own discovery. The first is the venerable
Boasian principle that, "the seeing eye is the organ
of tradition..." Human social experience is the
appropriation of specific percepts by general
concepts: an ordering of men and the objects of their
existence according to a scheme of cultural categories
which is never the only one possible, but in that
sense is arbitrary and historical. The second
proposition is that the use of conventional concepts
in empirical contexts subjects the cultural meanings
to practical revaluations. Brought to bear on a world
which has its own reasons, a world-in-itself and
potentially refractory, the traditional categories are
transformed. For even as the world can easily escape
the interpretive schemes of some given group of
mankind, nothing guarantees either that intelligent
and intentional subjects, with their several social
interests and biographies will use the existing
categories in prescribed ways. I call this double
contingency the risk of categories in action.
.....[T]he experience of human subjects, especially as
communicated in discoure, involves an appropriation of
events in terms of a priori concepts. Reference to
the world is an act of classification, the course of
which realities are indexed to concepts in a relation
of empirical tokens to cultural types. We know the
world as logical instances of cultural classes. Formal
classification is an intrinsic condition of symbolic
action.
Marshall Sahlins, Islands of History (Chicago:
Unversity of Chicago Press, 1987), 145-146.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sahlins claims that traditions arise arbitrarily, but I find it unlikely that the customs of one culture arose simply randomly. For instance, the ancient people of Mesopotamia such as the Sumerians, had a religion in which the gods were cruel because the Tigris and Euphrates rivers flooded irregularly sometimes causing these civilizations great turmoil. The Ancient Egyptians, on the other hand, had the Nile River which flooded regularly and therefore led to the gods of the Ancient Egyptians being much more benevolent than their Sumerian counterparts. From these examples, we can see how environment can shape the customs of a people. A culture is arbitrary only to a certain extent, but is also influenced by numerous outside factors.
ReplyDeleteThis class has made me aware of the idea of using religion as a political tool to change policy. I had always thought of religion in the past as merely a way of answering questions about the world which could not be explained through direct knowledge. I am still wondering, however, if China is a specifically a devout country or merely an example of how all of humanity is devout.
One of the first things we were asked in this class was how would we define religion? Then, it seemed to me that religion was a categorical explanation of a system of beliefs concerning the order of world. Through religion, value for certain virtues could be explained by super-imposing an understanding for the unseen onto to our physical, objective reality. I took for granted that people sensed an unseen power, and their interpretations of that power resulted in religion. I still think that is my essential argument. However, in retrospect there are many things wrong with my thesis about the nature of religion. For instance, I ignored the differences between religions and the problematic rise of cult formation within a religion.
ReplyDeleteShalins seems to have seen the same problem in his study of cultures, and he comes to the conclusion that "an ordering of men and the objects of their existence according to a scheme of cultural categories
which is never the only one possible, but in that sense is arbitrary and historical". In other words, the way in which men order themselves according to principles (a.k.a "religion"), is arbitrary. This would sufficiently explain away different religious beliefs between different cultures. However, it does not explain why, once a set of beliefs has been arbitrarily adopted, why cultic reactions are problematic to society. If the beliefs were truly arbitrary, then why wouldn't the beliefs of cults be added just as arbitrarily to the rest?
In our class, we have interpreted cult behavior and magic as a means of rectifying social discord. This seems to imply that society does not randomly assign the attributes of religion as much as society if formed and corrected by religion. Cults are a way of re-accessing the spiritual energy which religion has interpreted. I would like in the coming weeks, to think about how Falun Gong is attempting to structure society. We have established that there is very loose group control, without extensive attention to internal hierarchy, but if Falun Gong, as a religion, is exerting some force of social ordering on Chinese society as a whole, it would explain the government’s antipathy for it. Furthermore, I would like to discuss Falun Gong’s future in China, and if it is successfully repressed in China, is it inevitable that a similar group arise?
sorry, edit last sentence to "...is it inevitable that a similar group should arise?"
ReplyDeleteOne issue which I thought was most interesting and revealing to me was our discussions of the functions of religion as a solution to the individual and collective search for meaning. Through the works of Jiwei Ci and Ownby we learned that Falun Gong formed as a result of the meaninglessness that plagued society after they experienced suffering at the hands of the authoritarian. The Party lost legitimacy after the failed attempts at utopianism. This combined with severe economic downturns caused people to lose faith in the regime because the Party no longer supplied meaning. Thus, Falun Gong arose out of this loss of meaning; Falun Gong offered an alternative method for community. It did not coerce but offered a choice.
ReplyDeleteThis study reveals how religion forms and flourishes: as a way to construct a meaningful life to survive. Furthermore, living a meaningful live is a daily challenge; we all inherently want to have meaning because the challenge of living a normal, productive, successful life is always present. I found it fascinating to attempt to study the reasons for religious formation, rather than the doctrines themselves. The emphasis on the individual’s search for meaning actually reminded me of something I studied in a class I am in on the psychology of personality. One theory on the development of personality breaks personality down into eight stages. During middle age, the individual is in a stage of generation versus stagnation, which refers to whether or not one is making something out of their life or merely watching it go past without accomplishing anything. Furthermore, the last stage of life is characterized by integrity versus despair, which refers to the fact that at the end of one’s life, one can go into death being satisfied with their life or disappointed with their lack of accomplishments and feel that their life meant nothing to anyone (the feeling of integrity or despair respectively). This search for meaning is so inherently crucial for humanity that it provides a rationale for the formation of all religion, not merely the current phenomenon of Falun Gong which we are focused on.
Therefore, I think one of the most salient points I have taken from the course so far is the purpose and functionality of religion. Examining the phenomenon of the Cult of Saints has similarly made the search for meaning evident. The society itself was situated within such a context of change that it required a search for meaning. The people adopted this search in the form of reverence for the dead, entombed saints. They believed these dead saints were martyrs that should inspire us as examples to all. Thus, the search for meaning even continued with searching for significance not only with the living, but also with the dead. In today’s dynamic society of change, this search for meaning is omnipresent and manifested in various unique ways.
Coming back to the O'keefe reading at this point in the class has proven to be very interesting and enlightening, especially compared to our earlier reading of it. One point I have taken away and that has been reiterated numerous times in class is the inability of religion to be divorced from magic and likewise magic from religion. As the class is an exploration of religion in China, magic must also be emphasized. In reading O'keefe, we find that symbolism plays a major role in magic. Even through symbolism is perhaps quite easily identified as a major component of religion even without the bringing magic into the picture, this class has shown me that it is because of magic that symbols are so important in religion. From a western perspective, people often attempt to classify any supernatural action or intervention as realizations of faith, divine intervention, or something along these lines, but never explicitly magic. This class has called for looking at religion from new perspectives, and perhaps even the redefinition of religion. Evidenced from the fact of our continuous struggle to classify and define Falun Gong, it is extremely difficult to place limits and requirements on any sort of movement, group, institution, or practice.
ReplyDeleteThis ties in with what Shalins claims about classification, for who would know better than an anthropologist when it comes to interpreting, contrasting, and classifying various cultures and social events. Rather than focus on how such ordering is, "in that sense" (i.e. not entirely), arbitrary, I would like to draw attention to the conclusion of Shalin's quote. He claims, "Formal classification is an intrinsic condition of symbolic action". From this we can draw the importance of symbols have functioning both as instigators of magical action as well as classification.
Symbols have proved to be a common thread throughout our exploration of religion in China, and it is important to continue to ask our selves what symbols are present, what do they represent, and what, if anything, do they cause? There appears to be a distinct tie between the representative and classification functions of symbols and their efficacy. A few of the salient points of O'keefe, combined with our recent examination of the "Cult of Saints", which reaffirms the universality of symbolism, shows that, in a sense, religion is magic, magic is action, and symbols determine what is magic and incite the action
What I find to be the most interesting concept of class, which is addressed in the Sahlins quote, is that religion is a social concept, more of a label to explain phenomenon or beliefs than a thing in itself. We still are discussing whether Falun Gong qualifies as a "religion" but I don't feel that we have ultimately defined what religion is. I do not think that religion can be categorized, or at least I have not read anything to this point that convinces me it can be.
ReplyDeleteSahlins writes "Human social experience is the
appropriation of specific percepts by general
concepts: an ordering of men and the objects of their
existence according to a scheme of cultural categories
which is never the only one possible, but in that
sense is arbitrary and historical". I think what is and is not religion is completely arbitrary and historical. We said that "savages" were not religious, based on the historical precedence that only "western" religions were religions. Also, what we define as religious and not religious is arbitrary. If Scientology is considered a religion, why not Falun Gong? Or if Falun Gong is not considered a religion, what else falls under this "new age practice" category?
I thought this class would just be about Falun Gong, but now I see that is questioning the concept of religion in general. Sometimes it is a hard question to answer and to accept, but it is one that must be addressed.
The discussion on the cult of saints during the past week was of particular interest to me. I was especially intrigued by the idea of the cult of saints emerging as a subcult of Christianity, which emerged from Judaism and contained many of Judaism's beliefs. I can see many similarities between the development of Falun Gong and the rise of the cult of saints. Falun Gong draws many of its beliefs from the ideologies of Buddhism and Daoism. Many of the references made in Zhuan Falun draw heavily on traditional Buddhist and Daoist beliefs, such as references to a primordial being and the necessity of a return to the primitive.
ReplyDeleteBased on our discussion and the similarities between Falun Gong and established Chinese religions, I believe that the acknowledgment of Falun Gong and spiritual cultivation movements could possibly happen in the future. It might not ever (in fact, it's very unlikely) be acknowledged as an official religion by the CCP given its past interactions, but the possibility of being defined as such by other nations is open. After all, when Christianity first emerged, it was faced with much ridicule and persecution. Only in later times was it declared an official religion.
In addition, as Sahlins discusses, "Human social experiences is the appropriation of specific precepts by general concepts: an ordering of men and their existence according to a scheme of cultural categories which is never the only one possible, but that sense is arbitrary and historical". The ideas of religion and cult are examples of these concepts. Likewise, Christianity, Falun Gong, and others are placed into the categories of religion and cult according to cultural considerations, which are arbitrary and change with time. Falun Gong may be a considered a cult by many today, but at one time Christianity was held in the same regard. Who knows what the future may hold for Falun Gong.
I have become fascinated by how important language is in determining religion and culture. In Stolen Lightning, O'Keefe makes a reference to linguistics as it relates to magic symbolism. Magical words and incantations play a major role in leading a following of people to believe in a certain type of magic.
ReplyDeleteConcerning Falun Gong, language creates a strong barrier between Li Hongzhi and his practicioners and the Chinese government. There is such great importance upon the interpretation of the single word "religion" that this term alone can condemn millions of people to death or have them be accepted and even praised by the government.
Also, in Zhuan Falun, Li Hongzhi uses language in a way that convinces readers that his "scientific facts" are indeed true and believable. It is his persuasive rhetoric that also causes a rift between him and the CCP.
Another thing to keep in mind is that, like we discussed in class last week, language changes over time. Phrases like "epic fail" that carry meaning today had no significance even a few years ago. What does this mean for religion? Because language is an important aspect of a cultural system, the shedding of linguistic terms must also call for a purging of outdated cultural practices. For this reason, I think Sahlins argument makes sense as far "symbolic action" goes. Cultures changes, it either encorporates things from the past and makes new of them, or breaks away and beings something new entirely. Falun gong can be argued to encorporate religions of the past to create something new.
This semester we have focused a lot on the Falun Gong movement in China – the conflict between the movement and the CCP, the legitimacy of Falun Gong as a religion, and the teachings written by Li Hongzhi. Falun Gong is certainly a topic relevant to a class focusing on religion in China, as it plays such a large part in the current religious climate of China today. But I think it is only meant as a microcosm to the larger question that this class is meant to present to us: How do we define ‘religion’?
ReplyDeleteWe have read many articles and been given many quotations that attempt to provide a clear definition. None, however, that have given us anything that we can rely on. To look into the topic more in-depth while working on the research project with my group will provide a mote definite answer, I’m sure, but now it looks as if religion is predominantly an ambiguous concept. Our investigation into Falun Gong has given us an example to analyze and study in regard to the aforementioned question. Clearly, we have not yet been able to agree if Falun Gong qualifies as a religion or not. I don’t believe we will ever reach a definite conclusion, and I think that that is the point. We, in all likelihood, will never determine whether or not Falun Gong qualifies as a religion because there is no agreement over what qualities a religion must possess.
I think the obvious question for investigation is whether or not Falun gong is a religion, but we have discussed this in class at length. Unfortunately, I do not feel like we have denoted a specific answer, so a concise investigation and presentation on this topic may still be possible. This study could lead into a study of what a ‘religion’ is. We have not specifically discussed this definition. Similarly, I would really like to define the word ‘cult.’ I believe in our class work we have used a common-sense definition of ‘cult’ and I find it really difficult to discuss whether Falun gong is a cult without defining ‘cult.’ I have an idea of what a cult is - an all-encompassing group that generally coerces members into joining and alters their reasoning either through false promises or capitalizing on their gullibility – but I don’t believe this is a researched or supported definition. Random House Dictionary gives the following lengthy multi-part definition which would be a good place to start.
ReplyDelete1. a particular system of religious worship, esp. with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2. an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, esp. as manifested by a body of admirers: the physical fitness cult.
3. the object of such devotion.
4. a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
5. Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
6. a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
7. the members of such a religion or sect.
8. any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.
Such an investigation would further investigate the question of whether or not Falun gong is a cult. Further, the discussion could cover whether cults are by nature a negative phenomenon or if they can be benevolent entities. Lastly, if both of these options are plausible, then the investigation would discuss which of these Falun gong represents.
Throughout our course on Falun Gong, I’ve found, that while the aspect of our studies that affected me the most emotionally was the human rights issue, I was most engaged intellectually when considering the emergence, dissemination, and changes a religion, cult, or semi-religious behavior undergoes throughout a given time period.
ReplyDeleteI was especially interested in the ways Falun Gong has reacted to certain institutions- most dramatically, it’s interaction with the PRC- but also how it has interacted with other institutions. It has been drawing sympathy from other religions and drawing followers from certain qui-gong practices, and although many of these relationships seem to be somewhat dependent upon a single leader, there are many more factors at work.
It is also interesting to consider the ways in which Falun Gong has disseminated itself. Word of mouth seems to be the primary route, although an examination on how the use of the internet- which is a network-based communication system- rather than mass media or private, personal communication has affected this dissemination would be interesting to read. Unfortunately, it seems unlikely that the data for such as study would be available, especially considering the current political atmosphere in China.
How the speed of current communication affects the emergence of cult-like or religious behavior is also interesting to consider, and it is easy to draw certain parallels between religions. For example, there is some publicity and honor (at least within the community of Falun Gong practitioner- as evidenced by the publication of these individuals on Falun Gong web sites) surrounding those who’ve suffered for the faith in Falun Gong. Does that stem mostly from adherence to the value of forbearance? Are these publications perhaps evidence ofa desire to gain wider support for the religions by promoting the human rights issue? Could it perhaps be a common thread in many cult-like behaviors facing intolerance, to laud the bravery and sacrifice of those who refuse to refute the beliefs of said cult? To what extent is this natural to the practice of cult-like behaviors, or Falun Gong in particular, and to what extent is this behavior artificially enabled by current technology? Could (or should) Falun Gong even be separated from its historical context when analyzing it, or must we consider the speed of communication and travel -as well as other technological advancements- when analyzing any emerging religious community. (Indeed, any emerging social behavior or network.)
B. Murphy
vrynosybookwyrm
I feel that you can't just isolate China and say that it's only because of this particular region that movements such as Falun Gong can occur. The people of China are no different than people elsewhere. This does not mean we can't examine the pressures put on these people by the CCP. This pressure may be unique. I do not think that a different group of people in a different part of the world would react differently to this sort of pressure. So Falun Gong and other movements in China should not be thought of as a result of the the uniqueness of the Chinese people, but a reaction to the pressures from the CCP.
ReplyDeleteThis semester, I think the most important question we have tackled is, "What is religion." At the beginning of the school year, I felt like I had a fairly good understanding of the concept, but I could not articulate it. Studying Falun Gong has been an excellent tool to broaden my understanding of religion in general, and I hope we continue to explore that question. Especially effective, in my opinion, is reading "The Cult of the Saints" so far into the semester. While Falun Gong continues to be very foreign, being able to compare its roots in Buddhist and Taoist traditions to (the much more familiar) early Christian cults offers a great perspective.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the Sahlins passage, I think this quote is very apropos to our study of Falun Gong: "For even as the world can easily escape the interpretive schemes of some given group of mankind, nothing guarantees either that intelligent and intentional subjects, with their several social interests and biographies will use the existing categories in prescribed ways." I believe Falun Gong has clearly refused to use existing categories in expected ways. However, I also believe this quote is relevant for others discussing Falun Gong in China. We have discussed before that of those who keep an eye on the persecution of Falun Gong members, some fall into the freedom of religion camp, while others raise the human rights argument. Those in the latter group don't want to tackle the "what is religion?" question, and therefore avoid categorizing Falun Gong at all. While the decision might be driven from a desire to make the issue more universal, or as a desire to let Falun Gong define itself, the categorization (or lack thereof) is certainly interesting.
In the beginning of the semester when I was asked to define religion, I could easily give an answer to that question. Now, 10 weeks into the semester, it's got more complicated that it's harder for me to give an straight-forward answer regarding the definition of religion. Religion deals with too many things -- not only the faith in a heavenly deity, but also its political effects, magic, symbolism, power struggle and so many other aspects of humanity imbedded in it. So, I feel like, the most relevant investigation question should be "is Falun Gong a religion?"; however, I don't think anybody can even define "religion". So, the next investigation question that came up to my mind was "how can we reduce the complications between Falun Gong and CCP?" To investigate this question, we will have to deeply research what CCP likes and does not like, what exact part of Falun Gong so disturbing, what Falun Gong practitioners are doing different from what's written in their manual and what kinds of social modifications that two parties Rather than asking a 'what' question, asking 'how' question will lead us to actively participate in what's going on in the world.
ReplyDelete