To a Western observer, the term ‘religion’ is most likely associated with monotheistic Abrahamic religions, such as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam – and, consequently, with concern for godly beings. However, a proper understanding of religion as a phenomenon requires studying other sets of beliefs, which can be quite dissimilar – for instance, Buddhism. By analyzing Buddhist notions of agama, nirvana, pin, laukika, and lokottara, Southwold makes a compelling case for viewing religion as a polythetic phenomenon.
According to the author, Buddhism provides a particularly valuable case for refining one’s understanding of religion because it has both similarities and differences with Abrahamic religions. On the one hand, the concepts of ‘laukika’ and ‘lokottara,’ which can be roughly translated as ‘of the world’ and ‘not of the world,’ more or less corresponding to Western ideas of profane and sacred (Ames, 1964). Similarly, the ultimate goal of Buddhism is Nirvana – that is, the state of nonexistence when one is finally free from the cycle of rebirth and the inevitable suffering it brings (Ames, 1964). A closely related concept of ‘pin’ or merit means a step forward in one’s progress toward nirvana (Southwold, 1978). Based on that, one may be tempted to decide that Buddhism is inherently similar to Abrahamic religions because it is also concerned with largely the same issue of obtaining salvation by addressing otherworldly matters.
On the other hand, there are marked differences between Buddhism and the traditional European understanding of religion. For example, the term ‘agama’ refers to the beliefs and practices concerned with lokottara matters (Southwold, 1978). Based on that, it might be tempting to equate it with ‘religion,’ but Southwold (1978) cautions against it. According to him, these two are not equivalent, which is most evident in the Buddhist treatment of gods. In the classical European understanding of religion, it is dominated by the concern for godlike beings (Southwold, 1978). Buddhism recognizes the existence of gods, and people who proclaim themselves to be Buddhists participate in rituals to gain divine favor. However, they note that these rituals are intended to produce worldly results, therefore, relating to laukika rather than lokottara (Southwold, 1978). Insofar as Buddhists are concerned, veneration of gods has nothing to do with agama, and confusing the latter with the traditional European understanding of religion would be plainly wrong. While Buddhism recognizes the existence of gods, they are still subjected to the rebirth cycle and have not reached nirvana, which makes them largely irrelevant in the Buddhist worldview.
This distinction allows the author to develop his central point and posit that scholars should not attempt to provide strict and unbending definitions of religion. His main argument is that people should view religion as a polythetic rather than a monothetic phenomenon. A monothetic class describes a group of phenomena that have a “set… of attributes which is common to all of them” (Southwold, 1978, p. 369). A polythetic class, though, refers to a common set of qualities, each of which is present in at least one member of the group, but not all group members possess all the qualities (Southwold, 1978). According to him, approaching religion as a polythetic phenomenon ultimately yields a better understanding thereof.
To summarize, the author uses the example of Buddhism to argue for a broader and looser definition of religion on the grounds it would be a more operable one. Regardless of whether one agrees with this perspective, there is definitely something to get out of reading and processing the article. The most important outcome is the fact that it provokes the reader to think more intently about a workable definition of religion and base it on a broader set of real-life examples than those coming from one’s immediate cultural surroundings.
References
Ames, M. M. (1964). Magical-animism and Buddhism: A structural analysis of the Sinhalese religious system.The Journal of Asian Studies, 23, 21-52. Web.
Southwold, M. (1978). Buddhism and the definition of religion.Man, 13(3), 362-379. Web.