Transcendental and Pragmatic Aspects of Religion¹

Abstract

Indian diagers gmerdLy separate the transcudentad f w w k of thcir rdigion jrom the more pragmatic fw&ons, assigning diJerd deities, rijds, and practitioners to each. The two complexes o j religious bdiejs and praciicw are taken ar comfikmmtary to each other. Some tribd grwps NTHROPOLOGICAL studies of religion have long demonstrated thatA each people uses its religion to serve a number of purposes, but it has not often been noted that in some cultures two of the general functions of religion are separated, with different deities, rites, and practitioners being assigned to ,each. The one complex is geared to the transcendental functions of religion and the other to the more pragmatic functions. Each complex is taken as being complementary to the other, rather than as a rival or an alternate.If we then use this separation of function as a criterion for comparing religions, we can classify them into several categories. It will be seen that these categories have interesting implications for formulating sequences of development from one religious category to another, a kind of formulation that, as is well known, has not been conspicuously successful in a good many previous attempts.Religion as used here means all of a group's beliefs and acts relating to their concept of the supernatural. The term "religion" thus includes abstract cosmology as well as specific "magical" devices used to cure or exorcise. The test of what is to be taken as religious is whether those who hold the beliefs and perform the acts believe that in doing so they are dealing with forces beyond those that men, by their own power, can control and command. It covers all that they believe to be superhuman and supernatural, beyond the ordinary grasp of man and above the natural world (cf. Spiro 1964: 102-103; 1966:96-98). While the scope of the supernatural can be very differently defined in different cultures, the distinction between natural and supernatural has been made by most peoples.We start with the two functional aspects of religion as they appear in village Hinduism and other religious forms in India and in village Buddhism in Ceylon. These were noted in an earlier paper (Mandelbaum 1964), which .discussed the studies in Religion in South Asia (edited by Harper 1964Harper ), par-1174

Micro Foundations of Religion: A Revised Theory

“…In any event, following World War II, Tylor's claim that religion is about belief in supernatural beings reemerged as the preferred definition of religion by a distinguished list of anthropologists: Monica Hunter Wilson (1957:9), Raymond Firth (1959:131), Robin Horton (1960:211), Jack Goody (1961:157), David G. Mandelbaum (1966Mandelbaum ( :1174, Anthony F. C. Wallace (1966:5), and Melford Spiro (1966a:96-98). Even Mary Douglas (1982:29), who always has been reluctant to accept any general definition of religion, wrote: "I am not especially fond of the one based on belief in spiritual beings, but at least it defines the field without begging any questions about the integrative power-moral, intellectual, or social-of religion.…”

Medical management and giving birth: Responses of coastal women in Tamil Nadu

“…For example, Mandelbaum's vision in 1966 of the childless woman 'trying every conceivable supernatural resource in her anxious attempts to bear a child' is still largely a representative picture of the way in which everyday concerns are meant to proceed, particularly among the nonetite. 1 In contrast, I would argue that the decisions women make with respect to maternity are neither governed purely by religious tradition, nor the result of free "choice" from among the range of 'folk' and 'modern' options. On the contrary, women's decisions whether or not to seek medical care during pregnancy, and where to give birth, are based on a finely tuned appreciation of the ways in which class and caste power shape their experience of medical institutions.…”

Class and the clinic: the subject of medical pluralism and the transmission of inequality

“…9 By 1998, the figure of the pragmatic layman had given way to that of the 'pragmatic woman'. But the two behaved very similarly, showing the same irreverence for formal boundaries in their pursuit of self-interested goals:…”