Introduction

The aim of this book is to offer a survey of the world’s religions. We must ask ourselves at the outset what is the general character of the thing the more specialised chapters describe.

Before they are tackled it is worth while to note some important features of the context in which they are considered—features which also help to reveal some of the assumptions underlying the approach behind this entire work. So it is vital to understand that what is offered in these pages is a work in the study of religions and not in theology. Theology is an attempt to express or articulate a given religious faith (see Smart, 1973: 6). Theology thus begins, and is shaped by, the fundamental beliefs of, say, Christianity. The theologian in his development of these beliefs may offer historical accounts of the scriptures or church of his religion, but such accounts will be part of an attempt to state and defend the fundamentals of his faith for his fellow believers and the age in which they live. The student of religion attempts to offer a reflective account of the various facets of one religion or of many. He aims at detachment and disinterestedness in observa­tion so far as these are possible. In describing the beliefs, practices and institutions of a particular religion he seeks neither to defend nor attack them, but only to understand. So it should be possible to offer a study of religion (or of religions) without committing oneself or one’s reader to the truth or falsity of that religion (or religions). Whereas to present a theology is to claim endorsement of some religious beliefs.

The degree to which a detached study of religions can be successful in reaching a full understanding of religious tradi­tions will be discussed when our third question about the general character of religion is considered below (‘How far is religion available for disin­terested study?’). We may note now how the aims behind the study of religions, as opposed to theology, give a distinctive sense to these questions about the general character of religion. For the student of religion and the theologian will be inclined, because of their divergent interests, to give quite different answers to the question ‘What is religion?’. A typical theological account of the nature of religion is to be found in the writings of the great systematiser of medieval Catholic thought, St Thomas Aquinas (?1225-73). ‘Religion’ here figures as the name of a moral virtue, the virtue of offering due worship and service to God (see Aquinas, 1974: 2a2aeQ81). It is opposed to the vices of idolatry and superstition (see Aquinas: 2a2aeQ92 and 94). Thus one cannot recognise the presence of religion in someone’s life without judging the truth and adequacy of his beliefs about God and the theological appropriateness of the forms of worship he engages in. But the student of religion tries to use the concept of religion as a neutral, descriptive category. He neither desires nor needs to judge of the truth of someone’s beliefs in deciding that person is engaged in religion. Concerned to give an impartial treatment of religions as important historical and social phenomena, he does not contrast religion with idolatry or superstition, but with those other aspects of individual and social life, e.g. politics, art, science and economics, which are worthy of separate treatment from the student of human nature.

The use of‘religion’ to signify a descriptive category is relatively new in European thought, as is the concern for an impartial historical and sociological survey of religions.

We are now able to turn to our first question about the general character of religion: ‘What is religion?’. We must consider whether the detachment, comparison and historical reflection behind the study of religions presupposes or leads to some definition of religion that will fix its essential nature, or sum up in a sentence or two what we are looking to study in various societies or epochs.