[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
person may be.
The gods to whom one seeks for protection are henceforth regarded as either subject to an order or --like
the great kings-- as the creators of such an order, which they made the specific content of their divine
will. In the first case, a super-divine and impersonal power makes its appearance behind the gods,
controlling them from within and measuring the value of their deeds. Of course, this super-divine power
may take many different forms. It appears first as "fate." Among the Greeks "fate" (moira) is an
irrational and, above all, ethically indifferent predetermination of human destiny. Such predetermination
is elastic within certain limits, but flagrant interferences with predetermined fate may be very dangerous
even to the greatest of the gods. This provides one explanation for the failure of so many prayers. This
kind of predetermined view is very compatible to the normal inner attitude of a military hero, who are
particularly unreceptive to the rationalistic belief in an ethically meaningful, yet impartial, wise and
kindly "providence." In this we glimpse once again the deep vocational cleft between a warrior class and
every kind of religious or purely ethical rationalism. We have already made brief reference to this cleft,
and we shall have occasion to observe it in many contexts. [15]
(B.3.g) Impersonal Powers
Quite different is the impersonal power conceived by bureaucratic or theocratic strata, for example, the
Chinese bureaucracy or the Hindu Brahmins. Theirs is the providential power of the harmonious and
rational order of the world, which may in any given case incline to either more cosmic or more ethical
and social character, although as a rule both aspects are involved. In Confucianism as in Taoism, this
order has both a cosmic and specifically ethical-rational character; it is an impersonal, providential
power that guarantees the regularity and proper order of world history. This is the view of a rationalistic
bureaucracy. Even more strongly ethical is the Hindu impersonal power (rita) of the fixed order of
religious ceremonial, of the cosmos, and hence of human activity in general. This is the view of the
world held by the Vedic priesthood, which practiced an essentially empirical art of coercing rather than
of worshipping the gods. Also to be included this view is the later Hindu notion of a super-divine all-
united being, which is independent from the senseless change and transitoriness of the entire
phenomenal world. This is the worldview of speculative intellectuals who were indifferent to worldly
concerns.
On the other hand, where the order of nature and of the social relationships which are regulated by rules,
especially law, are not regarded as subordinating the gods, but rather as god's creations (later we shall
inquire under what circumstances this occurs), [16] it is self-evidently postulated that god will protect
against violation of the order he has created. The conceptual penetration of this postulate has far-
reaching consequences for religious action and for the general attitude toward the god. It stimulated the
development of a religious ethic, as well as the differentiation of demands of the god from demands of
an inadequate "nature." Hitherto, there had been two primordial methods of influencing supernatural
powers. One was to subject them to human purposes by means of magic. The other was to win their
favor by making oneself pleasing to them, not by the exercise of any ethical virtue, but by fulfilling their
egotistic demands. Here appeared obedience to the religious law as the distinctive way to win the god's
favor.
(B.4) Development Of Religious Ethic
(B.4.a) Taboo
To be sure, religious ethics do not really begin with this context of impersonal power. On the contrary,
there was already another and highly effectual context of religious ethics, that is, purely magically
motivated norms of conduct, the violation of which was regarded as a religious abomination. Wherever a
belief in spirits is developed, it is held that unusual occurrences in life are generated by the entrance into
a person of a particular spirit, for example, in sickness, at birth, at puberty, or at menstruation. This spirit
may be regarded as either "sacred" or "unclean"; this spirit is variable and often the product of accident,
but the practical effect is the same. In either case one must avoid irritating the spirit, lest it enter into the
offensive intruder, or magically harm oneself or any other persons who possessed by it. As a result, the
individual who was regarded as intruded by the spirit will be shunned physically and socially and must
avoid contact with others and sometimes even with his body. In some instances, for example, Polynesian
charismatic princes, such a person must be carefully fed lest he magically contaminate his own food.
Naturally, once this set of notions has developed, various objects or persons may be labeled as "taboo"
by the invocation of a charismatic magician; thereupon, contact with the new possessor of taboo will
cause evil magic, for his taboo may be transmitted. This charismatic power to transfer taboo underwent
considerable systematic rationalization, especially in Indonesia and the South Sea area. Numerous
economic and social interests stood under the sanctions of taboos. Among them were the following: the
conservation of forests and wild life (after the pattern of the prohibited forests of early medieval kings);
the protection of scarce commodities against uneconomic consumption during periods of economic
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]