COMPARATIVE RELIGION.
Idea of Soul, how Obtained (§ 2).
Anthropomorphic Conception of Causation (§3).
Incipient Dualism (§ 4).
Magic — Natural, Mimetic, Sympathetic (§ 5).
Metempsychosis (§ 6).
Myth Defined (§ 7).
Explanations of Myth (§ 8).
b. Primitive Religion in the Social
Sphere. Kinship (§ 1). Totemism Defined (§ 2). Marks of Totemism (§ 3). Its Supposed Origin (§ 4). Its Ritual; the Mysteries (§ 5). Blood-Brotherhood (§ 6).
c. Primitive Religion in the Ethical
Sphere. Things Taboo (§1).
I. Definition and Names: Scientifically considered, " Comparative Religion " is the second of three stages of study — the History, Comparison, and Philosophy of Religion; but because of the newness of the discipline and because the collection of data is still in progress, the term as popularly employed includes all three stages, and this usage is, for the time at least, justified by the state of the science. Other phrases have indeed been proposed as substitutes, among which the most
Characteristics of Taboo (§ 2). Penalties of Breach of Taboo (§ 3).
d. Primitive Religion in the Sphere of Cult. Communal Sacrifice (§ 1). Honorific Sacrifice (§ 2). Piacular Sacrifice (§ 3). Human Sacrifice (§ 4). 2. In National and Universal Religions.
a. Dependence on Tribal Religion.
b. Common Features. Psychological (§1). Social (§ 2). Ethical (§ 3). Cultic (§ 4).
c. Modifications Due to Ethnic or
Local Differences.
d. Parallel Lines of Development.
fitting is "The Science of Religion"— a name against which three objections are urged: (1) the other term is now in possession, and popular usage in language is conservative; (2) rigid scientists affirm that for the present stage the term " science " is too ambitious; (3) religionists shrink from admitting that the rigorous methods of investigation implied by " science " may be applied in the sacred sphere of religion. To these objections the reply may be made that " science " does not imply
RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Communism Comparative Beligriou
knowledge completed, but only knowledge verified and systematized so far as the state of learning permits. To the third objection it must be opposed that science admits no bar to its investigation. It claims all spheres as rightly its own and is not deterred by the charge of irreverence; indeed, its only reverence is for verified fact, before which alone it bows. Hence the time is near when the expression " Science of Religion " may be admitted, and when the entry of the scientific method into religious inquiry will be not only permitted, but privileged. The term " Comparative Religion " is employed in this article as best expressing the common conception of what is here to be discussed.
II. History of the Discipline: This discipUne is comparatively new. Max Miiller remarked just before his death that within his own recollection the " History of Religion " (Religionsgeschichte) embraced only Christianity and Judaism (LiUeU's Living Age, Dec. 31, 1898). The religions of Greece and Rome were classed as " superstition " or "mythology," and other religions were practically unknown. For centuries, up to the I. Reasons Elizabethan era, the only other faith for its within the ken of Christians was Mo- Recent hammedanism, and candid or sym- Origin. pathetic examination of the faith of the other by the adherents of either was precluded by the antagonism engendered by centuries of warfare. Before Comparative Religion could come into being, two things were necessary: the existence of many faiths had to become known, and recognized as religion. For the first, the age of travel and discovery begun by the fifteenth century was necessary; for the second, a process of education in candor and a grounding in the historical method were essential. Lack of information and prejudice were the two barriers against the new science, and the second was the more difficult to surmount. Three centuries were occupied in the collection of data the importance of which was of course at the time unrecognized; eve'n the direction in which it bore was unnoted. For the discovery of the pertinence of this body of facts to religious inquiry further illumination was needed which came only in the nineteenth century in the discovery of some of the ethnic sacred books and in the growth of the science of anthropology.
To discern the nature and difficulty of the obstacle interposed by prejudice is not easy in this more tolerant age. It is easy to forget that the native attitude of religion is exclusive and intolerant. When some Christians could declare of others that the latter were " unregenerate " and could do no good thing, and that, if they could, it could not be pleasing to deity, other faiths could scarcely be judged on their merits. This attitude of Christianity toward other religions may 2. Preju- be illustrated by two examples: (1) by dice Pecul- the naive explanation given by Roiarly
man Catholic missionaries of monas- Potent. ticism, the mass, the rosary, and like
parallels of Catholic practise found in non-Christian lands— they were the mocking devices of the devil; (2) by the curt censure admin-
istered by Franke to the pioneer missionary Ziegenbalg, who had sent home a book on the Hindu faiths: " You were not sent to India to study Hinduism, but to preach the Gospel." Further, this attitude of contempt and scorn was changed into something like hate when it was discovered that many of the claims put forward for Christianity were duplicated by " blasphemous " claims for the other faiths. Thus each of the " book religions " claims inspiration for its scriptures. It then seemed that such claims must either be unqualifiedly denied or the inspiration of the Christian Bible be given up. The unscriptural dogma that the voice of God was heard for only a few centuries and only in a limited area closed the ear and the eye of Christianity to testimony that he had spoken to others than the chosen people in lands other than the " Holy Land." Hence the view concerning other religions entertained by Christians is well expressed in the title of more than one book or chapter on religion — " The True Religion and the False Religions."
Comparative Religion in its original phase is an outcome of Comparative Linguistics. Two events precipitated the formation of the discipline: first, the opening of India with the learning of Sanskrit and the discovery of the Vedas and other literature of the country; second, the (somewhat earlier) finding of the Zend-Avesta, resulting in the discovery that Hindus, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Teutons, Slavs, and Celts spoke languages which were akin. This led to the knowledge that these peoples had gods who were related and had inspired faiths which were not unlike. Comparative Linguistics led to Comparative Mythology, and the step to Comparative Religion then became easy and short. The man to whom more than to any other the praise is due for leading the way to this result is the famous Oxford professor already mentioned, F. Max MuUer.
In thus giving the chief meed of praise to the celebrated Sanskritist, no injustice is intended or done to those who preceded him. All great discoveries have their adumbrations. The gestation of the science of religion was a long one. The Religions of the World (London, 1653), by Alexander Ross, was a prophecy of coming interest in the non- Christian faiths, though to the author they were still " false " religions. B. Picart and J. F Bernard {Ceremonies et coutumes de ious les peuples du monde, 9 vols., Amsterdam, 1723-43, partly translated in Ceremonies and Religious Customs of the World, 6 vols., London, 1733-34) dis-
covered in other religions the degenerate descendants of a pure primitive faith — the comparative method began here. J. G. von Her- 3. Prepara- der (Ideen zur Philosophie der Getory Work, schichte, 4 parts, Leipsic, 1784-91) laid a iDroader basis in a sort of anthropology which was to concatenate mankind and his faiths. C. Meiners (Grundriss der Geschichte alter Religionen, Lemgo, 1785, and Allgemeine kritische Geschichte der Religionen, 2 vols., Hanover, 1806-07) proved that the historical spirit as against the dogmatic had entered the sphere of religious investigation. Charles Dupuis (Origine de
Comparative Belig'ion