宗教是什麼？為研究韋伯宗教社會學的準備工作

Abstract

為了理解韋伯的宗教社會學，我們必須先理解「宗教」是什麼。但韋伯從未明示宗教「是」什麼。本文原為研究韋伯宗教社會學的準備工作。以下是關於「宗教是什麼」的猜想。 瞭解何謂宗教的困難，正出於把宗教當作一個物、對象、概念、因素、變項、範疇、體系、一套儀式或神話奇觀。這些說法可能不無道理，但不知有誰會把這些「道理」套用到自己身上？若自己的人生不能這樣理解，則為何可以這樣理解宗教？這種素樸卻不言而喻的設定顯然是理解的根本障礙。若宗教恆為彼而我恆為此，則再多說法也只在笛卡爾式迷宮裡打轉。 韋伯主張：一種帶有倫理色彩的生活導引的格律[準則]之特徵，這才是此處所採取的資本主義精神概念的特殊意義。資本主義的概念不是孤立個體，而是人類團體所承擔起來的一種直觀模式。人類團體的直觀模式只是某些人的直觀。這裡沒有神的「靈」，只有世俗人群的「意」。 宗教不是一成不變的玩偶。在字源上，宗教一詞源於拉丁語的(religare)，意指[再]綑綁約束。宗教被界定為對一個原則的信仰、敬拜、忠誠、或奉獻的一個體系。能重新把信徒綁在一起的思想、信仰和力量體系都是宗教。但「我們」重新綁在一起「練過」什麼？本文保留開放態度。  To understand Weber’s sociology of religion, we must first understand what religion is; this is something that Weber never explains. This article is a preparatory work for studying Weber’s sociology of religion. The following is a conjecture on what religion is. It is difficult to understand what religion is because it is often regarded as, for example, an object, a concept, a set of rituals, or a set of mythological wonders. These definitions might be somewhat reasonable, but religious adherents typically chafe at their self-application, finding them to be inaccurate or misleading. If a person cannot understand their life based on such definitions, how can they be expected to understand religion in this way? This simple but self-evident truth is the main obstacle to understanding religion. If what religion is defined as does not accord with my perception of what religion is to me, this tension is alienating. Weber argues that the character of an ethically colored maxim for the conduct of life is linked to the concept of the “spirit of capitalism,” which is applied herein. The concept of capitalism is not based on an isolated individual; rather, it is a mode of intuition perceived by human groups. There is no “spirit” of God here, only the “intention” of secular society. Religion is not static. The word religion is derived from the Latin religare, meaning rebinding constraints. Religion is defined as a system of faith, worship, loyalty, or devotion to one principle. The thoughts, beliefs, and power systems that bind believers together are all constitutive elements of religion. The following question must be asked: what is the purpose of this rebinding? The author approaches the topic open to novel realizations.