The Sacred and the Profane - The Nature of Religion, by Eliade & Trask - Assignment Example

1. Hierophany: According to Mircea Eliade on page 11 hierophany is a broad term which refers to sacredness or holiness. He clarifies that the term is used for a representation which holds sacredness or shows the signs of the sacred (God) himself. He emphasizes on the revelation and puts forward the claim that if this revelation is viewed from an educational perspective it can be seen that God (sacred) himself has revealed to man historically and has ordered stones and trees to show signs of him. He further tells that the number of hierophanies are varying but the most superlative of all is the belief in the Christianity. This hierophany can be witnessed in the Jesus Christ himself who is a personification of God himself. According to him the sacred only reveals himself to the reality of holy and not that of natural reality. 2. Eliade intends for us to understand “sacred” and “profane” as existing in opposition. How are they opposites? Eliade clearly distinguishes between an objects physical attributes and sacred attributes. He states that the sacred nature of objects is not to be counted as a physical attribute but rather a sacred attribute which he pronounces to be ganz andere. He tells about the sacred as something which is developing world order and is religious. He tells about nature as something which is conforming to the modes of sacredness. He differentiates between sacred and profane on the basis of the followers of both the existence. Individuals who believe in profane rely on natural realities rather than on sacredness and power is perceived by them as something which is eternal. In other words these followers are deviating from the role of existence in this world. Eliade describes the primitive race to be belonging to this world with natural realities and who deny their moral rights. These followers do not have a moral right to existence in this world as put by Eliade. He further concludes that profane and sacred are two different modes of existence in this world. 3. Mircea Eliade calls humankind “homo religious.” By homo religious Eliade is trying to tell that people in this world who follow this form believe in one religion and one god irrespective of their beliefs in profane or sacred. This is the very reason that Eliade distinguishes between the two forms of existence i.e. profane and sacred. 4. (a.) Desacralized cosmos” is used by the author to tell about the myth of the end of this world and existence. It is believed by him that this end would be marked by the hatred for profane and the eternal return of sacred to this world. (b.) “homogeneity of space” the author uses this term to signify the instability of the religious individuals living in this world. According to him this homogeneity of space is stuffed with interruptions and inconsistency. This is the reason why profane space is inconsistent. (c.) “Primordial experience” Eliade’s sense of primordial experience depicts his thoughts on the nature of space. In simple words it tells about the interruptions in sacred space and the nature of the non-homogeneity of space. This non-homogeneity of space is referred to as an experience of both the profane and sacred in this world. 5. Eliade pronounces a ‘fixed point’ or a central point to be very important in religious practice. The author puts forward his beliefs regarding the fixed point in this space. He argues that it is a time when the sacred space and the profane space meet to form a fixed point. Sacred space is referred to as a point which has direction whereas profane space was negated in the times even before human identity was acquired. It is believed by Eliade that at this fixed point both these spaces meet and form a center for human beings such that they live in peace. In other words this point is the meeting point for these two entities and the establishment of eternal reality. 6. Eliade tells us that, “a profane existence is never found in a pure state.” It is believed by him that profane nature is an irreligious culture which is practiced by humans. It is inconsistent and amorphous as per the reality of this world. On the other hand the sacred space is a nature which is consistent and pure. This is the very reason that profane space has been never been pronounced to be pure. 7. Eliade on pages 32 and 33 tells a mesmerizing tale about an aboriginal tribe which unknowingly breaks its “axis mundi”. Eliade refers to this tribe as Arunta tribe which was known to be Achilpa from the mythical time. Of the most divine tribes was of Numbaluka, which is believed to create the whole establishment of the tribe including the cosmic zed territory and their future. Numbakula created a sacred pole by the help of a trunk from a gum tree and smeared it with blood after which they climbed on it to disappear. This pole is then referred to as the axis mundi or cosmic axis but this pole could not live for long as it got broken and after it got broken the whole community died. 8. On page 68, Eliade states: “By its very nature sacred time is reversible in the sense that, properly speaking, it is a primordial mythical time made present.” The concept of re-actualization can be taken into consideration to clarify the concepts of Eliade. The author here is clearly denoting the sacred nature of the mythical times. He is trying to tell that a religious man should know the worth of the primordial myth of re-actualization and he should know how to balance the profane events with the sacred ones. He should build up on his sentiments such that he practices sacred elements in his life which took place previously in the mythical times. These sacred practices can help man to believe in himself and revive the original sacred space by the emergence of temporal reintegration. This re-actualization can only be done if the practice of festive is widely followed. References Eliade, M & Trask, W. (1987). The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion. When The Sacred Manifests Itself. Drive Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovic. Read More