1. Civilizations and world religions 3. Lecture. The religious freedom

2. The elements of evolutionary theory of religion 1. The interpretation of the origins of religion by the help of basic catherogies of evolution, (such as: inheritance, mutation, selection, adaptation, etc.) 1. The interpretation of the origins of religion by the help of basic catherogies of evolution, (such as: inheritance, mutation, selection, adaptation, etc.) 2a. The interpretation of religion as a social, „gadgeteered” construction, as an adaptation, (a function that helps the survival). 2a. The interpretation of religion as a social, „gadgeteered” construction, as an adaptation, (a function that helps the survival). 2b. The presentation of such functions, which helps the individuals and the group to solve certain problems in the actual situation, or in the actual level of evolution. (So, due to which function it is an adaptation, and not a by-product or a „bug”). 2b. The presentation of such functions, which helps the individuals and the group to solve certain problems in the actual situation, or in the actual level of evolution. (So, due to which function it is an adaptation, and not a by-product or a „bug”). 3. The understanding of „why” is the unfolding of evolutionary story that lead to the present, („just so story”). In evolution the answer to a question is always a story. 3. The understanding of „why” is the unfolding of evolutionary story that lead to the present, („just so story”). In evolution the answer to a question is always a story.

3. What is religion? In the prespective of evolutionary theory 1. Religion is a „cultural universal” – it could be found in every known present and past (after its material mementos known) societies. 1. Religion is a „cultural universal” – it could be found in every known present and past (after its material mementos known) societies. Concerning sociologists (Durkheim, Murdock, Lévi- Strauss, Donald Brown, etc.) a „cultural universal” is an element, pattern, trait, or institution that is common to all human cultures worldwide. Concerning sociologists (Durkheim, Murdock, Lévi- Strauss, Donald Brown, etc.) a „cultural universal” is an element, pattern, trait, or institution that is common to all human cultures worldwide.

4. The sacred and the profane. Initial remarks Every particular religion has religious texts and documents, rituals, festivals, holy items, sacred places. Has a sacred account about the totality of the world and being. Every particular religion has religious texts and documents, rituals, festivals, holy items, sacred places. Has a sacred account about the totality of the world and being. This means, that every particular religion has its institutionalized, canonized form of religious experience. At the core of religious experience lie the distinctions between sacred and profane, this-world and other- world. The positive religions give an institutionally articulated form to these basic distinctions. This means, that every particular religion has its institutionalized, canonized form of religious experience. At the core of religious experience lie the distinctions between sacred and profane, this-world and other- world. The positive religions give an institutionally articulated form to these basic distinctions. The conception of transcendence or the sacred is always embedded into a special cultural context. This could be a source of conflicts between different cultures. What one culture considers sacred, is not sacred for another cultural community, or even the antagonistic opposition of holy: the unholy. Some religions regard other as counter-religions, and fanatics sometimes desecrate the counter-religion’s holy symbols. The conception of transcendence or the sacred is always embedded into a special cultural context. This could be a source of conflicts between different cultures. What one culture considers sacred, is not sacred for another cultural community, or even the antagonistic opposition of holy: the unholy. Some religions regard other as counter-religions, and fanatics sometimes desecrate the counter-religion’s holy symbols. Conflict: American soldiers burnt Korans in Afghanistan a few days ago, which caused a huge wave of protestation there. Conflict: American soldiers burnt Korans in Afghanistan a few days ago, which caused a huge wave of protestation there.

5. Mircea Eliade. Life and work Mircea Eliade: born: Bucharest, 1907; deceased: Chicago, 1986. Romanian theorist and historian of religion, father of modern religious studies. Mircea Eliade: born: Bucharest, 1907; deceased: Chicago, 1986. Romanian theorist and historian of religion, father of modern religious studies. Most essential works: The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (1956), History of Religious Ideas I-III (1968), The Myth of Eternal Return: Cosmos and History (1969). Most essential works: The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of Religion (1956), History of Religious Ideas I-III (1968), The Myth of Eternal Return: Cosmos and History (1969). Other important works: „Yoga: Immortality and Freedom”, „Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy”, „Occultism, Witchcraft, and Cultural Fashions”, „Images and Symbols: Studies in Religious Symbolism”. Other important works: „Yoga: Immortality and Freedom”, „Shamanism: Archaic Techniques of Ecstasy”, „Occultism, Witchcraft, and Cultural Fashions”, „Images and Symbols: Studies in Religious Symbolism”. Was a supporter and an ideologist of the romanian Iron Guard, in the 1930es. For this reason he had to spend three weeks in prison, in 1938. Was a supporter and an ideologist of the romanian Iron Guard, in the 1930es. For this reason he had to spend three weeks in prison, in 1938. Because of his earlier radical rightist views he had to go to exile; on September 16,1945 he moved with his daughter to France. Due to his friendship with Georges Dumézil he got a position of a lecturer in Paris, (École pratique des hautes études). Because of his earlier radical rightist views he had to go to exile; on September 16,1945 he moved with his daughter to France. Due to his friendship with Georges Dumézil he got a position of a lecturer in Paris, (École pratique des hautes études). In October 1956, he moved to the United States, settling in Chicago, and became the professor of Chicago University. There has been organised a school of researchers around Eliade. In October 1956, he moved to the United States, settling in Chicago, and became the professor of Chicago University. There has been organised a school of researchers around Eliade.

6. Main ideas. Basic structures of religious experience According to Eliade the idea of a homogeneous space and time of the modern man is a result of a long cultural development. According to Eliade the idea of a homogeneous space and time of the modern man is a result of a long cultural development. The space and time of the modern man is homogeneous, every point of it is equal to the other. The space and time of the modern man is homogeneous, every point of it is equal to the other. On the contrary: the archaic, premodern, religious man had an inhomogeneous space and time. This means that the space and time of archaic man had special points. On the contrary: the archaic, premodern, religious man had an inhomogeneous space and time. This means that the space and time of archaic man had special points. For the archaic /premodern/religious man it meant a difference of sacred space and time as opposed to profane space and time. For the archaic /premodern/religious man it meant a difference of sacred space and time as opposed to profane space and time. Sacred space: the holy place, the sacred ground where the religious man had a special connection with transcendence. Sacred time: the holy time, the religious fest, when a special event of the religion’s mythical history returned. Sacred space: the holy place, the sacred ground where the religious man had a special connection with transcendence. Sacred time: the holy time, the religious fest, when a special event of the religion’s mythical history returned.

7. The sacred and the profane In Eliade’s opinion the most fundamental structure of religious experience is the experience of the sacred. The sacred is the manifestation of the transcendence. The difference of sacred and profane could be found in every known religion. In Eliade’s opinion the most fundamental structure of religious experience is the experience of the sacred. The sacred is the manifestation of the transcendence. The difference of sacred and profane could be found in every known religion. According to Eliade this structure of experience could be found even at modern, secular, non-religious man. The cult of politicians, political leaders in totalitarian regimes, and pop-stars in modern popular culture is a reminiscence of this experience, („the sacred person”). In Eliade’s interpretation this is a sign that religious experience is in a way inherent to the human being, it is a necessary structure of human existence. According to Eliade this structure of experience could be found even at modern, secular, non-religious man. The cult of politicians, political leaders in totalitarian regimes, and pop-stars in modern popular culture is a reminiscence of this experience, („the sacred person”). In Eliade’s interpretation this is a sign that religious experience is in a way inherent to the human being, it is a necessary structure of human existence. The differentiation of sacred and profane comes originally from Émile Durkheim, („The elementary forms of religious life”, 1912) – who used this distinction in his descriptions of totem and taboo of natural, primitive religions. The differentiation of sacred and profane comes originally from Émile Durkheim, („The elementary forms of religious life”, 1912) – who used this distinction in his descriptions of totem and taboo of natural, primitive religions. But it was Eliade who worked out an overall conception on the basis of this distinction, to characterize religion in its essence, in general. But it was Eliade who worked out an overall conception on the basis of this distinction, to characterize religion in its essence, in general.

8. Hierophany, epiphany, theophany. Eliade used mostly the term „hierophany” to characterize the phenomenon of the sacred. The term hierophany signifies the manifestation of the sacred. „Hierophany” is a greek expression: „hieros” – sacred, „phainein” – to reveal. Eliade used mostly the term „hierophany” to characterize the phenomenon of the sacred. The term hierophany signifies the manifestation of the sacred. „Hierophany” is a greek expression: „hieros” – sacred, „phainein” – to reveal. A strongly correlative term for hierophany is „epiphany”. Epiphany means in ancient greek language: epiphaneia, „manifestation, striking appearance”. The epiphany is „insight” or „illumination through the divine” or the supernatural. A strongly correlative term for hierophany is „epiphany”. Epiphany means in ancient greek language: epiphaneia, „manifestation, striking appearance”. The epiphany is „insight” or „illumination through the divine” or the supernatural. „Theophany” is a more restrictive term for hierophany. Theophany means: „the appearance of a god”. So: it is a more concrete understanding of hierophany, as it refers to a concrete form of transcendence, namely: to a godly or divine transcendence. „Theophany” is a more restrictive term for hierophany. Theophany means: „the appearance of a god”. So: it is a more concrete understanding of hierophany, as it refers to a concrete form of transcendence, namely: to a godly or divine transcendence.

9. The sacred place For the ancient man there were sacred places in space, which were considered by them as central points in the world. For the ancient man there were sacred places in space, which were considered by them as central points in the world. Usually there were several central sacred places, and a hierarchy of these points. So: there was a centre of centres or a highest centre for a certain religious community. Usually there were several central sacred places, and a hierarchy of these points. So: there was a centre of centres or a highest centre for a certain religious community. E.g.: three very favoured places of pilgrimage in Medieval Christianity were: 3. the Purgatory of Saint Patrick (Ireland), 2. Santiago de Compostella (Spain, the tomb of Apostle Saint James), 1. Rome, (Italy). But there was a centre of centres: Jerusalem, (Israel). Jerusalem was also the highest centre for Judaic (Jewish) and Muslim religions. E.g.: three very favoured places of pilgrimage in Medieval Christianity were: 3. the Purgatory of Saint Patrick (Ireland), 2. Santiago de Compostella (Spain, the tomb of Apostle Saint James), 1. Rome, (Italy). But there was a centre of centres: Jerusalem, (Israel). Jerusalem was also the highest centre for Judaic (Jewish) and Muslim religions. But over and above these major and „highest” centre, there were, so to say „minor” centers: the church and temple for every single religious community. In medieval communities the church counted as the centre of the particular community. But over and above these major and „highest” centre, there were, so to say „minor” centers: the church and temple for every single religious community. In medieval communities the church counted as the centre of the particular community.

10. „Axis mundi” This symbolism of the centre, or of the centres, according to Eliade, goes back to a fundamental structure of religious experience, which he called „axis mundi” („axis of world”). This symbolism of the centre, or of the centres, according to Eliade, goes back to a fundamental structure of religious experience, which he called „axis mundi” („axis of world”). For the proper religious community axis mundi was the centre of the entire world, and also a channel between the region of mortals and the region of deities, of divine transcendence. For the proper religious community axis mundi was the centre of the entire world, and also a channel between the region of mortals and the region of deities, of divine transcendence. The religious leaders of the group in question (shamans, witch- doctors, clerics, priests etc.), those who know the proper rituals, could easily communicate with the divine forces at these „world-centres”. The religious leaders of the group in question (shamans, witch- doctors, clerics, priests etc.), those who know the proper rituals, could easily communicate with the divine forces at these „world-centres”. All known religions knew centers of this kind. The more archaic religions had these „highest” centre in a very concrete form: the mountain Olympus for the Greeks, or the Yggdrasil, the „World Tree” for the old Nordic, German, Viking tribes. All known religions knew centers of this kind. The more archaic religions had these „highest” centre in a very concrete form: the mountain Olympus for the Greeks, or the Yggdrasil, the „World Tree” for the old Nordic, German, Viking tribes. The more „developed” a religion was, the more abstract the idea of this centre became. In monotheistic world-religions (on a certain degree of development) these centers gained a merely symbolic meaning. The more „developed” a religion was, the more abstract the idea of this centre became. In monotheistic world-religions (on a certain degree of development) these centers gained a merely symbolic meaning.

11. Sacred time. The festival The more important points (points of articulation, of orientation) of time for religious person were religious holidays or festivals. The more important points (points of articulation, of orientation) of time for religious person were religious holidays or festivals. Eliade criticized Carl Gustav Jung, who claimed that the religious person commemorated the important events of the mythical history of the particular religion in question. Eliade criticized Carl Gustav Jung, who claimed that the religious person commemorated the important events of the mythical history of the particular religion in question. According to Eliade religious festivals were something much more stronger than mere commemorations. In his opinion festivals were a sort of „Eternal Return”. According to Eliade religious festivals were something much more stronger than mere commemorations. In his opinion festivals were a sort of „Eternal Return”. The ancient, premodern person did not only commemorate the fundamental events of his or her religion’s mythical pre-history. For him or her those events returned and repeated during the sacred time of festivals, in quite a literal way. The ancient, premodern person did not only commemorate the fundamental events of his or her religion’s mythical pre-history. For him or her those events returned and repeated during the sacred time of festivals, in quite a literal way. As the sacred places, the sacred times too meant a channel through the world into the transcendent domain. As the sacred places, the sacred times too meant a channel through the world into the transcendent domain.

12. Eternal Return and the Terror of History In Eliade’s interpretation the archaic/premodern man lived in a rather cyclic world. For him/her the world was an Eternal Return or repetition of days, seasons, years – and mythical events. The born and death of Sun God, the born and death of barley (Eleusinian Mysteries!), the born and death of entire generations. In Eliade’s interpretation the archaic/premodern man lived in a rather cyclic world. For him/her the world was an Eternal Return or repetition of days, seasons, years – and mythical events. The born and death of Sun God, the born and death of barley (Eleusinian Mysteries!), the born and death of entire generations. The New Year ceremonies amongst Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and other Near Eastern peoples re-enacted their cosmogonic myths. Each and every New Year ceremony was the beginning of the World in real. The New Year ceremonies amongst Mesopotamians, Egyptians, and other Near Eastern peoples re-enacted their cosmogonic myths. Each and every New Year ceremony was the beginning of the World in real. According to Eliade, the linear view of history and time is a modern construction, which is based on the Eschatology of major monotheistic religions, (Judaism, Islam, Christianity). According to Eliade, the linear view of history and time is a modern construction, which is based on the Eschatology of major monotheistic religions, (Judaism, Islam, Christianity). Eliade refers with the term „The Terror of History” to the modern, secularized conception of historical time, which was entirely empty of the sacred. In Eliade’s interpretation the ancient man had a living connection with transcendence, due to its contact with the mythical age through the Eternal Return. Therefore the ancient people were in a way safe of the Terror of History. Eliade refers with the term „The Terror of History” to the modern, secularized conception of historical time, which was entirely empty of the sacred. In Eliade’s interpretation the ancient man had a living connection with transcendence, due to its contact with the mythical age through the Eternal Return. Therefore the ancient people were in a way safe of the Terror of History.

13. Myths of origin. The origin of time According to Eliade in ancient man lived a strong „nostalgia for origins”, (Eliade, Myths, Dreams and Mysteries, 1967: 44 ). The ancient man made a difference between his time and the mythical time, between his age and the mythical age. In the ancient man’s view of world the mythical time was the origin of time itself. According to Eliade in ancient man lived a strong „nostalgia for origins”, (Eliade, Myths, Dreams and Mysteries, 1967: 44 ). The ancient man made a difference between his time and the mythical time, between his age and the mythical age. In the ancient man’s view of world the mythical time was the origin of time itself. The mythical time was the time of the Beginnings, the time of myths of origins. In traditional societies, Eliade says, myths represented „the absolute truth about primordial time”, (Eliade, 1967: 23). The mythical time was the time of the Beginnings, the time of myths of origins. In traditional societies, Eliade says, myths represented „the absolute truth about primordial time”, (Eliade, 1967: 23). The myth of origins, as he states, „is always an account of a creation”, (Eliade, 1967: 6). The mythical time was the time when Sacred first appeared and established the structure of the world. The myth of origin is an account about the origin of Sacred itself. The myth of origins, as he states, „is always an account of a creation”, (Eliade, 1967: 6). The mythical time was the time when Sacred first appeared and established the structure of the world. The myth of origin is an account about the origin of Sacred itself.

14. „Coincidentia oppositorum” The coincidence of oppositions According to Eliade the Sacred often united antagonistic oppositions in itself. Eliade called the unity of opposition in one concrete form of the Sacred as „coincidentia oppositorum” or the „coincidence of oppositions”. According to Eliade the Sacred often united antagonistic oppositions in itself. Eliade called the unity of opposition in one concrete form of the Sacred as „coincidentia oppositorum” or the „coincidence of oppositions”. „Yahweh is both kind and wrathful; the God of the Christian mystics and theologians is terrible and gentle at once”, (Eliade, 1967: 450). „Yahweh is both kind and wrathful; the God of the Christian mystics and theologians is terrible and gentle at once”, (Eliade, 1967: 450). Coincidentia oppositorum represented, according to him, a strong union or unity of oppositions. It is a mythic pattern that could be found again also in almost every religions; so: in Far East, Oriental and ancient religions also. Coincidentia oppositorum represented, according to him, a strong union or unity of oppositions. It is a mythic pattern that could be found again also in almost every religions; so: in Far East, Oriental and ancient religions also. E.g.: for the ancient Greeks Zeus is terrible and noble at the same time. In Buddhism the Karma (which is the engine which drives the wheel of uncontrolled rebirth) could be gentle and terrible at the same time. (But in Buddhism the opposites appear only on the relative level of sensuous phenomena, and they disappear in the absolute space of enlightened consciousness ). E.g.: for the ancient Greeks Zeus is terrible and noble at the same time. In Buddhism the Karma (which is the engine which drives the wheel of uncontrolled rebirth) could be gentle and terrible at the same time. (But in Buddhism the opposites appear only on the relative level of sensuous phenomena, and they disappear in the absolute space of enlightened consciousness ).

15. The Sky Father. The pattern of High God According to Eliade in most archaic religions one could find a central divine figure, around which the „community” of other gods is organized. According to Eliade in most archaic religions one could find a central divine figure, around which the „community” of other gods is organized. Eliade criticizes both the "evolutionistic" theory of Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917) and others, and Wilhelm Schmidt’s (1868-1954) theory of a „primal monotheism” („Urmonotheismus”). Eliade criticizes both the "evolutionistic" theory of Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917) and others, and Wilhelm Schmidt’s (1868-1954) theory of a „primal monotheism” („Urmonotheismus”). According to Tyler’s evolutionist theory of religion, there was a natural progress from animism to polytheism, and from polytheism to monotheism. But in Eliade’s opinion this strict schema does not hold in the reality, and the figure of Sky Father could be found in almost every tribal, „primitive” religion. „The most popular prayer in the world is addressed to 'Our Father who art in heaven.' It is possible that man's earliest prayers were addressed to the same heavenly father.” – said Eliade, (Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion, 1958: 38). According to Tyler’s evolutionist theory of religion, there was a natural progress from animism to polytheism, and from polytheism to monotheism. But in Eliade’s opinion this strict schema does not hold in the reality, and the figure of Sky Father could be found in almost every tribal, „primitive” religion. „The most popular prayer in the world is addressed to 'Our Father who art in heaven.' It is possible that man's earliest prayers were addressed to the same heavenly father.” – said Eliade, (Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion, 1958: 38). But he also criticized Schmidt’s conception about a strict „primordial monotheism”. This theory, as Eliade thought, was „rigid and unworkable”. Though archaic, tribal cults had a central figure, they were nonetheless polytheistic, and their High God was very different from the One God of „more developed” monotheistic religions. (E.g.: the High God could manifest himself as an animal, without losing his status as a celestial Supreme Being). But he also criticized Schmidt’s conception about a strict „primordial monotheism”. This theory, as Eliade thought, was „rigid and unworkable”. Though archaic, tribal cults had a central figure, they were nonetheless polytheistic, and their High God was very different from the One God of „more developed” monotheistic religions. (E.g.: the High God could manifest himself as an animal, without losing his status as a celestial Supreme Being).

16. Cosmos and chaos. Fundamental structure of the actual world The distinction of cosmos and chaos referred again to further fundamental feature of the ancient man’s view of world at Eliade, (The Sacred and the Profane). The distinction of cosmos and chaos referred again to further fundamental feature of the ancient man’s view of world at Eliade, (The Sacred and the Profane). These words came from the ancient Greek language. „Cosmos” signified „world” and „order” at the same time. For the ancient man world meant an articulated world, with laws and order. „Chaos” was for him/her the counter-concept of cosmos: the lack of any order and law. Chaos was a rupture in the texture of cosmos, of the world. These words came from the ancient Greek language. „Cosmos” signified „world” and „order” at the same time. For the ancient man world meant an articulated world, with laws and order. „Chaos” was for him/her the counter-concept of cosmos: the lack of any order and law. Chaos was a rupture in the texture of cosmos, of the world. „Cosmos” signified at Eliade the home-world of ancient man; the world of laws, customs, habits, rituals which were familiar and accustomed for the premodern person. Cosmos was the world of mortals and immortals: the pantheon of the concrete cultural community belonged to the home- world of this community also. „Cosmos” signified at Eliade the home-world of ancient man; the world of laws, customs, habits, rituals which were familiar and accustomed for the premodern person. Cosmos was the world of mortals and immortals: the pantheon of the concrete cultural community belonged to the home- world of this community also. The „chaos” meant the opposite of the world, it meant „counter-world”, the lack of the world. Outside the particular world of the community, its laws do not hold anymore. Beyond the borders of the home-world of the particular group there is the other-world. The „chaos” meant the opposite of the world, it meant „counter-world”, the lack of the world. Outside the particular world of the community, its laws do not hold anymore. Beyond the borders of the home-world of the particular group there is the other-world.

17. Criticism of Eliade’s ideas The main points of criticism concerning Eliade’s scholarship aimed at Eliade’s overgeneralizations. The main points of criticism concerning Eliade’s scholarship aimed at Eliade’s overgeneralizations. Eliade’s critics claimed that he tended to use his classifications and conceptions even in those cases in which he was actually had no satisfactory evidence. He tended to elide the principal differences between different religions. Eliade’s critics claimed that he tended to use his classifications and conceptions even in those cases in which he was actually had no satisfactory evidence. He tended to elide the principal differences between different religions. According to these scholars (e.g.: Dougles Allen, Geoffrey Kirk, Wendy Doniger) even Eliade’s speculations about the fundamental features of religions implied to rigid categories, and every religion has such particular moments which cannot be described with Eliade’s own system of categories. According to these scholars (e.g.: Dougles Allen, Geoffrey Kirk, Wendy Doniger) even Eliade’s speculations about the fundamental features of religions implied to rigid categories, and every religion has such particular moments which cannot be described with Eliade’s own system of categories. The complexity of particular religions cannot be so easily grasped with such as system of categories that Eliade worked out. The complexity of particular religions cannot be so easily grasped with such as system of categories that Eliade worked out.