Skip to main content

Spatial Taxonomies of Religion

  • Chapter
Spaces of Modern Theology

Part of the book series: New Approaches to Religion and Power ((NARP))

  • 112 Accesses

Abstract

Tomoko Masuzawa’s book The Invention of World Religions describes how a discursive entity called “religion” emerged in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. According to Masuzawa, world religions emerged “as a category and as a conceptual framework initially developed in the European academy, which quickly became a means of differentiating, variegating, consolidating, and totalizing a large portion of the social, cultural, and political practices observable among the inhabitants of regions elsewhere in the world.”1 Where previously the world was divided into Christians, Jews, Muslims, and then the rest, with Christianity standing as the one true religion among them, in the early decades of the nineteenth century the discursive regime of pluralism rendered “the rest” visible. Buddhism, Hinduism, Shinto, Confucianism, and many others were suddenly understood as distinct entities, clearly demarcated sets of beliefs and practices that marked them off from other competing beliefs, practices, and cultures. On Masuzawa’s telling, these traditions were constructed by European scholars for the purposes of comparative study, as well as for the purposes of cultural classification and domination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Tomoko Masuzawa, The Invention of World Religions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005), p. 20.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1990), p. 252.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Masuzawa, pp. ix—33.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Friedrich Schleiermacher, On Religion: Speeches to Its Cultured Despisers (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), p. 123.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Friedrich Schleiermacher, The Christian Faith (London: T & T Clark, 1999), p. 137. Hereafter CF.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ibid., p. 173.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ibid., p. 532.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Immanuel Kant, Critique of Judgment, ed. Werner Pluhar (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing, 1987), p. 253. My reading of Kant here has been helped by a discussion found in Mark C. Taylor, The Moment of Complexity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), pp. 84—88.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ibid., pp. 249–250.

    Google Scholar 

  10. CF, p. 139.

    Google Scholar 

  11. I have borrowed the apt and felicitous term “life-system” from Henry Sussman, for it bypasses the ways the very category “religion” was formed within the crucible of colonial encounters within the ninteenth century.

    Google Scholar 

  12. CF, p. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A brief word on the relationship between Schleiermacher and Hegel is in order, for much of my analysis of Schleiermacher in the following pages seems to resemble moments within Hegel. Their personal animus toward one another is well-known, and yet I believe their projects are not as different as one might initially suspect. In a helpful chapter on Hegel and Schleiermacher, Richard Crouter argues that the two men were united by a number of common concerns, among them their commitment to the university as an institution for the shaping of modern culture, their sense that traditional Christianity and modern thought needed to be reconciled, including especially Christianity and the natural sciences, and in their shared belief that Kant’s pure reason was incomplete, a belief that led both of them toward new efforts at system building. Furthermore, both Hegel and Schleiermacher place great value on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit as central to the understanding of their respective systems, and to an understanding of history as such. Though their commitment to different academic languages (theology and philosophy) hindered their efforts at communication, and though Schleiermacher’s systematic formulations may have been open to greater adaptability and flexibility (Schleiermacher’s system does not unfold deductively through a progression of logic, for example), Crouter suggests their mutual disregard was as much a sibling rivalry between two enormously generative thinkers as it was a substantive difference. See Richard Crouter, “Hegel and Schleiermacher at Berlin,” in Friedrich Schleiermacher: Between Enlightenment and Romanticism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 70—97.

    Google Scholar 

  14. G. W. F. Hegel, The Philosophy of History, trans. J. Sibree (New York: Dover Press, 1956), p. 99. As quoted in Masuzawa, p. 42.

    Google Scholar 

  15. CF, p. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Masuzawa, p. 17.

    Google Scholar 

  17. CF, p. 32.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ibid., p. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ibid., pp. 18–19.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ibid., p. 22.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ibid., p. 31.

    Google Scholar 

  22. See Masuzawa, p. 18.

    Google Scholar 

  23. CF, p. 33.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ibid., p. 34.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Ibid. Schleiermacher uses the German term “System” in this passage, rather than one of the associated words or concepts that I mentioned earlier.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ibid., pp. 35–36.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ibid., p. 36.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ibid., p. 37.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Speeches, p. 114.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ibid., p. 115.

    Google Scholar 

  33. CF, p. 443.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ibid., p. 37.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ibid., p. 37.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ibid., p. 40.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ibid., p. 43.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Ibid., p. 43–44.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Speeches, p. 32.

    Google Scholar 

  41. CF, p. 52.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Ibid., p. 57.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Ibid., p. 56.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Ibid., p. 63.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Ibid., pp. 63—64.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Ibid., p. 58.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Ibid., p. 404–405.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Ibid., p. 405.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ibid., p. 405.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ibid., p. 562.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Ibid., p. 575, italics mine.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Ibid., p. 63.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Ibid., p. 201.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ibid., p. 202.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Ibid., p. 206.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Ibid., p. 207.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Ibid., p. 207.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ibid., p. 207–208.

    Google Scholar 

  59. See KGA 1/3, p. 271.

    Google Scholar 

  60. CF, p. 208.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Ibid., p. 209.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Ibid., p. 210.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Ibid., p. 211.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Ibid., p. 212.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Ibid., p. 215.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Ibid., p. 212.

    Google Scholar 

  68. See the first speech in the Speeches, in which Schleiermacher confesses to laboring among the ruins of religion. Speeches, p. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  69. David Friedlander, Friedrich Schleiermacher, and Wilhelm Abraham Teller, A Debate on Jewish Emancipation and Christian Theology in Old Berlin, eds. Richard Crouter and Julie Klassen (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 2004), p. 57.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Ibid.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Ibid., p. 61.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Ibid., p. 86. Joerg Rieger also treats these materials for their colonial implications in Christ and Empire. See especially pages 208–209.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Ibid., p. 93.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ibid., p. 98.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Ibid., p. 97.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Speeches, p. 118.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ibid., 103

    Google Scholar 

  78. Jonathan M. Hess, Germans, Jews, and the Claims of Modernity (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), p. 186.

    Google Scholar 

  79. CF, p. 173.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Jacques Derrida, Dissemination (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981), p. 3–59.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Mark C. Taylor, The Moment of Complexity (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), p. 97.

    Google Scholar 

  82. J. Hillis Miller, “The Critic as Host,” Deconstruction and Criticism (New York: Seabury Press, 1979), p. 219, as quoted in Taylor, p. 98.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Ibid., p. 98.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Schneider, Laurel, Beyond Monotheism (London and New York: Routledge, 2008), p. 10.

    Google Scholar 

  85. CF, p. 35.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Copyright information

© 2012 Steven R. Jungkeit

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jungkeit, S.R. (2012). Spatial Taxonomies of Religion. In: Spaces of Modern Theology. New Approaches to Religion and Power. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137269027_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics