The Archetypal Actions of Ritual: A Theory of Ritual Illustrated by the Jain Rite of Worship (Oxford Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology)

Religious rituals can provoke a deeply ambigious reaction in those who practise them. What happens in religious traditions when the nature of the ritual is questioned, but the practice of performing rituals is not itself abandoned? This book draws on the authors' observations of such reactions among Jains in western India, and asks why they can tell us about ritual as a universal mode of human action. Most anthropologists have assumed that ritual is a special kind of happening, which requires a special kind of interpretation. The authors argue that 'ritual' is a quality which can in principle apply to any kind of action. The question they try to answer is: what is distinctive about actions which are ritualized? They reject the common view that ritual carries intrinsic meaning, and explore the apparent paradox that ritualization, which makes action in an important sense non-intentional, is itself the result of an intentional act — the adoption by the actor of what the authors call the 'ritual commitment'. This book is intended for scholars and postgraduates in social and cultural anthropology, and religious and cultural studies; South Asia specialists; philosophers. What happens in religious traditions when the nature of the ritual is questioned, but the practice of performing rituals is not itself abandoned? How is it that people can accomplish ritual successfully without belief, and even without attributing any meaning to it? This book draws on the authors' observations of such reactions among Jains in western India, and asks what they can tell us about ritual as a mode of human action. Most anthropologists have assumed that ritual is a special kind of happening. The authors argue that we should not define ritual as a distinct type of event but instead look at ritualization, which is a modification of action. What is distinctive about actions which are ritualized? This book proposes a new theory to analyse the qualities which ritualization gives to a wide and disparate range of actions and events. The authors reject the common view that ritual carries intrinsic meaning, and stress the reasons why participants may or may not give meaning to ritual acts. They draw on insights from the philosophy of action, cognitive psychology, and phenomenology, to explore the paradox that in ritual, actors both are and are not the authors of their acts. . The book explores the implications for anthropology of this new theory of ritual, with discussions of the relation between texts and action, the importance of bodily experience in ritual enactment, and the sense of selfhood as it is affected by ritual. Humphrey And Laidlaw Present A New And Radical General Theory Of Ritual By Drawing On An Ethnographically Rich Account Of The Ritual Worship Of The Jains Of Western India. Ritual, They Argue, Is Not A Logically Separate Type Of Activity, But Rather A Quality That Can Be Attributed To A Wide Range Of Everyday Activities. In Exploring The Issue Of What Is Distinctive About Actions Which Are Ritualized, This Book Makes An Ambitious And Controversial Contribution To Social And Religious Anthropology. Caroline Humphrey And James Laidlaw. Includes Bibliographical References And Index. Series Page 3 Title Page 4 Copyright Page 5 Preface 6 Acknowledgements 9 Table of Contents 12 List of Figures and Plates 13 Notes on the Text 14 1. Introduction 16 2. Jainism and the Puja Ritual 31 3. What Kind of Theory Do We Need? 79 4. The Ritual Commitment 103 5. Getting It Right 126 6. Apprehension and Cognition 148 7. The Disconnection of Purpose and Form 182 8. Looking for Meanings 206 9. Meaning to Mean It 226 10. The Evocation of Mood 242 11. Stances of the Self 262 12. Conclusion 275 Glossary 284 References 290 Index 304 Presents a general theory of ritual by drawing on an ethnographically rich account of the ritual worship of the Jains of western India. The authors argue that ritual is not a logically separate type of activity, but rather a quality that can be attributed to a much wider range of everyday activity.