DURKHEIM’S IDEA OF RELIGION

Durkheim saw religion as a part of the human condition, and while the content of religion might be
different from society to society over time, religion will, in some form or another, always be a part of
social life. Durkheim also argues that religion is the most fundamental social institution, with almost
all other social institutions, at some point in human history, being born from it. For these reasons
he gave special analysis to this phenomenon, providing a philosophy of religion that is perhaps as
provocative as it is rich with insights.

According to Durkheim, religion is the product of human activity, not divine intervention. He thus
treats religion as a sui generis social fact and analyzes it sociologically. Durkheim elaborates his theory
of religion at length in his most important work, Forms. In this book Durkheim, uses the ethnographic
data that was available at the time to focus his analysis on the most primitive religion that, at the time,
was known, the totemic religion of Australian aborigines. This was done for methodological purposes,
since Durkheim wished to study the simplest form of religion possible, in which the essential elements
of religious life would be easier to ascertain. In a certain sense, then, Durkheim is investigating the old
question, albeit in a new way, of the origin of religion. It is important to note, however, that Durkheim
is not searching for an absolute origin, or the radical instant where religion first came into being.

Rather, as Durkheim says, he is investigating the social forces and causes that are always already
present in a social milieu and that lead to the emergence of religious life and thought at different
points in time, under different conditions.

It is important to look at the starting point of Durkheim’s analysis, his definition of religion: “A religion
is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart
and forbidden–beliefs and practices which unite in one single moral community called a Church, all
those who adhere to them” (Durkheim; 1995: 44). There are, thus, three fundamental elements to
every religion: sacred objects, a set of beliefs and practices, and the existence of a moral community.

Of the three, perhaps the most important would be the notion of the sacred, which is the point
around which any religious system revolves. It is that which inspires great respect and admiration on
the part of society and what is set apart and keeps believers at a distance. Durkheim contrasts the
sacred with the notion of profane, or that which desecrates the sacred and from which the sacred
must be protected, making the opposition between sacred and profane a central element of
Durkheim’s theory.

According to Durkheim, a religion comes into being and is legitimated through moments of what he
calls “collective effervescence.” Collective effervescence refers to moments in societal life when the
group of individuals that makes up a society comes together in order to perform a religious ritual.
During these moments, the group comes together and communicates in the same thought and
participates in the same action, which serves to unify a group of individuals. When individuals come
into close contact with one another and when they are assembled in such a fashion, a certain
“electricity” is created and released, leading participants to a high degree of collective emotional
excitement or delirium. This impersonal, extra-individual force, which is a core element of religion,
transports the individuals into a new, ideal realm, lifts them up outside of themselves, and makes
them feel as if they are in contact with an extraordinary energy.

The next step in the genesis of religion is the projecting of this collective energy onto an external
symbol. As Durkheim argues, society can only become conscious of these forces circulating in the
social world by representing them somehow. The power of religion must therefore be objectified, or
somehow made visible, and the object onto which this force is projected becomes sacred. This sacred
object receives the collective force and is thereby infused with the power of the community. It is in

Ph: +91-8826486658, +918826496658, | Email: [email protected]

this way that a society gains a tangible idea, or representation, of itself. When discussing these
matters, Durkheim is careful to use the word “sacred object” to describe what is traditionally
understood in the West as a god. This is because sacred objects can be very diverse and do not
necessarily refer to supernatural deities. For example, God is a sacred object for Christian societies,
Thor was a sacred object for Viking society, but the four noble truths are also sacred objects for
Buddhists.

Such views on religion allow Durkheim to make the radical claim that a society’s sacred object is
nothing but the collective forces of the group transfigured. Religion is society worshipping itself, and
through religion, individuals represent to themselves society and their relationship to it.

An object’s status is determined by the meaning that society attributes to it, or by its status as
a représentation collective. Importantly, this analysis goes beyond what is strictly considered the
religious realm, since all socially derived meaning operates in the same way. For example, a stamp, a
flag, or the sport of football are by themselves just a piece of paper, a piece of cloth, or a group of
padded men chasing a leather ball; they all have no value in themselves and derive their value from
the sui generis collective forces they represent and embody. The more important a society determines
an object to be, the more a group infuses an object with prestige, the more valuable it will be in the
eyes of an individual.

If these moments of collective effervescence are the origin of religious feelings, religious rituals must
be repeated in order to reaffirm the collective unity of a society, otherwise its existence is at risk.
Durkheim remarks that if the societal forces central to the religious life of a society are not re-
animated, they will be forgotten, leaving individuals with no knowledge of the ties that exist between
them and no concept of the society to which they belong. This is why religious ritual is necessary for
the continued existence of a society; religion cannot exist through belief alone-it periodically needs
the reality of the force behind the belief to be regenerated.

This takes place through various religious rituals, in which collective beliefs are reaffirmed and the
individual expresses their solidarity with the sacred object of society, or with society itself. The form
the specific ritual takes can vary greatly, from funerals to rain dances to patriotic national holidays,
but its goal is always the same. Through these rituals, society maintains its existence and integrates
individuals into the social fold, exerting pressure on them to act and think alike. While Durkheim’s
analysis is of explicitly religious contexts, it is important to note that the ritual interaction processes
he describes take place in different and less formal contexts as well. Ritual processes can be
considered a part of daily life and are instrumental in regulating group solidarities and interpersonal
relationships in different social institutions and at different levels of formality.

The Death of the Gods

In 1912, Durkheim wrote: “the former gods are growing old or dying, and others have not been born”
(Durkheim; 1995: 429).

There are two parts to Durkheim’s declaration that need to be de-compacted. On the one hand the
old gods are dead. Because of the massive transformations taking place, European society became
profoundly destructured. The institutions animating medieval life disappeared. As a result, individuals
were having a hard time finding meaningful attachments to social groups and society as a whole lost
its former unity and cohesiveness. Not only this, but the transformations that led to modernity also
rendered former beliefs and practices irrelevant. The big things of the past, the political, economic,
social, and especially religious institutions, no longer inspired the enthusiasm they once did. With
former ways of life no longer relevant and society no longer cohesive, the collective force so vital for

Ph: +91-8826486658, +918826496658, | Email: [email protected]

the life of a society was no longer generated. This would have an important impact on the religion of
medieval society, Christianity. Because society no longer had the means to create the collective force
that exists behind God, belief in God weakened substantially.

To begin, such a society is incapable of generating social forces that act on the individual. It is unable
to create an authority that exerts pressure on individuals to act and think in a similar manner. Without
these forces acting on the individual from the outside, individuals are dispersed from their
commitment to society and left to their own. Duties are no longer accepted carte blanche and moral
rules no longer seem binding. As such, individuals increasingly are detached from group obligation and
act out of self-interest.

Essentially, Durkheim’s analysis of the death of the gods concentrates on the underlying
disorganization of European society that led to the demise not only of Christianity, but of a number of
other economic, political, and social institutions as well. This same underlying disorganization was
preventing European society from generating the collective force necessary for the creation of new
institutions and a new sacred object. The death of the gods is a symptom of a sickened society, one
that has lost its internal structure and descended into an-archy, or a society with no authority and no
definitive principles, moral or otherwise, to build itself on. In spite of such a glum analysis, Durkheim
did have hope for the future. Out of the chaos he saw the emergence of a new religion that would
guide the West, what he termed “the cult of the individual.”

Ph: +91-8826486658, +918826496658, | Email: [email protected]