聖なるもの | 定義、歴史、特徴、事実 | ブリタニカ

Sacred | Definition, History, Characteristics, & Facts | Britannica Ask the Chatbot Games & Quizzes History & Society Science & Tech Biographies Animals & Nature Geography & Travel Arts & Culture ProCon Money Videos sacred Introduction The emergence of the concept of the sacred Basic characteristics of the sacred Sacred–profane and other dichotomies Ambivalence in man’s response to the sacred Manifestations of the sacred Dimensions of the sacred Critical problems The sacred today References & Edit History Quick Facts & Related Topics print Print Please select which sections you would like to print: Table Of Contents CITE verified Cite While every effort has been made to follow citation style rules, there may be some discrepancies. Please refer to the appropriate style manual or other sources if you have any questions. Select Citation Style MLA APA Chicago Manual of Style Copy Citation Share Share Share to social media Facebook X URL https://www.britannica.com/topic/sacred Feedback Feedback Corrections? Updates? Omissions? Let us know if you have suggestions to improve this article (requires login). Feedback Type Select a type (Required) Factual Correction Spelling/Grammar Correction Link Correction Additional Information Other Your Feedback Submit Feedback Thank you for your feedback Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article. External Websites sacred religion Ask Anything Quick Summary Homework Help Also known as: divine, holy Written by Frederick J. Streng Professor of the History of Religions, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, 1974–93. Author of Emptiness: A Study of Religious Meaning; Understanding Religious Life. Frederick J. Streng Fact-checked by Britannica Editors Encyclopaedia Britannica's editors oversee subject areas in which they have extensive knowledge, whether from years of experience gained by working on that content or via study for an advanced degree.... Britannica Editors History Britannica AI Ask Anything Quick Summary Table of Contents Table of Contents Quick Summary Ask Anything Top Questions What does the word 'sacred' mean in religion? How is something or someplace considered sacred? What are examples of sacred objects or places in different religions? Why do people treat sacred things with special respect? How do rituals and ceremonies show respect for the sacred? How can the idea of sacredness bring people together in a religion? Show more Show less sacred , the power, being, or realm understood by religious persons to be at the core of existence and to have a transformative effect on their lives and destinies. Other terms, such as holy , divine , transcendent , ultimate being (or ultimate reality ), mystery , and perfection (or purity ) have been used for this domain. “ Sacred ” is also an important technical term in the scholarly study and interpretation of religions. For a discussion of dogmatic interpretations of the divine as a being or force, see doctrine and dogma . The emergence of the concept of the sacred It was during the first quarter of the 20th century that the concept of the sacred became dominant in the comparative study of religions. Nathan Söderblom , an eminent Swedish churchman and historian of religions, asserted in 1913 that the central notion of religion was “holiness” and that the distinction between sacred and profane was basic to all “real” religious life. In 1917 Rudolf Otto’s Heilige (Eng. trans., The Idea of the Holy , 1923) appeared and exercised a great influence on the study of religion through its description of religious man’s experience of the “ numinous ” (a mysterious, majestic presence inspiring dread and fascination), which Otto, a German theologian and historian of religions, claimed, could not be derived from anything other than an a priori sacred reality. Other scholars who used the notion of sacred as an important interpretive term during this period included the sociologist Émile Durkheim in France, and the psychologist-philosopher Max Scheler in Germany. For Durkheim, sacredness referred to those things in society that were forbidden or set apart; and since these sacred things were set apart by society, the sacred force, he concluded, was society itself. In contrast to this understanding of the nature of the sacred, Scheler argued that the sacred (or infinite) was not limited to the experience of a finite object. While Scheler did not agree with Otto’s claim that the holy is experienced through a radically different kind of awareness, he did agree with Otto that the awareness of the sacred is not simply the result of conditioning social and psychological forces. Though he criticized Friedrich Schleiermacher , an early 19th-century Protestant theologian, for being too subjective in his definition of religion as “the consciousness of being absolutely dependent on God,” Otto was indebted to him in working out the idea of the holy. Söderblom recorded his dependence on the scholarship of the history of religions ( Religionswissenschaft ), which had been a growing discipline in European universities for about half a century; Durkheim had access to two decades of scholarship on nonliterate peoples, some of which was an account of actual fieldwork. Scheler combined the interests of an empirical scientist with a philosophical effort that followed in the tradition of 19th-century attempts to relate human experiences to the concept of a reality (essence) that underlies human thoughts and activities. Since the first quarter of the 20th century many historians of religions have accepted the notion of the sacred and of sacred events, places, people, and acts as being central in religious life if not indeed the essential reality in religious life. For example, phenomenologists of religion such as Gerardus van der Leeuw and W. Brede Kristensen have considered the sacred (holy) as central and have organized the material in their systematic works around the (transcendent) object and (human) subject of sacred (cultic) activity, together with a consideration of the forms and symbols of the sacred. Such historians of religions as Friedrich Heiler and Gustav Mensching organized their material according to the nature of the sacred, its forms and structural types. Significant contributions to the analysis and elaboration of the sacred have been made by Roger Caillois, a sociologist, and by Mircea Eliade , an eminent historian of religions. Basic characteristics of the sacred Sacred–profane and other dichotomies The term sacred has been used from a wide variety of perspectives and given varying descriptive and evaluative connotations by scholars seeking to interpret the materials provided by anthropology and the history of religions. In these different interpretations, however, common characteristics were recognized in the sacred, as it is understood by participant individuals and groups: it is separated from the common (profane) world; it expresses the ultimate total value and meaning of life; and it is the eternal reality, which is recognized to have been before it was known and to be known in a way different from that through which common things are known. The term sacred comes from Latin sacer (“set off, restricted”). A person or thing was designated as sacred when it was unique or extraordinary. Closely related to sacer is numen (“mysterious power, god”). The term numinous is used at present as a description of the sacred to indicate its power, before which man trembles. Various terms from different traditions have been recognized as correlates of sacer: Greek hagios, Hebrew qadosh, Polynesian tapu, Arabic ḥaram (not to be confused with ḥarām , “forbidden”); correlates of numen include the Melanesian mana, the Sioux wakanda, old German haminja (luck), and Sanskrit Brahman. Besides the dichotomy of sacred–profane the sacred includes basic dichotomies of pure–unpure and pollutant–“free.” In ancient Rome the word sacer could mean that which would pollute someone or something that came into contact with it, as well as that which was restricted for divine use. Similarly, the Polynesian tapu (“ tabu ”) designated something as not “free” for common use. It might be someone or something specially blessed because it was full of power, or it might be something accursed, as a corpse. Whatever was tabu had special restrictions around it, for it was full of extraordinary energy that could destroy anyone unprotected with special power himself. In this case the sacred is whatever is uncommon and may include both generating and polluting forces. On the other hand there is the pure–impure dichotomy , in which the sacred is identified with the pure and the profane is identified with the impure. The pure state is that which produces health, vigour, luck, fortune, and long life. The impure state is that characterized by weakness, illness, misfortune, and death. To acquire purity means to enter the sacred realm, which could be done through purification rituals or through the fasting, continence, and meditation of ascetic life. When a person became pure he entered the realm of the divine and left the profane, impure, decaying world. Such a transition was often marked by a ritual act of rebirth. Explore Britannica Premium! The trusted destination for professionals, college students, and lifelong learners. SUBSCRIBE Ambivalence in man’s response to the sacred Because the sacred contains notions both of a positive, creative power and a danger that requires stringent prohibitions, the common human reaction is both fear and fascination. Otto elaborated his understanding of the holy from this basic ambiguity . Only the sacred can fulfill man’s deepest needs and hopes; thus, the reverence that man shows to the sacred is composed both of trust and terror. On the one hand, the sacred is the limit of human effort both in the sense of that which meets human frailty and that which prohibits human activity; on the other hand, it is the