Talal Asad examines the widely known definition of religion by Geertz in Anthropological Conceptions of Religion: Reflections on Geertz and refutes his claim of a ‘model’ reality as Asad firmly believes that there is a link between religions and the configurations of power. Asad questions the universal definition of religion because in his interpretation, religion has a connection to political discourse even with ‘objective’ definitions of religion. Geertz defines ‘religion’ as a system of symbols which establishes powerful moods and incentives in people by formulating concepts of existence and intertwining the concepts with factuality that makes the moods and incentives realistic (Asad 1983:239). Asad takes issue with Geertz’s approach with ‘symbols’ as symbols, in general, do not have self-evident meanings to them and the people are the ones who make
…show more content…
He strongly claims that the authoritative status of these symbols are the products of historically different forces (Asad 1983:251), and this is supported through the quote about Geertz that he does form “a notion of culture as an a priori totality of meanings, divorced from processes of formation and effects of power, hovering above social reality.” (Asad 1983:251). Asad also rejects Geertz’s idea of religious ‘moods’ as it is uncertain to fully determine the standards that set religious ‘moods’ apart from secular ones (Asad 1983: 247). Asad quotes, “Such disciplines are preconditions for specific forms of thought and action, but they must be taught and learnt, and are therefore themselves dependent on a range of social institutions and material condition” (Asad 1983:251) which further supports his claim that there are other aspects such political and social standings that have shaped religion and people’s mindset in society over the years of
He strongly claims that the authoritative status of these symbols are the products of historically different forces (Asad 1983:251), and this is supported through the quote about Geertz that he does form “a notion of culture as an a priori totality of meanings, divorced from processes of formation and effects of power, hovering above social reality.” (Asad 1983:251). Asad also rejects Geertz’s idea of religious ‘moods’ as it is uncertain to fully determine the standards that set religious ‘moods’ apart from secular ones (Asad 1983: 247). Asad quotes, “Such disciplines are preconditions for specific forms of thought and action, but they must be taught and learnt, and are therefore themselves dependent on a range of social institutions and material condition” (Asad 1983:251) which further supports his claim that there are other aspects such political and social standings that have shaped religion and people’s mindset in society over the years of