Lam Wai Yan Janet (3035661877) BSTC2004_Class Participation

QUESTION 1

What are “rite,” “ritual,” and “ceremony?” What are their differences?

Rite Ritual Ceremony

Scale One symbolic action Series of symbolic Sequence of rituals
actions
Definition The particular manner “Type of routine Context in which rites
of celebrating a divine behaviour that occur (Trice & Beyer,
service (Asad, 1993)1, symbolizes or expresses 1984)3
including gestures something and, as such,
prayers and the relates differently to
particular manner of individual
doing so consciousness and
social organisation”
(Asad, 1993)2
Effect Conveys a symbolic The transition of one’s Bringing people
meaning when status invokes a together, reaffirming
contextualised transformative effect common bonds and
(Turner, 1967)4 reinforcing social
solidarity invokes a
confirmatory effect
(Turner, 1967)5
Example Gesture of hezhang (合 Rites of passage are The Hungry Ghosts
掌); when rituals (despite the term Festival
contextualised against “rite”) marking the
Chinese Buddhism, this transition in individual
carries the symbolic status within the
meaning of reverence lifecycle
and salutation
Linkage Studying rituals entails examining various rites and their expression in
between organizational ceremonies
the three

QUESTION 2
1
Asad, T. (1993). Genealogies of religion. Johns Hopkins University Press.
2
Ibid.
3
Trice, H., & Beyer, M. (1984). Studying Organizational Cultures through Rites and Ceremonials. The
Academy of Management Review, 9(4). 654-655.
4
Turner, V. (1967). The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual. Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press.
5
Ibid.
Lam Wai Yan Janet (3035661877) BSTC2004_Class Participation

What is the definition of “Ritual” in recent studies? Please state 3 approached to define
ritual from an academic angle.

Before offering a definition of “ritual” in recent studies, it is worth elaborating on how the
definition of ritual has been conceptualised over the years.

Early anthropological ritual theory

Studies were mainly premised on a single ethnic group that had closely intertwined religious
and social lives. Accordingly, such theories focused on how ritual and religion shaped
people’s understanding of the world and functioned to preserve stability and order (Bell,
1997)6. This led to the formulation of two approaches, namely: the functionalist and symbolic
approach.

Summary

Functionalist approach Symbolic approach

While both approaches have different conceptualisations, they share something in common:
they both emphasise belief over ritual – with the latter supplementing the understanding of
cultural phenomena such as religion  ritual as means of social control and conformity.

Functionalist approach

Malinowski:
biocultural functionalism
Scope of “Culture appears... first and
work foremost as a vast instrumental
reality... all of which allow man to
satisfy his biological requirements”7
 Humans have certain basic needs
Radcliffe-Brown:
structural functionalism
Institutions such as religion, kinship,
politics and economics function to
maintain the larger system. Similar
to what Durkheim believed,
Radcliffe-Brown held the view that
the satisfaction of individual needs

6
Bell, C. (1997). Ritual: Perspectives and dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press.
7
Malinowski, B. (1939). The Group and the Individual in Functional Analysis. American Journal of Sociology,
44(6). 938-964.
Lam Wai Yan Janet (3035661877) BSTC2004_Class Participation

which are satisfied by derived is incidental to meeting the needs of

cultural and social institutions. system maintenance
Accordingly, culture is a tool that
responds to the needs of humans
Linkage Individual needs are satisfied
with rituals through religion and rituals – a
social mechanism used as means to
regulate and stabilise the life system,
adjust its internal interactions,
maintain its group attitude, and
restore a state of harmony after any
disturbance
 The individual need for safety is
satisfied by rituals (and by extension,
religious institutions)
Limitation  Reductionism and being one-sided: as the functionalist approach
s focuses on social order and equilibrium in society, it fails to give
sufficient weight to human agency and is less likely to recognise how
individual actions may alter social institutions
 Fails to consider the inherent significance of rituals, instead viewing
rituals purely as means to preserve or enact stable sets of religious
beliefs

Symbolic approach

Clifford Geertz Victor Turner

Influenced Max Weber Emile Durkheim
by
Scope of Operations of “culture” rather than Operations of “society” and the
work the ways in which symbols influence ways in which symbols function
the social process within it. (Ortner 1983:128-129)
Lam Wai Yan Janet (3035661877) BSTC2004_Class Participation

Linkage “[Ritual is] some sort of ceremonial
with rituals form [in which] the moods and
motivations which sacred symbols
induce in men and the general
conceptions of the order of existence
which they formulate for men meet
and reinforce one another” (Geertz,
1973, 112–14)8
“Prescribed formal behaviour for
occasions not given over to
technical routine, having reference
to beliefs in mystical (or non-
empirical) beings or powers
regarded as the first and final
causes of all effects” (Turner, 1982,
p. 79)10

 Geertz investigates the way  Turner investigates the nature of

religion, as a system of symbols, ritual as being expressive of the
functions to establish powerful, social order of society
pervasive and long-lasting moods
and motivations in men by
formulating conceptions of a general
order of existence (Geertz, 1973: 90)9
Limitation Limitations to the symbolic approach were summarised by Bell. By
s analysing the constitute role of the thought/action dichotomy, she concluded
that such dichotomy did not come from the ethnographic data per se, but
rather the deep-seated assumptions of Western scholars11:

“Ritual is first differentiated as a discrete object of analysis by means of

various dichotomies that are loosely analogous to thought and action; then
ritual is subsequently elaborated as the very means by which these
dichotomous categories, neither of which could exist without the other, are
reintegrated” (Bell 1992, 2I)12

Key points:
 Ritual is the social mechanism that manages the disjunction between
the ideal world (ideology) and the lived world (action)
 Ritual also bridges the gap between the native ritualist and the
ethnographer:
o Native ritualist: adopts the role of unthinking actor
o Ethnographer: adopts the role of discerning but passive
observer
  Prevailing model of ritual is one of simple transference
o When trying to understand the rituals of others, theorists
concluded that ritual serves to integrate their thinking with
their actions
o Sentiment similarly reflected by Leach (1974), who explained
that the symbolic approach tries to understand human actions
deductively
o Therefore, rituals must be understood in context; this allows
for deeper understanding and interpretation rather than
8
The Interpretation of Culture
9
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures : selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
10
Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
11
Lopez, D. (2005). Critical Terms for the Study of Buddhism. University of Chicago Press.
12
Ibid.
Lam Wai Yan Janet (3035661877) BSTC2004_Class Participation

depending solely on symbolic meaning

Recent ritual theory

Later, ritual theory became conceptualised as a form of cultural communication, tending

towards how ritual relates to social life, function and structure (Bell, 1997)13. In contrast to
the early anthropological ritual theory which viewed ritual purely as preserving or enacting
stable sets of religious beliefs, the inherent ritual practice became significant. Ritual is now
viewed in terms of what it means, i.e. expressing beliefs and values; and also what it does, i.e.
a transformative process whereby people construct their identity and social relationships. This
led Fiona Bowie to reclassify Bell’s six categories of ritual actions into three broad
theoretical approaches, simultaneously providing a recent definition for ritual14:

(1) “Ritual as the expression of paradigmatic values of death and rebirth;

(2) Ritual as a mechanism for bringing the individual into the community and
establishing a social entity; or

(3) Ritual as a process for social transformation, for catharsis, for embodying symbolic
values, for defining the nature of the real, or for struggling over control of the sign”
(Bell, 1997 p. 89)

QUESTION 3

What are the functions of religious rituals?

Durkheim identified four primary functions of rituals and ceremonies:

1. Disciplinary function, since self-discipline is necessary in society
2. Ceremonies bringing people together
3. Revitalizing function: reminding people of their commonality and the past
4. Rituals giving people a good feeling of belonging to society; that is, overcoming
difficulties and strengthening its people

Beyond the four primary functions, other dimensions of religious rituals will be identified
below and subsequently linked with Durkheim’s four primary functions.

Dimension Link with ritual Link with

Durkheim
Religious Van Gennep opines that there is a gap Not too relevant as
between the profane and the sacred Durkheim focused
worlds that a man cannot pass from one more on the social
to another without growing through an function of rituals
intermediate stage15  rituals serve as the rather than its
intermediate stage which helps human inherent symbolic
beings deal with worldly beings values
Symbolic Edmund Leach defined rituals as Leach, similar to
culturally oriented behavioural patterns Durkheim before
13
Bell, C. (1997). Ritual: Perspectives and dimensions. New York: Oxford University Press.
14
Bowie, F. (2006). The anthropology of religion : an introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Pub.
15
Gennep, V. (1960). The Rites of Passage. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lam Wai Yan Janet (3035661877) BSTC2004_Class Participation

which seek to make a symbolic statement him, sought to focus

about human beings relationship with a on the
Supreme Being16  rituals should not be interrelationship
reduced into being merely social between society and
functions but can be studied as inherent religion 
systems of symbolic expressions revitalizing
 Rituals are symbolic statements function: it reminds
derived from the social and people of their
cultural dimensions of a commonality and
community the past
 Underlying symbolic value of
rituals to be understood with their
relationship with the sacred (c.f.
profane)
Social Social Durkheim examined the role of rite and ceremony in creating
integratio social integration and providing emotional solidarity amongst
n members of the group

E.g. During a Chinese Buddhist Monastic chant, individual

identities dissolve and instead collective passions arise  ritual
functions to bind individuals to the community and forge the
cognitive connections which render the world symbolically
meaningful

 Ceremonies bringing people together

 Ritual giving people a good feeling of belonging to society
Social Rituals control behaviour by (1) defining Durkheim
control social roles, (2) assigning social roles to recognised that
individuals according to some principle people are
of attribution, (3) demanding that the incentivised to
assignees conform their personal behave properly in
identities to the social roles so assigned, ways other than
and (4) encouraging others to identify and being threatened
treat the assignees as constituted by the with formal legal
role17 sanction

 Rituals functions as social norms  Disciplinary

which preserves the social fabric and function, since self-
controls the propensity for self-interested discipline is
behaviour18 necessary in society
Identity Rituals illustrate the way things ought to  Revitalizing
be, providing a moral framework to guide function: it reminds
people’s understanding of their lives19 people of their
commonality and
the past

16
Leach, E.. (196 l), Rethinking Anthropology. London : Athlone Press ; New York : Humanities Press.
17
Miller, G. (2005). The Legal Function of Ritual. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 80(3). 1187.
18
Ibid.
19
Ibid.