Yana Popkostova

All the various religions no matter how different they are between each other in values, beliefs and goals use the human body as the main symbol of identity through which they deliver their messages. All of the rituals are indispensably connected to the human body, because only it can truly distinguish one ritual from the other, and only it is part of the society toward which the religion is directed, and from which the religion brings its followers. This clear distinction between the rituals exercised by different religious groups but directed essentially to the society is there in order to separate the different religions and their followers, and to draw the boundaries among them. The religious identity of a person, and its manifestations can be exercised thorough special rules, ways of clothing, and eating, or through protest towards the existing widespread political and social structures.
The question of identity is a fundamental one which can be compared in significance to the popular dilemma “to be or not to be”. The same biological body, created at the same way, and guided throughout its life by the same mechanisms can feel so differently inside. Exactly this different spiritual self-imaging differentiates people in separate groups which are fiercely defending their own, peculiar identity. People are devoting in most cases their identity, and individualism in certain aspects in order to serve the group’s interests better. The groups are striving to preserve their peculiarness by answering the same questions from contradicting angles. Exactly this different answers are what put the boundaries around the different groups. If one wants to belong to a particular group he/she would be required to answer to the same everyday questions from the established group perspective. No matter how exclusionary a group may be, there are certain recognized memberships rules that are the fundamental points of differentiation from all of the others, and that may be transformed in time and adapted to the new requirements, but rarely changed completely. As mentioned in the previous sentence “the others” are the “thing” that defines “us”. The encounter with someone who is totally different than me (or my group) is the basic point at which I can define myself as part of a certain whole which is different than the other whole. The boundaries between different groups can either be physical, or conceptual. In most cases, though the physical and conceptual boundaries are blurred into one existing boundary. They are interconnected, and it is almost impossible one to exist without the other. The physical uniqueness is a precondition for certain conceptual peculiarity, and vise versa – the rareness of a conceptual belief makes one looks different physically or establishes structures that are symbols of one’s matchless belief. As an example of this interconnectedness I will briefly summarize an argument I had with a friend not long ago about the beautiful women and their mind potential. As an anti-emancipist his argument was that 90% of the really beautiful women don’t have any ambition for academic development and achievements. I was arguing against that supporting my thesis with the argument that the mind is not connected to the outlook, and the fact that most of the eminent beautiful women are not extremely smart is just a mere coincidence. Unfortunately, I admit that I lost the argument. Though, of course there are thousands good-looking women with marvelous achievements in the academic sphere a rule of thumb is that most of the truly successful academically women are not that interested in the 90-60-90 measures of their bodies, don’t waste hours for deciding which color of lipstick they should put, and spend more time above the books than in front of the mirror. Nice-looking girls stick together because they are attracted to each other. They are similar in outlook and interests, and vise versa their outlook sometimes is a precondition for their interests (in order to continue looking great it is better to read fashionable magazines than analysis on Kant’s existentialism). These type of girls cannot be part of the group of the intelligent women, first because they will feel their own inferiority (conceptual boundary), and second they will differ drastically in their outlook (physical boundary). And of course it is evident that if some spends 5 hours per day in front of the mirror, and in desperate dilemmas which skirt is best for today, this person will not be able to devote time for reading. Gradually the person’s mind is completely unable to grasp any kind of serious academic material. Thus, the limits become clear, and the communication with people outside of this group is diminished to minimum.
Not all of the time though the social boundaries are so strict and unmanageable. If we use the above example there is evidence of merging of members of the two groups – the smart and the beautiful. The fancy dresses which were a marking characteristic of the “beautiful” girls (and purely expressing their identity) today are bought by the smart, and more and more beautiful girls find their place in educational institutions. In this merge for sure both sides will gain mutual benefits (there is even such a show on the television), but unfortunately such cases are extremely rare, and though in today’s world it is increasingly more and more difficult to be exclusionary and non-receptive to the other, when groups are extremely different even when the boundaries are a little bit blurred the distinction stays. Negotiating boundaries is exercised when one of the existing groups is feeling threatened or its power and influence above its members has been diminishing. If this happen the group is ready to change part of the rituals, to try to deliver its message to outsiders, to make some concessions (not fundamental changes) to the rules of membership, and to try to convert more people into its beliefs. A powerful example in this direction can be the recent actions led by the Vatican. The new pope started a campaign of modernizing the Christianity, and making it more accessible to people of today’s world. Faced with fierce opposition from the most conservative members of the church, who wanted to preserve the purity and initial holy rituals and exclusivity of the church, the pope realized that the Christianity is loosing ground, that less and less people pay attention to the religion, and less and less people can find it useful in today’s globalized world. Thus, it is essential for a belief to grow, and to transform itself with the times in which it lives. Rituals and traditions that were applicable 100 years ago cannot find place today. The modernizing campaign of the Christian faith, and the attempt of the Pope to make it more understandable and attracting to modern people, without changing its basic rules and beliefs is an honored example of negotiating boundaries in order to preserve the belief.
The last, and maybe the most powerful example of the strive for exclusion and difference of the various belief’s systems is the ways in which physical boundaries, that deliver spiritual messages are used to contest existing political practices and widespread understandings. The example of the medieval women-ascetics is an interesting one. These women totally devoted to God were starving in order to reach sanctity, to denote their female biology, and to contradict their inferior gender role in a patriarchal society. Thus, their obsession with physical suffering which was a way to show their strong belief, and to deliver the religion’s messages transformed itself into a powerful challenge to the existing political structures which put the women on an inferior level than the men. These women were trying to achieve sanctity through starvation. The explicit connection developed by W. Davis in his book Holy Anorexia between holiness and starvation made this women determined to show first of all their devotion to God, secondly to show to the world that women can achieve holiness, and respectively women are not inferior than men. Maybe these women ascetics were the first feminists, who were “manipulating private and public symbols as to contest the boundaries of gender and conventional female roles.” Thus, by exercising one’s religious beliefs one is able to deliver political messages and to challenge the existing system, to apply non-violent dissidence and to achieve universal goals in a piecemeal manner.
There are many instances in which we will be able to identify symbolism, and the use of it as a weapon for maintaining or transforming social boundaries. The manifestations of different beliefs are the defining characteristic of the peculiarity of the belief, and its distinction from the other similar movements. According to one’s own value system the person is free to choose which religious group best fit his/her interests. Moreover, the person will be able to understand whether he/she is appropriate for the specific group by analyzing the membership rules. In some cases these rules are extremely harsh and difficult to pass, in others they are almost not visibly existing, but in either case one have to share these rules, and the beliefs that they defend in order to become part of the group, and to identify him/herself as an individual from this group as opposing to one from another group. As the essay showed there are cases when the boundaries between different groups are blurred so that the belief is strengthened or most correctly adapted to the changing environment which will require negotiating of boundaries and slight transformation of identities. This transformation will not change the belief or the fundamental principles of the specific group, it will just make it fit into the changing environment. The symbolism of various religion movements can be also used as a wind of change, as a powerful, non-violent instrument of dissidence against the widespread political practices. The silent feminist opposition of the medieval women-ascetics best exemplifies this trend.
After all that has been said to conclude with I will say that “Power means ability to adapt”. Power implies more physical than spiritual activity, but I am convinced into the interdependence of the two concepts. If a religious movements want to preserve its identity and power it will need to define its boundaries, to have some membership rules which will distinct its members from the members of the other religious group. Though, these boundaries should be flexible and susceptible to life transformation. The religious movement should be able to negotiate its boundaries in order to find its place with the same vigor and strength in the changed physical environment. Moreover, in order to be powerful the religious group should be able to apply its symbolism in the political side of the world, so that to be able to participate in the practical world of its followers and to contest widespread injustices or wrongdoings. A combination of all these three concepts should be evident in order for a religious group to maintain its identity, and to preserve its power throughout the constantly changing global environment.

References:
Anthropology of Religion (2000) Fiona Bowie-Chapter#3