Tomoko Masuzawa is a modern specialist in religious and cultural studies. Her analysis of religions includes linguistic, semantic, and even pedagogical aspects, especially if the problem of teaching religious studies is considered. Masuzawa, working with primary sources on ancient religions, combines religious issues with modern science and sociology methodology. In her works, she analyzes the terms and categories of religious studies, and one of the most common of them is the term ‘world religions’.
The discourse of world religions, according to Masuzawa, is a relatively young and accommodating construct, well rooted in schools and universities and reflecting the supposed position of religions in the world. The name ‘world religion’ becomes a synonym for the word ‘main religion.’ Masuzawa repeatedly emphasizes this and the impossibility of distinguishing between major and minor religions (Masuzawa 10-11). The spread and rootedness of the term “world religion” in the discourse of modern liberal arts education is an echo of Eurocentrism. It also speaks of the underdevelopment of the contemporary methodology of science.
The discourse of world religions arose in attempts to systematize knowledge about religions throughout the planet. In addition, attempts were made to organize religions in space and time, taking ancient religious teachings and medieval ones. The system of beliefs geographically (given the particular vagueness of sacred geography. People cannot accurately determine the geography of a specific religion) has developed in the Middle East, South Asia, and the Far East (Masuzawa 3). The progressive West remains, as it were, above religion; it is a researcher who gives names. For the developed West, where the triumph of logic and reason is set, the specifics of faith are not entirely clear. Because of this, religious consciousness remains misunderstood and hidden for researchers. Researchers associate it with mysticism and nebula to ‘declassify’ religiosity.
The current discourse of world religions allows us to see how Sikhism, Taoism, Confucianism, and Shintoism are presented in the literature. The latter is so rare in the literature with a detailed review that most people do not hear it, even though Japanese culture is highly developed and widespread in the world. For other people involved in a humanitarian or philosophical discourse, Confucianism will not sound like a religion, but like philosophical teaching, despite its pragmatic focus. Taoism, on the contrary, is just for the Eurocentric consciousness; it is too arcane; therefore, it is considered a religion.
The problem described by Tomoko Masuzawa has academic utility. This usefulness lies in the fact that professors must combine a fundamental change in the study of religions with religion’s philosophy. Attempts to structure religious teachings scientifically and even technically will only lead to ridiculous mistakes. The discourse of religions develops rhizomatic, and the category of ‘world religions’ is not compatible with this growth. This category refers to the language of transcendence, which has already exhausted itself in Christianity.
Tomoko Masuzawa’s research concerns the original linguistic aspect of using the term ‘world religions.’ She connects the use of this term with Eurocentric attitudes and a lack of understanding. Starting a lexical, semantic, and cultural analysis, Masuzawa moves on to an in-depth analysis of religiosity worldwide. She refers to Immanuel Wallerstein and other philosophers and sociologists to demonstrate the real problem in the methodology of religious studies. Eurocentric terminology permeates the entire system taught in schools and universities. The growth and development of religions, as Masuzawa postulates, is rhizomatic, so researchers cannot reduce it to direct divisions and hierarchies.
Work Cited
Masuzawa, Tomoko. The Invention of World Religions: Or, How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism. University of Chicago Press, 2005.