Sacred and Profane
Purity and Danger. An analysis of concepts of pollution and taboo. By Mary Douglas. (Routledge and Kegan Paul, 25s.)
ONCE every few years an anthropologist writes a book which kindles the imagination of readers outside narrow professional circles and demon- strates the contribution anthropology can make to the understanding of human nature. Frazer, Malinowski and Margaret Mead, in their differ- ent ways, made statements not about specific ethnic groups but about humanity in general, and the popular appeal of their books stems from the layman's conviction that their findings are of universal relevance. Dr Mary Douglas, too, is concerned with concepts and practices prevailing in archaic as well as advanced societies, and she shows that attitudes of mind expressed among primitive tribes in rituals of purity and pollution occur also in western com- munities, though there they manifest themselves in a different manner.
Starting from ideas of ritual uncleanness in Judaism and Hinduism, she proceeds to an an- alysis of modern attitudes to defilement and argues that our ideas of dirt also express sym- bolic systems and that the difference between pollution behaviour in one part of the world and another is only a matter of detail. Accord- ing to Dr Douglas there is no clear-cut distinc- tion between the sacred and the profane, and pollution ideas make sense only in reference to a total system of thought. Hence the taboos of another culture cannot be explained piecemeal. If uncleanness is an anomaly, something which does not fit into an ordered pattern, and is hence dangerous, then it can be understood only through the knowledge of the principles of the total system. Reflection on impurity and pol- lution involves reflection on the relation of order to disorder, of form to formlessness, of life to death. It is on this account that the author con- siders an understanding of rules of purity a sound entry to comparative religion.
In an analysis of the relationship between pol- lution rules and moral rules, Dr Douglas comes to the conclusion that in societies lacking an effective machinery for reinforcing moral in- dignation by practical sanctions, pollution beliefs and taboos act as deterrents to offenders against the moral code. Purification may then counter- act pollution and provide an adequate treat- ment for moral wrongs. Among Dr Douglas's numerous imaginative suggestions is the hypo- thesis that pollution ideas come into play where social barriers are precarious and in need of sup- port by other means than overt authority. Where sexual roles, for instance, are reinforced directly a society is pollution-free, whereas in a system deficient in effective legal sanctions, ideas of pollution and its inherent dangers tend to support the social order.
Dr Douglas is an expert on African societies and the most convincing examples bearing out her thesis relate to the African sphere. Readers familiar with India, on the other hand, may not follow her all the way in her interpretation of Hindu ideas on purity and impurity. Thus it is surely inadmissible to class 'warriors' with tan- ners and toddy-tappers, and describe them as low in the scale of purity because their pro- fession is 'involved with bloodshed.' Warrior- castes have always ranged immediately below Brahmins and above all the other twice-born Hindus. One may also doubt whether in traditional Hindu society the external boun- daries of the social system were any more under pressure than those of other hierarchically struc- tured societies, and whether it is legitimate to assume that for this reason the caste-system was in particular need of reinforcement by ritual prohibitions. Such minor reservations, however, do not detract from the value of an erudite and brilliantly written work characterised by origin- ality and insight of no mean order.
C. VON FUERER-HAIMENDORF
Previous page
