Reflections on Method and Theory

Throughout this semester I wrestled with the value in studying methods and theories pertaining to the entire study of religion. There were several weeks where I felt that even though the topics were interesting they had no relevance for my particular focus within the study of religion. While being informed of the broader methodological discussions within the field was useful in our classroom discussions I wondered how this knowledge would help me as a scholar.

A moment of clarity came when I was able to use some of our classroom discussions on methodology in another class I was taking within my area of study. It was a class about genre and the classification of texts. I had an “aha” moment when suddenly we were having a discussion about modern categories imposed on ancient texts. This resonated with our discussion of the problems of classifications found in the readings of Masuzawa, Smith and van Voorst. I think that the ability to take the themes and questions from this class on method and theory and to be able to see them used (or not used) within my particular field is the most valuable thing I learned this semester.

While I did not find all of the classroom discussions useful for ancient textual studies, it was interesting to see the broadness of the field of religious studies and how my classmates were able to use them in a meaningful way. I think that one of the challenges of a class like ours is the same challenge of defining the term ‘religion’. Our class as a whole represented over 2000 years of history and covered a large geographical area (all over the world), as well as drew in knowledge from many other disciplines including anthropology, sociology, women’s studies, psychology and philosophy. Each of us had different approaches and studied different subjects (people, rituals, texts, etc). With such a variety of interests and backgrounds I am actually surprised that we had so much in common! Just like the word “religion” is difficult to define, I think that to make a class which is useful for students with such diverse interests is quite a difficult endeavor.

In regards to my own intellectual personality, I think that I am starting to get a sense of where I fit into discussions of scholarship in the study of religion. While I am hesitant to make any conclusions about my particular methodological beliefs, attitudes or proclivities (mostly because I think that I still have so much more to learn!) I do see how they would greatly affect my work as a scholar of religion. I see the study of religion, especially in relation to the study of texts, as being a bit outdated in its approach. The term ‘religion’ still carries with it a lot of baggage which I think still plagues its critical study.

The study of canon and the classification of literature is a very important topic for my research project. The discovery of ancient medieval texts from the Cairo Geniza in 1895 (An ancient Jewish storehouse) and the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947 gave way to a flood of literature from antiquity and the early medieval period which opened a window into how texts and religious experiences were understood during that critical time in history when the biblical canon was being formed. When scholars first looked through this wealth of material they were often too haste in their classifications and categorizations of these texts. As a result there is a now a sense within my field that some of these categories do not accurately reflect the literature in question. There is also an idea that our very categories are not even useful in this study. Thus, I see myself as critically re-examining texts and deconstructing some of the preconceived ideas that went into the classification of this literature. I hope to be able to acknowledging the work that has been done in the past but “go beyond” it as Post was able to do in his paper about Hobsbawm.

One topic that I would have liked to discuss further was the insider-outsider approach to the study of religion. We are all influenced by religion in some way and it is important that we talk about how we are to use our influences in our studies. I think that this would have been a very useful discussion especially studying at the university of Toronto, being a university that has religious roots but is now a secular institution.

In regards to the structure of this entire course, I liked that we began with a discussion on methodology and then moved into a discussion on religion and religious studies. By covering different terms we were able to break down different aspects of the study of religion as a whole entity. I liked this way of navigating through the study of religion, however I think that perhaps it would have been useful to see the bigger picture from the beginning. I felt as though I was stumbling through this class, not knowing entirely what I was doing until now when I reflect back on the course. Perhaps at the beginning we could have laid out more of what we were doing and how we were going to navigate through the material. I also really like how we are ending. It is helpful to have a wrap-up class, where we discuss the overall picture.

I think that the greatest thing about this class was meeting others who had some of the same questions I did about the study of religion. Through discussion with those whose studies were also religious in nature though quite different than my own I was able to better understand the uniqueness of my own research questions within my field. Thanks to all of you who helped me this semester, either in person or in the virtual world. You enabled me to think and re-think my formulations and refine my research interests and gain a better appreciation for the study of religion as a whole.