Nothing pops to mind when I think about what is the essence of a religion. I can try to note similarities in institutions which self-describe as religions. You can look at the social aspects, the community within the greater community. But I don't have any confidence that there is anything in particular which sets religions apart from other social institutions apart from it being the way they themselves describe it.
I'm interested in the kinds of experience an individual can access directly which have nothing to do with institutions. These would be of the sort William James wrote about in a book titled "The Varieties of Religious Experience". It seems in less technological societies there are specialists sometimes called shaman who are charged with making this connection for a community. As far as I know, there is no record of any society in which the religious connection was distributed to the entire community.
Whatever this dimension is, I'm pretty sure that it is what gives rise to institutions of religion. But the further they are from any individual seeking a direct connection, the more boring they become. I think, since "religions" are mostly associated with the institutions which religious experience gives rise to, it would be necessary to analyze the nature of religious experience itself to define what is essential about religions. Unfortunately we know very little about it.
I'm interested in the kinds of experience an individual can access directly which have nothing to do with institutions. These would be of the sort William James wrote about in a book titled "The Varieties of Religious Experience". It seems in less technological societies there are specialists sometimes called shaman who are charged with making this connection for a community. As far as I know, there is no record of any society in which the religious connection was distributed to the entire community.
Whatever this dimension is, I'm pretty sure that it is what gives rise to institutions of religion. But the further they are from any individual seeking a direct connection, the more boring they become. I think, since "religions" are mostly associated with the institutions which religious experience gives rise to, it would be necessary to analyze the nature of religious experience itself to define what is essential about religions. Unfortunately we know very little about it.
