Triggered to Thinking

Jan Assmann (2006), in his work Religion and Cultural Memory, explores the concept of invisible religion as advanced by Thomas Luckmann. For simplicity’s sake, it is crucial to explore the definitions of invisible and visible religion that Luckmann uses. Invisible religion refers to the higher and invisible religion that determines the relationship between the individual, society, and the world (Assmann, 2006, p. 32). Whereas visible religion is the aspect of religion that has become visible in specific institutions and through interactions with sacred symbols (Assmann, 2006, p. 32).

Assmann (2006), being an expert in Egyptology, next analyzes these concepts in relation to Egyptian religion. This is used to draw a distinction between visible and invisible religion. The Egyptian symbol that was related to invisible religion was maat. Maat signified the principle of a universal harmony that represents itself in the world as order and serves as justice for human beings (Assmann, 2006, p. 33). Although Assmann is discussing ancient Egyptian religion, similar concepts of a universal moral order can be found in other religious traditions. This can relate to the Jain concept of ahimsa. Ahimsa is the Jain concept of doing no harm to any living being, and this, along with proper conduct, is a path to liberation from the karmic matter of one’s self (Diem, 2016, p. 14). Additionally, it can relate to the concept seen in Zoroastrian thought called asha. Asha relates to law, righteousness, and justice, and to act with justice means to do the right thing (Mehr, 2003, p. 70). While these concepts arise from different religious traditions, they each point toward an underlying moral order that shapes human conduct.

To develop this distinction further, Assmann (2006) analyzes an Egyptian religious text and argues that it distinguished between “law,” “cult,” “moral cosmos,” and “religious cosmos” as being the two spheres through which the kings uphold the world (Assmann, 2006, p. 34). Building on this argument, Assmann examines how within invisible religion there can be a distinction between the moral and political cosmos, which is contrasted with the religious cosmos. This ultimately leads to a new type of religion that no longer maintains a distinction between invisible and visible religion (Assmann, 2006, p. 36).

Assmann (2006) then introduces his distinction between primary religions, generally associated with polytheism, and secondary religions, generally associated with monotheism (see also Tupamahu, 2014).

He writes:

“Most if not all primary religions are based on the distinction between IR and VR (emphasis mine) and that one of the defining features of secondary religions is that they abolish this distinction. In this respect primary religions are differentiated; they are based on a supreme concept of a sacred order within which a religious cosmos appears as a VR with limited claims to be a meaningful world. Secondary religions, in contrast, elevate this religious cosmos to the rank of an ultimate reality that determines all knowledge and actions and thus annuls the distinction between the different planes of IR and VR” (Assmann, 2006, pp. 36–37).

In other words, Assmann argues that primary religions distinguish between an invisible moral order and its visible religious expressions, whereas secondary religions tend to merge these into a single religious worldview. Whether or not one agrees with this distinction, it provides an interesting way of comparing different religious traditions.

This can relate to Jainism as a primary religion, even though it is not a religion based on the worship of a supreme god or gods (Lane, p. 14). The “supreme concept of a sacred order” can instead be related to the Jain desire to break free from the cycle of rebirth known as samsara (Donaldson & Bajželj, 2015). In some ways, when religion becomes institutionalized, it can follow Assmann’s pattern of reducing the separation between invisible and visible religion.

One possible historical example is the Desert Fathers. Although they sought a deeply personal and ascetic spiritual life, they also formed communities in which those beliefs became visible through shared practices and communal living. Since they were proponents of Christianity, they were following a monotheistic religion. The Fathers followed strict ascetic practices but also lived together with other ascetics and hermits. In this sense, their communal life can be seen as blurring the distinction between invisible and visible religion.

In the last section of this essay, Assmann (2006) explores the factors that relate to the abolition of the distinction between visible and invisible religion. One reason for this is:

“Along with a particular worldview, cultural memory disseminates and reproduces a consciousness of unity, particularity and a sense of belonging among the members of the group” (Assmann, 2006, p. 38).

When members of a religion feel like they belong, they can participate in rituals like the Eucharist, group prayer, or scripture studies. Thus, the higher form of religious beliefs can become closely connected with the visible traditions that a community of believers creates. The consciousness of unity can also relate to shared doctrinal beliefs and to the reverence shown toward spiritual authorities such as priests, pastors, rabbis, and imams.

Assmann (2006) next examines two phases of history as they relate to cultural memory. There is the phase of rite-based repetition and the phase of text-based repetition. With this, he states:

“Repetition and interpretation are functionally equivalent procedures in the production of cultural coherence” (Assmann, 2006, p. 39).

The significance of writing and cultural themes is discussed, but Assmann argues that cultural memory is also preserved and kept coherent through festivals and rites (Assmann, 2006, p. 41). In this way, both written texts and lived practices contribute to preserving a community’s identity across generations.

Assmann’s (2006) essay on invisible religion and cultural memory is a fascinating contribution to Religion and Cultural Memory. His distinction between invisible and visible religion encourages students of religion to think about the role of memory in shaping religious communities. Likewise, his distinction between primary and secondary religion provides an interesting framework for comparing religious traditions, even if readers ultimately disagree with aspects of his theory. More broadly, cultural memory can be observed in both religious and secular communities, since civil religion also preserves shared memories, rituals, and identities. For these reasons, Assmann’s work remains a valuable resource for students of religion, history, sociology, and cultural memory.

Works Cited

Assmann, J. (2006). Religion and cultural memory: Ten studies (R. Livingstone, Trans.). Stanford University Press.

Diem, A. (2016). Ahimsa: A brief guide to Jainism. Equinox Publishing.

Donaldson, B., & Bajželj, A. (2015). Insistent life: Principles for bioethics in the Jain tradition. University of California Press.

Lane, P. (2006). Jainism. Lion Hudson.

Mehr, F. (2003). The Zoroastrian tradition: An introduction to the ancient wisdom of Zarathushtra. Element Books.

Tupamahu, E. (2014, January 3). Jan Assmann’s primary and secondary religions. Indonesian Journal of Theology.