 |
| blogspot.com |
Nomena
Phaenomena: yang nampak dari
benda
Edmund Husserl: dari gejala kita
bisa tahu hakekat sesuatu à zu de Sachen selbst
è Sebagai metode:
1.
Bebaskan
diri dari prakonsepsi
2.
Amati
gejala dengan sungguh-sungguh
3.
Ambil
ide dari apa yang dilihat
Definisi: Fenomenologi agama adalah
suatu usaha untuk menyelidiki esensi dan makna gejala-gejala keagamaan dan
mengelompokkan gejala-gejala menurut macamnya, lepas dari ruang dan waktu.[1]
Fenomenologi berusaha untuk
memahami suatu fenomena agama atau gejala-gejala tertentu/khas dari agama.
The phenomenology of religion concerns the experiential aspect of religion,
describing religious phenomena in terms consistent with the orientation of the
worshippers. It views religion as being made up of different components, and
studies these components across religious traditions so that an understanding
of them can be gained. The phenomenological approach to the study of religion owes
its conceptualization and development to Pierre Daniël Chantepie de la
Saussaye, William Brede Kristensen and Gerardus van der Leeuw.
Chantepie
de la Saussaye
Employing
the terminology of Hegel, Chantepie divides his science of
religion into two areas of investigation, essence and manifestations, which are
approached through investigations in philosophy and history, respectively.
However, Chantepie’s phenomenology "belongs neither to the history nor the
philosophy of religion as Hegel envisioned them".[2] For
Chantepie, it is the task of phenomenology to prepare historical data for
philosophical analysis through "a collection, a grouping, an arrangement,
and a classifying of the principal groups of religious conceptions".[3] This
sense of phenomenology as a grouping of manifestations is similar to the
conception of phenomenology articulated by Robison and the British; however,
insofar as Chantepie conceives of phenomenology as a preparation for the
philosophical elucidation of essences, his phenomenology is not completely
opposed to that of Hegel.
Kristensen
William Brede Kristensen.
Kristensen’s phenomenology "adopts many of the features of Chantepie’s
grouping of religious phenomena," and penetrates further into the
intricacies of Chantepie’s phenomenological approach.[7]
For
Chantepie, phenomenology is affected by the philosophy and history of religion, but for Kristensen,
it is also the medium whereby the philosophy and history of religion interact
with and affect one another.[8] In
this sense, Kristensen’s account of the relationship between historical
manifestations and philosophy is more similar to that of Hegel than it is to
Chantepie. In defining the religious essence of which he explores historical
manifestations, Kristensen appropriates Rudolf
Otto’s conception of das Heilige ("the
holy" or "the sacred"). Otto describes das Heilige with
the expression "mysterium tremendum"—a numinous power revealed in a
moment of "awe" that admits of both the horrible shuddering of
"religious dread" (tremendum) and fascinating wonder (fascinans)
with the overpowering majesty (majestas) of the ineffable, "wholly
other" mystery (mysterium).[9]
Like
Chantepie, Kristensen argues that phenomenology seeks the “meaning” of
religious phenomena. Kristensen clarifies this supposition by defining the
meaning that his phenomenology is seeking as “the meaning that the religious
phenomena have for the believers themselves”.[10] Furthermore,
Kristensen argues that phenomenology is not complete in grouping or classifying
the phenomena according to their meaning, but in the act of understanding.
“Phenomenology has as its objects to come as far as possible into contact with
and to understand the extremely varied and divergent religious data”.[11]
Being
a phenomenologist, Kristensen was less interested in philosophical
presuppositions than in his concrete depth-research in the incidental religious
phenomena. These subjects concerned mythological material (such as Creation,
the Flood etc.) as well as human action (such as baptism, Olympic Games etc.),
and objects of nature and handicrafts. In all of this he only made use of the
authentic sources: writings and images by the believers themselves. This
procedure compelled him to reduce the field of his research - he had to
profoundly master all relating languages and writings in order to be able to
understand his sources in a way as they would have wanted to be understood
themselves. Consequently he reduced his field of research to the phenomena in
religions living around the origin of Christianity: during the millennia before
and the centuries after Christ, in Iran (Avesta), Babylonia and Assyria,
Israel, Egypt, Greece and Rome. The required knowledge of speeches, also, is
one of the causes that only few (Van der Leeuw, Bleeker) of his pupils did
carry on in his line, although many scholars showed interests in the results of
his research. Apart from his synopsis The Meaning of Religion, and
a just simple Introduction in History of Religion, his publications
are mostly restricted to the results of his incidental partial researches,
published in the shape of a Communication of the Royal Academy of the
Netherlands.
Gerardus
van der Leeuw
For
van der Leeuw, understanding is the subjective aspect of phenomena, which is
inherently intertwined with the objectivity of that which is manifest. Van der
Leeuw articulates the relation of understanding to understood phenomena
according to the schema outlined in Dilthey’s definition of the human sciences
(Geisteswissenschaften) as sciences that are “based on the relations
between experience, expression and understanding” (“Verhältnis von Erlebnis,
Ausdruck, und Verstehen”).[12] Van
der Leeuw correlates subjective experience, expression, and understanding with
three objective levels of appearing—relative concealment (Verborgenheit),
relative transparency (Durchsichtigkeit), and gradually becoming
manifest or revealed (Offenbarwerden), wherein the understanding of what
is becoming revealed is the primordial level of appearing from which the
experienced concealment and expressed transparency of appearing are derived.[13]
Because
van der Leeuw, like Kristensen, appropriates Otto’s concept of das
Heilige in defining the essential category of religion, the
transcendence becoming revealed in all human understanding can be further
described as sacred — an overpowering “wholly other,” which becomes revealed in
astonishing moments of dreadful awe (Scheu) and wonderful fascination.[14] Van
der Leeuw argues that this concept of religious dread is also present in
Kierkegaard’s work onAngst and in Heidegger’s statement that “what
arouses dread is ‘being in the world’ itself”.[15] Moreover,
van der Leeuw recognizes that, although dreadful, Being-in-the-world is
fundamentally characterized as care (Sorge), the existential structure
whereby Dasein is concerned with meaningful relationships in
the world alongside other beings.[16]
Because
all experiences disclose concealed (wholly other) transcendence to the
understanding, all experiences of Being-in-the-world are ultimately religious
experiences of the sacred, whether explicitly recognized as such or not. Human
being as such is homo religiosus, the
opposite of homo negligens.[17]
It
is the task of the phenomenology of religion to interpret the various ways in
which the sacred appears to human beings in the world, the ways in which humans
understand and care for that which is revealed to them, for that which is
ultimately wholly other mystery. Among other great phenomenologists who worked
and influenced phenomenology of religion are Kristensen, Henry
Corbin, Mahmoud Khatami, Ninian
Smart, de la saussaye, Mircea
Eliade.
Gejala dan Realitas
Menangkap realitas
melalui gejala
Realitas, prakonsepsi,
ingatan, gambaran yang sudah ada dalam pikiran
Metode fenomenologi
terdiri dari dua prinsip: epoché (penangguhan keputusan) dan eidetic vision
(penglihatan untuk menangkap hakekat).
1. Epoché adalah
penundaan keputusan oleh peneliti
mengenai kebenaran, nilai dan kadang-kadang eksistensi gejala sendiri. Di sini
orang mesti mengambil jarak dari kategori-kategori spekulatif dan normatif
mengenai gejala-gejala keagamaan. Peneliti mesti meneliti apa yang dipercayai
oleh orang beragama, bukan apa yang dikatakan orang mengenai dia.[2]
Lihat gejalanya secara langsung, bukan mengingat prakonsepsi atau penilaian
yang sudah ada sebelum menyelidiki gejala (a priori)
2. Eidetic vision adalah usaha
untuk menangkap esensi gejala-gejala
dengan menggunakan empati dan intuisi.[3]
Menurut Leo Widengren, metode
fenomelogi terdiri dari empat tahap sbb.:
1. la description des
faits (pemaparan fakta)
2. l’arrangement des
faits dans un ordre systématique (penyusunan fakta secara sistematik)
3. l’interprétation
des faits pour comprendre la
signification (penafsiran fakta untuk
memahami makna-nya)
4. l’essai d’établir
un type, une structure, un méchanisme, sans violer en aucun manière les faits
historiques mais aussi sans confondre phénomenologie et histoire (usaha untuk
membangun suatu tipe, bangunan atau mekanisme tanpa memperkosa fakat-fakta
historis sama sekali, namun juga tidak dengan mengacaukan fenomenologi
[sistemasis, sinkronis] dan sejarah [kronologis, diakronis].[4]
Tujuan
fenomenologi agama adalah mencari pola-pola dan struktur-struktur atau esensi
dari agama, di balik penampilan-penampilannya yang bermacam-macam; atau
pemahaman terhadap sifat unik dari gejala-gejala keagamaan, pengalaman
keagamaan tertentu, atau menangkap peran agama dalam sejarah dan kebudayaan
Tokoh: Chantepie de la Sausaye,
Gerardus van der Leeuw.
Keuntungan:
- Membuka cakrawala mengenai keluasan gejala keagamaan
- Membebaskan orang dari penilaian yang tidak berdasar fakta
- Memberikan apresiasi kepada seluruh gejala keagamaan,
tidak hanya ajaran agama yang dianggap ortodoks
Kelemahan:
- subyektif: very personal appreciation
- tidak dapat mencakup semua gejala keagamaan
- tidak dapat lepas sama sekali dari kriteria, yakni ketika
orang mesti memilih gejala yang akan diteliti
Baca Juga: Pendekatan Feminis
[1]Ursula
King, “Historical and Phenomenological Approaches” dalam Frank Whaling (ed.), Contemporary
Approaches to the Study of Religion (Berlin, New York & Amsterdam:
Mouton Publishers, 1983), I:39.
[2]Ibid.,
39-41.
[3]Ibid.
[4]Ibid.,
90.
0 komentar:
Post a Comment