Changes

==Description==

==Description==

'''Holiness''', or sanctity, is in general the [[state]] of [[being]] holy (perceived by religious individuals as associated with the [[divine]]) or sacred (considered worthy of spiritual respect or devotion; or inspiring awe or reverence among believers in a given set of spiritual [[ideas]]). In other [[contexts]], objects are often considered 'holy' or 'sacred' if used for [[spiritual]] [[purpose]]s, such as the [[worship]] or service of gods. These terms can also be used in a non-spiritual or semi-spiritual context ("sacred truths" in a constitution). It is often ascribed to people ("a holy man" of religious occupation, "holy prophet" who is venerated by his followers), objects ("sacred artifact" that is worshipped), times ("holy days" of spiritual introspection, such as during winter holidays), or places ("sacred ground", "holy place").

'''Holiness''', or sanctity, is in general the [[state]] of [[being]] holy (perceived by religious individuals as associated with the [[divine]]) or sacred (considered worthy of spiritual respect or devotion; or inspiring awe or reverence among believers in a given set of spiritual [[ideas]]). In other [[contexts]], objects are often considered 'holy' or 'sacred' if used for [[spiritual]] [[purpose]]s, such as the [[worship]] or service of gods. These terms can also be used in a non-spiritual or semi-spiritual context ("sacred truths" in a constitution). It is often ascribed to people ("a holy man" of religious occupation, "holy prophet" who is venerated by his followers), objects ("sacred artifact" that is worshipped), times ("holy days" of spiritual introspection, such as during winter holidays), or places ("sacred ground", "holy place").

The French [[sociologist]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emile_Durkheim Emile Durkheim] emphasized the social [[nature]] of [[religion]], in contrast to other leading thinkers of his day such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James William James], who emphasized [[individual]] [[experience]]. Based on studies of Indigenous Australians, Durkheim proposed that most central to religion was not [[deity]] but the distinction between [[sacred]] and [[profane]]: "religion is a unified system of [[belief]]s and [[practice]]s [[relative]] to sacred [[things]], that is to say, things set apart and forbidden."  In Durkheim's theory, the sacred represented the interests of the [[group]], especially unity, which were embodied in sacred group [[symbols]], totems. The profane, on the other hand, involved mundane individual concerns. Durkheim explicitly stated that the [[dichotomy]] sacred/profane was not equivalent to [[good]]/[[evil]]: the sacred could be good or evil, and the profane could be either as well.

The French [[sociologist]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emile_Durkheim Emile Durkheim] emphasized the social [[nature]] of [[religion]], in contrast to other leading thinkers of his day such as [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_James William James], who emphasized [[individual]] [[experience]]. Based on studies of Indigenous Australians, Durkheim proposed that most central to religion was not [[deity]] but the distinction between [[sacred]] and [[profane]]: "religion is a unified system of [[belief]]s and [[practice]]s [[relative]] to sacred [[things]], that is to say, things set apart and forbidden."  In Durkheim's theory, the sacred represented the interests of the [[group]], especially unity, which were embodied in sacred group [[symbols]], totems. The profane, on the other hand, involved mundane individual concerns. Durkheim explicitly stated that the [[dichotomy]] sacred/profane was not equivalent to [[good]]/[[evil]]: the sacred could be good or evil, and the profane could be either as well.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mircea_Eliade Mircea Eliade], among the most influential twentieth-century scholars of [[religion]], adopted Durkheim's terminology, but Otto's idea. Eliade defined the sacred as "equivalent to a [[power]], and in the last [[analysis]], to [[reality]]." Like Otto, Eliade insisted that this experience was not reducible to any other experience: in other [[words]], that the sacred is not a mere experience, such as a hallucination, but it really exists. Eliade's analysis of religion [[focus]]ed on the sacred, especially sacred [[time]] and sacred [[space]], and very many comparative religion and religious studies scholars in the twentieth century followed him, though scholars such as Jonathan Z. Smith and Russell McCutcheon have challenged his theories.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mircea_Eliade Mircea Eliade], among the most influential twentieth-century scholars of [[religion]], adopted Durkheim's terminology, but Otto's idea. Eliade defined the sacred as "equivalent to a [[power]], and in the last [[analysis]], to [[reality]]." Like Otto, Eliade insisted that this experience was not reducible to any other experience: in other [[words]], that the sacred is not a mere experience, such as a hallucination, but it really exists. Eliade's analysis of religion [[focus]]ed on the sacred, especially sacred [[time]] and sacred [[space]], and very many comparative religion and religious studies scholars in the twentieth century followed him, though scholars such as Jonathan Z. Smith and Russell McCutcheon have challenged his theories.

==References==

==References==

* Durkheim, Emile (1915) The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. London: George Allen & Unwin (originally published 1915, English translation 1915).

* Durkheim, Emile (1915) The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life. London: George Allen & Unwin (originally published 1915, English translation 1915).