Revision summary
Sacred and profane are Durkheim’s two worlds of ritual marking. Religion unites a church around sacred things. The Australian totem stands for the clan. Ritual effervescence makes society felt as a force. Lévi-Strauss later added classification; the social reading still holds.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
Émile Durkheim split the world into sacred and profane. The totem is the emblem that makes the clan visible as a sacred thing.
Body
Sacred and profane
- Sacred things are set apart and forbidden, protected by ritual. Profane things are the ordinary workaday world.
- The split is social, not a list of gods. A rock becomes sacred when the group marks it.
- Religion is the system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, uniting believers into a church.
Totem
- In The Elementary Forms, Australian totemism is the simplest case. The totem animal or plant stands for the clan.
- Worship of the totem is worship of society itself. The clan feels a force, which Durkheim called mana-like effervescence in the corroboree.
- Taboos keep the totem sacred. Eating rules and designs on churinga objects carry the emblem.
Relation
- Sacred/profane is the grammar. Totem is the noun that names the group.
- Radcliffe-Brown kept the social function. Lévi-Strauss later said totems classify, they do not only worship society.
- The teaching point for anthropology remains: god-talk is also group-talk.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD REL[Religion] --> S[Sacred set apart] REL --> P[Profane ordinary] T[Totem] --> C[Clan emblem] C[C] --> S[S]
Conclusion
Durkheim’s sacred is the marked, collective side of life; the profane is unmarked routine. The totem is the clan’s flag, so totemic religion is society made visible.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Critically examine the Formalists' and Substantivists' views on the applicability of economic laws in the study of primitive societies
Next question on this syllabus topic (2015 · Q4(a)). View answer →
-
Is the sacred always a god?
No. A flag, a relic, or a totem species can be sacred without a high god.
-
Did Durkheim do Australian fieldwork?
No. He used ethnography by Spencer, Gillen, and others. The theory is sociological.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2016 · Q3(c) · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks
Critically examine different Anthropological approaches to Religion. -
2025 · Q4(c) · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks
Critically examine James Frazer's theory of evolutionism. Elucidate the place of religion in modernity -
2023 · Q3(b) · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks
How did Clifford Geertz look at religion. Differentiate between anthropological and psychological approaches to the study of religion.
More from this topic
Q5(d) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks · Solution
Shaman, sorcerer and medicine man
Religion
A shaman uses trance and soul travel, as in Siberian cases Eliade used. A sorcerer harms by learned rite, as Azande sorcery shows. Witchcraft in Evans-Pritchard is a different, often inherited, accusation. A medicine man treats with herbs and ritual skill. Roles can overlap; the terms should not.
Q4(c) · UPSC Mains 2022 · Anthropology GS 1 · 15 marks · Solution
Critically examine various anthropological interpretations about the Kula Ring
Religion
Malinowski made kula a total social fact of the Massim. Mauss generalised the gift from kula and potlatch. Weiner restored women’s wealth and rank. Munn and others added fame and political economy. The ring is historical, not a frozen primitive market.
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2021 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks · Solution
Animism and Deep Ecology
Religion
Tylor’s animism is belief in spiritual beings as the minimum of religion. Later work reads animism as relating to animals and places as persons. Naess’s Deep Ecology gives nature intrinsic worth beyond human use. The two meet as critiques of a dead, owned environment. They are not the same theory and must not revive Tylor’s ladder.