Recently, I had some
friends visit from out of town. These friends of mine wanted to explore the
city. So, on a bright spring day, we ventured out into the streets of downtown
Victoria, and wandered around. While walking along Blanchard Street, my friends
decided that they wanted to see the local Anglican cathedral, Christ Church
Cathedral. I was quite surprised by this. Not only were they not religious, but
they were also expressing some slightly offensive jokes about a religious
holiday the night before. Alas, we shuffled into the building, and silently
observed our surroundings. As we made our way out of the building, my friends
talked about how it was important for them to experience religious spaces,
saying something to the effect of, “we never grew up with religion, but yet we
find religious places to be especially appealing”. One of them was particularly
impressed by the architectural design, and the general layout of the building.
Their interest in religious space seemed slightly peculiar, however. How is it
that even those who do not consider themselves to be religious find themselves
enchanted with religious material culture? What it is it about the nature of
religious spaces that has the power to captivate us? In this paper I would like
to explore what it means for a space to be sacred. I contend that our
experience of the sacred is significantly elevated by the atmosphere and
feeling of sacred space. Moreover, the aesthetical quality of sacred space is
the result of a unique process of creativity that manifests in a dimension that
exists between the creative imagination of the human-self, and the Real, qua the
ontological locus of reality. I will briefly begin by reflecting on the ideas
of Mircea Eliade and Thomas Bender.
Mircea Eliade’s classic book, The Sacred and the Profane, is an illuminating study of the
‘sacred’. According to Eliade, “the first possible definition of the sacred is that it is the opposite of the profane”[1]. As Eliade states, the
sacred “always manifests itself as a reality of a wholly different order from
‘natural’ realities”[2]. For Eliade, the sacred is
a powerful force that, upon its appearance, consequentially establishes the Real in the world. Depending on how people
decide to characterize the Real, it
might be described as God, Allah, the Dao, or Brahman. Nevertheless, it is a
power that is unlike anything else in existence. Once we experience the sacred,
our world is opened up, and we are suddenly aware of the Real. This new awareness unlocks the door to a cosmic perception.
We then become attuned to the universe in an entirely different way. However,
the emergence of the sacred also leads to a profound bifurcation of reality. We
might describe this process as an ontological break in time and space. On the
one hand, there is the sacred, and on the other, there is the profane.
Eliade’s
analysis of the sacred is a fascinating account of the dynamic relationship
between the sacred and profane. Eliade’s philosophical framework appears to be profoundly
Platonic. The sacred is similar to the “Living Being” found in Plato’s Timaeus. In Plato’s Timaeus, it seems that all things
are a reflection of the “eternal Living Being”[3]. Similarly, the sacred
exists as an objective reality that “ontologically founds the world”[4]. Both are concerned with
what is Real. For Eliade, the sacred
does not appear to be dependent on our temporal activities, or our subjective
interpretations, it is the ground of being itself.
In The
Sacred and the Profane, the creation of sacred space occurs when “man symbolically
transforms it into a cosmos through the ritual repetition of a cosmogony”[5]. Sacred space is representative
of a universal microcosm. According to Eliade, the function of sacred space is
to “repeat the paradigmatic work of the gods”[6]. The purpose of symbols,
myths, rituals and festivals, is to recall the materialization of the sacred into
the world. Hence, the formation of sacred space is an act of “consecration”[7]. According to Eliade, this
can only be realized if we are aware that “’our world’ is always situated at
the center”[8].
This center is the ‘imago mundi’, a
focal point, a point of orientation. The sacred is that which establishes and
organises the cosmos. For Eliade, the sacred always appears to be an objective
and universal Other. Moreover, the consecration of sacred space orientates us
with this ‘universal Other’.
However,
there are some people who view the sacred as a product of the human
imagination. For them, the sacred is deeply subjective. This subjectivity is represented
in the creation of sacred space. According to Bender, “the places we make act
as mirrors to our lives. They reflect the good or ill, passion or indifference,
with which we hold them back onto the people whose lives they touch”[9]. This approach appears to
be a more humanistic approach to the idea of the ‘sacred’ than that of Eliade’s.
It focuses on the other side of the spectrum: the human side. As Bender states,
“what is significant about sacred places turns out not be the places
themselves. Their power lies within their role in marshalling our inner
resources and binding us to our beliefs”[10]. From this perspective,
it seems that the purpose of sacred space is part of a greater process of
individuation, i.e., the formation of the self.
In Bender’s view, we create sacred spaces in
order to express ourselves to a fuller extent. In a sacred space we tend be more
in touch with ourselves. Where we see ourselves in relation to the universe
becomes clearer. For instance, when we walk into a cathedral we are struck by a
certain feeling. One might argue that the cathedral is built for one purpose:
the glory of God. If this is the case, then we could argue that the purpose of
the structure of the cathedral is to allow our mind to travel upward to the top
of the spire, and then onward to the heavens. Similarly, one might claim that
the purpose of a hermit’s cave is to allow for deeper contemplation, without
the distraction of ordinary things. It appears that sacred space functions in a
way that permits our minds to enter altered states of conscious, and to truly
engage with the formation of the self.
However,
I would like to argue for a middle way: a conception of the sacred that lies
between the realms of subjectivity and objectivity. It appears as though a
truly objective perspective of the sacred would perhaps leave little room for
the personal. Likewise, a truly subjective approach would most likely reduce
the sacred to the workings of the human imagination. The human imagination is a
powerful tool, yet it cannot fully comprehend the ineffable. There is a reason
why something is ineffable, for it cannot properly be put into words. However,
our creative powers are remarkable. Indeed, creativity is a truly human
characteristic. If the sacred really is something that “ontologically founds
the world”[11],
then there must be a dimension of the sacred that exists both from within, and
from without. I contend that this dimension simultaneously resides within the
human self, and in the creative faculties of the Real. For it is creativity
that links the two. Our interaction with this spiritually creative dimension
often inspires us to cultivate certain qualities, such as reverence, patience,
humility, appreciation, compassion and equanimity. For instance, many musicians
find that song-writing is a spiritual process. It is as if they are tapping
into a sacred dimension of music. Music, as a “universal phenomenon”[12], has a way of transcending
the ‘normal’ into something sublime.
The sacred, as a particular dimension in time and space,
can then be manifested both on its own, as a creative process of the Real, and
as an imaginative spiritual endeavour of the human-self. Because our minds are
endowed with a creative imagination, we possess an innumerable variety of ways
of thinking about the universe and our relation to it. When we create sacred
space, we ascend to a symbolic level of reality where our actions, words, and
constructs, actually have the potential to manifest the sacred. This is
especially evident in ritual activity. Here I would like to discuss some of the
key features of sacred space.
Some important elements in the creation of a sacred space
include the incorporation of certain kinds of materials and architectural
styles such as the stone of a cathedral, the marble in a temple, the mud of a mosque.
All of these things contribute not only to the actual building, but also to the
aesthetic quality of the space itself. For instance, the use of materials in
Jamat Khana’s Prayer Facility adds a
minimalistic touch to a religious space that is meant for the minimal:
contemplation, prayer, and reflection. The use of colours, especially the red
flooring, matched with the sandstone colouring of the walls, have a very
desert-like appeal. The Sagrada Familia in Spain is an example of the
terrifying, yet powerfully entrancing, aesthetic of the sacred. It really is
quite an amazing feat of ingenuity. Looming above the city of Barcelona, the
Sagrada Familia was constructed over a 128-year period. It is a towering
testament to the creation of sacred space.
Sacred space is as much of a cultural phenomenon as it is
a spiritually material phenomenon. For instance, the newly restored Ben Ezra
Synagogue in Cairo plays the host to many local Jewish legends surrounding its
origins[13]. The Ben Ezra Synagogue
is also the oldest synagogue in Egypt. They say that the Biblical prophet Moses
used to pray there while he was living in Egypt before the Exodus. However,
there appears to be no historical evidence for this claim. The Ben Ezra
Synagogue’s association with various Biblical and local myths and legends is
part of the main reason why it is important to the Jewish cultural identity in
Egypt. Moreover, in general, there appears to be a magical quality associated
with old buildings such as the Ben Ezra Synagogue. These buildings tend to
radiate with an ancient character.
However,
there is another important element at play here. This is the role of ambience
in sacred space. The Indian yogi, Sadhguru, once wrote about the role of fire
in ancient Indian religious practices. Sadhguru said,
it
is part of the tradition that if you want to create the right kind of
atmosphere, the first thing you do is light a lamp. If you light a lamp and
simply sit there – you don’t have to believe in any God or gods. The moment you
light a lamp, around the flame, a certain etheric sphere naturally occurs.
Where there is an etheric sphere, communication is better. Before you talk to
God, you want to create the right kind of ambience, a certain amount of etheric
sphere.[14]
Indeed, many religious
traditions throughout history have used different devices to accentuate sacred
space. For example, in Catholicism it is customary to burn incense during the
procession in the Mass. Similarly, the burning of sage is a common religious
practice for many indigenous peoples in North America. However, in spite of all
these religious practices, fire is perhaps the most significant. Of course, our
species has used fire for many different purposes, but one can imagine how over
thousands of years, the imagery and feeling of fire has burned a tremendous
mark on our evolutionary consciousness.
Here, I have
argued that there exists an intermediate dimension of the sacred, existing
between the subjective self and the sublimely objective Other. We have the
potential to enter into this dimension, and explore the underlying meaning of
things through the creative capacities of our minds. Although my friends were
perhaps unaware of it at the time, there was a very good reason for their
curiosity for Christ Church Cathedral. The space was attractive to them because
it was created in order for people to better connect with the sacred, the Real, the very thing that gives life
meaning.
Bibliography
Bender, Thomas. “Making Places Sacred.” tombender.org. Last accessed April 11, 2016.
http://www.tombender.org/sustdesignarticles/MAKING%20PLACES%20SACRED%2088.pdf,
1.
Eliade, Mircea. The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of
Religion. New York: Houghton
Mifflin
Harcourt Publishing Company, 1987.
Plato, Timaeus. Translated by Desmond Lees.
London: Penguin Books, 1977.
Lambert, Phyllis. Fortifications
and The Synagogue: The Fortress of Babylon and the Ben Ezra
Synagogue,
Cairo. Montreal: Canadian Centre for Architecture, 2001.
Letts, Richard. “Music: universal language between all
nations?.” International Journal of Music
Education
29, no. 1 (1997): 22-31.
“Light the Fire
Within.” isha.sadghguru.org. Last
accessed April 11 2016.
http://isha.sadhguru.org/blog/yoga-meditation/science-of-yoga/lighting-right-fire-within/.
[1] Mircea Eliade, The Sacred and the Profane: The Nature of
Religion (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company, 1987),
10.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Plato, Timaeus, trans. Desmond Lees (London:
Penguin Books, 1977), 50.
[4] Eliade, 21.
[5] Ibid., 31.
[6] Ibid., 32.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid., 42.
[9] Thomas Bender,
“Making Places Sacred,” tombender.org,
last accessed April 11, 2016,
http://www.tombender.org/sustdesignarticles/MAKING%20PLACES%20SACRED%2088.pdf,
1.
[10] Ibid., 2.
[11] Eliade, 21.
[12] Richard Letts,
“Music: universal language between all nations?,” International Journal of Music Education 29, no. 1 (1997): 22.
[13] Phyllis Lambert, Fortifications and The Synagogue: The
Fortress of Babylon and the Ben Ezra Synagogue, Cairo, (Montreal: Canadian
Centre for Architecture, 2001), 197.
[14] “Light the Fire
Within,” isha.sadghguru.org, last
accessed April 11 2016,
http://isha.sadhguru.org/blog/yoga-meditation/science-of-yoga/lighting-right-fire-within/.
