A New Approach to the Phenomenon of Magic in Social Anthropology within the Framework of the Consept of “Spell”

Öz

Magic is one of the main topics of discussion in social anthropology. In these discusses, generally deal with the origins of magic, relations between magic, science and religion. The positivist paradigm plays an important role in determining the boundaries of these three categories. Within these boundaries, science is evaluated by the positivist paradigm; religion is evaluated by believing in supernatural power; magic is evaluated outside science and religion. This kind of evaluation prevents the understanding of the phenomenon of magic. This evaluation also makes the scope and origin of magic unclear. For this reason, in the article, the way in which anthropology evaluates the subject of magic, the scope of magic and the related basic terms (sihir/magic) has been questioned. It has not been aimed to compare the categories of religion, science and magic in this article. Particularly, the field of magic has been the subject of discussion. The aim has been to determine the basic boundaries of magic and to minimize uncertainty and also to question the effect of magic on daily life by referring to the mentioned problems. This questioning has been evaluated as important in order to understand past societies more accurately and to solve relevant problems in today’s world. 

Evaluation style of the subject of magic in anthropology and related basic approaches have discussed for this purpose. E. B. Tylor, J. G. Frazer, B. Malinowski and M. Mauss have been referenced to exemplify these approaches. Firstly, it has been discussed how the phenomenon of magic is shaped by those authors and their opinions about the subject in this article. Then, conceptual evaluations have made. In these evaluations, the concepts of "sihir" and "magic" have been emphasized. The concept of "sihir" has been eveluated as an important reference element in understanding the phenomenon of magic. This concept has been tried to be evaluated both in terms of dictionary meaning and in terms of verses in the Qur ‘an. In contrast, the uncertainty of the concept of “magic” has been explained. The term of “magic” has been found to be problematic because of it included rituals with positive and negative consequences. In the evaluations that are about the term of “magic”, the basic problems have been re-questioned and the subject has been tried to be clarified. In the discipline of anthropology, the concept of "magic" has been often dealt with in an equivalent way with the belief practices of the past societies. 

In this discipline, vital beliefs of old societies, including folk beliefs (and superstitions), cosmological readings and treatment methods, have been evaluated within the scope of magic. While the phenomenon of religion and magic have been evaluated in the supernatural and sacred area, science has been dealt with in the non-sacred area. It has been founded the basic distinction between "magic" and "religion" was in approaches of “mana” in discussions which are within anthropology. In these debates, while religion was interpreted as holiness, mana has been evaluated in the magical field, that is the supernatural immanent forces. Such assessments have led to the distinction between nature and religion, and made the disclosure of magic uncertain. The evolutionist-positivist paradigm and the institutionalization process of Christianity have been influential in this. In the article, magic (sihir) is defined as negative intention/purpose activity focusing on negative results and it has been associated with methods such as satisfying the eyes, intimidation, breaking the bonds by reducing the level of consciousness. On the other hand, magic (sihir) has been defined as the one phenomenon that weakens, closes, degrades and despairs human mind and consciousness. 

It has been emphasized that beliefs and practices that focus on positive results such as healing and folk beliefs have effective on the contrary. The basic distinction here is tried to be explained indirectly via “mana”. The mana has been considered as the vitality, formation and balanced energy potential in nature. The spell (sihir) has tried to be explained in relation to the deprivation of mana. In this respect, healing and healing activities were evaluated in terms of adaptation of the bond with mana. In contrast, the magic (sihir) has been interpreted as the opposite. Mana has been considered as a living / vital space that is occupied and destroyed by the spell, rather than a force directed at the spell. Therefore, it is tried to be specified that definitions such as white and black magic are problematic and the limits of magic should be discussed again. Magic (sihir) has not only been associated with old societies, supernatural consequences and demonic elements. In addition, it has been seen that magic (sihir) was related to people ‘s forms of interaction and new living conditions based on digital. Therefore, it has been concluded that the magic and magical conditions of today should be re-questioned by the disciplines of anthropology, history of religions, political science, sociology and psychology.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Sociology of Religion,Anthropology,Positivism,Sihir,Folk Beliefs

Sosyal Antropolojideki Büyü Olgusuna Sihir Kavramı Çerçevesinde Yeni Bir Yaklaşım

Öz

Makalenin konusu büyü olgusudur. Büyü olgusu, sosyal antropolojinin temel tartışma konularından biridir. Bu tartışmalarda, genellikle büyünün kökenleri ve sınırları, büyü, bilim ve din arasındaki ilişkiler ele alınmaktadır. Bu üç kategorinin sınırlarını belirlemede pozitivist paradigma önemli bir rol oynamaktadır. Bu sınırlar içinde bilim, pozitivist paradigma üzerinden; din, aşkın doğaüstü güce inanmak temelinde; büyü ise din ve bilim dışında değerlendirilir. Böyle bir değerlendirme, büyü olgusunun anlaşılmasını engellemekle kalmaz aynı zamanda büyünün kapsamını, kökeninin ne olduğunu ve büyünün gündelik yaşamdaki etkisini de belirsizleştirmektedir. Bu nedenle makalenin amacı, büyünün temel sınırlarını belirlemek, belirsizliği aza indirmek ve büyünün gündelik yaşamdaki etkisini ortaya koymak olmuştur. Bu amaca yönelik sosyal antropolojideki büyü konusunun ele alınış biçimi ve büyünün kapsamı problem edilerek sihir kavramı çerçevesinde yeni bir yaklaşım sergilenmiştir. Sonuç olarak büyü, olumsuz sonuçlara odaklanan negatif niyet/amaç edimi olarak belirlenmiş ve bilinç seviyesini düşürerek gözü tatmin etme, korkutma, bağları kopararak kapatma, indirgeme gibi yöntemlerle ilişkilendirilmiştir. Bununla birlikte büyü, insan zihnini ve bilincini zayıflatan, kapatan, indirgeyen ve insanı ümitsizliğe sevk eden bir eylem olarak belirlenmiştir. Büyü, sadece eski toplumlarla ve demonik unsurlarla ilişkili görülmemiştir. Ayrıca büyünün insanların etkileşim biçimleriyle de ilgili olduğu görülmüştür. Bu açıdan büyü olgusunun ve günümüzdeki büyüsel koşulların farklı disiplinler tarafından yeniden sorgulanması gerektiği fikrine ulaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Büyü,Sihir,Antropoloji,Pozitivizm,Halk İnançları,din sosyolojisi,sosyal antropoloji

Kaynakça

1. CENGİZ, Osman. “Sihir Kavramı Üzerine Semantik Bir İnceleme”, DEUİFD, 48, 2018, 169-200.
2. ÇELEBİ, İlyas. “Sihir”, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: TDV Yayınları, 2009, 37, 170-172. ÇELEBİ, İlyas “Geçmişten Devralınan Kültürel Miras: Sihir Problemi”, Din Eğitimi Araştırmaları Dergisi, http://isamveri.org/pdfdrg/D01239/2002_9/2002_09_CELEBII.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 0.11.2018). el-İSFAHANİ, Rağıb. “Sihir”, Müfredât: Kuran Kavramları Sözlüğü. Çev. Yusuf Türker, İstanbul: Pınar Yayınları, 2007, 702-704.
3. FRAZER, Sır James George. Altın Dal. Çev. Mehmet H. Doğan, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları, 2004.
4. GRAEBER, David. Değer Teorisi. Çev. Başak Kıcır, İstanbul: Sel Yayıncılık, 2017.
5. İBN MANZÛR, Ebu’l-Fazl Muhammed. Lisânü’l-Arab, Beyrut: Dârü’l-İhyai’t-Türasi’l-Arabi, 1999, 6, 189-192.
6. KİECKHEFER, Richard. Ortaçağda Büyü. Çev. Zarife Biliz, İstanbul: Alfa Yayınları, 2017.
7. KOÇHAN, Metin ve Kılıç, Muhammed Fatih. “Matematik, İhvân-ı Safâ Felsefesinin Dayandığı Aksiyomatik Zemin midir?” Artuklu Akademi, 4(2) 2017, 78-80.
8. KÖSEMİHAL, Nurettin Şazi. Sosyoloji Tarihi. 3.bs. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi Yayınları, 1974.

9. LEVİ-STRAUSS, Claude. Din ve Büyü. Çev. Ahmet Güngören, İstanbul: Yol yayınları, 1983.
10. MACDONALD, D. B. “Sihr”, MEB İslâm Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: MEB Basımevi, 1979,10, 599-611.
11. MALİNOWSKİ, Bronislaw. Büyü, Bilim ve Din. Çev. Saadet Özkal, İstanbul: Kabalcı Yayınevi, 1990. MAUSS, Marcel. Sosyoloji ve Antropoloji. 3. bs. çev. Özcan Doğan, Ankara: Doğu-Batı Yayınları, 2011.
12. MİDDLETON, John. “Magic: Theories of Magic”, Encyclopedia of Religion. in: Lindsay Jones (ed), Detroit and New York: Thomson Gale, 2005, 8, 5562-5569.
13. NOEGEL, Scott B. “Musa ve Sihir: Çıkış Kitabı Üzerine Notlar”. Çev. Esra Erdoğan, Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 58:2 (2017): 161-182.
14. ORHAN HANÇERLİOĞLU, “Bağı”, Felsefe Ansiklopedisi, 5. bs. İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 2012, 1, 157.
15. ÖRNEK, Sedat Veyis. Sivas ve Çevresinde Hayatın Çeşitli Safhalarıyla İlgili Batıl İnançların ve Büyüsel İşlemlerin Etnolojik Tetkiki. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi DTCF Yayınları, 1966.
16. ÖRNEK, Sedat Veyis. Etnoloji Sözlüğü. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi DTCF Yayınları, 1971.
17. ÖRNEK, Sedat Veyis. 100 soruda İlkellerde Din, Büyü, Sanat, Efsane. 3.bs. İstanbul: Gerçek Yayınevi, 1995.
18. TAMBİAH, Stanley Jeyaraja . Büyü, Bilim, Din ve Akılcılığın Kapsamı. Çev. Ufuk Can Akın, Ankara: Dost Kitabevi Yayınları, 2002.
19. TANYU, Hikmet. “Büyü”, Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı Ansiklopedisi, İstanbul: TDV Yayınları, 1992, 6, 501-506. UYULAN, Ferda Ercan. Okültizm ve Enerji. 4.bs. Antalya: Lotus Yayınevi, 2017.