Totemism is the governing belief in kinship based affiliation to a common totem.

The totem provides a central, shared symbol that represents the group's identity.

"Kinship" ceases to be bound to bloodline but transcends it.

This kinship does not come from specific blood relations with one another; members of the same clan are kin only if they bear the same name. ... And if we say that they consider each other part of the same family, this is because they acknowledge mutual obligations identical to those that have always been incumbent upon kin: obligations of assistance, vengeance, mourning, the obligation not to intermarry, and so on. (Durkheim, p. 88)

So, totemism is fundamentally about social organization.

It becomes a "religion" (but not distinct from cultural practices) because its purpose is to protect the livelihood of the group.

Supernatural forces became gods (and that process parallels the growing body of knowledge/categorization regarding those forces).

Note that there are additional steps between the following main stages:

• First, there was an unorganized existence of natural forces.
• Second, forces were attributed personalities (this served the purpose of categorizing the forces and "restricting" them).
• Third, forces became personified as gods and isolated by spatial location (but still lived among the people; parallel the development of the monarchy as a political organization).
• Fourth, sacred laws replace the actual presence of the deity, who now lives permanently in the supernatural world. (The rise of empires helped propel this stage.)

In short, as a social-political organization becomes more complex, so does its "religion."

According to Durkheim, the supernatural,

presupposes its opposite, which it negates and which is not at all primitive. In order to call certain phenomenon supernatural, one must already have the sense that there is a natural order of things, in other words, that the phenomena of the universe are connected to one another according to certain necessary relationships called laws. Once that principle is established, anything that pertains to these laws necessarily appears to be beyond nature, and so beyond reason ... (Durkheim, p. 28)

Totems are divided according to phratry (a group of clans), clan, and sub-clan.

Individuals may also have a personal totem (but one whose relevance is defined within the nature of the clan or sub-clan's totem).

Totems are not typically of the mother and father (recall the emphasis beyond bloodline) but of a mythical ancestor.

Mythic ancestors serve a centralizing role by offering a shared symbol (the idea of the ancestor) around which a group organizes its world.

The actions of mythic ancestors present moral obligations. (This moral code presents the basis by which individuals within the community should behave towards each other.)

For glorious example,

How does Durkheim account for the sacred? And how so within the framework of totemism?

Totems are attributed with sacredness because the livelihood of the group is thought to be intimately wrapped up in them.

The loss or destruction of the totem threatens the life of the group.

"Sacred" is the means by which we protect the core values and beliefs of the group, the loss of which threatens the existence of the group itself.

In other words, the idea of the sacred originates in human experience and desire.

It does not begin outside of human activity or creation.

In themselves, churingas are objects of wood and stone like so many others; they are distinct from profane things of the same kind in only one respect: they are engraved or painted with the totemic make. This mark, and this mark alone, confers their sacred character. [...] It is to this image that the rite's gestures are addressed, and this image sanctifies the object on which it is engraved. (Durkheim, p. 98)

Why is the image of the totem more sacred than the object itself?

What?! Are you saying, Durkheim, there is no god apart from society?! Shame on you. Shame. On. You.

We can further clarify: sacred and profane originate with the protection of and threats toward the totem.

Can we explain modern notions of sacred in this way?

No! Haven't you been paying attention?!

According to Durkheim, the relationship between a man and his totem is of two beings who are on the same level and of the same value. (Psst! They're members of the same clan.)

The totem directs one's gaze toward something else ...

What we identify as the gods or God is really the collective desire and will of society. Boom. Durkheim is throwing down the mike.

"

A conception of the universe.

Cosmologies are typically written to make sense of the world, usually in relation to the group.

Examples:

• Atrahasis centered on Babylonian society.
• Genesis centered on Israelite society.
• Etc.

Thus, cosmologies often describe the framework for social organization and that organization's dominant moral order.

To a greater or lesser extent, all known religions have been systems of ideas that embrace the universality of things and give us a total representation of the world. For totemism to be considered a religion comparable to others, it too must offer a conception of the universe. And it satisfies this condition. (Durkheim, p. 109)

The essence of living things. And part of the development of the concept of gods.

But not quite like this:

What does Durkheim mean by,

[T]otemism is the religion not of certain animals, men, or images, but of a kind of anonymous and impersonal force that is found in each of these beings though identical with none. None possesses it entirely and all share in it. This force is so independent of the particular subjects embodying it that it both pre-exists and survives them. (p. 140)

But there's more!

It animates generations today just as it animated those of the past and will animate those to come. Broadly speaking, we might say that it is the god worshipped by every totemic cult. Only it is an impersonal god, without a name, without a history, immanent in the world, diffused throughout a multitude of things. ... So the totemic god--to use the metaphor we just adopted--is in them, just as it is in the totemic species and in the people of the clan (pp. 140-41)

What would R. Otto say?

Discussion: Explain the Christian concept of the Holy Spirit in terms of the "impersonal force" of totemism (i.e. as a development from it).

Compare Matt. 12:31-33; Luke 24:45-49; John 3:1-16; Acts 2:1-5; Rom. 8:2-6

But how does one get from an impersonal god to a personal one?

Step 1: the totemic principle provides the basis for clan organization and identity.

• Tribal unity awakens within the individual a sense of the essential unity of the world.
• That is, the tribe presents a sort of microcosm of existence.

Step 2: the totemic cult develops around directing the group and individual's gaze toward a vague power that permeates all things. (There's something out there. Something strange that drives us toward unity.)

Step 3: the totem "identifies" or provides a categorical distinction for this power.

Step 4: the personification of the totem begins the process of personifying the "vague power" it represents. Over time, that vague power becomes identified as a god.

This happens as people become more expectant of the certainty of result from ritualistic behavior.

Gods are totemic principles given identities.

The tangible form of god is the symbol of a particular society. (Durkheim)

But note that we are still in the stage in which the gods live within the natural world and may be members of the tribe.

Therefore the the totemic principle is at once a physical force and a moral power; and we shall see that it is easily transformed into a divinity proper. (idem. p. 142)

The soul originates in a belief in the preservation of the group beyond the life of the individual.

Where does the concept of the soul come from? It stems from individual experience that the collective exists beyond the life of every individual.

Ancestors symbolize the continuing life of the community and so also reflect/embody the fundamental moral order: act toward other members within the community in a way that preserves the stability and survivability of the community. The totemic principle is the term given to that imperative.