So picture this. You're in a cozy room surrounded by people welcoming you with good food and kindness.

想象一下你在一個舒適的房間裡，周圍的人們用美食和善意歡迎你的到來。

They're showing interest in your questions, your anxieties, in you.

他們對你的問題、焦慮和你表現出興趣。

Hold on a second.

等一下

Is this a cult?

這是邪教嗎？

We've all read the headlines, watched the documentaries, and worried about the MLM our cousin joined, but without the stereotypes of white robes, wilderness compounds, and tinfoil hats, can we really tell the difference between a religion and a cult?

我們都讀過頭條新聞，看過紀錄片，也擔心過表弟加入的傳銷組織，但如果沒有白袍、荒野大院和錫箔帽的刻板印象，我們真的能區分宗教和邪教嗎？

INTRO

導言

When we think about cults, we often think about groups that are bizarre or outlandish or dangerous, like Heaven's Gate, a doomsday group whose members died by mass suicide in 1997, or Aum Shinrikyo, a group that piped deadly gas into the Tokyo subway system in 1995.

說到邪教，我們通常會想到那些離奇、離經叛道或危險的組織，比如 "天堂之門"（一個末日組織，其成員在 1997 年集體自殺身亡），或者奧姆真理教（一個在 1995 年向東京地鐵系統輸送致命毒氣的組織）。

Stories like these gain notoriety, capture our imagination, and of course make lots of money for Netflix.

這樣的故事聲名遠播，吸引了我們的想象力，當然也為 Netflix 賺了不少錢。

But the word hasn't always been so loaded. Historically, cults were a little eccentric, sure, but for the most part accepted by society. In ancient Rome, the word cultus was used for small, elite groups devoted to worshipping particular deities. They were more like fan clubs for obscure gods whose temples were closer to frat houses than doomsday compounds.

但是，這個詞並不總是那麼沉重。歷史上，邪教確實有些古怪，但大部分情況下都被社會所接受。在古羅馬，"邪教"（cultus）一詞用於指專門崇拜特定神靈的小型精英團體。它們更像是晦澀難懂的神靈的粉絲俱樂部，其廟宇更接近於兄弟會，而不是末日大院。

The rites of Dionysus got pretty wild.

狄俄尼索斯的儀式非常狂野。

Even what we know as Christianity began as a cult, and was viewed as a pretty weird one in its early days. In fact, many belief systems and traditions that today we consider religions were called cults when they first emerged. Let's head to the Thought Bubble.

就連我們所熟知的基督教也是從邪教開始的，而且在其早期被視為相當怪異的邪教。事實上，今天我們認為是宗教的許多信仰體系和傳統在最初出現時都被稱為邪教。讓我們進入 "思想泡泡"。

In the 1820s, a man named Joseph Smith said he was visited by an angel. The angel led him to unearth a golden book written in a language Smith called Reformed Egyptian. In 90 days, he translated it using special stones, gave the gold book back to the angel, and published all 588 pages. He called it the Book of Mormon. And with it, he started the Latter-day Saints movement.

19 世紀 20 年代，一個名叫約瑟夫-史密斯的人說他曾被天使拜訪過。天使帶領他發掘了一本用斯密稱為改革埃及語寫成的金書。在 90 天內，他用特殊的石頭翻譯了這本書，把金書還給了天使，並出版了全部 588 頁。他稱之為摩門經。有了這本書，他開始了後期聖徒運動。

Smith argued that Christianity needed a total makeover, and the Book of Mormon, which recounts Jesus' visit to the Americas, was the start of that makeover. Smith's movement drew tens of thousands of followers, but also countless haters. Fleeing persecution,

斯密認為，基督教需要徹底改變，而講述耶穌訪問美洲的《摩門經》正是這種改變的開端。斯密的運動吸引了數以萬計的追隨者，但也有無數的仇敵。逃離迫害

Smith led his flock, who had picked up the nickname Mormons, west from New York to Ohio, then on to Missouri, and eventually Illinois, where, after the locals got wind of his teachings, he was killed by an angry mob.

史密斯帶領著他的教眾，從紐約到俄亥俄州，然後到密蘇里州，最後到伊利諾伊州，在那裡，當地人聽說了他的教義，憤怒的暴徒將他殺害。

But the Latter-day Saints movement didn't die with Smith. It spread and grew at first on the margins, and then more mainstream. By 1972, historian Sidney Ahlstrom wrote,

但後期聖徒運動並沒有隨著史密斯而消亡。它先是在邊緣地區傳播和發展，然後逐漸成為主流。到1972年，歷史學家西德尼-阿爾斯特羅姆（Sidney Ahlstrom）寫道：

One cannot even be sure whether it is a sect, a mystery cult, a new religion, a church, a people, a nation, or an American subculture. Indeed, at different times and places, it is all of these.

人們甚至無法確定它是一個教派、神祕邪教、新宗教、教會、一個民族、一個國家，還是一種美國亞文化。事實上，在不同的時間和地點，它是所有這些。

Whatever it's called, 200 years and millions of believers later, the Latter-day Saints church isn't the fringe movement it was when it started.

不管它叫什麼，200 年過去了，數百萬信徒過去了，後期聖徒教會已經不再是剛開始時的邊緣運動了。

Thanks, Thought Bubble. So the way we think of the word cult today started in the 1950s, when fears of brainwashing took hold during the Korean War.

謝謝，思想泡泡。是以，我們今天對邪教一詞的理解始於 20 世紀 50 年代，當時人們對洗腦的恐懼在朝鮮戰爭中佔據上風。

To the American public, brainwashing was a scary but convincing answer to the question, why would anyone become a communist? Before long, brainwashing became a way to explain people's interests in other movements that society deemed abnormal, like new religions.

對美國公眾來說，洗腦是對 "為什麼會有人成為共產主義者 "這一問題的一個可怕但令人信服的回答。不久之後，洗腦成了解釋人們對社會認為不正常的其他運動（如新宗教）感興趣的一種方式。

That's what happened with the Unification Church, which was founded in South Korea in 1954.

1954 年在韓國成立的統一教會就是如此。

The church itself was influenced by traditional Christian ideas, but became known for holding mass wedding ceremonies and recruiting new members by showering them with attention.

該教堂本身受到傳統基督教思想的影響，但卻以舉行集體婚禮儀式和通過對新成員大獻殷勤來招募新成員而聞名。

Fears of brainwashing swirled around the church, even though research showed very few people recruited actually joined. Like other small religions before it, the movement got slapped with the cult label. Only this time, the word picked up association with scientifically unfounded ideas like mind control, which continue today. So where's the line? Can we really separate cults from religions? Oh no, I forgot that rhetorical questions summon my old friend the devil's advocate. Hello. Hey, Johnny Boy! Yeah, the answer's pretty simple on this one. Cults have obvious tells for one, charismatic leaders like L. Ron Hubbard of the secretive and famously litigious Church of Scientology. Please don't sue us. But religions have Jesus,

儘管研究表明很少有人真正加入教會，但洗腦的恐懼還是圍繞著教會。與之前的其他小型宗教一樣，該運動也被貼上了邪教的標籤。只是這一次，這個詞與精神控制等毫無科學依據的想法聯繫在了一起，並延續至今。那麼，界限在哪裡？我們真的能把邪教和宗教分開嗎？哦，不，我忘了，反問句可以召喚我的老朋友魔鬼代言人。你好啊嘿，強尼小子答案很簡單邪教有很明顯的特徵 第一，有魅力的領袖 比如L. 羅恩-哈伯德 神祕而又著名的山達基教會的領袖請不要起訴我們。但宗教有耶穌、

Muhammad, and Siddhartha Gautama, who I'd argue were a lot more influential than L. Ron Hubbard and better writers, even the ones who didn't write. Again, please don't sue us. All right, but what about all the rigid social norms that cults enforce, like how the Family International forces its members to forsake all school, voting, doctor's visits, even having a job? That seems pretty sus, bro. Yeah, no, wait until you find out about Catholic priests and nuns, though. But think about it, man. Cults exploit people. Members get manipulated into forking over all this cash in the hopes of enlightenment, salvation, or belonging. And there's abuse. We've seen it with the Branch

穆罕默德和釋迦牟尼，我認為他們比 L. Ron Hubbard 更有影響力，也是更好的作家，即使是那些沒有寫作的作家。再說一遍，請不要起訴我們。好吧，那邪教執行的那些嚴格的社會規範呢？比如國際家庭組織強迫其成員放棄上學、投票、看病，甚至工作？這似乎很可疑，兄弟。是啊，不，等你知道天主教神父和修女的事再說吧但仔細想想吧邪教剝削人成員們被操縱著掏錢 希望得到啟迪、救贖或歸屬感還有虐待我們已經看到了分支機構

Davidians, the Family International. And with Catholic, Evangelical, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu communities. Lots of religious leaders gain wealth from their followers, including millionaire pastors of evangelical megachurches. And sadly, abuse and suppression of victim stories happen in many religious traditions. Dude, but what about... No, see, you're just going to do this for literally ever. That's how these arguments work. I've been on Twitter. Bro, it's called X now. Okay, yeah, that's it. I'm done. The harms we associate with cults aren't unique to them. Listen, I have to go. I have a dental procedure I would prefer to this conversation.

大衛教派、國際家庭組織。還有天主教、福音派、猶太教、穆斯林、佛教和印度教團體。許多宗教領袖從追隨者那裡獲得財富，包括福音派大教堂的百萬富翁牧師。可悲的是，許多宗教傳統中都存在虐待和壓制受害者的現象。老兄，但是......不，你看，你只是要做到這一點 從字面上永遠。這些爭論就是這樣的我上過推特兄弟 現在叫X了好吧，是的，就是這樣。我說完了與邪教有關的危害並非邪教獨有聽著，我得走了比起這次談話 我更想去做個牙科手術

So, as I was about to say, many scholars of religion today think that we should ditch the word cult altogether because it implies that things like abuse and exploitation and violence only happen within those communities, when the truth is they occur across religions.

是以，正如我要說的那樣，當今許多宗教學者認為，我們應該完全拋棄邪教這個詞，因為它意味著虐待、剝削和暴力等事情只發生在這些群體中，而事實是它們發生在各個宗教中。

Communities labeled cults are often viewed as doing religion wrong, even if their beliefs aren't that different from accepted religions. Like, devotees of the Santa Muerte follow many

被貼上邪教標籤的群體往往被視為宗教的踐行者，即使他們的信仰與公認的宗教並無太大區別。比如，Santa Muerte 的信徒遵循許多

Catholic traditions like praying with rosaries and placing offerings on altars, but they do it in honor of Saint Death, who often appears as a skeletal woman in a white dress. And because

天主教的傳統包括用念珠祈禱和在祭壇上擺放祭品，但他們這樣做是為了紀念聖人死神，因為死神經常以身穿白裙的骷髏女人的形象出現。因為

Saint Death isn't recognized by the Catholic Church, her followers get labeled as cultists.

死神聖人不被天主教會承認，她的追隨者會被貼上邪教徒的標籤。

So, some scholars argue that the cult label reveals less about the group itself and more about who's using the label. Again, I'm not trying to say that religions, including religions with few followers that demand total obedience and have charismatic founders, can't cause harm.

是以，一些學者認為，邪教標籤所揭示的團體本身的情況較少，而更多的是誰在使用這個標籤。我再次重申，我並不是想說宗教，包括追隨者很少、要求完全服從並擁有魅力型創始人的宗教，不會造成傷害。

They cause harm all the time. Any system that has both secular and spiritual power over its believers is always going to be at risk of causing terrible, terrible harm. I'm saying that this harm is always a threat and always something to pay attention to in the context of religion, regardless of the novelty of belief and practice. Most experts today prefer less-charged terms like new religious movement or minority religion, words that don't label a religion as necessarily bad, just recent and practiced by fewer people. By that definition, many movements qualify.

它們一直在造成傷害。任何對信徒既有世俗權力又有精神權力的體系，都有可能造成可怕、可怕的傷害。我想說的是，無論信仰和實踐多麼新穎，這種傷害始終是一種威脅，始終是宗教背景下需要關注的問題。如今，大多數專家更傾向於使用新宗教運動或少數派宗教等不那麼尖銳的術語，這些詞並沒有給宗教貼上一定是壞的標籤，只是最近才出現的，而且信奉的人比較少。根據這一定義，許多運動都符合條件。

Shakers and Jehovah's Witnesses, crystal enthusiasts, and the spiritual but not religious.

撼地者和耶和華見證人、水晶愛好者，以及有靈性但無宗教信仰的人。

Because here's the thing. Maybe we want to call an unfamiliar group a cult because we're worried about its members and we want to highlight that they may be in danger. But the problem is that sometimes calling something a cult brings on new types of danger. And in groups already disproportionately targeted by the police, further marginalization can be especially dangerous.

因為問題就在這裡。也許我們想稱一個陌生的團體為邪教，是因為我們擔心它的成員，我們想強調他們可能處於危險之中。但問題是，有時稱某個團體為邪教會帶來新的危險。而對於那些已經成為警方重點打擊對象的群體來說，進一步的邊緣化尤其危險。

Take what happened in 1985 between the Philadelphia police and a primarily Black new religious movement called MOVE. MOVE's members were dedicated to resisting racist systems through what they saw as a natural lifestyle with practices like composting and communal living.

就拿1985年費城警方與一個以黑人為主的新宗教運動 "MOVE "之間發生的事情來說吧。MOVE的成員致力於通過堆肥和集體生活等自然生活方式來抵制種族主義制度。

But law enforcement repeatedly misunderstood MOVE's beliefs and labeled them a cult.

但執法部門一再誤解MOVE的信仰，給他們貼上邪教的標籤。

Ultimately, when neighbors complained about members shouting on bullhorns and children living in reportedly filthy conditions, police bombed a home where members lived.

最後，當鄰居們抱怨成員們用牛角號喊叫、孩子們生活在據說很髒的環境中時，警察炸燬了成員們居住的一棟房屋。

The bombing killed 11 people and destroyed the homes of 250 neighbors. A report one year later condemned the police's actions as unconscionable. But no one associated with the bombing was ever criminally charged. So while we tend to associate the word cult with violence, we have to also account for how the label itself can escalate violence. Calling a community a cult can change how it's policed, sometimes bringing more harm to vulnerable people.

爆炸造成 11 人死亡，250 戶鄰居的房屋被毀。一年後的一份報告譴責警方的行為喪盡天良。但沒有任何與爆炸案有關的人受到刑事指控。是以，當我們傾向於把邪教這個詞與暴力聯繫在一起時，我們也必須考慮到這個標籤本身是如何使暴力升級的。稱一個社區為邪教會改變對它的監管方式，有時會給弱勢人群帶來更多傷害。

At the end of the day, the word cult is complicated. It's changed over time and stretched to include everything from drinking the Kool-Aid to being a little too obsessed with Disney World. Though the word tries to draw a hard line between traditional and non-traditional religions, time tends to blur that line as new religions gain following and acceptance and old religions participate in some of the abusive practices we associate with cults.

說到底，"邪教 "這個詞很複雜。隨著時間的推移，它的含義也在不斷變化，從喝 "酷愛"（Kool-Aid）飲料到對迪斯尼樂園有點過於痴迷，無所不包。雖然這個詞試圖在傳統宗教和非傳統宗教之間劃清界限，但隨著新宗教得到追捧和接受，舊宗教參與一些我們認為與邪教有關的虐待行為，時間往往會模糊這條界線。

That line eventually gets so fuzzy that many scholars argue it doesn't exist.

這條界線最終變得如此模糊，以至於許多學者認為它並不存在。

So what is a cult, really? Well, many contemporary scholars argue it's often a way of saying this group is too weird or threatening or dangerous to count as a religion. And of course, some of those groups are weird and threatening and dangerous. But that label doesn't necessarily bring us closer to addressing harms within or beyond them. The members of these movements seek the same thing followers of any other religion seek—belonging, meaning, acceptance.

那麼，什麼是真正的邪教呢？許多當代學者認為，這通常是一種說法，即這個團體過於怪異、具有威脅性或危險性，不能算作宗教。當然，有些團體確實很怪異，很有威脅性，也很危險。但這一標籤並不一定能讓我們更接近解決其內部或外部的危害。這些運動的成員所尋求的東西與其他宗教的追隨者所尋求的東西是一樣的--歸屬感、意義、被接受。

And when we look at it that way, many scholars argue the line isn't just fuzzy, it's practically invisible. Next time we're going to examine some more fuzzy lines, specifically the ones between magic and religion. I'll see you then.

許多學者認為，從這個角度看，這條界限不僅模糊，而且幾乎不可見。下一次，我們將研究一些更模糊的界限，特別是魔法和宗教之間的界限。到時候見。

Thanks for watching this episode of Crash Course Religions, which was filmed at our studio here in

感謝您收看本期《宗教速成班》。

Indianapolis, Indiana, and was made with the help of all of these nice people. If you want to help keep Crash Course free for everyone, forever, you can join our community on Patreon.

它是在印第安納州印第安納波利斯市，在所有這些好心人的幫助下製作完成的。如果你想幫助《速成課程》永遠免費，可以加入我們的 Patreon 社區。