Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: an Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. London/New York: Routledge, 1996.

Summary of Chapter 8: "Internal Lines"

Within society pollution rules and moral rules are not always the same. There are some morally wrong or offensive actions that are not necessarily thought of as polluting to the society or the individual. There are other circumstances and situations where morality and pollution are thought to go hand in hand. The caste system in India illustrates some of the situations where pollution and morality go hand-in-hand. Crossing social barriers is seen as “dangerous pollution” (140).

Pollution rules tend to be pretty clear-cut. By contrast, moral codes are not always as clearly defined. Circumstances and conscience help to determine whether an action is morally correct.

• To illustrate the point, Douglas looks at murder and incest in the Nuer tribe. Both activities are considered morally wrong to the Nuer. However, a man is taught to protect himself and his family. Killing someone in self-defense is not considered morally wrong. Intention plays a role in the determination here. In the case of incest, genealogy is not easily determined in this particular society. Incest with one’s parent or sibling is always wrong, but it is not so easy to ascertain how closely related one is to others in the community. Incest can actually be unintentional. In such cases pollution plays a role in determining if incest has actually occurred.
• It is believed by the Nuer that “incest brings misfortune in the form of skin disease” (131). A sacrifice ritual can be performed to remedy the situation if a risk of such pollution is feared, or one can simply wait until a rash appears for the evidence of pollution to appear on the skin, performing the sacrifice at that time. In any case, pollution rules do help to determine morality in this case.
• Adultery is another prohibited activity for the Nuer tribe that apparently has become accepted as “risky sport in which any man may normally be tempted to indulge. ” (132)If caught in the act, the injured husband could kill the adulterer without being held morally accountable. The pollution risks help to keep the activity in check. Adultery is viewed as dangerous to the injured husband, an innocent victim, not the persons involved in adultery. The result could include back pain (for the husband) or could be so severe as to threaten his very life. “Unless the adulterer pays his fine and provides the sacrifice, he will have a death on his hands. ”(133)

Douglas concludes from evaluating both the moral codes and pollution rules of the Nuer that the two sets of rules do coincide from time to time, but not all morally wrong behavior has a polluting side effect, and not all pollution rules necessarily reflect immoral activity. Other pollution rules include punishments associated with violation of relationships or expected behaviors between husband and wife and their in-laws. The rules reflect the value of marriage and social structures in the Nuer society.

The following are ways Mary Douglas describes that pollution rules can support moral codes (134):

1. When a situation is morally ill-defined, a pollution belief can provide a rule for determining post hoc whether or not an infraction has taken place.
2. When moral principles come into conflict, a pollution rule can reduce confusion by giving a simple focus for concern.
3. When action that is held to be morally wrong does not provoke moral indignation, belief in the harmful consequences of a pollution can have the effect of aggravating the seriousness of the offence, and so of marshalling public opinion on the side of the right.
4. When moral indignation is not reinforced by practical sanctions, pollution beliefs can provide a deterrent to wrongdoers.

Some pollution can cause harm that is irreversible or fatal to the offender. Others can be cleansed away with rituals.

• Some forms of pollution can be washed away or symbolically buried and then forgotten. “There are rites of reversing, untying, burying, washing, erasing, fumigating and so on, which at a small cost of time and effort can satisfactorily expunge them” (137).
• When it comes to moral wrongs, intention does matter and the punishment corresponds to the severity of the offense and the need for revenge or retribution.
• Douglas notes that there is a certain advantage for a society to reduce an offence to the status of a pollution that can be easily washed away.

There are two basic ways in which the affects of pollution can be eliminated.

1. The first is by means of a ritual which makes no attempt to place blame. No questions are asked; the ritual eliminates the affects of the pollution.
2. The second method is the “confessional rite" (138) .