Sacred–profane dichotomy

French sociologist Émile Durkheim considered the dichotomy between the sacred and the profane to be the central characteristic of religion: "religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden." In Durkheim's theory, the sacred represented the interests of the group, especially unity, which were embodied in sacred group symbols, or totems. The profane, on the other hand, involved mundane individual concerns. Durkheim explicitly stated that the dichotomy sacred/profane was not equivalent to good/evil. The sacred could be good or evil, and the profane could be either as well.

Criticism
Durkheim's claim of the universality of this dichotomy for all religions/cults has been criticized by scholars like British anthropologist Jack Goody. Goody also noted that many societies have no words that translate as sacred or profane and that ultimately, just like the distinction between natural and supernatural, it was very much a product of European religious thought rather than a universally applicable criterion.

Some Eastern religions like Buddhism disapprove of cultivating dualism, even between the sacred and the profane. A disciple is first asked to cultivate "a good mind". In the intermediate stage, the disciple is asked to "break through the good mind" (i.e., stop distinguishing between the sacred and the profane). In the final stage of learning, the monk lets go of all conceptualizations of good and bad or sacred and profane. This is called the final good, and can thus said to be simply a different definition of good and evil, rather than truly forbidding or throwing away the concept.