Objective: Religion has a unique, distinct nature in the classical phenomenology of religion that can never be delivered to a historical, social and political matter and should be considered in his own terms and value, i.e. religious, sacred and supernatural essence. the method; here, in the analytic-critical approach, the foundations and assumptions of the suigeneris religion are discussed. the consequences of this look at the phenomenon of religion are:essentialism which causes the reduction of multiplicity to unity and dehistorization and generalization of religious phenomena, regardless of the social and cultural contexts and differences, studies merely non-historical structures and patterns. hence, the worldly function of religion is neglected. requires a theological, ideological and apologetic conception, a transcendental and metaphysical assumption and paying attention to religion focus and its ontological reality and the existence of religious practice instead of studying religion. incomparability, escaping from explanation and limited description of religious phenomena, and devout belief authentication to preserve the status and value of religion and thus its product is unrealistic and non-untenable and without scientific value and proof. Methods: classical phenomenology of religion recognizes religion as unparalleled phenomenon in human life which can never be reduced to an ordinary one. Here, in the analytic-critical approach, the foundations and assumptions of the suigeneris religion are discussed and to what extent it might affect Religious Studies from the social science religionists’ point of view. Results: the consequences of this look at the phenomenon of religion are:(1)essentialism which causes the reduction of multiplicity to unity and dehistorization and generalization of religious phenomena, regardless of the social and cultural contexts and differences, studies merely non-historical structures and patterns. hence, the worldly function of religion is neglected.(2)requires a theological, ideological and apologetic conception, a transcendental and metaphysical assumption and paying attention to religion focus and its ontological reality and the existence of religious practice instead of studying religion. (3) incomparability, escaping from explanation and limited description of religious phenomena, and devout belief authentication to preserve the status and value of religion and thus its product (4) is unrealistic and non-untenable and without scientific value and proof. Conclusions: Criticisms that focus on ignoring the historical, political and social dimensions of religion ask religious phenomenologists not to be phenomenologists in some way, but instead to be historians, sociologists and researchers of social sciences. However, the claims of the phenomenology of religion were very exclusive and questioned the validity and importance of other approaches to religion, and certainly one should have waited for such reactions from their representatives. In fact, this claim of phenomenologists who are interpreters and describers of religious experiences is true to a large extent. Every religious person feels empathy with Eliade's writings about sacred time and place since are tangible and understandable for them. For a religious person, a time and a place that has value and importance from a religious point of view is really seen in a different way, but not ontologically, that it is considered completely separate from other times and place. If religion is unique and in its own kind (1), then religious data must have a special superiority and rank, which is claimed to be non-reductive; (2) Religion has a supernatural and metaphysical nature that is beyond the historical, social and political contexts and it should not be explained by these approaches because it causes religion to be ignored its sacred and transcendent reality. As a result (3) leads to generalization. It turns into overlooking historicalgeographical, cultural and social differences, the incommensurability of religious phenomena from non-religious ones, and subjective and personal interpretation of religion.(4) Mere and non-analytical description and refraining from explaining religious phenomena and adhering to and confirming the belief of religious people, apart from its correctness and incorrectness, has no scientific value and phenomenology becomes a recounting of religious practice and not an academic and defensible work. The phenomenologists of religion, instead of discussing about the inherent or unique feature of religion, simply assumed it as a principle of their research. .(6) Phenomenologists with their theological tendencies followed the solution of the fear of losing the place of religion in scientific circles through the strategy of reinterpreting and demarcating the new time in repeating the control of the present time by placing it in patterns from the past and judging the present time based on the criteria of the past. which ends in a passive and static, shallow and unthinking, theological, conservative, elitist and vague, superiority-seeking and self-made and emotional interpretation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]