For those of you unfamiliar with Ninan Smart, try this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninian_Smart
The observation of religious activity can provide many clues as to the significance of its effect on the day-to-day lives of its practitioners. By attending a Sunday service in a Christian (CofE) church, you will be able to glean a great deal about Christianity. You may see the members of the service taking the sacrament; the vicar will read from the bible and explain that the wafer represents the body of Christ, the wine the blood. He will also explain that Christ, the son of God died for the sins of humankind "that we may be granted access to heaven" and reiterate some of the obligations inherent in believing this, including the Ten Commandments. Hymns may be sung, other bible and parable readings will be present, and prayers will be said.
The building itself may contain a cross and be fairly ornate, maybe containing images of Jesus on the cross, and the actual layout of many churches is that of a cross, this can be ascertained by walking around the outside of it. The surroundings of many churches will also contain a cemetery.
Ninian Smart's model, divided into seven dimensions, allows us to break this down into clearly definable aspects, which help us to define this as a religious practice. The church itself would be defined as "the material dimension". The actual attendance of the service by a group, and the fact that this is presided over by a religious official (the vicar) fill the requirements of "the social and institutional dimension".
The reading of the Ten Commandments would be part of the "ethical and legal" dimension, the explanation of the sacrament the "doctrinal and philosophical dimension". The reading of parables and other stories from the bible fulfils the "narrative or mythic dimension”.
The entire service itself is the "ritual and practical dimension", particularly the taking of the sacrament. This would be confirmed by virtue of attending the same church the following week, and noting that this particularly is always done in exactly the same way.
"The experiential and emotional dimension" is harder to define, the vicars talk of "gods forgiveness" and "Jesus’ love for mankind" would be part of this emotional dimension, but perhaps more so would be the expression's of rapture on the faces of some of the congregation.
However, an observance of the service itself, may not tell us a lot about how it affects the day-to-day life of the individuals in attendance. Asking these individuals specific questions may help, but unless you assume that every person in attendance is devout then the actual extent to which they practice their faith day to day is impossible to ascertain. An excellent example of this is the Christian “Lent”, originally intended to be a fast, now merely a time to “give something up”. Many Christians simply attend church and do nothing else, though there are still some Christians who still fast for parts of Lent.
Purely in terms of what can be observed outside of any mosque, synagogue or church, one aspect of the effect of the main weekly session of worship relevant to each of these buildings is the sense of community and belonging. The congregation leave the service and then spend time talking, laughing together, chatting to the leader of the service. This again is part of the "social and Institutional" aspect of nearly all faiths, no matter what the content or core ideals, and can be readily observed by any passerby. The benefits of being part of a close-knit community are well understood and measurable, in terms of rates of mental and physical illness.
When observing a religious gathering or festival where there are language barriers the extent to which you can glean information is far more limited, a degree of background knowledge is required in order to make sense of a service or ritual where spoken aspects are not comprehensible.
Sikh's are a good example of this, many Sikh's will wear clothes or items that are notably different, at least in the U.K. They may wear shorts, a turban, and a bracelet and maybe even a small dagger. Amritpal Singh Hunjan explains that the hair is worn long under the turban and that this is the "kesh", that the shorts are called "kachha", the bangle "kara", the dagger "kirpan" and that they may be carrying or wearing a small comb called the "kangh". He also explains they symbolism inherent in these, and also explains that they are referred to as the "Fives K's"
Without this information, simply observing a group of Sikhs leaving a temple may not prove to be particularly enlightening; some Sikh temples are actually converted from church buildings, which may still bear Christian symbols such as the cross, although of course this applies to other faiths as well.
What could be observed from viewing this instance without background knowledge is this, they are all dressed similarly. In the same way Christians are making a statement about their beliefs by often wearing a cross, or a fish symbol, Sikh's wear clothes and items that set them apart from non-Sikhs, whatever the underlying symbolism of the items, the practical outcome of this would be that they are recognizable to the other Sikh’s as being a member of their religious community.
So knowing absolutely nothing about the situation, other than that I was looking at a religious group I could draw some conclusions based on what I have seen, Ninian Smarts model can be applied to even to such rudimentary observation, these people have been drawn together for a common purpose (“the social and institutional dimension"), and are dressed in a manner which reflects some aspects of their faith (“the material dimension").
Ninian Smart has endeavored to produce a method by which it is simpler to decide what does, or does not fall under the very broad heading of a “religion”, one example given of a practice which is arguably not is T.M , the main reasoning for it not falling under this heading is that it does not require a practitioner to believe in a “higher power”, however, many aspects of it, such as ritual and it’s origins in Hindu Scriptures fill some of Smarts criteria.
Questioning faith groups where language is not a barrier as to what it is they gain from their beliefs seems to bring about some common responses, many faiths believe in life after death, be that of a heavenly variety or reincarnation, and most followers believe that adherence to their faiths “ethical and legal dimension” will assist them in achieving this. The overall effect is to provide community, stability and a sense of security.
Smarts model does assist in helping an observer to understand how an unfamiliar faith can have much in common with one that the observer does know and understand, and in many ways that is extremely helpful. It is possible to grasp the benefits and effects of belief on the lives of communities and individuals, whatever the religious platform if the similarities can be understood rather than being overwhelmed by the obvious differences.