1. Considering what are authors say about the subject of “spirituality,” what are the problems with defining the word?  What do you think the word means—or should mean?

2. Are religion and spirituality the same or different?  Why have we only recently separated the two?

3. What is the main thesis of Carrette’s and King’s argument and what are its strengths and weaknesses?  Can you offer examples of the commoditization of Asian religions?  Is this a problem—why or why not?

Selling Spirituality Intro.pdf  

[1] I had never given much thought to how many ways one could define "spirituality", but from Carrette and King, as well as the Encyclopedia of Religion, you realize that it's almost limitless. It's usually the case with any abstract concept that an exact definition is impossible, but I think the Encyclopedia's opening line comes as close as any: "the concern of human beings with their appropriate relationships to the cosmos". That to me is what the word should mean. The definition allows for someone in any culture, because it's a universal feeling to wonder how one fits into the grand scheme of things.

Carrette and King take a more cynical view that supports their premise; basically that spirituality can mean "anything you want, as long as it sells". I think that's a bit of a stretch- we need a phrase to represent all the businesses and products that have emerged in the name of spirituality. Something like consumer spirituality. Or political spirituality to apply to their statement that it has "always reflected political interests".

[2] Religion and spirituality are not the same, although synonymous. Religion for me has always connoted some form of deity that dictates how we fit into the universe, while spirituality is more of an individualistic quest that doesn't necessarily require a god; Christianity as opposed to Yoga, for example.

The separation of the two reflects the growing numbers of people that have become disenchanted with organized religion in fairly recent times. These defectors still feel a need for a sense of belonging, and the more modern meaning of spirituality (Carrette and King call it a "brand-label") has evolved from that "market".

[3] Selling Spirituality presents the thesis that spirituality has become a product- that it promotes the idea that anyone can buy this feeling of a relationship with the cosmos, in any flavor they desire, or set of beliefs that suits them. They certainly can cite many examples, which strengthens their case. Their weakness is that, so far at least in the readings, they seem to have forgotten that there's still plenty of people that cultivate a sincere spirituality in their lives without all these trappings. I try to be Zen Buddhist in my approach to things. However I feel no need to subscribe to Buddhist magazines, or buy statuettes/incense/aromatic oils/how-to books, etc. The commoditization of Buddhist and other Asian religions includes my examples in the prior sentence (the products you "must have" to be a practitioner, or that incorporate a religious name into the brand). I do see it as a problem because, at least in Zen's case, it's the opposite of what the philosophy stresses- that we should place no value on material things.