Religion 101

At sunset yesterday (April 30, 2013), a significant holiday on the religious calendars of Wiccans and other Neopagans began. However, which particular Wiccan holiday it happens to be will vary, depending upon which particular hemisphere of the world — the northern, or the southern — you happen to reside in.

In the Northern Hemisphere, it is Beltane. In the Southern Hemisphere, it is Samhain (pronounced “Sow-en”).

Since the season prevailing in one hemisphere is always the opposite of the season prevailing in the other hemisphere, seasonal holidays between the two hemispheres are staggered or out of sync from each other by some six months. So, by way of example, when the spring equinox occurs in the Northern Hemisphere, the autumn equinox occurs in the Southern Hemisphere — and vice versa.

As I write, Wiccans and other Neopagans in the Northern Hemisphere are today (on May 1, 2013) celebrating Beltane, while their fellows in the Southern Hemisphere are simultaneously observing Samhain. These holidays (or “holy days”) began, as mentioned, at sunset yesterday, and run until sunset today (May 1, 2013).

The natural cycle of the seasons is referred to among contemporary Pagans as “the Wheel of the Year,” and Wicca’s eight Sabbat festivals are spaced evenly around the perimeter of that wheel.

Of these eight annual Sabbats, four are classed as “lesser,” and four as “greater.” The two equinox festivals of Mabon (fall or autumnal) and Ostara (spring or vernal), together with the two solstice festivals of Yule (midwinter) and Litha (midsummer), comprise the lesser Sabbats. The Wheel of the Year is completed by the four greater Sabbat festivals of Samhain (Summer’s End), Imbolc or Candlemas (Brigid’s Day), Beltane (May Day), and Lammas or Lughnasadh (First Harvest).

As two of Wicca’s four greater Sabbats (or “fire festivals,” or four “cross quarter days”) — all four of which are distributed midway between the annual equinoxes and solstices (the four seasonal “quarter days”) on the Wiccan religious holiday calendar – Beltane and Samhain fall directly opposite each other on the Wheel of the Year. So, whenever one festival is being celebrated in one hemisphere (e.g., Beltane in the north), its polar-opposite counterpart (e.g., Samhain in the south) is being simultaneously celebrated in the other hemisphere.

Beltane, halfway between the vernal or spring equinox and the summer solstice (and which, in the Northern Hemisphere, began at sunset yesterday), is Samhain’s polar opposite, marking the return of summer. In northern latitudes, Beltane is historically a “first day of May” festival, and is essentially an optimistic celebration of light and fertility, traditionally observed with such festivities as music, bonfires, and maypole dancing. It is said that the veil between the worlds of the living and the dead grows thin at this time of year (as it also does at Samhain).

Samhain, halfway between the autumnal equinox and the winter solstice (and which, in the Southern Hemisphere, began at sunset yesterday), is essentially a festival commemorating the conclusion of summer, the end of harvest time — and, with that, the subsequent increasing dimming of the sun. As such, Samhain is a festival of approaching darkness, of deepening and lengthening shadows; it is traditionally a time for reflection, and for paying respects to the spirits of one’s ancestors.

So, to my Wiccan friends and readers in the Northern Hemisphere: “Blessed Beltane!”

And to my Wiccan friends and readers in the Southern Hemisphere: “Blessed Samhain!”

In my previous blog entry, I raised the question, “What is religion?” (and invited reader feedback).

In this blog entry, I’d next like to raise the question, “What is spirituality?” (and again invite reader feedback).

What’s the real difference, anyway, between “religion” on the one hand, and “spirituality” on the other — if any?

Both terms are used in various and often rather vague ways, so much so that sometimes whatever distinctive definitional borders they might have tend to blur, and even blur together.

Some people use these two words almost synonymously, as if “religion” and “spirituality” were virtually identical and interchangeable — as if the terms were synonyms.

Other people, by contrast, regard them as virtual antonyms, as polar opposites of each other — as if “religion” was one thing (usually a bad or negative or undesirable thing, in one way or another), and “spirituality” was something else altogether (usually a better or superior or more elevated thing).

Consider, for example, how many people these days characterize themselves as “spiritual, but not religious.” But what might that mean, exactly?

For some, it seems to mean people who are unaffiliated with any particular religion, but who nevertheless harbor “spiritual” beliefs, values, feelings, and so forth. Just exactly what those might actually amount to can sometimes be rather vague, of course, or alternately they may be quite specific — just not recognizably equivalent to those of any particular religious tradition.

Of course, one might fairly raise the question: can just “spirituality,” per se, exist in the abstract, as it were — divorced from, or independent of, any particular religion or system of belief? Most forms of spirituality, after all, are recognizably associated with some particular religion or belief system. There are, for instance, various sorts of Christian spirituality, of Jewish spirituality, of Islamic spirituality, of Hindu spirituality, of Buddhist spirality, of Sikh spirituality, of Taoist spirituality, of Baha’i spirituality, of Pagan spirituality; one could go on and on.

Even a highly individualized and very eclectic or syncretic form of spirituality, perhaps one personally or privately composed “cafeteria style” from drawing upon a medley of belief systems, could be seen as having recognizable roots elsewhere, even if were a plurality of such roots rather than from just one source. Just being “spiritual” without further defining it (in terms of this or that specific type of spirituality) might be describing a “spirituality” so vague as to have little to no definable content.

Others may instead prefer to use the term “spiritual” rather than “religious” to describe themselves for other reasons. Perhaps their spirituality really is so vague and undefined — or just so unusual or different — that they can’t quite specify it, much less label it, or even compare it with any form of religion that they know about.

Or perhaps they conceive of “religion” as a rather unspiritual entity or enterprise, as something ultimately all about rules  (which they may dislike) or rituals (which they may despise) or myths (which they may disbelieve), or even as something manmade (which they may reject).

Or perhaps for them religion essentially means organized or institutionalized religion They may take a dim view of such organizations, or have had bad or distasteful experiences with institutions which have become hardened and bureaucratic, or inflexible and authoritarian, or sometimes even abusive.

On the other hand, perhaps we should keep in mind that — as the eminent scholar and popularizer of comparative religion Huston Smith once put it — “religion is just organized spirituality.”

Think about it, dear reader. And then, because opinions on matters such as these can and do vary, I invite you to use the “Comments” feature of this blog to submit your own personal or preferred definition of “spirituality.” How, for you, does spirituality differ (if at all) from religion — and why?

It has occurred to me that, over the course of some 113 blog entries and counting (this one marking number 114, since starting this little blog back in July of last year), that I have not yet attempted to precisely define the specific subject matter of this “Religion 101″ blog.

What is religion, anyway?

I mean, can we define it, in a way that really works for everyone who uses the term?

The task is perhaps not as simple as it may seem. Some definitions of “religion” may be too narrow, while other definitions may be too broad.

For instance, many people might tend to define “religion” in terms of being about belief in God (or gods), and perhaps worship of that God (or gods).

But then you run into religions such as Buddhism, or some forms of Hinduism or Taoism, within which “God” per se simply does not figure. (And neither, for that matter, does “worship.”) In light of this, defining “religion” in terms of belief in (and worship of) God or gods would seem to fall somewhat short.

On the other hand, sometimes people define “religion” in terms so broad as to end up simply being too vague to be genuinely helpful. Religion might be thought about in terms of what one “worships,” but in a way which stretches the meaning of the term “worship.” Sometimes one hears language to the effect of, “Oh, that guy just worships sports,” or “Football is that guy’s religion.”

Alternatively, sometimes one hears that “Politics is that person’s religion,” along with the suggestion that some sort of political or even philosophical “-ism” constitutes this or that person’s “religion.” But surely we do not mean that literally. (Or do we?)

Defining “religion” might turn out to be a slipperier enterprise than it might at first seem. As one religious studies wag once put it (unfortunately, I cannot now remember who put it this way), when it comes to religion, “I may not be able to define it, but I know it when I see it.”

In this blog entry, I’d like to attempt something a little more “interactive” than has been done in past blog entries. I’d like to invite each and every reader of this little blog to take advantage of the “Comments” feature available here, and to post a comment in which a stab is made at defining “religion.”

In other words, dear reader, how do you define religion? Are some definitions perhaps too narrow and restrictive, or alternately too broad and loose? What definition of “religion” best works for you — and why?