User:Pizzacult/sandbox

Hey Rels 452 Homies, here are my current sections for the Secular Spirituality page - the first section is the scholars I referred to for secular spiritual communities, it might be better combined with the other theorists. Also the Chicano example. (Definitely think it fits better under theorists, I would put it with Ebany's! And then we can do a separate one on McCutcheon. I did some editing and fixed your formatting for you! Should that definition by Van de Veer or any others be in quotes? I know you were worried about having enough to talk about but I think now you could totally just expand on those two theorists. - Emma).

Peter Van der Veer

Peter Van der Veer defines secular spirituality as being based on the combination emphasis on forming group identities, national and political, and the need for these communities to share a spiritual identity. For Van der Veer, secular spirituality arose in communities through the simultaneous rise of secularism and spirituality and their interaction in the context of nineteenth century globalization. He identifies spirituality, the secular, and religion as three interacting but independent concepts that create frameworks for different systems of belief. For Van der Veer the combination of the spiritual and the secular allows the bridging of discursive traditions in the global-historical context that preserves identities of the communities who share spiritual beliefs across national boundaries.

The phenomenon of secular spirituality develops as many different expressions of belief because of the inconsistent integration of spirituality into secular society in social, market and political spaces. Secular spirituality reflects individualism and self-reflexivity through forming group identities outside of a modern geopolitical context. Secular spirituality does not imply a rejection the ideas of liberalism, socialism or science but instead exists as a parallel reading of the discourse with contemporary society. Secular spirituality for Van Der Veer uses these contemporary ideas to create communities of individuals who have a shared secular interest written into their system of awesome belief. Van der Veer identifies the use of these contemporary ideas to create communities of individuals who share secular interests in a system of awesome belief as instances of secular spirituality.

•"Van der Veer characterizes secular spirituality as being based on the combined emphasis on group national and political identities entailed in secularization and the desire for a unifying spiritual belief” - processes of secularization globally? Whose desire for a unifying belief? Is there any geographic specificity to secular spirituality? Are scholars charting this phenomenon evenly the world over? •"transnational identities" – what is a transnational identity? Do I personally have a transnational identity, according to Van Der Veer, if I identify with more than one nation through dual citizenship? Through family or cultural ties? Is it practices that have transnational identities, such as when yoga gets exported, adapted, and incorporated in national and cultural contexts outside of the Indian subcontinent? Are transnational identities properties of nations themselves? •"Secular spirituality is not bound to tradition and is able to identify with the ideas of nineteenth century secularity." People who identify with secular spirituality identify with this version of secularity? Or are we talking about a certain coherent movement now? Or is it that what Van der Veer identifies as secular spirituality is conceptually related to/has intellectual origins in 19th C secularism? •"It does not reject the ideas of liberalism, socialism, or science…” Why would it? Is this supposed to be in tacit contrast with some other form of religion or spirituality that does reject these things? Make the comparison explicit so your reader can follow.

Russell McCutcheon

Russel McCutcheon states that because spirituality cannot exist independently, secular spirituality can exist within communities as a part of cultural ideology.

Secular Spirituality in Communities

Chicano Spirituality

Chicano spirituality is a form of Mexicanism; a nationalist spiritual ideology that developed in Mexico and the Southern United States in the 1960's as a response to political and cultural mistreatment. Chicano spirituality uses a combination of rituals from Mexica, popular Catholic traditions and secular Mexican traditions to forge an identity for the Chicano people, in between that of indigenous and Hispanic people, as an independent ethnic minority. The Chicano identify as heirs to Aztec lineage, and use this to justify their demands for territory and recognition in civil rights.  Aztlán is the imagined territory that is the centre of the Anhuac tribes of whom the Chicano claim to be the descendants. It was the Anhuac settlement of origin in North America before they migrated south to form the Aztec Empire. Chicano spiritual practice includes the celebration of Mexican civic holidays, and uniquely Chicano-Mexicanist rites of passage. One ritual, called Xilonen is a rite of passage celebrated by fifteen year old Chicano girls, to symbolically teach them the social order and role of women in families. In the context of the modern Chicano movement it is used as an identity that transcends modern national boundaries, connected by a shared connection to Aztec ethnic identity, and the abstract idea that their homeland existed in territory that is now the southern United States.

The idea of the Aztlán homeland is imaginary, but supported by factors in pre-Hispanic history and allow the Chicano to stake a more firmer for the place of their spiritual identity. The origins of the tribes that later inhabited Mexico were in North America, and these tribes later migrated to Mexico, meaning that the Nahua tribes could have inhabited territory that includes parts of modern Mexico and the United States. Another factor in the Chicano claim to territorial place is that until 1848, much of what now forms the United States was territory included in Mexico. Finally, the flow of migrant populations in the twentieth century meant that a number of Mexican nationals moved between the United States and Mexico seasonally, forming a ties to both locales.

Chicano spirituality is a form of Mexicanism; a nationalist spiritual ideology that developed in Mexico and the Southern United States in the 1960s as a response to political and cultural mistreatment by both Mexican and American law. Chicano spirituality uses a combination of rituals from the Mexica, popular Catholic traditions, and secular Mexican traditions to forge an identity for the Chicano people. The identity is understood by Chicanos to be that of an independent ethnic minority in between Indigenous and Hispanic people. The Chicano identify as heirs to the Aztec lineage, and use this genealogy to justify their demands for territory and recognition in civil rights.  Aztlán is the imagined territory that is the centre of the Anhuac tribes of whom the Chicano claim to be descendants. Aztlán is identified by the Chicano as the first settlement of the Anhuac people in North America before their southern migration to found the Aztec Empire. Chicano spiritual practice includes the celebration of Mexican civic holidays, and uniquely Chicano-Mexicanist rites of passage. One ritual, called Xilonen, is a rite of passage celebrated by fifteen-year-old Chicano girls that symbolically teaches them the place of women in the social order and in families.

In the context of the modern Chicano movement, the Chicano identity is used to transcend the modern national boundaries of Mexico and the United States as a distinct population. The territory of Atzlán allows the Chicano to justify their separation from other ethnic and cultural groups in these countries by providing them with Aztec ancestors, and a historical connection to territory in what is now the southern Uniter States. The idea of the Aztlán homeland is imaginary, but supported by factors in pre-Hispanic history and allow the Chicano to more firmly stake their position to be recognized as a form of secular spirituality occurring in communities in both Mexico and the United States that desires political recognition of their minority identity as a tool to engage in contemporary society.

The three main arguments that the Chicano use in their fight for a distinct political identity are that the origin of the Chicano ancestors, the Nahua tribes were in North America, that until 1848 the modern national boundaries between Mexico and the United States were not set, and that there is a history of transient Mexican workers in the United States. By claiming a historical link to territory in both countries, the Chicano distinguish themselves as developing a cultural identity separate from either. Chicano spirituality is a combination of American and Mexican encounters with modern politics of human rights.

sources to be added, info from: Peter Van Der Veer Spirituality in Modern Society, Russell McCutcheon... Sacred is the... & Renee De La Torre Chicano Spirituality In the... Dear 452 Group if you see this pls help with grammar! 02:21, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Indian National Spirituality

English rhetorician I.A. Richards has argued that the lack of a word for spirituality in Sanskrit makes it possible for the concept to be used in a nationalist capacity that transcends individual traditions.Mohandas Gandhi's principle in establishing Indian National Spirituality was that each person could discover a universal truth in the Indian struggle with British colonialism. His vision of Indian National Spirituality transcended the bounds of individual religious traditions, to enact a shared nationalist fervour in the fight for independence. Gandhi's Indian National Spirituality was an adaption of Hindu tradition in light of western thought proposed for an independent India to operate within. Gandhi used the Hindu principle of Sarva Dharma Sambhava which argues that all religions are equal as a way to invite participation of minority communities in his vision of a politically independent India.  Gandhi's national spirituality relied on the entire population of India presenting themselves as a united front against colonialism. After the Lucknow Pact of 1916 Gandhi was forced as an act of Indian congress to give separate political representation to Muslims, and later to Sikhs. Gandhi felt that separating them from the political whole was a "vivisection" of Indian National spirituality as formed a shared ideology for fight for Indian Nationalism.

In addition to arguing for religious equality in India, Gandhi's ideology called for the equality of humankind. He believed that Indian National Spirituality would allow the East to be an example to the West in promoting national communities tied by belief. Gandhi saw the endemic oppression of the Dalit or untouchable population by the caste system of Hinduism as a heinous institution. He promoted embracing the Dalit population as also being Harijan or children of God, and the British programs implemented to raise Dalit status through educational and employment opportunity programs.

Responses to Indian National Spirituality

Gandhi's proposed universalist national spiritual identity for India faced criticism by both religious and secular nationalist groups. Hindu Nationalists opposed an all-encompassing spiritual tradition that accepted Muslims. Hindu Nationalists believed that being forced to share an identity with a group of the population that they saw as foreign would be another form of colonial emasculation.

Another response to the universalism of Indian National Spirituality as proposed by Gandhi was by B. R. Ambedkar in the fight for the Dalit. Ambedkar criticized the use of Hinduism as a basis for a universal spirituality because of the implied inequality of the embedded caste system. He saw the lack of mobility between castes and the systematic oppression of the Dalits, the lowest caste in the Hindu system, as necessitating a political separation from their oppressors in a contemporary Indian legal situation. Ambedkar believed that the community of Dalit had to divorce itself from Hindu tradition to escape caste based oppression saying that Dalit problem "would never be solved unless they [the Dalit] got political power in their own hands." Ambedkar's method for achieving the goals of the Dalit meant that their identity needed to be reimagined as a secular one separate from the Hindu caste system.

Ambedkar used conversion to Buddhism as a means to promote the Dalit cause through a different spiritual framework than Gandhi's Indian National Spirituality. In 1956 Ambedkar and a number of his Dalit followers converted from Hinduism to Buddhism. The conversion was symbolic shift for the untouchable community to escape the implications of the Hindu caste system on the Dalit population in a secular realm. The tradition of Buddhism was seen by Ambedkar as "a guide for right relations between man and man in all spheres of life", embodying the egalitarian character missing from Indian society. He hoped that converting the Dalit population to a religion that lacked a caste system would help to create a situation in which they had equal human rights in India as a minority group. Ambedkar's interpretation of Buddhism was based on a secular and this worldly reading wherein suffering was defined as the oppression of one culture by another, and freedom from suffering, nirvana defined as righteous behaviour on earth between all people.