Buying Buddha, Selling Rumi: Orientalism and the Mystical Marketplace
350 pages
10 hours
Included in your membership!
at no additional cost
Also available as...
See this imageFollow the Author
Sophia Rose Arjana
+ Follow
Buying Buddha, Selling Rumi: Orientalism and the Mystical Marketplace Paperback – 4 August 2020
by Arjana Sophia Rose (Author)
4.9 out of 5 stars 9 ratin
Kindle
$28.99Read with Our Free App
Audiobook1 Credit
Paperback
$30.79
In our consumer capitalist society, it should surprise no one that religion is for sale as never before. From jewellery to meditation pillows to tourist retreats, Eastern religious traditions are imitated, rebranded as 'new age' or 'spiritual', and marketed as an answer to suffering in the modern world. For the secular individual, the 'mystical' and 'exotic' East is offered as a path to enlightenment and inner peace.
In Buying Buddha, Selling Rumi, Sophia Arjana asks what happens when different cultures and religious traditions are turned into products to be sold for profit. How does it affect our conception of the peoples and places these ideas are taken from? And can we ever reconcile the individual's virtuous pursuit of self-improvement with the lucrative colonial project that is the commercialisation of mysticism?
272 pages
Product description
Review
'Buying Buddha, Selling Rumi highlights the hidden costs of what would appear to be positive stereotypes about Eastern religiosity. In doing so, Arjana interrogates cultural colonialism, i.e. the borrowing of other people's cultures and religions without giving credit to actual persons and institutions... With its comprehensive theoretically informed approach and exciting case studies, I would especially recommend this book for use in undergraduate classes.'-- "Religion (Liz Wilson, Miami University)"
'A fascinating and wholly engrossing exploration of how "mysticism", as we know it in the West, circulates as a modern-day product of colonial structures of power.'--Sylvia Chan-Malik, Associate Professor, Departments of American Studies and Women's and Gender Studies, Rutgers University
'A wide-ranging overview of the ongoing power and cultural significance of long-standing Western Orientalist tropes about "the Mystic East". This is an important work for anyone working on Asian traditions and their contemporary appropriation, transformation and commodification.'--Richard King, Professor of Buddhist and Asian Studies, University of Kent
'Both scholarly and readable, Buying Buddha, Selling Rumi deepens our understanding of the way the West appropriates Eastern religion.'--Jeffrey H. Mahan, Ralph E. and Norma E. Peck Professor of Religion & Public Communication, Iliff School of Theology
Book Description
How Eastern religions are commodified in the modern world, and why it matters
Read more
Product details
Publisher : Oneworld (4 August 2020)
Language : English
Paperback : 272 pages
Customer Reviews:
4.9 out of 5 stars 9 ratings
4.9 out of 5 stars
4.9 out of 5
Top reviews from other countries
tamarrivka
4.0 out of 5 stars
Scathing Indictment of Western Engagement With Eastern Religion that Goes Too Far
Reviewed in the United States on 14 October 2020
Verified Purchase
A fairly well written book on an engaging topic. I was interested to read it as I think there are some salient points to be made about commercialization of Eastern traditions in the West; yet this book goes way too far in its indictment of Western forms of spirituality to the point of nihilism. While I agree that exploitation and appropriation do happen, I see all of the world’s religions as fluid traditions shaped by historic cultural forces that have always included exchange and inquiry. The author seems to posit that white westerners and the spiritual practices they engage in cannot have real connectedness to anything authentic and holy; while adherents of the Asian religions of Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam are the only people authentically capable of experiencing Eastern spirituality through the fixed canon of the religion they were born into. What this leaves out is the reality that spiritual experiences can happen for everybody and each Eastern religion and Eastern nation has its own problematic elements and internal conflicts and will always be continuing to change and evolve.
In the end, the author describes her perspective as “cynical” which she associates with her role as an academic. Scholarship does not necessitate cynicism; if anything it feels like this author has such a strong bias against the West and white people that she is not able to approach what she observes from a nuanced perspective.
14 people found this helpfulReport abuse
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars
Verified Purchase
A fairly well written book on an engaging topic. I was interested to read it as I think there are some salient points to be made about commercialization of Eastern traditions in the West; yet this book goes way too far in its indictment of Western forms of spirituality to the point of nihilism. While I agree that exploitation and appropriation do happen, I see all of the world’s religions as fluid traditions shaped by historic cultural forces that have always included exchange and inquiry. The author seems to posit that white westerners and the spiritual practices they engage in cannot have real connectedness to anything authentic and holy; while adherents of the Asian religions of Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam are the only people authentically capable of experiencing Eastern spirituality through the fixed canon of the religion they were born into. What this leaves out is the reality that spiritual experiences can happen for everybody and each Eastern religion and Eastern nation has its own problematic elements and internal conflicts and will always be continuing to change and evolve.
In the end, the author describes her perspective as “cynical” which she associates with her role as an academic. Scholarship does not necessitate cynicism; if anything it feels like this author has such a strong bias against the West and white people that she is not able to approach what she observes from a nuanced perspective.
14 people found this helpfulReport abuse
Amazon Customer
5.0 out of 5 stars
Must Read in Modern Spirituality
Reviewed in the United States on 3 January 2021
Verified Purchase
Dr. Sophia Rose Arjana has written a masterful evaluation of the ways Eastern spirituality has been commodified in Western culture. From the appearance of what she calls "muddled orientalism" in films to the creation of retreat cultures like Burning man, the author shows how "Western", mostly American people, have used parts of "Eastern" spiritual traditions to create marketable, profitable, products. This is a book is a perfect theory text for university classrooms, but truly should be read by every yoga studio owner, retreat director, and practitioner of modern spirituality. Truly insightful!
One person found this helpfulReport abuse
JR
5.0 out of 5 stars
Verified Purchase
Dr. Sophia Rose Arjana has written a masterful evaluation of the ways Eastern spirituality has been commodified in Western culture. From the appearance of what she calls "muddled orientalism" in films to the creation of retreat cultures like Burning man, the author shows how "Western", mostly American people, have used parts of "Eastern" spiritual traditions to create marketable, profitable, products. This is a book is a perfect theory text for university classrooms, but truly should be read by every yoga studio owner, retreat director, and practitioner of modern spirituality. Truly insightful!
One person found this helpfulReport abuse
JR
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Mystical Marketplace
Reviewed in the United States on 16 February 2021
Verified Purchase
Drawing upon research in multiple contexts, effectively demonstrates how the orientalist marketplace functions, commodifies traditions, and appeals to particular "consumers" of mysticism. Important for those interested in religious pluralism, spirituality, and interreligious relations.
------
Verified Purchase
Drawing upon research in multiple contexts, effectively demonstrates how the orientalist marketplace functions, commodifies traditions, and appeals to particular "consumers" of mysticism. Important for those interested in religious pluralism, spirituality, and interreligious relations.
------
Oct 05, 2020Yusuf rated it really liked it
This is an excellent book to explore the commodification of "the wisdom of the East" from Buddhism to Sufism. The writer uses the concept of "muddled orientalism" to capture the process of making a hot-pot of non-Western religions, practices and concepts. Yet, the book suffers from repetition, and it also makes a lot of effort to fit things into its narrative, sometimes too much.
To begin with, the main idea is that the Western consumers of mysticism distort religions and beliefs originating from the East. The problem is fixation to this idea ignores the fact that throughout history, all these beliefs and practices have been continuously evolving. Therefore, the current process can be considered as a part of ongoing evolution.
The author almost accuses new-age cults of being "fake" or "not real", as if "traditional" cults have the key for eternal truth. What makes a new age group less real than a traditional cult group? The author exposes the problems, such as sexual misconducts and charlatanry, of the modern cults, but ignores the fact that these problems are also widespread in traditional ones.
The problem of repetition is probably also related to the problems of academic writing. It is expected to develop a concept and revolve around this concept throughout the book, like an upward spiral. However, this also makes books hard to read and a bit dull.
I feel like I have mistreated this book because I really liked it. So, I do not want you to think that this is not a good book. I enjoyed it, and I think you should definitely read it, especially if you are into any kinds of spiritualism. (less)
To begin with, the main idea is that the Western consumers of mysticism distort religions and beliefs originating from the East. The problem is fixation to this idea ignores the fact that throughout history, all these beliefs and practices have been continuously evolving. Therefore, the current process can be considered as a part of ongoing evolution.
The author almost accuses new-age cults of being "fake" or "not real", as if "traditional" cults have the key for eternal truth. What makes a new age group less real than a traditional cult group? The author exposes the problems, such as sexual misconducts and charlatanry, of the modern cults, but ignores the fact that these problems are also widespread in traditional ones.
The problem of repetition is probably also related to the problems of academic writing. It is expected to develop a concept and revolve around this concept throughout the book, like an upward spiral. However, this also makes books hard to read and a bit dull.
I feel like I have mistreated this book because I really liked it. So, I do not want you to think that this is not a good book. I enjoyed it, and I think you should definitely read it, especially if you are into any kinds of spiritualism. (less)
I was excited to read this book as the commodification and consumerism of religious traditions is a timely and interesting subject. However, I think Arjana's book has not done this topic adequate justice.
As others have said, this book suffers from disorganization and repetition. The same examples of cultural appropriation – the retail website Goop, white immigrants to Bali, the fetishization of Tibet, the book "Eat, Pray Love,”, Oprah, several spiritual festivals – are cited continuously throughout the book. One page of the book may deal with five to seven topics from multiple religions. Sentences and paragraphs feel like they have no connection to the sentence or paragraph that came before them. Arjana cites excessive examples of "cultural colonialism" throughout the book with little to no analysis. Despite the book's cover and title indicating it is about religion, it includes discussion of non-religious cultural colonialism like interior decorating in restaurants and belly-dancing. It also includes some examples of cultural appropriation of non-Asian cultures such as African-American, African, Native American, and Ashkenazi Jewish. The book would benefit from more organization and fewer, more generalized, more focused examples with deeper analysis. The only deep analysis provided is in the final chapters. These are much more engaging and readable than previous chapters, but confusing if you have never seen Lost or Star Wars.
She continually quotes various academics who are usually thrown in with no introduction to who they are, what their work is, or how it is relevant. The quotes are typically not analyzed. The reading experience is, therefore, cumbersome and disjointed as the voice is constantly changing. The reader is expected to be intimately familiar with numerous cultures and religious traditions as well as critical theory, critical race theory, sociology, critiques of capitalism, and American pop culture. At times, I found myself having to look up what book a particular author wrote, what a "heterotopia" is (not a mythical land of straight people), or what the film "Crazy Rich Asians" is about. She introduces and uses terminology without defining nor explaining it. For example, referring to "Eat, Pray, Love as "priv-lit" which I did not realize until significantly into the book is a word-play on privilege and a prior existing critique of this book after googling this word.
As the book stands, the author does not include discussion of examples that would enhance her argument. She talks about the "performance" of Islam by white scholar Hamza Yusuf but omits Abdal Hakim Murad. She completely omits writing about Romani people. However, she repeatedly talks about the Bohemian fashion style derived from the French term for Romani people, Bohémien, but never included this information.
Surprisingly, she doesn't talk about the biggest propagator of Fake Hafez, Daniel Ladinsky. She includes some discussion of racial fetishization in skincare but altogether forgoes discussing the new Western obsession with Asian skincare with its apparent exotic ingredients that keep Asian women perpetually youthful. I think about the brand Tatcha started by a Taiwanese-American woman but is marketed as the secret beauty recipes of Japanese geishas, fake Korean beauty brands, and the brand "Rituals of Karma" selling beauty products off of Hindu theology. She misses this entire trend of Asian skincare, which would be a rich well to draw from in criticism of orientalism mixed with capitalism.
One of the book's most bizarre aspects is that the author will sporadically point out if a group of people or a particular person are white (ex. Coleman Barks) and then implicitly or explicitly attribute their behavior to being white. Yet she mentions people of color (ex. Deepak Chopra) doing the same thing and never mentions their race and provides no analysis. She analyses these people as if they are white. How can we attribute this behavior to someone being white then and not the general trends of consumerism and capitalism in modernity? Some of the non-white people she brings up (ex. Osho) did far worse things than other whites mentioned, but ideas of non-white spiritual authenticity and inherent white inauthenticity (ex. her discourse on Hamza Yusuf), which Arjana implicitly promotes the entire book, can lead to extreme harm and abuse by capitalizing charlatans. In my view, this is a source of tension and dissonance.
Arjana seems to position herself as uniquely self-aware and enlightened above her many subjects of criticism – white conservative Muslim converts, pseudo-Sufis, perennialists, yoga practitioners, American Buddhists, ex-pats in Asia, Oprah, etc. She shifts from viewing the subjects with sympathy to contempt and disdain. I question why Arjana, self-professedly white, positions herself as a voice speaking on behalf of billions of people. At one point, she quotes a scholar who notes how mixed-race Peruvians will follow indigenous traditions, but on what basis can Arjana criticize and dictate the religious practice or racial identity of Peruvians as a white American woman? She is as subject to the forces of modernity and capitalism as her subjects are, but she seems to broadly disagree with every practice of Eastern religion by Westerners asides from liberal academic versions, which go uncontested. Arjana unintentionally promotes a monolithic view of Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. There is the true, traditional, authentic Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam and the false, bastardized modern versions in conflict with them. Only brief lip service is provided to mention of sects or diversity.
I think Arjana is excessively critical of what I would see as cultural exchange and what she calls "cultural colonialism." I believe aspects of cultural exchange are simply inevitable in a globalized world. I am particularly concerned with condemnations of Buddhist-inspired psychotherapy as I don't see an alternative, nor is this a racist or superfluous appropriation. For example, dialectical behavioral therapy is Buddhism-inspired and the primary treatment for Borderline Personality Disorder. I'm not comfortable with the massive generalizations made about certain groups on very little information, such as her anecdote about how she knew someone who went to a Nur Ashki dhikr and saw someone fall asleep. I think we should differentiate between offensive and harmful appropriations versus those that are positive or benign. She sort of touches on this in her positive analysis of Lost and Star Wars, but if those are an “okay” form of cultural appropriation, then I don’t see why at least some of the myriad other things she lists aren’t then.
The title and cover are very misleading to the actual contents of the book. Rumi is discussed only briefly and on a surface level. I feel she should have discussed the construction of the modern American Buddhist movement. This book is entirely unapproachable to those who don't have an academic background in religious studies and related fields. It's also excessively broad and simply trying to cover too many religions with too many topics at once, leading to a lacking analysis. The book ends abruptly, and the conclusion is insufficient.
Ultimately, the author had a very different vision of what her book is then I imagined it, but overall it suffers from flawed analysis, disorganization, inconsistency, too much quoting, and too many examples covered. It feels like there is no conclusion and no direction to go from here. (less)
As others have said, this book suffers from disorganization and repetition. The same examples of cultural appropriation – the retail website Goop, white immigrants to Bali, the fetishization of Tibet, the book "Eat, Pray Love,”, Oprah, several spiritual festivals – are cited continuously throughout the book. One page of the book may deal with five to seven topics from multiple religions. Sentences and paragraphs feel like they have no connection to the sentence or paragraph that came before them. Arjana cites excessive examples of "cultural colonialism" throughout the book with little to no analysis. Despite the book's cover and title indicating it is about religion, it includes discussion of non-religious cultural colonialism like interior decorating in restaurants and belly-dancing. It also includes some examples of cultural appropriation of non-Asian cultures such as African-American, African, Native American, and Ashkenazi Jewish. The book would benefit from more organization and fewer, more generalized, more focused examples with deeper analysis. The only deep analysis provided is in the final chapters. These are much more engaging and readable than previous chapters, but confusing if you have never seen Lost or Star Wars.
She continually quotes various academics who are usually thrown in with no introduction to who they are, what their work is, or how it is relevant. The quotes are typically not analyzed. The reading experience is, therefore, cumbersome and disjointed as the voice is constantly changing. The reader is expected to be intimately familiar with numerous cultures and religious traditions as well as critical theory, critical race theory, sociology, critiques of capitalism, and American pop culture. At times, I found myself having to look up what book a particular author wrote, what a "heterotopia" is (not a mythical land of straight people), or what the film "Crazy Rich Asians" is about. She introduces and uses terminology without defining nor explaining it. For example, referring to "Eat, Pray, Love as "priv-lit" which I did not realize until significantly into the book is a word-play on privilege and a prior existing critique of this book after googling this word.
As the book stands, the author does not include discussion of examples that would enhance her argument. She talks about the "performance" of Islam by white scholar Hamza Yusuf but omits Abdal Hakim Murad. She completely omits writing about Romani people. However, she repeatedly talks about the Bohemian fashion style derived from the French term for Romani people, Bohémien, but never included this information.
Surprisingly, she doesn't talk about the biggest propagator of Fake Hafez, Daniel Ladinsky. She includes some discussion of racial fetishization in skincare but altogether forgoes discussing the new Western obsession with Asian skincare with its apparent exotic ingredients that keep Asian women perpetually youthful. I think about the brand Tatcha started by a Taiwanese-American woman but is marketed as the secret beauty recipes of Japanese geishas, fake Korean beauty brands, and the brand "Rituals of Karma" selling beauty products off of Hindu theology. She misses this entire trend of Asian skincare, which would be a rich well to draw from in criticism of orientalism mixed with capitalism.
One of the book's most bizarre aspects is that the author will sporadically point out if a group of people or a particular person are white (ex. Coleman Barks) and then implicitly or explicitly attribute their behavior to being white. Yet she mentions people of color (ex. Deepak Chopra) doing the same thing and never mentions their race and provides no analysis. She analyses these people as if they are white. How can we attribute this behavior to someone being white then and not the general trends of consumerism and capitalism in modernity? Some of the non-white people she brings up (ex. Osho) did far worse things than other whites mentioned, but ideas of non-white spiritual authenticity and inherent white inauthenticity (ex. her discourse on Hamza Yusuf), which Arjana implicitly promotes the entire book, can lead to extreme harm and abuse by capitalizing charlatans. In my view, this is a source of tension and dissonance.
Arjana seems to position herself as uniquely self-aware and enlightened above her many subjects of criticism – white conservative Muslim converts, pseudo-Sufis, perennialists, yoga practitioners, American Buddhists, ex-pats in Asia, Oprah, etc. She shifts from viewing the subjects with sympathy to contempt and disdain. I question why Arjana, self-professedly white, positions herself as a voice speaking on behalf of billions of people. At one point, she quotes a scholar who notes how mixed-race Peruvians will follow indigenous traditions, but on what basis can Arjana criticize and dictate the religious practice or racial identity of Peruvians as a white American woman? She is as subject to the forces of modernity and capitalism as her subjects are, but she seems to broadly disagree with every practice of Eastern religion by Westerners asides from liberal academic versions, which go uncontested. Arjana unintentionally promotes a monolithic view of Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. There is the true, traditional, authentic Hinduism, Buddhism, and Islam and the false, bastardized modern versions in conflict with them. Only brief lip service is provided to mention of sects or diversity.
I think Arjana is excessively critical of what I would see as cultural exchange and what she calls "cultural colonialism." I believe aspects of cultural exchange are simply inevitable in a globalized world. I am particularly concerned with condemnations of Buddhist-inspired psychotherapy as I don't see an alternative, nor is this a racist or superfluous appropriation. For example, dialectical behavioral therapy is Buddhism-inspired and the primary treatment for Borderline Personality Disorder. I'm not comfortable with the massive generalizations made about certain groups on very little information, such as her anecdote about how she knew someone who went to a Nur Ashki dhikr and saw someone fall asleep. I think we should differentiate between offensive and harmful appropriations versus those that are positive or benign. She sort of touches on this in her positive analysis of Lost and Star Wars, but if those are an “okay” form of cultural appropriation, then I don’t see why at least some of the myriad other things she lists aren’t then.
The title and cover are very misleading to the actual contents of the book. Rumi is discussed only briefly and on a surface level. I feel she should have discussed the construction of the modern American Buddhist movement. This book is entirely unapproachable to those who don't have an academic background in religious studies and related fields. It's also excessively broad and simply trying to cover too many religions with too many topics at once, leading to a lacking analysis. The book ends abruptly, and the conclusion is insufficient.
Ultimately, the author had a very different vision of what her book is then I imagined it, but overall it suffers from flawed analysis, disorganization, inconsistency, too much quoting, and too many examples covered. It feels like there is no conclusion and no direction to go from here. (less)
Sep 12, 2020Jen (Remembered Reads) rated it really liked it
An overview of religion-as-mystical-product in the United States (and to a certain extent Western Europe). There’s a strange combination of repetitive notes (a particular poor translation of Rumi is mentioned so often that I wished I’d kept a running tally) alongside such a broad scope that we don’t get much depth into any single element. Still, overall it was an interesting read.
For a general audience, the repetitive bits mean it’s not as readable as the blurbs would suggest, but if I were looking for a textbook to assign excerpts to for a class on the subject, some of the chapters here would be perfect. (less)
For a general audience, the repetitive bits mean it’s not as readable as the blurbs would suggest, but if I were looking for a textbook to assign excerpts to for a class on the subject, some of the chapters here would be perfect. (less)
Dec 21, 2020Gowaart rated it it was ok · review of another edition
This book is a mess. It deals with a highly interesting subject matter -- the ways in which orientalism, commodification and disenchantment have come together in what Arjana calls a "mystical marketplace" -- and brings a lot of great material to the table, but approaches it in such a broad and chaotic way that I have come away from reading this without feeling like I learned much that was new to me at all. Arjana's writing style is extremely dry and for most of the book she eschews analysis in favour of endless namedropping, the cataloguing of various examples, and superfluous direct quotations of earlier scholars. Usually these examples and quotations are only very basically contextualised, and important theoretical conceptualisations are discussed exceedingly briefly. Deeper analysis is only present in the last three chapters (which redeem the book somewhat), but even then tends to be fairly superficial. The reader is expected to be broadly familiar with many aspects of various religions, mystical traditions, critical theories, as well as modern popular culture, as Arjana tends to provide very little in the way of context. For example, to fully appreciate the final chapter, the reader will need to have seen both Lost (about which major spoilers are given) and Star Wars. As someone else noted here, the book is also extremely repetitive, often signalling more extensive treatment of certain examples in other chapters. All of this gives me the impression that a different book structure in which examples are more exclusively relegated to certain chapters where they are then dealt with more deeply would've been much more satisfying. As noted, the last three chapters do a better job at this and could've served as a blueprint for a more tightly argued book.
Aside from bad writing and messy organisation, I felt the book's attitude towards much of what it describes is also somewhat problematic. The many new religious and mystical movements or practices discussed are contrasted with those parts of traditional religions they are derived or appropriated from. By doing so it sometimes seems like Arjana implies that only the latter can lay claim to authentic religious experience, while the former are too mixed up with (post)modernism and capitalism to have any real value. Arjana does seem to be aware of this tension and addresses it more directly in the very short postscript, but she never really provides a satisfying solution. Much as these new religious movements are dominated by charlatans and rampant with problematic appropriations, is it not important that we still try to understand their appeal and the meaning many people find in these practices? Again, Arjana is not insensitive to this question, but her book does not present much in the way of an answer.
I came across this book out of an interest in modern appropriations/bastardisations of Rumi via Coleman Barks and others and the witty title of this book seemed to suggest that it would provide some helpful context to understand it. As it turns out, this single article is still more informative and vastly better written than Arjana's whole book:
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-... (less)
Aside from bad writing and messy organisation, I felt the book's attitude towards much of what it describes is also somewhat problematic. The many new religious and mystical movements or practices discussed are contrasted with those parts of traditional religions they are derived or appropriated from. By doing so it sometimes seems like Arjana implies that only the latter can lay claim to authentic religious experience, while the former are too mixed up with (post)modernism and capitalism to have any real value. Arjana does seem to be aware of this tension and addresses it more directly in the very short postscript, but she never really provides a satisfying solution. Much as these new religious movements are dominated by charlatans and rampant with problematic appropriations, is it not important that we still try to understand their appeal and the meaning many people find in these practices? Again, Arjana is not insensitive to this question, but her book does not present much in the way of an answer.
I came across this book out of an interest in modern appropriations/bastardisations of Rumi via Coleman Barks and others and the witty title of this book seemed to suggest that it would provide some helpful context to understand it. As it turns out, this single article is still more informative and vastly better written than Arjana's whole book:
https://www.newyorker.com/books/page-... (less)
Nov 06, 2021Clarissa D rated it really liked it
It's impossible to not be outraged by this book. It invokes white guilt over the cherished practice of yoga and all our favorite movies among other things.
I like how the book calls out religious freeloaders sampling the buffet of world religions, skimming the surface and leaving the substance. I hate how the book skims the surface of popular world views and leaves the substance, and the implication that pure religions exist needs a whole chapter. (less)
I like how the book calls out religious freeloaders sampling the buffet of world religions, skimming the surface and leaving the substance. I hate how the book skims the surface of popular world views and leaves the substance, and the implication that pure religions exist needs a whole chapter. (less)
Sep 03, 2021C rated it did not like it
This book had a lot of potential but sadly lived up to none of it. It was incredibly sloppy, lacked knowledge of the religious traditions it was examining and most irritatingly, despite claims otherwise, repeatedly treated Asian religious traditions as unchanging and unaffected by interactions with the publics around them. While it seems to be written for poplar audiences, the constant theoretical citations make me wonder who exactly is the intended audience for this text. In the end, I just couldn’t “buy” into any of the arguments put forth in this book and ended the book annoyed at the time I lost on reading it. (less)
Feb 05, 2022Nitesh Singh rated it really liked it
A fairly well-written and researched book but the content could have been better. Many of the repetitive things. Those who want to understand interreligious relations, how spiritualism has been made a commodity in western culture can read this book.
Oct 14, 2021Andrew rated it liked it · review of another edition
a great topic and fine arguments throughout, but the writing/editing made the book feel redundant and distracted from those fine arguments
