No abstract

While historically sharing the characteristics of a universalistic religion and a modernist grand narrative, global Buddhism is mainly the product of a late modern development. Centripetal forces with circulating ideas, practices, and institutions have been part of a liberal market in an open exchange society with “open hermeneutics” and an accessible universal grammar. Its global focus has triggered de-ethnification, de-culturalization, and de-territorialization, claiming transnational universality as a central paradigm fit for a global world beyond isolationalist particularism. However, such seemingly universalist versions of a global Buddhism in recent years, mainly in North America, have been criticized for actually being representations of particular cultures (e.g., “white Buddhism”) with benefits for only particular segments. This article investigates the discourses of this new turn, involving questions of authority, authenticity, identity, cultural appropriation, and representation. It is suggested that criticism of global Buddhism should be seen as typical of what could be called “postglobal Buddhism,” in which identity politics is a frame of reference serving as a centrifugal force, signaling a new phase in “Western Buddhism.” The relevance for the study of religion is further discussed with reflections on how to respond to post-global religious identity politics without being consumed by either stark objectivism or subjectivist go-nativism.

This article is based on a quantitative study of two rather distinct religious traditions (Buddhism and Christianity) sharing the same ethnic origin (Vietnamese) in the same host nation (Denmark). It investigates the possible relations between religion and acculturation, and looks at whether various forms of religiosity and religious belonging are plausible variables in acculturation perspectives. Our analyses suggest that there is a clear tendency that Catholics, on a number of variables, are more likely than Buddhists to be oriented towards own ethnic and religious identity, and that religion and religiosity seem to be negative factors in integration processes. However, we also conclude that a broader complex of variables defines the field of study, including type of religion, religious engagement, socialisation, and general relations to host culture.

Mindfulness has become a phenomenon with widespread appeal in many Western countries. Like yoga, it has an Eastern religious origin, but through a long history it has been transformed and adapted to new cultural and social contexts. While the majority of research on mindfulness has been conducted within the health sciences, the aim of this article is to investigate the distribution, meaning and function of this practice through quantitative mapping and qualitative interviews with 16 mindfulness providers in the city of Aarhus in Denmark. The analysis reveals not just a booming phenomenon, but also a field characterized by diversity in terms of authority claims, motivations and uses. The discussion focuses on whether mindfulness can be seen as a religious practice or as a typical expression of an individualized and secularized technique.

No abstract