Spirituality for Sale
By Mo Edjlali
In a recent whackfulness article titled "Digital Deepak: A Byte of Enlightenment?", I briefly discussed Deepak Chopra and his association with the AI Foundation. Subsequently, just a few days ago, I watched this session featuring OpenAI CEO Altman and Buddhist teacher Jack Kornfield, which left me with mixed feelings. While I acknowledge and respect the intentions and capabilities of these individuals, I feel a sense of uneasiness in my bones. And sure I have my concerns about AI, but that was not what bothered me. I was disturbed a bit by the bromance on stage between these two powerful men. I could not help but wonder, are the spiritual teachers, like Deepak Chopra and Jack Kornfield who played a significant role in laying the foundation for mindfulness, now entangled with venture capitalists? And that leads me to an even greater concern:
If mindfulness and Buddhism become intertwined, and we offer mindfulness-related products and services for profit, are we effectively commodifying spirituality?
Don’t we need clear boundaries and separation of power between mindfulness, Buddhism/spirituality, and capitalism to maintain their integrity and preserve their distinct realm? There is much to explore on this topic, which led me to turn to ChatGPT4 for insight. I think AI is a powerful tool and continue to be impressed with how it can be applied. Here is the question I asked.
Paint a picture of a dystopian future in which spirituality is for sale, spiritual teachers actively use their influence to promote their personal interests and for profit companies use spiritual teachers as spokespersons. What effect will this have on us individually? On society? What can we look for as signs that this is happening?
The response was chilling, I was speechless. I did not feel like I was reading about a dystopian future, I felt like I was reading about the current state we are in.
Here is the response:
The commercialization of spirituality and its potential negative consequences is a critical issue. Let's envision a hypothetical dystopian future in which spirituality is commodified, spiritual teachers act out of self-interest, and for-profit corporations use spiritual figures as spokespeople.
Individual Effects:
- Loss of Authenticity: Individuals could lose access to authentic spiritual teachings. Teachings might be modified or diluted to increase marketability, rather than to guide genuine spiritual growth.
- Exploitation: People seeking spiritual guidance might become targets of exploitation. Spiritual practices might be sold as products or services with exorbitant costs, leading to a situation where only the wealthy can "afford" spiritual development.
- Misguided Decisions: If spiritual teachers use their influence to promote personal interests, they might convince followers to make decisions that are not in their best interests, whether that involves buying a product or supporting a cause that doesn't align with their values.
- Distrust and Cynicism: Individuals may start distrusting spiritual leaders and spiritual practices altogether, leading to cynicism towards spirituality and religion in general.
Societal Effects:
- Inequity: Spirituality, which traditionally has been accessible to all, might become another area of life where the divide between the rich and the poor widens.
- Commercialization of Sacred Traditions: Spiritual traditions could be stripped of their cultural and religious contexts and used for branding or marketing purposes, leading to the loss of sacredness and respect for these traditions.
- Erosion of Ethical Values: If the line between spiritual and commercial interests blurs, the focus could shift from selflessness, compassion, and enlightenment to profit, power, and status. This could impact societal values and behaviors negatively.
Signs that this is happening:
- High-Priced Spiritual Services: Spiritual services, such as workshops, retreats, and teachings, are consistently priced beyond the reach of average individuals.
- Profit-Oriented Spiritual Teachers: Spiritual teachers are visibly living extravagant lifestyles, inconsistent with the teachings they promote, or they seem more focused on their own financial gain than the spiritual growth of their students.
- Misuse of Influence: Spiritual leaders using their influence to promote personal interests, commercial products, or companies, especially when these do not align with the values of their spiritual teachings.
- Commodification of Sacred Symbols and Practices: Sacred symbols and practices being used for marketing or branding purposes in inappropriate contexts.
- Loss of Spiritual Depth and Meaning: Spiritual teachings seem watered-down, altered, or simplified in a way that makes them more marketable but less meaningful or transformative.
What do you think? Where is the conversation around this happening?
Welcome to our Wackfulness: The unexamined, sometimes silly, side of Mindfulness series, here we delve into critical thinking, alternative perspectives, and exposing collective blind spots in our field. While occasionally provocative, our intention is never to insult or disrespect beliefs. Join us for an honest debate where we aspire to grow and stay true to our shared intention. (note - thanks to some community feedback we have renamed the series Wackfulness, not to confuse our older readers with Whackfulness, we also have recategorized a collection of articles over the last four years that were the foundation for the launch of this series. You can go back and read all 17 here if you are finding this exploration of interest)
26 comments
No, Thanks for continuing to critically raise this issue of mcmindfulness.
Sorry, meant Mo!
David thanks for your comment, you and Ron very much helped highlight some of these issues and I am forever grateful to you all for creating the Mindful Cranks and for being bold enough to ask tough questions years ago. I have a slightly different take - I believe that the issue is not so much mindfulness and capitalism but mixing capitalism and Buddhism/spirituality. Appreciate your thoughts and comments as we play with this and explore more.
I'm reminded of my reaction in 2016 in the Mindful Life Wash.DC conference to the presence of all the mindfulness-certifying agencies and the message that sharing or teaching practice without being certified was misguided (I recall writing Mo a letter afterward). I was offended, even with all the privilege that I have, that many in the room would share but for the $10K and time required to become teachers.Three years later, I realized I did need that training if I wanted to validly and reliably share the practices and so went on to invest in myself to do so. I had realized that those qualified to teach were practicing right livelihood and, without that, could not be available to do that. Since then, I have donated more MBSR spaces than I've taken tuition, which is another lesson from my teachers. How does this relate to Mo's questions?
Despite the centuries of practice and evolution of the disciplines, we are only beginning to explore mindfulness for more than the few who can either afford it or dedicate their lives to it. There are many paths and none, at least that I've seen, that are free from potholes or dead ends. I admire folks like Christopher Plowman at Insight Timer who have sought to make as much content available for free as possible while remaining sustainable but I won't judge those who charge or make a profit, whatever that profit or use they make of that profit. We can and many will raise voices of concern about the many examples of Wackfulness that AI tells us we will experience (talk about Wackfulness...). I hope we avoid, however, what has become too common in the public square. Once I wrote that all we seem to do is talk at instead of to those we disagree with I'm afraid it's gotten worse - now we don't even talk at each other but about each other. Our safe spaces have become echo chambers and container building has become wall construction. Gratitude to you, Mo, for keeping the room open for this elephant.
I appreciate your insights, Chris, and it's given me food for thought. A question springs to mind regarding platforms like Insight Timer - while they do provide free content, isn't there still an aspect of monetizing spirituality? Much like Google, free content can be an effective marketing strategy. I can't help but question if these platforms, by blending religion, spirituality, and mindfulness, may further blur the lines.
Fair (as always) question, Mo! Since platforms can't exist without cost, and if we accept that right livelihood involves money for service or goods (too late to go back to bartering...), I feel we are stuck with blurry lines. I was told that Jack and Soren, without disclosing it during the conference, had become investors in OpenAI before sharing the stage with Sam Altman. If true, that smears the ink more than blurs it, at least for me. I don't feel Google is a fair comparison to Insight Timer, though. Google isn't free at all - we are just paying attention instead of money to Google as they monetize our addiction. As an Insight Timer contributor (disclosure), I get to choose to keep or donate whatever folks choose to contribute to me - there's an orphanage in Indonesia that gets a few bucks from me each year as a result. It's not much, but it's a line I can live with.
Thanks for your response Chris, I don't think any company is perfect, though I also think it's important to be honest about the business side of the equation with organizations like Insight.
I very much enjoyed your article and topic. However, this below was at the end of your article Digital Deepak and it puzzled me:
AI meditation teachers, immortal spiritual gurus? Where are we going? What do you think?
Eager to learn how to use ChatGPT and other AI tools? Great news – I'm developing a course to teach you precisely that. Sign up here, and we'll make sure you're in the know when it comes to course launch details.
The above seems to indicate you have made a decision about the very topic you were discussing and your concern. Perhaps I am not understanding fully, but after reading this article first and the Digital Deepak immediately after, I was left with being puzzled. I regularly consider this topic of commercializing/monetizing tools that support personal growth. Having said that, working in the National Park Service is how I was introduced to Mindful.org and am I ever so grateful!!
Hi Charlene, thanks for reaching out. It's great to hear that you discovered MindfulLeader.org through the National Park Service, and maybe even our friends at Mindful.org. You raise a great point, and one of my greatest concerns is hypocrisy in our field. To clarify - I'm a big believer in AI. I think it's an amazing tool and that it would help us all to understand it and learn how to use it. But, that doesn't mean I'm blind to its potential pitfalls. And I don't believe that using AI to create immortal spiritual gurus is ok either. I hope this clears things up a bit! In the context of that article on its own it does seem pretty odd to insert that bit and we might go back to add context. If you're curious to understand more of our thoughts around AI you might want to check out. Surviving the AI Apocalypse Mindfully, Move over ChatGPT, 3 New AI Tools , ChatGPT - 4 Things to Watch out For, 4 Ways ChatGPT Might Help With Mindfulness Facilitation.
Mo,
Thank you so much for your response! I also appreciate your strong and unequivocal statement of support for AI. I will read the article mentioned. My first instinct and internal response is "everything can and should be used as a tool for growth and development, and yes, enlightenment, too." This gives me the opportunity to sit with and ponder the nature of mind, and or not-ponder and just sit to watch the nature of my own mind in order to distinguish between acquired mind and what I will call the "great mind" that infuses all. Thank you!
Strong yes but I don't know if I would say unequivocal! And I appreciate the idea of seeing an opportunity for everything to be used as a tool for growth.
I, too, am concerned this. Thanks for continuing to raise these questions.
Thanks D! I hope to help raise the questions, have more dialogue around these topics, and move toward action.
Thank you for your insightful observations and comments Mo. This is endemic of the commercial world where everything is a commodity and deemed permanent, where as when I sit and meditate on my breath, I realize and humbled by how fragile my existence is. I am as confused as you are as to how AI can alleviate my suffering, understand the impermanence of life, as that is a personal spiritual journey through a mindfulness practice and inquiry through a life lived with gratitude, compassion, kindness and generosity. Finding the power of balance between a spiritually informed life to balance it as a parent, a partner, friend, a professional and an entrepreneur - to meet the daily challenges in life cannot be automated and generalized - as these are very unique individual imperfect journeys we are on. What we are seeing with these spiritual teachers seems a Terminal Case of Certainty - which is a contradiction to basic teachings I learned as a kid growing up in Sri Lanka of Dukkha, Anicca and Anatta. After many years of practice, I am finally realizing Anatta - "non self" in our fleeting life. Everything else is smoke and mirrors. May all beings be well and happy....
Thanks for your comments Lalith. I agree, the unique personal journey we each embark on through our religious or spiritual traditions can't be commodified or automated. It's about introspection and self-discovery, not certainty. AI can be a tool, whose place we need to sort out but it's no substitute for teachers or the community. As an agnostic myself, I see the blending of Buddhism with mindfulness as a potential part of the challenge. I have not had a problem with the idea of commercializing mindfulness but it does not feel quite right to commercialize spirituality.
Mo "commercializing mindfulness but it does not feel quite right to commercialize spirituality. " Thank you for naming that. As a longtime social worker, I waited for someone in my community to offer mindfulness until I could not wait any longer. I did the costly (time & $) training. It has been a great experience to be able to introduce mindfulness to people. No religion is involved and no money is involved. I am wondering "what now"? The seeds of mindfulness are planted. Am I done?
Thanks for your comment Anne and congratulations on completing training and helping others and no cost. The thought that comes up for me - once seeds are planted don't they need to be watered and nurtured? So they had then in turn produce more seeds?
According to Buddhism, as I understand, the most serious decision of a lifetime is to choose your spiritual leader. There are strict criteria for an authentic teacher.
Signs of a False Teacher:
- Impure Intentions
- Lacking True Realisation
- Close-Minded
Signs of an Authentic Teacher:
- Maintains ethical discipline
- Mind is tamed by meditation
- Afflictions are thoroughly pacified
- Has more qualities than the student
- Has enthusiasm for Dharma
- Has a strong spiritual education
- Honestly cares about others
- Has some degree of realization
- Is skilled in communication
- Unwavering perseverance
(source: UNVEILING YOUR SACRED TRUTH, Book Two, The Internal Reality, Shar Khentrul Jamphel Lodrö)
Maybe the question is whether you decided to follow a real spiritual path with commitment. If yes, critically assess your teacher based on the above criteria, then devote yourself to that path/teacher. Otherwise, you can easily find yourselves following a false teacher.
And this is not a contemporary challenge - false teachers in vast numbers are always there.
Thanks for sharing this resource, Tamas. It's important that teachers meet standards of transparency and accountability, steer clear of conflicts of interest, and are primarily dedicated to serving their community. In evaluating these standards, we should remain open to criticism and consider multiple perspectives, not just the criteria you've shared, or those that I or others might suggest. It's worth considering if the criteria for Buddhist and mindfulness teachers should be the same.
This is a really important conversation.
As I am delving more into spirituality, and more specifically eco-spirituality, I found an interesting and related text that suggests the following:
We are not consciously aware of the dominant spirituality of our times, which is defined by two key elements:
1- we have adopted a belief that consumption equals self-realization; 2- we are allowed to transform nature (including ourselves) as we wish (almost) for that purpose.
I am not sure to what extent this really holds, and it would need further investigation. But it changes the issue raised by Mo a bit in the sense that commodification is part of the new spirituality, and therefore difficult to question as it is intrinsic to the functioning of the dominant belief system. How can we question the following statement: "Within the confines of our respective states and its legislations, we are all allowed to find a way to earn a living (sell in the market our skills, knowledge, products...) and reap the benefits of these efforts, no?".
Thanks for raising this issue.
Bernard.
Great insights, Bernard. You've pointed out a major issue: the intersection of consumption and self-realization in our contemporary belief system, and the commodification of new spirituality. I believe historically religion and spirituality have helped counterbalance capitalism. I am very concerned about the mixing of the two. Is it ok to sell spirituality? Is mindfulness just a form of spirituality and Buddhism? Can we unlink spiritual growth from consumerism? Can we, (should we?) unlink mindfulness from spirituality / Buddhism?
Hi, Mo
I appreciate you consistently raising these big, important questions. I have several thoughts on these matters.
We haven’t entirely seen eye to eye on these matters, but I think we share this belief: we are distressed by the rapidity with which mindfulness is co-opted by consumerism. The movement toward making mindfulness a commodity has had multiple negative effects and create troubling distrust that we are no more than hucksters..
With regard to religion, our thoughts probably differ more significantly. An important concept from clinical ethics is that of informed consent. If you disclose information about the treatment you’re providing, treatment alternatives (without a bias), potential harms (using data), possible benefits (again, using data), it’s not causing harm, and it has more benefit than burden, you’re generally on pretty safe ground. I think the same thing applies to inclusion of religion in our practices. We should disclose the involvement of religion or spirituality. In the mindfulness sessions that I do, I specifically note that they are secular, although sometimes - when quoting some outside source - those sources might be religious. This is all disclosed on the sign-up form. I make it clear on that form, however, that I do not intend to promote religion even if there is a reference to religion or spirituality. I agree that workplace mindfulness meditation is not the place for religion: it divides people. I could imagine exceptions to that, however, if there was disclosure. My practice is to keep them separate (though I may quote a poem that uses the word God on occasion).
In addition, I worry that we may adopt a secularism that - in the effort to be inclusive of people who are not people of faith - effectively excludes the experiences of people of faith. How would this happen? By obsessively excluding any religious or spiritual experiences from conversation, reference, or discussion in the meditative context. There may be times where we read a poem, a quote, or make a reference to religion or spiritual experience with zero intent to promote a religion. That should be okay. We don't want secularism to become Pharisaical, religion of another color. We have to try to engage people where they're at and be willing to stretch ourselves into their space (without losing ourselves). I want meditation for everyone who wants it. The balance here is nuanced and we won't always get it right. We should avoid hard lines.
I appreciate you pushing the edges in these discussions and in our thinking, Mo. If we had these discussions over a beer, we'd discover we agreed on far more than we disagree on. :)
Resepectfully,
Mike
Mike this is great, what a wonderful contribution you have made to this conversation - I greatly appreciate your thoughts and the depth and perspective you bring. The idea of being careful not to alienate people of faith by being inclusive of people who are not of faith is a wonderful point that I think needs to be explored deeper. I also believe in the idea of transparency and disclosure, while figuring out how to incorporate the rich wisdom of religious traditions in a way that is accessible and beneficial to all. Thanks for providing the additional resources and your continued willingness to explore these topics with me! Ditto on the beer (or kambucha).
I appreciate this topic and your thoughts on it very much. Thank you. 🙏🏽 It has been on my mind a lot lately and I find myself becoming cynical about my practice at times wondering if I’m just a walking traumatized stereotype especially after the isolation of the pandemic. Yet it was during the early days of covid that the meditate together sessions felt at their most authentic to me- I still find gathering together very helpful and have life long connections and appreciate the safety of the new paid membership site.
In general, I do find myself searching for fresh language and ways of being but maybe that’s part of the overall marketing impact of “Spirituality for Sale” making me think briefly that I, too, need the next new thing. I think also I am feeling that authentic gifts are freely given from the heart and not for sale with an upgraded version or a retreat not to be missed or a course that will make me a better leader or employee etc… So many corporations and organizations seem to be using mindfulness/meditation terms as part of their branding or public virtue signaling or to check the employee wellness box. And the subject of appropriation of various elements, images and languages from diverse Asian cultures perceived to be spiritual both for money and branding is a whole other subject.
Supporting teachers and leaders and the infrastructure of Mindful Leader is important as with other teachers I follow. In the larger world I feel the impact of the “pseudo mindfulness’ language and posturing that has gained tremendous momentum right down to the steaming cup of Simple Truth coffee that I’m sipping while my Zen space salt lamp glows next to a likeness of the Buddha. (purchased from a major retailer online).
Humans…
I am following this timely topic with interest.
Leave a comment