At 3pm on Saturday 29 August, Gallery Sa:Yu on the basement level of Center One in Haebangchon, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, was packed, with not enough folding chairs for everyone. Despite the challenging subject of ‘Talking about spirituality in a post-religious age’, the inaugural lecture by Professor Oh Kang-nam, an emeritus professor at the University of Regina in Canada and a comparative religion scholar, drew a sizeable audience. After listening to and filming the nearly 90-minute talk, I felt that it was less a lecture about religion than one about how to approach life.
Why people who have left religion are sitting down to meditate again
Professor Oh began by describing human beings as Homo religiosus, one of the many names used for our species. The term is based on the fact that no tribe without religion has ever been found, nor has any animal displaying religious tendencies. Religiosity, he said, is a uniquely human trait.
But he diagnosed a decline in the persuasive power of traditional religion. Systems of explanation built on an old view of the universe have lost their force as that worldview has changed, he said. The Dalai Lama’s call to move beyond the framework of heaven and hell was quoted alongside theologian Marcus Borg’s view that transformation, rather than heaven and hell, lies at the heart of Christianity.
The figures on the slides illustrated this trend. The proportion of people in South Korea who identify as having no religion rose from 56.1% in 2005 to 63.4% in 2022, reaching 81.9% among people in their twenties. In industrialised societies, secularisation is the dominant trend, he explained, while the three Scandinavian countries are, in practice, societies without religion. Bishop John Shelby Spong’s remark that the largest reunion in the United States is the ‘church alumni reunion’ was also introduced.
Yet religion may disappear without religious feeling disappearing, he said. People’s desire to understand the meaning of life has not diminished, but as traditional religions fail to provide answers, they are looking elsewhere. Young people with no religion attending temple stays and taking their seats in meditation classes were offered as evidence.
Superficial religion in decline, deep religion that will outlast the age
The lecture centred on the distinction between superficial religion and deep religion, a concept Professor Oh has explored for many years.
Six characteristics of superficial religion were identified: a self-centred focus on wanting things to go well for me now; an emphasis on unconditional and blind faith; literalism, or accepting scripture word for word; a worldview of separation in which the Absolute, the self, and the self and all things are divided; an exclusive and self-righteous attitude; and a focus on the afterlife.
Deep religion also has six characteristics: seeking one’s true self; understanding and enlightenment instead of blind faith; trying to read the symbolism of scripture and its underlying meaning; an awareness that all things are one; inclusivism and pluralism; and an attitude that places importance on the reality of ‘here and now’.
A sentence by theologian Karl Rahner appeared on the screen: in the 21st century, nothing is of value unless it is deep religion. Professor Oh did not reject the superficial level. Just as children naturally go through a stage of taking Father Christmas literally, it is natural to begin at the superficial level, he said. The problem comes when people are held there and prevented from going further.
The democratisation of mysticism: scripture is not information but transformation
One striking phrase was ‘the democratisation of mysticism’. In an age when people could not read, faith was conveyed through pictures; now anyone can read scripture directly and reach profound experiences. Whereas people who reached the deep level once appeared only sporadically, he said, they now emerge in abundance.
The analogy he offered for enlightenment was simple but memorable. As you climb a mountain, you see a park; climb higher and a lake comes into view, followed in turn by the sea, islands and the horizon. The ‘aha’ that arises at that moment is enlightenment, he explained, and religion is the continuation of those ‘ahas’.
He was equally clear about how scripture should be read. Scripture is not intended to provide information, he said, but transformation. Just as no one would exhume Picasso’s grave because he painted eyes in unexpected places, readers must look beyond the literal words to their underlying meaning and the context of the age in which they were written.
Oneness and awe: the two pillars of 21st-century spirituality
Professor Oh identified two points as especially important.
The first is the discovery that all things are interconnected, interdependent and one. Buddhist concepts of mutual identity and mutual interpenetration, Won Buddhism’s ethic of the threefold unity, the words of John 17:21 — ‘that they all may be one’ — and the Neo-Confucian scholar Jeong Ho’s idea of the unity of all things appeared together on one screen. This was followed by Albert Einstein’s description of the sense of separation as a kind of optical illusion or delusion, viewing human beings as part of the larger whole of the universe.
Donghak’s terminology was also given considerable attention. If one had to choose the religion best suited to South Korea, he said, it would be Donghak. There was si-cheon-ju, serving Heaven; in-nae-cheon, the idea that humanity and Heaven are one; and sa-in-yeo-cheon, serving people as one would serve Heaven. The threefold reverence for Heaven, people and all things was also introduced.
The second is awe: an attitude of marvelling at the mysteries of everyday life and finding meaning and joy through ‘aha experiences’. Sociologist of religion Phil Zuckerman, the audience was told, called this ‘aweism’, and Einstein’s words were quoted: the most beautiful emotion we can experience is the mystical emotion.
Questions and answers from the audience
The audience’s questions were lengthy and serious. Asked whether spirituality could really develop in future when people seemed to be gradually losing the ability to think deeply, Professor Oh replied: ‘It has always been the 5% minority who lead the 95% majority. I became hopeful when I saw young people gathering for temple stays and more young people taking up meditation.’ Asked why people were turning to meditation and mindfulness, Professor Oh said they needed a true self they could discover for themselves, rather than a salvation carried on their behalf by someone else.
In response to concerns about whether younger generations possessed that depth, he acknowledged that it would be difficult for everyone, but cited Arnold Toynbee’s observation that history is led by a creative minority. The direction, he said, nevertheless seemed clear. Asked about religion in the age of AI, he predicted that if work declined and free time increased, people might have more time, rather than less, to consider the meaning of human life.
The answer that stayed with me most came towards the end. Asked whether the deep level was the same in every religion, he said it was not so much the same as mutually intelligible. Some religions climb mountains, some walk along riverbanks and others follow forest paths. He added that the distance between the superficial and deep levels within one religion can be greater than the distance between the deep levels of different religions.
As unexpectedly profound questions continued, the discussion proved as deep and substantial as the lecture itself.
Leaving the lecture hall
After the lecture, Professor Oh looked cheerful as he exchanged greetings with the audience.
The proportion of religious people continues to fall. But the question ‘Who am I?’ does not. The rise of SBNR — spiritual but not religious — and the sight that afternoon of young people with no religion filling the chairs at a meditation centre reflect the same trend. I was left with much to ponder after reaching the conclusion that, if even a writer who has moved beyond religion can embrace a religion beyond religion, human beings remain religious in some sense.
Reporting and photographs = reporter Oh Hye-sun