Today, when discussing the 'other' and 'spirituality', it is necessary to make some clarifications, both regarding the terms and the concepts they encompass.
When addressing the topic of the 'other', we first need to understand which type of other we are referring to: the Other with a capital O, as in religious traditions? Or the other as a generic equivalent of 'others' from my perspective? Or perhaps 'other' as that collection of obscure and/or profound alterities of each individual's soul?
Secondly, we need to determine how we classify the different 'others' we have encountered: hierarchically, indiscriminately, or critically? For example, when considering the other in the context of different cultures, do we adopt a monocultural perspective that favors one culture deemed superior, a multicultural perspective that treats all cultures equally, or an intercultural perspective that sees differences as important for productive cross-fertilizations?
Clarifying the term and concept of 'spirituality' adds even more complexity and, therefore, interest. Setting aside any reference to 'spirituality' as a vague religious sentiment—a concept currently quite popular—it can be defined as that horizon of meaning in which speculative rigor is accompanied by moral rigor. This horizon can thus encompass very different 'things' from very distant places: from Socrates to Laozi, from the Hellenistic Schools (Epicureanism, Stoicism, Skepticism, etc.) to the 'spiritual' Franciscans, from Sufi Masters to Zen Buddhism Masters, from Meister Eckhart to Nisargadatta, from Spinoza to Wittgenstein.
