On p. 2 of the IPS Harris thread kela said, and which we discussed at length, that for Harris "the conception of consciousness [...] is clearly indebted to Advaita Vedanta, and apparently Yogachara, is not at all free from metaphysical preconceptions." In the section on mindfulness Harris acknowledges that neurologically we aren't 'present.' Yet phenomenologically being present is the bomb. Again it's about a state experience of subject/object dissolution that is the crux of his spirituality. (And not just his but some sects of his favored Buddhism.) Which state of course is healthy if kept in context, the latter being that it helps us overcome constantly living in anticipation of the future or remembering the past. It is the meditative state of "clear awareness" where we dispassionately observe the contents of our experience, which can lead to subject/object dissolution in consciousness without an object. That is how he, and many others, define spirituality, this state experience.
Granted this is an important and healthy state to pursue, but by itself it's 'spirituality?' Early on he does make the connection of this state to ethics, but as yet has failed to describe how this is so. I've done so in many past threads, but again not as a metaphysical system, at least in the traditional sense. For me spirituality is in how we behave toward others after learning the lessons of such state experiences, how a 'nondual' state allows for compassion and public actions that benefit the well-being of others. And I don't mean just teaching them how to achieve such states too, but giving them a hand up through public policy, through active engagement in social action. Having state experiences without that is just so much narcissistic and masturbatory fluff.