You are quite right that I misspoke using the word "definition". Perhaps it would be clearer to refer to my original comment as my opinion regarding the purpose or role of religion, or perhaps core purpose. Religions can be an umbrella under which many social functions are aggregated and conducted or expressed. But at their core, it is their treatment of these questions: about the origins of the universe, why human beings exist, what is our purpose/function in life, and is there anything after this life, that we use to identify and differentiate different religious philosophies. I would argue that answering these question is their core purpose. If they are silent on these, then how is one to differentiate it from a secular social organization? What makes a religion a religion other than providing answers to unanswerable questions?
There are those already have the answer. For them, the purpose of their religion is to better understand that answer or even to validate it.
I would argue that what is real and existent is wholly independent of any person experiencing it. If every human being were to disappear tomorrow, all that is real and existent would continue to hum along without us. Reality does not require consciousness. We, however, need to be conscious to experience reality.
Perhaps, but there is really no way to verify your reality would hum along without you if you are not there to observe it. We already have evidence through the double-slit experiment that reality behaves differently when it's not being observed.
Quantum Theory Demonstrated: Observation Affects Reality