We’re in the middle of the Mindfulness Boom as Buddhist-derived meditation practices enter the cultural mainstream. But is this the Dharma touching and transforming western society, or is Buddhism being turned into a self-help technique and a consumer product? Its time for Buddhists to start reflecting seriously on the mindfulness movement and to learn its lessons.
In a recent piece for the Guardian I commented that mindfulness is where Buddhism and the west meet. I want to explain why I think this development is so significant and why I’ve become I’ve become an MBSR/MBCT trainer, offering courses through Mindfulness in Action.
People in many countries are learning Buddhist-derived meditation practices on eight-week Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) and Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) courses. I regret not having figures for the number of people learning these or other Mindfulness Based Approaches (MBAs), but it’s clearly substantial and rising dramatically. There’s a growing body of scientific research and the media is buzzing with coverage of mindfulness. When bodies as diverse as the US Marine Corps and the UK Health Service employ mindfulness training, something really interesting is happening: Buddhist-derived practices are entering the mainstream of western societies
Engagement in mindfulness practice does not, in itself, indicate engagement with Buddhist values or teachings. Ohio Congressman Tim Ryan’s new book is called A Mindful Nation: How a Simple Practice Can Help Us Reduce Stress, Improve Performance, and Recapture the American Spirit. That raises the question of whether the American spirit and the ‘core American values’ mentioned in the blurb are really compatible with the Buddhist spirit and Dharmic values. (I’m curious to read the book).
The encounter between Buddhism and the West has many dimensions, some of which have far more depth than MBAs, but this still seems to me the most substantial development in the encounter between Buddhism and the West for many years. Buddhists are naturally concerned that the mindfulness movement is not spreading the Dharma but co-opting it: turning a profound vision of the human condition into a self-help technique. That’s a real danger, but I think this concern misses important aspects of what’s happening. Yes, MBA’s are secularised, professionalised and strip mindfulness and meditation from their Buddhist context; yes, what you can achieve in eight weeks is limited; yes, the understanding of mindfulness is partial. But that’s not all.
The Dharma has always been concerned with dukkha (suffering or unsatisfactoriness), its causes and its cessation. As Buddhism arrives in new cultures, and as those cultures change, the forms it takes are inevitably shaped by the distinctive character of dukkha in those societies. ‘Stress’, in its many forms is the predominant expression of dukkha in modern, western societies, so Jon Kabat Zinn’s Buddhist-derived Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction course addresses a core issue as the Dharma comes to the West. That’s why MBSR and its derivatives have had so much more traction than any other Buddhist-influenced project in western countries.
It turns out that the Buddha’s account of the causes of dukkha has much in common with the account of mental suffering developed by cognitive psychology and MBAs have become a meeting-point between Buddhism and modern psychology. Craving and aversion are psychological processes that CBT has recognised from its own perspective. I am very impressed by the meeting of these two fields in Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), which was developed by leading British and Canadian psychologists to address relapse into depression. (Actually MBCT and MBSR are very similar and we can largely discuss them together).
This has brought a further encounter: between Buddhist meditation practice and western scientific research in general. That’s an historic shift as Buddhism has long been associated with philosophers and poets in western countries rather than scientists. Research into MBAs, along with research into the brain activity of advanced meditators, is developing rapidly. The claims made for it are often overblown, but it is lending mainstream credibility to practices that have often been dismissed as navel gazing. Meanwhile, Buddhist-influenced scientists such as Francesco Varela have rethought scientific methodology to accommodate data deriving from introspection a well as experimental observation. These developments have allied Buddhism with developments such as the growing understanding of the brain’s neuro-plasticity – its capacity to develop new connections in response to mental activity – as well as to positive psychology and the happiness movement.
For all these synergies, MBSR’s stance remains counter-cultural, at least in the approach of Jon Kabat Zinn. It challenges the culture-wide emphasis on what he designates ‘the doing mode’, advocating the spacious, appreciative ‘being mode’ instead. Identifying a compulsive problem-solving ethos that shapes our responses to difficulties, Kabat-Zinn advocates a seemingly un-American open, mindful exploration of difficulties. This is also rather different from the British reliance on our stiff upper lips.
Most writing on the mindfulness movement is concerned with conveying the benefits of mindfulness to the general public. As a Buddhist and a mindfulness trainer I think we can go further and reflect much more fully on both its strengths and limitations. As I’ll discuss in future posts, I believe that the mindfulness movement has much to learn from Buddhism and Buddhists have much to learn from the mindfulness movement.
Great Blog. Thank You.
It reminded me of Aronold Toynbee’s observation “Buddhism has transformed every culture it has entered, and Buddhism has been transformed by its entry into that culture.
Fiona
Thank you for these fascinating, learned and open articles. I am researching mindfulness from a Christian perspective in its contemplative history, but as a counsellor am also interested in secular mindfulness. However, I don’t think it can be fully understood without understanding its Buddhist roots which as you say are deeper and wider than just mindfulness – so have been engaging in some dialogue (was at a recent Lambeth Palace initiative) with Buddhists.
Hi Vishvapani.
It’s obviously the case that it is better that people are learning about mindfulness as a way to alleviate their suffering than not. And that they have the option of not having to engage with Buddhist values where they don’t want to. As you know I teach meditation and Buddhism at the Manchester Buddhist Centre. On recent courses I have led I have chatted to a number of psychologists who are themselves teaching mindfulness. I have been struck by something which has made me a little sad. The psychologists I have met don’t seem all that interested in my opinion, even though I have 25 years experience practising and teaching. And what I take from that is that maybe in the interaction between Buddhism and secular mindfulness experience won’t be passed on, perhaps because it isn’t valued. It would be a shame if that aspect of things were ditched because it was Buddhist and so ‘outside’ of the secular remit. Am I just being paranoid? Or is it just early days? It would be good to feel my experience might be valued!
Good ‘Thoughts for the Day’ by the way.
Vish, thanks so much for this piece! Much of the debate about “McMindfulness” seems to be entirely uninformed about what the MBAs actually teach and practice. Contrary to the prevailing meme, these programs are not just meditation techniques but attempt to promote a radically different perspective on the whole of our lived experience. As you say, the MBAs are at the crux of the conversation between Buddhism and the West, and I hope we can engage in that conversation with non-judging curiosity and friendly acceptance — values that both Buddhism and the MBAs share.
Even the Buddha did not invent the relationship between conscious attention and mental health. He simply discovered it. As such, the concept is not the exclusive property of Buddhism or of Buddhists any more than other natural phenomena. It is understandable that Buddhists might feel threatened by western culture co-opting vipassana and re-branding it as mindfulness. However, this happened before the term mindfulness was ever coined. A glaring example is the meditation exercise developed by The Foundation of Human Understanding (http://www.fhu.com/), which has promoted it since 1961 in books, records, tapes, CDs, and on the radio. It was through the book and records “How Your Mind Can Keep You Well” that I first learned this type of meditation in 1970.
Buddhist tradition is not necessary for the effective application of any mindfulness meditation. It works not because of the meditator holding certain concepts in their minds while practicing, but because there is a real relationship between mental health and the act of directing conscious attention in the present moment to thoughts, emotions, and feelings.
This is not a reason for Buddhists to feel threatened. Rather, it is validation for the concepts and practices Buddhists have employed for thousands of years.
Its such a pity that there is such a lack of clarification when referring to ‘mindfulness research evidence’ using the buzz words and then presenting another model which doesn’t adhere to the training spec or guidelines of those like Jon Kabat-Zinn mentioned. Profiles of people teaching meditation for decades, or training in India etc can be very vague as can the word ‘buddhist’ All claims should be questioned especially when assosciated with being able to help with mental health diagnoses such as depression. I have witnessed harm from people claiming to be able to help with mindfulness. I guess balance will come after greed and delusion.
Wow. This is a great post. I’m surprised, mostly, because it’s so relevant to some of the thoughts I’ve been having on the mindfulness boom.
You raise good points that ‘doing’ is an important factor for mindfulness. I agree with you here. Though, I think meditation must ally itself with neurology for it to succeed and grow in a Western context. The west, at this point, is almost entirely empirical. All of its faith is placed on what can be observed. I get the sense that the subjective experience, the introspection, the interior world – whatever that space is that is explored with meditation – will be largely ignored by the Western populace unless it is promoted by the data of science. With neural imaging technologies, science will catch up with meditation.
Perhaps, doing would be best, and science is not ideal. But its a whole lot better than mindfulness left to industry. Industry, i think is the major threat this mindfulness movement.
Here is an article that i wrote which explains more of my view: http://www.mindedmind.com/2013/11/23/yoga-and-mindfulness-what-does-the-future-look-like/
Also, there is a post on the economist which is related: http://www.economist.com/news/business/21589841-western-capitalism-looking-inspiration-eastern-mysticism-mindfulness-business
Thank you for the great article and I enjoyed reading the comments. I admit I have an aversion to the co-opting/secularization and “branding” of Buddhist meditation, but came to realize that if I would truly wish for all beings to be happy and at peace, I can rejoice that many are helped by MBSR and its counterparts. From my experience, without the Three Jewels (Buddha,Dharma,Sangha)and the 5 Mindfulness Trainings, mindfulness would not be sustainable. I learned to love life (and save my marriage) through the teachings and presence of my beloved teacher, Thich Nhat Hanh. As Thay once said, “The world already has enough Buddhists”, meaning that the practice is more important than the form.
“Mindfulness” was first coined by T. Rhys-David in the 1880’s, stationed in Ceylon and reading the Theravada liturgical language of Pali. From there he deemed the translation “sati”as meaning mindfulness in English. Experiencing it’s renewal I’ll say mindfulness is a plague of positivity, and anyone can join in. Anyone can take an 8-week course and become an expert. This is the country we live in, a constant embarrassment to me and endless riches to others with short attention spans, until the next big thing.