The monetization of mindfulness

[Dorothy Dandridge]

The New Yorker released a wonderful article on the history of commercializing mindfulness and other Eastern spiritual traditions in the west. The other day I was asked by @LuisDantas what I thought about secularing and reducing Buddhism to its most base form. In my reply I said that while bringing mindfulness to the masses is a wonderful thing, the movements disregard for self examination and deep exploitation of its very premise - especially by the elite - makes it spiritually hollow.

This article encapsulates my feelings on the issue. Corporate mindfulness is terrible, especially if they use it to justify and further continue their exploitation of America and the worlds denizens.

The Long Marriage of Mindfulness and Money - The New Yorker

A choice quote from the article:

“So we have Buddhism stood on its head. Mindfulness meditation has been brought into the service of a totally different perspective and world view.” By now, that’s part of a venerable American tradition.

What are your thoughts on this issue, RF?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Do you think that practising mindfulness is harmful when done outside of a Buddhist context?

 

[Dorothy Dandridge]

Do you think that practising mindfulness is harmful when done outside of a Buddhist context?

I wouldn't say so. The problem is that Pop Mindfulness often isn't even mindfulness, but a distilled, taken out of context and overly simplified version that only concentrates on the present moment. Rather than being something you use to train your mind, question your aims and decisions, and use to formulate conditional, logical, and compassionate reasoning sans attachment. Another issue is that it's advertised as the core and only aspect or benefit of meditation. I would be more open towards the Mindfulness Movement if it accurately represented what Mindfulness actually aims to be and that it also include ethical and other means tied to Mindfulness. Mindfulness is only one piece of the pie, and it feels dishonest to glorify mindfulness without compassion and things that are so intrinsically tied to it. It's like glorifying Jesus' miracles without having compassion for the poor: you have taken a message and butchered it. That said, America has had a long history with being reductionist towards philosophies (socialism/communism for example).

 

[Baladas]

I think that the spread of the practice of mindfulness is a positive thing, but I agree that it is hollow if divorced from self-examination and mental discipline.

 

[Dorothy Dandridge]

I find it to be a good and bad thing.

On one hand, I think it's great that it has gotten so many people interested in meditation and everything and this can lead them to possibly being introduced to the dharma. It also has legitimate health and mental benefits, and I think it's a good thing that people are starting to realize that the toil and push of modern life is spiritually defunct, and it's refreshing to just plunk down and meditate for 10-20 minutes.

On the other hand, people are now treating mindfulness and especially meditation as modern snake oil; a fashion accessory to show who is more Namaste than the other to accentuate Bourgeoisie privilege and pulpy pretentious pomp. This could prove the opposite of good and drive people away from meditation and the dharma, because people who do it are perceived as being elitist rich people who have their heads up their butts. More and more news reports are claiming meditation does EVERYTHING. How long till people view meditation as a bad thing and a fad?

So I think it's a two way street. It could lead to a renaissance in Dharmic religion thought - particularly Buddhism - or it could damage the future of the religions by being treated as a modern cure all.

Time will tell.

 

[LuisDantas]

It sure is disturbing to read things such as this.

Brendel’s fear is that meditation might make executives too mellow and compassionate; he described one client who asked for assurance that she could embrace Buddhist meditation and still fire people. Brendel expressed hope that “mindfulness culture” will remain focussed on “optimizing work performance,” so that people can achieve “genuine happiness and fulfillment.”

However, I think we should be realistic. People can only take one step at a time. It is unreasonable to expect those who have been bred and raised in a highly competitive and callous culture to simply change their worldview wholecloth in a few weeks or even months. They all have their pasts, their familiar references, their personal histories. It is entirely possible that a dedicated and fortunate few did benefit greatly and quickly from the Dharma they did learn, but we should expect most to have far less dramatic insights.

Nor is it all that clear that we should necessarily hope for faster, more dramatic renewal. Hard to accept as it may be, the truth of the matter is that societies tend to suffer from changing too fast. Families lose rapport, couples and friends distance from each other, general trust and familiarity drop.

Of course there are those who attempt to redress Buddhist Dharma into a guise that is more confortable for their previous expectations, even if that ends up distorting the Dharma's validity terribly.

But that is nothing particularly new. The Dharma has from the start been endangered by greed, laziness, pride, anger, proselistism, animism, perenialism, nationalism, ethnocentrism, syncretism, imperialism... you name it.

It is part of the Dharma's role to be expressed in environments that threaten to degenerate it. It could hardly be useful if it refused to.

Of course it will have to deal with the trappings of the places it meets. And of course there will be lots of disappointments, missteps and just plain mediocrity as a result. That is sad, but also the way of finding opportunities to make it blossom. We have to find and learn of our own shortcomings before we can hope to overcome them in any meaningful sense.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I think a problem is using the same terminology to describe two completely separate things. I my opinion, I see no problem in any type of meditation pop or not. Wherd I see the problem is classifying it under Buddhism. Suprisingly, not all Buddhist meditate. Over generalization with what they feel is a flexible belief system, when it is not, bothers me as well. Thats like taking communion, getting an emotional high from it, and not be Christian hence knownand practice the act and result of taking communion.

People.

I find it to be a good and bad thing.

On one hand, I think it's great that it has gotten so many people interested in meditation and everything and this can lead them to possibly being introduced to the dharma. It also has legitimate health and mental benefits, and I think it's a good thing that people are starting to realize that the toil and push of modern life is spiritually defunct, and it's refreshing to just plunk down and meditate for 10-20 minutes.

On the other hand, people are now treating mindfulness and especially meditation as modern snake oil; a fashion accessory to show who is more Namaste than the other to accentuate Bourgeoisie privilege and pulpy pretentious pomp. This could prove the opposite of good and drive people away from meditation and the dharma, because people who do it are perceived as being elitist rich people who have their heads up their butts. More and more news reports are claiming meditation does EVERYTHING. How long till people view meditation as a bad thing and a fad?

So I think it's a two way street. It could lead to a renaissance in Dharmic religion thought - particularly Buddhism - or it could damage the future of the religions by being treated as a modern cure all.

Time will tell.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So I think it's a two way street. It could lead to a renaissance in Dharmic religion thought - particularly Buddhism - or it could damage the future of the religions by being treated as a modern cure all.

I think meditation and mindfulness are generally helpful for people, and I'm not too worried how they come across it.

Here for example is some encouraging news about MBCT:
Depression: 'Mindfulness-based therapy shows promise' - BBC News

 

[Vishvavajra]

I'm with Dorothy on this one. In trying to divorce certain Buddhist methods from the rest of the Dharma, one typically ends up performing those methods incorrectly and to no real benefit. Meditation is something everyone should do, but it isn't easy, and there's a reason it's suggested that one learn it from a qualified teacher: it's easy to do it wrong and end up no better off, or even worse off, than before. By "worse off" I mean that people very easily come to conclusions that they're making progress that they're not, which can lead to self-justification and a deepening of certain attachments. Buddhist meditation is both the path to and the manifestation of selflessness. If people are meditating in order to bolster their egos and make them feel better about the terrible things they do for a living, then it's not doing them any good.

And let's face it, these folks aren't exactly in professions that foster compassion or even ethical behavior. If they'd existed back then, they would have been lumped together with butchers and soldiers as people whose livelihood makes practicing the Dharma extremely difficult. Then there's the fact that the culture, as the article states, has a strong tendency to twist things to its own ends, emptying them of meaningful content in the process. Really, is there anything American corporate culture touches that doesn't turn to ****? So we shouldn't be surprised, but at the same time it means there's a heretical Dharma gaining a foothold in certain areas of not-insignificant cultural influence, and that has the potential to mislead innocent people or turn them away from the true Dharma. It's the sort of thing that comes in for some harsh polemics in the scriptures for that reason.

 

[Dorothy Dandridge]

I think meditation and mindfulness are generally helpful for people, and I'm not too worried how they come across it.

Here for example is some encouraging news about MBCT:
Depression: 'Mindfulness-based therapy shows promise' - BBC News

But this ties into being treated as a modern cure all.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm with Dorothy on this one. In trying to divorce certain Buddhist methods from the rest of the Dharma, one typically ends up performing those methods incorrectly and to no real benefit. Meditation is something everyone should do, but it isn't easy, and there's a reason it's suggested that one learn it from a qualified teacher: it's easy to do it wrong and end up no better off, or even worse off, than before. By "worse off" I mean that people very easily come to conclusions that they're making progress that they're not, which can lead to self-justification and a deepening of certain attachments. Buddhist meditation is both the path to and the manifestation of selflessness. If people are meditating in order to bolster their egos and make them feel better about the terrible things they do for a living, then it's not doing them any good.

And let's face it, these folks aren't exactly in professions that foster compassion or even ethical behavior. If they'd existed back then, they would have been lumped together with butchers and soldiers as people whose livelihood makes practicing the Dharma extremely difficult. Then there's the fact that the culture, as the article states, has a strong tendency to twist things to its own ends, emptying them of meaningful content in the process. Really, is there anything American corporate culture touches that doesn't turn to ****? So we shouldn't be surprised, but at the same time it means there's a heretical Dharma gaining a foothold in certain areas of not-insignificant cultural influence, and that has the potential to mislead innocent people or turn them away from the true Dharma. It's the sort of thing that comes in for some harsh polemics in the scriptures for that reason.

It is hard for people like myself who do not have access to a teacher. All older buddhist sects I know have a teacher. Zen does yet people tend to practice it solo.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Unless meditation can bring them to the Dharma?

 

[Dorothy Dandridge]

Unless meditation can bring them to the Dharma?

When I first got interested in Buddhism I went to the zen center. I didn't know what to do and was taught meditation that day. Soon, I was told I could be taught further in the intro to Zen Meditation class that was open to the public. I ended up going and most of the people there, from what I saw, weren't really interested in Buddhism, but just the meditation. It wasn't exactly a secular thing either, though the abbot skillfully avoided things like karma, she did bring up the 4 Noble Truths and Eightfold Path for us to study. Despite this, I never really saw any of them again at the Zen Center aside from two people, who also said they had a pre interest in Buddhism.

So I like that many are being taught but how many people does it really translate being interested in the dharma and not meditation?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

When I first got interested in Buddhism I went to the zen center. I didn't know what to do and was taught meditation that day. Soon, I was told I could be taught further in the intro to Zen Meditation class that was open to the public. I ended up going and most of the people there, from what I saw, weren't really interested in Buddhism, but just the meditation. It wasn't exactly a secular thing either, though the abbot skillfully avoided things like karma, she did bring up the 4 Noble Truths and Eightfold Path for us to study. Despite this, I never really saw any of them again at the Zen Center aside from two people, who also said they had a pre interest in Buddhism.

So I like that many are being taught but how many people does it really translate being interested in the dharma and not meditation?

I wish I knew. Many people have a programmed christian world view so they may think of the Dharma as a list of dos and donts rather a guidence that instructs not replaces a way to find oneself. I also found meditation and zazen are quite different. So, I wouldnt know why they would call it a zen center when Zen does not stand alone without a teacher, traditonal trachings, and process of separating oneself from ego rather than just relaxing the mind.

Although quite popular, in Zen Mind Beginners Mind (book) I like how the author said zen is just to sit. There is no goal but enlightenment is the act (not the goal) of siting itself.

Meditation is not like that. If one is serious, Id hope they would practice Zazen and detach themselves from depending on the Dharma rather than studying and living it.

My therapist, in comparison, said to me once "the point of going to therapy is not to go to therapy." It is hard trying to cure onself without a doctor.

 

[von bek]

And let's face it, these folks aren't exactly in professions that foster compassion or even ethical behavior. If they'd existed back then, they would have been lumped together with butchers and soldiers as people whose livelihood makes practicing the Dharma extremely difficult. Then there's the fact that the culture, as the article states, has a strong tendency to twist things to its own ends, emptying them of meaningful content in the process. Really, is there anything American corporate culture touches that doesn't turn to ****? So we shouldn't be surprised, but at the same time it means there's a heretical Dharma gaining a foothold in certain areas of not-insignificant cultural influence, and that has the potential to mislead innocent people or turn them away from the true Dharma. It's the sort of thing that comes in for some harsh polemics in the scriptures for that reason.

^This.

If one is engaged in Wrong Livelihood, it is not doing them a favor teaching them to feel "good" about themselves. Genuine Buddhist practice is aimed towards dissolving the ego, not gratifying it.

I agree that Buddhism cannot be separated from morality and compassion.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It really floored me when Genpo Roshi initially upon his disclosure of Big Mind, had found a source of revenue that could be obtained by marketing workshops and such. It became apparent that the central theme revolved around a sense of "betterment" by which upon doing so leads people to some notion of accomplishment and used in this manner by which it's centrally focused upon exemplifying expected results themselves rather than meditation's pertenint value, by which insight is revealed.

Unfortunately, this clearly has morphed into a thriving cottage industry and quite a lucrative one to boot.

I think Brad Warner should start marketing his sock monkeys ........

 

[Vishvavajra]

When I first got interested in Buddhism I went to the zen center. I didn't know what to do and was taught meditation that day. Soon, I was told I could be taught further in the intro to Zen Meditation class that was open to the public. I ended up going and most of the people there, from what I saw, weren't really interested in Buddhism, but just the meditation. It wasn't exactly a secular thing either, though the abbot skillfully avoided things like karma, she did bring up the 4 Noble Truths and Eightfold Path for us to study. Despite this, I never really saw any of them again at the Zen Center aside from two people, who also said they had a pre interest in Buddhism.

So I like that many are being taught but how many people does it really translate being interested in the dharma and not meditation?

It's a good question. Our group, which is led by a student of Master Sheng Yen, advertises meditation as the draw, including a monthly stress-reduction workshop aimed at the general public. Then if they come to the center, there's meditation practice every week, and the Q&A sessions answer questions from a Buddhist perspective. Once a month there's a Dharma talk that is explicitly Buddhist in orientation, although it is geared towards practical applications. There are monthly retreats that are open to all, but they do involve prostrations before an image of the Buddha, as well as thanking Buddhas and bodhisattvas of the past, present, and future—plus another Dharma talk.

In other words, I guess the idea is to hook people with the promise that meditation will be good for them, which is true, and then gently expose them to the rest of Buddhadharma in a way that won't come off as information overload. Some stick around, while others come once or twice and then disappear. I really can't say how well this approach works, since I was interested in the Chan tradition for a decade before joining this group, which meant I was coming at it from the opposite direction of someone who already had the learning and moral precepts but lacked the strong meditation practice. But I think that's uncommon.

The difference in this case is that our group doesn't do anything for money (all donations are optional and only go towards maintaining the facilities), and even when stuff is aimed at non-Buddhists, the Buddhist element isn't eliminated or watered down, just expressed in a way that's easy for the average person to understand. Stuff like morality and compassion and generosity and selflessness are still very much essential to the practice. Our teacher is very easygoing and approachable, but his goal is to challenge people, not to make them feel better about themselves.

 

[Musty]

I've recently started reading Jon Kabat-Zinns Full Catastrophe Living after seeing his name come up a lot and wanting to know more about MBSR. I was partway through reading Thich Nhat Hanh's The Heart of the Buddha's Teaching and felt the need to take a step back from this and try out a more western secular approach to meditation. I think that this was in part because I was finding the sheer volume and variety of Buddhist teachings a little overwhelming and thought that MBSR would provide a distilled version of this.

I'm about a quarter way through the MBSR book and am already feeling drawn back to Buddhist teachings.That isn't to say the MBSR programme doesn't work for people but personally I'm not experiencing the same kind of connection with the practice that I did when I I was doing it within a Buddhist framework with it's four noble truths and so on. It was also a little off-putting that I felt the book was putting pressure on me to get the meditation CD's (Though you can find Jon's guided bodyscan and sitting meditation on youtube) in order to fully engage with the teaching, something I've never felt when taking the Secular Buddhist approach.

MBSR feels like Buddhism-Lite and there is a risk there is a risk that any subsequent benefits are going to be similarly superficial.

 

[Osal]

Well, if JKZ isn't doing it for you then go back to TNH.

The thing you may find though is that TNH and other meditation masters are not secular in their approach. If you want to learn meditation within a Buddhist framework, you'll have to reconcile the your seculaar leanings with the religious ones your teachers are likely to have.

It would be a good excercise, actually. Buddhism isn't really about what you believe. It's not about what you know. It isn't even about how or what you practice. It's about letting go of all that.