˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ

International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

MINDFULNESS, CULTURAL APPROPRIATION, AND THE GLOBAL DIFFUSION

OF BUDDHIST CONTEMPLATIVE PRACTICES

Mario Poceski (University of Florida)

ABSTRACT

The chapter explores the growing popularity and global spread of the practice of
mindfulness. It is especially concerned with the ongoing process of decoupling mindfulness
training from its traditional Buddhist origins, and its deployment in a variety of secular contexts.
That includes the teaching and practice of mindfulness techniques in hospitals, schools, and
corporate environments, commonly without an acknowledgement of their Buddhist background.
Among the questions being asked is whether such sucularised uses of mindfulness can be
understood to constitute potentially problematic cases of cultural (mis)appropriation.

KEYWORDS

Mindfulness, Contemplation, Theravada, Cultural Appropriation, Secularization, Globalization,

Meditation

1
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

INTRODUCTION

The practice of mindfulness (P: sati; S: sm‫܀‬ti; C: nian ⾝) has a long history and well-
established pedigree as a key component of Buddhist contemplative training, as well as an
important idea with significant ramifications for many aspects of everyday life. In contemporary
contexts, mindfulness practice is most often associated with the Theravada tradition. Nonetheless,
VLPLODU LGHDV DOVR DSSHDU LQ D QXPEHU RI 0DKƗ\ƗQD VRXUFHV LQFOXGLQJ ĝƗQWLGHYD¶V (fl. 8th c.)
Bodhisattva Way of Life (%RGKLVDWWYDFDU\ƗYDWƗUD) or the records of various Chan/Zen masters. 1
At a basic level, the practice involves the cultivation of attention or awareness of what is
transpiring in each and every moment, within and outside of oneself—without judgement,
addition, or subtraction. It can be done as a formal meditative exercise, like mindfulness of
breathing, or in the less structured context of everyday activities. This type of awareness can also
serve as a foundation for a broad array of other Buddhist practices, as formulated in South,
Southeast, and East Asian Buddhism.
In this article, I address salient aspects of the growing popularity and ongoing globalization
of the practice of mindfulness. I am especially concerned with the use of mindfulness teachings
and techniques in non-Buddhist or secular settings, such as hospitals, schools, and corporations,
often without any overt mention or acknowledgement of their Buddhist background. Among the
questions I broach is whether such non-religious uses of mindfulness can be construed to constitute
potentially problematic cases of cultural appropriation (or misappropriation). While most of my
discussion revolves around the fortunes and misfortunes of mindfulness teachings in America, the
main line of argument presented here also fits into the broader study of the ongoing globalization
of Buddhism, and the acculturation or application of its teachings and practices outside of their
original contexts.

MINDFULNESS TRAINING

The value of mindfulness as a building block of a Buddhist path of practice and realization
is evoked or elaborated in a number of canonical texts. For instance, “correct mindfulness”
(P: VDPPƗ-sati; S: samyak-sm‫܀‬ti) is the seventh of the eight steps of the Noble Path, as well as the
first of the Seven Factors of Awakening. In this and other instances, the practice is integrated
within an encompassing vision of a progressive path of practice and realization, which culminates
with the realization of spiritual liberation and the ultimate solution of the essential problem of
human suffering and imperfection. Accordingly, mindfulness practice is closely related to other
forms of spiritual cultivation, including ethical observances, and is imbedded in a specific
worldview and a set of values that guide human behavior.
Among the best-known examples of a canonical formulation of mindfulness practice is the
Satipat‫ܒ‬KƗQD 6XWWD 6FULSWXUH RQ WKH (VWDEOLVKPHQW RI 0LQGIXOQHVV LQ WKH 3ƗOL FDQRQ RI WKH
Theravada tradition. 2 This seminal text presents the cultivation of mindfulness as a direct and

1
For instance, see ĝƗntideva, 1997: 148-53, Hurvitz, 2009, and Sharf, 2014.
2
The text is part of the Majjhima Nikaya; there is also a longer version in the Digha Nikaya. In the Chinese Buddhist
canon, there is the Nianchu jing ⾝嗽䴻 (S: Sm‫܀‬W\XSDVWKƗQDVnjWUD), a translation based on a Sarvastivada version of
the scripture (T 26, vol. 1; in Zhong ahan jing ᷕ旧⏓䴻 24). There are several English translations. For instance,
see Nyanaponika, 1996: 129-50; and ÑƗ৆amoli, 1995: 145-55.

2
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

singular path of practice that can lead to the elimination of suffering and the attainment of spiritual
liberation. It encompasses four modes of practice, the so-called four foundations of mindfulness:
mindfulness of body, feelings, mind, and mental objects (or phenomena). 3 In terms of practical
application, the most widely used method is “mindfulness of breathing” (P: ƗQƗSƗQDVDWL; S:
ƗQƗSƗQDVP‫܀‬ti), which as implied by its name makes use of the natural process of breathing as the
focal point of meditative awareness. Its best-known canonical formulation appears in
the ƖQƗSƗQDVDWL 6XWWD of the Majjhima Nikaya (Middle-length Discourses), which explains the
basic technique and its benefits in some detail. 4
At a basic level, the practice of mindfulness involves the cultivation of awareness or
attentiveness on what is transpiring within the mind and body of the practitioner, as well as within
the immediate surroundings. The aspiring adept is instructed to simply observe the various
physical sensations, feelings, and mental processes that unfold at any given moment, without
engaging in any form of subjective reaction or judgment. Such awareness can be cultivated on the
meditation cushion, as a formal or structured practice, undertake in either solitary or communal
settings. There is also the option of deploying it within the context of everyday life, while engaged
in prosaic activities such as walking, eating, or doing household chores. 5
Mindfulness training is supposed to have a calming and settling effect on the mind. That is
accompanied by assorted physical and emotional benefits, including relaxation and stress-
reduction. Nevertheless, within the context of traditional forms of Buddhism, its ultimate objective
is to facilitate realization of reality—seeing things are they truly are. That, in turn, is said to lead
to release from imperfect life in samsara and attainment of spiritual liberation. In that sense, from
the outset the inducement to practice encompasses both utilitarian objectives and lofty spiritual
ideals, even though the second group is deemed to be more important.

GROWTH OF MINDFULNESS PRACTICE IN AMERICA

The practice of mindfulness, along with a constellation of spiritual ideals and perspectives
related to it, has been a growing part of the American religious landscape for several decades. 6 Its
expanding popularity is closely related to the increasingly global reach and impact of Buddhism,
whose teachings and practices have spread to various parts of the world. At the outset, mindfulness
was introduced as part of spiritual teachings and meditation techniques associated with the
Theravada tradition of South and Southeast Asian Buddhism (especially Burma/Myanmar and
Thailand, and to a smaller degree Sri Lanka). Its practice has also been promoted by Buddhist
WHDFKHUV ZLWK 0DKƗ\ƗQD DIILOLDWLRQ PRVW QRWDEO\ 7KtFK 1Kҩt Hҥnh (1926-), whose teachings
incorporate elements of Zen and Theravada. 7
There have been several conduits for the diffusion of Theravada teachings and practices in
North America and other parts of the world. Some of them are related to notable demographic
shifts, especially increased immigration from predominantly Buddhist countries in South and
Southeast Asia. While Theravadin monks who settled in America and other Western countries

3
ÑƗ৆amoli, 1995: 145. For modern renderings and interpretations of the canonical text, see Thich, 2006, and
Silananda, 2012.
4
ÑƗ৆amoli, 1995: 941-48. For additional details, see Shaw, 2015.
5
For an example of approach that focuses on the integration of mindfulness into everyday life, see Thích, 2013.
6
For a survey of some of the analogous developments in the UK, see Bluck, 2006: 25-64.
7
Pertinent examples include Thích 2013 and Thích 2006.

3
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

have tend to focus their efforts on ministering to the needs and interests of their Asian
parishioners, 8 some of them have been active in teaching and popularizing the practice of
mindfulness. 9 To that end, they have given meditation classes or retreats, sometimes geared
towards non-Asian participants. There are also several contemplative communities led by Western
monks, such as Wat Metta in the vicinity of San Diego, headed by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (1949-),
and Abhayagiri Monastery in Norther California, which follows the Thai Forest Tradition of
Theravada Buddhism, especially as formulated by Ajahn Chah (1918-1992) and Ajahn Sumedho
(1934-). 10 Nonetheless, overall the isolated efforts to establish traditional monastic forms of
contemplative Theravada in American settings have not been a resounding success, at least in
terms of scale and general impact on the American religious landscape.
Outside of select monastic or ethnically Asian enclaves, the practice of mindfulness has
tended to be primarily associated with a small but dedicated cohort of Vipassana practitioners, also
known as the Insight Meditation movement. Its American followers (or participants) tend to be
Caucasian and middle class (or above), and not all of them readily self-identify as Buddhists. Even
so, their basic approach to meditation, including the practices of mindfulness, tend to be inspired
or based on the teachings of prominent modern masters from Southeast Asia, such as Mahasi
Sayadaw (1904-1982) from Burma and Ajahn Chah from Thailand. 11 In America, among the
movement’s main figures are Joseph Goldstein (1944-) and Jack Kornfield (1945-). Originally
trained in Asia, both are founding members of the Insight Meditation Society, which have played
key role in the diffusion of mindfulness practice in America. 12 Jack Kornfield is also closely
associated with Spirit Rock Meditation Center, situated in a quiet hilly area of West Marin County,
north of San Francisco, which offers a range of residential retreats as well as non-residential
programs. 13
The communal and institutional nexus of the Insight Meditation movement revolves around
the meditation retreat. It can be described as a spiritual or psychotherapeutic boot camp of sorts,
centered around the structured and deliberate cultivation of meditation and mindfulness. There is
also a variety of meditation groups, typically in urban centers, that meet for communal meditation
practice, at regular or improvised schedules. While the retreat institution is a major feature of
American Buddhism, its modern origins go back to the large meditation centers that grew in Asia
during the second part of the twentieth century, such as those established by Mahasi Sayadaw and
his followers in Burma. 14 These centers made the practice of meditation accessible to large number
of lay people, a novel development in Theravada history.
Retreats can be of varying lengths, from a couple of days to a few months. Some of them
are held regularly at retreat centers established for that purpose, usually in rural settings, while
others are organized ad hoc at meditation centers or rented spaces. A prime example of a Vipassana
establishment that specializes in this kind of retreats is the aforementioned Insight Meditation
Society, established primarily for American practitioners in 1976. Located in Barre,
Massachusetts, it offers many different retreats, taught by both resident and visiting teachers.

8
Seager, 1999: 136-46.
9
A prime example of that is the best-selling Mindfulness in Plain English, written by Henepola Gunaratana, a Sri
Lankan monk who established a meditation center in West Virginia. See also Seager, 1999: 151-52.
10
See https://www.abhayagiri.org/home (accessed 8/15/2017), and Seager, 1999: 154-57.
11
See Clough, 2014, and Ajahn Chah, 2001.
12
Coleman, 2002: 77-81. For Goldstein’s teachings about meditation, see Goldstein, 2003. For a general overview of
the Insight Meditation movement, see Fronsdal’s chapter in Prebish and Tanaka, 1998: 163-80.
13
See https://www.spiritrock.org/programs (accessed 8/2017).
14
Braun, 2016; and Jordt, 2007.

4
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

Another prominent example is the Spirit Rock Meditation Center in California, which is a sister
establishment to the one in Barre.
These and other Vipassana groups offer streamlined and somewhat secularized forms of
contemplative practice, including mindfulness training. Their basic outlooks and practices tend to
be grounded in the Theravada tradition, but they are also adapted for an American clientele that is
largely driven by specific utilitarian concerns, such as search for personal happiness, sense of
contentment, general well-being, or stress-reduction. To that end, certain Buddhist concepts with
popular appeal—such as karma (interpreted in a specific way), love, and kindness—might be
highlighted. 15 However, others that are culturally alien or of little interest to an American audience
without background in traditional forms of Buddhism, such as reincarnation, merit-making, or
ritual, tend to be downplayed or glossed over. 16
Similarly, within the Insight Meditation movement there is a tendency to emphasize the
intersections of Buddhist meditation and psychology (or psychotherapy), often in relation to a
general interest in self-help techniques geared towards self-development and search for personal
happiness. 17 This is not an isolated case, but reflects a general tendency to articulate Americanized
and secularized forms of Buddhism, meant to resonate with the views and predilections of sizable
segments of American society. This kind of secularized Buddhism tends to be divested of many
traditional aspects of Buddhist religiosity, and be in tune with mainstream values and prevalent
scientific paradigms. According to a prominent proponent of such new form or representation of
American (or Western) Buddhism, the truth and value of Buddhism, in its essential (non-religious)
form, can be established by recourse to contemporary science, especially neuroscience,
evolutionary psychology, and cognitive science. 18
In contrast to the emphasis on monasticism in traditional Theravada Buddhism, the
American Vipassana movement—like most of American Buddhism—tends to be an almost
exclusively lay phenomenon. Moreover, many of the people going to retreats or engaging with the
practice are not necessarily Buddhists or overtly religious, at least in a traditional or conventional
sense. Others might espouse multiple or hybrid religious identities, in which Buddhism is but one
of several constituents. Nonetheless, in its fundamental approach, the Vipassana movement is still
recognizably Buddhist, despite its outright rejection or benign neglect of assorted aspects of
Buddhist culture and traditional forms of piety. That is not necessarily the case with other
prominent actors in the burgeoning mindfulness sphere, as some of them downplay or hide the
Buddhist origins of mindfulness practice.

MINDFULNESS FOR HEALTH, WELLBEING, AND PRODUCTIVITY

The recent growth and popularity of mindfulness practice represents a significant stage in
the broad diffusion and mainstreaming of Buddhist beliefs, teachings, and practices into American
society. The spectrum of actors that participate in this process is by no means restricted to
individuals and groups connected to the Insight Meditation movement. There are, as already noted,

15
For instance, see Salzberg, 2005, and Goldstein, 2003, esp. 93-108, 123-38. For the role of ethics in the movement,
see Fronsdal, 2002.
16
For a critique of traditional Buddhist doctrines, including reincarnation, articulated by a prominent proponent of
“secular Buddhism,” see Batchelor, 1998.
17
Pertinent book examples include Kornfield, 2009, and Epstein, 1998.
18
Wright, 2017.

5
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

courses and retreats offered by Theravada monks, or the network of Vipassana groups and centers
run by the disciples of S. N. Goenka (1924-2013). At the other end of the spectrum, there are those
who care little about Buddhism, and who apply Buddhist meditation techniques purely in secular
contexts, primarily for dealing with practical issues such as pain and stress reduction. It is
noteworthy that in the process of such secular adoptions, Buddhism tends to become sidelined, or
even completely disappears from the picture.
The growing acceptance of secularized forms of mindfulness practice and their deployment
in a variety of non-Buddhist settings encompasses numerous schools, healthcare centers,
businesses, governmental agencies, and universities. Among these secular or irreligious
deployments of mindfulness teachings, a trend that commands increasing popularity is the use of
mindfulness as a psychosomatic technique or therapeutic remedy. According to the proponents of
this kind of secularized approach, mindfulness supposedly can help in medical settings when
dealing with anxiety, pain, and illness. Additionally, it can enhance one’s overall sense of
psychical and mental well-being.
It is interesting to note similarities between this approach and the popularity of qigong 㯋
≇ practice in communist China. For several decades, the qigong system of physical and mental
exercises was promoted by the Chinese government as a unique and potent healing regiment—
with Chinese rather than Western origins—that was perfectly aligned with scientific research and
in tune with modernity. 19 However, by the late 1990s, the movement’s exponential spread and
rising religiosity, evidenced in the fast growth of large groups such as Falun Gong, led by Li
Hongzhi (1952-), came to be perceived as threats to the communist party’s monopoly of power
and authority. That led to a sharp change in policy, exemplified by the proscription of Falun Gong
and the harsh suppression of its followers.
The secularist trend in the appropriation of mindfulness techniques is exemplified by the
ideas and writings of Jon Kabat-Zinn (1944-) and other authors, who aim to strip mindfulness (or
other Buddhist forms of meditation) of their Asian origins and unique religious roots. Instead, a
secularized form of the practice is linked with science, which is construed as the ultimate
benchmark of truth and arbiter of reality. The decoupling from Buddhism—and religion, more
generally—apparently serves as a shrewd marketing ploy, meant to mainstream mindfulness and
bestow on it a potent sense of scientific legitimacy. 20 With Buddhism gone, mindfulness can
become a freestanding technique that can be harmonized with a preexisting worldview or
integrated into a predictable set of secular norms and values.
Early on, Kabat-Zinn studied with several Buddhist teachers, including Thích Nhҩt Hҥnh
and Seung Sahn (1927-2004). Relying on his medical background, he pioneered the mindfulness-
based stress reduction program (MBSR). He started with a modest stress-reduction clinic at the
University of Massachusetts, but over the subsequent decades the program has been adopted by
numerous hospitals and other health organizations. 21 There are also numerous instructors, who

19
Palmer, 2007.
20
See Pickert, “The Mindful Revolution,” Time, Jan 23, 2014 (http://time.com/1556/the-mindful-revolution/;
accessed 3/1/2017); Perser and Cooper, “Mindfulness’ ‘truthiness’ problem: Sam Harris, science and the truth
about Buddhist tradition,” Salon, 12/6/2014
(http://www.salon.com/2014/12/06/mindfulness_truthiness_problem_sam_harris_science_and_the_truth_about_b
uddhist_tradition/).
21
His numerous publications include Kabat-Zinn, 2009, Kabat-Zinn, 2013, and Kabat-Zinn, 2001.

6
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

offer structured series of classes based on the program, open to whoever is interested and can
afford the cost. 22
Other prominent mindfulness evangelists include Chade-Meng Tan, originally a software
engineer, who was employed by Google as their Jolly Good Fellow and tasked with promoting an
upbeat version of the practice within the company (and beyond). 23 To that end, before his departure
in 2015, he offered mindfulness training classes at Google, as a way of helping its employees
manage stress, find happiness, and increase productivity. This approach represents a growing trend
towards establishing close ties between the mindfulness movement and corporate America, within
a capitalist system where the central concern is the company’s bottom line. Within such milieu,
the technique is primarily used for increased productivity and business success, which lead to
accelerated wealth creation, especially for upper management and the shareholders.
The mindfulness movement has also made some inroads into the political arena. That is
best exemplified by Congressman Tim Ryan (Democrat from Ohio), who has advocated the use
of federal money for mindfulness research and its teaching in schools. Among other things, the
congressman has organized meditation sessions at Capitol Hill and has written a popular book on
mindfulness and its potential to transform society (praised by Bill Clinton, with a foreword by
Kabat-Zinn). 24 According to him, in addition to personal benefits, such as stress-reduction, the
widespread practice of mindfulness can rejuvenate America by, among other things, facilitating
the rediscovery of its true values, reshaping the economy, improving healthcare, and enhancing
military performance.
The application of mindfulness in clinical settings, companies, and other secular
environments is accompanied by a slew of medical and scientific studies—often not of the highest
quality or reliability—which purport to document its positive impacts on health and other related
benefits. 25 At times, its proponents make even larger claims about it extraordinary benefits, which
go beyond the procurement of worldly gains such as personal health and happiness, increased
productivity, professional success, acquisition of wealth, and development of “emotional
intelligence.” These can also include, we are told, even the realization of such lofty goals as the
growth of human consciousness and the realization of world peace. In fact, according to over-
enthusiastic promoters such as Kabat-Zinn, mindfulness might even hold the key to human and
planetary survival, by ushering a new “global renaissance.” 26
Part of this kind of repackaging of mindfulness practice seems to be driven by a desire to
reach a broad American audience, beyond the narrow confines of the Buddhist community. That
includes those who may feel uncomfortable about engaging with an exotic or foreign religious
tradition such as Buddhism, or may have a more generalized anti-religious bias. To such receptive

22
For examples of such programs, see http://www.mindfulness.com/ and http://mbsrprogram.org/.
23
In addition to his public lectures, Tan’s ideas about mindfulness and personal growth are expressed in his best-
selling book, Tan 2014.
24
Ryan, 2013.
25
Some of the problems associated with such scientific studies are discussed by Willough Britton, a neuroscientist at
Brown University and a Buddhist practitioner, in an interview published by the Buddhist magazine Tricycle
(https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/meditation-nation/; accessed 3/1/17). There is also a blog post in Tricycle, featuring
neuroscientist Catherine Kerr, regarding the problematic portrayal of mindfulness meditation research in the media;
see Heuman, “Don’t Believe the Hype” (https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/dont-believe-hype/; accessed 3/1/17).
26
See, for example, the transcript of a Jon Kabat-Zinn interview given to Insights at the Edge, at
http://www.soundstrue.com/podcast/transcripts/jon-kabat-zinn.php?camefromhome=camefromhome (accessed
3/1/17); also discussed in Perser and Cooper, “Mindfulness’ ‘truthiness’ problem.”

7
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

audiences, assorted teachers, gurus, and psychotherapists present mindfulness as a convenient and
effective form of therapy, a potent method of self-help, and perhaps even much more.
Over the recent years, the growing popularity of mindfulness have inspired the creation of
a small cottage industry of books, seminars, and lectures. These are led by an assortment of self-
proclaimed teachers, experts, and authors, who seem eager to carve their own space within the
burgeoning self-help arena, and cash-in on the growing acceptance and interest in the mindfulness
movement. Consequently, there are now glossy magazines such as the bi-monthly Mindful, which
advertises itself as “the voice of the emerging mindfulness community” and “the place to go for
insight, information, and inspiration to help us all live more mindfully.” 27
In a special “limited” edition of Mindful, we find an interview with actress Sandra Oh—
whose large and lovely picture graces the cover—about the reasons behind her meditation
practice. 28 Readers are also provided with advice about how to tame their “toughest emotions,”
and given five reasons why they should try the practice: ease one’s stress, be able to focus better,
enhance the ability to work smarter, establish connection with loved ones, and tap into inner joy. 29
Well-known mainstream publications, such as Time and Newsweek, have also jumped on the
mindfulness bandwagon, by producing special issues on the topic. 30
For those who are very busy and on the go—and are perhaps also addicted to their
smartphones—there is also a large variety of mindfulness apps. Pertinent examples include
iMindfulness, Smiling Mind, and Mindfulness Daily. 31 Open you phone, tap on an icon, and
(presto!) you gain an instant entry into a cheerful realm, filled with joy and peace. Then you can
(hopefully) integrate a centered inner state, developed with the help of an app, into what is
important to you: professional work, love life, hobbies, or whatever. It is that easy, we are told,
and it can be done by just about anyone.
The commodification of the originally Buddhist practice of mindfulness and its increased
integration into mainstream consumer culture has led to the promotion and selling of a repackaged
and secularized form of meditation, which is largely divested of both ethical considerations and
otherworldly concerns. Putting aside the lack of firm religious or ethical moorings—seen as
advantageous by some—the newfangled form of mindfulness seems to be lacking in a capacity to
critically examine and counter prevalent cultural values, including the pervasive consumer
mentality that afflicts contemporary society and the neoliberal capitalist ideology that underscores
it. It also seems to be unable to inspire serious rethinking of mainstream mores and dominant
power relations, or pose a challenge to the sociopolitical status quo. In fact, it can be seen as an
expression of mainstream values, prevalent therapeutic notions about selfhood, and ideological
orientations that are imbedded into the sociopolitical status quo.

27
For the magazine’s homepage, go to http://www.mindful.org/.
28
Sandra Oh is also featured on the cover of April 2014 issue of the magazine, which contains a discussion with her
on the “joy of being mindful.”
29
See https://mindful-magazine.myshopify.com/products/get-started-with-mindfulness-special-edition-pre-
publication-discount (accessed 3/10/2017).
30
Time, Mindfulness: The New Science of Health and Happiness (09/02/2016); Newsweek: Mindfulness, Special
Edition (2017).
31
For reviews of these apps, see Marlynn Wei, “What Mindfulness App Is Right for You?” The Huffington Post,
8/24/2015 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marlynn-wei-md-jd/what-mindfulness-app-is-right-for-
you_b_8026010.html; accessed 3/1/2017).

8
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

CRITICS AND DEFENDERS

The mainstreaming and commodification of mindfulness have elicited both incisive

criticisms and determined defenses. Detractors can readily point out to the mindfulness
movement’s manifest superficiality, even outright banality. There are also the exaggerated or
unproven claims of success in dealing with all sorts of problems and ailments, accompanied with
an apparent failure to deal with larger ethical and structural issues, which are behind many of the
varied forms of suffering and injustice we witness in the world daily. Referring to the secularized
and striped-down method as McMindfuness, some critics have pointed out that by decoupling
mindfulness from its Buddhist moorings, which include strong ethical foundations, the practice
tends to turn into a facile and self-centered form of self-help. 32
Thus applied, the secularized practice of mindfulness may end up reinforcing the basic
causes of human suffering and imperfection. These, according to traditional Buddhism, are
traceable to unfortunate human proclivity towards misguided views, harmful attitudes, and
unwholesome behaviors. According to canonical formulations, at their core these unfortunate
tendencies are driven by deeply entrenched human propensity towards greed, hatred, and
ignorance. Instead of critically examining prevalent assumptions and problematizing mainstream
values, the practice thus becomes a convenient tool for helping people manage their stress and
alienation, caused by rushed and unexamined lives that unfold within an unhealthy society that is
driven by a consumerist mentality. As they blindly pursue careers and obsess about status and
money, within the context of exploitative institutions and corporatist structures rife with all sort of
problems and inequities, individuals pursuing the mindfulness fad miss valuable opportunities for
deeper reflection and genuine transformation. In that sense, rather than problematizing or
challenging the status quo, the practice is coopted by egoistical agendas or corporate interests, and
turned into another cipher in a pervasive, narcistic, and destructive culture of utilitarian
individualism.33
Some of the critiques of the mindfulness movement tie up into broader assessments of the
increasing commodification and corporate takeover or exploitation of religion and spirituality. As
has been aptly described by Jeremy Carrette and Richard King, the pervasive cultural impact and
overwhelming dominance of global capitalism has extended into the overlapping spheres of
spiritualty and religion. 34 Entrenched market forces and corporate interests have rushed in, eager
to tap into or co-opt people’s vague yearnings for spirituality. In part, they have done that by
offering tools that seem to enable individuals to retreat from or deal with some of the tension and
unpleasantness that characterize modern life.
The targets of Carrette and King are much broader, as they include all sorts of “spiritual”
phenomena—such as feng shui, holistic healing, new age gurus, and yoga retreats. Nonetheless,
their analysis also applies to the corporatist or business side of much of the mindfulness
movement. 35 What we are witnessing is the emergence of novel forms of capitalist spirituality, in
which a tacit economic agenda and neoliberal ideology infiltrate social and cultural spheres that in

32
Purser and Loy, “Beyond McMindfulness,” Huffington Post (8/31/2013); http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ron-
purser/beyond-mcmindfulness_b_3519289.html (accessed 3/19/17).
33
See Bellah, 1996.
34
Carrette and King, 2005.
35
For a survey of the business side of the mindfulness movement, including some of the prevalent marketing strategies,
see Wilson, 2014: 133-58.

9
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

the past have been dominated by traditional forms of religiosity. 36 That also raises the issue of
entrenched neo-colonial attitudes, especially as it pertains to the contemporary appropriation of
ancient Asian beliefs, symbols, and practices, including mindfulness and other types of meditation.
That is especially the case in specific secular milieus, where they are de-traditionalized and put
into different uses, under general rubrics such as personal development or self-help.
At the same time, others have argued for the value and utility of secularized versions of
mindfulness practice. If mindfulness can bring about certain benefits to individuals (and
communities?), isn’t that something to be embraced and celebrated? Even if its specific
deployment is at times driven by corporate interests or egotistical consideration, are we still not
better with it, given the alternatives? Not to mention that the practice can (purportedly) offer real
benefits, such as healing and relaxation, without the usual corruption and mumbo-jumbo that
accompanies organized religion.
Furthermore, traditional Buddhism has all sorts of problems of its own, and its institutions
have not always lived up to the lofty ideals they are supposed to embody. Getting rid of them,
along with the whole cultural baggage that accompanies them, can be a useful strategy for
introducing essential aspects of Buddhist-inspired spirituality, albeit in a modern and simplified
form, to contemporary audiences with little or no interest in Buddhism (or any other religion, for
that matter). That also ties up with a general sense of disillusionment with traditional forms of
institutional religion, even if in American and European contexts Buddhism tends not to be
perceived as the main culprit.
Given all the alternative ways of thinking and acting in this world, isn’t it good if
individuals are given practical and cutting-edge tools that can enable them to pause and reconnect
with the present moment, so that they can reduce their stress and pain, rejuvenate their brain, and
perhaps even attain a measure of “enlightenment?” 37 In the same vain, how can one argue against
giving disadvantaged children in inner cities “new” tools for dealing with assorted forms of social
pathology and dysfunction, which they face in the course of their everyday lives? Moreover, if the
expungement or glossing over overt manifestations of traditional Buddhism is necessary for the
mainstreaming and broad diffusion of some of its basic insight and practical techniques, especially
contemplative forms of spiritual cultivation, isn’t that a price worth paying? After all, the Dharma
is said to be formless, even though it can manifest in a variety of forms and guises, in accord with
times and circumstances.

CULTURAL APPROPRIATION

The debate about the pros and cons of promoting secularized forms of mindfulness will
probably not be resolved anytime soon. One can make cogent or potentially valid arguments for
each of the opposing points of view. It might also be possible to find some kind of rapprochement
or accommodation, a middle way of sorts, whereas respect for tradition and drive for adaptation
are somehow reconciled. At any rate, the whole situation elicits several relevant questions, not all
of which can be addressed here. For instance, how do we properly assess the secularized
deployments of the specific technique and their alleged potential to bring about various benefits?

36
Carrette and King, 2005: 4.
37
Goldstein, 2012.

10
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

What are we to make out of the shifting or porous boundaries that separate spirituality from
religion?
There are also concerns about the appropriation and commodification of ancient religious
practices and their selling to unwitting consumers. That brings us to the problem of cultural
appropriation. Can the contemporary drive to mainstream and secularize mindfulness practice, in
order to deploy it in secular contexts such as schools, hospitals, and corporations—in part by
divesting it from its Buddhist origins—be construed as a form of cultural appropriation? Or
perhaps we can take that a step further, and ask if it can be deemed to be an instance of cultural
misappropriation, involving an important element of Buddhism?
It is undeniable that religious traditions change and adapt in the course of their historical
development. That is especially true as they move to new social and cultural milieus, as part of
their transmission to new lands and diffusion amidst different populations. The story of Buddhism
is a good example of such processes. For instance, it is irrefutable that Buddhism changed in
numerous ways and at many different levels during its transmission and development in China.38
Even after Buddhism became acculturated and firmly established as a central part of the Chinese
religious landscape, it continued to alter and adjust, although not always for the better. That process
continued into the modern period, as Chinese Buddhists adopted several stratagems in their efforts
to adapt and respond to the challenges of modernity. 39
From a historical perspective, it is apparent that Buddhist traditions are never static, as they
continuously evolve in response to all sorts of internal and external factors. What is new or
different in the present context is the apparent disappearance of Buddhism from the scene, as
evidenced by the manifest failure to properly acknowledge its central role in the development and
transmission of mindfulness practice by a large segment of the mindfulness movement. In that
sense, I am not sure we can assume that the mindfulness movement represents just another chapter
in the long historical evolution of Buddhism, as argued by some. 40 As Buddhism is pushed to the
sidelines, especially in the American context, it is replaced by something quite different: a curious
mixture of science, (pop-)psychology, self-help technology, and new age blarney, repackaged as
a novel healing or personal development paradigm.
Generally, cultural appropriation refers to the adoption or adaptation of specific elements
of one culture (often a minority or foreign one) by people from another culture (usually a majority
or dominant one). Cross-cultural exchange, appreciation, imitation, or borrowing, as well as
creative processes of cultural fusion or hybridization that can lead to the creation of new cultural
forms, are not necessarily bad things. In fact, they have been important factors throughout human
history, and are also major trends and pressing issues in our increasingly global word. It may thus
be unwarranted to take the cultural appropriation critique too far, by (for instance) arguing
stringently against a California take on sushi, which according to some purists might unacceptably
diverge for an undiluted Japanese prototype. Nonetheless, the whole process can be deemed to be
questionable, and potentially turn into misappropriation, when a dominant culture steals, harms,
or misuses key elements from a minority culture. The whole thing is made even worse when that
is done for personal gain or corporate profit, without permission from the original culture, and in
ways that can negatively affect its integrity or position in society.
A short publication like this cannot fully cover all pertinent angles and issues that pertain
to the fluid relationship between the mindfulness movement and Buddhism. The same goes for

38
See Poceski, 2014.
39
See Poceski, 2016.
40
For instance, see Wilson, 2014.

11
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

their adaptation strategies and evolving positions within American society. We can also put aside
for another discussion the exaggerated claims about the huge and varied benefits of mindfulness
practice, or the potentially questionable motifs and competencies of the various actors active in the
burgeoning mindfulness arena. However, it seems reasonable to argue that in this instance we are
facing an example of cultural appropriation, for better or worse.
It seems unconscionable, I think, to make use or exploit ancient cultural or spiritual
practices, such as mindfulness, without proper acknowledgement of the religious tradition that
have invented, nurtured, and transmitted them. At the end of the day, this becomes an issue of
personal and professional integrity, as well as intellectual honesty. That is even more the case
when we consider the consumerist character of most of the secularized mindfulness movement,
which involves manifold strategies for monetizing an ancient contemplative technique, sometimes
in ways that might evoke comparison with the snake oil merchants of yore.
From moral and legal perspectives, this can perhaps also be interpreted as a form of
infringement of intellectual property rights, even though Buddhist have never bothered with
copyrights or trademarks, when it comes to their techniques and practices. What would a large and
powerful corporation—like Apple, for instance— do if someone infringed in this manner on its
intellectual property? Furthermore, if mindfulness is a truly potent practice that can make genuine
contributions to the betterment or advancement of humanity, then at the very least the central role
of Buddhism, the religious tradition that created and transmitted the original practice, should be
explicitly acknowledged, rather than being glossed over or buried out of sight. Conversely, if there
is something unwholesome or profoundly wrong with Buddhism—or with religion in general—
then perhaps stringent proponents of secularism and scientism should abstain from appropriating
(or pilfering) select elements from the vast Buddhist repertoire of concepts, doctrines, and
practices.
It is difficult to foresee Buddhists becoming overly concerned about legal issues such as
copyright. The same goes with trademarking a term or practice such as mindfulness along the lines
of what companies do with their intellectual property, even if there were organizations or bodies
that can speak for the whole Buddhist community. That is very unlikely to happen in part because
of the diffused and decentralized character of Buddhist organizations. Namely, Buddhism lacks
common institutional frameworks and centralized sources of authority that can talk and act on
behalf of the religion as a whole. Such state of affairs has a long history, and can be both a source
of strength and weakness, depending on circumstances.
Buddhists themselves have often been complicit in the potentially exploitative processes
described above. With some notable exceptions, they have failed to articulate strong and sustained
critiques of the mindfulness movement or other instances of cultural appropriation. Even so, maybe
there should be stronger calls for intellectual honesty and proper disclosure regarding the
background and origin of the practice, from within and outside of Buddhism. More specifically,
all parties might benefit from an open acknowledgement of the central role of Buddhism, past and
present, in the formulation, transmission, and propagation of mindfulness (and other related ideas
and practices).

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In this short chapter, I surveyed some of the recent (and ongoing) transformations and
adaptations of mindfulness meditation. The originally Buddhist practice, traditionally anchored in

12
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

rich traditions of canonical teachings and contemplative practices, was slowly modified or adapted
in the course of its global spread in the modern world. That is especially notable when we look at
the ways it entered new lands like America. There it reached audiences with different mores and
horizons of expectation, who for the most part were not interested or steeped in traditional types
of Buddhist culture or worldview. The recent development of secular forms of mindfulness
practice, often referred as the mindfulness movement, is another stage in that protracted process.
However, in an interesting twist, at this point Buddhism becomes pushed to the wayside.
Curiously, even the term “meditation” often disappears from the lexicon, as the mindfulness
movement tries to align itself with mainstream (consumerist) values and use the authority of
science to promote its increasingly fashionable technique.
Glossing over overtly religious goals such as spiritual awakening and self-transcendence,
the purveyors of secularized mindfulness as a technique of personal growth purport to offer help
with physical healing, overcoming of stress or other psychological problems, and success in all
sort of mundane endeavors, including enhanced work performance and productivity. One can
perhaps perceive some positives in these developments, as elements of Buddhist worldviews and
technologies of spiritual cultivation enter popular culture and effect public consciousness, albeit
in indirect ways and watered-down forms. It might be early to judge, but it is possible that the
mainstreaming of mindfulness can bring benefits to certain populations, and can perhaps even
change society for the better, even if we do not quite buy into all the hype engendered by
mindfulness evangelists and entrepreneurs.
However, there are also darker or less enthusing aspects of these developments, including
the basic issue of cultural appropriation discussed in the previous pages. It might be helpful to
bring that more to the fore—along with a greater appreciation for intellectual rigor and nuance—
in future discussions of the practice and the growth of the mindfulness movement. That can be
accompanied with an insistence on greater intellectual honestly, moral/spiritual integrity, and full
disclosure.
There might be additional benefits accruing from an enhanced dose of candor and honesty.
For instance, clear acknowledgment of the role of Buddhism can pave the way for a more open
and nuanced assessment of the mindfulness movement. Bringing traditional Buddhist models and
perspectives into the discussion may facilitate better understanding of some of the problems and
downsides—including missed opportunities and things lost— that seem to befall most of the
mindfulness movement, which represents a notable case of spiritual commodification and cultural
appropriation. In the same vein, that might be also an opportunity for Buddhists to reflect on some
of the problems and challenges faced by their religion, especially as it evolves in (post-)modern or
global contexts. That, however, remains a topic for a future publication.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Ajahn Chah. (2001). Being Dharma: The Essence of the Buddha's Teachings. Boston: Shambhala.
Batchelor, Stephen. (1998). Buddhism Without Beliefs: A Contemporary Guide to Awakening.
New York: Riverhead Books.
Bellah, Robert N., et al. (1996). Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American
Life (Updated Edition with a New Introduction). Berkeley: University of California Press.

13
 ˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

Bluck, Robert. (2006). British Buddhism: Teachings, Practice and Development. London:
Routledge.
Braun, Erik. (2016). Birth of Insight: Meditation, Modern Buddhism, and the Burmese Monk Ledi
Sayadaw. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Carrette, Jeremy, and Richard King. (2005). Selling Spirituality: The Silent Takeover of Religion.
London: Routledge.
Clough, Bradley S. (2014). “Mahasi Sayadaw of Burma.” Lewis, Todd, ed. Buddhists:
Understanding Buddhism Through the Lives of Practitioners. Chicester: Wiley Blackwell:
157-64.
Coleman, James William. (2002). The New Buddhism: The Western Transformation of an Ancient
Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Epstein, Mark. (1998). Going to Pieces Without Falling Apart: A Buddhist Perspective on
Wholeness. New York: Broadway Books.
Fronsdal, Gil. (2002). “Virtues without Rules: Ethics in the Insight Meditation Movement.”
Prebish, Charles S., and Martin Baumann. Westward Dharma: Buddhism Beyond Asia.
Berkeley: University of California Press: 285-308.
Goldstein, Elisha. (2012). The Now Effect: How This Moment Can Change the Rest of Your Life.
New York: Atria Books.
Goldstein, Joseph. (2003). Insight Meditation: The Practice of Freedom. Boston: Shambhala.
Gunaratana, Henepola. (2002). Mindfulness in Plain English. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Hurvitz, Leon. (2009). “Fa-sheng's observations on the four stations of mindfulness.” Kiyota,
Minoru, ed. MahƗyƗna Buddhist Meditation: Theory and Practice. Delhi: Motilal
Banarsidass: 207-48.
Jordt, Ingrid. (2007). Burma's Mass Lay Meditation Movement: Buddhism and the Cultural
Construction of Power. Athens: Ohio University Press.
Kabat-Zinn, Jon. (2006). Coming to Our Senses: Healing Ourselves and the World Through
Mindfulness. New York: Hyperion.
———. (2013). Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face
Stress, Pain, and Illness. New York: Bantam Books Trade Paperbacks.
———. (2001). Mindfulness Meditation for Everyday Life. London: Piatkus.
Kornfield, Jack. (2009). The Wise Heart: A Guide to the Universal Teachings of Buddhist
Psychology. New York: Bantam Books.
McMahan, David L. (2008). The Making of Buddhist Modernism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
ÑƗ৆amoli, and Bodhi. (1995). The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation
RIWKH0DMMKLPD1LNƗ\D. Boston: Wisdom Publications.
Nyanaponika. (1996). The Heart of Buddhist Meditation (Satipa‫ܒܒ‬hƗna): A Handbook of Mental
Training Based on the Buddha's Way of Mindfulness with an Anthology of Relevant Texts
Translated from the Pali and Sanskrit. Boston: Samuel Weiser.
Palmer, David A. (2007). Qigong Fever: Body, Science, and Utopia in China. New York:
Columbia University Press.
Poceski, Mario. (2016) “Contemporary Chinese Buddhist Traditions.” Michael Jerryson, ed.
Oxford Handbook of Contemporary Buddhism. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 79–99.
———. (2014). “Buddhism in Chinese History.” Mario Poceski, ed. The Wiley Blackwell
Companion to East and Inner Asian Buddhism. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell: 40–62.
Prebish, Charles S., and Kenneth K. Tanaka, eds. (1998). The Faces of Buddhism in America.
Berkeley: University of California Press.

14
˪䥒冯Ṣ栆㔯㖶䞼䨞˫䫔 ĸ 㛇炷ijıijı炸ġġ
International Journal for the Study of Chan Buddhism and Human Civilization Issue 7 (2020)

Seager, Richard H. (1999). Buddhism in America. Columbia University Press.

Ryan, Tim. (2013). A Mindful Nation: How a Simple Practice Can Help Us Reduce Stress,
Improve Performance, and Recapture the American Spirit. Carlsbad, Calif: Hay House.
Salzberg, Sharon. (2005). The Force of Kindness: Change Your Life with Love & Compassion.
Boulder: Sounds True.
ĝƗntideva. (1997). The Way of the Bodhisattva: A Translation of the BodhicharyƗvatƗra. Boston:
Shambhala.
Shaw, Sarah. (2015). “Southern Buddhist Meditation: The ƖQƗSƗQDVDWL6XWWD.” Komjathy, Louis,
ed. Contemplative Literature: A Comparative Sourcebook on Meditation and
Contemplative Prayer. Albany: SUNY Press: 265-95.
Silananda, U. (2012). The Four Foundations of Mindfulness. Somerville: Wisdom Publications.
Sharf, Robert. (2014). “Mindfulness and Mindlessness in Early Chan.” Philosophy East and West
64/4: 933-64.
Tan, Chade-Meng. (2014). Search Inside Yourself: The Unexpected Path to Achieving Success,
Happiness (and World Peace). New York: HarperOne.
Thích Nhҩt Hҥnh. (2013). The Miracle of Mindfulness: An Introduction to the Practice of
Meditation. Boston, Mass: Beacon Press.
———. (2006). Transformation and Healing: Sutra on the Four Establishments of Mindfulness.
Berkeley, Calif: Parallax Press.
Wilson, Jeff. (2014). Mindful America: The Mutual Transformation of Buddhist Meditation and
American Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
Wright, Robert. (2014). Why Buddhism Is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and
Enlightenment. New York: Simon & Schuster.

BIOGRAPHY

Mario Poceski is a professor of Buddhist studies and Chinese religions at the University of
Florida. His numerous publications include Communities of Memory and Interpretation:
Reimagining and Reinventing the Past in East Asian Buddhism (Hamburg 2018, ed.), The Records
of Mazu and the Making of Classical Chan Literature (Oxford 2015), The Wiley
Blackwell Companion to East and Inner Asian Buddhism (Blackwell 2014, ed.), Introducing
Chinese Religions (Routledge 2009), and Ordinary Mind as the Way: The Hongzhou School and
the Growth of Chan Buddhism (Oxford 2007).

15