daverupa wrote:Well, if driving and I note "hearing" instead of "those are sirens" then I might not safely pull to the side of the road to let the ambulance drive past unimpeded. So, this noting seems like decent mindfulness, but what about clear comprehension for moving about, whether walking, sitting, standing, or lying down, while urinating or defecating, while eating... and pertinent to the OP, while watching TV?
Mindfulness, even if noting "seeing" and/or "hearing", makes watching TV impossible because the mere sense contact is noted, and the content is set aside. Clear comprehension, on the other hand, is the approach that would allow watching TV without getting drawn in and attached and lost in it, according to my understanding.
I think you've missed the main point of my post. The mind automatically recogises "those are sirens" there is no need to meddle with that, there is no need to note "recognising those are sirens". The practise is to note 'hearing" and therefore bring some attention to the point of contact with the six sense doors, this doesn't mean the recognition "those are sirens" stops happening as I say no need to meddle with it.
Mindfulness practise is adding another level of awareness to your daily activities not removing one and replacing it with another.
daverupa wrote:I simply get confused when the word 'mindfulness' is tasked with hauling both of these ideas; I think the Suttas underscore a useful distinction by using the two terms "mindful" and "clearly comprehending", a distinction that seems lost in colloquial discussions of 'mindfulness'.
Mindfulness practise includes Sati (remembering) and Sampajanna (Clear comprehension) among other things and I don't think it's really a direct translation for either. I think confusion arises when you try to match it to a pali word on a 1 to 1 basis, the way we use the term "mindfulness" in english is usually a description of a methodology.