Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minutes

General discussion of issues related to Theravada Meditation, e.g. meditation postures, developing a regular sitting practice, skillfully relating to difficulties and hindrances, etc.

Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minutes

Postby Anagarika » Sat Dec 21, 2013 7:35 pm

If you have 30 minutes, this is a most excellent presentation on the history of sati and mindfulness, and the downsides of diluting sati practice to 'nonjudgmental awareness."

What is missing in the modern mindfulness movement is precisely this transformation, which involves active engagement with the Buddhist teachings. This engagement with Buddhist doctrine is often rejected by modern advocates of mindfulness who believe they can garner the rewards of Buddhist practice without having to adopt a Buddhist worldview.
- Prof Robert Sharf

The Video: http://youtu.be/c6Avs5iwACs

[html]<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/c6Avs5iwACs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/html]
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby mikenz66 » Sat Dec 21, 2013 8:34 pm

Don't have time to watch right now, but, as with many other criticisms, it appears that speaker is not well informed about how such techniques are actually applied by Dhamma practitioners. I've copied the introduction from Youtube below, and, on the basis of that, I'm afraid I'm not particularly hopeful that that the talk will be of interest to serious Dhamma practitioners.

Perhaps in the talk he actually points out that Ven Mahasi (and the related monastic and lay teachers who take the Dhamma seriously) in fact spend a lot of time at retreats talking about Buddhist doctrine, the importance of sila, about right effort, etc, etc?

And that the problem he sees is with some secular Western misinterpretations that overlook tjese teaching.

If so, I'll watch it later. If not, it's probably not worth wasting 30 minutes on.

:anjali:
Mike

Buddhist scholars have shown that the form of "mindfulness meditation" (sometimes called satipatthāna or vipassanā meditation) that has become popular in the West is, at least in part, a relatively modern phenomenon; it can be traced to Burmese Buddhist reform movements that date to the first half of the twentieth century.

The features that made Burmese mindfulness practice—notably the form taught by Mahasi Sayadaw (1904-1982)—so attractive to a Western audience are precisely those features that rendered it controversial in the Buddhist world. For example, Mahasi's technique did not require familiarity with Buddhist doctrine (notably
abhidhamma), did not require adherence to strict ethical norms (notably monasticism), and promised astonishingly quick results.

This was made possible through interpreting sati as a state of "bare awareness"—the unmediated, non-judgmental perception of things "as they are," uninflected by prior psychological, social, or cultural conditioning. This notion of mindfulness is at variance with premodern Buddhist epistemologies in several respects.

Traditional Buddhist practices are oriented more toward acquiring "correct view" and proper ethical discernment, rather than "no view" and a non-judgmental attitude. Indeed, the very notion of an unmediated mode of apperception is, in many traditional Buddhist systems, an oxymoron, at least with respect
to anyone short of a Buddha. (Indeed, it is a point of contention even in the case of a Buddha.) It is then not surprising that the forms of Burmese satipatthāna that established themselves in the West have been targets of intense criticism by rival Theravāda teachers in Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia.

This doesn't mean that modern forms of "bare awareness" practice are without historical precursors. Both Tibetan Dzogchen and certain schools of Chinese Chan were, at least at first glance, similarly oriented toward inducing a mental state that was "pure," "unconditioned," "non-judgmental," and so on. Not surprisingly, these traditions were also subject to sharp criticism; they too were accused of heterodoxy—of promoting practices that contravened cardinal
Buddhist principles and insights. My paper will begin with the parallels between the teachings and practices of these three traditions, and suggest that some of these parallels can be explained by historical and sociological factors. I will then move on to the philosophical, psychological, ethical, and soteriological objections proffered by rival Buddhist schools.
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10398
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby m0rl0ck » Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:11 pm

Just a thought from his intro comparing buddhism and depression, if you give up hope you get hopelessness and maybe depression, but if you then give up hopelessness you may end up with a happy buddhist. Its all about what you are willing to surrender.

My only thought about the rest of the talk is that, there is nothing so simple that an academic cant complicate it beyond any hope of practical approachability.
There is no comfort without pain; thus
we define salvation through suffering.
-- Cato
User avatar
m0rl0ck
 
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sat Dec 21, 2013 10:37 pm

BuddhaSoup wrote:
    What is missing in the modern mindfulness movement is precisely this transformation, which involves active engagement with the Buddhist teachings. This engagement with Buddhist doctrine is often rejected by modern advocates of mindfulness who believe they can garner the rewards of Buddhist practice without having to adopt a Buddhist worldview.
    - Prof Robert Sharf
Sharf is a well known gadfly who usually targets Zen. In his attack on mindfulness -- if the above is an example of what he does -- he is a little late to the party: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=4623
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby Anagarika » Sat Dec 21, 2013 11:37 pm

Here is Prof. Sharf's bio for anyone curious: http://buddhiststudies.berkeley.edu/peo ... files.html

The video is very, very good. On the one hand, Sharf’s research shows that this popularization of mindfulness by stripping it from its ethical/philosophical context is nothing terribly new in Buddhism (going back at least to the 8th century in China). On the other hand, it shows that other Buddhists have criticized this approach for just as long, likening the uncritical ‘presentness’ emphasized then and now to a sort of sickness. It is a sickness in which one loses touch with the web of social relations in which one is embedded. Quoting a Chan master, Sharf states that the correct approach is both sudden and gradual, the gradual portion being where transformation from unenlightened to enlightened person happens.

Where I think Sharf is too brief is where says that “from a more traditional Buddhist perspective, what is missing in the modern mindfulness movement is precisely this transformation, which involves active engagement with the Buddhist teachings. This engagement with Buddhist doctrine is often rejected by modern advocates of mindfulness who believe they can garner the rewards of Buddhist practice without having to adopt a Buddhist worldview.” (21:30-59)
-Justin Whitaker, author of the blog American Buddhist Perspective and a Buddhist Ethics Ph.D. student at the University of London

I'm not familiar enough with his scholarship or his past comments on Zen, but it seems to me that he has an appreciation for Pali Canon based orthodoxy with respect to meditation, and reserves some question marks for the Burmese 'dry' vipassana school. I'm not going to touch that third rail here in this post, but his presentation, to me, is very compelling, and not at all a latecomer to the issue of sati's awkward emergence into the western marketplace.
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:09 am

BuddhaSoup wrote: it seems to me that he has an appreciation for Pali Canon based orthodoxy with respect to meditation, and reserves some question marks for the Burmese 'dry' vipassana school.
The so-called idea of the "dry school" comes out of the Visuddhimagga, which draws from the suttas and the commentaries. In other words, it is deeply couched in Theravada doctrine and practice. Secondly, as this "dry practice" is actually practiced, it not all that "dry," as a discussion of the vipassana jhanas will show. While there may be mindfulness teachers who have stripped the practice of it Dhamma context, that is hardly the case for all of them or the best of the mindfulness teachers. Every "vipassana" retreat I have participated in the mindfulness practice was always within the context of Dhamma teachings.

Also, I do not think Sharf has an accurate handle on the historical context of the practice he is criticizing.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby Anagarika » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:30 am

Every "vipassana" retreat I have participated in the mindfulness practice was always within the context of Dhamma teachings.


This is, of course, the most important point.

Now, to Ven. Thanissaro:

The role of jhāna as a condition for transcendent discernment is one of the most controversial issues in the Theravada tradition. Three basic positions have been advanced in modern writings. One, following the commentarial tradition, asserts that jhāna is not necessary for any of the four levels of Awakening and that there is a class of individuals — called "dry insight" meditators — who are "discernment-released" based on a level of concentration lower than that of jhāna. A second position, citing a passage in the Canon [AN 3.88; MFU, pp. 103] stating that concentration is mastered only on the level of non-returning, holds that jhāna is necessary for the attainment of non-returning and Arahantship, but not for the lower levels of Awakening. The third position states that the attainment of at least the first level of jhāna is essential for all four levels of Awakening.

Evidence from the Canon supports the third position, but not the other two.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... ml#part3-f

I feel that what Prof. Sharf is stating echoes what Ven. Thanissaro teaches, which is that the practices that evolved through the commentarial tradition (and found a home in the Burmese vipassana tradition) do not fully reflect what the Canon prescribes. I suggest this not as criticism, but as an observation. My take is that there is no "vipassana jhanas" that are Canon based (jhana being the vehicle for the cultivation of samatha and vipassana..see Anupada Sutta [Majjhima Nikaya 111]), but are derived from the VM commentarial period. That makes them solidly Theravadin, but perhaps not solidly Canon based.
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:20 am

Ironically Prof Sharf's criticism appears to be that that Ven Mahasi is not following the Abhidhama and Commentaries closely enough. Ven Thanissaro appears to think that some teachers pay too much attention to Commentaries...

In either case it's just particular viewpoints of individuals...

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10398
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:59 am

BuddhaSoup wrote:My take is that there is no "vipassana jhanas" that are Canon based (jhana being the vehicle for the cultivation of samatha and vipassana..see Anupada Sutta [Majjhima Nikaya 111]), but are derived from the VM commentarial period. That makes them solidly Theravadin, but perhaps not solidly Canon based.
First of all, it depends upon what you mean by jhana. This issue has been discussed at length here a number of times, and it has been pointed out that what is generally characterized as sutta jhanas -- that is, jhanas as described in the suttas -- look much as the vipassana jhanas. The vipassana jhana description are not derived from the VM or the commentaries. They are derived from empirical experience, using the classic description of jhana as found in the suttas.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Dec 22, 2013 7:28 am

mikenz66 wrote:Ironically Prof Sharf's criticism appears to be that that Ven Mahasi is not following the Abhidhama and Commentaries closely enough. Ven Thanissaro appears to think that some teachers pay too much attention to Commentaries.
This talk by Sharf is an appalling bad bit of "scholarship" on so many levels. Where to start . . . .
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby Anagarika » Sun Dec 22, 2013 8:35 am

tiltbillings wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:Ironically Prof Sharf's criticism appears to be that that Ven Mahasi is not following the Abhidhama and Commentaries closely enough. Ven Thanissaro appears to think that some teachers pay too much attention to Commentaries.
This talk by Sharf is an appalling bad bit of "scholarship" on so many levels. Where to start . . . .


I'm just not seeing this kind of response from others that have viewed the video. Reasonable people can differ, of course, as to what might be sound scholarship. Prof. Sharf, as Judge Smails would say, is no slouch ("Robert Sharf is D. H. Chen Distinguished Professor of Buddhist Studies in the Department of East Asian Languages and Cultures at the University of California, Berkeley").

My own view is that Prof. Sharf is on to something here. It may be a theme that someone closer to Ven. Thanissaro might appreciate, than someone out of the Burmese vipassana tradition. If we accept that the Buddha's core Dhamma is found in the Sutta and Vinaya pitakas of the Pali Canon, then we are likely to take the view that Prof. Sharf takes of sati and its interpretations. If we are scholars/students of the commentaries, VM, and later texts, then there will be pliability to the interpretations of meditation and mindfulness.

One of Prof. Sharf's themes seems to be that Buddhism has had a tendency, both in CE 8th century and the present 21st, to ignore the core Dhamma and bend practices such as meditation and sati to conform to the tastes of the laity. Meditation/enlightenment became easier, more comfortable, and faster to achieve (if we are already naturally enlightened, why work so hard at meditation?) . Teachers that wanted to develop new schools, and gather congregations and royal patronage, learned that the slow cooking Dhammic rice gruel was not nearly as tasty as a 7/11 chocolate doughnut. So, in a way, Prof. Sharf may be suggesting that there is real value and nutrition in a bowl of rice, but with so many new kinds of doughnuts in the market, who, other than orthodox practitioners, wants a bowl of rice?
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Dec 22, 2013 9:13 am

Hi BuddhaSoup,

Again, I think it's ironic that you mention Ven Thanissaro in this context, since one of Prof Sharf's criticisms is that Buddhist Modernists ignore the Commentaries. This is certainly true of Ven Thanissaro but not of Ven Mahasi.

Furthermore, from listening to Ven Thanissaro's talks, I don't see much difference between his instructions, and what I've learned from Mahasi-style teachers.
E.g. see my comments:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 80#p174339
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 74#p202976
He makes a big deal of his particular interpretation of the exact meaning of sati, but if you look at the whole of the instructions from various teachers, the differences between him and others is more a matter of splitting hairs than real, at least as far as I can understand him. See the discussion here:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=13538

As for the Sharf talk, there are some interesting aspects, and his criticism of secular variants is fair enough, but he obviously has very little idea of what Mahasi-style practice involves.

By all means criticise the secular teachers who divorce meditation from Dhamma. However, I think it is a little silly to focus on largely imaginary hair-splitting differences between obviously knowledgeable and talented teachers such and Ven Thanissaro, Ven Mahasi, and various other monastic and lay teachers that we are fortunate to have access to.

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10398
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Dec 22, 2013 9:20 am

BuddhaSoup wrote:My own view is that Prof. Sharf is on to something here.
What is he "on to?"


If we accept that the Buddha's core Dhamma is found in the Sutta and Vinaya pitakas of the Pali Canon, then we are likely to take the view that Prof. Sharf takes of sati and its interpretations.
Not at all. You might want to look at Ven Analayo's discussion of sati and Ven Bodhi's discussion of "bare attention": http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.ph ... 20#p201569

If we are scholars/students of the commentaries, VM, and later texts, then there will be pliability to the interpretations of meditation and mindfulness.
Interestingly, that is assuming that the suttas give us very detailed, percise, unequivocal meditation instructions that allow for no variations in understanding how they are to be applied.

One of Prof. Sharf's themes seems to be that Buddhism has had a tendency, both in CE 8th century and the present 21st, to ignore the core Dhamma and bend practices such as meditation and sati to conform to the tastes of the laity. Meditation/enlightenment became easier, more comfortable, and faster to achieve (if we are already naturally enlightened, why work so hard at meditation?) . Teachers that wanted to develop new schools, and gather congregations and royal patronage, learned that the slow cooking Dhammic rice gruel was not nearly as tasty as a 7/11 chocolate doughnut. So, in a way, Prof. Sharf may be suggesting that there is real value and nutrition in a bowl of rice, but with so many new kinds of doughnuts in the market, who, other than orthodox practitioners, wants a bowl of rice?
Clever, but he really offers no real argument that what Ven Mahasi Sayadaw is doing to trying to cater to the masses for his own aggrandizement, as in implied by this paragraph.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Dec 22, 2013 9:31 am

mikenz66 wrote:By all means criticise the secular teachers who divorce meditation from Dhamma. However, I think it is a little silly to focus on largely imaginary hair-splitting differences between obviously knowledgeable and talented teachers such and Ven Thanissaro, Ven Mahasi, and various other monastic and lay teachers that we are fortunate to have access to.
The problem is that he does not really distinguish between the secular, mindfulness as therapy crowd and the mindfulness Dhamma teachers, painting them all with broad, unflattering brush strokes.
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby mikenz66 » Sun Dec 22, 2013 9:59 am

Actually, some of the points about Buddhist Modernism are well known. That there was a reformation of Theravada in the 19th/20th C in Sri Lanka, Burma, and Thailand (the latter at the behest of King Monkut [Rama IV]) is well-recognised (and has been discussed here before). That practitioners in those countries invented/reinvented approaches to meditation based on various combinations of sutta/abhidhamma/commentary is also well recognised. The various strands of Thai Forest, as well as Burmese teachers are all part of this milieu...

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10398
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby Anagarika » Sun Dec 22, 2013 12:53 pm

Clever, but he really offers no real argument that what Ven Mahasi Sayadaw is doing to trying to cater to the masses for his own aggrandizement, as in implied by this paragraph.


I tried to be careful not to infer that Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw, or any of the noble Sayadaws, were included in this reference. I was referencing what I believe Prof. Sharf referenced, that being the 8th century CE dilutions with current mindfulness approaches...this would not include, at least as I was communicating, the noble Burmese traditions and its Sayadaws.

It may or may not be true that the Burmese "dry" vipassana approach involved allowing meditators to bypass samatha/vipassana in tandem (Canon jhana), and to get at the vipassana side more directly. I have no opinion on this, and wouldn't venture one, as I have not had the good fortune to train in Burma or with, for example, Joseph Goldstein. I make no suggestion that the Sayadaws or JG teach vipassana as a means to cater to self aggrandizement, and while having never met JG, I have read enough about him to believe he's a rare example of a selfless and dedicated teacher in the west. A recent Tricycle article that mentioned JG helping a disabled man meditate (even inviting the man to his home) after his Zen teachers disowned him because he couldn't sit upright without pain, spoke volumes about JG's compassion and selflessness.
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby Anagarika » Sun Dec 22, 2013 1:18 pm

If we accept that the Buddha's core Dhamma is found in the Sutta and Vinaya pitakas of the Pali Canon, then we are likely to take the view that Prof. Sharf takes of sati and its interpretations.

Not at all. You might want to look at Ven Analayo's discussion of sati and Ven Bodhi's discussion of "bare attention": viewtopic.ph ... 20#p201569


Unless I am missing something here, Ven. Bodhi is taking a Sutta based approach to sati, as has Ven. Thanissaro. Ven. Analayo's quote using the term "bare" uses this term differently than the "bare awareness" crowd.

I read the passages that Tilt linked and it seems to me that Ven. Bodhi makes the case for the Sutta based definition of sati, but does it in a perhaps more welcoming and inclusive way, but I see no suggestion that he and Ven. T differ greatly. If I have given Prof. Sharf more credit than he is due, then I need to read more of his work and perhaps have a more educated opinion...not that he cares a whit what my opinion might be.
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby tiltbillings » Sun Dec 22, 2013 3:17 pm

BuddhaSoup wrote:
If we accept that the Buddha's core Dhamma is found in the Sutta and Vinaya pitakas of the Pali Canon, then we are likely to take the view that Prof. Sharf takes of sati and its interpretations.

Not at all. You might want to look at Ven Analayo's discussion of sati and Ven Bodhi's discussion of "bare attention": viewtopic.ph ... 20#p201569


Unless I am missing something here, Ven. Bodhi is taking a Sutta based approach to sati, as has Ven. Thanissaro. Ven. Analayo's quote using the term "bare" uses this term differently than the "bare awareness" crowd.
Who is this '"bare awareness" crowd?'
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.
SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.
People live in one another’s shelter.

"We eat cold eels and think distant thoughts." -- Jack Johnson
User avatar
tiltbillings
 
Posts: 19584
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby Anagarika » Sun Dec 22, 2013 3:48 pm

tiltbillings wrote:
BuddhaSoup wrote:
Unless I am missing something here, Ven. Bodhi is taking a Sutta based approach to sati, as has Ven. Thanissaro. Ven. Analayo's quote using the term "bare" uses this term differently than the "bare awareness" crowd.
Who is this '"bare awareness" crowd?'


I should have been more careful with my phrasing. The term "bare awareness" seems to be a loaded term, having more breadth and depth as used in the vipassana community. I meant the term as it may be used in Soto Zen http://www.zcbclaresangha.org/pubs/Bare ... TheWay.htm , or by JKZ, as a "nonjudgmental, nonresponsive awareness of the present moment." Or, as used above "the secular, mindfulness as therapy crowd.." I won't use the term again, as it seems to have varying meanings across different traditions.
User avatar
Anagarika
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 11:25 pm

Re: Mindfulness or Mindlessness: Sati Explained in 30 Minute

Postby m0rl0ck » Sun Dec 22, 2013 6:54 pm

BuddhaSoup wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:Who is this '"bare awareness" crowd?'


I should have been more careful with my phrasing. The term "bare awareness" seems to be a loaded term, having more breadth and depth as used in the vipassana community. I meant the term as it may be used in Soto Zen http://www.zcbclaresangha.org/pubs/Bare ... TheWay.htm , or by JKZ, as a "nonjudgmental, nonresponsive awareness of the present moment." Or, as used above "the secular, mindfulness as therapy crowd.." I won't use the term again, as it seems to have varying meanings across different traditions.


Where is the quote from? I cant find
"nonjudgmental, nonresponsive awareness of the present moment."
anywhere in that linked page. What made me curious enough to look is the word "nonresponsive" I dont think i have ever heard that word applied to mindfulness in zen.
There is no comfort without pain; thus
we define salvation through suffering.
-- Cato
User avatar
m0rl0ck
 
Posts: 1024
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 10:51 am

Next

Return to Theravada Meditation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Goofaholix, mikenz66 and 3 guests