The Wise Heart . read it?

[jcsuperstar]

has anyone read jack kornfield's The Wise Heart

any thoughts on it?

[bodom]

Nah dont do much reading from Kornfield. I think the only thing ive ever read from him are introductions he's written in other books. Seems kinda generic to me. I could be wrong tho i might end up someday reading this book and loving it. Who knows?

[Will]

Many years ago I read his Still Forest Pool about Ajahn Chan, but nothing by him since. But I got The Wise Heart as a gift, so I took a look and am about one third of the way through.

This is the Dhamma as therapy. One would think that no one comes to the Dhamma except the many psychological basket cases that Kornfield mentions. But his "attentiveness" therapy does help or cure them all and that is wonderful to see. He gives 26 universal principles of Buddhist Psychology and personal examples of how those principles heal & help. For example, Principle 8 is "Mindfulness of the body allows us to live fully. It brings healing, wisdom & freedom."

Yes, I would recommend it.

[mikenz66]

Here is a critique of Kornfield's approach by Patrick Kearney:
Still Crazy after all these Years: Why Meditation isn’t Psychotherapy
http://www.buddhanet.net/crazy.htm

Metta
Mike

[Ben]

Hi all

Several years ago I read most of 'After the ecstacy, the laundry' by Kornfield. I got about 4/5ths of the way through and I couldn't continue. Definitely not my cup of chai.
Metta

Ben

[upekkha]

A year and something ago I interviewed Jack Kornfield for an article I was writing,
My impression was that he is a very sweet man. His approach, which I understood from my conversation with him and his books, is more general or 'mixed', and I personally prefer to concentrate my efforts,

Though I would say his approach is suitable for a certain audience.. and he was very nice

I remember he asked me whether I had done a meditation retreat and with whom, I told him I did several Vipassana retreats as taught by Goenka and he replied something of the nature of "Very hard! very good but very hard!"..

[uslic001]

I have two of his books and would classify them as Buddhism "light". I prefer to read from the Sutras or from a master who has realized enlightenment.

[Ben]

Here is a critique of Kornfield's approach by Patrick Kearney:
Still Crazy after all these Years: Why Meditation isn’t Psychotherapy
http://www.buddhanet.net/crazy.htm

Metta
Mike

Thanks Mike

I didn't want to be negative in my earlier post with regard to Kornfield, but I was relieved to hear my concerns and more being expressed by Patrick Kearney, a highly respected (Mahasi) Vipassana teacher in Australia.
Cheers

Ben

[Will]

I did not recommend the book be read because it was conventional Dhamma. It should be read because this is what many, many Occidentals do with the Dhamma (or Dharma), ie, they pick out one factor that they value and beat that one note for decades. If their motive is pure & wise then that fragment of the Dhamma will still be a help to themselves and others. We should be aware of these eclectic teachers so we can say, with some accuracy, this one is OK, this one is not - yet neither teach the Dhamma.

[mikenz66]

That's a good point Will. Korfield has clearly done a lot of good things and helped a lot of people.

Metta
Mike

[genkaku]

Here is a critique of Kornfield's approach by Patrick Kearney:
Still Crazy after all these Years: Why Meditation isn’t Psychotherapy
http://www.buddhanet.net/crazy.htm

Metta
Mike

Mike -- That was very, very nice. Thank you.

[zavk]

Yes, thanks Mike. A timely post. The article happens to address issues I'm considering in my research.

Best wishes,
Ed

[mikenz66]

Hmm, I posted this before really finishing what I meant to say...

That's a good point Will. Korfield has clearly done a lot of good things and helped a lot of people.

My take on Patrick Kearney's analysis is that the approach of Kornfield (and the others that he comments on) leaves out aspects of the Dhamma that Kearney (and presumably most members here) think are essential for "real Dhamma practise", as summarised in his closing paragraph:

Buddhism is not a collection of spiritual or therapeutic techniques. Buddhism is an ocean. If we want we are free to paddle on the edge of the shore, trying a technique here or a therapy there, occasionally getting our feet wet, but staying safely within our limitations. Or we can take the advice of Døgen Zenji, who said: "Arouse the mind that seeks the way, and plunge into the ocean of Buddhism." Ultimately the future of Buddhism in the West will be decided by those who take the plunge, because the paddlers will always draw back and, rather than adapt Buddhism to its new home, will develop new forms of Buddhised psychotherapy. For ultimately we must choose whom we will follow. We can follow Buddha or we can follow Freud; we cannot do both, because they are just not travelling in the same direction.

On the other hand, we should rejoice that Kornfield and others are making an effort to help people by introducing them to some Buddhist meditation techniques, just as we should rejoice any genuine attempt to alleviate suffering by non-Buddhists.

If I want advice on what I consider "Buddhist" practise, I read/listen to Kearney (among others), not Kornfield. However, Kornfield has certainly touched a large number of people.

Metta
Mike