FOUR MYTHS ABOUT MINDFULNESS

Despite all the information there is concerning mindfulness, many misconceptions remain concerning the 'thing' known as mindfulness. Let’s call these misconceptions myths, for that is what in truth they are.

Myth No. 1: Mindfulness is a religion

Incorrect. Mindfulness is not a religion. A religion ordinarily involves a system of beliefs or statement of doctrine, a code of conduct, prescribed forms of ritual or religious observances, and both ‘faith’ and’ worship.’ A religion is also ordinarily accompanied by a system of moral philosophy, particular doctrines of faith, and a religious community which supports the faith as well as its organization and practices. Mindfulness does not involve or require any faith at all---certainly no faith in a supernatural ‘Being,’ ‘Thing,’ or ‘Principle’---nor does mindfulness involve any worship or impose any system of beliefs or statement of doctrine, code of conduct or prescribed forms of ritual or religious observances. For more information on exactly what is a religion, or if you simply can't sleep at night, you may wish to read my doctoral thesis on the subject.

Myth No. 2: Mindfulness is Buddhist

Incorrect. Many people mistakenly believe that mindfulness is Buddhist. By the way, Buddhism is only a religion in some of its forms and manifestations. Now, true it is that the word ‘mindfulness’ can refer to a specific type or practice of meditation used as a psychological and educational tool in Theravāda Buddhism---a naturalistic form of Buddhism of which there are several schools---known as vipassanā (or insight) meditation. However, mindfulness is not restricted to Buddhism, Buddhists or Buddhist meditation. Indeed, there are several types or forms of Buddhist meditation, and Buddhists do not claim to ‘own’ or have a monopoly on mindfulness and mindfulness meditation. In short, any person can practise mindfulness, irrespective of their religion or lack of religion.

Myth No. 3: Mindfulness is a philosophy

Again, incorrect. Mindfulness is not a philosophy. A philosophy ordinarily consists of numerous teachings, ideas or principles which collectively provide an overall coherent view of the purpose or meaning of life. There certainly are certain teachings associated with the subject of mindfulness, but mindfulness as such does not seek to explain the purpose or meaning of life.

Myth No. 4: Mindfulness is a method and technique of meditation

Now, we must be careful here. Mindfulness is meditation but in a very special, indeed unique, sense. You see, mindfulness differs from all other types of meditation. Other forms of meditation involve the 'method' or ‘technique’---oh, how I hate those words---of concentration upon some image (be it physical or mental) or sound, and are designed primarily to calm the mind. As such, other forms of meditation provide little or no insight into the action of the present moment including one’s consciousness and external surroundings. Mindfulness does involve attention but not concentration as that word is ordinarily understood, although some amount of concentration in the form of a 'watchful' physical and psychological presence is certainly included in attention. Mindfulness is a means by which we can gain understanding and insight into ourselves and our behaviour. Mindfulness requires no 'method' or ‘technique’ as such, but is simply the direct, immediate, and unmediated experience of life as it unfolds from one moment to the next. Mindfulness is something which happens, all day long, as soon as we remove the barriers to its happening. Mindfulness has been described as a natural---naturalistic might be a better word---practice which ‘takes’ meditation and then applies it in a direct and most practical way to one’s whole day, indeed one’s entire life.

Whenever I mention that I'm into mindfulness some people immediately think of yellow robes, gurus, transcendental states of consciousness, mind-altering drugs, alternative medicine, alternative spirituality, out-of-body experiences, escapism, and just plain wackiness. Mindfulness is none of those things. Mindfulness is simply going about your daily, everyday life---with your eyes wide open and your mind open, curious and engaged. Got that? Then please never forget it---and pass the word around.

All you need to practise mindfulness is a purposively open mind---and, most importantly, a mind that is curious and receptive to whatever is happening in your moment-to-moment experience of daily life. And, after all, is it not self-evident that it helps to be purposefully alert, receptive, and attentive to what is going on in and about us?

So, what then is mindfulness? My short answer is this. Mindfulness is self-education. It's a school for life, where the learning is in the living.

The photos in this post were taken by the author on his
recent trip to France and are of various scenes in the city of Nantes.

RELATED POSTS

IS MINDFULNESS A RELIGION?

 

DALAI LAMA SAYS ‘MINDFULNESS IS NOT RELIGIOUS’

RELIGION WITHOUT SUPERNATURALISM

MINDFULNESS, SUPERNATURALISM, THEISM AND SPIRITUALITY

GOOD RELIGION … AND BAD RELIGION

'Religion is a monumental chapter
in the history of human egotism.' William James.

I’m not sure whether I am religious or not. That’s a strange thing coming from me---a minister of religion … albeit a minister of a very liberal religion [Unitarian Universalism] … assuming for the moment it is a single religion, or even a religion at all, but that’s another matter.

I have come to dislike organized religion immensely. All too often religion---all religions---divide rather than unite. Religion is the cause of so much misery in our world. It’s certainly not the only cause, or even the major cause, but it is right up there nevertheless.

What is ‘religion’? Well, I am supposed to know something about that subject, as I wrote a huge number of words on the subject in my PhD thesis. Regrettably, the derivation of the English word ‘religion’ is by no means as clear as perhaps one would like, but we do know that the current English word ‘religion’ is derived from the Middle English word religioun which comes from the Old French word religion. Then we need to go to the Latin word religio. That word has affinities with three separate Latin verbs:

· religare, to restrain, bind, bind back, bind up, bind fast together, tie back (especially to oneself again), from ligare, to tie, close a deal, cement an alliance, unite in harmony

· relegare, to banish, from legare, to depute, commission, send as an emissary, bequeath, entrust

· relegere, to gather, collect again, review, re-read, re-examine carefully, from legere, to read, recite, or choose.

All very confusing. Actually, it’s even more complicated than the above, but that’s enough for present purposes. When one considers the meanings of the various suggested derivations of the current English word 'religion' there appear to be some common elements or at least similar themes.

First, religion involves, at one or more levels, the notion of ‘binding together’ or ‘binding back’, whether to oneself (in the sense of one’s true or spiritual nature), one’s ultimate ‘source’ or to other people as some sort of response to life, with a sense of awe, reverence, ‘fear’, devotion, veneration and respect, whereby meaning is gained.

Secondly, religion involves, at one or more levels, the notions of ‘return’, ‘recovery’, ‘restoration’ and ‘re-encounter,’ whether to one’s own self, some condition or way of life, or one’s ultimate home or resting place, with the object and purpose of religion being to restore to us the knowledge of what we really are.

Thirdly, religion ordinarily involves the selection and systematization of certain teachings and beliefs and a consequent abiding by that selection with some degree of regulation and control (eg in the form of codes of conduct) as well as conscientiousness and scrupulousness arising from the religion and inherent as well in its practice.

Fourthly, religion involves the notion of ties in the sense of the fulfillment of duties and commitment.

Fifthly, religion involves practices and activities intended to give effect to the foregoing including but not limited to repetitious rites and the reproduction of formulas and expressions.

Finally, religion involves notions of holiness, sacredness and sanctity (including but not limited to sacred places or things and objects of veneration) and often---but not necessarily---involves notions of supernaturalism as well as superstition.

Now, it may seem overly simplistic to divide religion---all religions---into ‘good and ‘bad,’ but I intend to do just that. Here I go.

Good religion unites, that is, it binds together not just the adherents of the particular religion but all persons in the sense that it recognizes the existence of a larger family of persons who, though they may not be followers of the religion in question, are nevertheless worthy of the same respect and love shown to adherents of the religion. Good religion recognizes the interconnectedness of all life and all persons. On May 18, 1966 the Rev Dr Martin Luther King Jr [pictured left] delivered an important lecture at the Unitarian Universalist Association General Assembly at Hollywood, Florida. Among the important things Dr King said was this:

'All I'm saying is this: that all life is inter-related, and somehow we are all tied together. For some strange reason I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be, and you can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the inter-related structure of all reality.'

Good religion accepts, embraces, affirms, and seeks to enhance the inter-related structure of all reality. It does not seek to impose its beliefs or practices on those ‘outside’ the religion. That is hard for a religion such as Christianity, which seeks to follow what it understands Jesus meant when he said---assuming he actually spoke these words---‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation’ (Mk 16:15). Now, I could go on for some time giving you my understanding of those words, and what is meant by the ‘gospel,’ but I dare say most of my readers couldn’t care less about the matter. Those who do ‘care’ would reject what I would say in any event. I take comfort in these words of Richard Le Gallienne: 'Organized Christianity has probably done more to retard the ideals that were its founder's than any other agency in the world.' Ditto most if not all other organized religions.

Good religion does not oppose the findings of science nor the use of reason. It eschews superstition and does not ground itself in outdated and silly notions of supernaturalism. It allows its adherents to have perfect freedom in the interpretation of its scriptures and teachings. It erects no barriers around its ‘altars.’ In short, good religion is inclusive whereas bad religon is exclusivistic in nature. Good religion teaches and practises love. Bad religion teaches love ... but withholds it from certain people who think and act differently.

Yes, bad religion divides, judges, bans, and condemns. So, we have the 'saved' and the 'unsaved,' the 'faithful' versus the 'infidels,' and so on. Dreadful stuff. Appalling. Bad religion promulgates the nasty view that it is the one true religion, that its founder or head is the only way to God, heaven, enlightenment, bliss, or whatever. I make no apologies for using the word ‘nasty.’ Bad religion asserts the supremacy of its so-called ‘holy’ book over all others, and may even claim that its holy book is infallible and inerrant. 'The inspiration of the Bible depends on the ignorance of the person who reads it,' wrote Robert G Ingersoll. The same goes for all so-called 'holy' books. All talk of infallibility, inerrancy and unchallengeable authority in matters pertaining to religion is dangerous---and silly---stuff. It is the stuff of martyrs, religious terrorists, and the like. Such stuff has no place in the world of the 21st century, even though we see the evidence and workings of such religion all around us.

Of course, I am showing a certain prejudice or bias in all that I have written, for I have aligned myself with all that I see as ‘good’ religion, and strenuously reject all that I see as ‘bad’ religion, but I must and will say this in self-defence---I have used reason. If ‘truth’ is truth---that is, if the word has any meaning at all---then truth must be universal. It cannot be the exclusive preserve of some people but not others, or of one religion but not others. I like what Oscar Wilde said, 'Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived.'  That's funny, but Wilde is wrong. Truth, in all matters, is never a matter of opinion. Truth is a matter of what is.

Now, I must be careful here. I am not saying that all religions teach the same thing, although I do hold the view that, at a certain level, there are certain teachings that are more-or-less common to most, if not all, of the world’s major religions. Also, I am not saying that one religion is as good, or as bad, as another, because all of them are flawed in various ways … including the one of which I am a minister. What I do say is this---some religions are more silly, and (even worse) more dangerous, than others, and some religions have few redeeming features. I will leave it at that for the time being.

Religion is not unimportant. Indeed, it is of great importance. However, one does not need to be ‘religious,’ in any formal, organizational sense, to be a decent and responsible human being. Indeed, it may even be easier to be the latter kind of a person if one eschews religion in a formal, organizational sense. However, religion, in the true sense of the word, is inherent in what we are as human beings. I am thinking especially of the notions of ‘binding together’ and ‘binding back,’ as well as the idea of being ‘restored’ to our true nature. Religion is about ‘going home’---and, no, I am talking about some supposed ‘place’ called heaven, paradise or the like. We all need to be more closely bound together, and without some sense of being ‘bound back’ to our source---or to some principle, power of ‘thing’ of supreme, indeed ultimate, importance---life has little meaning. We all need to ‘wake up’ to an understanding of who and what we really are. True religion is about being … fully human. Albert Einstein [pictured below] expressed it well when he said:


'[A] person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings and aspirations to which he clings because of their super-personal value.'

A true ‘religious’ response to life---displayed as a sense of awe, reverence, and respect to all persons, indeed all life---is of ultimate importance. 

Only a response to life of that kind can save us---and the planet.

RELATED POSTS

‘HMMM, ISN’T THAT A CULT?’

IS MINDFULNESS A RELIGION?

BETTER TO NOT BELIEVE AT ALL

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF BUDDHISM

'Everything arises from the mind.'
- Buddha Shakyamuni.

The great esotericist Manly Palmer Hall (pictured left) once wrote, ‘In Buddhism we have what is probably the oldest and most perfectly integrated system of what we now call psychology.’ I think Hall is right. Certainly, there were others before Buddha Shakyamuni whose teachings were psychological in nature, but I don’t know of any other person before the Buddha who had expounded such a clear, coherent, logical and empirically-based set of psychological principles and techniques.

Yes, first and foremost, Buddhism is applied psychology, the aim of which, in the words of the Venerable Ajahn Chah, is to ‘cure disease of the mind.’ The Venerable Narada Maha Thera said something similar when he described Buddhism as ‘a system of deliverance from the ills of life.’  Alan Watts saw Buddhism as 'something more nearly resembling psychotherapy,' as opposed to its being a religion or philosophy 'as these [terms] are understood in the West.'

Specifically, the 'system' treats what Buddhism often calls an 'illusory [or a 'false'] mind' (that is, a mind characterized and dominated by wandering, oppositional and discriminatory thoughts) with a view to bringing into manifestation a 'true [or 'pure'] mind' (being a mind which is not in opposition to itself).

Buddhism has something distinctively unique and, I think, very meaningful to say about ‘disease of the mind’, and it is this –– the root cause of our disorder, distress, sorrow, anxiety, stress, tension, insecurity, discontent, frustration, and general ‘unsatisfactoriness’ (dukkha) is ... attachment, craving, grasping and clinging of various kinds (collectively, upādāna) ... especially, clinging ... to ‘mind stuff’ in the form of, among other things, ideas, thoughts, feelings, beliefs, opinions and prejudices. All of this ‘mind stuff’ we then turn back on itself ... and on ourselves. That is tantamount to insanity but we are all very good at doing it ... most of our waking hours (if not whilst asleep as well). Instead of living by reason and direct experience (sanity), we are driven by emotional compulsion. Worse, we cling to the ‘self’ as self, and we even manage to convince ourselves that we ‘belong’ to that self, and that we are those myriads of I’s and me’s that make up our waxing and waning consciousness.

Now, some dispute that Buddhism is a religion. I think it is a religion ... at least in some of its manifestations, but not others. Be that as it may, Buddhism, as Watts stated, is certainly not a religion as Westerners generally understand the term.

Nor is Buddhism a philosophy as we generally understand the term, although it does contain much which is philosophical, as well as ethical and moral, in nature. However, that which is philosophical in Buddhism is very much 'practical philosophy' ... with the emphasis on 'practical' or, rather, practice.

One thing Buddhism is not, is a ‘belief-system.’ I hope I have made that perfectly clear in my previous blogs. (The Buddha said, 'Do not believe, for if you believe, you will never know. If you really want to know, don't believe.')

Yes, first and foremost, Buddhism is a form of ‘therapy’ ... self illusion therapy or ego delusion therapy, you could call it. The basic premise of Buddhism is this –– all of our problems and difficulties in this life arise out of our mentality. More specifically, the root of all our problems and difficulties – all our  upādāna – lies in our illusory sense of a separate selfhood, in our misplaced concept of I-ness, that is, in a false view of who we really are. To borrow a couple of phrases from the ‘Big Book’ of Alcoholics Anonymous, the result of our misbelief in a separate ‘self’ is ‘self-will run riot’, and the regular practice – note that word practice – of Buddhism is able to relieve us of the ‘bondage of self.’

The essence of Buddhism, in two words, is ... ‘Wake up!’ Yes, Buddhism is ... an ‘awakening.’ Buddhism is a set of humanistic principles and teachings which, when put into regular practice, enable us to overcome (‘cure’) our false view of ourselves – which is due to ignorance (avijjā) – and thereby experience a psychological transformation or mutation. We then overcome what Manly Palmer Hall referred to as our ‘psychological astigmatism.’ That is a condition in which we fail to see things as they really are because we are locked into certain habits of mind and modes of perception which are based on the supposed existence of a separate self. That is why Buddhism has been described as a teaching of ‘practising within.’

Buddhism is a whole mind-body experience. Buddha Shakyamuni was a radical empiricist. He taught people how to realize for themselves enlightenment ... by direct experience. It is through the regular practice of mindfulness, from one moment to the next, that we experience – note that word experience – life directly ... without those mental filters and psychological barriers which we tend to erect between ourselves and the objects of experience.

Buddha Shakyamuni was very smart. He knew that it was impossible to directly cultivate 'happiness.' That is why he spoke in terms of the causes of 'unhappiness'. Do you want to be happy? Of course. We all do. Then correct the causes of your unhappiness. That is how Buddhist psychology works.

Although the Buddha was not a psychologist per se, he nevertheless 'discovered' and understood the unconscious mind (bhavanga-citta), the ego (atta), and ego fixation (atta-vādupādāna) ... some 2,500 years before Sigmund Freud!             

              Mushin - Empty Mind


That is amazing! Yes, if nothing else, Buddhism is an education. In that regard, the English word ‘education’ is derived from the Latin roots educo and educare.  Educare means ‘to rear or to bring up,’ and can be traced to the Latin root words e and ducere.  Together, e-ducere means to ‘pull out,’ to ‘draw out,’ and to 'lead forth’ ... all aptly applicable to Buddhism, for the teachings of Buddhism, if diligently practised, will indeed 'draw out' one's innate potential to become a buddha.

Buddhism is also a praxis ... and a practice. It consists of various practices and activities by means of which we can better come to understand ourselves, others and the world. However, those practices and activities have to be enacted, practiced and realized in our minds and bodies. We learn in Buddhism that our mind is part of the ‘problem,’ but it can still be used to faithfully report on the flow of life from one moment to the next. That is why mindfulness is so important. We are not separate from life. We can never be less than life. We are persons among persons, each part of the endless procession of life. We are not those waxing and waning I’s and me’s, those various ‘selves’ which we mistakenly take for the person each of us really is.

It has been said that, for the first time, Buddha Shakyamuni taught that not only was self-deliverance possible, it could be attained independently of an external agency. He said, ‘I have delivered you towards deliverance. The Dhamma, the Truth is to be self realized.’ Further, he encouraged his followers to ‘come and see,’ that is, to investigate for themselves whether or not his teachings worked.

No wonder Krishnamurti - who was not a Buddhist - could nevertheless say, 'The Buddha comes closer to the basic truths and facts of life than any other.'

Now, it really doesn’t matter whether or not you're a Buddhist. The only thing that really matters is that you attain freedom from the bondage of self. That is where mindfulness is very useful, for it involves observing and releasing all those habits of mind that would otherwise preserve and maintain the illusion of a separate self.

RELATED POSTS

THE HEART OF BUDDHIST PSYCHOLOGY

MINDFULNESS, PSYCHOLOGICAL MUTATION AND HEALING

TAKING REFUGE IN MINDFULNESS

MINDFULNESS, THE ‘SELF’ AND SERENITY

THE MINDFUL MIND OF NO-MIND

BIGOTED BUDDHISTS

IS MINDFULNESS A RELIGION?

IMPORTANT NOTICE: See the Terms of Use and Disclaimer. The information provided on this blogspot is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Never delay or disregard seeking professional medical advice from your medical practitioner or other qualified health provider because of something you have read on this blogspot. For immediate advice or support call Lifeline on 13 1 1 14 or Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800. For information, advice and referral on mental illness contact the SANE Helpline on 1800 18 SANE (7263) go online via sane.org

IS MINDFULNESS A RELIGION?

Not at all.

The High Court of Australia, in the famous case of Church of the New Faith v Commissioner of Pay-roll Tax (Vic) (the “Scientology case”) (1983) 154 CLR 120, delineated what is a religion.

In the Scientology case, 4 of 5 justices of the High Court of Australia, in the course of determining whether Scientology constituted a “religion” for the purposes of section 116 of The Australian Constitution, considered belief in a supernatural Being, Thing or Principle to be a necessary indicia of or prerequisite for a particular belief system being a religion.

Religion ordinarily involves all of the following: first, a system of beliefs or statement of doctrine concerning so-called "ultimate reality"; secondly, an associated moral or ethical code of conduct; thirdly, participation in prescribed forms of ritual, observances and other acts of devotion.

In addition, religion ordinarily involves both “faith” and “worship”, accompanied by a system of moral philosophy or particular doctrines of faith as well as a religious community which supports that faith and its organization and practices.

My 2007 doctoral dissertation sought to formulate and propose a more suitable legal definition of “religion” in substitution for that formulated by the High Court of Australia in the Scientology case having regard to salient judicial authorities from the USA as well as non-judicial authorities.

The present legal definition of religion in Australia is misleading, inadequate and unhelpful. First, the definition does not readily accommodate a number of important belief systems that are generally regarded as being religious even though they do not involve any notion of the supernatural in the sense in which that word is ordinarily understood. Secondly, the High Court of Australia has provided little or no guidance as to how one determines whether a particular belief system involves a “supernatural” view of reality. Thirdly, I am of the opinion that it is impossible, philosophically and otherwise, to postulate a meaningful distinction between the “natural” and the supposedly “supernatural”.

Now, Mindfulness does not involve or require any faith at all ... certainly no faith in a supernatural Being, Thing or Principle ... nor does Mindfulness involve any worship or impose any system of beliefs or statement of doctrine, nor any code of conduct, nor any prescribed forms of ritual or religious observances.

Mindfulness is simply the practice of the presence of the awareness of the action of the present moment ... that is, the practice of paying attention, in the present, purposefully and receptively, choicelessly and non-judgmentally, to whatever arises in the present moment ... moment to moment … both inside and outside of us.

Mindfulness does not require that you believe in one god or many gods, or become a Buddhist, a Hindu, a Christian, or whatever. People of every religion, and none, can derive lasting benefits from the regular practice of Mindfulness including Mindfulness Meditation.

True it is that Mindfulness, and Mindfulness Meditation, can both refer to a specific type or practice of meditation known as Vipassanā Meditation, which is used as a psychological and educational tool in Theravāda Buddhism (a naturalistic form of Buddhism of which there are a number of different schools). Vipassanā Meditation is also known as Insight[ful], Sensory or Thought Watching Meditation. However, Mindfulness and Mindfulness Meditation are not restricted to Buddhism, Buddhists or Buddhist meditation. Indeed, there are several different types or forms of Buddhist meditation, and Buddhists do not claim to “own” or have a monopoly on Mindfulness and Mindfulness Meditation.

Mindfulness takes meditation … in the form of deliberate and purposeful awareness of the present moment … and applies it, as a psychological and educational tool, to one’s whole life.

What about meditation itself? Isn't that religious? No. Meditation, in one form or another, has been practised by human beings for thousands of years, long before most of the major world religions were formed. Meditation is as simple, and as natural, as breathing in and breathing out ... from one moment to the next ... until the mind reaches a "median", that is, a point of equilibrium, balance, harmony and equanimity. Meditation is simply medicine, or exercise, for the mind which, by the power of its own non-resistance and calm but secure acceptance (as opposed to mere passivity), is truly life-enhancing as opposed to life-denying.

Forget about "expanded consciousness", so-called higher orders or levels of reality, and all notions of transcendence. Meditation may well bring us to a state of choiceless awareness and detached, but otherwise bare, attention that some describe as being "supramundane", "transnatural" or "transrational", but true meditation is grounded firmly in everyday reality, that is, in the one order or level of reality in which we all live and move and have our being.

Unlike religion, Mindfulness is not "organized" ... and may that always be the case. Krishnamurti often told his listeners this little anecdote:

"There is a rather lovely story of a man who was walking along the street and behind him were two strangers. As he walked along, he saw something very bright and he picked it up and looked at it and put it in his pocket and the two men behind him observed this and one said to the other: 'This is a very bad business for you, is it not?' and the other who was the devil answered: 'No, what he picked up is truth. But I am going to help him organize it.'"

If Mindfulness were ever to become systematized and organized, one could never be successfully liberated from all those conditioned responses, predispositions and predilections, and psychological tendencies that otherwise beset us. Religion "believes" ... Mindfulness "knows" and "understands". There is a huge difference between the those two things.

Mindfulness is not a religion, or even a philosophy, but rather a way of being, a way of life, a journey in self-discovery, and an education. Mindfulness, being devoid of all notions of religiosity, is entirely experiential and, unlike most if not all religions, it is empirically based.

RELATED POSTS

A SPIRITUAL GUIDE TO MINDFUL LIVING

DALAI LAMA SAYS 'MINDFULNESS IS NOT RELIGIOUS'

GOOD RELIGION ... AND BAD RELIGION

MINDFULNESS BROADENS YOUR HORIZONS

The practice of Mindfulness Meditation requires no belief commitments, but it certainly can broaden one’s horizons by affording insight into ourselves and the world around us. Over time, we start to break loose from tired, worn-out, narrow, constricted and confined thought forms which have held us back, often for decades. Not only do our thoughts change, but so does the grey matter of our brains by means of which we think our thoughts.

Dr Jon Kabat-Zinn (pictured below), Professor of Medicine Emeritus and the founding director of the Stress Reduction Clinic and Center for Mindfulness in Medicine, Health Care and Society at the University of Massachusetts Medical School, and the celebrated author of numerous seminal best-selling books and audio books on Mindfulness and Mindfulness Meditation including Full Catastrophe Living: Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness and Wherever You Go, There You Are: Mindfulness Meditation in Everyday Life, has written:

“Mindfulness means paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, and nonjudgmentally … When we commit ourselves to paying attention in an open way, without falling prey to our own likes and dislikes, opinions and prejudices, projections and expectations, new possibilities open up and we have a chance to free ourselves from the straitjacket of unconsciousness.”

Dr Ellen Langer (pictured below), a professor in the Psychology Department at Harvard University, and the author of many books including Mindfulness, The Power of Mindful Learning, On Becoming An Artist, and Counterclockwise, has carried out over 30 years of research into “mindfulness” and its opposite … “mindlessness”. Professor Langer describes the “mindless” person - that is, the person who fails to act mindfully in their daily lives - as being “trapped by categories”, engaging in “automatic behaviour”, and “acting from a single perspective”. Langer writes, “The mindless individual is committed to one predetermined use of … information, and other possible uses or applications are not explored.”

“Mindlessness” manifests itself in various all-too-familiar ways … reacting emotionally and automatically to triggers, labelling and prejudging people, inability to think outside the square, predetermining matters, acting on and never questioning false, unstated, unconscious assumptions and presumptions, and so forth. On the other hand, a mindful person - someone who has applied meditation to their entire daily life - is open-minded, nonjudgmental, ever curious and alert, looking for and actually noticing new things, creative and innovative. A mindful person, being self-aware, knows. A “mindless” person believes and accepts on faith what others have told them is true whether the subject-matter is religion or whatever.

There is an old saying which is often heard in Twelve Step recovery groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous, “If nothing changes, nothing changes.” When people and organizations suffer from mindlessness, their mindsets and thought forms are fixed and rigid with the result that … so are they … and so are their experiences of external phenomena.

Break free from the past! There are no chains that bind you … and no fetters … except those you have created for yourself. Dr Norman Vincent Peale (pictured below), who, with the Freudian psychiarist Dr Smiley Blanton (who trained under the master Sigmund Freud himself), founded in 1937 the first service in the world combining religion and psychiatry for the sake of mental health (which is now known as the Blanton-Peale Institute), once wrote, “There is a spiritual giant within you which is always struggling to burst its way out of the prison you have made for it.” So, come alive! Be awake!