Today
some otherwise astute x-buddhist commentators are inclined to
unabashedly argue, as for example triratna-buddhist blogger Jayarava,
that mindfulness “is the future of Buddhism.” And yet despite a
long time alliance between mindfulness industry and modern
x-buddhism's mass media outlets like Tricycle or Shambhala Sun magazines, recently a few cracks have appeared on the surface of
this seemingly symbiotic relationship. Some time ago religious
studies scholar David McMahan in an interview for Tricycle talked
openly about the “mindfulness” as a new “folk religion of the
secular elite in Western culture” and tried to counterpoint it with
a wider Buddhist context. Most recently in another, I bet very
uncomfortable interview for many Mindfulnistas and more overt
x-buddhists alike, given to the Tricycle by neuroscience researcher,
and Buddhist practitioner Willoughby Britton, one reads that what
“blows [her] mind is that the main delivery system for Buddhist
meditation in the modern West isn’t Buddhism; it is science,
medicine, and schools. There is a tidal wave behind this movement.
MBSR practitioners already account for the majority of new meditators
and soon they are going to be the vast majority. If Buddhists want
to have any say, they better stop criticizing and start
collaborating, working with instead of just against. Otherwise, they
might get left in the dust of the 'McMindfulness' movement.” This
syncs pretty well with what Glenn Wallis used to wrote in the
beginning of his post titled Elixir of Mindfulness:
“The mighty 'Mindfulness' juggernaut continues to roll joyously
throughout the wounded world of late-capitalism. And why shouldn’t
it? The Mindfulness Industry is claiming territory once held by the
great occupying force of assorted self-help gurus, shrinks, health
care workers, hypnotists, preachers, Theosophists, the church, the
synagogue, actual gurus, yogis, meditation teachers, and even—gasp!—
Buddhists themselves.”
No
matter how divergent goals would have the above critiques of
mindfulness industry, I think that all of them generally assume that
this crypto-Buddhist industry, with all of its ambiguous relations
with The
Dharma,
is in fact on some fundamental level another x
of Buddhism. But even if one assumes that the buddheme sati
is
the main link that makes mindfulness industry a sub-station in this
vast power grid pumping buddhistic charism,
how, my question is, given the legendary ambiguity of sati,
one can say that “mindfulness” is an x
of Buddhism at all? Or maybe to some degree it is like with Modern
Yoga phenomenon, as in his very revealing paper writes Mark
Singleton, that “[t]his blend of biomedicine, psychology, and
esoterica is very generally propagated as ‘wisdom of the East’
and a critical distinction is rarely drawn between modern relaxation
techniques
and ancient practices. In fact, the line often seems to be
intentionally blurred to lend a method asiatic cachet.” (italics
mine) And right after that, to explain this obvious machination, he mentions about “the belief in the salvific
function of proprioceptive awareness” understood as William James's
“salvation through relaxation” from his famous The
Varieties of Religious Experience.
Hence my use of the term “relaxationism” in the title.
Now,
let me quote a list of six elements of yoga relaxation that Singleton
presents in his paper, which to me look virtually indistinguishable from the
elements that one can find in various descriptions of “mindfulness
techniques”:
- Progressive muscular (tensing and relaxing the muscles of the body in turn)
- Differential relaxation (tensing muscles in one part of the body and being aware of all other muscles being relaxed)
- Sensory awareness (focusing on the contact or absence of contact between the body and clothes and the support beneath it etc.)
- Yoga Nidra (rotation of awareness through the body and the use of sankalpa)
- Using affirmations such as ‘I am confident and aware’
- Visualisation/guided imagery, such as a picture of a garden or country scene or building a personal safe haven
It
is not my main point here to draw attention to this obvious similarity but
to highlight the fact that all of the above elements that have been relatively recently subsumed under Zinn Industries' marketable floating signifier “mindfulness” have actually nothing to do with The Dharma/Buddhism dispensation, but are
plain and simple, assortment of methods that one can find in the
books of now obscure Western authors that lived at the end of
nineteenth and in the first half of the twentieth centuries. Authors, who,
what everything indicates, had nothing at all to do with 'wisdom of
the East'. So to paraphrase Singleton one can say that relaxation
techniques of Zinn Industries “is an alloy of relatively new
practices, which do not derive from an ancient (...) tradition, as is
often claimed. Although some of the methods find apparent equivalents
in pre-modern sources, the theological and ideological frameworks
that underpin them tend to remain permeated by assumptions of New Age
religion and indigenous Western esotericism.”
So
who are those long forgotten Western authors that according to
Singleton originally and with no connection to the "East" devised all those methods that today mindfulness
industry sells cunningly exploiting asiatic glow of sati/mindfulness?
Regarding the progressive and differential relaxation techniques,
both of them are “simply and unequivocally,” as writes Singleton,
techniques developed by the Chicago scientist Edmund Jacobson in the
1920's. The rotation of awareness can be linked to the methods such
as Autogenic Training of German psychiatrist J. H. Schultz from
1930's, or the “Brain Control” method of Mesmerism-inspired Swiss
physician R. Vittoz (1863-1925). “The affirmations of point five,”
writes Singleton, “although often (...) hopelessly confused with
mantra, derive from a particular strand of the mesmeric tradition exemplified
by Emile Coue´ (1857–1926). The guided imagery of number six, not
to be confused with tantric practices of visualisation, is in reality
a psychotherapeutic method favoured by post-Jungians and a variety of
New Age therapists.”
Annie Payson Call (1853-1940) was one of the first to adhere to the
view – writes Singleton - that “the physical body becomes the
locus of a new religion, with proprioceptive relaxation as its
principal form of prayer. That only by relaxing the muscles of the
body that the heart and mind can be quieted, because thoughts and
emotions are stored within the physical frame. (…) If we were to
rid ourselves of physical (and thereby emotional and mental tension),
'We should grow faster spiritually, because we should not make
conflicts for ourselves, but should meet with the Lord’s quiet
strength whatever we had to pass through'. Call believes that by
relaxing fully and with awareness, we align ourselves with God’s
and nature’s ‘law’. If, however, we are full of tension, we
will not be receptive to this influence. Thus, paradoxically, by
slackening the pace of our physical and mental drives, we enter a
fast track to spiritual growth.”
I
am not going to paste here all of such informative bites from
Singleton paper, I just would like to recommend it to everyone who
wants to challenge the status quo that Zinn Industries seem to
promote worldwide. Whatever they mean by the “mindfulness” meme,
they have to recognize that very similar ideas had been propagated at
least century ago in the West and most importantly those ideas had
nothing to do with the commodified and monopolized buddheme sati
so markatable today. They used to be, as much as they are increasingly today, a form of relaxationism that, as in conclusion writes Singleton,“is
far less (as some would have us believe) an integral package
despatched through the millennia by Indian sages than a symptom of
the religious and economic crisis of our time.” Earlier in his
conclusion he also writes that “modern relaxationism develops
explicitly in response to this perception [of frantic pace of modern
life]. However, techniques of rest and streamlined activity are not
conceived as challenges to this oppressive order, but are enlisted
into the service of efficient labour.” One should remember that
already “[I]n the 1920s (…) The British Industrial Health
Research Board found that with regular relaxation, 'The work curve is
not only raised in height but it is also improved in form' (...) and
a later series of tests in a textile factory revealed that
'organised' relaxation pauses yield far more 'output' than informal
ones.”
Sounds
familiar to us today, right? It just proves that Zinn Industries
have a long and rich
heritage, but most certainly it does not derive from "Eastern wisdom."
So we should call Zinn's products by its actual name: The Great Zinn Authenticity Swindle!
ReplyDelete