A Holistic Mindfulness

Ajahn Amaro 0 The Four Noble Truths 0 0 Philosophical Roots of Mindfulness Practice 1 ) Amaravati Buddhist Monastery , St Margarets Lane, Great Gaddesden, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire HP1 3BZ , UK layers of meaning, and (3) the role of ethics in human wellbeing, as it is understood from a traditional Buddhist viewpoint. The perspectives offered here should not be considered definitive or exhaustive in terms of commenting on Monteiro et al. (2015) specifically or the field of mindfulness in general; rather the issues outlined in this paper are those that appear most in need of clarification, from a traditional standpoint, and the elucidation of which is likely to bring a greater understanding of the field of mindfulness practice and the benefits that derive from it. It has been propounded that the basic scheme of four truths mirrors a diagnostic scheme apparently employed in Indian medicine (Analayo 2011). The pattern employed being as follows: 1. Symptom = dissatisfaction (dukkha) 2. Cause = craving (tah) 3. Prognosis = ending of dissatisfaction (dukkha-nirodha) 4. Treatment = the Eightfold Path (a hangika magga) - This paper is a commentary on traditional and contemporary mindfulness: finding the middle path in the tangle of concerns by Monteiro, Musten and Compson (2015). These are interesting times. Whereas as little as 10 years ago, such subjects as Buddhist meditation and mindfulness were confined to a specialist fringe of society, now these are so commonplace as to become the substance of a series of UK parliamentary enquiries. The most recent, at the time of writing, addressed the selfsame issues as discussed by Monteiro et al. (2015) (see Halliwell 2014). The interest in mindfulness and its introduction into the areas of health care, education, business, and the military is increasing at an exponential rate. It is an accelerating aggregate of systems, and as such, it is delicately balanced between rapid beneficial progress and destructive implosion. On account of this escalation of interest, the field lends itself to careful scrutiny and to exploration of what within it is supportive of long-term well-being and what is extraneous or obstructive. As a contemplative monastic functioning largely outside the academic field, and therefore hailing from the more traditional camp, there are perspectives that come from this background that can perhaps shed useful light on several areas outlined in (Monteiro et al. 2015), such as (1) the pragmatic versus dogmatic approach of the Buddha in his teachings on psychological transformation, (2) clarification of the traditional understanding of the term mindfulness (sati) and its various This simple formulation points to the Buddha taking a radically pragmatic, rather than dogmatic, approach toward spiritual life and the development of well-being. Instead of using the more customary tactic of spiritual teachers, making declarative statements lauding the truth and virtues of an ultimate reality, he started with the everyday experience of dissatisfaction, suffering. Moreover, he approached it with the attitude of a clinicianWhere does it hurt?rather than a theoreticianLet me tell you how it all works. This pragmatic approach is echoed in Monteiro et al. (2015) (p. 3) where the limbs of the Eightfold Path are described as: Right insofar as they lead toward this realization [of the cessation of suffering]. This points to the understanding that it is the experience of the individual that is the defining factor, rather than any received religious ideal. This principle is articulated most clearly in the Kalama Sutta where the Buddha encourages his listeners: Kalamas, do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumour; nor upon a scripture; nor upon deduction; nor upon an axiom; nor upon dubious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered; nor upon anothers apparent ability; nor upon the consideration, This is our guru. Kalamas, when you yourselves know: These things are unwholesome; these things are blameworthy; these things are criticized by the wise; undertaken and followed, these things lead to harm and dissatisfaction, then you would be wise to abandon them And when you yourselves know: These things are wholesome; these things are not blameworthy; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and followed, these things lead to benefit and happiness, you would be wise to enter upon and dwell in them. (A 3.65) This encouragement of the Buddha accords well with the comment in Monteiro et al. (2015) (p. 3), that: Buddhist traditions offer a course of training that helps to align ones conduct in accordance with this structure of reality and attain liberation from suffering, but there is no reason in principle why familiarity with explicitly Buddhist teachings are a necessary condition for such liberation. This perspective that the outcome of the training transcends Buddhist teachings becomes particularly important to understanding the ways in which mindfulness has been adapted for secular applications. In the same way, it does not matter what the name or nationality of the physician is, or even the medical approach they use, if the sickness is cured, those details are incidental (as in the simile of the arrow at M 63.5, and the handful of leaves at S 56.31). Samm and Right and Wrong In Monteiro et al. (2015) (p. 11), it is stated: It is also important to investigate the subtle ways in which the very teaching of a philosophy derived from an Eastern culture is already a propagation of a set of valued virtues or an actionguide based on a different worldview. This is granted, however, it is also important to investigate those subtle influences that are already with us, in the Judeo-Christian conditioning of the West, particularly in relation to such issues as the concepts of right and wrong as well as the broader topic of ethics. This latter element will be addressed below, but here, it will be useful to look briefly at the use of the word right. Monteiro et al. (2015) (p. 3) phrased the principle very well in stating, above: Right insofar as they lead toward this realization [of the cessation of suffering]. In contrast, the use of the word right in the context of the Noble Eightfold Path can easily be assumed to mean that there is the correct and good that should be done and there is the bad and wrong which should not be done. However, the word right is being used to translate the Pli word samm; samm is not just the right which is the opposite of wrong but rather has connotations of right as in upright, balanced, and attuned (Sumedho 2014b, p. 101): Using the words right and wrong in relation to right understanding and wrong understanding is too strong I think. Theyre too fixed: This is right and thats wrong. With sammdi hi, you see right and wrongnot from trying to blend them together, but through seeing them from this position of awareness so one is in ha (...truncated)