Abstract
The Buddhist practice of mindfulness has enjoyed a tremendous surge in popularity in the last few decades, both in the popular press and in the psychotherapy literature. However, the philosophy and practice of mindfulness has often been erroneously equated with quietism or a withdrawal from the world of action, misconceived as a practice of sterile, self-absorbed contemplation. On the contrary, the core Buddhist conception of existential freedom lies in the belief of doing over thinking, and intersubjectivity over introspection. Moreover, the cultural differences in how one conceives oneself, particularly in relation to others around, prove to be a critical factor in determining the efficacy of various clinical techniques including mindfulness practice. The chapter explores the interpersonal dimensions of mindfulness philosophy and practice, and the implications of such paradigms to question whether the current methods of intervention and training based on internality are sufficient for the clinical application.
TopIntroduction
The practice and aesthetics of spirituality is claimed to be one of the most popular Eastern cultural imports to the West. The Buddhist practice of mindfulness in particular has seen a great surge in popularity both in the mass and social media as well as in the academic literature in last few decades (Davis & Hayes, 2011; Carrette & King, 2005; Purser, 2019). Its industry is currently worth $4 billion, with the practice of mindfulness being adopted as part of corporate training by technology giants such as Google and Apple (Purser, 2019). Among its benefits shown in research are: improved concentration and mental clarity, moderation of psychological distress such as anxiety and depression, enhanced emotional intelligence such asobjectivity, affective tolerance, equanimity, compassion and the capacity to attend to others and one’s own self with benevolence (Davis & Hayes, 2011; Wallmark et al., 2013; Pratscher et al., 2019; Farris, et al., 2021). More specifically, the practice and philosophy of Zen (禅) has enjoyed an increasing attention thanks to such influential figures as D. T. Suzuki, Alan Watts, John Cage and David Lynch, before getting picked up by popular brands, Hollywood celebrities and social media influencers. Zen is often characterised by formal qualities and experiential concepts such as simplicity, introspection and quietude, with a slow and meditative attitude, stylistically employing monochrome or muted colors and natural material in terms of design. With its ascetic quality, minimalism, particularly in design such as fashion and architecture, has therefore been closely linked to Zen. However, what such modern Zen design represents is often far from the aesthetics of the original Japanese style (Kurosawa, 2004). Cox also claims that the artistic appropriations by post-war creatives in the West bear no physical resemblance to the Japanese Zen and its arts, reducing the historical and anthropological complexities of the practice into a mere aesthetics style (Cox, 2003). Zen is said to have been transplanted and transformed in the West, carefully manufactured into a set of media representations, which are central and critical to the shaping of the entire spirituality industry. While Zen philosophy and practice has often been misconceived to represent introspection with the wellbeing industry focuses on the improvement of the internality of the self, the chapter explores the interpersonal dimensions of Zen and question the efficacy of the current paradigm for clinical application.
Key Terms in this Chapter
Mu (?): The nothing/none-ness.
Zen (?): The religio-aesthetic practice of the Japanese Buddhist ‘Way’.
Riken-No-Ken (????): A technique of creating an embodied Ma, first introduced by the noh theatre master Motokiyo Zeami.
Ta (?): The Other.
Ma/Gen (?): The awareness of an intersubjective time/space interval.